A review of this book by Robert R. Reilly was posted in September, and one reader was inspired to purchase the book, read it, and provide personal observations. I continue to recommend the book. I especially recommend it to those who believe that we can depend on “moderate Muslims” to allow logic to prevail in the dealings between Christians and Muslims. The book indicates there are only pure Islamists and infidels; there is no such thing as a “moderate Muslim.” I struggled with whether the following is commentary or an extension of the review, so I’m posting it as both. With that introduction, the following is the input from the “Guest Commenter.”
During my time on the Yucca Mountain Project, I worked with a very devout Sunni Muslim Imam. He provided me with a couple of books on Islam that were written by Muslims and we had several discussions that left me wondering why our philosophical views were so different. He is a fine fellow and I do not mean to disparage his theological or philosophical outlook. However “The Closing of the Muslim Mind” provided a context that makes understanding his viewpoints much easier.In the 10th and 11th centuries there was a debate between the Mutazilites, who believed that the Qu’ran was a created document that Allah had used reason to create. The other side was the Ash’arites who believed that the Qu’ran was uncreated and has existed forever along with Allah who made it available to man through the Prophet Muhammad. I was told by my Muslim friend that the Archangel Gabriel came to earth each evening for a year to make sure that Muhammad got every letter of the Qu’ran correct. The Ash’arites and their leading philosopher, Al Gazali, won the argument and the Sunni Muslims follow their philosophy.
Major points of their beliefs are that the world we live in is here due to the will of Allah and that there can be no application of reason as that would constrain Allah or that there is an effect that had a cause, also a constraint on Allah. If Allah changes his will, the universe will change and there will be a new reality over which man has no input. If one fires an arrow at a target, the arrow hits the target due to the will of Allah and it has nothing to do with skill or preparation. Because there is no reason and all is the will of Allah, the study of philosophy and Hellenic logic (logos) are superfluous and, indeed, will probably cause confusion and is, therefore, forbidden (haram). This view, of course, leads to the conclusion that one’s fate is predetermined and that one has no free will. Most Muslims conclude their sentences with “Inshalla” – Allah Willing. If one is not able to complete a task on time, Allah was not willing and there is nothing one can do about it.
In the 13th century, a similar debate was conducted in Christianity with St. Thomas Aquinas positing the idea that God did indeed provide revelations, but that man had been given reason and free will and could develop ideas on his own. He was condemned by some in the Catholic Church and it was not until the 19th century that he was canonized.
Islam completely rejects the view that man has any control over his destiny. Man can only do what Allah wills and everything that man does is due to the will of Allah. The Qu’ran is eternal and perfect and contains no contradictions (as is clearly described in the book being reviewed). This has allowed various Muslim theologians to issue fatwas (interpretations of the meaning of Qu’ranic verses) that seem to be in conflict. This is the reason that there is such turmoil in Muslim countries – Allah is always on your side. The Qu’ran specifies that a true believer is only required to ask the infidel three times to convert to Islam and then the infidel can be killed. This allowed the spread of Islam from Arabia to Indonesia and Spain in about 150 years. In the view of the Muslim, Islam is the way Allah wants it and any change – for example, the acceptance of a different religion – means that one is an apostate with a punishment of death. There are also fatwas that specify that death of an infidel will be smiled on by Allah.
Some of the U.S. politicians have proposed that curing poverty in the Middle East or that the closure of the Guantanamo Prison will remove the reason for terrorists. This book instructs that eliminating poverty and the closing of Guantanamo are both meaningless; the existence of infidels is the reason for Islamist terrorists.
That is the end of what the “guest commenter” provided, but I feel compelled to add some thoughts inspired by his input. I hold out little hope that Islamists could ever accept freedom of religion . Compromise requires that both sides recognize the right of the other to present a reasonable argument. As “The Closing of the Muslim Mind” describes, Islam advocates that a person using reason is an infidel who must be killed. One glimmer of hope is the country of Turkey. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was raised as a Muslim but insisted on ending Islamic influence on government when he came to power in the early 1920s. Religion has slowly crept back into government in that country, but the example set is that there is hope for those who use reason to make decisions. Perhaps that is true only if the military is sufficiently strong to intimidate those who might resist. That was the case when Ataturk came to power in Turkey or in the more recent example of Egypt. Not exactly the model of democratic action, but perhaps democracy is ineffective in standing up to religious extremism.