Genealogy of Islamic Civilization Thought from the Constitutional Revolution to the Islamic Revolution

By Shaykh Rasul Jafariyan | Translate by Sayyid Ali Imran¹

Introduction

Two revolutions, the Constitutional Revolution and the Islamic Revolution, occurred in our country approximately seventy years apart (1285 SH / 1906 and 1357 SH / 1979). What relationship do these two revolutionary events have with the “sense of civilization-seeking” among Iranians? A revolution is a transformation from one state to another through revolutionary means. Such a transformation has both a starting point and an endpoint. Its starting point is the society inherited from the past, and its destination is the idealized society that it seeks to achieve. The revolutionary uprising that facilitates this transition is fueled by both resentment towards the past and hope for the future.

It appears that people are dissatisfied with the existing social order. They move towards a desired society where they expect to experience better conditions in all aspects of life and civilization. However, the definition of “good” and “bad” depends on their fixed and changing perspectives and the various criteria that differ among societies. Nonetheless, in any case, economy and ethics are among the key pillars of such transformation. A reasonable standard of living, suited to its time, along with accepted moral values that ensure a good and peaceful life without negative consequences in the eyes of the people, has always been a central concern for those who object to current conditions and seek new ones.

Thus, what we call culture and civilization must have a definition, expectations, and a position within this revolutionary transformation. The key question is: What is the relationship between these two revolutions and the concept of “civilization,” particularly desirable and undesirable urbanization (madanīyat)? How did these two revolutions relate to the state of civilization that was both rejected and anticipated?

The Relationship Between the Constitutional Revolution and the Islamic Revolution with the Concept of “Islamic Civilization”

Various perspectives can be taken on these two revolutions, and they can be compared based on these viewpoints. For example, what relationship do these two revolutions have with the concept of “religion”? How did each of them perceive “economy,” and to what extent did economic factors play a role in them? Do these two revolutions differ in their approach to foreign affairs? These and other similar questions can be examined.

Here, I intend to compare these two revolutions concerning the concept of “civilization,” particularly what is recognized as “Islamic civilization.” What relationship did the Constitutional Revolution have with the issue of civilization? What about the Islamic Revolution? How can these two revolutions be compared in this regard?

As mentioned earlier, revolutions emerge to bring about change and improvement in the existing conditions. The question now arises: In the case of the Constitutional Revolution, what specific issues in Iranian society required change? At the very least, we must take a general view of Iranian civilization, its position in the world at the time, and its relationship with other nations’ lifestyles and access to civilizational benefits. The same question applies to the Islamic Revolution.

The fact that we have dozens of books written by the intellectual leaders of the Islamic Revolution on the concept of civilization and Islamic civilization, and that this term appears thousands of times in Iranian texts over the decades leading up to the revolution, indicates the significance of the relationship between the Islamic Revolution and civilization. In this context, comparing the demands of the Constitutional Revolution regarding civilization with those of the Islamic Revolution is naturally a meaningful endeavour. Over these seventy years, the intellectual and spiritual tendencies of the people have changed, disillusionments have emerged, expectations have grown, and even the necessity for a new revolution has arisen. How can these developments be interpreted in relation to the concept of civilization?

The Widespread Use of the Concept of Backwardness in Pre-Constitutional and Constitutional Era Literature

If we consider the treatises written in the decades leading up to the Constitutional Revolution, during the revolution itself, and even in its aftermath as a criterion for assessing the intellectual climate of Iranian society before the revolution, one of the most pivotal concepts that emerges is the notion of backwardness. In other words, for many years before the Constitutional Revolution, we consistently emphasized our own backwardness and initiated the revolution with the goal of transforming ourselves into a civilized nation akin to those in the West.

According to a significant number of writers from that era—whose works we still have access to today—the world was divided into two groups: civilized societies and backward societies. Although some individuals continued to defend the status quo, the prevailing perspective held that Iran was backward and that escaping this condition was only possible through a revolution against despotism and an embrace of new political values.

A glance at the booklet Tuhfat al-Mutamaddinīn (written by Sheikh Reza Dehkhawraqani and published in Understanding the Urban Aspect of the Constitutional Movement, pp. 131–148), which was authored by a cleric in support of the Constitutional Revolution and the necessity of cooperation in achieving civilization, can familiarize us with this discourse, which had numerous other examples as well.

It is important to reiterate that some individuals had different objectives for the revolution, but the dominant narrative was as described above. Even when the discussion centered around the implementation of Islam, it was often framed as follows: backwardness was the result of failing to properly practice Islam, and if we adhered to it correctly, we would enjoy the benefits of life just like the civilized world.

Ultimately, the agenda was one of modernization, renewal, and civilizational progress. While the specifics were not entirely clear, for many who intellectually aligned with the foundations of the Constitutional Revolution and pushed it to an irreversible point—despite opposition from traditionalists—it was evident that Iran needed such a revolution to enter the realm of civilization.

The Constitutional Movement, Modernization, and Overcoming Backwardness

Although the general trajectory of the Constitutional Revolution aligned with the goals mentioned above, there were internal disputes over various concepts and the overall direction of the movement. In fact, from the moment disagreements among religious scholars regarding the constitution arose, multiple ideological currents emerged—ranging from full endorsement of Western political principles to efforts to Islamize Western thought, and even the belief that the two were fundamentally incompatible.

Aside from the general movement toward modernization and the renewal of Iranian society, there were those who opposed the Westernization of thought and social life altogether. Some religious scholars adopted this stance. Among them, some criticized the intellectual foundations of the Constitutional Revolution, while others objected to its external manifestations, such as the spread of corruption, irreligiosity, and other perceived vices they associated with Western influence.

One of the most serious intellectual opponents was Mirza Sadeq Aqa Mujtahid Tabrizi². Sheikh Fazlullah Nouri, who initially supported the movement in principle, gradually grew skeptical and ultimately opposed it, becoming the leader of the anti-Westernization faction. This perception of Sheikh Fazlullah as a symbol of resistance to Westernization persisted, particularly after the rise of anti-Western sentiment in Iran.

Jalal Al-e Ahmad, for instance, interpreted Sheikh Fazlullah’s execution as a moment marking the rise of the fight against Westernization.

Three major perspectives emerged within the Constitutional Revolution: absolute rejection of Western influence, absolute acceptance of Western ideas, and a middle-ground position. The Constitutional Constitution itself represented a middle path, as it incorporated Islam into its framework. While the faction advocating full acceptance of the West may not have been entirely dominant, it held considerable influence in the post-Constitutional era, particularly during the Pahlavi period.

