Islam, Academia and the Coloniality of Knowledge

A rising body of academic literature on decolonization has demonstrated that the production of knowledge is largely subjected to imperial and colonial designs across the world. While “invisibilizing” and “subalternizing” other epistemes, the geopolitics of knowledge universalizes European thought as scientific truths (Walsh 2007, 224). The hegemonic geopolitics of knowledge is even present in the ideological and theoretical orientation of many recognized academics who are considered as the proponents and producers of critical theory (Walsh 2007, 224).

The same phenomenon might be observed in the academic production of knowledge on Islamic studies in the West and beyond. The aim of this study is not just to show the colonialist attitudes toward traditional knowledge systems but to trace the process of the hierarchization of modern knowledge over any other epistemologies. To trace the colonialist attitudes, this study begins with scrutinizing classical anthropological knowledge production followed by the anthropology of Islam or Muslim societies and modern/secular speculations in Qur’anic studies. While the worldwide discussion on decolonization is happening within the academic space, the idea of decolonization of the concept of the “knowledge” itself is largely overlooked and this is no different within the academic disciplines including Islamic studies, Qur’anic studies, postcolonial studies, Middle Eastern and South Asian studies. If we look at the universalized knowledge system (Westernized university) and the imposed relationship between knowledge and scientific methods, there exists a “grammar of knowledge production”. In this context, does the project of decolonization act as a “complete disorder” to challenge or destabilize the “grammar of knowledge production” or produce knowledge maintaining the “sacred methodologies” set by the West?

The aim of decolonization was not to color the prison of coloniality by establishing numerous area studies and having the pseudo-pleasure of breaking the “iron cage”. Instead, it was aimed at breaking the prison itself. How far we have travelled towards the goal, what should be the goal today, and its actual realization needs to be pondered upon critically. This study concludes with a humble attempt to do so and unpack the multifaceted dimensions of the “grammar of knowledge production” and how it dilutes the revolutionary spirit of decolonization and reproduces the “coloniality of knowledge” within the “colonial matrix of power” even when we are witnessing the current hype of decolonization/decoloniality within Western academic space and beyond.