Muslim Reformist and Political Thought Revivalists, Modernist and Free Will

Posted: 26 Apr 2016

See all articles by Sarfraz Khan

Sarfraz Khan

University of Peshawar - Area Study Centre (Russia,China & Central Asia)

Date Written: January 1, 2003

Abstract

Orthodox Muslims consider Islam to be a complete and consummate religion. They argue that changes or reforms are neither possible nor tolerable and regard any attempt at introducing change as an intolerable intrusion into a divinely revealed religion, hence apostasy. However, the existence of various sects, throughout the history of Islam, testifies to the presence of acute disagreements in the Muslim community. These religious sectarian movements have expressed spontaneous discontent with the existing order, and represented the aspirations of Muslim people for social change. The need to adapt Islam to modern times mounted in the nineteenth century when the Muslim world in general realised its weakness and backwardness in relation to the militarily and technologically powerful West. Some representatives of the Muslim intelligentsia began actively advocating reform in religious and other practices and structures (educational, political, cultural and social) to make Islam more relevant to the demands of contemporary society. This approach, which attempts to forge changes in religion and society, may be termed ‘reformist’. It is a complex process, one which requires not just a superficial adaptation of practices, but a fundamental alteration of the religious system of values, in order to bring Islam into line with the changing circumstances of a new age.

In the Christian world the term ‘Reformation’ refers to the struggle which took place in the first half of the sixteenth century against the Church as an institution. Some of the reformers invoked the doctrine of predestination, namely, that man’s fate is divinely determined in advance, as an argument against the Church’s claim that man’s salvation depended on the kindly deeds and chaste exploits of the holy fathers. Martin Luther (1483-1546) renounced the Catholic concept of ‘merit’, deeming it a blasphemous haggling with God, and instead put forward the idea of salvation through faith.2 John Calvin (1509-1564) went further, maintaining that divine predestination was eternal and unchanging; some people were destined to salvation, and others to eternal damnation. Jesus Christ sacrificed himself not for the sake of everybody, but for those who have been chosen by God. Evidence of being chosen lay in man’s conduct. Thus, a Christian could regard himself as being endowed with divine blessing and could proclaim his actions as those of the ‘broom of God’. This interpretation of the idea of predestination was used as a religious foundation for individual activity and liberation from the control of the Church.

Muslim reformist movements have inevitably followed a different path from the analogous Christian trends because Islam has neither an organised institution such as the Church, nor an officially ordained clergy. Functions similar to those of the Christian clergy are discharged by the ulama (the collective term for all religious functionaries, including teachers and interpreters of the sacred law). The foundation of their temporal power was (and in some societies still is) the exclusive right to interpret the word of God. Thus, ordinary believers had no right to exercise ijtihad (systematic original thinking). Most of the ulama have traditionally defended the ‘purity’ and fundamental nature of the laws that have been transmitted to them through the centuries. The ulama have used the doctrine of predetermination to sustain the existing social and political structure, promoting the idea that these were ordained by God. These attitudes impede freedom of thought and action, and encourage passive subordination to the prestige of the ulama and the rulers. In order to break free of the domination of the ulama it has been essential to revise the doctrine of predetermination. Muslim reformists, therefore, in contrast to the Christian Protestants, put greater emphasis on the doctrine of freedom of will. Reformist Islamic teaching presents a new understanding and interpretation of the entire complex of religious, ethical, political and economic problems.

New interpretations are offered regarding the ontological and epistemological aspects of the problem of relations between God and man, which sanction the freedom of the will.

Muslim reformist movements, like their Christian counterparts, are based on an understanding of a personal relationship between man and God; they seek to abolish, or at least minimise, the mediating role of the clergy in this relationship. In both religions, the reformist movements introduced a more democratic attitude in religious institutions and rituals. In Islam, this has encouraged such developments as the translation of the Quran into the vernacular, the offering of prayers in indigenous languages, and the simplification of the Haj ritual. A key feature of Muslim reformist movements is humanism, based on a rationalistic critique of the medieval world outlook. More precisely, it represents an affirmation of human dignity, of man’s right to freedom of thought and action and of his multifarious development as an individual.