Over time, the third faction, which sought a balanced approach, became a refuge for opponents of the prevailing order, although it remained sidelined for several decades. Nonetheless, anti-Western sentiment persisted among many opposition figures, particularly the clergy, who generally viewed the West with suspicion. Political and colonial events, along with the spread of social corruption—at least from an Islamic interpretative lens—reinforced their stance.

Their main objection was not necessarily to Western civilization itself but to its manifestations, technological advances, and certain legal structures. Even among the opposition, some acknowledged the positive aspects of Western civilization, which caused them to waver. They often argued that while certain elements of this civilization were beneficial, others were harmful and needed to be discarded. From their perspective, Islam was compatible with the beneficial aspects, and in fact, they believed that these positive elements had been derived from Islamic principles in the first place.

The Partial, Authoritarian, and Enforced Modernization Under Reza Shah

For twenty years after the Constitutional Revolution, the political sphere in Iran was marked by continuous conflicts, with one government rising to power only to collapse shortly thereafter. It was clear that the Qajar political structure and the country’s governance system could not be easily transformed. While there was a strong idealism driving the goals of the Constitutional Revolution, economic and social capacity, along with public awareness, remained very low—creating an imbalance between aspirations and reality.

Meanwhile, foreign pressures, particularly the demands of Russia and Britain—regardless of the Iranian people’s will—acted as major obstacles to the ruling governments. These pressures were shaped by the new global political arrangements emerging between world powers. There needed to be a plan to both fulfill the Constitutional Revolution’s aspirations and align the country’s situation with the new international political landscape. This was especially important given that Russia had fallen into the hands of the communists, while the British aimed to establish a protective barrier around it.

Within this context, Reza Shah emerged as an ideal candidate, upon whom both intellectuals and the British largely agreed. His rule promised the implementation of modernization, the stabilization of Iran, and the suppression of political movements—particularly communist ones. Consequently, the civilizational aspirations of the Constitutional Revolution, which had called for the modernization of Iran and the resolution of longstanding national issues, were pursued under Reza Shah.

Reza Shah’s government sought to introduce changes in all sectors and, using military force and authoritarian rule, attempted to enforce the vision of modernization and civilization. According to some, this led to a forced modernization of Iran. However, this period also saw resistance from traditional forces, which Reza Shah crushed with violent repression. These crackdowns quelled opposition for a time but later created problems for the Pahlavi regime.

Despite judicial reforms, Reza Shah himself was an authoritarian ruler, making the establishment of even a minimally flexible and free political system impossible. In practice, the constitutional movement’s aspirations for liberty were sacrificed in favour of modernization and national reconstruction. Nevertheless, under authoritarian rule, some obstacles were removed, dissenting voices were silenced, and certain changes aligned with the goals of the Constitutional Revolution were implemented. Thus, Iran entered the modern era under dictatorship.

The Beginning of Doubts About Modernization and Accusations of Westernization Without Substance

Iran’s goal had been to modernize and reach the same standard of living as the West—albeit without adopting what it considered the West’s problems. However, the key question remains: what did entering civilization and the modern era truly mean, and to what extent was it achieved?

Did the post-Constitutional Revolution period bring about a fundamental transformation in Iranian culture, elevating its level of civilization from zero to at least fifty or seventy (on an arbitrary scale)? Or did authoritarian rule merely impose a superficial modernization and Westernization?

Historically, some countries have undergone forced modernization, achieving advancements in science and civilization—Russia being a prime example. However, in contrast, Iran and Turkey—two nations with deep cultural legacies—failed to make significant civilizational progress even under authoritarian modernization.

During Reza Shah’s reign, economic, technical, and administrative reforms were implemented—reforms that had been part of the demands of reformists both before and after the Constitutional Revolution. However, two major problems emerged:

1. Lack of Deep Structural Change – Perhaps because the country’s conditions were not conducive to a fundamental transformation, the reforms remained surface-level.
2. Authoritarianism and Its Consequences – The autocratic nature of the reforms led to public resentment toward Reza Shah, to the point where many celebrated his departure and rejected some of his modernization efforts.

Ultimately, a partial modernization was achieved. The country had taken an irreversible step forward—it was no longer possible to return to the pre-Constitutional era—but the reforms were also insufficient to fully institutionalize modernization and make it widely accepted.

During this period, Iranian society became divided into two main groups:

1. Those who embraced Western civilization.
2. Those who were skeptical, outright opposed, or supported modernization only on the condition that it remained compatible with religious values.

A quatrain from the early 1940s captures this sentiment:

“One day, mankind turns to religion and faith,
The next, he follows new laws and creeds.
Alas! This wild and strange beast,
Will never truly be human, no matter which path he takes.”

(Poem by Malek Hojazi from the Rangarang Yearbook, 1945, p. 115)

The Conditional Support of Reformist Religious Scholars for Western Civilization During the Constitutional Era

During this period, reformist religious scholars, both clerical and non-clerical, entered the arena to articulate their views on civilization. For years, religion and the clergy had been accused of obstructing civilization. To some extent, these accusations were justified, as various religious figures had sporadically opposed aspects of the modern world. However, radical intellectuals exaggerated these claims, and many others, albeit subtly, echoed similar sentiments or at least argued for some form of religious reform.

The fundamental question was: Why couldn’t Muslims establish a society on par with Western nations in terms of knowledge and prosperity? Now that modernization was gaining momentum, the key question became: What did reformist religious scholars say about Islamic civilization and civilizational progress after the Constitutional Revolution? What vision did they have for the future?

If we set aside traditional scholars and jurists in seminaries or certain cities—those who were primarily focused on jurisprudence or philosophy and largely uninterested in modernity except in minor practical matters (such as resolving the issue of showers in Islamic purification laws)—we can identify a group of reformist religious scholars who worked on the relationship between religion and society. Their focus was on how religion should interact with modernization and civilization, seeking to establish new theoretical foundations to determine which aspects of modernity were acceptable or unacceptable.

While civilization was a broad concept, the manifestations of modernization were numerous. Sometimes discussions focused on specific aspects of modernization, while at other times they engaged with the broader notion of Islamic civilization. The reason even reformist scholars defended modernization only conditionally was due to the broader trajectory of modernity. The Pahlavi regime—both Reza Shah and Mohammad Reza Shah—pursued modernization as a central objective, using it as their main slogan and attempting to implement it through authoritarian means.

