{"id":140679,"date":"2020-05-26T15:59:35","date_gmt":"2020-05-26T15:59:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/?p=140679"},"modified":"2020-05-27T00:05:21","modified_gmt":"2020-05-27T00:05:21","slug":"what-exactly-is-islamic-architecture-and-is-architecture-a-problematic-concept","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/?p=140679","title":{"rendered":"What exactly is Islamic architecture, and is architecture a problematic concept?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By Spahic Omer<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic architecture is a very important subject insofar as properly grasping the level of the Muslim religious consciousness, cultural sophistication and civilisational evolution is concerned.  The subject is of no less importance and value to Islamic and global scholarship than, for instance, the subjects of Islamic epistemology, science, law and economics, which, however, have traditionally been receiving more attention and have been regarded as more essential, relevant and so, more impactful sectors than Islamic architecture. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic\narchitecture is an all-embracing field. It comprises both the world of ideas\nand values and that of practicality and function. The extent of the value and\nquality of Islamic architecture is attributable to the extent of the health of\nthe relationship between the two worlds. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic architecture serves as a framework of Islam as a complete code of existence and a framework of its eclectic culture and civilisation. It is therefore as comprehensive, profound and dynamic as the latter. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conceptualising Islamic architecture<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic architecture is a style of architecture that embodies the core of the Islamic \u02dcaqidah<\/em> (belief system or articles of faith) and the body of inclusive Islamic standards and behavioural moral values. Islamic architecture does so through its three main dimensions: as a philosophy, process, and a final outcome, and at the planes of the conceptualisation, planning, designing, constructing, and the using of the built environment. This is done partly latently and intuitively, as a result of peoples prior embodiment of the same Islamic beliefs, principles and values, which they then radiate and implement in the various fields of their individual and collective lives – including the realm of the built environment \u201c and partly consciously through a series of premeditated and thought-out methods, steps and even procedural guidelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic architecture is a framework of both human lives and the implementation of the Islamic message. This is so because Islam is a comprehensive way of life and the two are meant for each other: life needs Islam to be inspired, guided and properly lived thereby, while Islam needs life to be exteriorised, actualised and \u0153seen\u009d therein. It is thus often acknowledged that Islam is life and life, in turn, is Islam. Apart from framing and containing human lives and Islam, Islamic architecture, moreover, facilitates, nurtures and further promotes them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Herein\nlies the significance and strength of the universe of Islamic architecture, as\nit has to cope with and cater to the needs of the vicissitudes of life and\ntheir dynamism as well as changeability. As a result, some of the most\nremarkable characteristics of Islamic architecture revolve around the notions\nof the profundity and inviolability of its meaning, purpose and wide-ranging\nfunctions, on the one hand, and the dynamism, fluidity and open-endedness of\nits physical and artistic considerations, on the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, Islamic architecture stands for the cultural and civilisational identity of Muslims. Yet, it is their own real-life identity. It is a microcosm of Muslims cultural and civilisational awareness and evolution. It is their soul. Ensuring its universal and timeless appeal, Islamic architecture represents the principle of unity in diversity: the unity of vision, purpose and values, and the diversity of methods, forms and styles. Needless to say that the more a style of architecture embodies the faith and tenets of Islam, the more Islamic it becomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic\narchitecture: unity in diversity <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\nis no doubt that Islamic architecture reveals a remarkable consistency in\ncontent and appearance, no matter when and where it was conceived and produced.\nThis unity does not prevent styles, materials and motifs from changing somewhat\nfrom one geographical region or chronological period to another. Regardless of\nhis race, colour, language or homeland, a Muslim experiences this architectural\nidentity and unity everywhere he goes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just as he finds in each land not identical, but similar Islamic inspired responses to lifes political, economic and social challenges, he also finds not identical, but similar architectural and other aesthetic expressions of the Islamic spirit. What is more, the power of the aesthetic values of Islam are such that, even without the conscious awareness and pursuance of those values, the architect, artist, user and the spectator alike have been guided to an architectural and artistic unity in Islam which is unmistakable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the heart of this Islamic architectural identity resides the idea of Islamic monotheism or tawhid<\/em> (Almighty Allahs Oneness) as a religious philosophy and experience whose core is Allah as the Absolute Creator and Master of the universe, as normativeness, as the final end at which all finalistic nexuses aim and come to rest, and as the ultimate object of all innate hope, craving and desire (Ismail al-Faruqi). Muslims create their civilisation, including architecture, based on this principle and faith. This translates itself into a common identity regardless of the difference in time and space. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\non account of the striking positions and roles of creativity and freedom of thought\nand action that Islam guarantees its followers within the parameters of faith\nand piety, diversity where diversity was due was fostered to a great extent,\nenriching the history of Islamic architecture, and with it the world, with\nevidences that are not copies of each other. Rather, they are integral parts of\nthe same organic whole, sprouting from and complementing each other (Afif\nBahnassi).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Predicated\non the principles of unity in diversity, qualified flexibility and dynamism of\nIslamic architecture, Ernst Grube perceives Islamic architecture as \u0153hidden\narchitecture\u009d. That means that Islamic architecture truly exists and can be\nfully experienced and understood not when seen as monument or symbol visible to\nall and from all sides, but only when entered, penetrated, interacted with and\nexperienced from within. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\nmeans, furthermore, when we become and behave like Islamic architectures\nimmediate users, developing emotional and spiritual relationships with it. That\nis, ultimately, when we and Islamic architecture identify each other as one;\nyet, when we become one. \u0153Closely related to the concept of a \u02dchidden\narchitecture is the striking and almost total absence of a specific\narchitectural form for a specific function. There are very few forms in Islamic\narchitecture that cannot be adapted for a variety of purposes; conversely, a\nMuslim building serving a specific function can assume a variety of forms\u009d\n(Ernst Grube).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According\nto Ismail al-Faruqi, if Islam as a comprehensive religion, worldview and culture\nneglected to influence the architecture of its peoples, such would be a\nterrible shortcoming. Like all other fine arts, architecture is an aesthetic\nexpression of Muslims insofar as they have a unique and distinct view of\nreality and its physical and metaphysical constituents, of space and time, of\nhistory, and of the ummah<\/em> or community and Muslims organic relation\nthereto. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As such, Islams influence is expected to pervade the totality of human life, with architecture and the rest of the built environment receiving much attention on a par with the other most vital life segments. Islam \u0153did determine the style of clothing, of eating, of sleeping, of socialising, of leisure and recreation. How could it omit to determine mans habitat? Nay, it did; and it even buttressed its influence with the power of law as regards all these. Had Islam not determined anymore than the mosque, its decoration, tile, woodwork, lights and carpets, that would be more than sufficient to establish its relevance, for the mosque is the archetype and paragon of all Islamic architecture\u009d (Ismail al-Faruqi).