Ptolemy II, who became the ruler of Egypt after Alexander the Great in the third century BC, was a great patron of learning, and founded a library in Alexandria, Egypt, which contained about 5,00,000 books on different subjects.托勒密二世，谁成为了第三个世纪，埃及在公元前亚历山大大帝的统治者，是一个学习的好靠山，并创办，于埃及亚历山大，其中载有大约5,00,000不同主题的书籍图书馆。 It is this collection which is known in正是这一点是众所周知的收集 history历史 as the great library in Alexandria.作为伟大的亚历山大图书馆。

It has been据 alleged所谓的 that this library was burned down by Amr bin Aas at the behest of the Second Caliph, Umar.这个库被烧毁了由AMR的原子吸收光谱法斌在第二哈里发欧麦尔的遗志。 The story goes to state that Amr fed the numerous bath furnaces of the city with the volumes of the Alexandrian library.据说AMR的美联储声明，与亚历山大图书馆的体积城市众多浴炉。 The story also relates the oft-quoted remark allegedly made by Caliph Umar (ruled: 634-644) when he consented to the destruction of the library, “If these writing of the Greeks agree with the book of God, they are useless and need not be preserved; if they disagree, they are pernicious and ought to be destroyed”.这个故事还涉及人们经常引用的一句话据称哈里发欧麦尔（裁定：634-644）提出时，他同意库的破坏，如果这些希腊人与神的书面同意书“，他们是无用的，需要不被保留，如果他们不同意，他们是有害的，应该被销毁。“ It was, the story continues, thereupon, decided that the books were contrary to the这是，这个故事继续下去，于是，决定书违背了 Quran古兰经 and the whole library was burned down without even opening the books.和整个图书馆被烧毁，甚至没有打开的书。

Equating the burning of Alexandria Library with that of Nazi policy, Joseph Barnabas writes, “the arguments of Caliph Umar and the Nazi book burning are not without explanations.”在亚历山大图书馆等同与纳粹的政策，燃烧，约瑟夫巴拿巴写道，“欧麦尔的哈里发和纳粹焚书的论点是没有解释没有。” ^{1 一} A Hindutva theorist, BN Jog, was more emphatic and clear: “Many people are surprised that Caliph Umar burnt down the huge and rich library of Constantinople.一个印度教主义理论家，英国国民慢跑，更有力和明确的：“许多人感到吃惊的是哈里发欧麦尔烧毁了君士坦丁堡的巨大而丰富的图书馆。 The urge for him to do so was, however, provided by his religion.”在敦促他这样做了，但是，他的宗教提供的。“ ^{2 2}

Encyclopedia Britanica says that the Alexandrian Library had, in fact, been destroyed much earlier in the fourth century AD, long before the advent of Islam: “The library survived the disintegration of Alexander?s empire (first century BC) and continued to exist under Roman rule until the third century AD.” 百科全书Britanica说，亚历山大图书馆有，事实上，在更早被摧毁公元4世纪伊斯兰教，很久之前的来临：“图书馆幸存下来的公元前解体下，亚历山大？帝国（第一世纪），并继续存在罗马人统治，直到公元三世纪。“ ^{3 三} The truth is that one-half of this library was burnt by Julius Caesar in 47 BC.事实是，一，这个库的一半是由凯撒烧毁了47年。 In the third century, Alexandria came under the domination of Christians.在第三个世纪，亚历山大遭到基督徒的统治。 At another place the same work states that, “The main museum and library were destroyed during the civil war of the third century AD and a subsidiary library was burned by Christians in AD 391.”在另一个地方的同样的工作，指出“主要博物馆和图书馆是在公元三世纪的内战和销毁被烧毁附属图书馆在公元391年的基督徒。” ^{4 4}

Phillip K Hitti states that the story “is one of those tales that make good fiction but bad history.” He goes on, “…the great Ptolemic library was burnt as early as 48 BC by Julius Ceasar.菲利普K表希提说的故事“是其中的故事，使好的小说，但坏的历史之一。”他接着说，“...伟大的Ptolemic库高达48凯撒早在公元前烧毁。 A later one, referred to as the daughter library, was destroyed about AD 389 as a result of an edict by the Emperor Theodosius.后来一位之一，被称为图书馆的女儿，被销毁约公元389一间由皇帝狄奥多西法令的结果。 At the time of the Arab conquest, therefore, no library of importance existed in Alexandria and no contemporary writer ever brought the charge about Amr or Umar.”在阿拉伯征服时间，所以没有存在的重要性，在亚历山大图书馆和当代作家永远没有带来有关AMR或者欧麦尔费。“ ^{5 5}

