Arabic symbol





Philosophers of  the Arabs

George Tarabishi

Custom Search


      George Tarabishi (b. 1939), A Syrian thinker and translator, defends Islam as a culture and as a civilization within his view of 'the Islamic Secularism'; well known by his project of "Critique of Critique of the Arabic Reason".

His Life

Tarabishi was born in Halab, Syria, he earned a license in Arabic language, and a Masters degree in education from Damascus University. He worked as a manager of Damascus broadcast (1963-1964), and chief editor of the magazine "Arabic Studies (1972-1984), and chief editor of the magazine "the Unity" (1984-1989).

His Intellectual Life

The Intellectual production of George Tarabishi is marked by its diversity from translation of Freud, Hegel, Sartre, Garaudy and others, to writing about the 'Arabic Renaissance thought' and 'literal criticism of the Arabic novel'. He utilized the tools of 'Psychoanalysis' in his critical works of both the Arabic novel and the Arabic culture. In the second phase of his journey he turned out to the Arabic heritage and produced his encyclopedia 'Critique of critique of the Arabic raison', which included a reading and revision of both the philosophical Greek/European heritage, and the Arabic heritage in its philosophical, theological, and religious manifestations. He was introduced in his dialogue with the 'Middle east' newspaper (Al-Sharq Al-Awsat), January 2008, as follows,

When talking about the Syrian thinker and researcher George Tarabishi, one should take a long stand in front of his major accomplishments in the field of thought. In addition to his translations of the works of the major Western thinkers and philosophers, such as Hegel, Freud, Sartre, and Simone de Beauvoir, which exceeded 200 books, Tarabishi has accomplished a number of researches and studies in the areas of philosophy, general thought, and literature criticism, such as: "Marxism and the Nationality issue", "the sickness
by the West", "Heretics - about democracy, secularism, modernism and the Arabic resistance", "God in the symbolic journey of Naguib Mahfouz", and "East and west, Virility and Femininity – A study in the crisis of gender in the Arabic fiction".
However, the most important intellectual project of George Tarabishi is his encyclopedia "Critique of Critique of the Arabic reason", which the Syrian researcher Abdulrazzaq Eid rated it as one of the most important three intellectual encyclopedias that dealt with the intellectual Arab/Islamic heritage in the twentieth century. He refers here to the encyclopedia of the Egyptian thinker Ahmad Amin which is composed of three parts "the dawn, the morning, and the noon of Islam", and the encyclopedia of the Moroccan thinker Muhammad Abed Aljabri "Critique of the Arabic Reason". For, Tarabishi has endeavored over 20 years, which is the age of his project, to respond to the project of Aljabri through re-reading the Arabic heritage, and using it later on in the battle of modernity against those who preach for pre-modernity.

His intellectual Journey

The intellectual journey of George Tarabishi may be divided, generally, into two basic phases; each of them has its own specific rout, too. In the first phase, he embraced modern Western ideologies such as Marxism and Nationalism, with complete break with the Arab/Islamic heritage. In the second, he moved toward discovering such a heritage, in general, and toward his critique of the famous work "Critique of the Arabic Reason", in particular. In an interview with 'Alhayat' newspaper (Jan. 2006), he says,

I have first to confess that the generation to which I belong, which followed two previous generations of renaissance thought, and which has been called the generation of the revolution, has lived and we lived with it a complete break with our heritage. Our thought has been devoted to the modern Western ideologies, which turned out in our hands to be sacred texts, either Marxist, Nationalist or Socialist. We lived a complete break with the heritage, which we viewed as old yellow books. Due to the failure of our 'modernizing' project, and the failure of 'our revolution', which was successful only in burning itself and us, in addition to the plangent fall of the ideologies which followed our discovery of the scandal that plagued Marxism through governing in its name for about three quarters of a century. Due to all of this, an essential change occurred, especially that all of this followed the defeat of 1967, and the proliferation of extremism and violence in the name of Islam.
All of this made us, or at least made me personally, reconsider my cultural heritage to discover the gap between me and our heritage. As a result, with no expectation from me, my relation with the heritage started to activate, for I discovered in it an alternative of my homeland, from which I left. From this point came my interest of the project of the Moroccan thinker Muhammad Abed Aljabri, who were the first to introduce the notion of the 'Critique of the Arabic reason', purporting for it to be an epistemological critique, using modern methodologies. I found his project, in the beginning, the opposite of the project on which I have lived. Nevertheless, the journey of admiration of Aljabri didn't continue for long, for quickly I felt that this thinker has introduced the correct title but missed his shot. In other words, he didn't perform the process of criticism, which we expected, on the contrary, he confiscated the process of criticism, which we waited for long. On the other hand, I discovered that the West didn't build itself except as much as it has criticized itself. The Western reason has become prevailing and international in its civilization when it indulged in
to a process of self-criticism. But we, who possess a bequeathed heritage that is not less important or sizable than that the Western intellectuals bequeathed, will not be able to continue the process of modernization and reach the required renaissance unless we perform the same process to which the West has subjected itself to. We will not be able to fight the battle of modernism barren from real criticism.

