Featured Post

قرآن آخری کتاب Quran : The Last Book

Don't Discard Quran: Quran is the Only Last, Complete, Protected Divine Book of Guidance, without any doubt, all other books are h...

Showing posts with label Modernism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Modernism. Show all posts

23.7.17

The Failed Rationalist


The growing religious-ideological discord and presence of an assortment of religiously inspired extremist movements and groups in Pakistan have complex socio-political implications. Where these processes of negative social change will lead Pakistan is a worrying prognosis.

The religious discourse in the country, though diverse in sectarian terms, is largely monolithic intellectually. Even ideological diversity is rare; historically two trends have remained dominant, ie a traditional religious-political discourse, and Islamisation.

Although the two trends have some common violent and non-violent expressions, Islamist movements have also nurtured certain rational tendencies. These rational tendencies acted as a catalyst for overall religious trends in the country. On the one hand, rationalists shaped their own movements and established their institutions and on the other, under their influence — or in reaction — the traditionalists and Islamists tried to amend their strategies. However, the rationalists have failed to completely transform the religious discourse in the country. Their desire to become distinguished among the religious discourse would be a reason for this failure. This is strange, that in South Asian intellectual discourse leading Muslim scholars, rather than contributing, established their own movements while being part of the mainstream tradition.

An examination of why post-Islamist movements are unable to transform into populist social movements

Scholar, researcher and professor Dr Husnul Amin argues in his doctoral thesis about why the rationalists could not develop a populist approach. He counts many reasons, including the country’s peculiar societal structures, rationalists’ comfortable relationship with the power elites and — most importantly — the rationalists’ larger focus on the middle classes and special interest in academic issues. These findings give an impression that the rationalists failed on a strategic level, but one can argue about their whole intellectual paradigm, which may be borrowed from the West and influenced by contemporary socio-political environments rather than be linked with philosophical tradition or evolution of Islamic thought.

In pursuit of alternative modernity, the rationalists are developing compatibility with Islamic text and democratisation. Amin has tried to understand the dynamics of this process in his book Post-Islamism: Pakistan in the Era of Neoliberal Globalisation. This is indeed an important contribution to understanding the construct of Muslim intellectual movements in contemporary societies. He takes Javed Ahmed Ghamidi’s blueprint as a case study to comprehend the phenomenon, but uses the term post-Islamism for Muslim rationalism.

Post-Islamism is not a new term. French scholar Olivier Roy, as well as Iranian Asef Bayat, have mainly constructed the framework of post-Islamism, which is taken as a transformative form of Islamist movements of post-world wars that emerged in the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia. Bayat contributed more in shaping the conceptual framework of Amin’s thesis, as he has acknowledged, but Amin applied this framework in a different context and with some variation. Amin believes post-Islamism is not the dead end of Islamism. It may not be dubbed anti-Islamic or secular, but secularisation of state/society. Post-Islamism proffers a framework where political reform is linked to religious reform. The Islamist parties have shifted their focus to minorities, youth and gender concerns and adopted a rights-based approach — this is a practical manifestation of post-Islamism.

As far as Islamism is concerned, Amin considers it a revivalist movement and lists three factors that contributed to the conceptualisation of Islamism: 1. Political interpretation of religious text and thus blurring of categories of collective obligation and personal obligation. 2. Socio-political struggle to enforce Sharia, pursuance of an Islamisation programme through the institutional arrangement of the state and re-affirmation of Islam as a ‘blueprint’ of socio-economic order. 3. Islamists’ openness to adopt and deploy all modern means of propaganda machinery, technology, print, electronic and social media.


In that context, he distinguishes post-Islamism as a social movement with a retreat from the idea of creating an Islamic state and an outcome of neo-liberal globalisation inspirations on modern Muslim minds. The Ghamidi movement is a perfect manifestation of this phenomenon as it has succeeded in creating an interpretive community in Pakistan that engages with liberalism and democracy.

