American Journal of Islam and Society Special Issue.indb 220 Psychology and Religion: Their Relationship and Integration from an Islamic Perspective (1998)* A M B E R H A Q U E Religion is a pervasive and influential phenomenon in the lives of many people. Instances of religious behavior are easily found in almost all societies and cultures of the world. However, psy- chology as a behavioral science has largely ignored the study of religion and its profound impact on human behavior. This article attempts to explore the relationship between psychology and religion and how these two disciplines interact. After a gen- eral overview of the relationship between the two disciplines, Islamization of psychology is suggested as a way out of the cur- rent impasse between psychology and religion. Amber Haque is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at the International Is- lamic University of Malaysia. This biography appeared in the article when it was first published. *This article was first published in the American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 15, no. 4 (1998): 97-116 Haque, Amber. 2024. “Psychology and Religion: Their Relationship and Integration from an Islamic Per- spective (1998).” American Journal of Islam and Society 41, no. 1: 314–337 • doi: 10.35632/ajis.v41i1.3425 Copyright © 2024 International Institute of Islamic Thought R E V I E W E S S AY  221 Religion1 and science2 form the most significant and influential forces in our lives. It is also undeniably true that the influence of religion, in these modem times, has declined and that of science has gained ascendancy. It is unfortunate that they are generally regarded as opposed to each other. The religion and science conflict has become legendary; whether there is any inherent conflict between the two is earnestly and passionately debated. There are intriguing questions on both sides, but whether there is a real conflict and incompatibility, or that one is irrelevant to the other, is contingent upon several factors. It seems plausible that most of the ideas expressed regarding this conflict stem mainly from widespread misunderstandings as to the actual nature of science and religion and the basic goals that they pursue. In the area of psychology, many secularly educated psychologists today believe in the worldview that emphasizes “scientific” understand- ing of all phenomena in life and considers religion as archaic. A recent U.S. survey of religious preferences of academicians shows psycholo- gists to be among the least religious.3 In spite of the important role that religion plays in many people’s lives, religious beliefs are perhaps the least addressed if not totally neglected in the present day science and profession of psychology. This article briefly examines the historical relationship between psy- chology and religion; identifies what position science adopts on religion and why some psychologists are antireligious; attempts to explore some common ground between the two disciplines; examines whether and how psychology and religion interact with each other; and presents an analysis of the ongoing trend toward integration of the two disciplines. It is contended that the Islamization of knowledge project, especially Islamization of psychology, has opened up fresh avenues for bridging the gap leading to their eventual integration.4 Although modem psychology largely rejects the notion of religion in the study of human behavior,5 the bond between psychology and religion is as old as the origin of psychology itself. Western6 psychology emerged out of several disciplines. In the fourteenth century, psychologia referred to a branch of pneumatology, the science of spiritual beings and substances.7 In the sixteenth century, a new term anthropologia was 222  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 added to the literature of science, which studied the science of persons and was divided into psychologia, the study of the human mind, and somatologia, the study of the human body. Later in the 18th century, Von Wolff distinguished between rational and empirical psychology,8 which paved the way for scientific psychology. Biblical psychologies were also common in the nineteenth century; for example, the works of Rausch, Delitzcsch, and Chambers are quite important.9 Even earlier, in the thirteenth century, “natural science” was a part of philosophy and the debate of reason versus faith was also addressed by Aquinas (1225- 1274) as a doctrine of one truth, when he said, “There are two paths to the same truth, not two truths. Truth is one and comes from God.”10 It is also interesting to note that while behavior is obviously a critical part of human nature, reducing the definition of psychology to the “scientific” study of behavior is limiting the subject matter of psychology as well as narrowing its focus. Historically speaking, the science of psychology concentrated on the study of the human soul. Psyche originally meant “soul or spirit” in Greek, “breadth of life” and “inner-man” (Roman- Latin). Ancient Greek philosophers were greatly influenced by Islamic concepts of human nature. Hence, we see that not only the definition of psychology is reduced, but also misconstrued and redefined in many ways by experts and laymen alike. This can also be characterized as the initial step to move psychology from its religious base. Today, the scien- tific community looks at science and religion as separate and unrelated. In its “Statement of Perspective,” Zygon—Journal of Religion and Science, states the following: Traditional religions, which have transmitted wisdom about what is of essential value and ultimate meaning as a guide for human living, were expressed in terms of the best understand- ings of their times about human nature, society, and the world. Religious expression in our time, however, has not drawn simi- larly on modem science, which has superceded the ancient form of understanding. As a result, religions have lost credibility in the modem mind. Nevertheless, some recent scientific stud- ies of human evolution and development have indicated how R E V I E W E S S AY  223 long-standing religions have evolved well-winnowed wisdom, still essential for the best life. The U.S. National Academy of Sciences, following the same view, stated its policy on the relationship between religion and science in the following resolution passed in 1981: Religion and science are separate and mutually exclusive realms of human thought whose presentation in the same context leads to misunderstanding of both scientific theory and religious belief.11 Some of the general reasons for this separation and incompatibility are, increasing secularization and modernization of knowledge, emphasis on empiricism and experimentation in science, and the acceptance of experiment as the method of investigation. In addition, Barbour sug- gests that there are at least three areas in which science and religion are unrelated: 1 Science is based on facts; religion is based on faith. 