Such transformation through which Tarabishi's thought has passed did not represent replacement of old ideas by new ones, but a continuous process of self-criticism and an accumulation of experience and reconstruction. Thus,

If I had surpassed my Marxist, nationalist, and existentialist stages, this doesn't mean that I didn't keep from these 'stops' elements that still play its role in the overall resultant of my intellectual journey. (Alsharq Alawst Newspaper dialogue, Jan. 2008)

His Philosophical Project

The philosophical project of George Tarabishi has three dimensions. The first, works on transferring and translating the major important works of the modern Western thought into Arabic. The second concentrates on criticizing modern and contemporary Arab/Islamic thought. The third is devoted to search in the Arab/Islamic heritage, on the basis of a process of a wide and extensive critique of the above mentioned project of Professor Muhammad Abed Aljabri titled 'Critique of the Arabic Reason".

For Tarabishi, this work, which he criticizes, is no more than a suitable point to confirm his philosophical interest in searching deeply in the Arab/Islamic heritage. In the introduction of his book (Critique of critique of the Arabic reason – the resigned reason in Islam", he says,

In fact, Aljabri has introduced for me the occasion, the starting point, but not the end point. For my project is no longer a project of Critique of critique, it turned out to be a re-reading, re-excavation, and re-foundation, or at least that is what I hope it to be. (P. 9).

His Methodology

Tarabishi implements in his huge project two types or two levels of methodology. The first pertains to dealing with the contemporary Arab/Islamic problems of renaissance. The second is related to the issues of the Arab/Islamic heritage and his project of "Critique of critique of the Arabic reason".

With respect to contemporary renaissance problems, he implements the psychoanalysis methodology in order to analyze and criticize the intellectual and cultural contemporary Arabic realities. In his book "the Arab intellects and heritage: the psychoanalysis of a collective paranoia", he describes the difficulties of applying the methodology of the psychoanalysis on contemporary Arabic discourse. The difficulties, according to Tarabishi, arise from the fact that the 'objective' structure of such a discourse appears to be separate from the self of its producers. However, he asserts, major events in the lives of nations and communities create wide range reactions of the individuals that are similar in nature, which makes it appear as if the behavior of the whole community is similar to the behavior of a single person, and hence, can be subjected to the human sciences and psychoanalysis. (P.9)

In addition, Tarabishi depends on re-interpretation of heritage texts in order to understand it within its historical and social context, he says,

I don't construe modernism as a complete break, epistemological break is something, and break with the text is another, modernism is an epistemological break… What is the epistemological break? It is to be performed on the level of understanding the texts, re-interpreting it, not ignoring it. We are a heritage nation, overwhelmed with heritage from the top of our heads to the toes of our feet, therefore, we can't enter modernism bared from such texts, it is the founder of all what we have… We should understand these texts in view of our needs not as the ancient understood it. (Dialogue, Islam online, July 2008)

With respect to dealing with heritage through his project of "Critique of critique of the Arabic reason", he implements the methodology of deconstruction in order to reconsider the 'epistemological' basis of Aljabri's text. Afterwards he implements the archeological methodology, as well as that of historical criticism in order to uncover the basic heritage concepts that underlie the notions that are presented in Aljabri's text. And finally, he implements re-constructive methodology in order to reconstruct such concepts and notions in its correct form, on the basis of his previous criticism. An example of his epistemological critique is the following excerpt,

The technique of the ad-hoc of concepts, which Aljabri's epistemology performs, violates both conditions together. It violently detaches the concepts from its original context and pushes it with no less violence into the weave of the new system. Aljabri's epistemology cuts its concepts from the body of the text and sews it into the other body without any methodological precautions. (The Problematic of the Arabic reason, P. 291).