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So unified and interrelated are Islam as a way of life and Islamic architecture as a physical manifestation of such a lifestyle, that it is yet affirmed that by simply pointing to a masterpiece of Islamic architecture would be sufficient as an answer to the question of what Islam in reality is. That answer, summary as it is, would be nonetheless valid, in that Islamic architecture expresses what its name indicates, and \u0153it does so without ambiguity\u009d. As a religious and civilisational fundamental rule, the most outward manifestation of a religion or civilisation like Islam \u201c and art and architecture are by definition an exteriorisation \u201c \u0153should reflect in its own fashion what is most inward in that civilisation\u009d (Titus Burckhardt).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Misconceptions\nabout Islamic architecture<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oleg Grabar, a French-born art historian and\narchaeologist who was a leading authority in the field of Islamic art and\narchitecture in the West, wrote that \u0153with the partial exception of Q27:44, the\nQuran does not contain any statement which may be construed as a description\nof manufactured things or as a doctrinal guide for making or evaluating\nvisually perceptible forms.\u009d That is so mainly because \u0153the world in which the\nrevelation of the Quran was made was not one which knew or particularly prized\nworks of art\u009d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the same spirit, K.A.C Creswell, a English\narchitectural historian who penned some of the seminal and most authoritative\nworks on Islamic architecture in the West, called the history of the early\nIslamic society architecturally primitive in the extreme; that the Prophet (pbuh) was entirely without architectural ambitions; that\nthe first Muslims brought nothing architectural to the conquered countries\nbeyond what would serve their simple ritual requirements; and that especially\nin Syria in the early days of the Islamic presence, there was no any building\nactivity and the first mosques were churches that had been converted or merely\ndivided.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many other in\nparticular Western scholars in Islamic architecture followed suit and arrived\nat similar inferences. Some of them are Alexander Hahn who said that \u0153Muhammad\nhimself had no use for architecture\u009d; Peter Watson who alleged that the Prophet\n(pbuh) was \u0153hostile to the decoration of mosques\u009d; and Brenda Schildgen who astonishingly\ncontended that the Prophet (pbuh) seemed \u0153to prohibit religious art and\narchitecture\u009d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be fair to Oleg\nGrabar, he later somewhat\ncorrected his position. He wrote in his article \u0153Art and Culture in the Islamic\nWorld\u009d, which was contributed to an encyclopaedia of Islamic art and\narchitecture titled \u0153Islam, Art and Architecture\u009d: \u0153But it is possible to argue\nthat Islams initial revelation, the Koran, contains passages and points of\nview on which attitudes to the arts could be, and often were, based. Many of\nthem acquired different interpretations over the centuries and it should\nsomeday be possible to sketch out a history of their use.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Oleg Grabar then proceeded to analyse a number of\nsuch Quranic passages and the different categories of the arts they deal with,\nincluding architecture. He also rightly maintained somewhere else that the\nProphets hadith<\/em> or Sunnah<\/em> contains \u0153theoretical positions and\npractical opinions on the making of works of art.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What is common to all the mentioned and many other\ncomparable statements and views is the strongly accentuated message that Islam\nis irrelevant to architecture. Its concerns should not transcend the ambit of\nsheer religious rituals and personal relations with God. Architecture is an\nentirely secular and material domain devoid of any spiritual significance or\nexperience. It should be divested of its right and merit to express the noblest\naspirations and ends of man. In contrast, it should be primed only to fulfil\nthe base needs of utility and everyday function, and to be subjected to\n\u0153correspondence with nature, a sort of pagan neo-Hellenism\u009d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One wonders why most Western art and architecture\nhistorians rarely discussed the works of Islamic architecture with sympathy and\nunderstanding, and why not beyond the departments of forms, plans, materials\nand superficial functions. This is notwithstanding their commendable amount of\ncareful research and documentation across the vast expanse of the Muslim world.\nMost of the prevalent misinterpretations and outright errors that today\nsurround Islamic art and architecture are due to such peoples intellectual\nlegacies, and the legacies of those who followed in their footsteps in the\nMuslim world. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

That could be the case because of the inherent\ndifficulty of understanding artistic and architectural styles and traditions\nalien to ones own, or because of a chauvinistic desire to see ones own\nartistic and architectural traditions as prior in importance or superior in\nskill and beauty to any produced by a foreign society (Lamya al-Faruqi),\nspecifically those societies that at the time of the studies proved\npolitically, economically and militarily substantially despondent and inferior.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ismail al-Faruqi wrote about how the Western scholars of Islamic art and architecture have failed in their assessment of the latters real value, in spite of their exhausting application to the task of studying, collecting and systematising the same into art schools and styles: \u0153Nobody can survey the field without being struck by the Western scholars arduous application to the task, without falling in admiration of and gratitude for their legacy of scholarship and museum-achievements. There is no road to the serious study of Islamic art except through their works; and there is as yet no library of Islamic art in which these works do not constitute the overwhelming majority. And yet, the Western scholars of Islamic art have been unfair in their overall assessment of its real value. For all their self-application, their seriousness and brilliance, their hard work and perseverance, they have failed in the supreme effort of understanding the spirit of that art, of discovering and analysing its Islamicness. For lack of any such understanding, they fell upon the spirit of their own art (i.e. Western art) and, armed with that spirit as absolute norm of all art, they sought to bend Islamic art to its categories. And, when Islamic art naturally refused to be so bent, their misunderstanding of it deepened. The charge they imputed to Islamic art was always the same, namely, that it had failed in that in which their Western art had excelled and almost everyone repeated the charge.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Similar charges against the Western scholars and Western scholarship of Islamic art and architecture have been levelled by Lamya al-Faruqi who affirmed: \u0153In almost every case, however, these non-Muslim scholars mastered an exterior knowledge of the Muslim artistic tradition but failed to penetrate beyond the outer veil to the heart of the Islamic aesthetic norms and standards. Because of their alien background and sometimes even an apparent antagonism to the materials, they were doomed to view Islamic artistic creations as misconceived and unsuccessful attempts to match the glories of Western art works. They have been unable to escape the blinding cultural pull to judge every artistic creation of Islamic culture by criteria which are valid for their own art, but not necessarily valid in any other culture. These art historians failed to realise that the Islamic artist, whether consciously or unconsciously, had his own criteria for the beautiful and for the artistic expression of his world God view.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic,\nor Muslim, or\u00a6. architecture<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a\nmatter of semantics, the suitable architectural styles of Muslims throughout\nhistory can be called either \u0153Islamic\u009d or \u0153Muslim\u009d. In English, both approximately\ndenote the same thing \u201c which however is not entirely the case with the Arabic\nlanguage. