لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Chapter 2
Modern Day Orientalism
One of Hourani's major goals in this book is to
explicate the historical development and the intellectual substance of modern‑day
Orientalism. In this he roughly follows the lines laid down by Edward Said in
his now classic work, Orientalism. Nevertheless, Hourani does not agree with
some of the main conclusions of Said. Edward Said is of the notion that
"Orientalism" is a type of knowledge constructed for the purpose of
dominating the Orient, which is in this case Islam. As Said defines the term,
it has a number of interdependent aspects: 1) It is an academic tradition. This
refers to institutions and scholars who study the East, be they historians,
philologists, or theologians. 2) It also refers to a style of thought based on
a distinction made between the Orient and the Occident‑that the Orient is
the "other." 3) It is also a Western type of knowledge that aims at
dominating, restructuring, and wielding authority over the Orient. "Mr.
Said," Hourani contends, "is right to say that orientalism' is a
typically occidental' mode of thought, but perhaps he makes the matter too
simple when he implies that this style of thought is inextricably bound up with
domination, and indeed is derived from it." (p. 63)
It is true, Hourani maintains, that Western
scholarship on Islam was motivated politically, and certain images of Islam, as
a backward and totalitarian religion, were, and still are, reflected in the
writings of many a Western scholar. But this was not the case with serious
Orientalists. "E. G. Browne in England was a supporter of the
constitutional revolution in Iran; Louis Massignon of the Algerian movement for
independence; others, such as Hurgronje, used what influence they had in favour
of a more sensitive and understanding attitude towards those whom their nations
ruled." (p. 38)
Therefore, Hourani invites us, implicitly at least,
to reexamine Edward Said's basic formulations, theses, and conclusions and
study the relationship between Islam and the West in, perhaps, a more positive
manner than does Said. It is true, Hourani argues, that at the level of
religious encounter Islam was a problem for Christian Europe. But it is also
true that another, no less important, attitude was at the center of the
interaction between Christianity and Islam, and, later on, between secular
Europe and the World of Islam, involving a deep exchange of ideas. During the
formative phase of Islam, distinguished Muslim theologians and thinkers, such
as 'Ali al‑Tabari, Imam al‑Ghazali, and Ibn Hazm wrote major works
in an attempt to refute the central doctrines and tenets of Christianity. There
is no doubt that ascendant Islam then presented a religious, intellectual, and
political challenge to Christendom. The world of "Islamdom," to use
one of Hourani's favourite terms, was in the process of expansion at all
levels. As a result, Christianity ceased to exist as an organized political,
and economic force in the Middle East and North Africa, and, for a good period
of time, in Spain. Christians felt the Islamic menace deeply, and, therefore,
some of them were compelled to study the reasons behind the success of the
Muslim world and the ramifications of the universally‑oriented Islamic
scholarship on their lives as the backward "other." Isn't the Muslim
world in a similar position today? Hourani ponders this questions, and proposes
that because of modern Western political and cultural hegemony, better
understood as colonialism, Arabs and Muslims were compelled to take a critical
look at the nature of their decline, and formulate an appropriate religious,
scientific, intellectual, and cultural response to the multifaceted Western
challenge. [3]
In discussing the emergence
and intellectual formation of modern Orientalist scholarship, Hourani points to
two major characteristics, especially, of nineteenth‑century Orientalism:
(1) positivism, and (2) missionary training and outlook. In the first instance,
positivism, as a Western (American and European) scientific movement,
encouraged the Orientalist to gather useful data and information on the Orient,
its history, theology, philosophy, and culture. In the second instance,
however, missionary training gave the Orientalist a clear religious conviction
and a specific mission: conversion of the non‑Christians, who were
usually perceived as inferior to the white European Christians. The missionary
Orientalist devoted his energy to two major areas of study: the Qur'an and the
Prophet Muhammad. This is still the pivotal tradition in those leading
(Christian) seminaries which promote Islamic studies both in Europe and the US.