Tarabishi afterwards gives an example of such a problem and introduces a detailed analysis to uncover the deep epistemological problems of such a text. He discusses Aljabri' usage of the concepts of the 'epistemological system' (the episteme) which is borrowed from Michel Foucault and the 'unconscious structure', which is borrowed from Claude Lévi-Strauss. He then ends up by concluding that Aljabri implemented those concepts detached from its scientific contexts, and hence, didn't realize that it contradicts each other. (The Problematic of the Arabic reason, P. 291-292).

The Civilizational Islam

The basic philosophical position, which Tarabishi defends in his second phase, is what we may call 'the Civilizational Islam". For, Tarabishi deals with Islam itself, as a religion, and with the Islamic heritage (in all its theological, philosophical, scientific, and religious aspects) as the heritage of the Arabic cultural itself. The basic intellectual starting point for this position is his concept of the "secular Islam". Which means that Islam has no sacred cultural material except the Holy Qur'an [the Holy text of Islam], and that all of the social activities in the early days of Islam, i.e., in the early days of the Islamic state, has been secular in essence. Not only that, but also he founds such a position on the texts of the Holy Qur'an itself, and the sayings and actions of the prophet Muhammad (Al-Sunnah) [Sunnah is the second source of jurisdiction in Islam, after the Holy Qur'an], as well as the activities of the early Muslims.

This position appears clearly in his numerous dialogues in which he states such a position. It appears clearly, also, in his in-depth analyses of the Arab/Islamic heritage in his project of "Critique of critique of the Arabic reason". In a dialogue with Al-Arabi magazine (June 1998) he defends such a position as follows,

There is a need for us to recognize that we, as a nation, possess the most comprehensive heritage in comparison with the other nations of the world. Even the Greek heritage is not comparable in size to the Arab/Islamic heritage, India despite its huge heritage does not match the size of that of the Arab/Islamic culture… We have to reconcile with that ancient history, because we are the sons of this historical continuity, which started before Islam. In addition, we can't understand Islam without returning to the 'Jahelyah' (i.e., the time before Islam), and before 'Jahelyah' also, for such a heritage will help us to understand ourselves. I belief that the issue of the heritage is an essential issue, but it is subject to the conditions of the modern reading, for, we need the past to be contemporary to us. Here I see that the reading which takes its queue from modernism and its methodologies to construct such a continuity with the heritage, can add to, and enrich, the self.

Tarabishi doesn't depend only on the historical analysis in defending his concept of the 'Civilizational Islam', but also through analysis of the sacred text of Islam. In a dialogue with the website 'Islam on line', July 2008, he describes this view as follows,

I didn't exclude the text, and it is the subject of my next work, for, my new book which carries the following title, which may bear some of courage, and for some it may be intimidating, "God and the Prophet: the legislator, and the subject of legislation". In Qur'an the right of Legislation is only for God, even the messenger doesn't have the right of legislation. I have returned to dozens of verses that limit the authority of the messenger from everything except revelation. If it was a revelation, then God speaks, if the messenger speaks, then he might make mistakes. For, the messenger is human, and this is a major value for Islam, in contrast with other religions, which made prophets Gods, such as what happened in Christianity when it made Christ God. Therefore, in Qur'an itself there is a clear duality between God and the human messenger, between the creator and sender of the message, which is God, and the receiver, which is a human being, and this is a major and existing differentiation.

The depth of Tarabishi's dealing with 'the Civilizational Islam' appears in all of his works in his second phase, in general, and his project of 'Critique of critique of the Arabic reason', in particular. For example he discusses in his book "The Problematic of the Arabic reason", (p. 66 -67), a very technical point that relates to the sayings of the prophet Muhammad 'Al-Hadith'. In his discussion, he introduces his view that such sayings has been inflated in volume due to irrational causes, which is in contradiction with the heart of the Islamic message. Therefore, he calls for brave 'archeological' studies that uncover the roots of the phenomenon of the inflation of the 'Hadith'.

Another example is his historical-analytical defense of 'the Civilizational Islam' presenting it as more rational than the 'Civilizational Christianity', in his book "the Fates of Philosophy between Islam and Christianity", (P. 9 -10). He first attacks the view that makes contrast between an open rational Christianity and an irrational closed Islam, which is the prevailing view in the West. He depicts such a view as ideological and void from any historical reality. This view is supported in his work by historical evidences that prove that the early Christianity has been hostile toward the rational philosophical Greek heritage. On the other hand, he proves historically that such a heritage has flourished within the Islamic civilization.

