You are on page 1of 20

The Roots of Liberal Islam Thought1

Introduction As the twentieth century came to a close, the Islamic ummah was confronted with novel and phenomenal ideas concerning the religion. The people who described themselves as representing a certain Liberal Islam raised controversial issues and forwarded daring ideas that would unsettle the Islamic world. This movement has been especially popular in Indonesia. Not many realized however that the movement carried a worldwide influence that included both Islamic as well as non-Islamic countries such as Egypt, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, America, France, Canada, Holland, Malaysia, Turkey, Jordan, Sudan, Syria, Morocco, Tunisia, Lebanon, Algeria, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, etc.2 Fundamentally, the initiatives of Liberal Islam amounts to a contemporary effort to resuscitate Islamic modernism in the 21 st century, and it has exerted its influence over various circles of Muslim intellectuals since the 19th century. The objective of this paper is to examine and elucidate the ideological roots of the Liberal Islam movement, and to survey new developments in this trend of thought which has given rise to so much debate and argumentation in contemporary intellectual discourses. Our thesis is that Liberal Islam is related to and influenced by the forces of secularism, orientalism, postmodernism, and modernist activism within Islam. Modernism in the West, Islamic Modernism and Liberal Islam Islamic modernism is closely allied to Western modernism. It is important to understand modernist thought and its emergence in the West prior to examining Islamic modernism which notably came into being as a consequence of the interactions between the Islamic world and Western civilization. Recall that the Islamic ummah had been colonized and inundated by ideas and cultural elements foreign to their previous experience since the 16th and 17th centuries. The 18th and 19th centuries witnessed reactionary responses from the Muslims ranging between acceptance and rejection. Traditionalists were more inclined to oppose and alienate themselves from all forms of westernization. The modernist camp during those periods however was composed of largely western-educated individuals who perceived Western civilization as nurturing every good; it would be a great loss to the Muslims, indeed a travesty of reason if the ummah did not step forward to accept those goods. Modernism in the West was inspired by the humanist-enlightenment philosophy which has exerted its dominance over the minds of the greater section of Western society and their major intellectuals. Philosophers such as Rene Descartes (1592-1650), John Locke (1632-1704) Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), David Hume (1711-1776), Auguste Comte (1798-1857), Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), J.S. Mill (1806-1873), Nietzsche (1844-1900) were among those who emphasized rationalism and encouraged the liberalization of the human individual from tradition and dogma.

Generally, the modern West has been a gratified champion of the rational faculty. Three major premises are discernible in the writings of the modernist thinkers just mentioned : Firstly, that God does not exist or His existence is doubtful (atheism and agnosticism). Secondly, that the universe exists mechanistically in accordance with its own laws (immanentism). Thirdly, that the rational mind and the human senses in themselves are sufficient for a proper understanding about phenomenal creation (humanism and rationalism). Modernism attained maturity with the emergence of the positivism of Auguste Comte (1798-1857) and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). This intellectual progress gained momentum with the existential philosophy of Sartre (1905-1980) and the logical-positivism of the thinkers known as the Vienna Circle. Today, the humanist movement is spearheaded by the Council for Secular Humanism for whom secular humanism means : Ways of thinking and behaving with the objective of bringing about the best for humankind through the rejection of all religious beliefs and powers outside the fold of creation. Secular humanism emphasizes human rationality, scientific investigation, individual freedom and responsibility, human values and compassion, together with the need for tolerance and cooperation. 3 Initially, Islamic modernism constituted a program of reformation aimed at combating retarding imitative tendencies (taqlid). Muhammad Abduh, who is seen as the foremost Islamic modernist desired mostly to reform education so as to liberate the ummah from backwardness and rigidity, but it later transformed into an ideology which fixed rationalism as the principle in every method it adopted. Orientalists understand the aggregation of Islamic modernists as those who promote liberalism within Islam and who advocate rational interpretations of the Quran. 4 The rise of modernism in Islam is the result of an unbalanced encounter or confrontation between the Islamic world and the West. The 400year old colonization of the Islamic peoples has to a greater or lesser degree ushered an inferiority-complex among Muslims as they continue to negotiate with a more sophisticated and versatile culture. It needs to be pointed out that Islamic modernism is not a unique and unambiguous movement but instead encompasses several currents of thought which accord with the rather fuzzy concept termed as modernism. The modernist movement underwent a transformation with the emergence of Fazlur Rahman (19191988) who was responsible for outlining the framework of neomodernism in the early 80s. Furthermore, individuals with private interests have taken advantage of his initiatives to justify the launching of bolder, more liberal and radical ideas.5 It is this aggregation of individuals therefore that gives substance to what is known as Liberal Islam.6 Islamic modernism adopted the spirit of renewal and reformation from a model of modernization that had succeeded in transforming Western society. In the West modernism paved the way to enlightenment and induced the industrial revolution which eventually turned the West into advanced