It is interesting that Ghamidi thought was promoted by military dictator Gen Pervez Musharraf as his top-down project of ‘enlightened moderation.’ It could be conceived as an enforced moderation project, that was part of a political tool and foreign policy agenda of the military government. Amin rightly argues, “Ghamidi and his close associates received disproportionate media coverage on newly liberated private television channels. He became a member of the Council of Islamic Ideology in 2006 and remained in this position for two consecutive years. Despite an overwhelming emphasis on the status of democracy in their [Ghamidi movement’s] religious discourse, Ghamidi has hardly directly questioned the legitimacy of the system in place in which he gained the opportunity to flourish.”

It is also interesting that Ghamidi does not subscribe to major Islamic schools of thought in the Indian subcontinent and places himself in a self-constructed category, Dabistan-i-Shibli. Amin believes that this imaginary school of thought has served the Ghamidi movement in multiple ways. “It enables them to place themselves in the middle of two popularly known opposite poles, namely Deoband’s conservatism and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan’s rationalism.” As a post-Islamist, Ghamidi has challenged the notion of the Islamic state projected by the Islamists including Maulana Maududi, who believes in the supremacy of Sharia over all aspects of social, political and religious life.

Amin also examines existing religious political movements in the country in the third chapter ‘Islamism Without Fear.’ He argues that though the Jamaat-i-Islami is a well-structured and organised party in Pakistan and played a leading role in shaping the Islamism discourse in the country, compared to the Jamiat-Ulema-i-Islam Fazl (JUI-F), which is a loosely connected party, the latter remains more accommodative to religious minorities and in its political approaches. It can be assumed that despite its conventional credentials, the JUI-F has more flexibility to accommodate post-Islamism concepts of a social life.

Despite making some visible intellectual contribution, post-Islamist movements have failed to transform their ideas into a popular social movement. Amin is not hopeless and he agrees with Bayat that post-Islamism is an evolving concept and a conscious attempt to conceptualise and strategise the rationale and modalities of transcending Islamism in social, political and intellectual domains. Most importantly it provides an inward-looking approach, which may have a slow impact.

Amin is a fine scholar with exposure to the best international academic forums and his attempt will provoke healthy academic debate in Pakistan.

NON-FICTION: THE FAILED RATIONALIST
Muhammad Amir Rana, The reviewer is a security analyst and director of the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, Islamabad
Book: 
Post-Islamism: Pakistan in the Era of Neoliberal Globalisation, By Husnul Amin
International Islamic University, Islamabad.  ISBN: 978-9697576050  , 198pp.
Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, July 23rd, 2017
https://www.dawn.com/news/1347016/non-fiction-the-failed-rationalist
Read More:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~

SalaamOne سلام

Humanity, ReligionCultureTolerancePeace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
Web,Books, Articles, Magazines,, Blogs, Social Media,  Videos

20.7.17

Islam and the Trap of Bigotry


In recent times, the topics ‘modern Islam’ and ‘Islam and modernism’ have been frequently discussed in the Islamic world. When people examine them more closely, it becomes very apparent that Islam, both historically and in the future, presents us with an understanding of the most modern way of life and the perfect social model for all people. However, at this point it is useful to clarify what the expression ‘modern Islam’ really means, which is often misunderstood or distorted by some people.

First of all, ‘modern Islam’ is not the adaptation of Islam to the mentality, lifestyle nor to the understanding of morality and accepted social values of the period. Neither does it mean diverting morals from the essence of the religion of Islam.

Modern Islam is not the wannabe interpretation of Islam through superstitious philosophies such as socialism, communism, materialism, or Darwinism by people with inferiority complex who cannot properly comprehend the greatness of Islam. Also, ‘modern Islam’ is not at all an effort to integrate various degenerate cultural concepts and twisted moral values, such as homosexuality, into Islam by labeling these perversions as modern.

Modern Islam defines the fact that the Islam based only on the Qur’an, free from superstition and bigotry, teaches a concept of modernity that is far beyond the perception and comprehension of what most people or societies understand. Modern Islam is the perfect system that will emerge when people live in the sincerest after having understood the Qur’an in the most correct way. It is the true application of democracy and freedom.