Critique of Critique of the Arabic Reason

"Critique of the Arabic Reason" is a major project authored by the Moroccan thinker Muhammad Abed Aljabri. The project is composed of four parts, "Formation of the Arabic Reason", "the Structure of the Arabic Reason", "the Political Arabic Reason", and "the Ethical Arabic Reason". We may also add a previous work by Aljabri titled "We and the Heritage" to that project.

The project includes deep and comprehensive details and analyses of the Arab/Islamic heritage. Such analyses has ended up by several basic categories and principles, the most important is the division of the Arab/Islamic reason into two major schools, the Eastern school, and the Western school. The first, i.e., the eastern, is descriptive (Bayanya in Arabic) and Sufi /intuitive (E'rfanya in Arabic), i.e., an irrational religious school. The second, i.e., the Western, is evidential (Burhanya, in Arabic), i.e., a secular rational school.

Tarabishi's project of 'Critique of critique of the Arabic reason' is in essence an endeavor of 'destruction' of the epistemological basis over which the project is established, and hence, a destruction of the results he ended up with. It is possible to divide his critique of such work into a critique of the methodology of Aljabri, a critique of the facts upon which Aljabri constructs his project, and a critique of what he calls 'the epistemological functional exploitation' of both the methods and facts.

On the basis of such multilevel critique Tarabishi accuses Aljabri that 'he counterfeits, on a wide range, his evidences and scientific facts', and that he misunderstands the epistemological basis of his project, and consequently, he accuses him by what he calls 'the epistemological opportunism', i.e., utilizing epistemological conceptions, incorrectly, in order to fulfill specific ideological goals. On the whole, Tarabishi sees that such a project doesn't deserve the title 'Critique of the Arabic reason' and that Aljabri has aborted such an aim.

In a dialogue with 'Alsharq Alawsat' (Jan. 2008) newspaper he mentions that he was fascinated by the project at the beginning, but he later on discovered that he utilizes counterfeited evidences; in his words,

I have repeatedly stated that I have been fascinated at the beginning by the book of Aljabri "Formation of the Arabic Reason'… What made me move on to the position of criticism, is that I discovered by mere chance that Aljabri forms his fascinating problematic on the basis of counterfeit evidences deliberately in order to force the reader to conclude the results he wants, on the basis of a prior ideological position.

Tarabishi's critical position is apparent in his extensive analysis of Aljabri's work, supported by numerous historical, social, and textual evidences. For example, in (the Resigned Reason in Islam, P. 11), he describes the central idea in Aljabri's project as follows,

East and West in Aljabri's project aren't merely two geographical categories, rather, they are elevated to the status of two epistemological categories that define the knowledge system of Reason in general. What is related to the West represents the principle of rationalism in its highest form: evidence. While, what is related to the East its chance of rationalism is relegated to the status of 'Albayan' (description), if not to a more lower level, which is the status of 'Al-E'rfan' (Sufi/intuition) – the lower kingdom of irrationalism – in case it lies in the east of the east.

The main concern, in Tarabishi's view, behind such a systematic division of the Arabic reason is that it reckons on an underlying sectarian (ideological) division. As a consequence he expresses his shock from the straightforward expression of Aljabri that divides the Arabic knowledge system into three separate 'national/ethnic' systems, as follows,

What is stunning is that the author of the Critique of the Arabic reason doesn't find it enough to found each reason of the three different ones in a separate knowledge system that is standing by itself, nor to 'iconize' it and give it an inherent 'essence'. But he moves forward to make it a differentiating symbol between different civilizational and national identities in a way that the most extreme idealistic theories about the soul of the 'people' and the geniuses of nations haven't dared to do. For he says literally, with extreme scientific irresponsibility: "we look to the Arabic reason as a production of the Arab/Islamic culture which is founded on three knowledge systems: a linguistic knowledge system Arabic in origin, a Gnostic knowledge system Persian in origin, and a rational knowledge system Geek in origin. (The Problematic of the Arabic Reason, P. 285)

Another example is Tarabishi's attack of 'Aljabri's epistemology' on the basis that it purports to chatter the unity of the knowledge system of the Arabic reason, in "the Unity of the Arabic Reason", P. 139, he writes,

This text uncovers the central teleology that commands Aljabri's project of Critique of the Arabic reason: the ideological exploitation of epistemology in order to chatter the unity of the knowledge system of the Arabic reason. And, since the purpose justifies the means, as it is said, Aljabri elevates the antagonism between Ibn Rushd and Ibn Sina [Avicenna, in English literature] about the interpretation of the Aristotelian system to the level of the epistemological break. After that, he hastens to elevate the two parties of the antagonism to a generalized break on the level of the theoretical thought, between the East as a whole and the West as a whole, as a soul, as a system and as a reason.

