Formulation of the Claim
The historical responsibility for backwardness does not lie with the West alone; it also includes Muslim intermediaries.
Explanation
Arkoun places this claim in a context in which some Muslim intermediaries turned religion into a political instrument from the beginnings of Islamic history. Thus, he does not reduce the political transformation of religion to the modern colonial period alone, but regards it as earlier than that.
In this sense, Arkoun does not offer a merely moral accusation; rather, he links the role of religious mediation to the formation of historical dysfunctions within the Islamic sphere itself. For him, the issue concerns the structure of history as it took shape, not merely an external conflict with the West.
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom enters into Arkoun’s critique of explaining backwardness as a purely external product. It approaches his broader thesis, which rejects reducing the crisis to the colonial factor and urges scrutiny of the structures and mediations that contributed to directing religion in a political direction within Islamic history.
Limits of the Claim
This atom should not be taken as a blanket judgment on all Muslim intermediaries or as reducing the whole history of Islam to this role alone. Nor does it deny the impact of the West; rather, it objects to restricting responsibility to it alone.