Strategy to Doctor Islam | Building Moderate Muslim Networks

By Omar Javaid

The famous American think tank RAND (www.rang.org), which seems to have immense influence on global policy framework of the so called developed world, has published a few reports on how to restructure Muslim societies. The notable one is ‘Building Moderate MuslimNetwork’. This report outlines a comprehensive strategy on how to use the Cold War experience to discredit the traditional orthodox interpretation of Islam, and popularize an interpretation which is compatible with modern western ideological framework. 

The phrase ‘War of Ideas’ has been explicitly used for this clash in this report. As the title suggests the idea is to build network of so called ‘Moderate Muslims’ and make them role models for the rest of the public to follow. These ‘Moderate Muslims’ are the ones who believe in Islamic Liberalism or an interpretation of Islam compatible with Liberal philosophical discourse. This would mean that those intellectual, academics, thinkers, politicians, public figures, celebrities, even so called religious scholars who endorse such an interpretation of Islam would be provided with various plate forms and mediums to connect and influence the remaining population through their ideals, beliefs, world view, values, life style, etc, while rendering the traditional and orthodox Muslims as obsolete and irrelevant.

The report suggests identifying Moderate circles among Muslim world and financially sponsoring them for the said objective. Just like millions of dollars were provided during Cold War era to various radio channels, newspapers, schools, universities, etc. to organize academic conferences, print and broadcast content which endorse anti communist ideas, a similar strategy is proposed (which is perhaps already being executed) to accomplish the objective of building moderate Muslim network. The private electronic media, NGOs, with the help of civil society, modern schooling network and academia are the places where this battle is going to be fought, in fact it already is.

If the mission is accomplished then we would see a so called liberal brand of Islam being popularized among Muslim world. The efforts are already under way. What is wrong with it really? How does it influence the social fabric of Muslim society? How it influence the beliefs and lifestyle of generations of come? And the most crucial question from perspective of Islamic belief system: will Allah s.w.t forgive us for living our lives under a liberal pretext? These are some of questions which require urgent attention from the concern circles. This post is a brief attempt in this context.

Liberalism?

Liberalism is inherently a political idea which has its unique concept of socioeconomic and political justice. John Rawls is one of leading liberal thinkers of this century whose work reestablished the credibility of liberal discourse which was very much lost in a post world war scenario. Amertya Sen is another one, who is also a Nobel Laureate. Both of their work, despite having significant differences, explicitly denies using religious scriptures, and belief in hereafter or a Divine being to be incorporated in the liberal framework of justice; and rather propose using human rationality to be the fundamental criterion of determining what’s good or bad, right or wrong, just or unjust, moral or immoral etc. 

Just to explain more, liberalism is deontologist in nature, means a person sitting with a prostitute in night club and a person teaching interpretation of Quran have equal moral worth, and none of them would be considered superior to the other by any means. For example it would be preposterous for the government to provide stipend to the teacher or student of Quran and ignore rather punish the adulterer.

Furthermore in a liberal atmosphere, it is again outrageous to stop anyone, even your children and spouse, from doing anything against ones belief, like drinking alcohol, gambling, fornication, leaving children at day care or parents at old homes (when one can afford to spend time with them), take interest on the amount loaned, having relationship with na-mehram (girl friend/boy friend thing), listening to music, or even changing ones religion etc. It is perhaps the state’s responsibility to stop people from doing anything with a rationalistic justification only; this justification must be formulated through the intensive process of public debate done by a population who believes in rationalism and is not superstitious aka religion (democracy). The fundamental principle of liberalism as explained by various political thinkers in western history is as follows:

“‘a State of perfect Freedom to order their Actions…as they think fit…without asking leave, or depending on the Will of any other Man’ (Locke, 1960 [1689]: 287). Mill too argued that ‘the burden of proof is supposed to be with those who are against liberty; who contend for any restriction or prohibition…. The a priori assumption is in favour of freedom…’ (1963, vol. 21: 262). Recent liberal thinkers such as Joel Feinberg (1984: 9), Stanley Benn (1988: 87) and John Rawls (2001: 44, 112) agree. This might be called the Fundamental Liberal Principle (Gaus, 1996: 162-166).” (source: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/liberalism/ accessed on 1^st March 2014, see bibliography on this link for complete references of citations mentioned above)

Liberal Islam?

Now how would we justify such an inherently incoherent and dichotomous term i.e. ‘Liberal Islam’. In Islam the a-priori assumption is: mankind is bound to submit to a Divine Being, Who can’t be seen or experienced in the physical world, Who would allow things and but also restrict as well, without providing any rationalistic justification. Furthermore Islam requires Muslims to stop the un-Islamic stuff from occurring around them, either by hand, or by verbal persuasion, or at least consider it wrong in his heart (if stopping by any means isn’t possible), and even if he or she doesn't do that as well, then he or she would be in trouble on the day of judgment.