This division of the Arabic reason into three different 'types', which characterizes Aljabri's project, has been established through a series of central arguments that underpin this division. Consequently, Tarabishi's strategy in his project of 'Critique of the critique', is to attack those underpinnings. Such a strategy has forced Tarabishi to perform detailed archeological and historical studies in order to be able, on the basis of scientific studies and historical facts, to undermine the value or even to discredit those underpinnings of the Aljabri's project.

Therefore, Tarabishi studies extensively in his "the Unity of the Arabic Reason" (pages 11 – 98), the rationality of Ibn Sina (Avicenna). From one side, he studies his relation to what is termed the 'Eastern philosophy', and proves at the end that such a philosophy has no objective basis. From the other side, he studies the relation of the works of Ibn Sina to the ancient Greek thought, and proves that he was not antagonist to the rational Greek philosophical thought. Thus undermines one of the basic premises over which Aljabri constructs his concept of the 'Eastern irrational E'rfani reason', which is his attack on Ibn Sina as the major 'irrational Eastern thinker'.

In the same vein, Tarabishi studies extensively in his 'the Problematic of the Arabic Reason' (pages 9 – 71) the rationality of the Arabic language and its effect on the Arabic reason. Through his linguistic study he refutes the thesis that the Arabic language has not been developed and changed over history, and that it suffers from structural deficiencies that make it defiant to rationality and scientific studies. Such accusations are again an essential basic premise of Aljabri's 'irrational Bayani Eastern Arabic reason'.

Similarly he performs extensive as well as reconstructive effort to study the ancient book titled "The Nabati Agriculture" (Nabat are ancient people lived in south Iraq), in his book "The Resigned Reason in Islam" (Pages 177 – 285). Here he reconstructs the work through studying its date of writing, who is the writer, and through analyzing its content and valuing its rational content. In his analysis he refutes Aljabri's assessment of the work which asserts that it is about magic, and hence, irrational in nature, and proves that such work is about agriculture as a science and reckons on the experience of agriculture. Therefore, he refutes one of the basic evidences that Aljabri introduces to support his thesis of the 'irrational Eastern Arabic Reason'.


Tarabishi takes a firm position from the issue of secularism, which is that Islam is only a religion, and the social practices even in the early Islamic societies were in essence secular. Moreover, he sees that the concept of secularism in Islam is much stronger than its counterpart in Christianity, and such a concept existed in the Islamic cultural heritage before its appearance in the Christian West. Therefore, he defends strongly his concept about secularism in Islam from the heart of the Islamic traditional thought itself. He says in a dialogue with Islam online website (July 2008),

What I found in the history of Islam equals if not greatly exceeds such a Biblical discriminative sentence between God and Caesar… There is at least fifteen narratives that assert such a discriminative orientation between the world and the 'hereafter', between matters of the real world which is the subject of knowledge of people and matters of the hereafter which is the subject of knowledge of God…I say all of this as a response to the orientalist view which purports to keep the Islamic world outside the modern history, and states that it has no entrance to such modernity due to religious reasons… For, Islam throughout its entire history has known the duality of the world and the hereafter, and the duality of state and religion, the kingship and prophecy… secularism in the meaning of differentiation between these two levels is not new for Islam.

However, secularism for Tarabishi, doesn't have a fixed form that is ready for application, rather the Arab/Islamic society should possess its own concept of secularism.