However, two major problems arose:

1. Superficial Modernization – Many modernization efforts were shallow and facilitated the spread of corruption.
2. The Cultural Challenge – The fundamental question of how culture should integrate with modern civilization was not addressed. Since Iran already had a distinct cultural foundation, constructing a civilization disconnected from that culture proved highly challenging.

These issues led to a focus on superficial and aesthetic changes, which critics denounced as Westernization or a hollow imitation of the West. Whether or not these critiques were entirely justified, they resonated widely with the public. Eventually, such criticisms became central to the discourse of the Islamic Revolution, shaping its opposition to the previous era.

Jalal Al-e Ahmad, through his polemical writings—especially Westoxification (Gharbzadegi) and On the Service and Betrayal of Intellectuals—became a key voice in this discourse, which was later reinforced by thinkers such as Ahmad Fardid and others. Thus, while the Pahlavis aimed for a particular vision of civilization—symbolized by their slogan of reaching the Gates of the Great Civilization (the title of a book published under Mohammad Reza Shah’s name)—the Shah viewed his opponents as reactionary, while considering himself civilized.

Defining True Civilization, Critiquing the West and Its Corruption, and Reviving Islam as a Civilization-Building Force

Religious scholars engaged in civilizational and social discussions across three major phases:

1. First Phase (circa 1921–1928) – A slower-paced period extending into the early 1940s, during which several religious publications emerged in cities like Tehran, Tabriz, and Kermanshah.
2. Second Phase (1941–1957) – A more dynamic period marked by a wider reach, sharper discourse, and clearer viewpoints. The most prominent publication of this phase was Ayin-e Islam (The Doctrine of Islam).
3. Third Phase (1961–1971) – During this period, publications such as Maktab-e Islam (The School of Islam), Maktab-e Tashayyu (The School of Shi’ism), and various others emerged, accompanied by numerous books addressing Islamic thought and society.

Between 1919 and 1928, and to a lesser extent until the 1940s, reformist religious scholars in cities like Tehran, Tabriz, Isfahan, and Mashhad began reshaping religious discourse to engage with modern civilization. While they criticized the negative aspects of modernization, they consistently emphasized the need to revive Islamic civilization, which had fallen into decline.

After years of accusations that religion was anti-civilization, these religious reformers sought to defend Islam using new language. A significant part of their effort focused on the perceived conflict between religion and science, or between religion and modern civilization. Their writings extensively addressed these issues, offering alternative perspectives.

One example among many is Mirza Ali Aqa Moqaddas Tabrizi (d. 1951), who left behind six books and a religious journal that ran for two years. His messages were consistent:

• Criticism of the current state of society
• Praise for the golden age of Muslim civilization
• Emphasis on pragmatism and action
• The necessity of eliminating superstitions
• Re-examining religious thought and practice to create a new Islamic society capable of overcoming its present decline and advancing toward growth and excellence

Thus, these reformist scholars sought to redefine the role of Islam in modernity—not as an obstacle to civilization but as its guiding force.

The Expansion of New Religious Literature: Criticism of Western Corruption and Defense of Civilization

During this period, discussions on political and social issues within Islam took on a significantly different tone compared to the Constitutional era and earlier periods. Perspectives evolved under the influence of decades of transformation in Iran, exposure to translated Western works, the expansion of educational institutions and schools, the rise of journals and periodicals, and a general increase in the clarity of intellectual debates. These changes also affected religious writers.

A key component of contemporary religious discourse was the effort to reconcile Islam with the notion of progress and civilization, which had now become a dominant theme in politics, with governments actively pursuing its realization. At this juncture, it seemed necessary to articulate an Islamic perspective that aligned—at least partially—with modernization while also offering a critical stance.

The dominant religious-political discourse revolved around the question of how Islam related to science and civilization. The prevailing argument was that Islam was fundamentally compatible with civilization. Most writers of this period sought to distinguish between the positive and negative aspects of Western modernity. They frequently emphasized that they did not oppose civilization itself.

Two key considerations shaped this discourse:

1. Civilization as an Unavoidable Reality – Given the remarkable global advancements, civilization could no longer be denied. While some had rejected it outright during the Constitutional era, by this time, such a stance was no longer considered reasonable.
2. The Corruption and Decay of the West – While civilization was acknowledged, the moral corruption and decadence of the West—widely reported both in Western and Iranian sources—were strongly condemned. Many practices that were considered normal in the West were viewed as corruption due to their perceived incompatibility with Islamic law.

There were extensive efforts to highlight the harms of certain Western cultural influences, such as music and alcohol consumption. Religious writers even sought Western sources to support their critiques of these elements. Thus, when assessing Iranian authors’ views on civilization, a dual discourse emerges: support for civilization and modernization on one hand, and rejection of the moral corruption associated with Western civilization on the other.

However, these writers often refrained from engaging in deeper philosophical debates about the fundamental differences between Western and Islamic thought. A simple example of this approach can be found in Mustafa Zamani’s book Islam and Modern Civilization, in which he compiled reports from newspapers and magazines highlighting Western corruption³. Another example is Zain al-Abidin Qorbani’s book The Role of Cinema in Life and Modern Civilization (Qom, 1972).

Sayyid Qutb’s Critique of Western Civilization, the Need to Establish an Islamic Civilization, and Its Influence in Iran

The debates surrounding Islamic and Western civilization in Iran were neither novel nor unique; similar discussions had taken place in other Muslim-majority countries. Egypt, as the religious and intellectual hub of Al-Azhar, had long been engaged in these debates, predating their emergence in Iran. In fact, Egypt played a pioneering role, serving as a model for Iran in these discussions.

Here, we will focus on the period between 1961 and 1979, during which new intellectual movements arose in Egypt, Pakistan, and beyond. One of the most influential figures of this era was Abul A’la Maududi (d. 1979), whose ideas laid the groundwork for the revivalist movements. However, it was Sayyid Qutb who, at the height of these discussions, articulated these concepts most forcefully before being executed by Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1966.

Following the translation of Qutb’s works into Persian, his ideas gained traction among Iranian intellectuals. One such work was A Manifesto Against Western Civilization and the Future Mission of Islam, which was translated in 1970 by Ayatullah Khamenei. In his introduction, Ayatullah Khamenei argued that while technology was beneficial, Western civilization lacked spirituality, and Iranian modernization had become mere imitation and artificiality.

Another key work was Islam and Western Civilization by Abul A’la Maududi, which was translated into Persian by Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini.

