Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T12:58:03.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Why Not Islam?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

R. C. Zaehner
Affiliation:
Spalding Professor of Eastern Religions and Ethics, Oxford University, 1952–74

Extract

As everyone knows, since the end of the Second World War there has been a sensational revival of interest in the non-Christian religions particularly in the United States and in this country. The revival has taken two forms, the one popular, the other academic. The first of these has turned almost exclusively to Hindu and Buddhist mysticism and can be seen as an energetic reaction against the dogmatic and until very recently rigid structure of institutionalised Christianity and a search for a lived experience of the freedom of the spirit which is held to be the true content of mysticism, obscured in Christianity by the basic dogma of a transcendent God, the ‘wholly Other’ of Rudolf Otto and his numerous followers, but wholly untrammelled by any such concept in the higher reaches of Vedanta and Buddhism, particularly in its Zen manifestation. On the academic side the picture is less clear. There is, of course, the claim that the study of religion, like any other academic study, must be subjected to and controlled by the same principles of ‘scientific’ objectivity to which the other ‘arts’ subjects have been subjected, to their own undoing. But even here there would seem to be a bias in favour of the religions of India and the Far East as against Islam, largely, one supposes, in response to popular demand.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 167 note 1 Politics, 1297 a 11.

page 168 note 1 Smith, Wilfrid Cantwell, Questions of Religious Truth, Scribner, New York, 1967, pp. 3962.Google Scholar

page 168 note 2 Ibid. p. 56.

page 168 note 3 Ibid. pp. 40–1.

page 169 note 1 Doctrine of the Sūfīs, by Arberry, A. J., Cambridge, 1935.Google Scholar

page 170 note 1 Koran, 12. 1; 26. 1; 28. 1; 43. 1; 44. 1 etc.

page 170 note 2 Ibid. 12. 2; 43. 2; 13. 37 etc.

page 171 note 1 Koran, 3. 5.

page 171 note 2 Al-Kalābādhī, , Al-ta ‘arruf li-madhhab ahl al-tasṣawwuf,, ed. Mahmūd, A. and Surūd, T. A., Cairo, 1960, p. 39.Google Scholar Cf. A. J. Arberry, op. cit. p. 21.

page 171 note 3 Text, p. 41: trs. p. 23.

page 172 note 1 Koran, 2. 70; 9. 6; 48. 15.

page 172 note 2 A1-Kalābādhī, text, pp. 40–1: trs. pp. 22–3.

page 173 note 1 Koran, 3. 52.

page 173 note 2 Ibid. 3. 40–2.

page 173 note 3 Ibid. 2. 32.

page 173 note 4 Ibid. 3. 40; 4. 69.

page 173 note 5 Ibid. 4. 169.

page 173 note 6 Ibid.

page 174 note 1 Hussey, E., The Presocratics, Duckworth, 1972, p. 46.Google Scholar

page 174 note 2 Koran, 4. 169.

page 175 note 1 Koran, 5. 116.

page 177 note 1 Koran, 20. 120.

page 177 note 2 See Koran, 33. 28–52.

page 179 note 1 Acts 5: 39 (NEB).