Muḥammad ‛Ābid al-Jābirī and the Critique of Arab Rationality

The examination of the Arab-Islamic written heritage (turāth) and its relationship with the modern world became one of the central issues of Arab thought from the nineteenth century onward, particularly during the Arab Awakening. What initially appeared as a cultural-intellectual concern soon became intertwined with political anxieties regarding the causes of Western progress and Muslim decline, crystallizing into the dichotomy of “tradition and modernity”. In response, various approaches emerged: identity-oriented and religious reformist currents (such as Ṭahṭāwī and ‛Abduh) who saw the heritage as requiring reinterpretation; intellectual historians (like Aḥmad Amīn and ‛Abd al-Raḥmān Badawī); and ideological readings (Salafī, liberal, Marxist), which grew especially prominent after the defeat of 1967. Within this context, Muḥammad ‛Ābid al-Jābirī advanced his project of “Critique of Arab Reason,” marking a significant shift from merely critiquing the content of the heritage to scrutinizing the epistemological foundations and mechanisms of thought production in Arab-Islamic culture. He analyzed Arab reason as comprising three competing epistemological systems: 1- The bayānī system, rooted in scripture (Qurʾān and Sunna) and the Arabic language, governing the transmitted and theological sciences, whose chief mechanism is juridical and theological analogy (qīyās). 2- The ʿirfānī system, deriving from pre-Islamic Hermeticism and Gnosticism, emphasizing mystical intuition and esoteric interpretation (taʾwīl), manifest in Eastern philosophy (al-Fārābī, Ibn Sīnā), Sufism, and Shīʿism (especially Ismailism). From Jābirī’s perspective, this represents a “resigned” or “withdrawn reason.” 3- The burhānī system, based on Aristotelian rationality and logical demonstration, which reached its peak in Islamic philosophy—particularly in the Maghrib with Ibn Rushd—yet remained marginalized in comparison to the other two. Jābirī attributed the decline of rationality in the Arab world to the dominance of the bayānī and ‛irfānī systems, arguing that revival depended on restoring the burhānī model. While his analysis countered orientalist views, it has itself been criticized for ideological bias—namely, privileging Maghribī rationality over Mashriqī thought, reflecting Arab nationalist tendencies. In this article, the author first outlines Jābirī’s key ideas and concludes that both his project of critiquing Arab rationality and similar reformist schemes in the Arab world misdiagnosed the malaise of Islamic societies. They overlooked the decisive role of economic and social factors while misplacing emphasis on epistemological reform alone.