Modern progressive ideologoy of Islam - not shallow degenerate irrational secularism/capitalism
z.iqbal80
people from the time of Muhammad (saw) until the last day. However we are
living in a time of immense scepticism. This is a time when humans rely on
oft repeated 'norms' and 'truths' rather than look at the reality of our
situation and the divine truth revealed to Rasul-Allah (saw). Sceptics may
ask; how can a way of life that was implemented fourteen centuries ago be
applicable today? Humans have 'progressed' and our lives have changed
dramatically since then. Our tools of production, means of trading and modes
of communication would be unrecognised by the desert Arab of the 6th Century
CE.
Regardless of who says what about Islam; as Muslims we must believe Islam is
applicable for today. We should be confident that if we live by true Islam
we will be successful in this life and in the hereafter. We should not feel
that dates, deserts and dromedaries are incongruous in today's world. Rather
we should be proud of the setting that Allah (swt) chose to reveal the last
guiding light to humankind.
What of modernism?
The utterances of illusionists are no longer 'abracadabra' and 'hey presto'.
The magic words are now; 'new and improved' and 'best ever'. This Mickey
Mouse, modern, plastic disposable society is obsessed with what is new and
what is modern. The spin used to sell us soap powder is also used to sell us
ideas about; life, culture, society and politics. Does new really mean
better? Just because this is repeated to us over and over again ad nauseam,
it dose not mean that it is true. The average speed of travel in a BMW on
the grid-locked streets of London is no faster than horse-back in the Middle
Ages. The main differences being a stereo system and one in seven children
becoming asthmatics. This example may seem flippant, but we should all be
quicker to question modernity than we are to question Islam.
Are things really so different today?
The complexities of human existence and communal living are bewildering. If
we are to take stock of who we are and how we live, we will find that
certain basics remain constant. We have certain organic needs and instincts
that have never changed. The first man was in need of food, water and air to
breath etc. All other human beings since have all had these necessities.
Islam had various laws revealed concerning the intake of food. Because we
have not done away with the need to eat those laws may still be lived by
today. 20th Century living has not stopped Muslims from being mindful of
Islamic dietary laws.
Can Islam be implemented today?
Allah (swt) has forbidden men from wearing gold. This was mentioned in the
Sunnah. It's just as easy for us to understand this law, implement this law
and benefit from this law today as it was in the 6th century CE. This law
has not changed at all. The Qur'an has forbidden the consumption of wine.
The context that this was revealed was in reference to a liquid fermented
from date, grapes and molasses. However, in origin, appearance, smell,
texture and probably taste, 'Johnny Walker' Scotch Whisky is worlds apart
from the drink consumed by the Arabs of jahiliyyah. Does this mean that
whisky is not forbidden in Islam? Of course whisky is haram. It is no more
and no less haram than wine from grapes. The nature of befogging the mind is
an intrinsic quality of both whisky and wine. It is easy for us to see how
the rule of khamr may even be extrapolated to something as new as alcopops.
"O you who believe! When the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday (the day
of Jum'ah), hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah, and leave off
business (bai'a): That is best for you if you but knew! And when the Prayer
is finished, then may you disperse through the land, and seek of the Bounty
of Allah: and celebrate the Praises of Allah often (and without stint): that
you may prosper." [TMQ 62:9]
This is a verse that millions of Muslims respond to, today and ever since
the time of the Prophet (saw). The law that Allah (swt) has laid down in
this verse is that it is forbidden for the male mature Muslim to trade at
the time of Friday prayers. The word bai'a (trading) is explicitly
mentioned. However, it is not only trading that is forbidden during this
period. To be more accurate, a Muslim may not busy himself during this time.
'Busying oneself' is still the same today and ever since the time of the
Prophet (saw). 'Busying oneself' has never changed and never will change. To
sit and watch television is still 'busying oneself', to read the newspaper
is still 'busying oneself'. To cook, clean or crochet is still 'busying
oneself'. All of these are far removed from trading. Nevertheless, they are
all forbidden at the time of Jum'ah.
The principle of studying the text of Islam and finding its application
today is a whole science in its own right. But it is a science that we
should all have conviction and confidence in. Another example can be seen in
the verses concerning war strategy, that were revealed in the surah
al-Anfal.
"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power,
including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies,
of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom you may not know, but
whom Allah does know. Whatever you shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall
be repaid unto you, and you shall not be treated unjustly." [TMQ 8:60]
The underlying principle of the law is that Muslims must be prepared for
war, "make ready your strength". This is not merely to have safety catches
released, but to be so prepared that the enemy is actually intimidated by
the shear preparation and readiness to fight. The nature of the armaments
will obviously change with time and place. However, the principle of
preparation and the principle of intimidation will not. The detail of the
verse refers to steeds of war, as these were the killing machines of the
time. In this day and age ballistic missiles may be manufactured, paraded
and used to intimidate the enemies of Islam. It is compulsory on the Islamic
State to be prepared for war, in this manner.
