 | |
| Author | Ibn Warraq |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Subject | Islam |
| Publisher | Prometheus Books |
Publication date | May 1995 |
| Publication place | United States |
| Media type | Print (Hardcover andPaperback) |
| Pages | 294 pp |
| ISBN | 0-87975-984-4 |
| OCLC | 32088699 |
| 297 20 | |
| LC Class | BP169 .I28 1995 |
| Followed by | The Origins of The Koran: Classic Essays on Islam's Holy Book |
Why I Am Not a Muslim, a book written byIbn Warraq, is a critique ofIslam and theQur'an. It was first published byPrometheus Books in the United States in 1995. The title of the book is a homage toBertrand Russell's essay,Why I Am Not a Christian, in which Russell criticizes the religion in which he was raised.
Outraged over thefatwa and death threats againstSalman Rushdie, Ibn Warraq assumes apseudonym to write what the historian and writerDaniel Pipes called "serious and thought-provoking book" using a "scholarly sledgehammer" approach to "demolish" Islam.[1] Warraq claims the work is his contribution ('my war effort') in the struggle against the kinds of people who would want to murder Rushdie.[2]
The author's "polemic" criticizes Islam's mythology, theology, historic achievements, and current cultural influence.[1] Warraq, drawing largely on previous research, provides what English philosopherAntony Flew called an "invaluable compilation" of Islam's shortcomings. Flew wrote that the book "makes a compelling case" that Islam is "flatly incompatible" with "individual rights and liberties of a modern liberal, democratic, secular state".[3] According to Warraq, one either has to believe that the Qur'an is the word ofGod, or thatMuhammad was a liar. Moreover, progress made in moderncritical scholarship of the Bible has serious and possibly detrimental consequences for belief in theinerrancy of the Qur'an once it is subjected to the same type ofscholarly criticism.[2]
Dutch ArabistHans Jansen noted that 'it is remarkable that in this first book, Ibn Warraq makes no distinction at all between 'normal' Islam and Islamic fundamentalism. Both oppose the freedom of expression with all their might.' Jansen wondered whether the criticism of Islam that Warraq, Rushdie and other British–Indian writers such asV.S. Naipaul andArun Shourie displayed was perhaps so 'ruthless' – compared to the much milder approach commonly adopted byJudaeo-Christian writers – because of vestiges of 'Hindu prejudices', or because these authors felt no inhibition to scrutinise a fellowAbrahamic religion.[2]