2 Scientific claims are verifiable or falsifiable, whereas religious claims are subjective and cannot be evaluated by objective means. 3 Criteria for choosing between scientific theories are clear and objec- tive, whereas criteria for choosing between religions are ambiguous and subjective.12 Psychology’s Antipathy toward Religion The science of psychology operates on the principle that behavior is a result of cause and effect. This idea is premised on the debate of deter- minism versus freedom, and whether man is solely responsible for his own actions. As a result, most psychologists tend to believe that the reason human beings behave the way they do is because of their nature, and that man is certainly limited in his own free will. Psychoanalysis to behaviorism, and more recently, brain research attempt to prove the force 224  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 of determinism in shaping man’s behavior. This scientific explanation of human behavior, including religious ones, certainly poses a challenge for those offering explanations using religious concepts for human behavior, including the exercise of “free will.” If one attempts to find out the psychologist’s reasons for antipathy toward religion, one can perhaps speculate, and with good reason, that since psychology and human nature were major explanatory concepts in the domain of philosophy and religion, it is only by repudiating their importance, that psychologists can develop new methods of under- standing behavior. The creation versus evolution debate, no doubt, also had a great impact on the minds of these psychologists. Several other factors, which could be gleaned from psychological literature, suggest their superficial understanding of religion, and a rebellious spirit and attitude against religion due to their overly conservative upbringing. Those psychologists who believe in their discipline as “hard” science deliberately avoid studying “soft” topics that are not scientific in nature. Moreover, psychology in America has its roots in positivistic philosophy, which always undermined the value of religion. Wulff points out that psychology’s dominant philosophy of positivism attracted those persons who had rejected religion in the first place, and repelled those for whom religion was important.13 Psychologists Against Religion Due to specific and general reasons, several prominent twentieth cen- tury psychologists have shown direct antagonism toward religion and favored science and its method in the study of human behavior. Two renowned names that subscribe to such a position are Sigmund Freud and B.F. Skinner. Freud describes religion as a belief in a father-god, followed by obligatory rituals. He explains that in early years of life, the child perceives parents and specially the father as an all-powerful, yet loving figure, who provides protection from all woes of life. In later years, when internal and external factors in a person’s life arouse a sense of helplessness, the person’s longing for a powerful father figure finds its fulfillment in religion.14 Thus, Freud declares religion as an illusion, R E V I E W E S S AY  225 which is the result of wish fulfillment rather than reason. Freud further contends that only forsaking religion and relying on science could allow a person and society to enjoy growth beyond the infantile stage. Skinner maintains that religious behavior is the same as all other behavior, which occurs because it is followed by reinforcement. Also, religious behavior that cannot be explained through the principle of direct reinforcement can be understood as a product of accidental reinforcement, which he terms as “superstitious” behavior.15 Skinner’s ideas are expounded in his popular book Beyond Freedom and Dignity, in which human beings are presented as machine-like models, which exemplifies his thinking.16 Two other psychologists who exclude religion from the study of psychology are James Leuba and George Vetter. Leuba on the basis of experimen- tal evidence concludes that mystical experiences might be explained in terms of basic laws of psychology and physiology.17 Vetter argues that religious behavior is equivalent to an unpredictable human response, something like what Skinner calls superstitious behavior.18 On the applied side, Ellis categorically indicates that religion incor- porates the concepts of sin and guilt, which can only make people worse off than they would be without them. Ellis also contends that religious beliefs are pathological and may lead to self-defeating behavior or even neurosis.19 Due to Ellis’s great influence on cognitive therapy, religious beliefs have generally evoked hostility from cognitive therapists.20 Ellis, however, revised his position on religion in 1992, when he suggested that his stance on religion is applicable to the “devoutly religious,” rather than to those who believe in religion in general.21 Psychologists for Religion For numerous twentieth century psychologists, religion plays a sig- nificant role in people’s lives and its study should not be ignored in psychology. Carl Jung considers religion as an essential function of the human psyche in the absence of which individuals fall victim to various forms of neuroses and psychoses. Jung has points out that, among all of his patients who were in the second half of their lives (beyond age 35), the main problem is that they cannot find a religious outlook on their 226  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 lives. Jung asked psychologists to study the full range of their patient’s lives, which must include religious experience.22 Another psychologist, Erik Erickson, described how religion universalizes the qualities of faith, trust, and ego in the growing child, and asserts that religion is vital in achieving a fully developed and healthy personality.23 The humanis- tic psychologists of the twentieth century also explain the interaction between psychology and religion. Those who emphasize this interac- tion include Gordon Allport, Erich Fromm, and Abraham Maslow. They concur that human beings have a need for spirituality in their attempt to self-actualize.24 London contends that psychotherapy, in addition to being a scientific application of psychological theories, is also a moral enterprise with religious overtones.25 Browning also points out that reli- gion and psychology have a special relationship, as both of them provide ways of “ordering the interior life.”26 Common Ground Between Psychology and Religion What is the common ground between science and religion? Is there a need for integration? And what purpose would this integration serve? To find some common ground between science and religion, it would be useful to examine the subject matter and goals of both, science and religion. One might say that science studies the objective, external, vis- ible, and verifiable phenomena, while religion focuses on the internal, subjective, and transcendental aspect of human experience that cannot be objectively seen or measured. But science, at the same