I believe that separation between the state and religion is not enough in the Arabic arena, but secularism should penetrate the society itself, otherwise we will face a conundrum similar to that which tears Turkey today, as a result of its division into a secular state and an Islamic, or re-Islamized, society. (Dialogue – Alsharq Alawsat newspaper, Jan. 2008)

In addition, Tarabishi places much effort to support his concept of secularism in the Islamic society from within the Holy Qur'an itself. Thus, he discusses in his "Heretics – About Democracy, Secularism, Modernism, and Resistance", (P. 38), the expression 'God's verdict' in verse: 43, chapter: 5. He concludes that "this verse should be understood in the context of the previous two verses, and hence should include Al-Torah beside the Holy Qur'an as a source of such 'verdict', which contradicts the understanding of political Islam.

The Future of the Arabic Renaissance

The view of George Tarabishi is that achieving the Arabic renaissance is Governed by liberating the Arabic mind, in general, and achieving a religious revolution, in particular, through a radical process of criticism of the Arab/Islamic heritage. His vision is that such a condition didn't realize until now, and it is not expected to realize in the near future. He describes the obstacles that confront the modern Arabic renaissance thought in his dialogue with Alhayat newspaper as follows,

The modern Arabic renaissance project has developed under a heavy effect of colonialism in our area… Consequently, the renaissance intellectual had to build and deconstruct himself at the same time. He had to fight colonialism and build renaissance. As a result he was lost between the two issues. He couldn't overcome colonialism, nor he could build a real intellectual critical renaissance thought… For me, I have discovered later on that we are in urgent need to criticism… But I discovered also that a self-defense mental complex has been formed in our unconsciousness as a result of the colonial period, and that such a complex increases by time. As a result of 1967 war such a complex has turned out to be a collective paranoia, which forced us to search for compromise in fantasies that don't exist. From here we understand why many of the nationalist and Marxist intellectuals have ended up being extremists or mystical.

However, despite his general optimism and his trust in the power of the Arab/Islamic culture, Tarabishi takes at the end a pessimistic stance. In a dialogue with Al-Arabi Magazine (June 1998) he says,

We, the Arabs, should be the least of all nations to be afraid from the inability of assimilating the modern culture, because we have a wide historical experience in assimilation and surpassing what we have assimilated toward developing a new richer and deeper culture. I am not afraid from the future despite all the factors of pessimism in the Arabic reality today. I keep some feeling of optimism because I believe in the existence of factors that invite to optimism, despite that there are factors that outweigh optimism. Here we note a simple paradox: we lived in the beginning of this century[the twentieth] with Al-Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, Qassem Amin and Alkawakeby [major reformists in the modern Arab/Islamic world] when we were eager to enter civilization and modernism. And I fear that we enter the end of the century with prevailing invitations to get out of it, and I think that this is a major paradox in our current Arabic culture.

 The Future of the Arabic Philosophy

Tarabishi sees that there is no contemporary Arabic philosophy, moreover, he sees that current circumstances pose obstacles for the appearance of such a philosophy. In his book "Heretics – About Democracy, Secularism, Modernism, and Resistance" (P. 59-61) he says,

Let's start by stating a real fact, which is that there is no existence of a modern or contemporary Arabic philosophy. Even if such a philosophy existed it is a translated philosophy, or born through translation. This is valid with respect to Yusef Karam's Thomism, Abdelrahman Badawy's existentialism, Osman Amin's Internalism, Aziz Lehbabi's Character doctrine, Samir Amin's Marxism, Hassan Hanfi's Feuerbachism and Husserlism together. However, when we state this fact we have to combine with it an explanation, and hence, we should ask: why there is no, and nearly impossible, for a modern or contemporary Arabic philosophy to exist? In order to answer this question we observe, as we see it, three combined chains of reasons.
First, contemporary philosophy itself, on the level of the whole world, is in crisis. Such a crisis is related essentially to the rise of science, which replaces philosophy in many areas…
Second, the advancement of the European thought, which produced modernity, has made the basic aim of the Arabic thought limited to entering such modernity. The Western civilization, due to its leadership into modernity, became the controller of the intellectual time of the other cultures…
Third, philosophy doesn't flourish except in a medium of autonomy of reason. Without going into details, we see that rationalism, which is the essential condition for the birth of philosophy, is still far from possessing top priority in contemporary Arabic culture. We don't mean by rationalism anything other than such a simple and revolutionary principle together: that no other authority should be above the authority of reason. But the authority of the Arabic culture is still crowned by the authority of religion.

His Works

In English:

Woman Against Her Sex: A Critique of Nawal El-saadawi, Saqi Books, 1989.

Dialogues (in Arabic)

Articles about him (in Arabic)

By: Samir Abuzaid