Freethinkers in history: Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi

This is the first of what I hope to be a multipart subject of freethinkers in Islamic History.

What is the sort of stuff that is widely attributed to Islam these days? Close-minded, violent, non-tolerant, jihad etc. So called moderate Muslims have little or no voice or they simply choose not to raise their voices. Imagine how Islam would have been like in the 10th century. Imagine how hard it would have been for free thinkers to exist in those times. Well guess what? It appears it wasn't the case according to Abdel-Rahman Badawi, a free thinker from Eygypt, who details how Muslim philosophers and scholars put reason above tradition, evidence above blind belief. And some of them openly criticized Islam, the prophet and Quran. Surprised? So was I.


Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi, a Persian Muslim, who lived during the 9th and 10th century, was a physician, alchemist and chemist, musician, philosopher and scholar. He is regarded as the "perhaps the greatest clinician of all times". He was the first to differentiate smallpox from measles. He discovered alcohol and kerosene. Described as the father of pediatrics and was a pioneer in neurosurgery and ophthalmology.

Razi also wrote three books on religion. “The Prophets' Fraudulent Tricks”, “The Stratagems of Those Who Claim to Be Prophets”, and “On the Refutation of Revealed Religions”. Imagine that! Just the title .... Imagine publishing something even close in these days. Sorry Salman Rushdie my man, your Satanic Verses is nothing compared to these.

He was critical of the idea of prophet hood.
"On what ground do you deem it necessary that God should single out certain individuals [by giving them prophecy], that he should set them up above other people, that he should appoint them to be the people's guides, and make people dependent upon them?"

Headline of today "War on Terror". Looking at the various disagreements between religions and the zeal of their followers he said
"there would be a universal disaster and they would perish in the mutual hostilities and fighting. Indeed, many people have perished in this way, as we can see."

Razi doesn't seem to belong to the 10th century. It seems like he is talking about our time, talking about us. You and me! and here is another one.

"If the people of this religion are asked about the proof for the soundness of their religion, they flare up, get angry and spill the blood of whoever confronts them with this question. They forbid rational speculation, and strive to kill their adversaries. This is why truth became thoroughly silenced and concealed"


He was a brilliant….. brilliant man. You can't imagine this coming from Muslims even today and this guy lived in medieval times.

Razi believed that people had been conned into believing by people in authority. He believed that this trickery had been continuous over time and as a result people got habituated to their religious denomination. After a while these lies and myths deluded the people so much that it came to the tone of “we head from so and so who was told by so and so ”.

He believed that the existence of a large variety of religions was, in itself, evidence that they were all manmade, saying, "Jesus claimed that he is the son of God, while Moses claimed that He had no son, and Muhammad claimed that Jesus was created like the rest of humanity" and "Mani and Zoroaster contradicted Moses, Jesus and Muhammad regarding the Eternal One, the coming into being of the world, and the reasons for the [existence of] good and evil"

In relation to the Hebrew's God asking of sacrifices, he said that
"This sounds like the words of the needy rather than of the Laudable Self-sufficient One."

On the Qur'an, Razi said:

"You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Koran. You say: "Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one." Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. ... By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: "Produce something like it?""

All those who claimed to be prophets, from the beginning of the human history, in Razis view, were at worst tortuous and devious and at best had psychological problems.

What do you think happened to this guy? Did he have to apply for asylum in another country? Did he have to remain in hiding? Was he jailed? Were fatwas issued for his head? Did some fanatic assassinate him? ... No. He remained in Iran. He was the Director of the Hospital in the city, a respected scientist, a teacher and a philanthropist. If you want to see more of Razi and other freethinkers in Islamic history then read Freethinkers of Medieval Islam: Ibn Al-Rawandi, Abu Bakr Al-Razi and Their Impact on Islamic Thought (Islamic Philosophy, Theology, and Science)

Next time I am going to dig into Rawandi’s thoughts. I have heard he was more open as compared to Razi and also had to suffer because of it.