time, deals with interpretation and a certain degree of uncertainty,27 in its inquiry. Science deals with the abstract and private, especially in the field of psychology. Religion provides an understanding of complex issues in life, and the revelations provide us with scientific knowledge, from the creation of the universe to the birth of man, existence in this world, and life after death. Many of the revealed statements have been verified by science itself. On the subject of man, religion attempts to explain human problems and their diagnosis, and ways to overcome man’s difficulties. As far as the goals of science and religion are concerned, both offer an understanding on how man came to exist and both claim to provide R E V I E W E S S AY  227 knowledge for mankind’s betterment. Both attempt to provide ways to make mankind’s life easier; for example, science provides technologi- cal advances, and religion provides existential knowledge in attaining understanding and happiness. However, one can argue that science operates with the presumption that there are causes to things, religion with the presumption that there are meanings to things. Meanings and causes have in common a concept of order, but the type of world differs.28 Both science and religion also use analogies and metaphors to make their explanations easier to understand.29 This implies that psychology and religion are compatible to each other in more ways than realized, and a relationship between the two does exist. In addition, these argu- ments suggest that an integrative study and a joint application of both disciplines could be useful. However, it should be noted that integration of science and religion is not a synthesis of the two; instead, it is a thesis or antithesis to complement the analytical phase of differentiation in the quest to understand each discipline in its own right. It should also be remembered that differentiating various disciplines is necessary only for the purpose of knowledge on how disciplines complement each other and not so much to emphasize their dis-integration and independence and autonomy. Scientific psychologists, especially those who call themselves “inter- behaviorists,” believe that a developmental history of the person under investigation must be taken into account for a thorough analysis of behavior. Because the historical developments and cultural and religious influences shape our behavior, they say that psychology cannot ignore those unseen factors, as a scientific study cannot be a study of raw behavior, but of behavior in all its sophistication, contexts, and com- plexities. In his recent essay, Browning declares that besides being a science, psychology is also a hermeneutic discipline, and an understand- ing of cultural and historical images which we carry as human beings, is essential to the study of human behavior.30 The sacred books, especially in the Abrahamic faiths, call their believers to search for congruence 228  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 between their knowledge and religious teachings. The books declare that all knowledge emanates from one source, that is, God, and to truly understand this phenomena in its total richness one has to study all knowledge in their integrated form. Despite claims to the contrary, psy- chology is a behavioral (and social) science, as opposed to a “natural science.” It has an obligation to integrate all knowledge and forces that affect human behavior in order to grasp the totality of factors shaping our personalities. Interaction Between Psychology and Religion Psychology and religion do interact with each other on an ongoing basis.31 Jones explains this phenomena in three ways.32 How a psychol- ogist evaluates a particular theory or paradigm within his or her religious dogma is called the critical-evaluative mode of inquiry. The psycholo- gists may reject a theory or move toward another based on his or her religious presupposition. Another mode of relating religion to science is the constructive mode, where religion contributes positively to the growth of science by providing unique worldviews that encourage new modes of thought. Religious scholars will not contribute to science by being passive and too critical of scientific inquiry, but by testing their beliefs and seeing how they promote improved human understanding. Another way, in which science and psychology may interact, is through dialogical or dialectical means. In other words, instead of one dictating the other, each improves its understanding by knowing the approach or perspective of the other. This opens the door for scientists to become theologically educated and religionists to become scientifically literate. Psychology is a scientific study of human behavior and mental processes, at the same time, it applies its theories to help humans live a better life. Psychology and religion, in this sense, interact on a continuous ongoing basis and share the common concern of improving the human condition. The interaction between psychology and religion also depends upon how a particular branch of psychology perceives itself. For example, psy- chologists who focus on neurobiology, behavior, or experimentation belong to the so-called “hard science” group who emphasize that environmental R E V I E W E S S AY  229 factors explain cause and effect relationships. Those who are searching for ways of describing the meaning of life as a psychological phenomenon end up in the realm of religion and combine psychology with their religious perspectives in the study of human nature. If one agrees with this argument, psychology encompasses both scientific and religious aspects, and hence, is fairly wide in its scope compared to other social science disciplines. This, nevertheless, remains a challenge as to how psychology can interact with religion in the most appropriate and positive way, to develop better under- standing of human behavior in its total comprehensive richness. Attempts at Integrating Psychology and Religion It seems that for well over 100 years, attempts were made by various scholars to reintegrate psychological science with religion. Works like, Paine’s Physiology of the Soul, Boudreaux’s Psychological Study of God, Maudsley’s Naturalistic Explanations of Spiritual Phenomena, and Starbuck’s Psychology of Religion, are a few examples from the nineteenth century.33 Several attempts were made in the mid-twentieth century at integration as well.34 As a result of these efforts, an attempt at integra- tion between psychological science and religion has been taking place through burgeoning professional organizations, integrated journals, collaborative research projects, and new textbooks of an integrative nature. Other significant attempts at integration in the West during the mid-twentieth century resulted in the formation of the Christian Association for Psychological Studies in 1953, the National Academy of Religion and Mental Health in 1954, and the American Foundation of Religion and Psychiatry in 1958. In 1976, a