|
Towards
A New Islamic Discourse
Beyond
Modernity: The Turn of the Sixties
…it was not difficult for the bearers of the new Islamic discourse, those who studied Western modernity in the middle of the twentieth century, to recognize many of its shortcomings and to see it in its totality. |
|
By
the mid-sixties, the critical Western discourse of modernity was
crystallized and the works of its critics, such as the Frankfurt
School thinkers, had become widely available and quite popular. Many
studies revising of the notions of the Enlightenment were published.
Works on the standardization that resulted from Western modernity
and about its One-Dimensional Man, such as Herbert Marcuse, sought
to demonstrate the existence of a structural defect that lies at the
very heart of modem secular project of the Western civilization--a
defect that goes beyond the traditional division of its ideologies
(and stretches itself into a socialist and a capitalist camp). Many
revisionist historians, rewriting the history of modem Western
civilization, tried to underscore the enormity of the crimes
committed against the peoples of Asia and Africa and of the colonial
pillage of their lands. Many studies, radically critical of
development theories, appeared during the same period. The New Left
movement made a significant contribution in this regard. Thus,
whether on the level of practice or on the level of theory, it was
not difficult for the bearers of the new Islamic discourse, those
who studied Western modernity in the middle of the twentieth
century, to recognize many of its shortcomings and to see it in its
totality. It was no longer possible for them to experience a naive
admiration and amazement experienced by the intellectuals of the
early twentieth century generation.
It
should be pointed out that neither the new nor the old generation of
Muslim intellectuals based their respective intellectual
constructs on the basis of an Islamic worldview exclusively, nor in
an exclusivist manner. Their interaction with Western modernity was
expectedly a very important formative factor, and their ideas were
aspiring universal causes and virtues. It was an inclusive
vision--different from the knowledge claimed by modernists--to be a
science applicable to all communities, and later suggested to be the
final answers, declaring the end of history . Responses of Muslims
varied according to the type of challenge they faced and its
intensity. The early reformists found many positive aspects in
Western modernity. This is evident from Sheikh Muhammad Abduh's
frequently quoted remark that "whereas in the West he found
Muslims without Islam, in the East he found Islam without
Muslims"; he wanted to stress that in the West he found people
who manifested in their very conduct the ideals of Islam even though
they were not Muslims, whereas in the Muslim world he found people
who believed in Islam, but their conduct belied their belief.
Consequently,
the issue for many of the bearers of the old Islamic discourse was
basically how to reconcile Islam with Western modernity, and even
how to make Islam catch up with it, and live up to its standards and
values. This was the core of Muhammad Abdu's project, which
predominated the reformist discourse until the mid sixties of this
century. Had the experience of Sheikh Muhammad Abdu with Western
modernity been different, he would have hesitated long before making
this remark and before proposing his project for progress.
The
following incident might explain this point further. In 1830, Sheikh
Rifa'ah At-Tahtawi, whose admiration of the Western civilization is
well-known, was in Paris. In that same year, the French cannons were
pounding unsuspected Algerian towns and villages reducing them to
rubble. Sheikh At-Tahtawi could only see the bright lights of Paris
and could only hear the urbane and sophisticated rhythms of Western
modernity. In a different encounter with the French, the Algerian
sheikhs, who were subject to a brutal colonial attack using the most
sophisticated military technology available at the time, could only
see the raging flames of fire and could only hear the racket of
bombs. One of these sheikhs was once told that the French troops had
actually come to Algeria so as to spread Western civility and
modernity. His response was cryptic as it was significant: "But
why have they brought all this gunpowder?". Like this Algerian
sheikh, the bearers of the new Islamic discourse smelled the reek of
gunpowder, saw the flames of fire, heard the racket of cannons and
watched the hooves of colonial horses tread on everything. Then they
saw the gunpowder becoming omni-present, for it was transformed into
all kinds of weapons of mass destruction and extermination: bombs,
missiles, biological and nuclear weapons. et cetera. (how relevant
to our current Pax -Americana!). Huge budgets were allocated for the
production or purchase of these weapons first by Western, then
Eastern, Southern and Northern governments. In fact, the mass
destruction weapons industry has grown to be the most important
industry of our enlightened rational times, and humanity, for the
first time in its long history, allocated more funds for the
production of weapons than for the production of food.
It is interesting to note that all the trends and movements, religious or secular, irrespective of their ideological inclinations and social or ethnic backgrounds, had turned the West into a silent and ultimate point of reference. |
|
The
traditional Islamic discourse was neither unique nor isolated in its
advocacy of Western modernity; it was, in a sense, part of the
general outlook that prevailed in the third world since the
beginning of this century. Efforts were directed at catching up with
the West and at competing with it according to its own terms. The
liberals called for the adoption of the full modem Western
outlook--with "both its sweet and bitter aspects". The
Marxists rebelled slightly and suggested that the peoples of the
third world could enter the promised land of Western modernity
through the gates of Marxism and social justice. The Islamists, in
their turn, imagined it would be possible to adopt the Western modem
outlook or rather adapt Islam to it. It is interesting to note that
all the trends and movements, religious or secular, irrespective of
their ideological inclinations and social or ethnic backgrounds, had
turned the West into a silent and ultimate point of reference.
As
a result of this attitude towards Western modernity, the authentic
Islamic worldview retreated, its dimensions shrunk, and it lost its
comprehensiveness. Instead of providing a universal Islamic frame of
reference for Muslims (and non-Muslims too) in a complex modem
age, the issue became how to "islamize" certain aspects of
Western modernity. The Islamization process would, in most cases,
take the form of "omitting" those aspects of Western
modernity deemed inappropriate or contradictory with Muslim ethics
and prohibited by Islamic law, without any addition, innovation or
even constructive synthesis. And this inevitably meant the
eventual atrophy of those aspects of the Islamic worldview that have
no equivalent within the modern Western worldview. Ironically, those
aspects constitute the very essence and source of supreme
contribution of the Islamic worldview to the universal civilization.
…religious fundamentalism emerged as a populist extension of these intellectual concerns, forming only one version of a wider resurgence that is in its mainstream moderate and even progressive in its own terms. |
|
The
bearers of the new Islamic discourse do not have the same
fascination with Western modernity. Actually, a radical
sophisticated critique--not simple rejection--of Western
modernity is one of their main points of departure. They, too, are
neither unique nor isolated in their critique. For, they do not
differ from many of the thinkers and political movements in the
third world at the present time who try to evolve different forms of
modernity and new models of sustainable development .They also
do not differ much from many important trends in the West that are
critical of Western modernity. Marxism created a form of critique of
modernity, and romanticism, as indicated earlier, was also created a
form of protest against its capitalist system. More recently,
religious fundamentalism emerged as a populist extension of these
intellectual concerns, forming only one version of a wider
resurgence that is in its mainstream moderate and even progressive
in its own terms. All of these trends, in one way or another, show
an increasing doubt that Western modernity can provide man with
enough sources to fulfill his true human essence.
The
critique of the new Islamic discourse of modernity overlaps with
other parallel discourses. It recognizes and emphasizes the
inextricable ties between Western modernity and Western imperialism
as Marxism does. Imperialism was after all the first encounter with
modernity. Yet unlike the Western critique of modernity, which is in
many cases nihilistic and pessimistic, the Islamic critique is
optimistic by virtue of the fact that it proposes a project for
reform and does not fall in nihilism.
Dr. Abdel-Wahab M. Elmessiri is a Professor Emeritus of English Literature, Ain Shams University, Cairo-Egypt.
|