Sayyid Qutb’s critique of Western civilization was not purely philosophical; it was deeply rooted in social justice concerns and revolutionary thought. His critique was framed through an Islamic shari‘a-based perspective, particularly a Qur’anic interpretation of resisting ṭāghūt (tyranny). He also emphasized the necessity of building an Islamic civilization based on Islamic law.

For decades in Egypt, Islamic scholars had defended shari‘a against Western influence—an effort exemplified by the Tafsir al-Manar project. By the time of Sayyid Qutb, this intellectual groundwork had been laid, and his writings sought to harvest the results of these efforts.

Qutb portrayed Western civilization as a source of moral decay and corruption and sought to present Islamic civilization as the superior alternative. His book A Manifesto Against Western Civilization articulates this view clearly:

“With the dominance of Western culture and civilization, humanity is on the path to destruction. At one time, people looked to Karl Marx for salvation, but that too led nowhere. Now, the only hope lies in Islamic thought.”

In the opening chapter of A Manifesto Against Western Civilization, titled Man: The Unknown Being—a title inspired by Alexis Carrel—Qutb explores the idea that modern science’s obsession with nature has led to a neglect of the human soul and spiritual qualities (A Manifesto Against Western Civilization, p. 43).

Through such critiques, Sayyid Qutb and like-minded thinkers influenced a growing wave of Islamic intellectualism in Iran, shaping the discourse that would later be absorbed into the revolutionary movement.

In the following chapter, Sayyid Qutb argues that modern civilization has led to human confusion and anxiety due to the West’s abandonment of religion. To support this claim, he discusses how Europe entered the modern civilizational era and examines the influence of Islam and Arab culture on Francis Bacon, citing existing admissions of this impact (p. 63). However, according to Qutb, the problem arose when the West distanced itself from religion, leading to its present state of existential disorientation and turmoil.

A part of this confusion, he argues, stems from Darwin’s theory of evolution—though he notes that Thomas Huxley criticized it (p. 70). Qutb claims that Darwin degraded humanity to the level of mere animals (p. 71). At the same time, modern science’s discoveries highlight human complexity, while attempts to reconcile science and faith have led to books such as Science Calls to Faith, which was translated from English to Arabic (pp. 77–78).

Throughout this section, as in much of his book, Qutb heavily relies on the ideas in Alexis Carrel’s Man, the Unknown, a work that critiques modern Western civilization for leaving humanity alienated and lost. His disdain for Darwin’s ideas is evident:

“With the rise of Darwinism, humanity suddenly lost all the special status, dignity, and independence that religion had granted it, as well as the intellectual prestige it had gained during the Enlightenment. Suddenly, man was placed among the animals.” (p. 92)

Qutb argues that modern anthropological theories have led to social and personal instability (p. 93). He references Abul Hasan Nadwi’s What the World Lost with the Decline of Muslims (p. 95) and Maududi’s The Veil (p. 96, pp. 222–223).

He also critiques medieval Europe’s backwardness and the role of Christianity in it, suggesting that Western hostility toward religion stems from its historical experience with the Church (p. 104). This perspective was popular among Iranian intellectuals, including Morteza Motahhari, who addressed it in his introduction to The Causes of Inclination Toward Materialism.

One of the key aspects of Western civilization that Qutb criticizes is its treatment of women, which he believes has led to social chaos. According to him, the West has stripped women of their natural identity, whereas Islam provides a balanced and just approach to the role of women (p. 106 onward). He attributes the West’s flawed approach to the historical stance of the Church, which viewed women as inherently evil. Consequently, modern Western society—reacting against this Church doctrine—went to the opposite extreme, leading to moral decline (pp. 121–122).

In his discussion on Western corruption, Qutb recounts a personal anecdote from his time in America, where he overheard a conversation between hotel staff that, to him, illustrated the depths of Western moral decay (p. 126).

For a traditional Muslim perspective, there was no greater indicator of societal corruption than moral laxity. Qutb likens the modern West to ancient Rome, arguing that it is entirely obsessed with pleasure and indulgence (p. 129). He asserts that today’s Europeans are not truly Christian but materialist, referencing Nadwi’s What the World Lost with the Decline of Muslims (p. 133).

To further prove Western irreligiosity, Qutb cites passages from his book America That I Saw, describing how Americans, despite their outward reputation for religiosity, lack genuine faith. He criticizes churches for marketing faith by offering snacks to attract attendees, arguing that this reflects a distortion of religion and worship (p. 135).

Qutb extends his critique to the Western political and economic systems, portraying them as chaotic and anxiety-inducing. He dismisses Marxism as a failed ideology and asserts that only a comprehensive Islamic movement can establish a stable social order (p. 151).

His proposed solution is the creation of an Islamic society, which he sees as the only viable alternative to the “decadent and collapsing” Western order. He critiques both capitalism and socialism, advocating instead for Islam as the middle path.

In another chapter, Qutb describes Western civilization as fundamentally incompatible with human nature. He cites his own book The Future Belongs to Islam—translated into Persian by Ayatullah Khamenei as The Future in the Realm of Islam (p. 177). Here, he again references Alexis Carrel, arguing that modern civilization is in a dire and miserable state (p. 179).

Qutb extensively quotes Carrel’s criticisms of modernity (up to p. 184), but then clarifies:

“Our condemnation of this civilization does not rely solely on the words of this learned man.” (p. 188)

He acknowledges that Carrel himself does not fully grasp the role of religion, dismissing his perspective as shaped by Western thought (p. 189).

In a chapter titled The Revenge of Nature, Qutb explores how modern civilization has clashed with human nature, citing increasing rates of mental illness in the West (p. 207). He continues with Carrel’s argument that Western society has disrupted the natural balance between men and women, particularly in motherhood and childbirth.

Qutb also references Will Durant, discussing the dehumanizing effects of technological and industrial changes on people’s lives (p. 218).

In the final chapters, Qutb describes how Western corruption, immorality, and moral decay have spread into Muslim societies, leading to an environment where sexual temptation is pervasive (p. 231). This theme—Western moral decline as a major factor in Muslim opposition to the West—was central to Islamic intellectual critiques of modernity.

As an example, Qutb discusses how sexual permissiveness in France has weakened the physical and moral strength of the French nation, even affecting public health and family structures (p. 233). He cites newspaper reports and observations from Aisha Abdel-Rahman (Bint al-Shati’), who described how Western career-oriented women had suffered from rising infertility rates, not due to physical changes but because of lifestyle shifts (pp. 238–242).

