ABSTRACT
The notion that “idolatry” represents the antithesis of “good” religiosity in the form of monotheist worship of a transcendent god is so deeply ingrained in many modern minds that terminology itself becomes an obstacle to exploring important questions of material religion. The critique of idolatry often follows predictable patterns in which both the idolater and the idol as object of veneration are subjected to ridicule. The idol is the object of contempt for its impotence and its construction out of base matter, while the idolater is derided for being stupid and primitive in his or her eagerness to worship a worthless idol. In addition to ignorance, the origins of idolatry are seen to lie in tyranny and conceit, where the wielders of worldly power use fear to force the helpless to worship them. 1
Deriding idolatry as a religious system goes hand in hand with exoticizing the cultures that practice it, a phenomenon readily obvious in the medieval Islamic construction of India as a place of wonders as well as the world-centre of idolatry. The function of idolatry as a derogatory construct intended to differentiate between one’s own religious group and others whom one delegitimizes is apparent in Islamic polemics directed against Christianity (though to a lesser extent than it is in Christian polemics against Muslims and Jews). A ninth-century CE Muslim polemical work characterizes Christians as
a nation ( umma ) which had not previously been given a scripture or a prophet; sunk in an ignorance ( jāhiliyyīn fī jahāla ) in which it was unaware that there is a Lord and reckoning after death; on the wrong path and given to creating falsehoods; its people were enemies one to another and in mutual hatred; disobedient to God and lacking in fear of Him; worshipping idols and eating carrion and blood; allowing what should be prohibited, rejecting the right path and complacent in error; its people killing one another and shedding their own blood; disregarding the prohibited degrees in matters of sexual relations; heedless of ties of kinship; causing harm to its own children and . . . in the worst evil. Thus it remained until God sent them this Prophet. (Sourdel 1966: 25, 32; trans. Hawting 1999: 99) 2
Another passage from the period of the crusades juxtaposes Christian devotion to visual images against the Muslims’ own nonmaterial, pure faith:
The Franks said “we will pour forth our soul, spill our blood, give up our lives. This is our church of the Resurrection . . . We love this place, we are bound to it, our honour lies in honouring it. Here are the pictures of the apostles conversing, Popes with their histories, monks in their cells . . . here are the effi gies of the Madonna and the Lord of the temple . . . and what is described and sculpted of his disciples and the Master, of the cradle and the infant. Here are the effi gies of the ox and the ass.” (Gabrieli 1969: 148-49) 3
Although such polemical passages are rare and they normally stop short of accusing Christians of idolatry (probably because of explicit Qur’anic acknowledgement that Christians are monotheists), they do condemn Christians for being excessive in their love of images, leaving it up to the reader to make the connection between Christianity and idolatry.
