Modernism In Islam - http://www.islaam.com
abusul...@my-dejanews.com
Jamal Zarabozo
WHAT IS MODERNISM AND WHERE DID IT COME FROM?
We can relate, ideologically, the modernist movement spreading these
days to one sect in the past. This sect is called the Muta'zila, which
is dated back to the third Islamic century. Although those people
accepted the Qur'an and Sunna they made ta'weel (their own
interpretation of the Qur'an) and said 'aql (intelligence) takes
precedence over naql (guidance of the Prophet). However, this school
died out. The modernist movement did not evolve from them, but they are
very similar to them. The modernist movement actually originated in
Europe (middle-ages). At the time when the scientific method came about
in Spain, it was seen that what the church was teaching was not true.
This led to a slow revolt. The basic view of modernism (in all
religions)is that: the religion should change according to the
circumstances, and that it is not fixed. There is no such thing as
absolute truth. The Jewish and Christian modernist responce in Europe
tried to explain how the religion was still relevant for the people.
They made innovations to keep people interested in the religion (such as
singing in church, introduced only in the 1900's). They tried to say the
divine and the human is mixed in the Bible and that the parts that are
true must be the ones that are not out of date. Also, the religion is
improving over time and there is no absolute truth in the Bible. This is
the time in history when many Muslims were looking to Europe. This led
to three choices for those Muslims: accept the West; reject the West; or
mix the two (reform Islam). Those who followed the third (the modernist)
developed in, and focused on: Turkey - because it was under British
influence; and Egypt - because Al-Azhar was the seat of Islamic
knowledge. The people of this modernist movement judge Islam according
to their 'aql. Some of their faults in regards to it are:
1) use it for things which it can't comprehend;
2) refer everything to it: accept what agrees with it, reject what does
not;
3) judge the revelation by it. However, Ahl As-Sunna Wal Jamaa' believes
that using the sound 'aql should lead one to the conclusion that the
Qur'an and the Prophet are true and that their teachings should take
precedence over pure 'aql.
THE INFLUENCE OF MODERNISM IN AMERICA
Modernist are saying that the West and the world has changed, and that
Islam must become "civilized". Modernism has spread the most in the U.S.
because:
1) there are no scholars available to refute them, or they won't refute
them because people don't want to criticize them;
2) it allows Muslims from overseas to become part of American society
and they do not have to be recognized as Muslim. Also, new American
Muslims will not have to change their old lifestyle;
3) much of the literature, scholars, and institutions in the U.S.
reflect the modernist thinking.
In tafseer, Yusuf Ali is the most popular translator of the meaning of
the Qur'an, even though he denies what the 'aql can't see (of the
unseen). In seerah, one book is saying the Prophet is like anyone else.
Another tries to say the sunna is not for the shariah and that sometimes
we have to throw away the hadith because Allah did not correct the
Prophet's mistakes when he made ijtihaad. In Fiqh, modernists say
interest is permissible, menstruation women can pray, and Muslim women
can marry kaafir men. They say the face of women was not covered until
150 years after the time of the Prophet, even though it existed in his
time, and that women should always pray in the mosque, even though
hadith only show women in the mosque at Ishaa and Fajr because they
could not be recognized in the dark. They also say the hadith that a
people with a woman ruler will not succeed is not true today and
polygamy is forbidden except under certain conditions (which do not
exist). Finally, it should be mentioned that this movement is organized
and has resources such as magazines, television, conventions, and
literature.
SOME OF THEIR VIEWS
Modernists influence the thinking of people, and that person spreads
their views on unknowingly. Their way of thinking is the most dangerous
thing about them. None discuss aqeedah (belief) because it is not
important to them ('aql judges naqal). They are also trying to remove
the sunna and say that the system of the old muhadditheen is
insufficient. Most say (as do critics of the Bible) that we need a
"higher criticism" of hadith and the earlier conclusions (ijmaa) of
scholars are not sufficient, yet they give no new way to judge hadith.
However, we as Muslims understand that the Prophet was guided by Allah
and that we may not be able to understand everything in the hadith with
our 'aql. It is common for the modernists to question the role of the
sunna in the shariah. One said all of the sunna is of this world and not
deen, even in the Prophet's time, therefore it is all a matter of shoora
(consultation) and ijtihaad (therefore changeable). Another says we need
to make ijtihaad for what is to be followed, and changes of time and
place make sunna difficult to use. All of this is mentioned to weaken
the view of the sunna. The Jews and Christians tried to differ the human
from the divine. Modernists try to point out the differences between the
Messenger as a human and as a Prophet. They also avoid following the
sunna by dividing his life into parts (imam, judge, military leader,
prophet, etc.), saying some are not divine teachings and not law. Some
say everyone is free to make ijtihaad, and later restrictions on it were
imposed by the people. Another said a ruling may change even if it is
from the Qur'an and Sunna.