Will the real Islam Please Stand Up

So, will the real Islam please stand up?
And put one of those fingers on each hand up

TV runs in the background …… Bomb blast rocks through a market in Lahore many are feared dead

Me: When will Muslims actually get some respect for life and property?
Muslim: Surely you don’t believe that these are real Muslims?

Me: Real?
Muslims: Islam is a religion of peace and hence and therefore Muslims can’t do this. This is probably the work of some other force.

Me: Yoda?
Muslim: Who? I don’t know ….is he Jewish?

Me: Which other force do you think is doing this?
Muslim: The Jews, the Americans Allah knows.

Me: But the Taliban accepted responsibility for this.
Muslim: Yes they did but maybe it is some fragment of the Taliban that is being funded by the Americans.

Me: let me get this straight. There are mullahs that are getting money from America to bomb Pakistan
Muslim: Yes.

Me: (I want to ask why? but) So we should kill them. If we are the land of the pious Muslims, we should go after these Taliban who are damaging Pakistan no matter who is backing them up. If you hate the Jews and Americas that much you should equally hate their cohorts.
Muslim: uhhh… ?

Me: You said that these guys were running a proxy war on behalf of the Americans to destabilize Pakistan, so we should go after them and kill them
Muslim: Actually these Taliban are misguided Muslims, we should try and reason with them.

Me: Reason with them? How do you do that?
Muslim: talk to them.

Me: But we tried that it failed.
Muslim: yes because government sabotaged it.

Me: ahh ... no it didn’t the Taliban backed out.
Muslim: NO THE GOVERNMENT SABOTAGED IT.

Me: but you have to agree that there is something really wrong with Islam
Muslim: No. Islam is the one true religion

Me: really? How do you explain terrorism, bombs going off and suicide attacks?
Muslim: That’s not real Islam

Me: Subjugation of Women, public lashing?
Muslim: That’s not real Islam

Me: Child marriages?
Muslim: That’s not real Islam.

Me: Blasphemy laws? Let me guess not the real Islam?
Muslim: yeah see you finally see it from our angle.

How many times have you entered into a debate that has ended with this? The problem with Islam is that A would say B is not the real Islam, B would say A is not the real Islam and along would come C who would say neither A nor B are the real Islam. Islam has become this amorphous, fluid, mutilating object, when it comes to debates, whatever aspect you touch you are told that that isn’t it.

The fact is Quran is a very ambiguous to say the least. It contradicts itself a lot. If you talk to the Mullah-apologists regarding this he will say that the wrong kind of muslims …. which means everyone else but him …. misinterpret the verses of the Quran. Some verses are to be taken literally, some are to be taken in context of the verses before and after it, some are to be taken in the context of the situation in which they are revealed, some in the context of the times of the Prophet (marriage to a minor and slavery are explained using this trump card) and yet some have metaphorical meanings and are not to be taken in the literal sense. Here comes the problem, which verse is to be interpreted in which way. Apparently no one knows for sure. Each sect, mullah, militant group, suicide bomber makes up his own mind as how to interpret it. Then there is the hadith, that’s a whole different can of worms that is far more complex in interpretations.

This is the thing that makes Islam amorphous. If the Quran is as complete and as absolute as it is portrayed to be, then why is there room for so much variation? If Allah was all powerful, all knowing, all wise he would have seen the conundrum his words would have caused. Why couldn’t he just say in clear words listen these are the dos and these are the don’ts? Did Allah deliberately cause this confusion, in that case he is a sadistic bastard, or did he not know what this was actually going to cause, not something that would look good on an all powerful creator. Or was it man made and like all religions most of the stuff had to be kept ambiguous enough to allow it to be bent so that the masses can be controlled.

I think Islam needs a proper command and control structure of sorts. Like the Vatican Church, Islam needs a centralized authority that every Muslim adheres to (or two or three for different sects but not more than that). Issues pertaining to incorrect interpretation of Koran can be checked. Just like the Vatican kept some of the rules of traditional Christianity out, this centralized body can keep stuff like jihad, child marriages in check. It would put a leash on Islam and that is precisely what is needed. Get Islam in some solid state.