professional psychological group called Psychologists Interested in Religious Issues (PIRI) achieved a division status within the American Psychological Association (APA) and later changed its name to the “Psychology of Religion,” in 1993. This APA division publishes its own newsletter. In the East, conferences on integrating scientific and religious knowledge have taken place, but published accounts are rather difficult to find.35 On the educational and training front, integrated postgraduate pro- grams are also available.36 In the United States, the first integrated and 230  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 APA accredited Ph.D. program in psychology was offered at the Fuller Theological Seminary in 1988. At the Master’s level, an integrated pro- gram was also introduced outside the U.S. at the International Islamic University of Malaysia in 1996.37 Several other integrated postgraduate programs are also becoming available, especially in the West. It is safe to say that, by far, most graduate training programs and professional societies in psychology are Christian. The reason for more integrated programs in Christian majority countries may be due to the availabil- ity of funds and organized efforts, as well as greater marketability of such programs. Another important reason for the growth of such pro- grams could be the absorption of graduates into Christian counseling centers, hospitals, and other human service agencies. The integration of religion and psychology has also taken place in Jewish,38 Muslim,39 and Buddhist40 communities. Research studies done in the last decade also show that clinical psychologists and psychotherapists, especially from Western countries, are more religiously oriented now than before.41 Another interesting finding by Worthington is that practicing psychol- ogists will need to deal with religious issues more in coming years, as people are becoming more open and vocal about their religious beliefs and practices.42 Several psychology journals that are integrative in orientation have also emerged, for example, the Journal of Religion and Health established in 1961, the Journal of Psychology and Theology established in 1973, the Journal of Psychology and Christianity established in 1982, the Journal of Psychology and Judaism, and the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion, established in 1990. The International Association of Muslim Psychologists (IAMP) also launched its efforts in 1997 and plans to start its new integrated journal, The Muslim Psychologist. Another integrated journal started by a Muslim organization in the U.S. in 1973 is the American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, which generally includes articles on issues related to psychology and other social sciences. This journal, in addition, is making efforts to Islamize the social sciences. Ample literature, including books, are now available on the sub- ject of psychology and religion. Most of these books are written by Christian psychologists and published in the West. The case with Muslim R E V I E W E S S AY  231 psychologists is different, as most books are written by Arab scholars and are not translated into English; thus their works remain unknown and unavailable in the Western world. Monographs, chapters, and articles on psychology and religion have also been appearing in the Annual Review of Psychology,43 American Psychologist,44 and Psychological Science.45 On the applied side, psychologists working in the mental health area are collaborating with religious workers to improve various human problems, including homelessness and physical or mental illness.46 Tan describes two major models of integrating religion and professional psychology.47 The first is implicit integration, where the psychologist shows respect for the client’s religious beliefs and may even pray for the client quietly. In explicit integration, the psychologist takes a more overt approach that focuses on outward religious behavior on the part of the professional, i.e., integrating therapy with spiritual guidance. Psychiatric hospitals and centers may also encourage an integrated treatment of the mentally ill, depending on the orientation of their institution. Public hospitals in the U.S. do not encourage this practice, as the general philos- ophy in the West is “separation of church and state.” Private Christian or Jewish hospitals are not bound by such rules and freely exercise religious practice with patients in various healthcare settings. It is also important to mention here that the Ethical Principles of Psychologists now mandates that practicing psychologists in the United States and APA members view religion as a significant aspect of human life and that this may require special knowledge and training on the part of the psychologist.48 The 1992 APA Code of Conduct also specifies that in the absence of such a service from the psychologist, appropriate referrals for the clients should be made to ensure proper and complete treatment of the patients. lslamization of Psychology Anyone who is not familiar with the concept of Islamization would surely ask the question, why Islamize a discipline? First, it is necessary to understand the meaning of the term “Islamization.” Islamization refers to processes that are utilized to construct and recast the total corpus of 232  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 human knowledge so that it conforms to the key concept in Islam, i.e., al-Tawhid. The Islamization process calls for making all knowledge sub- servient to and in consonance with the Qur’anic revelation. According to Qur’anic injunctions, man is duty-bound to reflect on all things within a proper framework of faith if he is to function in harmony with the cosmic laws. Islamization primarily deals with the social sciences, as they are extremely crucial in shaping people’s values and regulating their lives in this world. Psychology being the study of behavior has top priority for Islamization, so that all behaviors can be understood and remodeled within the Islamic framework. Western psychology operates largely in the materialistic system dictated by materialistic values while ignoring the spiritual aspect in the study of human personality. Islamic psychol- ogy, on the other hand, aims at regulating behavior in the direction of the divine will, with the goal of bringing worldly as well as spiritual success to man. lsma`il Faruqi, who initiated the Islamization of Knowledge (IOK) movement, also coined the term “Islamization.”49 The Concept of Man in Islam Numerous verses of the Qur’an reflect man’s nature.50 Also many refer- ences in the Qur’an explain man’s status in this world and his ultimate destiny.51 However, the Qur’an is primarily concerned with guiding man to the right belief and righteous conduct.52 The Qur’an also declares that the whole process of creation was deliberate as opposed to accidental (a belief favored by most scientists). The Qur’an asserts that man is given God-consciousness, which may not be