The Critique of Arab Reason by Mohammed Abed Al-Jabri

"The Critique of Arab Reason" by Mohammed Abed Al-Jabri

A Visionary Intellectual Project

Mohammed Abed Al-Jabri’s book The Critique of Arab Reason (1935–2010) stands as one of the boldest intellectual projects aimed at dissecting the epistemological structure of Arab-Islamic thought throughout history.

This project is not limited to abstract philosophical analysis; it extends to the deconstruction of the intellectual, social, and political systems that shaped the Arab mind.

Historical Context

Al-Jabri’s project emerged during a critical period in modern Arab history, marked by key questions such as:

The Crisis of the Nahda (Renaissance): Why did Arabs fall behind while others progressed?
The Heritage vs. Modernity Dilemma: How should we approach our religious and philosophical legacy?
Western Domination: How can we embrace modernity without losing our identity?

His thought was influenced by a range of intellectual currents, including:

Marxism: For analyzing the relationship between ideological (superstructural) and material (economic and political) systems.
Structuralism: In treating systems of knowledge as independent structures.
Kantian Critical Philosophy: For deconstructing the conditions of possibility for knowledge within the Arab mind.

Chapter One: The Methodological Framework

1. Critique as Deconstruction and Reconstruction

Al-Jabri rejects traditional methods of interpreting heritage, whether:

Sanctifying traditionalism (which views the heritage as a perfect whole), or
Orientalist superiority (which regards the Arab mind as stagnant or inferior).

Instead, he adopts a historical-deconstructive method aimed at:

Uncovering the internal mechanisms governing the production of knowledge.
Analyzing the historical formation of Arab reasoning over time.

2. Al-Jabri’s Concept of “Arab Reason”

“Arab Reason” does not refer to ethnicity but rather to:

A historical epistemological system.
Cognitive tools that shaped the Arab worldview, such as bayān (textual exposition), burhān (logical demonstration), and ‘irfān (gnostic intuition).

Chapter Two: The Three Epistemological Systems

Al-Jabri identifies three dominant systems that structured Arab reasoning:

1. The Bayān System (Textual and Linguistic Authority)

Sources: The Qur’an, pre-Islamic poetry, and language sciences (grammar, rhetoric, jurisprudence).

Characteristics:

Reliance on textual authority as the ultimate source of knowledge.
Domination of language and rhetoric at the expense of logical reasoning.
Centrality of jurisprudence over philosophy or the sciences.

Result: The transformation of Arab reasoning into a traditionalist, imitative mode rather than a critical one.

2. The Burhān System (Rationalist Attempts)

Key Figures: Al-Kindi, Al-Farabi, Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ibn Rushd (Averroes).

Characteristics:

Attempting to apply Aristotelian logic to religion and nature.
Advocating for a separation between religion and philosophy (especially in Ibn Rushd’s work).
Conflict with bayān: Al-Ghazali’s attack in The Incoherence of the Philosophers led to the decline of rationalism.

3. The ‘Irfān System (Mystical and Intuitive Knowledge)

Representatives: Sufis like Ibn Arabi and Al-Hallaj, Ismailis, and extreme Shiite thought.

Characteristics:

Dependence on inspiration and revelation over reason.
Fusion of philosophy and religion (e.g., the theory of the unity of existence).

Impact: It further undermined critical reasoning in favor of personal, mystical experience.

Al-Jabri’s Analysis of the Conflict Between Systems

He argues that the dominance of bayān and ‘irfān over burhān was a key factor in:

The stagnation of Arab thought after its classical Golden Age.
The absence of scientific rationalism in later Islamic civilization.

Chapter Three: Arab Political Reason (Critique of Autocracy and Legitimacy)

1. Power and Knowledge in Islamic History

Al-Jabri explores the relationship between:

Political authority (caliphs, rulers)
Religious authority (jurists, Hadith scholars)

He concludes that:

Political despotism led to intellectual authoritarianism, where religion was used to legitimize rule.
Jurists often aligned with rulers (e.g., Ash'arite theology’s support of predestination to justify submission).

2. The Problem of Political Legitimacy

He critiques the absence of a “social contract” concept in Islamic political thought, in contrast with:

The Caliphate model, which fuses religion and politics.
Jurisprudence of obedience, which forbids rebellion even against unjust rulers.

3. Why Did Democracy Fail in the Arab World?

Al-Jabri links this failure to:

An authoritarian political heritage.
The lack of a critical mindset capable of challenging power structures.

Chapter Four: Arab Ethical Reason (Between Text and Practice)

1. Ethics in Theory and Practice

Al-Jabri exposes the duality in moral discourse:

While texts promote justice and equality,
Historical practice was often marked by despotism and opportunism.

2. Ethics of Obedience vs. Ethics of Freedom

He contrasts:

Ethics of Obedience: which reinforces submission to authority (e.g., the jurisprudence of “hearing and obeying”).
Ethics of Reason: which emphasizes personal responsibility and rational autonomy (as in Ibn Rushd’s philosophy).

Chapter Five: Evaluation and Criticism

Al-Jabri’s Achievements

He shattered taboos around heritage by critiquing its sacred elements.
He linked knowledge with power, analyzing ideas as products of political struggle.
He paved the way for new critical projects (e.g., those of Taha Abderrahmane and Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd).

Criticisms of His Project

Overgeneralization: Treating “Arab Reason” as a unified block, ignoring diversity (e.g., Persian or Amazigh thought).
Neglect of External Influences: Downplaying the role of Persian and Turkish civilizations in shaping Islamic thought.
Bias toward Western Models: Accused of mimicking European rationalism without sufficient regard for Arab-Islamic particularities.

Summary and Legacy

Al-Jabri proposed a reformist vision through:

Deconstructing tradition: Not to reject or glorify it, but to understand it critically.
Adopting critical rationality: As a tool to break intellectual stagnation.
Linking knowledge to freedom: Arguing that intellectual backwardness is tied to authoritarianism.