These media reports were widely used by Iranian religious writers such as Mostafa Zamani and others to reinforce their critique of Western society.

The final chapter of Qutb’s book, What Is the Path to Salvation?, begins with Alexis Carrel’s claim that Western industrial civilization must be overturned—but since that is impossible, an alternative path must be found (pp. 255–260).

Qutb critiques Carrel for seeking answers solely in science while misunderstanding religion (p. 261). He argues that Carrel—despite being a critic of the West—remains trapped within its worldview, unable to see the true solution: Islam (p. 263).

However, Qutb does not reject industrial civilization entirely. He acknowledges that the empirical mindset that led to scientific advancements actually originated in Muslim Spain (Al-Andalus), not ancient Greece (p. 271). He distinguishes between the positive scientific foundations of modern civilization and its corrupt ideological superstructure (p. 273).

He concludes by emphasizing that Islam’s true strength will only be demonstrated through a functioning Islamic society:

“No book, no speech, no film can demonstrate the truth of Islam as effectively as a small community that is built entirely upon Islamic principles.” (p. 287)

Qutb warns that Zionists and Crusaders will always oppose the formation of such a society, not fearing books or speeches, but actively preventing the realization of Islam in practice:

“They will never, under any circumstances, allow an Islamic society to be established—even in the most remote island in the ocean.” (p. 287)

In his final remarks, Qutb acknowledges the immense challenges in building an Islamic state but insists that it is the only path forward. Implementing shari‘a remains his primary solution, as he outlines in his final reflections.

The Influence of Sayyid Qutb’s Thought in Iran and Its Intellectual Context

Sayyid Qutb’s ideas, which were translated into more than ten works in Persian, had a significant impact in Iran. Although he was influenced by Abul A’la Maududi, Abul Hasan Nadwi, and others, he also infused his works with his own radical ideological foundation, advocating for revolution and the establishment of an Islamic government. His ideas gained widespread popularity in Iran, where the Islamic civilization discourse was shaped by a shared intellectual movement across the Muslim world.

In the introduction to Qutb’s A Manifesto Against Western Civilization, written by the Persian translator in 1970, various terms reflecting Islamic resistance against Westernization appear:

• Western imitation (farangi-ma’abi)
• Loss of self-identity (khud-bakhtegi)
• Brainwashing
• Breaking traditions
• The horrific slaughter of spiritual values
• Begging at the feet of the West
• The expansion of Western civilization
• A glorious forgotten past
• The demon of colonialism
• Self-forgetfulness and alienation

The translator further writes:

“Before Islam, the doctrine of monotheism and humanity, stands the monstrous figure of Western civilization, which looms ever larger, consuming another portion of the human breathing space at every moment… The products of this civilization—which, undoubtedly, cannot all be condemned—continue to expand daily. Modern man, who has been forced to wear the iron mold of this civilization, increasingly finds himself in need of it. The reach of this civilization, once confined to this planet, now extends to the farthest planets and celestial bodies…” (pp. 9–11)

This passage acknowledges the technological and scientific advances of the West but argues that Western civilization is fundamentally incompatible with human nature. Qutb portrays it as a system that thrives on the destruction of its creators, increasing its dominance by diminishing human dignity.

This critique was not unique to Qutb. Similar arguments appeared in other Islamic intellectual critiques of the West, including those influenced by Alexis Carrel’s Man, the Unknown. In Iran, Ali Shariati also explored the theme of industrialization and dehumanization, often using Western sources to express an Eastern critique of the West.

These ideas were not exclusive to Iran but were also prevalent in the Indian subcontinent. Apart from Maududi, who influenced Sayyid Qutb and, to a lesser extent, Iranian intellectuals, Abul Hasan Nadwi also played a role in shaping these discussions. Nadwi, who once visited Iran as a guest of Dar al-Tabligh, authored What the World Lost with the Decline of Muslims, which was translated into Persian as:

• “The Limits of the World’s Decline and the Muslims’ Downfall” (translated by Mostafa Zamani)
• “The World in the Shadow of Muslim Decline” (translated by Abdul Hakim Osmani, Zahedan, 2003)

Another work by Nadwi, The Struggle Between Islamic and Western Thought in Muslim Lands, was translated into Persian as “Evaluation of Western Civilization” (also published under “The Ideological Battle”) by Mohammad Thaqafi and Ali Akbar Mahdipour in Qom (1975).

Maududi’s Perspective on Islam and Western Civilization

Comparable to Sayyid Qutb’s works, Abul A’la Maududi (d. 1979) authored Islam and Western Civilization, which was translated into Persian by Ayatullah Ibrahim Amini in 1972, with its third edition published in 1977.

This 315-page book, though small in size and printed in fine font, presents a harsh critique of Western civilization. As expected from a devout Islamic scholar, Maududi consistently condemns Muslims who are enamoured with the West. He argues that Western thought is entirely opposed to the essence of Islam, depicting the entire Western world as inherently irreligious and steeped in disbelief (kufr).

The opening chapter of the book critiques the intellectual enslavement of Muslims, arguing that modern Muslims have become subjugated to Western ideas due to the political and intellectual dominance of the West:

“Some people have become convinced that whatever the Western world deems right must be right, and whatever it deems wrong must be wrong.” (p. 9)

Maududi attributes this intellectual servitude to the scientific and technological advancements of the West, which have granted it global leadership:

“Every nation that surpasses others in scientific research inevitably assumes leadership over the world.” (Islam and Western Civilization, p. 9)

He explains that while the West advanced intellectually, Muslims declined, losing their scientific curiosity and analytical thinking. This decline, he argues, was precisely when the West embraced scientific inquiry, leading to the present subjugation of Muslims.

“When Muslims awoke after centuries of slumber, they were shocked to find Christian Europe standing before them with two formidable weapons: science and military power.” (p. 11)

According to Maududi, Muslims reacted poorly to this situation, succumbing to Western influence rather than resisting it.

“The wave of Western civilization eroded religious beliefs, moral principles, and traditional laws.”