nations and leaders in the world. Acutely conscious of the decline and backwardness of their own countries, the Islamic modernist groups studied the factors responsible for Western progress, and concluded that Islamic nations should adopt an open attitude towards Western civilization in order to master Western science and consequently to catch up with their level of development. This open-minded spirit is founded on the conviction that knowledge is qualitatively neutral or value-free, uncolored by the ideology of its progenitors, but rather dependent on the understanding of its practitioners to apply scientific knowledge in the manner they see fit. When it seemed evident that such science had succeeded in bringing progress to western societies, it was believed that it would equally bring the same results if those sciences were transferred to Islamic societies. 7 The Influence of Secularism on Liberal Islam What we have said about secular humanism implies the existence of a dichotomy between religion and science, between morality and individual freedom, and also between Gods injunctions and human values. Apart from some of its apparently sound ideas this school of thought also promulgates negative ideas for the adherent of Islam : the focus on rationalism, the repudiation of religion and the liberty of the individual to opine and judge in every (religious) issue. Therefore, these ideas should be subjected to a comprehensive evaluation by means of explicating modernism from two differing perspectives, namely that of the West and Islam. Rene Guenon, the French writer who took up residence in Egypt stated that modernism is essentially the repudiation of all things divine, transcendent and supernatural. It is humanisms rejection of tradition and authority in deference to the revered faculty of ratiocination and to the natural sciences. It was conceived on the basic premise that the faculties of the human individual represent the only source of meaning and truth.8 It may be surmised that Western humanism has greatly shaped the framework of Islamic modernism. In explaining the roots of Islamic liberalism Leonard Binder states that rational argumentation comprises the prime underpinning of the Liberal Islam camp.9 Rationalism, in the sense of aggrandizing rational intelligence as the criterion in evaluating the foundational elements of the Western cultural tradition, has been adopted by the modernists and the Muslim liberals. In defining Islamic modernism Charles Kurzman, another liberal Islamic theorist wrote in his book Modernist Islam that the modernistic individual does not passively accept the modern values of the West but is rather an active proponent of that modernity which derives from rationalism, science, constitutionalism and the equality of human beings. 10 For Kurzman, the role of the modernist does not merely rest on an informal search for similarities between the values of modernity and the values espoused by Islam. 11 More than that, a modernist must work to develop robust theories that would prove the existence of such similarities and proprieties. 12 This is clearly a false preconception in their understanding

of Islam since the deliberate convergence of these modern values with the Islamic teachings is sought for in an arbitrary and biased manner. It is achieved by selectively choosing traditional Islamic narratives and religious texts which seem to enshrine the values of the West. In contradiction to this, these people are quite sympathetic and uncritical with respect to their own Western traditions. From the writings of the liberal theorists it is evident that the themes of Liberal Islam differ little from the modernists of Islam. Among these themes are democracy, championing the rights of women, freedom of expression and the future advancement of humankind. The things that they highlight gives the impression that no rational person would reject their cause. Although these issues may appear fresh and engaging they are yet not the prime concerns of Islamic communities. In fact, the primary topics of contention of this movement are the repudiation of the Shariah, religious pluralism, freedom of religious interpretation (ijtihad), the rejection of religious authority and the employment of hermeneutics methodology. Along with that, the liberalist movement also harbours an insidious desire to monopolize the cause of humanity, even when the mission of the Islamic religion itself from its very inception has been to promote the cause of humanity, to illuminate and free mankind from degeneration. 13 The view that it is necessary to appropriate Islam to the values of the West and to integrate revelation (wahyu) with modernism is based on the supposition that the two are compatible and can be harmonized. On this presumption it appears not too difficult a task to mutually connect these two value systems. But is this a correct evaluation? Is there not a conflict of values and principles between the worldview of Islam and that of the West? Islamic thinkers such as Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas asserts that Islam possesses its very own worldview which differs markedly from the worldview of the West. The Western worldview values the philosophies of humanism, rationalism and secularism as the foundation of its civilization, 14 ideologies which are alien to the teachings of Islam and are thus dispensable. Ismail al-Faruqi observed that Western humanism today is heavily textured by the Graeco-Roman humanism which was characterized by an unwarranted exaltation of human dignity. It represents a reaction to the Christian (Church) tradition which has disputably been guilty of impoverishing human values. In contrast to that, by way of its revolutionary concepts such as tauhid and the khalifah, Islam has always been concerned to raise the dignity of human beings. Al-Faruqi concluded that humanistic concerns are native to and unsurpassed in Islam. 15 Owing to the strong influences of secularism and humanism in Western civilization al-Attas recommends that the western sciences should be Islamicized before they are introduced into the ranks of the Islamic community. This program anticipates the emergence of dilemmas and psychological crises among the Muslims, and wrong conceptual dichotomies, all of which will cause confusion, apathy and disintegration within the ummah.

To gauge the extent to which secular humanism and postmodernism has exerted its influence on the thinking of Liberal Islam, we need to inspect the themes raised by the ideologues of this movement, such as Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd (b. 1943), Muhammad Said al-Ashmawi (b. 1932), Muhammed Arkoun (b. 1928), Abdullahi Ahmed al-Naiim (b.1946) and Asghar Ali Engineer (b.1939). Fazlur Rahman thought that secularism was the alternative to being embroiled by conservatism since the progressive rise of secularism was impelled by the resolute domination of conservatism. Rahman also proposed that modern secularism should accomodate the sources of Islam.16 Indeed for him, the act of comparing the law of Allah to human laws is a form of secularism in itself since, in his view, what are commonly conceived as divine statutes are really but the legal decisions of human scholars. More boldly, Abu Zayd has claimed that Islam is a secular religion (al-din al-ilmaani) and that secularism (ilmaaniyyah) which he says originates from the word ilm, or knowledge is the only way to advance the Islamic peoples and to deliver them from antiquated thought.17 As for Muhammad Arkoun, he is very much influenced by postmodernist thinking 18especially the ideas of Jacques Derrida and Paul Ricouer. Deconstruction and the stance of denying any valid truth-claims chief characteristics of postmodernism are clearly evident in Arkouns writings. Robert D. Lee who wrote the introduction to Arkouns Rethinking Islam states that for Arkoun all currents of thought and approaches must be placed abreast of one another : In the world that Arkoun proposes there will be no margins and no center, no marginalized groups and no dominant ones, no inferior beliefs and no superior, truth-producing logic.19 Muhammad Said Ashmawi, like his ideologue predecessors Ali Abd al-Razaiq, Wahid Rafat and Faraj Fawdah, challenges the completeness of the teachings of Islam (shumuliyyat al-Islam). For him, political issues are unconnected with religious beliefs. He is adamantly against the implementation of the Islamic Shariah for he believes that this will provide political domination to the religious authorities thus leading the way towards a theocratic state. 20 Asghar Ali Engineer writes in his book The Islamic State that Islamic jurisprudence represents the inventions of the fuqaha or doctors of the law, which is precisely why the administration of Islamic Shariah is equivalent to theocratic rule.21 Therefore, he fully endorses secular rule instead. He writes : Secularism is highly necessary if India is to survive as a nation. But apart from survival of Indian nationalism and Indian unity, secularism is necessary for modern democratic polity. And this need for secular polity becomes much greater if the country happens to be as diverse and plural as India. Secularism is a great need for democratic pluralism . . .The most orthodox Muslim Ulama of the Deobandi school preferred secular India to a Muslim homeland or theocratic Pakistan. They outright rejected the idea of Pakistan