Modern Islam is the Islam our Prophet (pbuh) and his companions lived by. The period in which these blessed people lived was a period where liberty, freedom of thought, democracy, justice and human rights were practiced perfectly. It was a time when happiness, comfort, honesty and sincerity prevailed, and Islam in its true sense was the most comfortable, easy and enjoyable way to live. If the Messenger of God had lived in this period, there is no doubt that he would be the most modern man of our time, the most beautiful example of modern religiosity.

Being the most modern is not a material concept. Modernity means being the most decent, the most imitated, the most loved and liked person in every respect such as morality, reason, culture, understanding, consciousness, attention, depth, status, attitude, manners, behavior, personality, fashion, art and the sense of love.

It is obvious that the understanding of religion, mode of thought and lifestyle prevailing in the overwhelming part of the Islamic world today, is unfortunately not at all related to the model described above. In fact, when Islam is mentioned, a system that is entirely against modernity, quality, aesthetics, art, science and freedom comes to mind in the Western world.

The only reason for this negative perception is because the majority of the Muslims are not following the Islam mentioned in the Quran but rather a religion of “bigotry”, filled with superstitions and dated practices far removed from the Qur’an, yet practiced in the name of Islam. The beliefs, rules, customs and traditions of the tribal culture of the past periods define the social, cultural and moral basis of this fanatic system. This superstitious system, which can also be referred to as the “religion of the ancestors” and severely condemned in many verses of the Qur’an, is unfortunately recognized as the “religion of Islam” among the majority of Muslims, and also in the Western world today.

Women are the greatest victims of tribal cultures, and have been subjects to the strongest sanctions, oppression, prohibitions and the hardships stemming from this bigotry. The fact that women are considered as second-class human beings, subjects to domestic and external violence, excluded from the social life, considered as the property of her husband or family, forced into marriage as a commodity, deprived of many humanitarian rights and freedoms like education and travel and rendered victims of honor or lapidation killings are all products of a twisted mindset that is inherited from male-dominated tribal order, all of which go against the Qur’an, and are inhumane, brutal practices.

Honor killings, which are committed every 90 minutes in the Islamic world, are considered to be a just act and are not subjected to legal sanctions. In some countries where honor killings are the most prevalent and considered virtually legal, more than 1000 honor killings are covered up and left unpunished every year.

While a bigoted understanding of Islam considers making women similar to men by leaving them neglected and unhealthy as acceptable, the Messenger of God has strongly banned women becoming similar to men and men becoming similar to women, and has always advised women to be well-groomed. At that time, Muslim women dyed their hair and used make-up, from materials such as henna and hail.

The only reason that some Muslims today are so removed from the possibilities and beauties that a contemporary civilization presents is because of the fact that they abandoned the Qur’an and fell into the grip of bigotry. Living according to an artificial representation of Islam, these people turned their backs on modernity, freedom, prosperity, quality, science, art and aesthetics, painting, music, sculpture, and furthermore became subject to all kinds of exploitations, suffering, poverty, and disaster

The greatest underlying reason for the Western world and the global powers to consider Islam as a threat to their own culture and civilization is because of the bigoted system that goes against the Qur’an. The reason for the emergence of concepts like ‘Islamophobia’ is due to the fear and horror of radicalism, primitiveness and violence, which again are a product of the bigoted system.


Returning to the true essence of Islam, that is, to a pure and true religion based solely on the Qur’an, will be the key not only for the salvation, peace, happiness and security of the Islamic world, but also for the whole world. This is only possible through education. To accomplish this, it is important that the education based on the essence of Qur’an is strengthened. Good sensible Muslims must also put their efforts into scientific works educating people. This is the only way to end the bigotry, anger and the brutality that arises from radicalism.

BY HARUN YAHYA
https://egyptianstreets.com/2017/07/19/islam-and-the-trap-of-bigotry/

Read More:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page

7.5.17

Salafism




MISGUIDED INTERPRETATIONS

The intellectual, religious and educational movements of the 18th and 19th centuries in Muslim societies shaped what we today call the Muslim world. Colonialism and the rise of the West triggered processes of internal transformation in Muslim societies, that had multiple expressions ranging from the revival of political systems, selective Westernisation and inner purification through Sufism to socio-cultural reformations.