One of Maududi’s central arguments is that Western civilization is inherently atheistic. He claims that the Church’s resistance to science caused the West to abandon religion entirely, leading to a worldview in which God was no longer necessary (p. 14). This, in turn, led to the rise of Darwinism, which Maududi sees as the final nail in the coffin of faith (p. 19). He asserts that Darwin’s work legitimized a worldview in which God was entirely unnecessary:

“Darwin confirmed that it is possible to explain the order of the universe without the existence of God.” (p. 21)

Maududi argues that modern philosophy and science have no place for religion, rendering prophethood, revelation, and divine inspiration irrelevant (p. 23). According to him, this intellectual shift coincided with colonialism, as Muslim lands from East to West fell under European domination. Muslim students, educated in the West, absorbed Western ways of thinking, leading to a corrosion of Islamic values:

“Islamic civilization’s foundations were shaken, and the intellect and faculties necessary for proper Islamic thought were corrupted.” (p. 23)

How can Muslims reclaim their lost civilization? Maududi argues that salvation depends on the emergence of strong Muslim leaders and independent Islamic thinkers who can restore the dominance of Islamic civilization. However, he acknowledges that it is impossible to reverse history and return to the golden age of Islam:

“The train of civilization cannot be turned back 600 years to the era of Islamic supremacy.”

Instead, he proposes building an Islamic scientific framework based on Qur’anic principles:

“Muslims must establish the foundations of new natural sciences in accordance with the blueprint laid out in the Holy Qur’an.”

To achieve this, atheism must be eradicated, and a scientific and intellectual revolution must occur, allowing true Islamic civilization to replace the materialist West (p. 25).

Maududi likens civilization to a locomotive, arguing that Muslims must seize control of it to regain leadership:

“The only way forward is to seize the key to the locomotive. There is no other solution. Simply looking back, or left and right, will not solve our problem.” (p. 26)

Both Sayyid Qutb and Maududi critiqued Western civilization, but their approaches differed:

• Qutb’s thought was more systematically structured but also more radical.
• Maududi’s work was more extensive but often meandering and contradictory.

Ultimately, both thinkers shaped the discourse of Islamic revival, influencing generations of scholars in Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, and beyond.

The Discourse of Admiration for Western Civilization Alongside Opposition To It

As previously mentioned, two key aspects of Western civilization preoccupied the minds of Muslims. The first was admiration for its grandeur—its vast influence across the world and its astonishing advancements, which seemed more remarkable by the day. The second was its corruption and moral decay, its destruction of other cultures, including religious traditions, which Muslims could not remain silent about. However, the problem was that Muslims saw no benefit from this modern civilization; rather, they were mostly confronted with colonialism, aggression, and oppression. Ultimately, the rule of power had placed the strong over the weak. This situation led to the formation of a distinctive discourse, which had to be constantly explained to the people who were exposed to Western civilization.

Thus, within Islamic thought, particularly in discussions about Islamic civilization and its relationship with Western civilization, certain principles emerged among Muslim writers. These principles were developed to rationalize the greatness of Islamic civilization, explain why the West had surpassed Muslims, and address similar concerns. Some of these principles were historical, some were theoretical interpretations, some were derived from religious devotion, others from nationalist or ethnic pride, and some were influenced by various socio-political factors. These principles can be found in the works of many Islamic thinkers and writers, each emphasizing them to different degrees. Some were intellectuals, while others were popular-level writers and preachers, particularly those active in the decades leading up to the Islamic Revolution, who had not yet witnessed an Islamic government in practice.

Among these thinkers, Morteza Motahhari is a notable example. While he did not write extensively on Islamic civilization, his discussions were serious and well-structured. His works help outline the religious-civilizational discourse he engaged in. In the introduction to his book Man and Destiny, he dedicates a discussion to “The Greatness and Decline of Muslims”, where he explores several key themes—many of which reflect the widely accepted principles among Islamic writers regarding civilization. He states that for at least twenty years, he had been reflecting on the issue of Islamic civilization (Collected Works: 1/346).

However, the reason this discussion appears in Man and Destiny is that he investigates whether belief in destiny played a role in the decline of Islamic civilization. The key principles that emerge from his writings, which have been repeatedly referenced in this discussion, include the following:

1. Islamic civilization has experienced a period of remarkable greatness and glory. Muslims established a magnificent civilization, which remains one of the great pillars of human civilization. Islam played a crucial role in its development (Collected Works: 5/38).
2. Western civilization, with all its astonishing advancements and global dominance, owes much of its success to Islamic civilization. Even impartial Western scholars have admitted that European progress was largely built upon Islamic knowledge and contributions. Many of the ideas claimed as Western inventions were first developed in the Muslim world, but Muslims themselves are unaware of their historical achievements (Collected Works: 17/284, 24/22; citing Gustave Le Bon and Abdolhossein Zarrinkoub). Motahhari cites Muhammad Abduh’s argument that Western civilization advanced by rejecting Christianity and absorbing knowledge from other nations, primarily from Muslims (Collected Works: 13/484-485). He even suggests that the rise of Protestantism was indirectly influenced by Europe’s contact with Islam.
3. After achieving great heights, Muslims fell into decline. The question is: Who or what is responsible for this decline? Islamic civilization may have faded, but Islam itself remains a living force, actively competing with the most powerful contemporary social and revolutionary movements (Collected Works: 1/351). Meanwhile, the Muslim world is awakening (Collected Works: 1/351).
4. Western intellectuals acknowledge the past greatness of Islamic civilization. Some commonly cited figures include:
   • Gustave Le Bon (Collected Works: 21/55)
   • Jurji Zaydan (a Christian Egyptian historian) (Collected Works: 14/394)
   • Will Durant, who stated: “There has never been a civilization more astonishing than that of Islam.” (Collected Works: 21/24, 1/349)
   • Jawaharlal Nehru (Collected Works: 19/572).
5. The causes of decline—internal and external factors—are debated. One key question is whether belief in predestination (jabr) contributed to the decline of Islamic civilization (Collected Works: 1/361).
6. Modern civilization is plagued by corruption and decadence, which have alienated humanity from itself. This is the most significant negative aspect of contemporary civilization, rooted in secularism and the abandonment of religion. Unfortunately, Motahhari also embraced the myth that Muslim Spain (Andalusia) fell due to moral corruption, an idea he referenced multiple times (Collected Works: 3/404, 24/547).

Imam Khomeini, the Islamic Revolution, and the Critique of Western Civilization, Along with an Alternative Vision

Imam Khomeini, as the leader of the Islamic Revolution, had clear views on Islamic civilization and the West. Before elaborating on them, it is essential to note that if the Constitutional Revolution can be considered a movement toward modernization, then the Islamic Revolution was a movement for the revival of Islam against the West. In other words, it was inherently anti-Western civilization.