An important feature of Muslim reform movements has been their anti-colonial bias. The reason for this is historical. These movements first emerged in the nineteenth century when the Muslim world was suffering under various forms of foreign colonial rule. The fight for liberation from the oppression of alien colonial masters soon merged with the struggle against the religious oppression of the orthodox ulama.Two specific trends may be distinguished in Muslim reformist movements: ‘Modernism’ and ‘Revivalism’. Modernism generally implies ‘Europeanisation’ or ‘Westernisation’ and is expressed in the adoption of European/Western standards. This is mostly justified by recourse to the doctrine of ijtihad (systematic original thinking): the argument is that such changes are compatible with Islamic principles and dogmas. In most cases, the reformist approach to Islam is characteristic of the intelligentsia and bourgeoisie who have experienced a European education and had contact with the Western way of life. However, European standards and institutions are often not applicable to local conditions, and are alien to ordinary Muslims. Therefore, even today, modernists mostly represent a tiny minority within their own countries. They are often accused of apostasy by the orthodox, and are distrusted or misunderstood by the population at large.

In the political theory of the modernist reformists the idea of the supremacy of religious law is rejected. Instead, they tend to advocate modern, Western-style legislative practices. They denounce outdated canons and standards, arguing for the revision of fiqb and the recognition of the right to ijtibad for every Muslim, or for a democratically elected legislative body (mailis). They reject the need for a spiritual ‘Vicegerent’ (Caliph); some support instead the call for an elected, secular head of state who has no religious powers.

In the socioeconomic sphere they often interpret Islamic teachings as sanctioning Western-style capitalism, although they try to combine this with concepts of a welfare state and Islamic socialism. In the field of education, Muslim reformists advocate the restructuring of the system, with particular emphasis on the need for the inclusion of modern sciences in the curricula. They are also in favour of the acquisition of modern technology.

The second, more popular trend presents reformist ideas in the form of revival of the ideals of early Islam. The revivalist approach was sometimes rooted in opposition to colonial rule, glorifying Muslim achievements in the past, but it soon acquired a broader intellectual base. Islam is regarded by this group as the absolute, divine truth, and any deviation from the established precepts is considered bida (‘innovation’). They differ from the orthodox in the fact that they do not accept as authoritative the whole range of traditional beliefs and practices that have developed over the centuries among Muslims, but wish instead to go back to the practices of early Islam. They agree with the modernists in opposing blind acceptance of the authority (taqlid) of medieval schools. But the revivalists wish essentially to re-enact the past, whereas the modernist reformists talk of interpretation. Thus, reformist thinkers have either had to discard the traditionalists’ rejection of innovation by advocating the need for ijtibad (‘modernist’ reformism), or, on the contrary, have had to maintain that the modifications they suggest are aimed at ridding Islam of corrupt forms of bida (‘revivalist’ reformism). Reformists have sometimes gravitated towards Westernism, and sometimes drifted towards revivalism.

The various ideological trends, orthodox, modernist and revivalist, should not be taken as reflecting merely religious differences among Muslims. Rather they represent the fundamental contradictions that are to be found in modern and early modern Muslim societies. The actions of the reformist Muslim intelligentsia have shaped the development of political and social thought in their respective countries, but beneath the surface, there has generally been a strong, albeit often silent, orthodox opposition.This has frequently re-emerged in times of stress.

Suggested Citation

Khan, Sarfraz, Muslim Reformist and Political Thought Revivalists, Modernist and Free Will (January 1, 2003). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2766201

Sarfraz Khan (Contact Author)

University of Peshawar - Area Study Centre (Russia,China & Central Asia) ( email )

University of Peshawar, Peshawar, Pakistan
Peshawar, Khyber Pukhtoon Khwa 25120
Pakistan

HOME PAGE: http://www.asc-centralasia.edu.pk/index.html

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
586
PlumX Metrics