Darwin and the Niqab

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله

It might strike you as odd when you know that Darwin and the Niqab had some connection but yes they do. It struck me as odd too.

When Charles Darwin wrote his Descent of Man[1] in chapter 3, he spoke about how beliefs are created by the community for the good in the long term but sometimes it might  "err" due to people's "ignorance and weak powers of reasoning" (meaning not well evolved people, like you and me - the savages). The question is how? What proof? He says,

"The judgement of the community will generally be guided by some rude experience of what is best in the long-run for all the members' but this judgement will not rarely err from ignorance and from weak powers of reasoning. Hence the strangest customs and superstitions, in complete opposition to the true welfare and happiness of mankind, have become all-powerful throughout the world. We see this... in the shame of a Mahometan woman who exposes her face..." (75-76)

It should be clear that Mahometan means Muhammad صلى الله على و سلم. Even Wikipedia agrees by saying,

"Mohammedan (also spelled Muhammadan, Mahommedan, Mahomedan or Mahometan) is a term for a follower of the Islamic prophet Muhammad . It is used as both a noun and an adjective, meaning belonging or relating to, either Muhammad or the religion, doctrines, institutions and practices that he established"[2]

There is even a map showing the countries where "Mohammedan['s]" live throughout the world in 1883.

So according to Darwin, the Niqab (or even Burqa, since they both cover the face but most likely Niqab) is "in complete opposition" to "welfare and happiness of mankind". How does a piece of cloth make the entire mankind happy or not? He is also ridiculing the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله على و سلم because it was he who taught us about the covering of the hair and if you wish (though some say it's an obligation) to cover your face. The Prophet صلى الله على و سلم made "strange customs and superstitious" according to Darwin even though it's more likely that Darwin never knew about the life of Muhammad صلى الله على و سلم.

But there is a contradiction.

Jump two chapters later (chapter 5) he speaks about how the Holy Inquisition brought Spain down after it was great and full of civilisation. But who did the Holy Inquisition take Spain over from? Exactly, the Muslims. So Muslims made Spain great[3] and civilised and here he is talking about our teachings as "strange customs and superstitious" even though it civilised Spain!

Darwin says,

"Who can positively say why the Spanish nation, so dominant at one time, has been distanced in the race? The awakening of the nations of Europe from the dark ages is a still more perplexing problem. At this early period, as Mr Galton[4] has remarked, almost all men of a gentle, nature, those given to meditation or culture of the mind, has no refuge except in the bosom of the Church which demanded celibacy;[5] and this could hardly fail to have had a deteriorating influence on each successive generation. During this same period the Holy Inquisition selected with extreme care the freest and boldest men in order to burn or imprison them. In Spain alone some of the best men - those who doubted and questioned, and without there can be no progress - were eliminated during three centuries at the rate of a thousand a year. The evil which the Catholic Church has thus effected, though no doubt counterbalanced to a certain, perhaps large extent in other ways, is incalculable; nevertheless, Europe has progressed at an unparalleled rate" (137 - italics are mine) 

Let me break it down since it's a mouthful. 

So first Spain was a great nation, so dominant (i.e. so civilised according to context) but then it started to be impotent. Why? Because of the Holy Inquisition. The question is what is the Holy Inquisition? The Holy Inquisition were Catholics who took control of Spain and would kill, burn, torture, you name it, anyone who doubted Catholicism, even if you were from another sect of Christianity! They would send their men to people who they thought were not practising Catholicism their way. They would knock on the door and ask if you are so and so, then, after so and so comes, they would say "the Holy Office (i.e. the Church) summons you" and as a good Catholic you would go to the Holy Office. They would bring you to a room and sit you down, sometimes for hours, asking you question after question (hence the name "Holy Inquisition") about your life, age, family etc. Then they would ask you about the un-Catholic practice you were accused of doing, for example, not eating pork. You would say something like "I don't like pork" but they wouldn't see it like that. They then would strip you semi naked, torture you and then say that they want to "save your soul" because they accused you of, for example, being Jewish (since Jews don't eat pork) and would keep on torturing you until you 'confess' or until they were happy that you have been tortured enough. There is a movie about this called Goya's Ghost, watch it and you'll see the meaning of the Holy Inquisition. But this is what Darwin was talking about. Due to this evil practice, the Catholics killed all the best men who doubted Catholicism (and without doubt there is no progress) and thus brought the civilised Spain to uncivilised Spain but nevertheless Europe in general evolved rapidly. 

I hope this made sense to you. So what is Darwin saying? Though perhaps he himself didn't realise, is that Muslims civilised Spain (due to our teachings) but there he is saying how Niqab is superstitious and of course our Prophet having weak powers of reasoning. So were Muslims civilised (thus great power of reasoning) or not civilised (then fair enough, no contradiction)? Darwin didn't see the contradiction. 

There is more but this is extra. He also speaks about the superstitious belief of "...a Hindoo who breaks his caste..." (75) 

I would agree with Darwin that it is definitely superstitious and it is a racist caste system (as far as I have heard, but if there is more to this "caste system" then please do tell me). But what is ironic is that Darwin made his own caste system based on biological 'scientific' superstitious belief with no evidence whatsoever. 

Of course the above shows that you can be 'civilised' and have an 'inferior mind' - contrary to Darwin's vision of human evolution.

Summary

Charles Darwin certainly was no historian and what he knew about history is what was viral in the society. Holy Inquisition ended in the 19th century, so it would've been news at the time.

Darwin's view of man's history was wrong. If he was right that people with inferior mind can't civilise yet then Spain couldn't have been civlised, but it was. This is where he contradicted himself. And his views on the Niqab is an example of historical prejudice.

و الله اعلم

(Note: People ask (due to my "Was Darwin Racist?" article) why is evolution racist, even if Darwin was? The answer is that evolution requires three things in order for it to work: (1) hereditary (2) different reproduction and (3) variation. The "variation" is the important one. Variation according to natural selection (i.e. evolution) means different success in life. Some live, some die. As we have seen before we know who lives and who needs to die. It's a requirement of natural selection in order for it to work, without it, it can't work. That is why Darwin repeated these three requirements right at the start in Descent by saying whether man differs even if so slightly (variation),

"He who wishes to decide whether man is modified descendant of some pre-existing form, would probably first enquire whether man varies, however slightly..." (9)

And whether we pass hereditary (hereditary + reproduction),

"The enquirer would next come to the important point, whether man tends to increase at so rapid a rate, as to lead to occasional severe struggles for existence, and consequently to beneficial variations... being preserved, and injurious ones eliminated" (9)

If we deny variation, then natural selection didn't create humans (it didn't anyway) and there's no need to believe that we are heading anywhere like those trans-humanist believe in.)

Notes

1. Charles Darwin, Darwin: The Descent of Man, Wordsworth Classics of World Literature.

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammedan

3. For more information on Muslim Spain, read S. E. Al-Djazairi, 2005, The Hidden Debt to Islamic Civilisation, Bayt Al-Hikma Press.

4. He is the cousin of Darwin and the father of Eugenics. His book Hereditary Genius affected the thinking of Darwin. 

5. As far as I know it was Augustine of Hippo who introduced this teaching, a bid'ah.