when it was mooted by Jinnah. They denounced a two-nation theory on the basis of religion.22 Radwan Masmoudi, president of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) an influential Islamic institution in America - recently expressed his view that Liberal Islam champions responsible governance, individual liberties, and basic human rights. According to him this is why Liberal Islam rightly represents the mainstream view of the Islamic world, 23 an unfounded personal opinion which is open to disputation because liberals often have hidden agendas behind the issues they propose. Actually, it would be more accurate to characterize those who support the issues just mentioned as modernists instead of liberals. Masmoudi includes under the banner of Liberal Islam thinkers such as Muhammad Salim al-Awwa, Anwar Ibrahim and Fathi Osman who are not categorized by Kurzman as such. Indeed, there are no indications in their writings which would link them with Liberal Islam. The other thinkers quoted such as Tariq al-Bishri and Abdulaziz Sachedina are better known as modernists. Some of us may wonder why personalities such as Muhammad Iqbal, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Muhammad Natsir, Rashid Ghannouchi and Anwar Ibrahim should be called intellectuals and supporters of Liberal Islam? 24 Whether this is a genuine intellectual mistake or not, the intention appears to be to take advantage of their popularity to appeal to the Islamic community since these personalities have large followings. Ironically, Kurzman himself has been refuted by other Western scholars, the majority of whom regard alQaradawi as a fundamentalist. Dualism and Dichotomy Dualism is the main characteristic of secular thinking. Secularism dichotomizes between religion and science, revelation and reason, democracy and theocracy, etc. We may begin to understand this phenomenon if we recall the protracted turmoil that had once occurred between the church clergy and the philosophers and scientists of the West. In the context of the experience of the West, the emergence and legitimization of dichotomous thinking is understandable, but what concerns us is whether it is justifiable in Islam. The Liberal Islam movement considers itself as an alternative means of unifying or merging religion or faith with reason.25 The liberals perceive the majority of the adherents of Islam to be in the mould of traditional conservatism whose rigidity restricts the intelligence from performing its role as the instrument of religious interpretation. They further accuse the fundamentalist camp of working to monopolize the discourse of Islam 26 and will go so far as to label as unislamic any viewpoint which does not conform to their framework of comprehension. If we probed into the history of Islamic thought and jurisprudence, we would find the unification of religion with reason to be embodied in the tradition of Islam. A great number of verses from the Quran and the Hadith of

the Messenger of Allah call attention to the important role of reason. 27 Certainly, the understanding and behaviour of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and his Companions with respect to the various Quranic verses show that they never relegated the role of rationality. The intellect functions effectively to decipher religious injunctions and to infer the best means of meeting its requirements. The imams of the madhhabs first perceived the concepts and then introduced terms for them such as qiyas, istihsan, masalih al-mursalah and maqasid al-Shariah which constitute the sources of Islamic jurisprudence and are recognized as part of the Islamic tradition. If a number of religious scholars in the present times, portray a narrow-minded attitude or an unsophisticated frame of mind it in no way implies that tradition is the culprit. Islamic teachings warrant and optimize the use of reason within the parameters of the Shariah, which explains why Literal Islam as opposed to Liberal Islam have never been part of the conception of the religion. We note the inclination of Liberal Islam to view religion and reason as two separate and fully autonomous entities. Religion or the Shariah, due to its rather limited number of source-texts, is held to be operational over the general concerns of religion and functions to provide its common values and objectives. Reason in contrast, operates over a wider more pragmatic horizon and is deemed to regulate the relative importance of religion to the contemporary world. This magnification of rationality on the part of the modernists and the liberals in Islam contradicts the position of the ulama and scholars of religion whose criterion for the exercise of ratiocination is that it must not contravene the textual meanings of the Quran and the Sunnah. In the view of the proponents of Liberal Islam, if and when there arises a contradiction between the textual meanings of the Quran and human reason, resort must be made to hermeneutical methods to resolve the issue to avoid being bogged down by literal interpretations of the Shariah. For that matter, the sources of revelation must be subjected to rational evaluation in order to be acceptable and legitimate. Commensurate with such a methodology and pattern of reasoning, not a few liberals consider the values of the Shariah to be universal values which are also inherent to Western civilization, indeed universal to all the worlds religions. Freedom of Religious Interpretation and the Repudiation of Religious Authority Liberal and Modernist Islamists reject religious authority.28 In the discourse of Liberal Islam precedence is given to the freedom of individual opinion with regard to any religious matters.29 This is the position of relativism which is to hold that truth is relative and therefore cannot be claimed by any party. The repudiation of religious authority is vital so as to guarantee free opinion and the liberty to exercise ijtihad - it is only thus that Liberal Islam may be productive. Based on this notion, Liberal Islamists often reference OrientalistChristian writings, because for them, the Orentalists represent critical authority characterized by rational and versatile scholarship.