present in man at all times, but which becomes apparent in times of need or crisis.53 In Islam, man pos- sesses a dual nature, as he is both body and soul. Among other things, God bestowed upon man a limited knowledge of soul or spirit. And it is through this knowledge that man can arrive at knowledge of God. The seat of knowledge in man comes from the metaphysical elements, referred in the Qur’an as heart (al-qalb), soul (al-nafs), spirit (al-ruh), and intellect (al aql). Knowledge and ruh are inherent in the nature of man and are collectively known as al-fitrah, which directs man’s behavior throughout his life.54 From an Islamic perspective, the term “insan” or R E V I E W E S S AY  233 man, is a derivative of “nasiya” or to forget, and it is this forgetfulness of man that leads to his disobedience, injustice, and ignorance in this world. But man is given a choice (ikhtiyar) coupled with intelligence to distinguish between right and wrong, good and bad, so he can be God’s vicegerent on earth-conducting his and others’ lives according to the will of God.55 The human soul possesses faculties that are vegetative, animalistic, and human or volitional.56 The Qur’an contains 143 verses that contain the Arabic word al-nafs, of which, 28 verses refer to the mind or human psyche.57 Explanations of Human Nature by Muslim Scholars The written accounts on the description of human nature by early Muslim scholars can be found as early as 800 A.D. and then onwards until year 1100.58 Al-Kindi wrote his books On Sleep and Dreams, First Philosophy, and The Eradication of Sorrow, using cognitive strategies to combat depres- sion. Al-Tabari was a pioneer in the field of child development, which he elucidated in his book Firdaus al-Hikmah. Al-Farabi wrote his treatise on Social Psychology, most renowned of which is his Model City. Ibn Sina, in his famous book Al-Shifa, discusses mind, its existence, mind body relationship, sensation, perception and other related aspects. lbn Sina also gave psychological explanations of certain somatic illnesses as well. lbn Bajjah based his psychological studies on physics. He explained intelligence as the most important ability of man and wrote many essays on sensations and imaginations. lbn Tufail gave a unique concept of man as Hayy bin Yaqzan which shows that man has enough powers to reach the ultimate truth with the help of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Al-Ghazzali examined human nature in greater detail and found that all psychological phenomena originate with the self. He described in detail the nature of the self, using four terms—heart, soul, desire, and intellect. Al-Ghazzali’s research covers almost all basic aspects of psychology, ranging from moti- vation and sensation to emotions and feelings, from psychopathology to behavior of the individual in the society. On the applied side, Yahya Ibn Massawayh, Abu Zayd Hunayn and Ishaq bin Imran all wrote monographs on melancholia, emphasizing the 234  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 benefits of psychotherapy. Abu Bakr Mohammad Ibn Zakariya al-Razi wrote Kitab al-Hawi, where he discusses different types of melancholia, hypochondria, effects of temperament on personality, lethargy, mad- ness (junun), schizophrenia (hadhayan), various forms of insomnia, mental confusion (iqtitlat), and delirium. He describes in great detail the causation, symptoms, and treatment of these disorders and he is also credited for coining the term “ilaj al-nafsani.” Abu’l Hasan Ali Ibn Abbas al-Majusi in his book, Kitab al-Malaki, which was translated into Latin twice, writes about sleeping sickness, loss of memory, and coma. He also differentiated hot and cold meningitis, vertigo epilepsy, love sickness, and hemiplegia. Abu Bakr Rabi wrote a book named Al Muta’alimuna fi al-Tibb. Of special interest to psychologists are the chapters on nerves, the nature of the brain, its form and functions, and symptoms of brain disorders, as well as emotional, sexual, and sleep disorders. Al-Balkhi wrote in detail about rational and cognitive therapies for anxiety, depres- sion, anger, panic, and obsessive disorders. It is hard to find written accounts of psychological explanations of human behavior by Muslim scholars in more recent years. Apparently, writings of Muslim scholars from various parts of the world did not get translated into English and could not be effectively communicated to others. Some materials that are directly relevant and readily available in the English language are cited below.59 However, it must be remembered that although “Islamic psychology” did not exist before by this particu- lar name, very important works were written by Muslim scholars from around the world. It is more noticeable now that Islamic psychology is gaining prominence as a field and Muslim psychologists are attempting to Islamize their discipline.60 What Is the Next Step for Muslim Psychologists? Regrettably, Muslim psychologists have made few, if any, attempts at organizing their efforts in Islamizing their discipline. It must also be pointed out here that Islamization is not an easy task and must begin with a cognitive restructuring of those Muslim psychologists who think like Western psychologists.61 Muslim psychologists have to divest themselves R E V I E W E S S AY  235 of the strong influence of their training in Western psychology. As such, there are no institutions where Muslims interested in psychology can be trained. All contemporary Muslim psychologists are trained either in the West or in the East in schools using Western methods. Therefore, reed- ucation begins with the reorientation of Muslim psychologists toward the Islamic worldview. No doubt, Muslims who are deeply rooted in their religious tradi- tions do bring their values to bear on their professions. However, while an Islamic thought is necessary for Islamization, it is not sufficient in itself. A systematic approach toward Islamization has to be initiated. This can begin with the integration of the Islamic attitude with the scientific disposition. For example, a Muslim astronomer looks through his tele- scope and not only sees Allah’s ayahs (signs) in the cosmos—stars and other celestial bodies—but will reflect upon them in the light of ayahs from the Qur’an. Similarly, a Muslim psychologist will read peoples’ behavior and not only see stimuli and responses, but reflected in them, he will recognize the grand design of human nature and human existence as embodied in the Qur’an. Specifically, at this juncture what should Muslim psychologists strive for to Islamicize their discipline? First, it is imperative, that works of Muslim scholars relevant to psychology be collected and reviewed carefully. In fact, a collection of original contributions of Muslims to psychology in general, and Islamic psychology in particular, should be prepared. This task is difficult no doubt, but achievable. Any organization, which is serious about Islamic social sciences research, can take up this responsibility. This would tell us