14 Sep 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com
Theology And The Thrust Of Modernity
Modernity is rooted in today. Theology is rooted in the days gone by. But man’s world- view is influenced by both. Development of new schools of thought in all ages (modern age, every time, no doubt), rather than sticking on to old schools of thought, are the keys to the challenge of facing the contemporary world. Some resistance from the teachers and staff employed by the old schools of thought should be legitimately expected, but the community should not be a hostage to such vested interests.
The leadership of the community must not lie with madrasa-produced maulvis alone, who were created by the community for a certain routine purpose of maintaining our religious places and institutions. The management of these institutions must not go into the hands of such a class. If educated Muslims do not understand this and finance the products of madrasas to assume leadership positions, appropriate management of change within the community cannot be expected. Doubtless, the change cannot be stopped, but it will be a directionless change and this must be understood by us, educated Muslims.
One tactical plea of this writer is never to overuse the strategic Islamic humility by saying ‘I am not a religious scholar, but…’, because the other man, read the traditional madrasa-turned-out muallim, might readily accept it without the least humility. This sort of bogus idea has been advanced by our traditional Sharai Talim holders that to know one’s religion, one must pass out from a madrasa. Truth is that religion is a much bigger deal and it encompasses all known knowledge of the time. An Asri Talim scholar, who has the required religious inclination, is fully qualified to deliberate on religion in any language which is understood in the milieu where the deliberation is taking place. The sum and substance of his discussion will be appreciated by others based on the merits of his arguments. -- Manzoorul Haque
Theology And The Thrust Of Modernity
By Manzoorul Haque
To my mind modernity appears to be a complex concept because its study throws up paradoxes. When you almost identify a person to be representing modernity, you often find him surprisingly pitted against the changes you had expected him to support. The reason is that an individual is essentially conservative – he is a no-changer in his private life. If an individual is seen stationed at an ‘advanced’ level on the scale of modernity, it is because he has been pushed by the society to that level. I don’t deny the individual role in accepting the push. But the real seat of modernity lies in the society at large. No modern times can ever be the same as the olden golden times, because society is primed to move to newer configurations.
I am constrained to borrow the phrase of Marx by suggesting that the ‘material conditions obtaining in the society’ force all human beings to push the others for a change, while at the same time affirming, that the change in the material conditions of society are planned , executed and effected by God, and it does not happen of its own. This pressure tactic of the society on the individuals has been described variously but the softest description of this phenomenon perhaps is: ‘others always want you to be, what you are not’. Understanding this mechanism will not reverse the phenomenon entirely, because Lord God is the Master of history, but this understanding may help modify the course of the phenomenon on one hand and to the degree the hidden divine scheme permits such modification by the exercise of free human will, and on the other hand, it may make it easier for us to get pushed easily. The alternative to this is to get pushed painfully and without any control on the direction of change.
Modernity as a social phenomenon is thus unrelenting on individuals in the matter of applying pressure, and this has been going on for ‘ages’, which have always remained modern in their times. A stone tablet was found in China dating back three thousand years, with these inscriptions, “the modern generation of young men is so spoilt; that one does not know what will happen to the society in future.”
And of the several areas of the human brain, the one that contains the seat of theology is the most stubborn pocket of human mind. Theology as contained in books is a mere collection of stories; what resides in human mind, is the real theology and so invariably it is at loggerheads with modernity - throwing up challenges before an individual to face the contemporary world.
Islamic theology ‘as residing in the minds of Muslim men’ is under great challenge of modernity because the thrust of modern conditions (material conditions of the Muslim community, no doubt) is a divine phenomenon and it is not easy to resist God. So what is to be done? The catch phrase is ‘as residing in the minds of men’. Can theology as ‘residing in the minds of men’ change and to what extent and in which direction this change is desirable to come to terms with the material conditions of the society? When we discuss these specific questions, different responses emerge from different communities. In the case of Muslims however the situation is uniquely different from any other theology, because the original source of Islamic theology is the holy Quran which has been retained in the pristine form it was revealed to the Prophet (PBUH). This retention is again through a unique institution of ‘hifz’ as is well known.
Does this leave any scope for change? Apparently, it doesn’t - if we presume that Muslims follow nothing but Quran - but logically it does. What is needed to be changed is not the Scripture, but the ‘theology that resides in the minds of men’ and the presence of so many schools of Islamic thought are a conclusive evidence that what resides in the minds of men are substantially different from what is contained in the revealed Scripture.
Change under the pressure of modernity is therefore not un-available to Muslims. Only proper understanding of the mechanism is needed, which to my mind is the equivalent of the correct use of semantics while analyzing the community situation, and the formulation of appropriate responses to various issues.
Modernity is rooted in today. Theology is rooted in the days gone by. But man’s world- view is influenced by both. Development of new schools of thought in all ages (modern age, every time, no doubt), rather than sticking on to old schools of thought, are the keys to the challenge of facing the contemporary world. Some resistance from the teachers and staff employed by the old schools of thought should be legitimately expected, but the community should not be a hostage to such vested interests.