Bernard Lewis, a vehement critic of Islam, has thus summarised the verdict of modern scholarship on the subject:伯纳德刘易斯对伊斯兰强烈批评，也因此总结了关于这一主题的现代学术的判决：

“Modern research has shown the story to be completely unfounded. “现代研究表明这个故事是完全没有根据的。 None of the early chronicles, not even the Christian ones, make any reference to this tale, which is mentioned in the 13th century, and in any case the great library of Serapenum had already been destroyed in internal dissensions before the coming of the Arabs.”早期无编年史，甚至连基督教的人，做任何提及这个故事，这是在13世纪中提到，在任何情况下，Serapenum大图书馆已经在内部纠纷前销毁了阿拉伯人的到来。 “ ^{6 6}

Lewis wrote the above words in 1950.刘易斯在1950年写上面的话。 As late as in 1990, he went on to state, “not the creation, but the demolition of the myth was achievement of European scholarship, which from the 18th century to the present day has rejected the story as false and absurd, and thus exonerated the Caliph Umar and the early Muslims from this libel.”由于晚于1990年，他又继续状态“，而不是创造，而是拆迁的神话是欧洲奖学金，从18世纪到今天已经拒绝为虚假和荒谬的故事成就，从而清白哈里发欧麦尔并从这个诽谤早期的穆斯林。“ ^{7 7}

John M. Robertson, a historian of rationalistic and free thought, also dismissed the story of the destruction of the Alexandrian library by Umar as a myth.约翰M ·罗伯逊，一个理性和思想自由的历史学家，也驳回了由欧麦尔的亚历山大图书馆的神话毁灭的故事。 ^{8 8}

Historian DP Singhal considers the story untenable.历史学家阿密特认为，民主党的故事是站不住脚的。 ^{9 9} Singhal writes,阿密特写道：

“It makes its first appearance in the solitary report of a stranger, Abul Faraj, who wrote 500 years later. “这使得它在一个陌生人，阿布法拉杰，谁写了500年后首次出现单独报告。 The reported sentence of the Caliph is alien to the traditional precept of the Muslim casuists who had expressly commanded the preservation of captured religious text of the Jews and Christians, and had declared that the works of profane scientists and philosophers could be lawfully applied to the believer.”该报告的哈里发判刑陌生的穆斯林谁已明确指挥被俘的犹太人和基督徒宗教文本保存，并宣称，亵渎科学家和哲学家的作品可以合法地应用到传统的经商之道的信徒casuists “。 ^{10 10}

Bertrand Russell has gone deep into the controversy and made the following statement:罗素已经深入到了争议，并提出以下声明：

“Every Christian has been taught the story of the Caliph destroying the Library in Alexandria. “每一个基督徒都被教导的哈里发的故事破坏了亚历山大图书馆。 As a matter of fact, this library was frequently destroyed and frequently recreated.由于事实上，这个库，还经常破坏，经常重新创建。 Its first destroyer was Julius Caesar, and its last antedated the Prophet.它的第一个驱逐舰是凯撒，并且上次antedated先知。 The early Mohammedans, unlike the Christians, tolerated those whom they called ?people of the Book?, provided they paid tribute.早期的伊斯兰教，不像基督徒，容忍那些人，他们叫什么名字？人的图书？，只要他们表示敬意。 In contrast to the Christians, who persecuted not only pagans but each other, the Mohammedans were welcomed for their broadmindedness, and it was largely this that facilitated their conquests.与此相反的基督徒，谁迫害异教徒，但不只是对方，伊斯兰教受到欢迎他们的心胸开阔，这在很大程度上这是促使他们征服。 To come to later times, Spain was ruined by fanatical hatred of Jews and Moors; France was disastrously impoverished by the persecution of Huguenots.”来后来，西班牙毁于狂热的犹太人和摩尔人的仇恨，法国是灾难性的迫害的胡格诺贫困“。 ^{11 11}

In the 500 years between the supposed event and its first reporter no Christian historian mentions it, though one of them, Eutychius, Archbishop of Alexandria in 933, described the Arab conquest of Alexandria in great detail.在这两者之间假定的事件，其500年来第一次记者没有基督教历史学家提到它，虽然其中一人，Eutychius，亚历山大大主教在933中描述的非常详细的亚历山大阿拉伯征服。

Colin Wilson, a popular science writer and researcher expressed his firm opinion that the demolition of the Alexandrian library was caused by Christian clergy.科林威尔逊，科普作家和研究员表示，他坚定地认为，在拆迁的亚历山大图书馆是由基督教神职人员造成的。 He writes,他写道：