These processes of reformation and moderation were not only constructing new Muslim societies, but also intellectual discourses. In different Muslims societies, thinking processes were producing almost similar intellectual trends that were difficult for Western — and even Muslim — scholars to accurately describe. However, in the Indian subcontinent, the transformation discourse was largely educational in nature and did not create much trouble for the colonial rulers. Various educational movements associated with the names of cities, places and institutions, such as Deoband, Aligarh and Bareilly, etc, emerged. Western scholars, particularly, were interested in the interpretations of Islam emerging from North Africa and Ottoman Asia. The terms ‘Salafi’ and ‘Salafiyya’ referred to these interpretations of mainly neo-Hanbali theology.

French Orientalist Louis Massignon, who was studying reformist movements, thought the terms Salafi or Salafiyya referred to a coherent reform movement. Massignon’s notion swiftly became popular among Western and Muslims scholars. Still, many ambiguities surrounded the less-explored term of Salafism. Henri Lauzière, an assistant professor of history at Northwestern University, has resolved the issue in his well-researched book, The Making of Salafism: Islamic Reform in the 20th Century.

Straightening out over a century of confusion around the Salafist movement Tracing and understanding the making of Salafism was not an easy task. For that Lauzière followed the intellectual journey of the Moroccan Salafi and globetrotter Muhammad Taqi al-Din al-Hilali, a former Sufi of the Tijani order. According to Lauzière, Al-Hilali embraced what he later called Salafism in 1921 and embarked on a lifelong mission to study, teach and defend the primary textual sources of Islam on three different continents.

It is particularly interesting to learn how an academic Islamic journal, Al-Majalla al-Salafiyya, from Cairo, edited by Abd al-Fattah Qatlan, played a significant role in spreading the word Salafiyya overseas. Al-Majalla al-Salafiyya contoured the concept of Salafiyya mostly in a theological context. Lauzière discovered the fact when the first issue of the journal reached the office of the Revue du Monde Musulman in Paris, to which the French scholar of Islam, Massignon, was a major contributor. Massignon wrongly conceived of Salafiyya as an intellectual movement. Later, Arab social intellectuals and journalists created conditions conducive to the misinterpretation. Though Massignon played a leading role in labelling Islamic modernists Salafi, the definition provided useful context to Western scholars who were looking for a conceptual box in which they could place Muslim figures such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Muhammad Abduh, and their epigones, who all seemed inclined toward a scripturalist understanding of Islam, but proved open to rationalism and Western modernity.

Lauzière’s contribution is important because, as cited earlier, there was confusion around the term Salafism and Muslim scholars referred to it in two contrary perspectives. Some considered Salafism an innovative and rationalist movement and others conceived of it as anti-rationalist; the view of Salafism as purist evolution is a result of decolonisation.

Lauzière notes that from the medieval period until the beginning of the 20th century, Muslim scholars and activists referred to themselves and to others as Salafis only to signal their adherence to the Hanbali theology espoused by Ibn Taymiyyah and other theologians of his tradition. The 20th century Islamic modernist reform movements were labelled Salafism because of their reformists’ Salafi credentials. Lauzière has also probed the roots of different Salafi traditions, including the one focusing on doctrinal purity and characterised by adherence to neo-Hanbali theology. The 20th century reform movements later triggered an ecumenical approach towards other Muslims among neo-Hanbalis and made Salafism compatible with emerging Muslim nationalism concepts. Both tendencies nurtured another stream of purification. This trend emerged in Morocco and was hallmarked by such figures as Muhammad Allal al-Fasi.

Two main conceptualisations of Salafism — one purist and one modernist — rose in parallel to each other during these decades. And because their construction occurred simultaneously, modernist Salafism did not morph into purist Salafism. The former simply faded during the postindependence era [...]— Excerpt from the book

Lauzière’s critical appraisal of the term Salafism is a commendable effort; it not only removes confusions surrounding it, but also helps in understanding the construct of Islamic thought in contemporary times. He explains that prior to the 20th century, Salafism was not part of the typological lexicon of traditional Islamic science. The growth of colonialism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries entailed greater interaction between native and non-native people. So, too, did it favour cross-pollination between indigenous and non-indigenous ways of thinking about Islam. He argues that the concept of purist Salafism did not initially entail a complete rejection of religious compromise.