When the Pahlavi regime promoted modernization and the idea of the “Great Civilization”, its opponents attacked it as a form of Westernization, arguing that it had brought nothing but destruction. They accused the regime of promoting moral corruption in the name of civilization by spreading cabarets, cinemas, gambling houses, and other Western-inspired vices.

Beyond figures like Jalal Al-e Ahmad, if we focus solely on Imam Khomeini’s thought, we see that the Islamic Revolution took on a distinctly anti-Western trajectory. However, it is important to clarify that the revolution did not oppose civilization itself—a distinction that had to be repeatedly emphasized to avoid misunderstandings. Nonetheless, some ambiguity remained, necessitating frequent clarification.

We know that Imam Khomeini, from his early youth, was anti-Western and opposed to modern statutory laws. His ideas were shaped in a period when the clergy had been sidelined following the Constitutional Revolution, and Western-oriented factions had come to power. During Reza Shah’s rule, this situation created significant difficulties for the clergy, as the government’s push for modernization deepened the divide between the state and religious scholars.

The Imam’s opposition to the West was not merely a reaction to the political conflicts left over from the Constitutional period, but rather an opposition to statutory laws and the sweeping modernization efforts that were replacing traditional institutions with new state-run bureaucracies, particularly during Reza Shah’s reign. We can trace this stance in at least two instances before 1941:

1. In a 1935 letter of authorization (ijaza) written for the Hujjat brothers, which appears in Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 12, as one of the earliest surviving texts from Imam Khomeini, he warns against modern civilization and Westernization:
   

   “Beware! Beware! O spiritual brother and rational friend, of these inverted shadows, these so-called civilized and modern people. They are nothing but startled donkeys, predatory beasts, and devils in human form, who are more misguided than animals and even more wicked than Satan.”

2. In 1930, in a note written in Khomein, he sharply criticizes the modernist atmosphere of Reza Shah’s era (a document published on my blog on Khabar Online, January 3, 2016, under the title “Imam Khomeini’s Astonishing Criticisms of the Times in 1930“).

His 1944 book Kashf al-Asrar (Unveiling the Secrets) reflects a similar stance. In this work, Imam Khomeini responds to two individuals who had criticized Shi‘ism using a Western rationalist perspective. With this background of opposition to Westernization, Imam Khomeini entered a new phase in 1961, launching what would later be called the Islamic movement, which ultimately triumphed in 1979. From this period until the victory of the revolution, what did Imam Khomeini say about civilization, particularly Western civilization?

It is notable that in 93 instances in his speeches, he specifically referred to Mohammad Reza Shah’s notion of the “Great Civilization”, criticizing it as if this conflict revolved around the very concept of civilization itself. A historical review of his views on civilization shows that on September 3, 1962, he stated:

“Now that the expansion of Western civilization and the infiltration of communist propaganda have led many of our Iranian youth towards corruption, the only solution to counter this great danger is to strengthen spirituality among the people. Those who weaken the clergy in the name of modernity are in fact fostering corruption.” (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 77)

Imam Khomeini criticized the Shah for portraying himself as civilized while labelling his opponents as reactionaries. He frequently highlighted state-led massacres as evidence of the contradictions in the Shah’s so-called civilization (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 258, April 1964).

In another speech, he rejected the accusation of being a reactionary, stating:

“I am saying clearly: Sir! We are not reactionaries in the sense you claim. We do not oppose the signs of civilization. Islam does not oppose civilization.” (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 294)

This theme was repeatedly emphasized:

“We are not against civilization. Show me one cleric who is against civilization.” (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 299)
“What part of civilization do we oppose? We oppose corruption.” (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 300)

The Pahlavi regime’s effort to depict clerics as “anti-civilization” forced Imam Khomeini to repeatedly clarify his stance. At one point, he stated:

“We are at the highest level of civilization. Islam is at the highest level of civilization. The esteemed religious authorities of Islam are at the highest level of civilization. Well, go see them—they are in Qom, in Mashhad, in Tehran, in Najaf—go see which of them is reactionary? The very people who travel by airplane and car then turn around and say that the nation should ride donkeys!” (Sahifa, Vol. 1, p. 301)

This discourse continued until the 2,500-year celebrations of Iranian monarchy, when the Pahlavi regime used ancient Persian civilization as a veiled attack on Islam. Imam Khomeini turned the argument against the Shah, declaring that:

“It is the Shah himself who stands against civilization!” (Sahifa, Vol. 3, p. 368)

A French journalist once questioned Imam Khomeini about the fact that both he and the Shah accused each other of being anti-civilization, suggesting that neither argument was convincing. (Sahifa, Vol. 3, p. 369). Imam Khomeini responded with irony, referring to the Shah as:

“The so-called ‘Mr. Great Civilization’—where is he now to see these slums and the suffering of his people?” (Sahifa, Vol. 3, p. 408)

Throughout his speeches leading up to the revolution, he contrasted the Shah’s rhetoric about civilization with the real suffering of the Iranian people—their poverty, oppression, and mass killings (Sahifa, Vol. 3, p. 506). During his exile in Paris, he stated:

“When we raise our voices, it is not because we want to eliminate all manifestations of civilization. They accuse the clerics of rejecting all signs of modernity, claiming we want to ride donkeys instead of using modern transportation. But we have accepted all manifestations of civilization.” (Sahifa, Vol. 4, p. 25)

Elsewhere, he said:

“We do not want the Iranian nation to be Westernized; we want it to progress and achieve civilization based on its own national and religious identity.” (Interview with Reuters, Sahifa, Vol. 4, p. 160)

And:

“With which aspect of civilization have the clerics ever opposed? We accept all manifestations of civilization.” (Sahifa, Vol. 4, p. 200)

Imam Khomeini’s critiques largely targeted the Shah’s claim to civilization, arguing that the Pahlavi regime’s modernization was merely the spread of corruption, prostitution, and moral decay under the guise of civilization (Sahifa, Vol. 4, p. 398).