“The Library of Alexandria ? “图书馆的亚历山大？ which contained, among other things, Aristotle?s own collection of books ?其中主要包括外，亚里士多德？自己的集合S的书？ was burned down on the orders of the Archbishop of Alexandria (backed by the Emperor Theodosius).被烧毁了对亚历山大大主教（由皇帝狄奥多西支持）的订单。 Knowledge was evil; had not Adam been evicted from Paradise for wanting to know?”知识是恶，并没有被从天堂驱逐亚当为想知道？“ ^{12 12}

MN Roy penetratingly analysed the issue in a wider perspective.百万罗伊深刻更广泛的角度分析了这一问题。 It is worth quoting some part of his views on the subject:这是值得引用的一些关于这个问题的看法的一部分：

“While books written in the 11th and 12th century indignantly details the shocking tale of the burning of the library of Alexandria, the historians Eustichius and Elmacin, both Egyptian Christians, who wrote soon after the Saracen conquest of their country, are significantly silent about the savage act. “虽然在第11和12世纪愤怒地详细介绍了在亚历山大图书馆的焚毁令人震惊的故事写的书，历史学家Eustichius和Elmacin，无论埃及基督徒，谁写自己的国家后，很快征服萨拉森，大约有显着沉默野蛮的行为。 The former, a patriarch of Alexandria, could be hardly suspected of partiality to the enemies of前者，是亚历山大的元老，可很难怀疑偏袒的敌人 Christianity基督教 . 。 An order of Caliph Umar has been usually cited as evidence of the barbarous act ascribed to his general.哈里发欧麦尔的秩序通常被举为一般归因于他的野蛮行为的证据。 It would have been much easier not to record that order than to suppress any historical work composed by Christian prelates who had endless possibilities of concealing their composition.这本来是很容易不记录任何历史，而不是镇压的工作谁曾隐瞒其组成了无限的可能性基督教主教组成的顺序。 A diligent examination of all relevant evidence enabled Gibbon to arrive at the following opinion on the matter: 'The rigid sentence of Omar is repugnant to the sound and orthodox precept of the Mohammedan casuist; they expressly declare that the religious books of the Jews and Christians, which are acquired by the right of war, and that the works of profane scientists, historians or poets, physicians or philosophers, may be lawfully applied to the use of the faithful.'一个勤奋的所有有关证据审查启用长臂猿到达就此事提出以下意见：'奥马尔刚性的句子是令人厌恶的声音和正统的伊斯兰教戒律诡辩，他们明确宣布的犹太人和基督徒的宗教书籍，这是收购战争的权利，并认为亵渎科学家，历史学家和诗人，医生或哲学家的作品，可依法申请使用的忠诚。' ( The Decline and Fall of Roman Empire ) （ 帝国的衰落和秋季罗马 ） ^{13 13} Byzantine barbarism had undone the meritorious work of the Ptolemies.拜占庭式的野蛮毁坏了的托勒密功勋卓著的工作。 The real destruction of the Alexandrian seat of learning had been the work of St. Cyril who defiled the Goddess of learning in the famous fair of Hyparia.在亚历山大的学习真正的破坏座位一直是圣西里尔工作谁玷污了著名的Hyparia公平学习女神。 That was already in the beginning of the 5th century.”那是在5世纪开始了。“ ^{14 14}

It is no mere chance that for most of its 2000 years of history, Christianity not only did not inspire a spirit of learning at an extensive level, but often suppressed it.这不是偶然的为它的2000多年的历史最，基督教不仅没有激发出在一个广泛的层面学习的精神，但往往抑制它。 Churchmen and Crusaders were responsible for the destruction of hundreds of thousands of Greek and Muslim books.牧师和十字军是推动希腊和穆斯林的书籍成千上万破坏负责。 For example, in 389 AD the celebrated library of Serapis at Alexandria was ruined on the order of Archbishop Theophilus.例如，在公元389塞拉皮斯在亚历山大的著名图书馆被毁掉的大主教提阿秩序。 The guiding principle of Pope Gregory was, “Ignorance is the mother of piety.” According to this principle, Gregory burned the precious Palestine Library founded by Emperor Augustus, destroyed the greater part of the writings of Livy and forbade the study of the classics.教皇格雷戈里的指导原则是，“无知是虔诚的母亲。”根据这一原则，格雷戈里烧了宝贵的巴勒斯坦图书馆成立由皇帝奥古斯都，破坏了李维的著作的大部分，并禁止对经典的研究。 The Crusaders destroyed the splendid library of Tripoli and reduced to ashes many of the glorious centres of Saracenic art and culture.十字军摧毁了辉煌的图书馆和的黎波里化为灰烬的Saracenic艺术和文化中心的许多光荣。 Ferdinand and Isabella put to flames all the Muslim and Jewish works they could find in Spain.费迪南德和伊莎贝拉投入火焰所有的穆斯林和犹太教的作品，他们可以找到西班牙。 Nor is it a coincidence that when science and learning did become widespread in Europe in spite of the Church, it was accompanied by a rejection or reduction of the authority of the Bible and science became completely secularised.它也不是一个在科学和学习也成为欧洲的教会普遍存在的，尽管它是由拒绝或圣经的权威和科学同时减少成为完全世俗化的巧合。

