Showing posts with label Knowledge. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Knowledge. Show all posts

Friday, 18 May 2012

The Decline of Knowledge and the Rise of Ideology in Muslim World


A Brother from HAKIM shared this:

by Dr. Joseph Lumbard, "The Decline of Knowledge and the Rise of Ideology in Muslim World" in Islam, Fundamentalism and the Betrayal of Tradition (Indiana: World Wisdom, 2009) 

Some excerpts from the book:

"Not only have many Muslim thinkers demonstrated a shallow understanding of non-Islamic elements, they have also distorted the religion itself. In attempting to reconstruct and reinterpret the Islamic tradition in light of the perceived achievements of the times, modernist thinkers of the past, such as Sayyid Aḥmad Khān, Muḥammad ʿAbduh and Jamāl al-Dīn Afghānī abandoned the rigorous intellectual discernment of traditional Islamic intellectuality - the first outright, the others with more subtlety. They lost sight of their intellectual traditions and unwittingly surrendered the ground of intelligence to a secular humanist tradition, whose ideologies they tried to foist upon other by reading them into their own traditions or simply by adding the adjective "Islamic"

...

Though each has different players with different shades of emphasis, both stringent reformism and liberal modernism constitute artificial limitations of traditional Islamic knowledge inspired by the influence of secular ideologies. This has led to the inversion of Islamic thought and the destruction of Islamic civilization. As Seyyed Hossein Nasr writes, "In trying to render back to Islam its power on the stage of history, many of these movements have disfigured the nature of Islam itself."

...

Liberal modernist Muslim thinkers and radical reformist activists are two sides of the same coin. Whereas medieval thinkers like Ghazālī were able to analyze and utilize tools from outside influences, radical reformists reject them outwardly while submitting inwardly, andmodernists attempt to patch them onto the fabric of Islam, some claiming that they have been a part of that fabric all along. Both movements represent a subversion of traditional values and teachings from within the Islamic tradition. In an effort to transform Islamic civlization,each has in fact hastened the onset of the very illnesses they sought to ameliorate. Rather than contemplating and evaluating Western civlization through the Islamic intellectual tradition, modernists have embraced many tenets of Western though out of a deep sense of inferiority - a sense which results from mistaking the power of Western nations for the truth of Western ideologies. Finding these movements within their midst, the reformists have retreated to fanatical adherence and pietistic sentimentalism. The modernists fail to offer solutions because they only provide intermediate solutions which are fideistic and voluntaristic at best. But such a response cannot provide lastings solutions to the challenges posed by the West, beacuse these are at root intellectual challenges which demand an intellectual response.

...

The choice of great thinkers from whom one seeks guidance is not limited to a narrow definition of "orthodoxy", but extends to all those Islamic thinkers, Sunnī and Shīʿī, who have tried to lend clarity to the understanding of reality enjoined by the Qurʾān and ḥadīth. Those intellectuals who have been chosen for this essay are but few luminaries from an extensive tradition one which continues into our own day and is now showing signs of new life. In order for the malaise of the Islamic world to be fully addressed and the radical reform movements to be brought back into the fold of the Islamic tradition,the iḥsānī intellectual tradition needs to be accorded its proper place in a way of life that is fully and truly Islamic. In applying the principles of Islam to the modern world, whileavoiding the passionate rhetorical battles which rage around them, the representatives of this tradition exemplify this saying of Abū Saʿīd b. Abī 'l-Khayr:

"A [true] man is one who sits and rises among others, sleeps and eats, and interacts with others in the bazaar, buying and selling, who mixes with people, yet for one moment is not forgetful of God in his heart."

But such a path is not achieved by focusing upon reform of the world, of Islam, or of one's nation. It is first and foremost a reform of one's self."

____________________________________________________________________

For preview: http://books.google.com.my/booksid=uTUnWkJ4kmMC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

Short comments:
Same points as raised by Prof. Al-Attas although Prof. Al-Attas have more gravitas in explaining those in his seminal works such as Risalah Untuk Kaum Muslimin and Islam and Secularism.

For further explication of such topics can be attained in WISE of HAKIM:
http://www.hakim.org.my/wise/course-module

1st Semester

  • Module 1: The Worldview of Islam: A Brief Overview
  • Module 2: The Place and Role of the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah
  • Module 3: The Nature and Reality of Man
  • Module 4: The Cosmos as the Created Book
  • Module 5: The Nature and Purpose of Knowledge
  • Module 6: The Meaning and Experience of Happiness


  • 2nd Semester

  • Module 7: The External Problems of the Muslims: The Challenges of Western Culture
  • Module 8: The Threats of Secularization towards the Natural World, Politics and Values
  • Module 9: The Internal Problems of the Muslims: The Corruption of Knowledge, the Loss of Adab and the Rise                     of False Leaders
  • Module 10: The Islamization of Contemporary Knowledge and the Dewesternization of Thought and Language
  • Module 11: Ta'dib as the Concept of Education in Islam
  • Module 12: The Advent of Islam in the Histories of the Western and Malay Worlds


  • 3rd Semester

  • Module 13: Epistemology
  • Module 14: Islamic Pyschology
  • Module 15: Islamic Theology
  • Module 16: The Study of Religion: Its History and Philosophy
  • Module 17: Philosophy and Ethical Theory
  • Module 18: The Philosophy of Science
  • Module 19: Tafsir, Ta'wil and Hermeneutics
  • Module 20: Usul Al-Fiqh: Siyasah Shar'iyyah
  • Module 21: Usul Al-Fiqh: Maqasid Al-Shari'iyyah
  • Module 22: Ethics and Leadership
  • Module 23: The Study of Malay Civilization: Its Philosophy and The Role of Islam
  • Module 24: Contemporary Islamic Thought
  • Monday, 26 March 2012

    The Chance to Debate in Malaysia


    The search for truth is the most fundamental thing in to humans. It is something that is deep in the heart, but sadly it gets clouded by emotions and irrationality.