what has already been accomplished in the way of Islamization and help us prepare current and future plans of research accordingly.62 Second, those Muslim psychologists who are interested in Islamizing their discipline should devote ample time systematically studying the Qur’an and the source books of the Islamic legacy. Without first hand knowledge of the basic sources, Islamization of any knowledge remains a distant possibility. Third, an ongoing joint venture by Muslim scholars of revealed knowledge and the social sciences should put their heads together, using 236  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 their respective methodologies to study human nature. Developing an appreciation for the interconnectedness of psychology with its sister discipline can also prove helpful. Fourth, an Islamic theoretical framework of psychology needs to be advanced in order to function as a guide for future research. This means that Islamization of psychology should begin by redefining its subject matter and scope in an all inclusive and comprehensive manner including aspects of the human soul. Emphasis should be placed on knowledge of psycho spiritual basis of human behavior and on finding ways of fostering righteousness. This further means that Muslim psy- chologists have to create their own science of psychology, based on the tawhidi paradigm. Fifth, Muslim psychologists should incorporate Islamic ethics into psychology, as psychology relates to people and changing people’s behavior for the better. This ethical and moral concept should be based on the guidelines given in the Qur’an and the Shari’ah. Present day psychology has not quite lived up to its professed goals of helping indi- viduals understand themselves, the purpose and meaning of life, and how to live in a balanced and constructive manner. Islamic Psychology should not be lacking in this sphere. Sixth, and perhaps most importantly, a change in the teaching cur- riculum must take place at the university level.63 The Islamic perspective must be incorporated in various psychological concepts and phenom- ena, which must be discussed in the classrooms. This will foster Islamic thinking among today’s Muslim psychology students so that they are better equipped to deal with these issues in the future. Conclusion Although historically, psychology and religion have generally avoided each other, recent trends suggest increased interchange and interaction. With the emergence of postmodern ideology, a growing tolerance is growing between the two disciplines. We see a spurt of growth in the form of psychological organizations, integrated journals, research proj- ects, and textbooks of an integrative nature. Several graduate programs R E V I E W E S S AY  237 in renowned universities around the world, now offer advanced degrees that are integrated in nature. Also, on the applied side, practicing pro- fessionals increasingly are asked to fulfill their client’s needs related to religious beliefs and ideologies. Nevertheless, it is still a fact that, only a tiny minority realizes the importance of this relationship and growth. This article suggests that integration will be achieved through the Islamization of psychology process. Hopefully, this article will help to enhance awareness and develop “integrated thinking” among Muslim psychologists, for indeed, if psychology wants to be more effective as a behavioral science, it cannot ignore the important variable in human personality we call “religion.” 238  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 Endnotes y Dr. Amber Haque is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology at the International Islamic University of Malaysia. He was a practicing psychologist in the State of Michigan, USA, between 1983 and 1996. The author is indebted to Dr. Saiyad Fareed Ahmad and Sabeena Watanabe for providing useful references for this article. 1 The term “religion” is a derivative from the Latin word legare, which means “to bind” or “connect.” Religion then refers to “connecting,” but serious differences exist on its definition. Connecting to what is also unclear. However, an etymological analysis of the word religion connotes the idea that it involves people’s striving for a sense of wholeness or completeness. See for example, R.F. Paloutzian, Invitation to the Psychology of Religion (Mass: Allyn and Bacon, 1996). Some experts also prefer to use the term “religious faith” and “religious tradition,” since religion by itself carries little meaning apart from its human context. See D.M. Wulff, Psychology of Religion (John Wiley and Sons, 1997). 2 Science can be defined as any body of knowledge that is systematically obtained, and is subject to verification through objective means. The label “science” as applied to psychology offers a framework of psychology that imitates the methodology common to the natural sciences. This means that psychology studies (or should study, if consid- ered science) behavior in terms of variables that are subject to experimental scrutiny. 3 Politics of the professorate. The Public Perspective, p. 86-87, 1991. 4 It must be emphasized here that no worldly or scientific knowledge is dis-integrated from revealed knowledge, in the first place. It is only the misperception or incom- plete knowledge of humans, which leads to view religion and science as separate. When examined carefully, one would recognize that all scientific knowledge does or will eventually lead one to confirm the revealed knowledge. 5 This attitude is perhaps inferred from the virtual absence of religion as a topic in most psychology textbooks, and often a vehement opposition from some prominent psychologists toward religion, from the scope of psychology. Even William James, who wrote a separate treatise on the psychology of religion in 1902, neglected this topic entirely in his classic 1400-page book, Principles of Psychology. See, C.G. Shaw, “The Content of Religion and Psychological Analysis,” in Studies in Psychology: Contributed by Colleagues and Former Students of Edward Titchner, (Worcester, Mass: Louis N. Wilson, 1917). 6 The term “Western” is used here because psychology has its own place and image in the East as well, which is varied in models inherent in the religious and moral philos- ophies of the East. For a detailed description of “Eastern” traditions in psychology, see James Brennan, History and Systems of Psychology, 4th ed. (Prentice Hall, 1994). 7 H. Vande Kemp. “The Tension Between Psychology and Theology: I. The Etymological Roots.” Journal of Psychology and Theology. 10 (1996): 105-112. R E V I E W E S S AY  239 8 K. Ramul, “The Problem of Measurement in the Psychology of the Eighteenth Century,” American Psychologist, IS (1960): 256-265. 9 F.A. Rausch, Psychology, Or a View of the Human Soul: Including Anthropology. (New York: Dodd, 1840). F.J. Delitzsch, A System of Biblical Psychology, R. E. Wallis, trans. (New York: Ungar, 1867). O. Chambers, Biblical Psychology: A Series of Preliminary Studies, 2nd ed. (London: Simpkin Marshall, 1900). 