Islam seen through Western eyes

Press, 14 April 1984, Page 20

Islam seen through Western eyes

The Koran Interpreted. Translated by A. J. Arberry. Oxford, 1983. 674 pp. $6.50. Muhammad. By Michael Cook. Oxford, 1983. 94 pp. $6.50. (Reviewed by William Shepard) These books have two significant things in common: they deal with Islam and they represent largely the fruit of non-Muslim scholarship. (Less significant, but interesting, is the coincidence of publisher, date and price). On most other counts they diverge widely. “The Koran Interpreted” is the latest reprinting of a translation of the Islamic scripture which was first published in 1955 and has become certainly the most widely used English translation by a non-Muslim scholar. Since I reviewed this translation about two years ago on the occasion of a previous reprinting, I shall restrict myself to a few comments. The emphasis, and to some extent the strength, of the translation are its efforts to reproduce in English the literary force of the original, an effort which probably succeeds as much as possible, given the differences between Arabic and English. Where Western scholarship differs from Muslim scholarship' on specific points of interpretation, Arberry generally opts for the former. Probably the most important example is his translating “prophet of the common folk” where the Muslim tradition strongly insists on “illiterate prophet.” Nevertheless, Arberry evinces a considerable sympathy for the Muslim tradition and appreciation of the power of its scripture. This is a substantial work of scholarship and a “must” for anyone with a serious interest in Islam. At the price, this edition is unquestionably “good value.” The introduction to this edition, it should be noted, is a considerably scaled down version of that which appears in some of the other editions, a loss to the scholar, but undoubtedly easier for the “lay” reader. Michael Cook’s is a much lighter work in several respects, including size (only 94 pages). As one volume in the “Past Masters” series (edited by Keith Thomas and dealing with such figures as Aquinas, Aristotle, the Buddha, Carlyle, and Dante), it is quite clearly intended as a brief introduction for the novice, and in several respects succeeds quite well. The style is clear

and the content is basic, assuming little if any prior knowledge of the subject on the part of the reader, and in its brevity it will avoid tiring those whose interest is only superficial. The first six chapters briefly present, in order: historical background of Muhammad, the traditional account of his life, and Muslim views of history, law and politics. In doing this Cook relies as much as possible on the Koran itself, fleshing out the details where necessary with material from the early post-Koranic traditions. One result is to give a picture of Islamic belief as it had come to be by about one or two centuries after the prophet’s death. Another result arises from his interpretation of Islam as a particularly radical form of monotheism combined with his own stance — apparently — as a non-theist. The effect is to show what an odd thing monotheism is, in many respects, in the broad perspective of the whole history of human thought. Such an approach is common enough in scholarly works on the history of religion, but much less so in popular works. The seventh chapter addresses the question of the historical reliability of sources upon which the traditional picture of Muhammad and his teachings is based. The author notes that there is a range of views on this matter and, on the whole, indicates his preference for the most sceptical current of Western scholarly opinion — a current which does not deny the existence of Muhammad, but does question some of the most basic and widely accepted views about the events of his life and the early history of Islam. Particularly interesting is his brief summary of some of the ideas presented in the book, “Hagarism,” which he co-authored with Patricia Crone. To my knowledge this is the first popular presentation of the ideas of this book, which is probably the most radical of recent Western scholarly works and is far from accessible to the non-expert. In the light of this chapter, one can see why Cook in the previous chapters has presented the picture of Muhammad’s life and thought as it existed a century or two after his death. He is very sceptical of our ability to go behind this picture with any degree of certainty. At the strictly factual level, Cook is

on the whole dependable, although there are occasional lapses. On p. 28, for example, he says “Islam does not accept the notion that God created man in His own image.” While this statement may be true for the Koran, it ignores one of the most influential of the post-Koranic traditions. At the level of interpretation this is a very “Western” book. Not only is it far removed from contemporary Muslim views at most points, but it is often grossly insensitive to Muslim feeling. The most blatant example of this is chapter eight, where the author begins by blithely speaking of Muhammad “creating a new religion” and then goes on, equally blithely, to speculate on the human “sources” of the Koran, without betraying the slighest awareness that all of this is grossest blasphemy to virtually all Muslims, for whom both Islam and the Koran come directly from God. Cook is, of course, entitled to state his opinion on this matter, but to do so with no reference to Muslim feeling is to perpetuate an insensitivity which I thought Western scholarship had outgrown. A slightly less blatant, but no less telling, example is found on page 34 where he says that the Koran’s polemic against the Jews “is not focused on any central issue of doctrine — other than the Jewish refusal to accept Muhammad’s own credentials.” Muhammad’s status as a prophet might seem peripheral to the unthinking Westerner, but it is one of the two most important Muslim doctrines (the other being the unity of God). The compliment that Cook pays to Islam at the end of the book is worth quoting, since it seems to sum up his own view of the subject: “The bleakness which we saw in its (Islam’s) conception of the relationship between God and man is the authentic, unadulterated bleakness of the universe itself.” It is a compliment no Muslim would accept. In short, this book has its place. It popularises one view found among Western scholars of Islam, and this is worth doing. It gives the uninitiated reader, to whom it is ostensibly directed, however, precious little sense of what Islam means to Muslims, and at many points it is unrepresentative of the predominant current trends in Western scholarship. Let the reader beware!