Islam underscores the great importance of authority in the pursuit of knowledge. Numerous verses of the Quran and Hadith instruct the adherents of Islam to respect scholars and to learn the scientific disciplines. 30 The religion lays down strict criteria for teaching qualifications and counsels students to exercise discretion when seeking the right teacher. To not heed these criteria is to court religious deviation. Every discipline has its own authority. One who seeks to increase his knowledge whether in medicine, engineering or any other field must consult and learn from the authority or specialist in that particular field. This surely applies to the religion of Islam as well. Shariah, aqidah, tafsir and hadith are specialized disciplines of Islamic knowledge which call upon the resources of our time, energy, and capacity to learn and master them, and this is not any less than what it takes to master medical or scientific knowledge, for instance. Indeed, of the thousands who strive to acquire proficiency in the Islamic sciences only a handful can be deemed to have attained expertise in their fields and can thus function as legitimate authorities. Liberal Islam perceives religious authority to be a negative form of religious authoritarianism. According to them, the religious ulama monopolize truth and tend to judge others who do not agree with their viewpoints to be non-Islamic and deviant etc. This confused evaluation is either the result of misunderstanding or an intentional distortion of the facts. What is certain is that the existence of authority in knowledge does not necessarily imply the existence of an hierarchical structure for the Islamic religion has never ordained its scholars as representatives of God nor approved of Muslim rulers as deputies of God, as has happened in the Christian tradition and the rule of the Church during the Dark Ages. In Islam, a scholars interpretation of religious sources does not attain to absolute truth. His viewpoint is acceptable if it evidently accords with the objectives of the Shariah and his veracity is subjected to the consensual scrutiny of other acknowledged scholars. In the knowledge tradition of Islam we recognize the key concept known as the majority viewpoint (qawl al-jumhur) and the consensus of Muslim scholars (ijma). To reject religious authority is to give unconditional freedom to the upholders of Liberal Islam to practice their private interpretations of religion. Individuals such as Kurzman will coin impressive idioms like freedom of thought and freedom of religious interpretation with regards to religious texts. Based on these presumptions the liberals conceive the need for the Islamic community to augment the existing interpretive sciences which are supposedly incommensurate with the modern times - with a hermeneutical approach to the Quran. Among the proponents of Liberal Islam who promote hermeneutics today is Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd, whose book Mafhum al-Nas 31 has received considerable opposition from Muslim scholars.32 The Idea of Religious Pluralism Religious pluralism was introduced into the Western world by W. C. Smith under the rubric of a universal theology of religion. This idea was subsequently elaborated by John Hick and Hans Kung and it received

extraordinary patronage around the world prior to its introduction into the sphere of Islam.33 Debate over the topic of religious pluralism in Indonesia and Malaysia has lately been rather heated. The modernist movement and the liberal Islamists profess religious pluralism and circulate it widely with their publications and public seminars. Among their writers are Budhy Munawar Rachman with his book entitled Pluralist Islam : A Discourse on the Equality of the Believers of Various Faiths34 (Islam Pluralis : Wacana Kesetaraan Kaum Beriman) and Alwi Shihab the writer of Inclusive Islam : Towards An Open Attitude in Religiosity (Islam Inklusif : Menuju Sikap Terbuka dalam Beragama). Budhy asserts a unity of function in the religions of the world, which is to promulgate an awareness of the perennial value of basic human rights. In his view, this unity of function is urgently pertinent to society since there exists a discordance between the counsels of the religions and the reality of society. 35 Perennial philosophy and the concept of a perennial religion is fully attributed to the transcendant unity of religions conceived by Fritjof Schuon. Budhy says :
As such it is called perennial religion signifying that there is an underlying reality common to every religious manifestation - in the terminology of the Sufis this is popularly known as the religion of the heart, whatever form the external dressing may assume. As Ramakrishna, the saint and philosopher of India of the 19th century once put it : God has created the various religions for the requirements of their various followers, the various ages and the various circumstances. Every teaching is a path. Verily, a man shall reach God by whatever path he takes as along as he traverses it in full devotion. There are therefore many approaches to God. In Islam, the way is symbolized by the terms shariat and tariqat. Shariat constitutes the exoteric laws that will guide man towards God, while tariqat is the path of the traveler into the presence of his Lord by means of inner purification and the elimination of blameworthy human traits.36

The question here is why did Budhy select Sri Ramakrishna as his reference in the topic of religiosity. Hindu religionists probably experience no difficulties in accepting the validity of all other religions since it is itself in disarray and thus incapable of demonstrating the truth and falsehood of other religious creeds. Furthermore, while it is true that all religions in some way do aspire to bring their adherents closer to God, Islam reminds us that in order to arrive at the destination it is the authentic path that must be taken, that one is safeguarded from deviation. Moreover, Budhys resort to the use of Sufi terminology to authenticate religious pluralism is altogether unwarranted since he employs them with other non-traditional contextual meanings. In their writings, Budhy Munawar-Rachman and Alwi Shihab usually affirm the vital importance of religious pluralism in attaining harmonious religious living. The prime qualification of a pluralist is to strive to avert an exclusivistic mentality and never claim total truth for his own religion. Only