The process of purification took place between the 1920s and the 1950s, mainly to accommodate political considerations and to increase the likelihood of achieving political independence from colonial powers. Lauzière explains how this process expanded the meaning of Salafi and Salafism beyond the confines of theology and constructed a rigorist notion of Salafism in the hopes of strengthening and uniting Muslims of different regions and cultural backgrounds under a common standard of Islamic purity.

Lauzière also discusses the new challenges facing the adherents of Salafism. Apart from the violent expressions, the most important question for purist and modernist Salafis regards their participation in the political process. Lauzière lists some questions that he believes dominate contemporary Salafi discourse: should they establish political parties at the risk of creating divisions? Should they run for [public] offices at the risk of legitimising democracy? Should they take to the streets at the risk of encouraging social and political instability? He argues: “For the most part, these questions fall under the purview of the Salafi method because they pertain to neither orthodoxy nor orthopraxy in a strict sense. Under specific circumstances, different Salafis have, therefore, been providing different answers depending on their understanding of the Manhaj [Method].”

One important chapter of the book discusses Rashid Rida’s engagement with the Wahhabis and its consequences. Rida, a Syrian-born Islamic scholar who formulated an intellectual response to the pressures of the modern Western world, had offered his unconditional support to Abd al-Aziz al-Saud. The fall of the Ottoman Empire, the failure of Faisal ibn Hussein ibn Ali’s Arab kingdom in 1920, the loss of Iraq and Greater Syria to the mandatory powers, the triumph of secular Kemalism in Turkey and the abolition of the caliphate in 1924 had created enormous challenges for Muslim political, religious and intellectual leaderships. Rida’s initial response was not to support one group or one doctrine in particular for he believed that factionalism and sectarianism could only weaken the already fragile Islamic community. Later, the circumstances that finally caused Rida to lend his full support to the Saudis resulted from Sharif Husayn’s self-proclamation as caliph two days after Mustafa Kemal Ataturk abolished the institution in March, 1924. This event confirmed Husayn’s arrogance in the eyes of Rida, for whom the offence had particular significance. Rida’s challenge was two-fold: first, to transform the new state according to his concept of the caliphate. Second, to rationalise Wahhabi thought. Rida explained that even though Wahhabis were Salafi in creed, they often ignored the significance of modern science and opposed modernist ideas. However, he failed to transform the Saudi clergy that was critical towards his new ideas of theological rationalism and tolerance of religious error.

Lauzière’s scholarship on Salafism is commendable and an example for young Muslim scholars on how to pursue intellectual queries. His journey to exploring the dynamics of Islamic reform movements still continues. He considers Salafism a useful category as long as scholars refrain from using it imprudently.

NON-FICTION: MISGUIDED INTERPRETATIONS
Book Reviwed by MUHAMMAD AMIR RANA: The reviewer is a security analyst and director of the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, Islamabad


https://www.dawn.com/news/1331211/non-fiction-misguided-interpretations
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page

26.2.17

The problem with ‘Islamism’, the Political Islam

Image result for islam and modernism


A valuable contribution to recent critical analyses of Islamism as it is not limited to its ideology. Taking human rights and Islamic law as the context of the Islamist discourse, it has been able to observe the significant tension between idealism and activism. Activism pushed the Muslim Brotherhood to come into conflict with the Al Azhar Ulema who had been at the forefront in Tahrir Square, not to challenge but to replace its authority. The author concludes that this activism is among the factors that have obstructed Islamic law reform and the expansion of human rights. Reading this book I was reminded of similar tensions and compromises in Pakistan between Islamism and modernism on the one hand and with orthodoxy on the other.

Exploring: "Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam" (by Dr.M.Iqbal)

Islamism, especially the ideology as formulated by the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) in South Asia and the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab world and that called for an Islamic state, has been attracting critical attention from scholars. The JI in Pakistan and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt both began political life as critics of the traditional approach to politics, stressing upon the sovereignty of God and enforcement of Sharia. In practical politics, they gradually adopted the concepts of the nation-state and democracy where they differed with traditional Islamic thought, but with reference to Islamic law they not only incorporated traditional fiqh into the concept of Sharia, but also its sectarian interpretation. The tension between sectarian and national conceptions of law posed crucial challenges to the concept of democratic rule of law, but Islamists justified it because they defined democracy as majority rule, even if it meant tyranny of the majority.

