A recurring call echoed in the West since September 11 was that of reform in
the Muslim societies. To this end, the United States is asking them to reform
their religious education. It is assumed by several scholars, journalists and
politicians that fanaticism that motivated the highjackers, is rooted in
religious precepts - that they teach narrow views to be imposed on the rest of
humanity through violence.
This call is made without any objective analysis: it does not take into
account the causes that underlie Muslim frustrations with the current situation,
and is an exaggeration that considers only a fringe element of Muslim society.
Despite this, it requires examining the 'why' of this reality: why the West is
at odds with the non-Western, especially Islamic concepts.
Clearly, this problem arises because the West insists that its cultural norms
should become universally accepted as standards. And it is this universalistic
monologue that the U.S. is forcefully engaged in now, instead of relying on a
cross-cultural dialogue that would aim at finding a middle ground for common
human existence.
In fact, ever since the emergence of Islamic movements, the Western
decision-makers and their cohorts in the Muslim societies have suspiciously
viewed the advocacy of religion in the public domain as regressive, and a return
to medieval way of life. Their contention is that the Western society has
progressed intellectually, politically, socially and economically by pushing
religion aside into private life; and therefore, other societies must follow a
similar course for modernity and progress.
This secular assumption has been vigorously advanced as a strategy for
modernization through the model of Westernization. Its advocates range from Leonard
Binder to Samuel Huntington. Although Binder realized that Islam is central to
modernization in the Middle East in his seminal work, Islamic Liberalism, but
unfortunately, that marked the end of his career among modernization theorists.
Conversely, Huntington advanced from advocating modernization to forecasting the
doomful "Clash of Civilizations."
It must be realized that the call for reformation within Muslim societies is
nothing new: For example, consider the middle nineteenth century reputed
reformers Jamaluddin Afghani and Muhammad Abdu. These reformers realized that
profound societal and cultural changes in the Muslim societies were needed; but
they always based them within the Islamic vision - although their endeavors were
frequently undercut by the ruling elite who used the facade of Western
modernity to disguise their despotic intentions. Isn't it ironical that
Western reformation within Muslim societies is voiced by the very powers that
resist Islamic reform? And isn't it even more ironical, that the advocates of
freedom and democracy in the West, in gross violation of these principles, have
aligned themselves with such autocrats to achieve their specific selfish ends?
There goes the truth and honesty!
A meaningful reform of Muslim societies cannot be undertaken by ignoring the
Islamic foundations of Muslim cultures. Nor, can it be unwillingly forced upon
the Muslim masses. Islam is ingrained in the very psyche of Muslims and any
reform effort must be firmly based on it; nothing that is in conflict with this
basic understanding will ever succeed - as clearly evidenced from various
post-colonial experimentation in Muslim lands. Furthermore, all reform efforts
must proceed through free and open debate in the public square and a consensus
achieved before it could be enacted. This is also what Islam demands in all
dealings from home to the state affairs.
Ads by Google:
Advertisements not controlled by IslamiCity
|
A cultural reform has been underway since colonization of Muslim lands, and
includes, in addition to the above, a long list of reformers; for example,
Khairuddin al Tunusi, Abdulrahman al Kawakibi, Rashid Rida, Muhammad Iqbal, Said
al-Nursi, Malik Bennabi, Ali Shariati and Ismail al Faruqi, to name a few
others. Their appeal is to the values and ethos embodied in the Islamic sources
in order to restore the moral autonomy of the individual, and to develop an open
and egalitarian political culture.
Indeed, all major reform movements that brought about profound cultural changes
have been religious. Even the modern secularist West owes it to the Religious
Reformation, as reminded by Weber in his Protestant Ethic. Likewise, the Muslim
East should carry out its own reformation that is rooted in its
Islamic ethos.
Islam requires both individual and societal reformation. It emphasizes
individual responsibility, and as a result, has encouraged various individual
expressions within its very broad boundaries. It inspired individual creativity
in eminent works such as that of al-Farabi, Averroes, Avicenna and Ibn Khaldun
that contributed to the Western scholarship. And along with it, this
individualism has historically maintained, rather celebrated - pluralism, much
more than the modern West. And this pluralism, lasting until the fall of the
Ottoman Empire, reached far beyond the religious and political into the social,
cultural and even legal spheres. Indeed, the current totalitarian orientation is
the result of decline in rational thought, and the rise of authoritarian regimes
encouraged and assisted by the West.
The universalistic monologue of the U.S. is predicated on its strategic and
hegemonistic designs and is coercive in its nature whereby its proponents feel
justified dictating to others their particulate dictums based on these
considerations. In order that a meaningful dialogue could take place, it
requires instead a change in understanding and attitude - from one that relies
on power and self-righteousness to one that depends on rational interaction, and
respects the autonomy of various cultural communities. Only thus through an open
and free dialogue could universally shared standards be objectively established.
Therefore, in a world distinguished by its cultural pluralism, the emphasis
must shift from an inter-subjectively derived universal norm of a certain
cultural community (the West, in the current situation), to cross-cultural
inter-subjectivity, wherein communities with their different normative
references must freely acknowledge a universal norm. While explicit agreement of
people within a similar cultural set-up is essential, it is all the more so, for
a cross-cultural dialogue that aims at peace and justice for the world.
Siraj I. Mufti, Ph.D. retired as a research professor from the University
of Arizona and a chaplain from the U.S. Department of Justice. He currently
writes as a free-lancer.