thus can there be any successful initiatives towards religious tolerance and dialogue.37 Here one senses the presence of an a priori bias among the ranks of the Liberals in their conjecture that all strife occurring between religions is absolutely due to the mentality of religious exclusivism. Alwi denies that the conventions of sacred law (shariah) sent down to Prophet Muhammad (saw) has superseded all the previous canons of divine regulations. He also thinks that the Quranic verse often quoted and professed in support of the exclusiveness of Islam - Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him. - should rightly be understood as this matter (Islam) is not meant for the Muslims only but for everyone who believes in God throughout the history of humankind.38 Alwis rationale is that since Islamic faith is to surrender the self, any individual who ably responds to the call of faith and submits his soul to the will of God is thereby included as one who has surrendered his self, and this is the intended meaning of the verse just quoted. In reality, the ensuing confusion is the result of conjecturing that truth has no absolute sense and that it is unattainable by any one, hence also the denial of the truth-claims of everyone else. This relativism is exactly the core of philosophical religious pluralism. Several Western as well as Islamic philosophers are responsible for nurturing this idea, among whom are Frithjof Schuon and Seyyed Hossein Nasr 39who proposed the idea of a transcendant unity of religions, particularly emphasizing the oneness of the Abrahamic faiths. Perceiving the dangerous implications of this conception of transcendant unity of the religions, Al-Attas has responded succinctly to the arguments advanced for it. 40He has demonstrated that none of its stated proofs have displaced the reality of Islam being the true religion since all other belief systems have deviated in some respect or another from the truth. The following is an example of Al-Attas engaging arguments concerning the confused idea of the unity of religions at the level of transcendence : They assume that the universality and transcendence of esotericism validates their theory, which they discovered after having acquainted themselves with the metaphysics of Islam; in their understanding of this metaphysics of the transcendant unity of existence, they further assume that the transcendant unity of religions is already implied. There is grave error in all their assumptions, and the phrase transcendant unity of religions is misleading and perhaps meant to be so for motives other than truth. Their claim to belief in the transcendant unity of religions is something suggested to them inductively by the imagination and is derived from intellectual speculation and not from actual experience.41 By basing their theories on the concept of a unity of religions at the level of transcendence the liberalists thus obtained a philosophical foundation to support their religious pluralism. Yet the approach of Alwi Shihab has been bolder and more radical; he speaks not only from the angle of ideas and

philosophy but encroaches upon Islamic tradition through manipulation from the inside, in particular by interpreting Quranic verses as he sees fit. The presumption underlying the pluralists sense of confidence in their viewpoints comes from their perception that many Quranic verses admit the faith of religious communities other than the Islamic community, and again concedes that their devotions are equal to the Islamic devotions of the Muslims. Alwi shores up his case with his own interpretation of verse 62 of alBaqarah and verse 69 of al-Maidah that diverges from their widely accepted meanings. His endeavour exemplifies the mission of the Liberalists to distort the understanding of Quranic verses. This is how Alwi has translated verse 62 of al-Baqarah : Verily they have accepted faith - the Jews, Christians and Sabians - they who believe in God and the Last Day and do good will receive their recompense from God. They shall not be losers nor will they sorrow.42 The verse is rightly translated as : Verily, the Believers and those of the Jews and Christians and Sabians, whosoever amongst them believes in Allah and (believes in) the Last Day, and do good, will obtain their rewards from their Lord and they shall not fear (unfortunate events) nor shall they grieve.43 To the unwary reader, Alwis interpretation appears to justify religious pluralism. Those of us however, who have mastered the Arabic language know very well that he has unjustifiably added words into his translation to achieve the desired meaning. Clearly, the verse does not state that the parties mentioned are true believers in the faith but it affirms instead the possibility that among these religious groups are those who truly believe in Allah Most High and Sublime and in the Day of Judgement. Ibn Kathir states that this verse was revealed in connection with Salman al-Farisi who was commending the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) for their faith in Allah Most High and Sublime to which the Messenger of Allah (saw) replied that contrary to that most of them will be the denizens of hell. This judgement shocked Salman. Thereafter, this particular verse was revealed which witnesses that people of religion are not deemed true believers until they accept the divine message of Prophet Muhammad. 44 Evidently, in the comprehension of this verse the Liberals have resorted to their rational faculty prejudicially and discounted the authority of Quranic exegetical scholarship (mufassirin) which has interpreted the verse as it was understood during the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw). This means that they have rejected the use of traditional interpretation (tafsir) as a scientific method that has been acceptable to the Islamic community throughout its long history a method of semantic analysis which is unpermeated by relativism. In its stead, the Liberals have adopted the hermeneutic methodology developed by Western scholarship.

Al-Qurtubi explains that according to the judicious opinion of Ibn Abbas, verse 62 of al-Baqarah was superseded by the verse wa man yabtaghi ghayra al-Islami diinan . . .45 Another opinion says that the verse had not been superseded but affirms instead the implicit command of this verse to believe in the divine message revealed through Prophet Muhammad (saw). Indeed, a significant number of scholars and exegetes state that this verse should be understood as a clarion call to those People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) who possess a fragment of faith to bring their faith to fruition by believing in Prophet Muhammad (saw); because having faith in Allah Most Sublime and High without also believing in His Messenger (saw) is an imperfect and unacceptable form of faith. Likewise, apparent good deeds do not count as virtue if the doers refuse to abide by the sacred law or shariah of the Messenger of Allah (saw).46 The liberals take this verse to justify the concept of religious pluralism, although it does not entertain such a view at all. They are guilty of ignoring the other Quranic verses which clearly condemn as unbelievers those who reject the status of Prophet Muhammad (saw) as a divinely inspired messenger. In fact there are many verses which assert the existence of such deviation and disbelief which the Liberals simply ignore. 47 In investigating the meaning of Quranic verses an exegete (mufassir) must understand them as a part of the totality of the Quran. The Liberals are however inclined to regurgitate only those textual verses (nas) which support their viewpoints. The correct approach for interpreting the Quran is to aim for comprehensiveness and impartiality and this has been the way of the outstanding scholars through the ages. In encountering religious pluralism, which today has the support of nearly every other religion besides Islam, I wish to propose the adoption of a scientific approach because there is valid concern that theological means alone will not equip us to meet the challenge of addressing non-Muslim peoples. Every religious grouping possesses its own theology hence there is a need for a mediating language or agency to communicate meanings between the various groups. A scientific approach is universal and credible in this respect and it will help to address the issues through critical inquiries into the intellectual bases of religious pluralism. We find that religious pluralism is fundamentally not a concept implicit to the religious community but that it has an extraneous source. The initiatives taken to implicate Ibn Arabi, alHallaj and Rumi as the progenitors of religious pluralism are little more than the subjective interpretations of particular individuals.48 At its dawn every religion advances exclusive claims to truth - in the sense that deliverance rests only with its particular religious beliefs - for such is the nature of religious experience. The path to salvation is not something to be compromised with others. Historically, when the (Christian) clergy realized their inability to rationally defend the verity of their religious principles they were compelled to submit to the programs of the secular academics.