Scholars such as Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im (Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Sharia) faulted Islamists for their rejection of the secular state and found it problematic for the future of Sharia in Muslim countries. For the same reasons, but interpreting them differently, Wael Hallaq (The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament) concluded that the Islamic state based on Sharia as law is an “impossible state.” Most other academic studies also found Islamism paradoxical in its approach to the modern state. Hallaq, however, missed some very important inner developments in Muslim societies.

Humeira Iqtidar (Secularising Islamists? Jamaat-i-Islami and Jamaat-ud-Dawa in Urban Pakistan) observed that despite their vehement opposition, Islamists have been, in fact, facilitating the secularisation of Muslim societies. She argued that Islamists placed religion in the public life and forced Muslims to engage critically with it. By focusing on the state, Islamist movements accelerated the process of secularisation further. Projects to Islamise laws and knowledge could not resolve the tensions between sectarian Islam and secularising societies and added to the frustration of religious politics. These frustrations led to not only local, but also international faith-based and sectarian violence. Calls for an Islamic state eventually turned into clashes between the sects.

The ideology is detrimental to the progress of Islamic law argues a new book
The Arab Spring in 2010 was commonly regarded as a revolt against tyrannical regimes in the Arab world. Contrary to general expectations, it was Islamism that gained prominence in this revolt. Islamist parties in the Arab world adopted slogans of democracy and liberty and emerged more powerful than the others. They took it as an opportunity for establishing an Islamic state, but failed as soon as they came into power. According to Bassam Tibi (The Sharia State: Arab Spring and Democratisation), Islamists hijacked the Arab Spring with their rhetorical commitments to democratisation in order to win elections. They failed because rather than reducing, they quickened the tension between Islamic law and human rights as they imposed their conception of limited religious freedom. Rached Ghannouchi, the leader of al-Nahda, had already moved to separation between religion and state (Public Liberties in the Islamic State). Al-Nahda, which came to power after the Arab Spring in Tunisia, opted for a secular interpretation of an Islamic state. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt failed to resolve that tension. Moataz El Fegiery explores the story of this failure in his book Islamic Law and Human Rights: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

El Fegiery finds that Islamism retarded the progress of Islamic law and human rights. The Muslim Brotherhood came into political prominence during the post-Hosni Mubarak era, winning half of the seats in the 2011 elections. They formed a government with Mohamed Morsi as president in June 2012. The Muslim Brotherhood enjoyed unprecedented political freedom until 2013, but Morsi was dethroned by a popular uprising that ended with military dictatorship. Examining its thinking on the relationship between Islamic law and human rights in Egypt, El Fegiery finds that the Muslim Brotherhood failed because it justified democracy in terms of a tyranny of the majority.
El Fegiery explains that Islamism is based on two assumptions: first, that Islam mandates Muslims to establish an Islamic state in which Islamic law regulates all aspects of state and society and, second, that the normative content of Sharia must comply with the methods developed by mainstream traditional Muslim jurists. The Muslim Brotherhood legitimised human rights in the traditional framework of Islamic law; it benefitted in coming to power but failed in the cultural practice of human rights.

This book offers a thorough analysis of the conceptual and theoretical issues about religion and human rights in general and studies major issues such as the supremacy of Sharia, political pluralism, freedom of opinion, minority rights, conversion and apostasy, and family law. The book concludes that management of political diversity is not possible in the Islamist framework.

El Fegiery finds the Muslim Brotherhood’s approach to human rights too theoretical to proceed within the framework of traditional Islamic law. Human rights developed historically with the evolution of international law and treaties. They adjusted universality with cultural diversity. Islamism failed to adjust with the concept of human rights because Islamists believe that the nature of Islamic law is not compatible with the idea of the nation-state. In fact, Islamic political theory has been quite pragmatic since the first four caliphs and has been adapting to changes in the Muslim body politic. Islamic law has limited the boundaries of Sharia and the doctrine of Siyasa [political science] has given more privileges to the rulers than the Islamists allow.