The story is now generally rejected as a fable and a fabrication.这个故事是现在人们普遍拒绝作为一则寓言和捏造。 Let us conclude this piece with a remark by Dr. Singhal:让我们结束这个用一块博士阿密特注：

“Seldom in history has there been a parallel for transcribing a falsehood with such persistence, conviction, and indignation, in spite of contrary evidence.” “历史上很少有一个有过这样的转录与毅力，信念和愤慨的相反证据，尽管谎言平行。” ^{15 15}

And only God knows best.只有上帝最清楚。

Welcome to Bismika Allahuma , your premier source of counter-missionary information from an Islamic perspective!欢迎来到Bismika Allahuma，您的传教士信息的主要来源反从伊斯兰的角度！ If you are new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新这里，您可能想要通过定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!感谢您的光临！

1. C. Joseph Barnabas, “Religious Freedom and Human Rights,” in CJ Nirmal (ed), Human Rights in India , Oxford University Press: N Delhi, 2000, p.三约瑟夫巴拿巴，“宗教自由和人权”，在终审法院首席法官Nirmal（教育），大学出版社在印度的人权 ，牛津：无新德里，2000年，第 144 [ 144 [ back回 ] ]
2. BN Jog, Threat of Islam: Indian Dimension , Unnati Prakashan: Mumbai: 400081, 1994, p.国阵慢跑， 伊斯兰威胁：印度尺寸 ，Unnati Prakashan：孟买：四〇 〇 〇八一，1994年，第 428 [ 428 [ back回 ] ]
3. Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol.大英百科全书，卷。 1, 1984, p.一，1984年，第 227 [ 227 [ back回 ] ]
4. Encyclopedia Britannica, ibid. , p.大英百科全书， 同上。，第 479 [ 479 [ back回 ] ]
5. Philip K. Hitti, History of the Arabs , Macmillan: London, 1970, p.菲利普K ·希提， 阿拉伯人的历史 ，麦克米伦：伦敦，1970年，第 166 [ 166 [ back回 ] ]
6. Bernard Lewis, The Arabs in History , Goodword Books: N. Delhi, (1950), 2001, p.伯纳德刘易斯， 阿拉伯人的历史中 ，Goodword书籍：全德里，（1950），2001年，第 54 [ 54 [ back回 ] ]
7. Bernard Lewis, New York Review of Books , 2 September 1990 [伯纳德刘易斯， 纽约书评的 ，1990年9月2日[ back回 ] ]
8. John M. Robertson, A Short History of Free Thought , Watts & Co: London, 1914, p.约翰M ·罗伯逊，A公司简史思想自由 ，沃茨：伦敦，1914年，第 253 [ 253 [ back回 ] ]
9. DP Singhal, India and World Vol I. Civilization, Rupa and Co: London, 1993, p. DP的阿密特，一，印度和世界文明卷，鲁帕与合作：伦敦，1993年，第 136. 136。 [ [ back回 ] ]
10. DP Singhal, ibid. , p. DP的阿密特， 同上。，第 136 [ 136 [ back回 ] ]
11. Bertrand Russell, Human Society in Ethics and Politics , Routledge: London, (1954), 1992, p.罗素人类社会与政治伦理 ，劳特利奇：伦敦，（1954），1992年，第 218 [ 218 [ back回 ] ]
12. Colin Wilson, The Occult , Panther: London, 1984, p.科林威尔逊， 隐匿 ，豹：伦敦，1984年，第 278 [ 278 [ back回 ] ]
13. MN Roy, ibid. , p.百万罗伊， 同上。，第 64 [ 64 [ back回 ] ]
14. MN Roy, ibid. , p.百万罗伊， 同上。，第 65 [ 65 [ back回 ] ]
15. DP Singhal, ibid. , p. DP的阿密特， 同上。，第 136 [ 136 [ back回 ] ]