Religious pluralism is located within the compass of secularism. The phenomenological methods introduced by secular Western scholarship in the examination of religious phenomena attempts to delimit the functions of religion by socio-cultural factors. When a religion is successfully incorporated into a cultural framework that religion itself will be subjected to a relativistic and subjective bias. The concepts of religious pluralism are well dominated by the premises of secularism which themselves are founded upon dichotomous reasoning in such opposing concepts as : sacred versus profane; exclusivism versus inclusivism. When such modes of thinking are acceptable to the society, pluralism will be legitimized. Dichotomous reasoning is foreign to traditional Islam for, as we shall soon see, Islam has long acknowledged the reality of the middle way (al-wasatiyyah). Besides secularism religious pluralism is also rooted in the discourse of postmodernism. The acceptance of the idea that there can be no valid truth-claims as well as the perception of the relativism of ideas ultimately leads people to the denial of all truth and religion itself.49 We must stress here that the issue which should be addressed is not whether Islam should accept the truth of other religions or not, or to accuse Islam of attempting to monopolize truth. The foremost issue is really how the adherents of every religion can coexist together in amiable civility and peacefulness, and this of course does not involve the protestation by any particular religion of its own truth. Non-muslims often pressure Muslims to accept the truth of their religions. If in fact the adherents of a religion are convinced of the truth of their religion then they should not require the certification of other non-adherents. The multi-religious community will coexist peacefully as long as its members remain open-minded and never force their own convictions upon others. In this respect therefore, those who champion religious pluralism are quite guilty of forcing their beliefs upon other people. What is wrong with allowing everyone the right of professing their own convictions? If every believer is able to defend the truth of his own religion then there should be no requirement for a policy of religious pluralism. Every religion should by right be free to declare its own truth and consequently to defend that profession of truth with valid proofs and knowledge. This has always been the most effective and best way to negotiate between religions. People will evaluate for themselves based on their own discernment and knowledge which particular religion bears the truth and ought to be followed. Contrary to this however, the condition of uncertainty about our own selves and our religion will induce us to promote religious pluralism. Muslim scholars on the other hand are quite capable of defending the truth of Islamic teachings and they are adept at addressing the problematic issues raised by the scientists and secularists, the reason being that the teachings of Islam are almost entirely accessible to sound reasoning and are thus acceptable to the intelligence and proper to the nature of humankind. Religious pluralism runs parallel to the mission of secularization and liberalization. Much of Western society in general has lost faith in religion.

Christianity is no longer a locus of reference in the resolution of moral issues, let alone political and social problems. Existential philosophy and pragmatism have taken up the functions of determining the moral values of western society. Religion is perceived as a human innovation that is not devoid of errors and misconceptions. Indeed, many of the Gospel teachings are considered as irrational myths which civilized and advanced humanity ought to abandon. If the general consensus decides that all religions are human inventions then there can be no absolute truth. What is left are relative truths that satisfy private opinions, each man to himself. The Repudiation of the Islamic Shariah Liberal Islam repudiates the implementation of the Islamic shariah. In Indonesia, the Jaringan Islam Liberal (Liberal Islam Network) has been proclaiming just this message.50 Over in America the loyal disciple of the controversial Sudanese Mahmud Muhammad Taha, by the name of Abdullahi Ahmed al-Naim produced a book in 1990 entitled Towards an Islamic Reformation which essentially undermines the basic understanding of Muslims concerning the Shariah of Islam - for al-Naim the Islamic shariah is not divine in nature.51 Al Naim also recommends that the Shariah, particularly Islamic public law, be revamped and restructured because religious texts should not be interpreted literally. He asserts that the implementation of Islamic law in the present times are counter-productive because they are antipathetic to basic human rights and inappropriate to contemporary advancements.52 Now, the rejection of Islamic law really stems from a reluctance to actualize religion as the basic principles for societal life - such rejections are but the corollaries of secularistic thinking. Al-Naim himself admits this.53 He writes : I have shown that the shariah was in fact constructed by Muslim jurists over the first three centuries of Islam. Although derived from the fundamental divine sources of Islam, the Quran and Sunnah, Shariah is not divine because it is the product of human interpretation of those sources. Moreover, this process of construction through human interpretation took place within a specific historical context which is drastically different from our own. It should therefore be possible for contemporary Muslims to undertake a similar process of interpretation and application of the Quran and Sunnah in the present historical context to develop an alternative public law of Islam which is appropriate for implementation today.54 We see here the obvious influence of Orientalism on al-Naim. Together with the Orientalists before him such as Goldziher, Schacht 55 and Coulson56 he considers the Islamic Shariah to be a product of the interpretation of religious scholars (ulama and fuqaha) during the first three hundred years. The Liberal groups have made explicit use of the extensive findings of the Orientalists and have adopted Orientalist assumptions towards the end of repudiating Islamic law. Unfortunately, there are few scientific writings which have ably criticize such ideas other than a handful which should be highlighted such as On Schachts Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence by