HOW DO MODERNISTS GO ASTRAY?
The observer can easily point out the following points as the driving
force for this trend:
1) Their premises and assumptions are wrong Modernists look to the West
and try to reinterpret the "old religion" with modern science and modern
times. They assume that:
a) the present situation is advanced or different (i.e. "this is not the
Prophet's time!"). However, the idea of progress and that things are
better now is Marxian and Hegelian. It is against the hadith, as the
Prophet said each generation is getting worse. They must prove that
there has been progression (no definition of it given). Islamically the
advanced society is the one that comes closer to Allah, and understands
and applies Islam better (such as the sahaaba). In fact, the current
societies have the things of the old societies (such as homosexuality,
etc.) as mentioned in the Qur'an;
b) religion is relative to time and place (i.e. "therefore we need to
judge Islam in light of modern science"). Modernists are "people of
science" and judge Islam according to modern science. They think that
the West is based on science, but they fail to notice that not all
science is based on fact. In reality, much of science is only hypothesis
(not a fact). Also, every science has its own philosophy, which will
lead to its own conclusions;
c) the way of thinking of a society is based on (is a product of) its
enviroment. Modernists say most of religion is from the people and their
environment and it can be judged by later times, and hadith are related
to that time only. However, there is no proof for the modernist
hypothesis that religious truth is relative. Allah says the Qur'an is
Haq (truth). Modernists are saying (by inference) that if the Qur'an is
not true now, then it was never true.
2) The methodology they use is wrong. The methodology of the modernists
is the way they mislead people to the wrong conclusions. They claim to
be scientific, but they are usually inconsistent or have no proof or
foundation for their beliefs. Some of the means and principles they use
include:
a) Sunna and Hadith. They claim the Qur'an is authentic and they only
follow "authentic" hadith. This implies that they have a way to judge
hadith (different from that of the traditional scholars), yet most give
no new way to judge hadith, and are using their 'aql (intelligence) to
determine this (like the female ruler hadith). Modernists especially
dislike hadith which have specific meanings and prefer ones which only
have general principles.
b) Use of weak hadith to help their points and arguments (while they are
calling for the use of authentic hadith). For example, in the area of
women in Islam (the two areas the modernists try to change the most are
the sunna and women) they like to quote two stories from the time of
Umar: 1) when Umar was giving a Khutbah he tried to restrict the amount
of dowry, a woman opposed, and Umar corrected himself and thanked the
woman, and 2) Umar appointed Umma Shifaa as a market-regulator (used by
modernist to say women can work in the government). However, both of
these stories are not authentic.
c) Use vague terms without defining them. Modernists use terms like
democracy, freedom, and equality, but they do not define what they mean
by them. The danger in using vague terms is that a knowledgeable person
will pass over the word or concept, thinking they meant the Islamic or
acceptable definition while in fact they did not, while others may
believe what they are saying is true.
d) Do not present all of the relevant information that is available on
the subject. That is, from Qur'an, sunna, etc. They only present that
which will support their views. This tactic is used to avoid unliked
beliefs, so they just do not mention them.
e) Force their interpretation onto the text. This is what the Muta'zilla
did, when they said 'aql takes precedence over what is from the Prophet.
Many modernists say Islam is the "rational" religion. This is true if
you mean everything is from Allah and there is no contradiction, but to
say that we can study everything in Islam by judging it with only our
intellect is unacceptable and there is also no proof for this. To avoid
implementing what the Qur'an and sunna says, the modernists say we need
to follow the "spirit" of Islam and not worry about the laws
specifically. But it is clear from the Qur'an and Sunna that we are to
take both. They will argue that the text of the Qur'an only says for
women to dress modestly and they do not like to talk about the specific
details of hijaab and say we only need to follow the "spirit" of the
law.
f) They tend to oppose scholars by saying they meant something else.
They say that the door to ijtihaad is open, which is something accepted
by the Ahl As-Sunna Wal Jamaa'. However, it is not open to everybody on
any subject. Modernists claim that anyone would make ijtihaad until Imam
Shaffie narrowed the qualifications (not true), and today anyone can do
it. In one magazine, on the question of polygamy and divorce, some said
that these two can be restricted by ijtihaad. They often misquote
scholars and give their own meanings for what they said.
g) Often follow strange and rejected opinions. They try to revive some
of the old opinions because they like it and say that this writer said
it in the past. Modernists try to open the door to these opinions and
choose what is the most suitable and easy to follow. However, we are
supposed to look for the fiqh opinions that are the closest to the
truth. They usually bring bad hadith such as "The differences in my
Ummah is a mercy" or reject authentic hadith such as the one about the
breakup of the Ummah into 73 sects.
h) Follow their desires. They often make rulings and fatawa without
permissible daleel (evidence). One said music is permissible because he
did not see something wrong with it, so it is halal. But he did not
check what the Qur'an and the sunna say about this subject.