    In today’s Malaysia, public debates are not common and this leads to many misunderstandings and large gaps between different groups, and even ignorance of what they say. To leave issues on differences to the side and to ignore them also leads to hidden feelings of hatred. This is all because often one side will give a distorted view of the opposition, but not get the chance to have the opposition clarify it, or that the laymen argue amongst each other and don’t actually have the sound understanding to represent one of the sides, thus promoting misunderstandings.

    Rather what should be done is that the best/most suitable people from each side should be given platforms in the public to debate the differences, so then people can make informed decisions about which side is on the truth and what is correct. This should not just be done on political issues, but also on issues of religion.  

    It is like when a person makes a claim against another person (and the religionists make claims about others), and the case gets taken to court to decide which side is right and each has to bring its evidences and witnesses. Otherwise anyone can claim whatever s/he wants, and deceive people.

    For too long has there been hatred and misunderstandings between different religionists, it is time that they discuss their differences openly, so we (the people) can see who is with the stronger and logical arguments, and which side has the truth.

    If a religion or belief claims that its book is holy, or that God exists, and another says that it is not, then the most knowledgeable person from each side should come up and prove their claim, and discuss and debate the matter. Even if it’s not the best person, then it should someone who is qualified (that is the minimum condition) in the matter. After all, if one scholar (whether Muslim, Hindu or Christian) is claiming with certainty that s/he has the truth, then the person should be able to prove that. If one can’t, then let people know that the person and belief doesn’t have any grounds for saying that what it believes is the truth whilst asking others to follow it.

    It is time we went back to the times where open discussion and debate amongst different viewpoints was done in a civilised manner. Take the example of the Muslim world and the Byzantines, the Caliph sent Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani to debate the best Christian scholars in the Byzantine empire, in front of the Emperor. Not only was there one or two debates, but they arranged another debate with the head of their church, in a great event attended by the emperor, politicians and people of influence in government and church.  Or take the example where an atheist asked that the best debater debate with him, so Imam Abu Hanifa debated and defeated the atheist in the Muslim empire.

    And the example of the Prophet Muhammed (peace be upon him) is also well known where a Christian delegation from Najran came to the Mosque and debated with the Prophet. He didn’t quick them out or treat them badly, but had a public discussion and debate to reveal which side was on the truth. The Qur’an commented on this "Say, `O People of the Book, come now to a fair principle common to both of us, that we do not worship aught but God, that we do not associate aught with Him and that we do not take one another as lords besides God.' But if they turn away, then say, `Bear witness that we are Muslims.”[Qur'an, 3:64]

    Many of us believe that we decide the truth through reason and objective evidence, so that is our common ground. Thus let us see which belief is supported by historical, logical, scientific evidences. Let us not appeal to emotions and prejudices in arguments. Let the representatives reveal the arguments to the public in front of the opposition, and let the people decide. They should be sincere in the search for the truth, and critically analyse the arguments of the opposition, and accept them if they’re the truth.

    Imam Shafi’i said: “I have never debated with someone who I want to make a mistake. And I have never debated someone except I say to them, O’ Allah, put the truth in his heart and on his tongue. If I am on the truth he will follow me, and if he is on the truth then I will follow him.

    But is the Malaysian public ready for it you may ask? But I ask “is any society ready for it?” You will always have some people who can’t reason, or who are not educated, but by having these platforms of debate, they can learn (by God’s will) to reason. This is by having intellectual/qualified people debating (they may say when debating “such is an emotional argument, not logical, and here is why...” and give thought provoking questions), not just some random people. 

    Furthermore Muslim scholars should be free to speak their mind and make their own khutbas (unlike in many Malaysian states where the government sadly makes its own scripts and appoints its own Imams). It is a pity that Muslim scholars can speak more about Islam and make their own khutbas in the UK than in Muslim countries like Malaysia. Traditionally the image of many scholars has been destroyed when they have been perceived to be close to the government (although in some conditions it is allowed). This is because the independence of the scholars from all  governmental institutions is paramount and something that great scholars like Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal fought for.

     Sheikh Muhammad Ya'qoubi


    Though different Muslims specialise on different topics, amongst the Muslim debaters willing to debate on the issue of secularism, Islam, or atheism in Malaysia is Hamza Tzortsis. He has debated leading secularist and atheist professors throughout the world masha’Allah. Others who are good at inter-religious debates throughout the world include Dr Zakir Naik and Sheikh Muhammad al-Ya'qoubi (he opposed the brutal Syrian govt, and debated leading orientalists (those who specialise in attacking Islam) and made them shiver through his logical and sound Islamic arguments in Scandinavia). So Malaysia can benefit through having Muslim speakers/debaters from outside Malaysia, or inside Malaysia, since we are all one body of believers as the Prophet said: "“Wisdom is the lost property of the believer; he takes it from wherever he finds.” (Tirmidhi)


    Sunday, 11 March 2012

    Knowledge in Islam- khutba

    I gave the khutba/lecture below at Warwick university Alhamdulillah, its on knowledge


     (part 1)


     (part 2)