The leadership of the community must not lie with madrasa-produced maulvis alone, who were created by the community for a certain routine purpose of maintaining our religious places and institutions. The management of these institutions must not go into the hands of such a class. If educated Muslims do not understand this and finance the products of madrasas to assume leadership positions, appropriate management of change within the community cannot be expected. Doubtless, the change cannot be stopped, but it will be a directionless change and this must be understood by us, educated Muslims.
One tactical plea of this writer is never to overuse the strategic Islamic humility by saying ‘I am not a religious scholar, but…’, because the other man, read the traditional madrasa-turned-out muallim, might readily accept it without the least humility. This sort of bogus idea has been advanced by our traditional Sharai Talim holders that to know one’s religion, one must pass out from a madrasa. Truth is that religion is a much bigger deal and it encompasses all known knowledge of the time. An Asri Talim scholar, who has the required religious inclination, is fully qualified to deliberate on religion in any language which is understood in the milieu where the deliberation is taking place. The sum and substance of his discussion will be appreciated by others based on the merits of his arguments. Sure enough when a presenter, merely to buttress his arguments (and not as part of religious ritual, which stands on a different footing), reads aloud some Arabic verses from the holy Quran, knowing very well that the language is not understood in the majlis; he exhibits a clear indication of the lack of his conviction in his own arguments. Can such beings guide us through the challenges of modernity in the realm of theology?
So where do these analyses take us to? Well, the person who accepts modernity as a phenomenon is more amenable to changes and he is thus more modern than the other who does not. But there is no one, who is hundred per cent modern, just as there can be no one who is hundred percent not. Between a modern and a conservative there is a difference of the degree. But modernity on the other hand is a social phenomenon, having its roots in the changing material conditions of society and the inevitable and continuous collective push over an individual. This is according to divine plan and is not an individual trait in the sense of being part of human nature. The acceptance of modernity by an individual can be cultivated because it is cultivable. By accepting modernity we only abide by the divine writ. There is another implication too. Modernity not being an individual trait cannot and need not be the same for all individuals. This is one mistake of presumption that has been repeated far too many times. Wearing of short-skirt and hot pant does not signify modernity just as the black suit, red tie and French beard do not guarantee modernity of a man. I would rather consider Mr. Wahiduddin Khan as the most modern Muslim (beard can always grow on a man if he decides not to shave, and whitening is a process of aging) and have deliberately not called him a Maulana because the Maulana baradri of India does not consider him one, and so let it be.
A practical corollary of this analysis should be to see Talim (education) as one continuous spectrum, and Sharai Talim just occupying one small segment of that spectrum. Some people have started attacking the madrasa education completely. But we do need some muallims in the society to teach our children Arabic alphabets in order to be able to read the holy Quran which is a ritual for us and of course to teach namaz too to our children. We also need them to answer to the small questions of housewives, relating to ‘what to do and what not to do?’ for let’s say good omen. What I mean is they have a job to do and let them be confined to their jobs. But educated Muslims repeating before them ‘I am not a religious scholar, but…’, is a bad cultural practice that has given these gentlemen a role larger than life and they have started discoursing on the philosophy of Islam without understanding the P of it. This way Islam has been straight-jacketed ideologically.
The downside of this cultural practice is this. A highly educated, believing and practicing Muslim, with grasp of quantum mechanics, particle physics, structure of genes, intricacies of international law etc is considered not fit enough to expound on his own beliefs, because apparently he did not get time enough to cram a few verses in Arabic to spew those at the appropriate time (that is when there should be nobody to understand the verses and verify their authenticity). But then this is the fault of the educated Muslims to abdicate their responsibility and this has been the undoing of the Muslim civilization. Now we see these rustics having involved us Muslims in the inter-sect rivalries of which a person like me has not the remotest idea, which is my way of saying that I do not believe in any of these sects and I completely reject sectarian divisions based on flimsy issues. Yes if there is a genuine theological dispute, there are ways of handling it by sitting together and sorting out and always parting with a handshake. It goes without saying that only the educated ones can handle this task whose grasp is of principles and not of prejudices.
All these discussions slowly bring us to the ultimate field of action. What are the areas that need to be addressed, what is the leeway possible with the clear conscience of a believer, and how much of consensus is possible on each one of the issues facing the Muslim community as a whole? I am cursorily identifying the areas in which modernity is confronting the theology that we hold in our minds. The challenge is to face questions emerging in these areas and seek a consensus on the answers to those questions: Handling of criminal laws by the State, regulation of sexual conduct, importance of contract including marriage, importance of filial bond including care of the old, personal wealth vis-à-vis social productivity, morality in the use of authority, ecology and international relations including war laws. There can be some more broad heads as well.
Based in Patna, India, Manzoorul Haque is a regular commentator on www.NewAgeIslam.com (manhaq@yahoo.com).
URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIjtihadRethinkingIslam_1.aspx?ArticleID=3429
10:04 PM
Moderate Islamist here
0 comments:
Post a Comment