Mohammed Arkoun - Islamic Subversion or Reformism in Disguise?

Arkoun's works present a nuanced dialectic, moving between subversion and reform, and at times the latter under the guise of the former.

Mar 21, 2025

To Reform or To Subvert?

The stimulating rhetorical question ‘To Reform or to Subvert?' encapsulates the very essence of the dialectic at the core of this discussion, stemming from Mohammed Arkoun's notable attempts to establish the foundations for challenging traditional systems of Islamic thought. At the forefront of his philosophy lies a resounding call for a critical reassessment of Islamic thought, advocating the need to subvert established systems rooted within religious discourse. Yet, whilst Arkoun desires to position himself as a thinker focused on subversion, there persists a debate questioning whether his advocacy for subversion merely disguises a form of reformism.

Mohammed Arkoun remains one of the most provocative and underappreciated figures in modern Islamic thought. This piece explores how Arkoun’s critique of Islamic reason, his advocacy for "Emerging Reason," and his dissection of power and authority in Islam all indicate an agenda that, while radical in tone, leans more towards reform than outright subversion. This discourse portrays Arkoun's approach as layered, resisting strict categorisation as purely reformist or subversive and revealing complexity between both inclinations within his arguments, While his work contains subversive elements, the overarching intent implies a desire for reform veiled within the framing of subversion; as Tibi (2009, p. 72) iterates: '[t]he "subversion" consists purely of rhetorics.' Much of this intent can be discerned from the contextual influences that informed and shaped his thought.

Context

Arkoun, a prominent intellectual figure from the Kabylia region, rose from humble beginnings under French colonial rule, deeply shaping his views on identity, power dynamics, and the tension between tradition and modernity (Lee, 2019). His early experiences of marginalisation, primarily due to his social status, and governmental suppression of diverse perspectives, motivated Arkoun’s commitment to challenging orthodoxies within Islamic discourse (Arkoun, 2008, 2014).

Arkoun’s critical approach to Islamic thought drew significantly from his academic background in postmodern literary theory. This influence shaped his reinterpretation of the Qur’an, utilising post-structural methodologies in contrast to rigid structuralist frameworks. He emphasised the need to ‘decompose’ these frameworks (Derrida, 1988, p.2), advocating for a paradigm shift - a new form of ijtihad, or critical re-examination of Islamic thought, within the context of modernity (Arkoun, 2003, p.18).

A pivotal aspect of Arkoun’s work was his interdisciplinary approach, which integrated social and human sciences into Islamic thought. His intellectual trajectory was deeply influenced by thinkers such as Ricoeur, Derrida, and Hussein (Kersten, 2011; Arkoun, 2019a). Arkoun shared Hussein’s drive to apply modern critical tools to religious matters, aiming to create a new humanism that transcended traditional dogma by treating religions as cultures, not just doctrines. This vision sought inclusivity, accommodating a variety of traditions and practices. Arkoun’s approach mirrored the deconstructionist philosophy of Derrida (Kersten, 2011, p.23), embracing hermeneutics, semiotics, linguistics, and critical discourse analysis to unearth the layered meanings in Islamic texts and traditions.

By identifying and subverting unthought aspects, Arkoun sought to open new possibilities for critical engagement with the Islamic tradition. He emphasised that rendering these ‘unthinkable’ notions intelligible was not only a religious but a historical imperative (Arkoun, 2003, p.18).

The Critique of Islamic Reason

Arkoun’s intellectual project was, at its core, an epistemological one. He was concerned with the limitations imposed on Islamic thought by its historical and doctrinal developments. He called for a "new impetus" in Islamic studies, urging scholars to adopt a critical and historical approach rather than a purely theological one (Günther, 2006, p. 152).

A crucial aspect of Arkoun’s critique was his distinction between the "Qur’anic fact" and the "Islamic fact" (Arkoun, 2006). The former refers to the original, fluid, and evolving transmission of the Qur'an, while the latter represents the rigidified, codified version institutionalised by religious and political authorities. This distinction allowed Arkoun to argue that much of what is accepted as Islamic orthodoxy is, in fact, a historical construct rather than an immutable truth. The codification of the Qur'anic fact into the Islamic facti 'abolish[es] this openness' that once existed as a thinkable space (Filali-Ansary and Esmail, 2012, p.36).

His critique extended to the "unthinkable" in Islamic thought, borrowing from Lucien Febvre’s concept of "l’impensé." Arkoun argued that certain areas of inquiry had been rendered intellectually off-limits due to ideological constraints imposed by religious scholars and political powers (Arkoun, 2006, p. 8). By identifying and challenging these limitations, he sought to create a space for unrestricted scholarly inquiry.

An example of this "unthinkable" in Islamic thought is exemplified in his discussion of the Arabic language and its sacralisation. He argued that over time, Arabic became more than just a linguistic tool - it was transformed into a sacred, untouchable medium, limiting critical inquiry. The codification of Classical Arabic, particularly through the standardisation of Qur'anic Arabic, created an illusion of linguistic immutability, preventing alternative interpretations of Islamic texts. Arkoun challenged this by emphasising the historical evolution of language, arguing that treating Arabic as a fixed, divine entity stifles intellectual engagement and modern reinterpretation of Islamic thought. By questioning this linguistic rigidity, he sought to break the ideological constraints that made such discussions "unthinkable" in traditional Islamic discourse.