Also, the ninteenth century
witnessed the rise of a new type of Orientalism, one that was less religious
and somewhat more liberal than its predecessor. This Orientalism is best
exemplified by two main figures: Ernest Renan (1823‑92), a French
Catholic, and Ignaz Goldziher (1850‑1921), a Hungarian born Jewish
scholar. Hourani argues that although Renan lost his inherited Catholic faith,
he "retained a basic seriousness in his search for truth." (p. 28)
Renan fell under the spell of the school of philology, and basically believed
that one could study a universal religion through the study of its basic
terminologies, concepts, myths, and worldview. Ignaz Goldziher, on the other
hand, grew up in the secular liberal environment of Hungary in the 19th
century, and though he was a highly secularized and assimilated Jew, he
retained a concern for the study of Judaism as a monotheistic tradition. He
believed that it was possible to study Judaism through studying the living
spirit of Islam. He opted to study Islam by examining two major principles: (1)
the Shari'ah, and (2) the balance
struck by Islam between Shari'ah and tasawwut. The spirit of Islam, Goldziher
maintained, was based on a vision of "creating and maintaining a balance
between the law, the articulation of God's word into precept for action, and
mysticism, the expression of the desire for holiness." (p. 41)
Underlying Hourani's
discussion of Orientalism is the notion that it is a complex, empirical,
pragmatic, religious‑, and political‑oriented movement. A wise
scholar, therefore, cannot overlook its wide scholarly activities, and its research
into the origins of Islam, history, and theological structure and formation. In
this regard, Hourani echoes the words of the late Fazlur Rahman (d. 1988), a
distinguished Pakistani scholar at the University of Chicago, who realized the
potential of Orientalism, as well as the shortcomings of modern‑day
Muslim scholarship. To Rahman, writes Hourani, "The main work of the
history of Islam . . . has been done by Western scholars, but the task should
now be that of Muslims themselves."(p. 56)
Hourani considers H. A. R. Gibb as the best
representative of twentieth‑century Orientalism. Gibb, who, in various
writings and discussions, was deeply committed to bringing out the salient
features of classical and modern Islamic intellectual history, was an immense
intellectual figure, who represented a living force in the British academia at
the time. The last of the universal Arabists,' Gibb argued on behalf of
applying the most developed social science concepts and methods in Islamic
studies. In addition to his profound understanding of Islamic intellectual
history, as an "elite culture," i.e. the product of the Islamic
literati class, Gibb endeavoured to bring to light the great transformations,
changes, and movements in the life of the Muslim community and the life of
common people. One such example is the study of sufi tarcqahs and their impact on Muslim societies. To Gibb, as well as
to Hourani, Sufism has always represented vital forces in Islamic societies,
past and present. In a sense, Hourani implies that the study of the "elite
culture" in Islam is insufficient, since it cannot shed enough light on
the dynamics of "popular culture" and its often unnoticed
contributions to the life of the Muslim community. In discussing Orientalism, one
cannot escape the feeling that Hourani himself is part of this eminent silsilah (chain) of learning. Hourani
concludes his discussion of Gibb by saying that he was an intellectual and
spiritual murshid (guide) if not the qutb (pole) of oriental learning. In his
portrayal of T. E. Lawrence and Louis Massignon, Hourani is very sympathetic.
He considers both of them as lost European souls searching for a meaning in the
desert of the Orient. Hourani maintains that "for both . . . this world
was somehow a forbidden one: they had a sense of exile, of loneliness in a
desolate country, of seeking something which visible forms could not
give." (p. 118) Also, "For both of them, life and travel in the world
of Islam was the experience by which they became aware of themselves." (p.
118) They sought a decisive confrontation with themselves, a subjective self‑examination,
if you will, as a means of discovering the alien self in their lives. Although
Hourani thinks that Lawrence imposed a high sense of literary order on his Seven Pillars of Wisdom (London, 1935),
Massignon's work is more exceptional and lasting. The latter displayed concern
for the plight of the Third World people, especially Muslims, and was
distinguished by a sharp intelligence, a deep compassion, and great humility.
Notes:
[3]. The attempt at
formulating an appropriate religious response to the West was a major
preoccupation of the nineteenth century ulama'. On this response, consult the
following travel book, Sue Miller, Disorienting
Encounters: The Travels of Muhammad As‑Saffar, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.