ISLAM AND MODERNISM
Ahl As-Sunna Wal Jamaa' believes that there is only one true Islam. This
is proven in Qur'an and Hadith. One hadith shows the straight line as
leading to Allah, and branching paths leading off it with a devil at
each one calling to it. Also, the umma will break into 73 sects, and the
true way is the one who follows Muhammad and his companions. Modernists
are differing from Ahl As-Sunna Wal-Jamaa' in:
1) everything in accordance with Qur'an and Sunna is Haq (truth) and
what disagrees with it is false (some modernists disagree with this).
Also, statements consistent with the Qur'an and Sunna are accepted;
2) Ijmaa (consensus) of the sahaaba (and early generations) is a hujja
(proof) for all Muslims. Modernists say sahaaba are men and we are men,
and even matters agreed on by them are open to ijtihaad;
3) anything in the Qur'an and Sunna cannot be opposed by 'aql, rational
thought, opinion, or qiysas. This is supported in the Qur'an and is not
open to discussion or vote. One modernists said the cutting of the hand
of the theif is a "Khomeni Islam" and is unethical;
4) there are constants in Islam related to belief, worship, etc. and
these are good, sound, proper, and correct for all places and times.
This view is accepted by the Ahl Sunna, but not by many of the
modernists, saying that all truth is relative and there is no constants.
However, these constant principles are basic aspects of the Ahl Sunna
and are traced to the Qur'an and Sunna and Sahaaba. They are not
questionable or changeable things. In many of these things, modernists
say we need ijtihaad and tajdeed.
DANGERS
1) Many are influenced by it and do not know it. Also, their views are
unacceptable and should be refuted.
2) Many people do not recognize it as a movement of munkar or bida' and
do not evaluate its writings and speeches, so they try to defend it.
Many of their writings are from rationalization (which has no end or
conclusion), and the effects of this are seen in the Christian church
(that is, they now have no relationship to their religion, and it has no
practical value or purpose).
3) This group is also playing into the hands of the kuffar. They are
happy with is because their effort is to bring the Muslim women out of
the home to change them. The last 200 years has been a colonialist and
orientalist attack on the position of the woman in Islam (to destroy her
and the society).
CONCLUSIONS
1) The modernists movement as a whole (what it is based on) is from
Bida' (innovation). They have their own principles and ways, which
contradicts that of Ahl-Sunna. They say we want ijtihaad in the basic
principles of the deen (religion) which are constant.
2) They are very willing to reject and contradict the ijmaa of the
sahaaba on clear points (such as stoning of the adulterer and the
apostate is to be killed) and hadith are dealt with as if they are not
important (women ruler hadith is common).
3) One of the main points of modernism is to change the role of women.
They say it is permissible to mix men and women and to not wear hijaab.
The modernists are impressed by the West and their conclusions always
seem to agree with the views of the West.
* * *
Most of the information used for this article is from a seven part
cassette series which is available from: Dar Makkah: 2040 S. Oneida #2A.
Denver, CO 80224. The speaker frequently pointed out that his purpose
was to warn about the dangers and mistakes of this movement and not to
defame individual Muslims. Also, his information came from their
writings, speeches, and discussions with these individuals, and not from
what he heard from other people.
END OF MODERNISM IN ISLAM
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
David Byrden
<6orncm$5k6$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> The basic view of modernism (in all
> religions)is that: ....There is no such thing as
> absolute truth.
In fact, modernism accespts that there is
an absolute truth, and that "science" is the quest
to discover it.
> Also, the religion is improving over time and
> there is no absolute truth in the Bible.
I don't agree with that. I think modernists
agree that there can be quite a lot of absolute
truth in the Bible. When it says David was king of
Israel, well, he very probably was. (p.s. that was
not me, it was another David)
> However, the idea of progress and that things are
> better now is Marxian and Hegelian. It is against the hadith, as the
> Prophet said each generation is getting worse. They must prove that
> there has been progression (no definition of it given).
Really! And did the Prophet give
you a definition of "worse"?
> They think that
> the West is based on science, but they fail to notice that not all
> science is based on fact. In reality, much of science is
> only hypothesis (not a fact).
This is not true. Science is based on
THEORY, which is a MUCH stronger thing than a
hypothesis.
There are many people who deliberately
pretend that 'theory' and 'hypothesis' are the
same word; including those professional liars,
the Creationists. Do not believe them. A theory
is (a) self consistent (b) consistent with known
evidence and (c) testable by the predictions
that it makes. (Therefore Creationism is not a
theory because it predicts nothing).
David