Ultimately, his aim is for a subversion that targets subjects traditionally inaccessible due to religious or political 'taboos,' challenging established traditions and beliefs; and, to question why these notions became taboo in the first place (ibid, p.61 ).

Emerging Reason: A Reformist Framework?

One of Arkoun’s key contributions to Islamic thought was his concept of "Emerging Reason," which he described as a mode of critical-historical examination that challenges dominant forms of reasoning across history (Kersten, 2011, p. 35). Emerging Reason, unlike procedural reason, does not merely improve existing methodologies but actively disrupts entrenched epistemologies.

Yet, even in its radical implications, Emerging Reason aligns with reformist tendencies. Arkoun was not advocating for the wholesale rejection of Islamic tradition but for its critical reassessment and modernisation. His emphasis on historicity—the idea that all knowledge is historically contingent—suggests that he saw Islamic thought as adaptable rather than static (Arkoun, 2003, p. 24).

Arkoun (2006) contrasts the evolution of Christian theology with the stagnation he perceives in Islamic thought. While Christianity adapted during the Enlightenment and capitalist rise, revising its dogmas and societal roles, Arkoun argues that Islamic thought remains constrained by fixed concepts like violence, the sacred, and truth. This stagnation prevents Islamic principles from engaging with modern issues like governance and secularism.

This places him in opposition to both revivalist movements, which seek to return to a supposedly "pure" Islam, and fundamentalist interpretations that resist change. Instead, his approach resonates with the modernist-reformist tradition in Islamic thought, which sees the Qur’an as a text whose meaning must be continually reinterpreted in light of contemporary challenges.

Arkoun calls for a critical re-engagement with Islamic thought, suggesting that Emerging Reason might either subvert or reform traditional interpretations. Though his methods appear subversive, aiming to dismantle fixed Islamic reasoning, Emerging Reason also serves as a constructive force, offering new perspectives by addressing marginalised aspects. Kersten (2011, p.36) links Arkoun’s approach to Derrida’s ideas on transcending Eurocentric views, aligning with Arkoun’s efforts to cultivate intercultural dialogue and reform within Islamic thought by broadening its scope and engaging with other traditions.

Power, Authority, and the Myth of the "Authentic Madina Model"

Arkoun’s critique extended beyond theology to the structures of power within Islamic history. He took particular aim at the concept of political legitimacy in Muslim societies, arguing that contemporary ulema have largely functioned as gatekeepers of dogma rather than as facilitators of critical discourse (Arkoun, 2006, p. 364). Arkoun (2019, p.xi) 'minces no words in his critique of those who would exploit Islam for ideological purposes, either to legitimise political aspirations or to delegitimise the efforts of others.'

He challenged the romanticised view of early Islamic governance, the "Authentic Madina Model," as an ideal to be restored in modern times. According to Arkoun, this model had been mythologised to serve political ends, masking the historical complexities of the early Islamic period (ibid.). His analysis of events like the First Muslim Civil War (al-Fitnah al-Kubra) illustrates how theological narratives were retrospectively imposed on what were, at their core, political conflicts.

Arkoun (2006) critiques the concept of ahl al-sunna wal-jama’a (followers of the Prophet’s tradition), arguing that it became a post-facto doctrine that shaped both religious reasoning within the Muslim community and pre-modern religious thought. He traces its emergence to the Abbasid period, a time of consolidating Islamic authority and codifying theology and jurisprudence. During this period, the concept transformed into an orthodox representation that created a defined split between the followers of the Prophet's tradition and other factions (Arkoun, 2006, p. 405–406).

His critique challenges the sacralisation of terms and concepts in Islamic thought, urging a critical re-examination of their historical evolution. His goal is not to undermine these beliefs but to reinterpret them within their sociopolitical context. This critique forms a foundation for reworking Islamic political thought by reassessing the power dynamics and religious authority that shaped current systems. Arkoun advocates for a contextual evaluation of historical events that led to the imposition of religious frameworks on politics, aiming for reform rather than complete dismantling.

Yet, his critique of authority does not seek to abolish religious legitimacy altogether. Rather, it calls for a reassessment of how power and authority function in Muslim societies today. In this sense, his work is not an outright rejection of Islamic governance but an effort to redefine its foundations in a way that is more historically and intellectually honest.

Subversion or Reform?

While Arkoun’s work is often framed as subversive, much of his intellectual project is geared towards reconstruction rather than destruction. His concept of Emerging Reason, his call for a historical-critical approach to Islamic texts, and his critique of political legitimacy all point to an attempt to reform Islamic thought from within.

This is why Arkoun remains a contested figure. To his critics, his methodology appears dangerously radical, even destabilising. To his supporters, he represents a necessary corrective to centuries of intellectual stagnation in the Muslim world. In reality, his project is neither purely subversive nor merely reformist—it occupies a liminal space between the two, challenging fixed categories and pushing the boundaries of what is intellectually possible.

As Arkoun himself once wrote: "To identify the unthought and the unthinkable is necessarily to subvert" (Arkoun, 2006, p. 8). But if that subversion ultimately leads to reconstruction, is it truly subversion at all?

Daniyal’s Substack

Discussion about this post