Friday, April 10, 2026

Jefferson and the Quran

 The Christian Bible was not the only religious tome to experience Thomas Jefferson’s examination. His vast collection of books contained many on religion. The Virginia Gazette, a newspaper from Williamsburg, served as a bookseller and sold Jefferson a two-volume set of the Quran in October of 1765.

 

It was titled “The Alcoran of Mohammed.” George Sale had translated it in 1734 from Arabic to English. In his introduction, Sale wrote that the purpose of the book was to help Protestants understand the Quran so that they could argue against it. He wrote:

 

“Whatever use an impartial version of the Korân may be of in other respects. It is absolutely necessary to undeceive those who, from the ignorant or unfair translations which have appeared, have entertained too favorable an opinion of the original, and also to enable us effectually to expose the imposture.”

 

Jefferson was 22 years-old and had studied law for three years when he obtained the book. Law professors of that time considered the Quran a book of law. Sale expanded on his motives:

 

“If the religious and civil Institutions of foreign nations are worth our knowledge, those of Mohammed, the lawgiver of the Arabians, and founder of an empire which in less than a century spread itself over a greater part of the world than the Romans were ever masters of, must needs be so.”

 

To them the Quran represented the ruling precepts of the Ottoman Empire, governing over 25 million people. Jefferson, as well as the Western world at that time, thought that the Quran was the chief representation of Islamic law. He is known to have studied the book, but it did not affect his practicing of law.

 

Jefferson carried the same anti-Islamic views of his colleagues. He did however, have the opinion that the Trinity and the humanness of Jesus were parallel in Islam. His experiences dealing with Islamic piracy in the Mediterranean Sea during his Presidency caused him to question Islam’s legitimacy as a religion.

 

In 1786, the United States found that it was having to deal directly with the doctrines of the Muslim religion. The Barbary states of North Africa were using the ports to wage a war of piracy and enslavement against all shipping that passed through the Strait of Gibraltar. Thousands of ships were overtaken, and more than a million Europeans and Americans were sold as slaves. 


Congress offered an agreement called the Treaty of Tripoli, negotiated by Jefferson, which stated roundly that “the government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion, as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen (Muslims).”

 

Many considered this to be a secular affirmation that attempted to buy off the Muslim pirates by the payment of tribute. Soon after it was discovered that Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman, Tripoli’s envoy to London, had extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson later reported to the Secretary of State and to Congress his motive was backed by his religious beliefs:

 

“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

 

Jefferson’s prejudice against Islam was questionable in some ways. He insisted on a constitution wherein “neither pagan nor Mahamedan (Muslim) nor Jew ought to be excluded from the civil rights of the Commonwealth because of his religion.” Still, to him and his contemporaries the idea of a Muslim president, or even a Muslim citizen, was an abstraction. The first American Muslims who traveled to the country, both free and enslaved, may have numbered in the tens of thousands, but at no time was true equality considered to be accessible.

 

That said, Jefferson did mention supporting religious freedom for Muslims in writings. He asserted in his autobiography that his original legislation for religious freedom had been intended “to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan [Muslim], the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.”

 

Late in his life he wrote disparaging terms about the religion and the book.

1 comment:

Jonathan Rowe said...

It's a good piece as usual. The thing about Jefferson, and J. Adams and Franklin, is that they seemed to believe that all organized religions, including various aspects of Christianity were "corrupt." But also that they could be reformed in the right direction. They were not the "cold deists" that scholars and others have portrayed them to be. But there was a certain nuance that few people really understand (which is why I write about it quite a bit).

They could be at once very critical of any religion, be it Christianity, Islam or what have you, without necessarily being anti-Christian or anti-Islam, etc.