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The adjective \u0153Islamic\u009d means \u0153relating to Islam\u009d, or \u0153connected with Islam, or with people or countries who follow it.\u009d Correspondingly, the adjective \u0153Muslim\u009d implies \u0153relating to Islam or Muslims\u009d, or \u0153relating to the religion, law or civilisation of Islam.\u009d While the latter (\u0153Muslim\u009d) seems to be more inclusive than the former (\u0153Islamic\u009d), the former, obviously, is a more delicate attribute. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nadjective \u0153Islamic\u009d takes its meaning from the fact that it reflects some\ncharacteristics of Islam, and does so in varying degrees. It can be used in two\ncontexts. First, it describes things, ideas and events whose origins are in\nIslam. Second, it can be used to describe things that are present in Islamic\nsocieties and cultures, even if their origins are not rooted entirely in Islam\nor produced exclusively by Muslim peoples. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islamic civilisation came to existence because Muslims ideas and standards were dominant, but they were not the sole engines that produced its rich legacy (Ahmed Souaiaia). A great many non-Muslim internal and external factors played a part. Hence, \u0153Islamic\u009d and \u0153Muslim\u009d are almost identical and can be used interchangeably, especially with regard to architecture as a main dimension of culture and civilisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\nit should be borne in mind that any of the designations commonly\nattached to the architectural legacies of Muslims might in principle be\nespoused, provided they are all properly comprehended and contextualized, and\nthat the one using them is fully cognizant of their meanings and implications.\nThere is certainly nothing dogmatic, nor sacrosanct, in the whole issue. The\nmatter can continuously be revisited, re-evaluated and, if necessary, modified,\non condition that such is done open-mindedly, scientifically and in the spirit\nof the whole of Islamic scholarship. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, the architecture of Muslims can be both \u0153Islamic\u009d and \u0153Muslim\u009d. Even to give no adjectives or appellations whatsoever would be utterly correct, in particular when it is recalled that early Muslims never called their architecture, art, urbanism, countries, governments and lifestyles in general, \u0153Islamic\u009d or \u0153Muslim\u009d. They knew that those were, chiefly, their own legacies spontaneously generated and imbued with the impetus of their perceptions of reality and the world, of life and death, and of space and time, and which were part of their larger civilisational vision and drive. Giving designations under the circumstances was superfluous, as the things were instinctively implied and understood by everyone, and the culture of giving precedence to substance over the form largely prevailed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, when mere names, titles and descriptions became an obsession, such denoted a sign of civilisational weaknesses and decline. It meant desperate clinging to something that was gradually fading away and was hard to keep. The efforts in due course turned into sheer reminiscing about things that were lost and became difficult to bring back. Hence, reminiscing became nostalgia, and the latter soon morphed into individual and collective acts of desperation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps the first person who officially used the term \u0153Islamic\u009d in Islamic scholarship was Ibn al-Tiqtaqa (d. 1310 AC). He did so in the context of Islamic history as well as polity. He wrote a well-known compendium of Islamic history called \u0153al-Fakhri fi al-Adab al-Sultaniyyah wa al-Duwal al-Islamiyyah\u009d. This was the first time that someone formally spoke about an aspect of Islamic civilisation, calling it \u0153Islamic\u009d. The author spoke about \u0153Islamic dynasties or countries\u009d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

About four centuries earlier, Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari used the word\n\u0153al-islamiyy\u009d, albeit not as an adjective \u0153Islamic\u009d, but as a noun, meaning \u0153a\nproponent of Islam\u009d. He titled one of his main works in the fields of heresiography\nand theology as \u0153the Discourses of the Proponents of Islam (Islamiyyin<\/em>)\nand the Differences Among the Worshippers\u009d. \n <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A\npersonal experience<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Parenthetically, in my own writings, I sometimes deliberately use the\nterm \u0153Islamic architecture\u009d and sometimes \u0153Muslim architecture\u009d. Yet, at other\ntimes I even try to circumnavigate the issue of semantics altogether, employing\nsimply such terms as the \u0153architecture\u009d, \u0153buildings\u009d or \u0153built environment\u009d of\nMuslims. The word \u0153Muslims\u009d is used and interpreted either generically or in\nrelation to specific regions and times, depending on the contexts and\nobjectives. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

I do that with the aim of bringing home the message that the subjects of\nsheer naming and branding are relative and minor ones. They also tend to be\nfairly subjective, causing disagreements and divisions. As such, they should be\naccorded a degree of flexibility and open-mindedness, while people should focus\non understanding the root cause of the problem \u201c and each other. They should\nfoster an ethics of disagreement and just move on. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

More fundamental matters are to be addressed and meticulously attended to.\nWhat is critical should be perceived and treated as such, and what is secondary\nshould also be perceived and treated only as such. Priorities are by no means\nto be haggled and swapped. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The architecture, or built environment, of Muslims worldwide cries for\nquality and improvements along the lines of the Islamic worldview, values and\nethics. The matter is so distressing and urgent that nobody should waste time\non trivial concerns, such as the one of mere names and labels. Call it whatever\nyou want, but much needs to be done in real life, sooner rather than later, in\norder to start off improving the quality of peoples lives. Wasting time,\nenergy and resources on what is uncalled-for is a transgression against the\nreligion of Islam, good sense and, of course, Islamic architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nconundrum is a Western import<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Besides, it was in fact non-Muslim scholars and researchers who especially during the colonisation era first coined and imposed on the world those artificial appellations as regards Islamic civilisational legacies, including architecture. It was also them first who in the process loaded the terms with some erroneous, or questionable at best, connotations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That was part of the modern Western mans culture of labelling, stereotyping and scorning all \u0153others\u009d, who to him were less enlightened and less cultured and civilised. It was his obsession, while conquering, colonising and controlling \u0153others\u009d, to set permanent cultural and civilisational barriers between himself and his presumably superior world, and \u0153them\u009d and whatever inferior, or outright backward and barbaric, legacies they possessed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of the ways of doing so was excessive conceptual and intellectual labelling and tagging, loading the new expressions with the targeted flawed meanings and interpretations. Thus, such expressions as \u0153Ishmailities (as early as the 8th<\/sup> century by Joannis Damasceni, a Syrian monk and Doctor of the Church in his \u02dcHeresy of Ishmailities)\u009d, \u0153the Saracens (as early as the 13th<\/sup> century during the Fifth Crusade by Francesco dAssisi, an Italian saint)\u009d, \u02dcMohammedanism (from the early 19th<\/sup> century)\u009d, \u0153Mohammedan dynasties, law, jurisprudence, dogmas and beliefs\u009d, \u0153primitive, medieval, modern and liberal Islam\u009d, \u0153orientalism\u009d, \u0153Islamic fundamentalism\u009d, \u0153Islamic, Muslim, Saracenic and Mohammedan culture, civilisation, art, architecture, cities, urbanism, etc.\u009d \u201c were created and widely articulated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For instance, Merriam-Webster Dictionary renders \u0153Saracenic architecture\u009d as \u0153Islamic architecture consisting chiefly of mosques and tombs and characterised by decorated surfaces, bulbous domes, and horseshoe, pointed, and multifoil arches.