AFAIK not as such, but there was “Truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). I was taught that “teaching the ignorant” (lit. “enseñar al que no sabe”) was one of the labors of mercy, but my English-for-religion isn’t good enough to find a reference for that if one exists.
I erroneously suggested that everyone is poor; more properly I should have said that we should not look at Saudi princes and then assume that everyone in the country is rich.
A lot of the “ancient” learning my Muslims is incorrect. Muslims used the Eastern Christians to record and store information, virtually anything that had to do with or was written in Greek or one of the languages in Europe was done by Eastern Christian Religions in Baghdad.
Raw literacy rates don’t tell the full story. For example in Pakistan, poor people have little ability to read functionally. But then again, they don’t have ready access to books, Internet and newspaper so they have little incentive to read. The richer you get in Pakistan the more likely you are able to read. The ommission to this generalarity is women. They still fall far behind even when wealthy.
Another problem is the choice of education. In Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, about 90% of the bachelor degrees and even higher numbers of Masters and Doctorate degrees are in some form of Islamic Studies.
This accounts for the huge number of educated people that have to be imported into Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States to do work, while their own population is very capable of doing those jobs but choose not to, by going into college programs on religion.
The biggest hold back to Islam is it’s not a religion as Westerners see religion, but it’s really a way of life. There’s no seperation, it engulfs all parts of your life.
The Koran is also literal. Most Christian, but not all, view the Bible as symbolic. This makes it easy to put your religion in with your education. The Koran is not symbolic but the EXACT word of God, with no errors.
Ask Solomon. 
But if you’re going with “how people interpret the Bible”, Solomon’s book contains a lot of verses praising knowledge and the pursuit of knowledge as a way of following God’s path.
I suppose the other side of the coin is - does the religion approve of knowledge?
We have cases like that here - fundamentalists who object to science because it teaches that earth is not at the center of everything, that life is a random acident not a creation of 4000BC, the trial of Galileo etc. (Jerry Falwell in his interview in Playboy years ago mentioned that it was no surprise that the Bible was the first book ever printed, and in English no less. Duh!)
When there is a freedom from oppression, and people can speak their mind, religion loses its grip. We can see this fight in Iran, where the fundamentalists stop at nothing to restrict the freedom of the people; or worse, Iraq or Pakistan, where fanatics use pure terror tactics to suppress dissent and questioning of local status quo. Religion is just an excuse to maintain control.
Where free, modernized areas exist, like some bigger cities and smaller freer countries - then free though, and freedom from religious oppression can occur. In the countryside, the local clergy are well aware that allowing the locals to question the religious tenets can quickly result in unemployed clergy. They like being lords of creation.
I suppose what saved Europe was the protestant revolution; is it a surprise that the renaissance died to a quagmire in France, Italy and Spain where the catholic church was still strong, while science and exploration flourished more in northern countries like England and Germany where no church was large enough to impose its will on the majority?
I read somewhere once that the social attitude of islamic authorities concluded about 600 years ago, after the flourishing of islam during the dark ages, that scientific enquiry was bad because it let scholars question religious beliefs. About the same time, the religion in Europe was going slowly in the opposite direction - that science was not bad in and of itself.
While it’s true that much classical-era learning was recorded in Greek and Syriac by Middle Eastern Christians in late antiquity and afterwards, there were also thousands of Arabic translations of classical works and thousands more original works in Arabic and Persian extending those fields of knowledge. After about the 7th century CE, the Eastern Christian scholars were bit players compared to members of the Muslim intelligentsia as far as scientific development went. Eastern Christian scholars just didn’t have the numbers or the infrastructure to make comparable contributions.
This may be wandering into GD or IMHO territory, but back when most of these ancient religions were formed, there was no clear contradiction between religion and seeking knowledge about the natural world. I might also make the radical claim that the founders of these religions probably thought they were right!
I think this is part of the key to reconciling the golden age of Islam with present-day conditions-- Islam does encourage exploration and inquiry into the natural world, but once those bounds of that knowledge began to run into facts that contradicted some of the fundamental teachings of the Quran, well, you can see which won out. The fact that by the time things like the Theory of Evolution came along the center of scientific progress had shifted to Europe made it convienient for modern science to be labeled as “western” or “unislamic” science while maintaining (as many do to this day) that there is no contradiction between the Quran as literal truth and science.
Of course there were other political considerations as well-- I think importance of the relatively cosmopolitan nature of the Ottoman Empire can’t be overlooked in the golden age of Islamic science and the decline of Islamic scholarship follows very clearly the decline of some of the more multi-cultural institutions of that empire
Nitpick: Most of what’s generally called “the golden age of Islamic science” (approximately 9th-13th or 9th-15th centuries CE) pre-dated the Ottoman Empire, occurring primarily during the Abbasid Caliphate. Admittedly, the Islamic world under the Abbasids was pretty cosmopolitan and multicultural too.