He also argued that a country without freedom cannot be civilized:

“A country without freedom is not civilized.” (Sahifa, Vol. 5, pp. 32–33)

As discussions shifted towards Iran’s post-revolutionary future, the emphasis became that an Islamic government was synonymous with progress, civilization, and advancement (Sahifa, Vol. 5, p. 69):

“Under no circumstances has Islam ever opposed civilization. Islam itself laid the foundations of a great civilization in the world.” (Sahifa, Vol. 5, p. 204)

“In Islam, all forms of modernity and civilization are permissible—except those that lead to moral corruption.” (Sahifa, Vol. 5, p. 262)

These statements, mostly from his time in France, were meant to counter Western media’s portrayal of an Islamic government as anti-modernity. In response to journalists, he clarified:

“An Islamic government will not seek to eliminate civilization. It does not oppose universities or science. What we oppose are those aspects of civilization that corrupt our youth—not civilization itself.” (Sahifa, Vol. 5, p. 264)

In later years, Imam Khomeini emphasized replacing “Western civilization” with an “Islamic civilization”:

“We accept civilization, but we reject an ‘exported civilization’.” (Sahifa, Vol. 12, p. 25)

His final critiques of Western civilization, particularly during the Iran-Iraq War, declared:

“Today, in what they call the era of civilization and progress, it is in fact the age of devils.” (Sahifa, Vol. 19, p. 235)

The Emergence of an Anti-Western Philosophical Movement

Since the publication of The Conquest of Western Civilization by Fakhruddin Shadman in 1948, a philosophical (rather than purely religious) foundation for anti-Western thought was laid. Up to that point, critiques of the West had mainly revolved around its irreligion, cultural impiety, moral corruption, and excessive Westernization. It is worth noting that during the Constitutional Revolution, a strong intellectual movement also existed that saw an inherent conflict between Islam and the West, but over time, it faded from prominence. Now, however, a new intellectual discourse was emerging, not necessarily from a religious perspective but with the same fundamental idea of opposition to the West.

To understand this phenomenon, several key points must be considered:

1. Some aspects of the East-West conflict are unrelated to Islam. There has always been a form of competition between these two worldviews, and various theories have been proposed regarding their origins and distinctions. Islam was just one part of this broader discourse. Persian thought, as part of Eastern identity, along with Indian and Chinese philosophies, had always been defined in contrast to the West. Even some Western thinkers supported Eastern thought and developed theories emphasizing its uniqueness.
2. A philosophical movement centered around Seyyed Hossein Nasr, along with Western scholars like Henry Corbin and Toshihiko Izutsu, emerged in the late 1950s and continued through the 1960s and 1970s in Iran. This movement, which included Iranian philosophers such as Mehdi Mohaghegh and Seyyed Jalal Ashtiani, was part of a broader project on Eastern philosophy, and a crucial aspect of their discourse was the fundamental incompatibility between Eastern and Western thought.
   • This movement attracted numerous intellectuals and writers, including Dariush Shayegan and, for a period, even Bijan Assoori.
   • Among its key figures, Ahmad Fardid became especially influential, developing a network of dedicated followers in later years.
   • The common thread among these scholars was deep skepticism toward Western thought and a search for an alternative intellectual foundation.
   • Nasr’s works articulated this perspective, portraying Eastern knowledge as a sacred science, fundamentally incompatible with Western intellectual traditions.
   • Corbin, similarly, played an important role in shaping this discourse, particularly by framing Shi‘ism as an integral part of an Iranian mystical identity that had no common ground with the West.

This discourse emphasized the idea that Eastern thought possessed a spiritual dimension absent in Western civilization. This notion resonated with many religious scholars and intellectuals in Iran and beyond. When the Iranian Revolution occurred, this movement—minus Nasr, who faced political issues and left Iran—gained prominence. It attempted to revitalize Eastern thought, this time under the banner of Islam and Shi‘ism. The revolutionary trajectory necessitated an alternative to Western civilization. There were two possible approaches:

1. Constructing an entirely new civilization (as suggested by thinkers like Abul A’la Maududi), even establishing a Quranic foundation for natural sciences.
2. Reinventing Iranian wisdom (hikmat) as a means of countering Western influence.

As political tensions between Iran and the West escalated, the need for an independent intellectual path became increasingly urgent, reinforcing this anti-Western discourse. This had a profound impact on the ideological framework of the revolution, shaping the perception of the West within revolutionary thought.

This movement gained access to major centers of Islamic intellectual revival, particularly in history, culture, philosophy, and the arts. The post-revolutionary discourse on Western opposition—and even the rejection of modern science as a manifestation of Western dominance—was largely the product of this movement’s expansion and influence.

Some saw this movement as an opportunity to create a new civilization that was fundamentally distinct from the West. A key feature of this worldview was the insistence on the fundamental and irreconcilable differences between East and West, particularly between Islamic thought and Western thought. According to this perspective, a fundamental opposition existed between the two civilizations, making their synthesis impossible. This idea took various philosophical and intellectual forms, including:

• The concept of “Sacred Science” (Ilm-e Qudsi) in the East vs. Secular Science in the West
• The notion that Eastern knowledge is inherently connected to spiritual and divine realities, particularly in the Sadrian (Mulla Sadra) interpretation
• The portrayal of Western science as purely materialistic, created for the sake of domination and power

After the Islamic Revolution, this line of thinking spread across multiple fields, including philosophy, the arts, literature, and education. It also influenced management policies in state institutions, including:

• The national broadcasting organization (IRIB)
• The Ministry of Education
• Other state institutions focused on cultural production

The ultimate goal of this movement was to construct a civilization that was entirely distinct from the West. The philosophical justifications for this approach drew heavily from linguistic theories, the history of Western philosophy, and its intellectual trajectory, all to demonstrate the necessity of an alternative vision of civilization.

One of the most accessible expositions of this approach came from Morteza Meddapur, a student of Fardid, who explored philosophy and art from this perspective. Additionally, several philosophy professors at the University of Tehran played a major role in promoting these ideas.

In Qom, institutions were also established to develop an Islamic civilization that was entirely distinct from the West. This intellectual framework remains deeply embedded within the ruling establishment and continues to influence governmental policies. For Nasr and his intellectual circle, Islamic science was fundamentally opposed to Western science, as both were rooted in entirely different philosophical paradigms:

• Islamic knowledge is grounded in absolute divine truth
• Western knowledge is relativistic, lacking any intrinsic value, and is merely concerned with external material reality

In this interpretation, Western civilization is driven purely by materialism and scientific knowledge was developed solely as an instrument of power and control over nature.

There is no doubt that Nasr’s intellectual movement and his associates’ ideas became integrated into the post-revolutionary discourse, shaping Iran’s conception of Islamic civilization. It has continued to influence the theoretical foundations of Islamic civilization in Iran and has gathered a strong following among policymakers and intellectuals.

1. Source
2. See his two treatises on the nature of the Constitutional Revolution in Understanding the Urban Aspect of the Constitutional Movement, pp. 85–127
3. Islam and Modern Civilization, pp. 206–278