There is a famous hadith which narrates a story of a person who was asked to be punished by Allah s.w.t even before his fellow villagers, as despite being very punctual about ritualistic worship he never intervened in various acts of injustice and immorality, which were rampant in his city or village. Surah Al Asar, also explicitly declares that those who don't save others (starting from their immediate  family members, relatives, friends, neighbors, so on and so forth) from indulging in sinful behavior, are themselves doomed.

It is a little surprise that a so called Muslims who would want to qualify as a liberal as well, would eventually have to stop doing the above, or act in a way which would seriously jeopardize their chances of being forgiven on the day of judgment and avoid being thrown into hell fire. The term ‘Islamic Liberal’ therefore is nothing but an oxymoron. 

Epistemology of Liberalism 

The problem is undoubtedly epidemiological in nature. The liberal discourse also accepts the intervention of a political authority to restrict liberty of individuals; however this restriction requires a justification which needs to be rationalistic and not based on some religious authority. Additionally this restriction has to be for the sake of preserving liberty on a collective or macro level. The fear of punishment for example will allow people to let everyone enjoy the principle of liberty and will not cross the boundaries of other liberals. 

Islam also allows corrosive powers to authority however this power is to be regulated in the light of shariah whose foundation explicitly claims to be meta-rational (beyond rationality) or Divine, brought down to Prophet Muhammad s.a.w through the process of revelation. This obviously doesn't fit in the scientific paradigm, which filter out any phenomenon which can’t be explained rationally and be verified through independent scientific experimentation. So a scientific explanation would say that Prophet Muhammad s.a.w came up with Quran all by himself (naozubillah).  

No one will directly say this in the public discourse in Muslim societies particularly. The process starts with gradually seeking rational and scientific explanation of each and every injunction of Quran and Sunnah. Like daily prayers, fasting in ramazan, and doing wudu is explained in context of having various health benefits these days. 

This might not be incorrect, however this is not their primary objective from an Islamic perspective; the objective is rather to seek pleasure of Allah s.w.t. However when logical, rationalistic and scientific interpretations are considered supreme then gradually such an approach is used even to explain the phenomenon of revelation (wahi), concept of akhirah, heaven and hell etc. which obviously can’t be explained by a method which believes that ‘anything which cannot be physically experience doesn't exists’. 

At this stage either the belief in scientific method is rejected or the belief in the concept of revelation, akhirah and ultimately in the Divine Being is distorted or even shattered. This process might take a couple of generation to complete. Our previous generation embraced the scientific rationality, a small minority in our present generation has now begun to even questioning that Quran is the word of God or not, and population of such people is only expected to increase if the trend continuous.

The Modern Scholars

The modern world has three fundamental features: a liberal democratic system, a free market economy and a scientific & rationalistic method of understanding the world from a positivist and a normative perspective. The liberal Islam needs to fit in between this triad. 

It is ironic to note that various scholars of Islam are endorsing these features of modern secular world and showing their compatibility with Islam. Dr. Zakir Naik endorses scientific rationality, Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri, Javed Ahmed Ghamdi, Khalid Zahir etc. endorse democracy. The top scholars of deoband school in Pakistan have also begin to endorse free market economy and democracy. 

Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam and Jamat-e-Islami has already gone far enough to practically endorse the democratic framework such that they have reached a a point of no return. This is perhaps enough to create a ground conducive enough for the cultivation of liberal brand of Islam, and the harvesting would be done by various secular & liberal intellectuals with the help of media, schools operated by various foreign funded NGOs and the civil society; perhaps this harvesting already going on since a while.

War of Ideas: The Gazalian Strategy

This is a ‘war of ideas’ as referred by RAND itself, where the pen is mightier than the sword. However the pen holders in the Muslim world don’t seem to realize their responsibility. The last known personality was Allama Iqbal, and to some extent Abu Ala Moududi who extensively contributed in this context. To some extent presently the task is taken up by people like Orya Maqbool Jan, Shahnawaz Farooqi etc. however these two gentlemen are far behind in terms of their contribution as compare to past examples. 

The best example we have in the past is of Imam Ghazali r.a. who took up the challenge to intellectually counter the Mutazilaits who were corrupting the Islamic belief system through Greek Philosophy. Imam Ghazali r.a. wrote Tahafatul Falasafa to destroy their influence for once and for all. This proves that all it takes is just one book, but in at a place where the vast majority is either illiterate, or despite being literate doesn't want to read, the task at hand become much more difficult. 

The medium of Madresah and Mosques where almost every Pakistani goes every week to attend the Friday prayers can be an effective medium, only if the top ulema-e-kiram decide to educate their disciples to counter the same. However looking at the contemporary trends among traditional orthodox circles, such a proposition seems quite far fetched.

Author is an academic researcher and a student of Philosophy and Economics