Mustafa al-Azami who disproved Schachts premises regarding the Shariah and Fiqh.57 Disbelief in the divine origins of the Islamic Shariah is based upon the Orientalist perception that it was instead the result of the creative enterprises of the ulama and the ruling classes over the three hundred year period following the passing of the Messenger of Allah (saw) and is therefore nuanced with political and vested interests. The confusions of these people are conspicuous since they are unable to distinguish between the Shariah and the Fiqh, between the thawabit and the mutaghayyirat, between issues which were consensual decisions (qatiyyat) with those of the nature of personal perspectives (ijtihadi or zanniyat). Devoid of such discriminative knowledge ones understanding of shariah will be disoriented. Conclusion There exists a fundamental difference between the theory that Kurzman has formulated with what Liberal Islam truly represents. His theory popularizes the movement and aims to justify its ideas and reasoning. Towards this goal Kurzman has managed to blur the vision of the masses by resorting to the use of popular terms such as progress, freedom of thought, democracy, etc. Such emphases imply the presence of a conservatism in those groups which refute the Liberal Islamic program. It has also succeeded in blinding the masses towards its principal ideas and salient characteristics, such as its convergence with secularism and modernist values, the freedom of interpretation and the rejection of religious authority, religious pluralism and the problematization of the Shariah, and so on and so forth.58 Table 1 : Comparative characteristics of Liberal Islam and Islamic Modernism Islamic Modernism Rationalism Critical of Traditional Islam Reinterpreting the Shariah Evaluating Western science as neutral or value-free. Supporting Western democracy Accepting Western values (particular individuals among them) Liberal Islam Rationalism and Secularism Rejection of the Shariah Formulation of a religious pluralism Rejection of religious authority Liberal interpretation of religious texts Accepting no truth-claims Promulgating Western values Promoting the liberation of women Unreservedly accepting liberal democracy

The influence of Western ideas like secularism, orientalism and post modernism on Liberal Islam is borne out by clear and undeniable evidence. Kurzmans book Liberal Islam establishes secularism as the pivotal element of this movement. Many Islamist writers rightly perceive Liberal Islam to be a product of the West, conceived and moulded within the parameters of Western thought it is not an outcome of the Islamic paradigm. Their ideologues and sympathizers may seek to legitimize their ideas with proofs from religious texts, but this is little more than a strategem of validation. It is incorrect to think that Liberal Islam does not have a discursive methodology. My investigations have ascertained that their ideologues avail themselves to methods adapted from the artifacts of Western rationalism such as historicism and hermeneutics. The paradigm formulated by the influential thinkers of the movement has invented frameworks of thought which have since departed from its original concepts. There has been much Islamic discourse concerning the invasion of foreign ideas as represented by orientalism, secularism, and modernism, and certainly our argument so far supports the observation that Liberal Islam is the most recent Western affront to the teachings of Islam. The Islamic thinker Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas has thoroughly expounded the Islamic worldview and contrasted it with the worldview of the West, the purpose being to shield the Islamic ummah from the confusing and pervasive influence of Western ideas, the crux of which is a definitive weariness about religion, if not its antithesis. To suppose no contradictions between these two worldviews is to perceive Islam without a self-identity and to see that it does not provide a comprehensive meaning to the life of man. This would be altogether untrue.

Notes

This article is based on a working paper originally delivered at the International Seminar on Islamic Thought (ISoIT) 2004 at UKM on 7-9 December 2004. 2 This movement has a unified vision and mission even if it appears under various names. For further information about the thinkers and supporters of Liberal Islam worldwide see : http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/Liberal IslamLinks.htm 3 Council for Secular Humanism, www.secularhumanism.org/: 22 May 2004 4 Muhammad Muslehuddin, Philosophy of Islamic Law and the Orientalists (Lahore : Islamic Publications, 1994), 84. 5 See Abd Ala, Dari Neomodernisme ke Islam Liberal : Jejak Fazlur Rahman dalam Wacana Islam di Indonesia (Jakarta : Paramadina, 2003) 6 See Charles Kurzman, ed. Modernist Islam (London : Oxford University Press, 2002), 3; Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism : A Critique of Development Ideologies (Chicago and London : University of Chicago press, 1998) 16-25. Bider has cooperated with the purveyors of modernist Islam, among whom are Fazlur Rahman himself and Nurcholish Madjid, in research concerning contemporary Islamic thought. 7 For an exposition of the emergence of modernism and the its reaction towards Western science, refer to Aziz al-Azmeh Muslim Modernism and the Text of the Past in Islam and the Challenge of Modernity. Ed. Sharifah Shifa al-Attas, International Symposium at ISTAC, Kuala Lumpur, 1994. 8 As quoted by Omar K.N. in Modernism and Post-Modern Thought in www.livingislam.com from the writings of Rene Guenon, The Crisis of the Modern World, trans. A. Osborne, M. Pallis, R. Nicholson (London : Luzac, 1962), 42-54. 9 Leonard Binder, Islamic Liberalism, 5-9. 10 Charles Kurzman, ed. Modernist Islam. 4. 11 Ibid., 3. See also the website of Jaringan Islam Liberal : www.islamlib.com. 12 Ibid., 27 13 Charles Kurzman, Liberal Islam: A Source Book (London: Oxford University Press, 1998), 2-4; Charles Kurzman, Liberal Islam: Prospects and Challenges, MERIA, vol.3, no. 3, September 1999; http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/LiberalIslamLinks.html.
14