10 R.J. Watson, The Great Psychologists: From Aristotle to Freud (Philadelphia: Lipincott, 1963). 11 National Academy of Sciences, Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences (Washington, IX. 1984), 6. 12 I. Barbour, Myths, Models, and Paradigms (New York: Harper & Row, 1974). 13 D.M. Wulff, Psychology of Religion (John Wiley and Sons, 1997). 14 S. Freud, Totem and Taboo: Some Points of Agreement Between the Mental Lives of Savages and Neurotics, in J. Strachey (ed. and trans.) The Standard Edition of the Complex Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, vol. 21 (London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psychoanalysis). 1-56. (Original work published in 1927.) 15 B.F. Skinner, Science and Human Behavior (New York: Macmillan, 1953). 16 In a personal interview of B.F. Skinner conducted by the author during the Behavior Analysis Convention (1983) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Skinner mentioned religion as an amazing creation of the civilizations, because “people need to look forward to someone in times of need and thank someone when their needs are met.” See A. Haque, An Interview with B.F. Skinner, Behavior Analysis Annual Convention, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 1983, unpublished manuscript. 17 J.H. Leuba, The Psychology of Religious Mysticism (New York: Harcourt-Brace, 1975). 18 G.B. Vetter, Magic and Religion: Their Psychological Nature, Origin, and Function (New York: Philosophical Library, 1958). 19 A. Ellis, “There ls No Place for the Concept of Sin in Psychotherapy,” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 7 (1960): 188-192. A. Ellis, Reason and Emotion in Psychotherapy (New York: Lyle Stuart, 1962). 20 L.R. Propst, “Psychotherapy with Religiously Committed People,” in Edward P. Shefranske (ed.) Religion and Clinical Practice of Psychology, 1996. 21 A. Ellis. “My Current Views on Rational-Emotive Therapy and Religiousness,” Journal of Rational-Emotive and Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, 10 (1992): 37-40. 22 C.G. Jung, Concerning the Archetypes, with Special reference to the Anima Concept, in H. Read, M. Fordham. & G. Adler (eds.) The Collected Works of C.G.Jung, vol. 9, Part 1, 2nd ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968), 54-72. (Original work published 1954.) 23 E.H. Erikson, Childhood and Society. 2nd ed. (New York: W. W. Norton, 1963). (Original work published 1950.) 240  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 24 Although humanistic psychologists have favored religion, or more accurately, “spiritual experience” in the study of human personality, they promoted their own spiritual vision rather than developing an outlook on psychology of religion. See H. Kung, Freud and the Problem of God (trans.) E. Quinn (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press. 1979). 25 P. London, The Modes and Morals of Psychotherapy, 2nd ed. (Washington DC: Hemisphere, 1986). 26 D.S. Browning, Religious Thought and the Modern Psychologies (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987). 27 Every scientific inquiry begins with a question and hypothesis, which often leads to more questions and hypotheses. This leaves the scientist groping in the dark about what’s next. Science always keeps changing due to this uncertainty, whereas religion is always fixed and firm in its principles. 28 H. Rolston, Science and Religion (Temple University Press, 1987), 22. 29 Paloutzian, Invitation to the Psychology of Religion also explains this phenomenon by saying that it is not essential to rule out the validity of one discipline because you accept the validity of the other, as disciplines are not mutually exclusive. He says that the modem philosophy of science has now made it clear that the “either-or” approach is unnecessary, and instead of perceiving the other field as a threat, experts should “draw upon and cross fertilize the research and experiences of the other.” 30 D.S. Browning, “Can Psychology Escape Religion? Should it?” The International Journal for Psychology and Religion 7 (1997), 1-12. 31 While the two disciplines interact, they are not necessarily integrated. To interact is rather casual and informal, but to integrate is to consider both as an offshoot of a united whole and value the importance of the systemic perspective where knowl- edge is analyzed in a highly complex and interpersonal environmental context. The integrator “holds things together” or works to bring things together, which is the function of religion based on the root ligare. Progoff (1956) in his attempt to inte- grate psychology with religion states: “The ultimate task of the new psychology is to re-establish man’s connection to life fundamentally and actually as an evident fact of modem existence” (p. 265). 32 S.L. Jones, “A Constructive Relationship for Religion with the Science and Profession of Psychology,” American Psychologist 49 (1994): 184-199. 33 M. Paine, Physiology of the Soul and Instinct as Distinguished from Materialism (New York: Harper, 1872). F.J. Boudreaux, God Our Father (New York: Catholic Publications Society, 1873). H. Maudsley, 1886. Natural Causes and Supernatural Seemings (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, 1886). E.D. Starbuck, The Psychology of Religion (London: Walter Scott, 1899). 34 H. Yande Kemp. “Historical Perspective: Religion and Clinical Psychology in America,” in (ed.) Edward P. Shefranske, Religion and Clinical Practice of Psychology, p. 72, 1996. R E V I E W E S S AY  241 35 One such recent attempt took place in the form of a major international confer- ence on counseling and psychotherapy from the Islamic perspective held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in 1997, which gave birth to the International Association of Muslim Psychologists (IAMP). In the 1980s, a similar conference was held in Lahore, Pakistan. See Z.A. Ansari (ed.), Qur’anic Concepts of the Human Psyche (Islamabad, Pakistan: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1994). 36 An important question, however, is whether religion is taught within the Introduction to Psychology course. This would be a more prudent way to judge the treatment religion is getting in psychology today, as authors in an introductory textbook would presumably write whatever is most important in that field at the time of their writing. A recent study on the use of religious content in introductory books in psychology reveals substantial progress in the 1980s compared to the 1970s. See, E. Lehr and B. Spilka, “Religion in the Introductory Psychology Textbook: A Comparison of Three Decades,” Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion, 28 (1989), 366-371. 37 A catalog explaining the integrated psychology program can be obtained from the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Human Sciences, International Islamic University, P.O. Box 70, Jalan Sultan, 46700 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. 