The underlying principle of befogging the mind, busying oneself at Jum'ah,
and preparing for battle, are all principles that have not changed in their
essence since the time of the Prophet (saw). The fine details of these
things have obviously changed but the essence and hence the rule is still
apt, appropriate and applicable. Allah (swt) has blessed this Ummah with
brilliant scholars that are capable of bringing rules from the Qur'an and
the Sunnah. In order to better ourselves we should bring those rules into
our lives.
What sustains the strength of the Islamic state is not only the authority of
government. The citizens must have belief and have confidence in Islam. This
confidence and belief not only helps us in this life and the hereafter as
individuals, but helps us to implement Islam as a whole unit. These are the
political implications of us believing in Islam as a complete way of life.
We should have the strength to ignore the propaganda of the West, and reject
the modernist philosophy.
The principle of referring back to the sources of Islam for current times is
a principle completely contrary to Capitalism. The philosophy that 'new is
good' is what instils in Capitalist nations an insatiable need for 'newness'
. As mentioned earlier, the principles that fuel Capitalism, are the same
principles that fuel consumerism. Muslims should consider consumerism,
capitalism and secular philosophy inextricably linked. Moreover, we should
consider them all alien to Islam, i.e. Kufr. We may be justified in asking;
how is it that these ideas become so popular amongst Muslims? We must
remember that these ideas were not adopted by in the Islamic lands
over-night. They were slowly injected into the Ummah in a most subtle and
devious way.
Modernism as a cover euphemism for Kufr
Modernism has been used as cover to introduce the principles of secularism
into the minds of Muslims. Secularism being the separation of life's affair
from reverence. A better definition would be the changing of Islam from a
complete way of life to a complete sham.
Historically, the Western powers found it a formidable task to destroy Islam
by military means. They resorted to a more indirect approach. Missionaries,
schools and propaganda campaign in the form of books etc. were all key
pieces in the Westerners' armoury against Islam. However, their master
stroke was to try to destroy Islam from within. They cooked up a plot to
effect the so-called intellectuals within the Islamic lands. These in turn
would affect the Muslim masses via the universities and other educational
establishments. The net results of this were the 'modernist schools'. The
most significant of whom were formed by Jamal al-Deen Afghani, Muhammad
'Abdu and Rasheed Ridah. A particular area in which they devoted their
attention was ruling. They reasoned that society and government had
progressed significantly since the time of the Prophet (saw). For example,
Rasheed Ridah once described the head of the Islamic State as being similar
to a Medieval Pope! The follow-on from such outlandish statements, is a plea
to the Muslims to replace the 'old' with the 'new', as the West did when
they replaced the Pope with the Parliament. So, on the back of the idea of
'modernism', Muslims were urged to take on board a whole host of 'new'
secular corruption, such as democracy, freedom, human rights and free
market.
Though they have passed away long ago, their thoughts and ideas are still
wide spread throughout the Islamic world. These thoughts exist in their
original forms as well as in the up-dated versions. For these founding
fathers of modernism spawned a whole host of second generation
pseudo-intellectuals, that are often now the so-called official spokesmen
for Islam. Today we find 'Abdu's progeny taking positions as advisers to
corrupt governments, heads of departments in universities and Imams of the
'State Mosques'. They have continued where the others left off. They today
reason with 'those who live in the past', to greet the 'new' United Nations
and World Bank. They continue to undermine the understanding of Muslims of,
and as a result their confidence in, Islam as a viable option in the modern
age. This erosion is not confined to the field of ruling, either. Some say
that there is no need for women to wear hijaab because society has outgrown
its need. Others say that it is no longer sensible to pray five times a day
as the pace of modern day life is much faster than at the time of the
Prophet (saw). Or that fasting was only practical in the past, when the
stress of revising for exams in information technology was not a problem.
Indeed, Islam is crushed underfoot as they rush into their 'brave new world'
. Will they one day offer a Virtual Reality Ka'abah for a simulated Hajj?
Conclusions
"This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon
you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." [TMQ 5:4]
"And We have sent down to you the Book explaining all things." [TMQ 16:89]
Islam did not come specifically for the Bani Israel, nor the Romans nor the
Persians. Neither did Islam come for the desert dwellers of the 6th Century
alone. It came as a guiding light for all humankind from the time of
Muhammad bin 'Abdullah, Rasul-Allah (saw), until the end of the world. In
this Muslims have confidence. In this Muslims believe. Allah's (swt)
guidance can and will be implemented in the world in its correct manner. In
this also Muslims have confidence. In this also Muslims believe.
rmp
John H. McCloskey
>From: "rmp" xxno...@xx.com
It is also a bit mind-fogging (at least at 0800 before I'm through the first
cup of coffee) to have to cope with this particular kind of post, where
everything the critic wants to say is said by rewriting the header.