\u009d It then instructs the readers to \u0153compare Moorish architecture\u009d as another expression of Islamic architecture. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, a book titled \u0153Architecture, Classic and Early Christian\u009d\nwritten by T. Roger Smith and published in 1882 in London, contains a chapter\n(Chapter XV) on \u0153Mohammedan architecture\u009d. Also, in 1930 a book titled \u0153A\nHandbook of Mohammedan Decorative Arts\u009d was published. It was written by Dimand\nM.S. and was \u0153the first\nhistory of Mohammedan decorative arts to appear in English, highlighting the\nMetropolitan Museum of Art’s (New York) strong Islamic art collection with over\n170 works discussed.\u009d And in 1910, the exhibition \u0153Masterpieces of Muhammadan\nArt\u009d was held on the Theresienh\u00c3\u00b6he in Munich. \u0153With almost 3,600 exhibits, it\nwas the largest display of art from the Islamic cultural sphere ever shown,\neven to this day.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Or \u0153Islamicate\u009d architecture<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The situation got so convoluted that Bernard Lewis went so far as to suggest that the adjective \u0153Islamic\u009d be used in the cultural sense, where Islam is seen as either an idealised or a historical cumulative tradition of faith, and the adjective \u0153Muslim\u009d in the religious sense, pertaining to the Muslims insofar as they accept and practice that faith. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, it will ever remain unclear as to where exactly the\njurisdictions of the two adjectives meet, interact and possibly overlap, and\nwhere they separate. Some people may yet propose the opposite arrangement of\nmeanings and construals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

All this prompted Marshal Hodgson, an influential American\nhistorian of Islam (d. 1968), to propose in the first volume of his magnum\nopus<\/em> \u0153the Venture of Islam\u009d yet a new term and adjective: Islamicate. He\ndid that in response to the confusion surrounding the conception and usages of\nthe terms \u0153Islamic\u009d and \u0153Muslim\u009d when they are used \u0153to describe aspects of\nsociety and culture that are found throughout the Muslim world.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to Marshal Hodgson, it has been all too common in modern\nscholarship to use the terms in question too casually both for what is called\nreligion and for the overall society, culture and people associated historically\nwith the religion (Islam). He believed that the term \u0153Islamicate\u009d is most\ncomprehensive and has \u0153a double adjectival ending\u009d. It refers not directly to\nthe religion of Islam itself, \u0153but to the social and cultural complex\nhistorically associated with Islam and the Muslims, both among Muslims\nthemselves and even when found among non-Muslims.\u009d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accordingly, it should be neither \u0153Islamic\u009d nor \u0153Muslim\u009d, but\n\u0153Islamicate\u009d architecture. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A word of caution   <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As\npart of the Western socio-political, economic, cultural and educational systems\nthat dominated the Muslim world for much of the last two centuries, those ideas\nwere imposed on the Muslim intellectual consciousness, dictating his\ncultural reality and forming his identity. In the name of progress and\ndevelopment, a great many Muslims, unfortunately, fell victims to the ploy.\nThey not only adopted the initiative, but also became its ambassadors and\nfiercest proponents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, therefore,\nwhile it is possible to use any of the existing designations often attached to\nthe historical and current architectural (built environment) realities of\nMuslims, Muslims, at the same time, should be watchful on the implications each\nand every designation entails, so that the most appropriate terms, those\nclosest in describing an intended matter, are selected and articulated.\nNumerous fallacies and misconceptions, old and new, are also to be\nscientifically and thoroughly unravelled and repudiated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But these ought\nto be no more than interim and short-term strategies. They by no means are to\nbe regarded as ends in themselves, as they cannot offer permanent answers and\nsolutions to the pressing dilemmas. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rather, those\nand other similar intellectual efforts must represent \u201c or at least be\nprecursors to — a gradual fashioning of a new and unified scholarly culture\namong Muslims, which will be closest to reverberating the authentic philosophy\nof Islam and the soul of its teachings and values, paying no or very little\nattention to the often meaningless and worthless labels and descriptions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new comprehensive intellectual culture will need to skilfully amalgamate the fundamental nature of the Islamic message with the spirit and exigencies of modern times, dispensing generally with religious, cultural and intellectual mediocrity, prejudices, formalism and apathy, which can seriously damage the prospects of reviving not only Islamic\/Muslim architecture, but also all the other aspects of Islamic eclectic culture and civilisation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Muslims, it follows, the notions of freedom, independence and community-building need to assume an extra meaning and consequence. In fact, colonialism as an ideology and colonisation as a process never stopped. They only modified their respective scopes and modi operandi<\/em>, while the intentions and objectives remained the same.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How\nserious Islam is against literal symbolism and deadening formalism, above all\nwhen they work against substance and real class, verify these verses of the\nQuran: \u0153Righteousness is not that you turn your faces toward the east or the\nwest, but (true) righteousness is (in) one who believes in Allah , the Last\nDay, the angels, the Book, and the prophets and gives wealth, in spite of love\nfor it, to relatives, orphans, the needy, the traveller, those who ask (for\nhelp), and for freeing slaves; (and who) establishes prayer and gives zakah;\n(those who) fulfil their promise when they promise; and (those who) are patient\nin poverty and hardship and during battle. Those are the ones who have been\ntrue, and it is those who are the righteous\u009d (al-Baqarah, 177).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u0153And\nthey say: \u02dcNone will enter Paradise except one who is a Jew or a Christian.\nThat is (merely) their wishful thinking, Say: \u02dcProduce your proof, if you\nshould be truthful. Yes (on the contrary), whoever submits his face in Islam\nto Allah while being a doer of good will have his reward with his Lord. And no\nfear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve\u009d (al-Baqarah,\n111-112).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islams\ninsistence that mere compliance with external forms and superficial symbols does\nnot fulfil the requirements of piety and righteousness, should also extend to\nthe ways people perceive, appreciate and practice Islamic architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When\nprophets Ibrahim (Abraham) and Ismail (Ishmael) prayed to God to make \u0153from\nour descendants a Muslim nation (ummah muslimah<\/em>)\u009d (al-Baqarah, 128),\nthey meant a nation, people or progeny that will follow only the true Islam by completely\nsubmitting themselves to and worshipping Almighty God alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Architecture and proselytisation <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a small digression, an additional illustration of how challenging the times are, is modernist architecture which was always projecting itself as universal and self-righteous. It exuded a sense of superiority that was reminiscent of Western colonialism. It possessed a missionary or proselytising attitude, and its architects personal visions were infused with a sense of moral superiority. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