38 L. Meier, Jewish Values in Psychotherapy (New York: University Press of America, 1996), 72. H. Vande Kemp, “Religion and Clinical Psychology in America,” in Edward P. Shefranske (ed.) Religion and Clinical Practice of Psychology (1996), 72. 39 See S.A.A. Rizvi, A Muslim Tradition in Psychotherapy and Modern Trends (Lahore, Pakistan: Institute of Islamic Culture, 1988). F.A. H-L. Abou-Hatab, Mental Health from the Islamic Perspective. a paper presented at the International Conference on Counseling and Psychotherapy from the Islamic Perspective, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1997. 40 W.D. Lax. Narrative, Deconstruction and Buddhism: Shifting beyond Dualism, a paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Aug. 1993. 41 A.E. Bergin and J.P. Jensen, “Religiosity of Psychotherapists: A National Survey,” Psychotherapy 27 (1990): 3-7. E.P. Shefranske and H.N. Malony, “Clinical Psychologists’ Religious and Spiritual Orientations and Their Practice of Psychotherapy,” Psychotherapy 27 (1990). 72-78. 42 E.L. Worthington, Jr., “Psychotherapy and Religious Values: An Update,” Journal of Psychology and Christianity 10 (1991), 211-223. 43 R.L. Gorsuch. “Psychology of Religion,” Annual Review of Psychology 39 (1988), 201-221. 44 A.E. Bergin, “Values and Religious Issues in Psychotherapy and Mental Health,” American Psychologist 46 (1991), 394-403. 242  A M E R I C A N J O U R N A L O F I S L A M A N d S O C I E t Y 4 1 : 1 45 S. Sethi and M.E.P. Seligman, “Optimism and Fundamentalism,” Psychological Science 4 (1993), 256-259. 46 E. Cohen, C.T. Mowbray, V. Gillette, and E. Thompson, “Preventing Homelessness: Religious Organizations and Housing Development,” Prevention in Human Services 1l (1991), 169-186. E. Eng and J.W. Hatch, “Networking between Agencies and Black Churches: The Lay Health Advisor Model,” The Christian Journal of Psychology and Counseling 11 (1991), 123-146. 47 S.Y. Tan, “Explicit Integration in Christian Counseling,” The Christian Journal of Psychology and Counseling 2 (1990), 7-13. 48 American Psychological Association, “Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct,” American Psychologist 47 (1992), 1597-1611. 49 Isma’il Raji al-Faruqi started the Islamization of Knowledge (IOK) movement and he also coined the term “Islamization.” In the words of Faruqi, IOK “in its entirety, is the comprehensive, normative framework for individuals and society, for thought and action, for education and practice, for knowledge and organization, for the rulers and the ruled, for this world and for the world to come. By applying “Islamization” to everything one does, a Muslim seeks the pleasure of God by practicing what is true and just, through transformation and improvement, to achieve happiness, peace, and security in this life as well in the life hereafter.” Islamization of Knowledge: General Principles and Work Plan (Herndon, Virginia: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 1995), 84. 50 See for instance, 4:28, 21:37, 50:16-18, 70:19-35, 75:31,40, and 95:4. 51 See 2:29, 14:33, 15: 28-29, 16:12, 31:20, 35:39, and 38:71-72. 52 See 2:112, 2:157, 3:7-9, 3:199, 5:125, 9:61, 17:23-29, 21:127, 23:57-61, 32:15, 33:21, 60:4-6, 68:4. 53 See 6:63, 8:172. 54 For a detailed explanation of the term al-fitra, see Yasien Mohamad, “Fitrah and Its Bearing on the Principles of Psychology,” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences vol. 12, no. 1 (1995): 1-18. 55 See 2:30. 56 For details on the description of the human soul from an Islamic perspective, see S.M. Naqib al-Attas, The Nature of Man and the Psychology of the Human Soul (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization, 1990). 57 The article by Tariq Hamidi and A.M.H. al-Jadiry, in Shahid Athar (ed.), Islamic Perspective in Medicine (American Trust Publication, USA, 1993). Islamic description of the term “psyche” can be found in the edited book Quranic Concepts of Human Psyche by Zafar Afaq Ansari (Islamabad. Pakistan: Islamic Research Institute Press), 1992. 58 A.A. Vahaab in M.G. Husain’s Psychology and Society in Islamic Perspective (New Delhi: Institute of Objective Studies, 1996), 10-20. R E V I E W E S S AY  243 59 Some of the relevant literature published on this theme recently includes, S.M. Mohsin, Keynote of the Holy Quran (Seemant Prakashan, 1992), 155; M.Z. Azhar and S.L. Varma, “Religious Psychotherapy-A Proposed Model Based on the Malaysian Experience,” Journal of FIMA vol. l (1996): 118-123. M.G. Hussain, Psychology and Society in Islamic Perspective (New Delhi: Institute of Objective Studies, 1996): 171; S.M. Naqib al-Attas, The Nature of Man and the Psychology of the Human Soul: A Brief Outline and a Framework for an Islamic Psychology and Epistemology (Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (1STAC), 1990), 41; Proceedings on the Second Symposium on Islam and Psychology, vol. 2, published for the Association of Muslim Social Scientists of USA and Canada by the American Trust Publications, Indianapolis, Indiana, 1977, p.65; Z.A. Ansari (ed.), Quranic Concepts of Human Psyche, Islamization of Knowledge 11 (The International Institute of Islamic Thought and Institute of Islamic Culture, 1992), 118; Manzurul Huq, “In Quest of a Meaningful Model of Human Self and Behavior,” Intellectual Discourse vol. 2, no.I (1994): 1-18; Yasien Mohamad, “Fitra and Its Bearing on Islamic Psychology,” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences vol. 12, no. 1 (Spring 1995), 1-18; A.H. al-Hashmi, “On Islamizing the Discipline of Psychology,” in Social and Natural Sciences, eds. I.R. al-Faruqi and A.O. Naseef (Jeddah: Hodder and Stoughton, 1981); Naumana Umar, “Psyche: A Traditional Perspective,” Iqbal Review vol. 27, no. 1 (April-September 1986): 135-165; Abbas Husein Ali, “The Nature of Human Disposition: al Ghazzali’s Contribution to an Islamic Concept of Personality,” Intellectual Discourse vol. 3, no. 1 (1995): 51-64; Aliah Schleifer, “Ibn Khaldun’s Theories of Perception, Logic and Knowledge: An Islamic Phenomenology,” The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences vol. 2, no. 2 (December 1985): 225-231; A.N.M. Wahidur Rahman, “Rasa’il Ikhwan Al-Safa. The Idea of Perfection of the Soul,” Hamdard Islamicus vol. 14, no. 3 (Autumn 1991): 25-48; Muhammad Saleem, ‘“Contemporary Study of Human Nature,” vol. 12, no. 1 (1989): 75-81. 60 The current issue of AJISS devoted to psychology is a proof, as well as Islamic psy- chology offered as a subject of study in several places, including the Psychology Department at the International Islamic University of Malaysia 61 Amber Haque, “Cognitive Restructuring of the Muslim Psychologist: A Prerequisite for Islamization of Psychology,” Islamic Thought and Scientific Creativity vol. 7, no. 4 (1996). 62 Perhaps those psychologists interested in this task could create their own plat- form or organization to facilitate communication and unify efforts at Islamizing psychology. 63 The International Islamic University of Malaysia already practices this model; other interested universities can also follow suit.