In this case, "Koran befogs the mind without giving pleasure unlike wine" has
replaced "Modern progressive ideology of Islam -- not shallow degenerate
irrational secularism/capitalism."
That is all the critic positively said, but he did in addition snip out a lot
of the original. I suppose we are invited to think that what's left is
especially foggy. Well, here it is:
"Allah (swt) has forbidden men from wearing gold. This was mentioned in the
Sunnah. It's just as easy for us to understand this law, implement this law and
benefit from this law today as it was in the 6th century CE. This law has not
changed at all.
"The Qur'an has forbidden the consumption of wine. The context that this was
revealed [in] was in reference to a liquid fermented from date, grapes and
molasses. However, in origin, appearance, smell, texture and probably taste,
'Johnny Walker' Scotch Whisky is worlds apart from the drink consumed by the
Arabs of jahiliyyah. Does this mean that whisky is not forbidden in Islam? Of
course whisky is _haraam_. It is no more and no less _haraam_ than wine from
grapes. The nature of befogging the mind is an intrinsic quality of both whisky
and wine. It is easy for us to see how the rule of _khamr_ may even be
extrapolated to something as new as alcopops."
===
The _seventh_ Christian century was meant, almost certainly, but apart from
that, there is not much sign of fog. Quite the opposite -- the real problem is
a sort of phony clarity, especially at two points:
(1) ... OF COURSE whisky is [forbidden] in Islam ...
(2) ... it is EASY FOR US to see how the rule ... may be EXTRAPOLATED ....
Two, four, six, eight -- high time we ought to complicate! So how about the
following prime slice of Orientalizing?
The prohibition of wine was not in Muhammad's programme at the
beginning. In XVI, 69 we even find it praised as one of the signs of Allah's
grace to mankind: "And of the fruit of palmtrees, and of grapes, ye obtain an
inebriating liquor, and also good nourishment". But the consequences of
drunkenness manifesting themselves ... are said to have led Muhammad to change
his attitude. The first revelation giving vent to these feelings was II, 216:
"They will ask theeconcerning wine and gambling (_maysir_). Answer, in both
there is great sin and also some things of use unto men: but their sinfulness
is greater than their use". This revelation, however, was not considered as a
prohibition. As people did not change their customs and the order of prayer
happened to be disturbed in consequence thereof, a new revelation was issued,
viz. IV, 46: "O true believers! come not to prayers when ye are drunk, until ye
understand what ye say" etc. But neither was this revelation considered as a
general prohibition of wine, until V, 92 made an end to drinking: "O true
believers! Surelywine and maysir and stone pillars and divining arrows, are an
abomination of the work of Satan; therefore avoid them, that ye may prosper".
This sequence of revelations regarding wine is the accepted one among the
traditionists and commentators of the Qur'an (see Ahmad b. Hanbal, _Musnad_,
ii, 351-2; Tabari, [_Tafsir_] v, 58 ad IV, 46).
[IV:994a (Wensinck) -- Extract from the Encyclopaedia of Islam CD-ROM
Edition v. 1.0 © 1999 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands]
One slight patch of befoggery crops up -- "wine" pretty clearly meant "wine,"
sc. from grapes. The dates business has to do with the rather mysterious
_nabiydh_, and the molasses business is probably a red herring altogether.
When did sugar cane reach Arabia? (Maybe just barely before Islam.) Does
_dibs_ have to be from sugar cane? (No.) Does any of this matter at the
moment? (No.)
To borrow the original poster's fake lucidity, OF COURSE it is EASY for US to
EXTRAPOLATE from V,92 that anything else which has in common with wine, maysir,
stone pillars and divining arrows what these four items all have in common with
one another must undoubtably be an abomination also. Who could doubt it? The
only minor difficulty is about making out exactly what that common element is.
The headline-switcher meant to impugn all of Islam. -- a head-on attack on the
Qur'an can mean nothing else. Myself, I wonder about only the OF COURSE IT'S
EASY FOR US brands of neo-Islam, whether "modernist" or _salafiyy_. In light
of the whole original post, it is genuinely foggy whether "z.iqbal80" is a
neo-Muslim or not. His original header advises us that Islam is progressive
and not shallow, but the contents of the post don't seem to make much headway
towards showing it to be so.
Still, as against EASY FOR US, it is only fair to quote him as also saying
"The principle of studying the text of Islam and finding its application
[for] today is a whole science in its own right. But it is a science that we
should all have conviction and confidence in."
and
"Allah (swt) has blessed this Ummah with brilliant scholars that are capable
of bringing rules from the Qur'an and the Sunnah. In order to better ourselves
we should bring those rules into our lives."
That doesn't get rid of all the problems, especially if he only means that it
is EASY FOR most of THEM to follow a small caste of hard-working scholars
blindly, but it is a good deal more intellectually respectable than the casual
endorsement of amateur extrapolation suggested by what the responder snipped
him down to.
Happy days.
--JHM