They believed that the modern architects mission was to redesign the whole world in his own modernist image, and his modernist values applied to all. Less \u0153civilised\u009d people could only profit from adopting modern Western architects way(s) of life. So important were the precepts and mottos of modernist architecture that they were regarded as articles of faith. They were \u0153rhetorical statements whose moral overtones made them as unquestionable as Divine Law\u009d (Brent Brolin).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Moreover, modernist architecture\ndeveloped its own universe, oblivious to myriads of other universes around it.\nSuch could be dubbed haughtiness,\nself-centredness and obstinacy. Satiated with a deep sense of exclusiveness and\nsuperiority, modernist architecture looked down on any other style and school\nof thought, including the architectural realms of \u0153others\u009d. It tolerated\nneither competition nor peaceful coexistence. It was a destructive force, so to\nspeak. The past, old, traditional and metaphysical ideas and looks were the\nbane of its revolutionary existence. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

As part of its precarious character, modernist architecture was proselytised globally. In terms of intensity and range, the proselytisation of modernist architecture was just about on a par with Christianisation. Little wonder that both of them existed and were popularised globally for and in the name of the absolute truth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is architecture as\na concept problematic?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As absurd as it may\nseem, this question ought to be asked. Architecture is generally defined\nas the art and science of planning, designing and constructing buildings and\nother structures, comprising both the process and the product. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\nthe matter is not as simple as it looks. Becky Quintal at archdaily.com gave\n121 definitions of architecture, commenting: \u0153There are at least as many\ndefinitions of architecture as there are architects or people who comment on\nthe practice of it. While some embrace it as art, others defend architectures\nseminal social responsibility as its most definitive attribute. To begin a\nsentence with \u02dcArchitecture is is a bold step into treacherous territory.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Certainly,\narchitecture as a concept, theory, art, science and procedure is multidimensional.\nIt is an extremely complex multi-tiered orb. It fulfils numerous practical and\nexpressive requirements, and serves as many functional, aesthetic and\nintellectual ends. Even ideologies and socio-politics are built into the realm\nof architecture. Yet, architecture itself is an ideology. Its philosophy as a\nsub-discipline is considerably profound and is set but to flourish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\nit likewise must be underlined that the concept \u0153architecture\u009d originated from Middle\nFrench architecture<\/em>, from Latin architectura<\/em>, from architectus<\/em>\n\u0153master builder, chief workman\u009d. It was first used as such in mid-16th<\/sup>\ncentury (etymonline.com). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Architecture\nis also from the Greek architecton<\/em>: archi<\/em> (first or lead) and tecton<\/em>\n(builder, originally carpenter). Architecton<\/em> (master-builder) is used\nonce in the Greek New Testament (1 Cor. 3:10), where Paul allegorically thought\nof himself as a director of works, a chief builder and a foreman.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prior\nto the idea of architecture in the 16th<\/sup> century and onwards, there\nwere only particular \u0153arts\u009d and \u0153styles\u009d of building, particular construction\nprocesses, builders, master builders, master masons, carpenters, craftsmen, workmen,\nand application of various traditional rules of good and functional\nconstruction to the materials at hand. There was no architecture as an art and\nscience in the contemporary sense of the word; there were only \u0153arts\u009d,\n\u0153patterns\u009d and expertise of building as an everyday individual and social\nnecessity. Similarly, there were no architects as professionals in the\ncontemporary sense of the word either; there were only builders as naturally gifted\nand trained experts and many other related craftsmen. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

When\nVitruvius – a Roman author, \u0153architect\u009d and military engineer during the first\ncentury BC – composed his celebrated multi-volume \u0153De Architectura\u009d \u201c widely\nregarded as the first treatise on \u0153architecture\u009d written as a handbook for\nRoman \u0153architects\u009d \u201c he did so more in accordance with the above-explained pre-16th<\/sup>\ncentury meaning and substance of construction and built environment, rather than\nin accordance with what was understood by the terms of \u0153architecture\u009d and\n\u0153architect\u009d from the 16th<\/sup> century onwards. At most, he and his book\ncould be regarded as precursors to architecture, especially in terms of its\ntheoretical or philosophical dimensions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When architecture started as an art and science\napproximately in the 16th<\/sup> century \u201c subsequently evolving into\nmodernist and post-modernist architecture \u201c it did so as part of Renaissance\nhumanism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

According to the latter, \u0153man is the measure of\nall things\u009d and \u0153mankind is at the centre of the universe\u009d. As a product of\nRenaissance humanism, the \u0153enlightened\u009d Western man constantly pretended to be\nin control of his own destiny. He, rather than God, was the source of all value\nand legitimacy. Human reason and talents, rather than any\nmetaphysical entity or source, were placed on a pedestal.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On\naccount of the Scientific Revolution, which took place towards the end of the\nRenaissance period, giving birth to the intellectual and social movement in the\n18th<\/sup> century known as the \u0153Enlightenment,\u009d and serving as a\nharbinger of the subsequent modern and post-modern eons, this anthropocentric\nview was propelled to unprecedented heights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Man started at once to believe and behave as\nthough he was in control of the whole earth<\/strong>.<\/strong> The whole universe became the target of his exploration and\nconquest ambitions. The modern Western man believed that he had the whole world\nat his feet, both literally and metaphorically. For him, God was dead, so to\nspeak, and Heaven a fiction. It was only man and his talents, together with his\nendless hopes and desires, that could be deified. They were solely to be lived\nfor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nbirth of \u0153architecture\u009d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was primarily the spirit of this milieu that\ninstigated and shaped all architectural \u201c and artistic – movements and styles\nin the West from the Renaissance to modern times. Admittedly, though, the\nRenaissance man was not a non-believer per se<\/em>. Christianity still held\nconsiderable sway over his life, but he was increasingly sceptical, unconvinced\nand restless. He ever more craved for separation from Heaven, and for\nnonconformity, freedom and authority. He wanted to rule, rather than being\nruled. He wanted to live and express himself freely, rather than being dictated\nwhat to do and how to behave. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Renaissance mans seminal ideas, thoughts and actions represented seeds that subsequently grew into basically everything the modern (and post-modern) man treasures most, such as democracy, liberty, secularism, science, progress, power, audacity and perennial optimism. Man became elevated and sanctified thereby, while God became either humanised and degraded, or completely abandoned and forgotten. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ideal of \u0153Renaissance Man\u009d or \u0153Universal Man\u009d (Uomo\nUniversale<\/em>) was thus created. According to one of its most accomplished\nadvocates in Italy, Leon Battista Albert (d. 1472 AC), such Man was able to do\nall things, if he so willed and if his endeavours were appropriately\nfacilitated. His capacities were limitless, rendering him equipped to stand up\nto and defy Heaven.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Architecture \u201c together with art \u201c soon became one of\nthe most powerful media for expressing and promoting those ideals. It became\ntheir voice and emissary. Yet, it became their incarnation and epitome, oozing\nand communicating their unique spirit to the outside world. Architecture was finding\nitself universal, as it were, typifying \u0153Universal Man\u009d and his universal point\nof view.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Norman Foster, in consequence, defined architecture as\n\u0153an expression of values \u201c the way we build is a reflection of the\nway we live.