“This paper begins with a brief outline of two major positions on the question of whether the ancient (or ‘rational’) sciences were excluded from Muslim madrasas and cognate teaching institutes. In the section that follows, I take up positions formulated by Jonathan Berkey and Michael Chamberlain, who both stress the importance of networks, rather than schools, for Muslim education in the post-classical period, to show that these networks integrated the teaching and studying of mathematics, astronomy, astrology, philosophy, logic and/or the occult sciences into the Muslim educational landscapes. In the third and fourth sections of the paper, I talk about the differences between the ancient and the ‘rational’ sciences and about partnerships between the religious and philological sciences, on the one hand, and the ‘rational’ sciences, on the other. In section five, I discuss the inimical attitudes of religious scholars toward the ancient and ‘rational’ sciences and illustrate some of their strategies to deal with them. Finally, in the conclusion, I claim that the much-debated decline of the ancient sciences did not result from their exclusion from the religiously-dominated Muslim educational landscapes, but rather from their integration into them.
Historians of science in Islamic civilization usually study science as it was practiced in the context of falsafa: the mathematical sciences, the physical sciences, the life sciences, and medicine and its allied disciplines. But within the milieu of Islamic civilization, the physical sciences, particularly theories of matter, space, time and motion, were also discussed by scholars immersed in the discipline of kalām. Preserved in eleventh-century kalām texts, these discussions highlight problems of physical theory that arise as a result of kalām’s minimal parts atomism, which is similar, in many ways, to Epicurean atomism. These problems include the nature of space and of motion, the possibility of relative motion within an absolute space and the questions of place, the earth’s motion and falling bodies. Kalām ‘s engagement with these problems provides a vivid illustration of the anti-Aristotelian spirit of its physics, which is generally evident in its embrace of discontinuity, atomism, vacuum and impetus. kalām perspectives on these problems of physics are echoed in earlier as well as later historical developments, although there do not seem to be any clear lines of influence or transmission. Kalām discussions are therefore a rich source for the study of the history of these problems, some of which are central to the evolution of physics.