The Egyptian constitution recognises Islam as the religion of the state. The Muslim Brotherhood believes that Islam does not separate religion from politics, rather Islam is state. To them, the only legitimate method of interpreting Islamic law is traditional. The problem is that state law is a modern project, but not all human rights are normative in Sharia. This tension became obvious in the changed political context in the post-Mubarak era. Islamist policies to dominate and impose limitations on public liberties created mistrust in society. Freedom of religion and expression in the modern state requires pluralism. The Egyptian constitution also allowed the establishment of political parties. A focus on the unity of the Ummah in classical Islamic political theory prohibited dissent and considered it fitna and sedition. Although Islamists were divided on this issue, the political discourse by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt generated hate and violence against liberals, the left, the secular, and NGOs. Questioning their sincerity and piety, the regime declared these groups heretic and ignorant. Equal rights for non-Muslims as citizens also remained questionable. The Muslim Brotherhood evoked conflict between Islam and the West to justify restrictions on freedom.

El Fegiery finds that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt had two different positions on religion and freedom of expression depending on whether they were in opposition or in power: while in opposition they operated as a pressure group that proclaimed freedom but restricted it on issues such as modesty for women and censorship of artists and intellectuals. In power, in 2012 the regime imposed further restrictions, persecuting writers and artists in blasphemy cases.

This created tension for the Muslim Brotherhood in practice. They adopted orthodox criteria and targeted those who challenged Sharia as state law, and used censure to restrict arts. Activism, informed by this unclear and ambivalent criterion, made Morsi’s regime intolerant towards intellectual pluralism and gender equality.

The book is a valuable contribution to recent critical analyses of Islamism as it is not limited to its ideology. Taking human rights and Islamic law as the context of the Islamist discourse, it has been able to observe the significant tension between idealism and activism. Activism pushed the Muslim Brotherhood to come into conflict with the Al Azhar Ulema who had been at the forefront in Tahrir Square, not to challenge but to replace its authority. The author concludes that this activism is among the factors that have obstructed Islamic law reform and the expansion of human rights. Reading this book I was reminded of similar tensions and compromises in Pakistan between Islamism and modernism on the one hand and with orthodoxy on the other, but that is beyond the scope of the present review.

NON-FICTION: The problem with ‘Islamism’
MUHAMMAD KHALID MASUD-
Islamic Law and Human Rights: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt By Moataz El Fegiery Cambridge Scholars Publishing, UK ISBN: 978-1443894791 340pp.

The reviewer is a former chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, February 26th, 2017
https://www.dawn.com/news/1316817/non-fiction-the-problem-with-islamism

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Modernism
  1. Dual Islam  دو اسلام : ڈاکٹر غلام جیلانی برق کی شہرہ آفاق کتاب ......  Are there two Islams, one in theory and one in practice. The Original Message of Allah (Quran) remained a theory and a parallel Islam emerged centuries ago?.. >>>

Islam And Modernism By: Mufti Taqi Usmani : Free Download ...

https://archive.org/details/IslamAndModernismByMuftiTaqiUsmani

Jul 2, 2011 - Islam And Modernism By: Mufti Taqi Usmani. Topics Islam, And, Modernism, By:, Mufti, Taqi, Usmani,. Mediatype texts. Identifier ...

Islam & modernism - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

www.dawn.com/news/1128387

Aug 29, 2014 - But the hateful beliefs of Muslims against non believers and concept of Jihad to kill non muslims goes back to about 1000 AD. Historically, that is the time when Islamic renaissance stopped and the religion took a turn against modernity and advancement to its present form.

Modernism in Islam - ilaam.net

www.ilaam.net/Opinions/Modernism.html

Modernism in Islam. by Jamaal al-Din Zarabozo. Based on "Modernism in Islam" lecture series by Sh. Zarabozo. WHAT IS MODERNISM AND WHERE DID IT ...

Islam and Modernism by Abdus Sattar Ghazali

ghazali.net/book4/

An online book by Abdus Sattar Ghazali; examines movements of regeneration and/or revival in the Muslim world from the 18th to the 20th centuries; includes an ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page