\u009d Bernard Rudofsky, similarly, said that \u0153architecture is not just\na matter of technology and aesthetics but the frame for a way of life. And to\nStanley Tigerman, \u0153architecture is supposed to be about a higher purpose.\u009d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those developments gave birth to \u0153architecture\u009d as we know it today as an art, science, ideology, profession, career, and a way as well as standard of life. For the first time in history, the processes of planning, designing, constructing and using buildings became standardised, homogenised and professionalized. They were yet proselytised as a gospel of humanism, enlightenment, naturalism, materialism, and later modernism and post-modernism. They stood at the core of Western civilisation, becoming its face.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For the first time in history, moreover, the skills\nand ability of construction (now architecture) became exclusively\nhuman-centric. Theretofore construction was generally either Heaven or\ndivinity-centric, or was meant to meet a combination of the concerns of Heaven\nand those of human societies on earth. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From merely behaving and performing in space,\narchitecture evolved into appropriating, gaining mastery over and manipulating space.\nAnd from serving and conforming, generally embracing humility and respect,\narchitecture evolved into controlling and dominating, embracing might and\ndefiance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is therefore said that architecture is all about\nenclosing and shaping spaces, and creating spatial relations. Space is that immaterial\nessence that the painter suggests, the sculptor fills and the architect\nenvelops, \u0153creating a wholly human and finite environment within the infinite\nenvironment of nature\u009d (britannica.com). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

An architectural design is created by carving a space\nout of space, by creating a space out of the carved space, and by designing\nspaces by dividing the created space using various tools, such as geometry,\ncolours, shapes and light (Ungur). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It stands to reason that there is architecture only when and where there is man who idolises and exalts himself, with his architecture exemplifying his ostentatious ambitions and dreams. Through architecture, he seeks that which he cannot find within himself and within his personal life compass: longevity, perfection, certitude and peace. His architecture is shaped in his own real and coveted image. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Architecture furthermore is a mask behind which disoriented,\ndoubting and over-ambitious man intends to hide his intrinsic weaknesses and\nfaults. Through architecture, he seeks solace and self-assurance. He also seeks\nimmortality thereby, transforming his architecture into a form of creed and\nself-concocted faith. Architecture is a seventh heaven, antidote and cure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hence, there was no architecture as such before the\nRenaissance. There were only construction processes and peoples simple, albeit\noccasionally very exquisite, built environments. Such was the case owing to the\nfact that architecture is human and self-centric, whereas mere construction and\nmere built environments, by and large, are Heaven and human innocent\ninterests-centric.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Architecture before the Renaissance <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Before the Renaissance, there were only erratic\narchitectural attempts and, at most, intermittent architectural accomplishments.\nNonetheless, it is noteworthy that those efforts and accomplishments proved\nviable only after certain people perverted the interests of both Heaven and man\n– either individually or institutionally – and made them subservient to their\nown self-centred pursuits. In other words, their actions became self-absorbed\nand egocentric, projecting themselves as objects of collective exaltation instead.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those people thus generated more than a few causes whose inevitable outcomes were elements of architecture. What they did became an end in itself, instead of being a means to reach out to a higher order of things. It became an asset for the fulfilment of their personal and societal missions, justifying their very visions and intents as well. Their architectural flashes turned into privatised and manipulative enterprises, so to speak.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This explains the \u0153greatness\u009d and durability of, for\nexample, some remnants of the architecture of Mesopotamia (ziggurats and royal\npalaces), ancient Egyptian architecture (pyramids, temples and royal palaces), Persian\narchitecture (temples and royal palaces), and the architecture and urbanism of\nthe Greeks and Romans (temples and colosseums). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It also explains why the architecture of the\nRenaissance period \u201c including some of its succeeding derivatives \u201c was able to\ndemonstrate a conscious revival and development of a number of components of\nancient Greek and Roman thought and material culture. The latter formed the\nideological base for the former.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At any rate, on closer inspection, the entire story\nand its manner do not tell us how things are to be done, but rather how and why\nthey are not to be done. The architectural legacies in question serve as signs\nof spiritual and moral bankruptcies and failures. In actual fact, they are not\nto be admired, but pitied and learned from. The same mistakes should not be\nrepeated by the current and future generations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the Quran reminds us: \u0153Do\nthey not travel in the land, and see what was the end of those before them?\nThey were superior to them in strength, and they tilled the earth and populated\nit (and built upon it) in greater numbers than these (pagans) have done, and\nthere came to them their Messengers with clear proofs. Surely, Allah wronged\nthem not, but they used to wrong themselves. Then evil was the end of those who\ndid evil, because they belied the signs of Allah and used to mock them\u009d\n(al-Rum, 9).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Through\nthe same prism, by analogy, all architectural \u201c and artistic – legacies of the\n\u0153rebellious\u009d Western man, from the Renaissance until today, ought to be\nobserved and dealt with. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islam\nand its built environment predate \u0153architecture\u009d by about nine centuries  <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Based\non the above, \u0153architecture\u009d and pure spirituality are hardly compatible. When\npaired together, one is expected to give way, which is normally spirituality.\nThe reason for that is that architecture was born and evolved in part as a\nresponse against spirituality. At first, their relationship was an uneasy one, progressing\ngradually \u201c and rather quickly – towards separation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nproblems lay in the domains of architecture, rather than the domains of\nspirituality. While spirituality contains inherently nothing against\nconstruction and built environment as lifes essentials, affording thereby a\nplatform for possible confluence and cooperation, architecture, on the other\nhand, even though outwardly willing to lend a hand to spirituality, sincerely always\naspired to carve out its own independent universe and to operate freely\ntherein. Cooperation was still possible, though, but on condition that the\nprovisions of spirituality played second fiddle to those of architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accordingly, it is expected that Islam should harbour scores of objections concerning the humanistic and materialistic tendencies of architecture. One would also expect Islam to be inclined either to sail around the whole thing if possible, or to inevitably Islamise its problematic aspects and features – due to architectures ubiquitous presence and strong universal appeal – and to then integrate it as such into the dominion of its own extensive cultures and civilisation. Without doubt, Islam is against the principle whereby the more there is architecture the less there is spirituality, and vice versa<\/em>. Instead, the two should promote and aid each other. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islam and Muslims could cultivate this attitude on account of the verity that Islam with its culture and civilisation, including its outstanding construction styles and built environments, predates \u0153architecture\u009d by approximately nine centuries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Islam\nwith its fundamental sources: the Quran and the Prophets Sunnah, dealt extensively\nwith the issues of planning and building. The Prophet (pbuh) himself was a\nplanner and builder. All generations of Muslims were great builders, producing\nextraordinary built environment legacies in the process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However,\ntheir outputs were not \u0153architecture\u009d, but the Islamic ways of planning and\nbuilding. They were purely the Islamic built environment varieties. They also signified\nthe Islamic ways of dealing with Heaven and earth, and were manifestations of\nrelationships between people and God, people and their overall Islamic\nworldview, values and ethics, people and the natural world, and people among\nthemselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Doing\nso was a religious (spiritual) injunction, for the Quran affirms that man was\ncreated as khalifah<\/em> on earth (vicegerent, viceroy and successive\nauthority) (al-Baqarah, 30), and that he was assigned to perform the \u02dcimarah<\/em>\nof the earth (Hud, 61), that is, to settle or establish residence therein, to\npopulate, develop and sustain it. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Quran likewise clearly suggests that it is at once natural and prerequisite for man to populate (colonise) the earth and to build over it (\u02dcamara<\/em>, \u02dcumran<\/em>, \u02dcimarah<\/em>) (al-Rum, 9). The extent and quality of mans doing so is a testimony whether he succeeded or failed in his worldly assignments. His built environment \u201c as part of his civilisational consciousness and growth \u201c is an oblique inventory of his deeds and misdeeds. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Built environments were needed as frameworks, means and facilities for the realisation of mans honourable purpose on earth. In Islam – generally speaking – cultural and civilisational sophistication, progress, science, technology, socio-politico-economic development, etc. are all indispensable for mans successful completion of his earthly mission. As an innately religious and social being, man cannot succeed in isolation and in states of utter plainness and primitiveness without abundantly taking from and giving back to the world.  However, all those sectors and undertakings must be cast in Islamic moulds. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Towards\nan Islamic terminology<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

That is why in Islam and its civilisation, such terms as \u02dcumran<\/em>, \u02dcimarah<\/em> or \u02dcimarah al-ard<\/em> should be nurtured and promoted as substitutes for the Western concept of architecture. Efforts should also be made towards the prospect of their Englishisation Those terms are more meaningful, more consequential and more value-loaded, since their origin is the Quran as Almighty Gods Holy Word. They are closer and more acceptable to the Muslim mind and soul. They are his. They belong to him and he belongs to them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even the words bina<\/em> and bunyan<\/em> could be utilised for the purpose. They both mean \u0153building\u009d, \u0153construction\u009d and \u0153act or manner of establishing and building\u009d. They are widely used in the Quran as well. They are used 22 times in seven different forms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It was on account of this that some visionary Muslim scholars called for what could be dubbed an \u0153Islamisation of English\u009d. The reason is that a great many key concepts and ideas of Islam, when arbitrarily and inaccurately translated into English, are rendered imprecise. The same holds true as regards inadequately translating, or adopting, into Arabic \u201c or other major Muslim languages – some key English concepts and words.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\ncontributes to the misrepresentation of the image of Islam and Muslims in the\neyes of the world. It also makes the prospect of teaching the pure and\nauthentic Islam, both to Muslims and non-Muslims, all the more difficult. It\nmakes everybody confused.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One of those visionary scholars was Ismail al-Faruqi, who wrote a book titled \u0153Toward Islamic English\u009d. The book represents a segment of the authors profound philosophy of \u0153Islamisation of knowledge\u009d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The real\nproblems in the realm of the Islamic built environment did not start until some\nsubsequent Muslim generations started displaying more penchant for \u0153architecture\u009d\nthan for the Islamic ways of doing similar things. Just as it might have been\nexpected, importing \u0153architecture\u009d meant diminishing Islamic spirituality and\nits built environment ambits. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\nis no wonder that we are still unsure as to which adjective: \u0153Islamic\u009d, or\n\u0153Muslim\u009d, or something else, to use before architecture. As if we sense that\nthere is something deeply amiss. Clearly, the dialectic is more complicated than\nit seems, extending beyond the level of semantics. There is more to the problem\nthan meets the eye. Relating the Western humanistic and materialistic\nunderstanding of architecture to Islam and Muslims is almost akin to trying to\nrelate – for instance – liberalism, secularism, materialism, modernism, etc. to\nthem. They are anything but matches made in heaven.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nissue of genesis <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Be\nthat as it may, authentic Islamic architecture (Islamic built environment) commenced\nas soon as its discernible soul, ontological personality, causes and aims were\nintroduced, irrespective of the level of sophistication and elegance in its\nfirst built environment manifestations. That time was the time of the Prophet\n(pbuh) and the first and most exemplary generation of Muslims, who lived in the\nfirst and archetypal Islamic urban environment: Madinah as the city of the\nProphet (pbuh).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\nwas then that the realm of Islamic architecture \u201c as an expression of a\nworldview and its values, and as a reflection of the way the people lived their\nlives – was formed and its first physical articulations came to pass. As simple\nand unassuming as they were, the first Madinah private and religious buildings\nwere meant to reflect, improve and facilitate the peoples new Islamic\nlifestyle. And they did so at once dramatically and emphatically. Just as the\nProphets life and the lives of the first Muslims were the symbols and paragons\nof piety and virtue, so did their houses and mosques, yet the whole built\nenvironment of the city of Madinah, stand as the signs and models of a Muslim\ncollective integrity and spiritual triumph. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Both\nthe first Muslims under the leadership of their Prophet (pbuh) and their built\nenvironment succeeded almost miraculously in performing their respective\nmissions. Hence, the first Muslims were the most outstanding generation in\nIslam, and Madinah with its built environment the most excellent city whose\nessence was attempted to be emulated ever since in every upcoming Islamic urban\nenvironment. That was an evidence of the undisputed excellence of the earliest\narchitecture of Muslims. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Afterwards,\nMuslims were only trying to keep up the high architectural standards set by the\nProphet (pbuh) and the first Muslims, while facing as part of natural processes\nthe challenges imposed by the vicissitudes of everyday life and its time and\nspace factors. Doing so enriched significantly the secondary and less\nsignificant physical properties of Islamic architecture and its vocabulary.\nHowever, it did nothing to its substance and truth, which are permanent and\nabiding. Islamic architectures alterable and evolving physical properties are\nthe receptacle, or a bearer, so to speak, of the former. They are their\nphysical locus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, the genesis of Islamic architecture coincided with the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and the creation of the Madinah city. At the same time, that was the golden age of Islamic architecture, in that the first Muslims were most successful in each and every department of civilisation-building procedures. Their time and efforts constituted standard-setting processes. All subsequent contributions to the subordinate artistic, functional and expressive dimensions of Islamic architecture served as supplements and performance-enhancers, nothing less, nothing more. Their mere existence was due to the earliest times and the legacies of the protagonists of those times. Yet, the legitimacy of future contributions was always to be assessed against the backdrop of such legacies. It follows that each successful future of Islamic architecture will stand on the shoulders of the earliest \u0153giants\u009d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mosques\nas an example<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For\nexample, regardless of the simplicity of the form of the Prophets Mosque, the\nMosque made a powerful and perennially valid architectural statement about the\nfollowing: the institution of the mosque as a community development centre;\nhuman resources and community-building processes; the meaning of life and its\nrelationship with the metaphysical dominion; respect for and peaceful\ncoexistence with the order of nature (sustainable development); the\nrelationship between man and God, man and man, and man and his surroundings;\nform-function relationship; encouraging and aiding peoples equality, justice\nand other human rights; professional ethics; authentic hygiene; and grand\nHeaven-oriented aesthetics. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\nshort, there was nothing architecturally positive, nor wholesome and productive\nfor human life, which the Prophets Mosque did not exemplify. How could there\nbe, then, a better and more beautiful and functional mosque at any stage in\nMuslim history than the Prophets Mosque? Or how could someone ever claim that\nthere was no architecture during the Prophets time, and that his epoch was\narchitecturally primitive in the extreme? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surely,\neverything the Prophet (pbuh) did was trustworthy and authoritative. His\ndivinely administered personal infallibility and perfection were exclusive and\nthey extended into the compass of everything he did. In actual fact, the\nProphets Mosque, the Prophets dealings generally with mosques, and his\nnumerous statements directly and indirectly concerning them, served as the\ncore, source of inspiration and guidance, and a point of reference for the\ncomprehensive vocabulary of mosque architecture then and now. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each\nsubsequent mosque that was good, beautiful and functional was so only because\nit stayed faithful to the paradigm and criteria set by the Prophet (pbuh) and\nhis Mosque, impressing the effects of the circumstances of different eras and\ngeographical locations upon them. No mosque could be ever dubbed good,\nbeautiful and functional if it violated primarily the conceptual, ethical and\nfunctional architectural benchmarks set by the Prophet (pbuh) and his Mosque.\nThe more a mosque did so, the more it drifted away from the value of beauty,\nappropriateness and functionality, and towards the abyss of repugnance,\nunseemliness and inconsequentiality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mosque\narchitecture in particular, and Islamic architecture in general, cannot be\nbased on a spiritual and ethical ugliness, nor defiance. This is a universal\nprinciple. Nothing can be exempted from it, including the corollaries of human\nscientific and technological development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Housing\nas another example<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another example was the Prophets and his companions houses. Regardless of the minimalism of their form, they nonetheless made a powerful and enduringly binding architectural statement about the following: the institution of the house as a family development centre; the family institution as the fundamental and most critical component in society and civilisation-building; the meaning and significance of life at large and its relationship with the metaphysical province; respect for and peaceful coexistence with the order of nature (sustainable development); the relationship between man and God, man and man, and man and his surroundings; form-function relationship; reassuring and facilitating egalitarianism and justice among people; authentic hygiene and aesthetics; the true import of well-being, contentment, self-fulfilment and happiness. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a nutshell, those houses symbolised and embodied everything that was architecturally affirmative and beneficial for human life. One can then wonder how there could be a better and more comprehensively valuable brand of residential architecture, or how someone could argue that there was no architecture whatsoever during the Prophets time, and that his epoch generally was architecturally primitive in the extreme. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Definitely, the Prophets and his companions houses, their relationships with and abundant reports concerning building and using them, combined with myriads of Islamic general teachings and values which directly and indirectly influenced Islamic residential architecture, served as the crux, source of inspiration and guidance, and a point of reference for the shaping of the easily recognisable identity of Islamic residential architecture and its wide-ranging vocabulary, then and now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Each\nsubsequent Muslim housing type, which proved excellent and functional, was so\nonly because it adhered to the architectural philosophy and behavioural\ncriteria instituted by the Prophet (pbuh), and which were implemented by the\nProphets houses and the houses of his companions in the socio-economic,\nreligious, cultural and environmental context of Madinah. There is no housing\ntype that can be dubbed excellent and effective if it breached especially the theoretical,\nethical and functional architectural benchmarks set by the Prophet (pbuh) and\nthe houses of Madinah. The more a housing type did so, the more it deviated\nfrom the true spirit of Islam and its perceptions of success, good life and\nhappiness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because\nthose ostensibly simple houses satisfied the modest needs of their occupants,\nfacilitated all the individual and family-oriented functions, fulfilled the\nspiritual and ethical requirements of the Islamic message, and produced the\nlowest possible ecological footprint – they were outstanding and exemplary\nhouses. They were an example of brilliant domestic lifestyle and its\narchitecture. They thus set a high standard for other successful Islamic\nhousing styles in the future. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good domestic architecture is not about having lofty buildings with lofty facilities and majestic decoration. Rather, it is about fully comprehending the meaning of life and ones personal together with family roles, rights and responsibilities in it, and how the physical loci of housing personify, contain, facilitate and advance such a profound realisation and ontological commitment. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good architecture, on the whole, is only that which impeccably amalgamates the two poles of lifes reality under the sway of different natural and man-generated contexts. Good architecture, in addition, is about actualising and living the permanent and unchangeable in the throes of the temporary and changeable. It is about giving the former a current and up-to-date display within the moulds, methods and conventions of the latter. It would be an architectural offence to give precedence to either of the two orbits at the expense of the other. ***<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Spahic Omer Islamic architecture is a very important subject insofar as properly grasping the level of the Muslim religious consciousness, cultural sophistication and civilisational… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":140684,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22,9,21],"tags":[],"nelio_content":{"isAutoShareEnabled":true,"autoShareEndMode":"never","automationSources":{"useCustomSentences":false,"customSentences":[]},"followers":[111,134,12,5],"suggestedReferences":[],"efiUrl":"","efiAlt":"","highlights":[],"permalinkQueryArgs":[]},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/l.png","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140679"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=140679"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140679\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":140690,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140679\/revisions\/140690"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/140684"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=140679"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=140679"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.iium.edu.my\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=140679"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}