15

16

17 18 19

20

21

22

23

Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, The Worldview of Islam : An Outline, in Islam and the Challenge of Modernity : Historical and Contemporary Contexts, ed. Sharifah Shifa al-Attas, (Kuala Lumpur : ISTAC, 1994), 25-69. Ismail Raji al-Faruqi, Tawhid : Its Implication for Thought and Life (Virginia : IIIT, 1982), 71-73 Fazlur Rahman, Cita-cita Islam (Yogyakarta : Pustaka Pelajar, 2000) 60-61 (an anthology of his articles that have been translated into the Indonesian language); Fazlur Rahman, Islamic Modernism ; Its Scope, Methods and Alternatives in International Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 1 (1970), 317-333. Abu Zayd, Naqd al-Khitab al-Dini (Kaherah : Sina li al-Nashr, 1994), 37. Chapter 7 presents a detailed discussion of postmodernism. Muhammad Arkoun, Rethinking Islam, trans. Robert D. Lee (Boulder : Westview Press, 1994), 9. Muhammad Said al-Ashmawi, Al-Islam al-Siyasi (Beirut : al-Intishar al-Arabi, 2004), 27-37. Asghar Ali Engineer, The Islamic State, 2nd ed, (New Delhi : Vikas Publishing House, 1996), 134-135. Asghar Ali Engineer, Future of Secularism in India, at the site : http://ecumene.org/IIS/csss115.htm Radwan Masmoudi, The Silenced Majority, in Journal of Democracy April 2003, vol. 14 : no. 2 pg. 2

24 25 26 27

28 29 30

31

32

33

34

35 36 37 38 39

40

41 42 43 44 45

46

47

see http ://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/LiberalIslamLinks.htm Radwan Masmoudi, The Silenced Majority, 2 Ibid., 2. Many hadith reports illustrate the excellence of al-aqil (reasoning-knowing-understanding person) as compared with al-abid (worshipful-literal person). Among these is the saying of the Messenger of Allah (saw) : The superiority of a learned man with respect to a worshipper is like the superiority of myself with respect to the lowliest man among yourselves. (narrated by Ibn Majah and al-Tirmidhi) Kurzman, 13. Kurzman, 13; Masmoudi, 1 This is illustrated by verses which instruct the Islamic community to enquire from knowledgeable people about things they do not understand (al-Nahl : 43; al-Anbiya : 7) and verses which prohibit from stating things about which they do not have knowledge (alIsra : 36). Indeed, the consultative system of Islam affirms the spirit of enquiry since the consultative committee should be made up of specialists in the topic under discussion. Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd. Mafhum al-Nas : Dirasah fi Ulum al-Quran (Beirut : al-Markaz alThaqafi al-Arabi, 1996). See chapter seven for a detailed explanation of hermeneutics. This book caused him to lose his position at Cairo University and to be judged an apostate. Presently, Abu Zayd resides in Leiden, Holland and receives the support of several bodies. See al-Attas, The Concept of Education in Islam, 1980 edition (Kula Lumpur : ISTAC, 1999), 4; Wan Mohd. Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy and Practice of S.M.N. al-Attas, 343362. For a discussion of the root principles of hermeneutics see Ugi Suharto, Apakah alQuran memerlukan Hermeneutika? ISLAMIA, tahun 1 no. 1 Muharram 1425/March 2004 (4650). Adnan Aslan, Religious Pluralism in Christian and Islamic Philosophy : The Thought of John Hick and Seyyed Hossein Nasr (Ri, 1998)chmond, Surrey : The Curzon Press). Budhy Munawar-Rachman, Islam Pluralis : Wacana Kesetaraan Kaum Beriman (Jakarta : Raja Grafindo Persada, 2004), 101-130. This book was given a forward by Nurcholish Madjid who fully commends Budhys concept of religious pluralism. Ibid. Ibid., 111 Alwi Shihab, Islam Inklusif, 39-45. Ibid., 103 See Seyyed Hossein Nasr, The Heart of Islam, Enduring Values for Humanity (New York : Harper Collins, 2002), 46-53. See Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas, Prolegomena to the Metaphysics of Islam, 7-12; Wan Mohd. Nor Wan Daud, The Educational Philosophy and Practice of S.M.N. al-Attas, 88-91. Al-Attas, Prolegomena, 9. Alwi Shihab, Islam Inklusif, 108. Surah al-Baqarah : 62 (refer to Tafsir Pimpinan A-Rahman) See the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir (Riyad ; Maktabah Dar al-Salam, 1992), 1 : 110 ; 2 : 91 Surah Ali Imran : 85 which states Whoever seeks another religion besides the religion of Islam , it will not be accepted of him, and he shall be among the losers on the Day of Judgement. See Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Qurtubi. Al-Jami li Ahkam alQuran (Beirut : Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, 20.00). Vol. 1 : 296 Surah al-Maidah : 72-73; al-Tawbah : 29-31; Ali Imran : 86. This stance of the Quran is ably explained in the Kuliah Tafsir of Dato Dr. Siddiq Fadzil entitled [trans.] Religious Pluralism : The Quranic Perspective in the Malay language on 6th November 2004, Kolej Dar al-Hikmah dan Akademi Kajian Ketamadunan (AKK), Kajang.

48

Based on the concept of Nur Muhammad, al-Hallaj and Ibn Arabi perceived the inexistence of differences between religions in reality. See Asmaran As, Pengantar Studi Tasawuf (Jakarta : Raja Grafindo Persada,1994). Asmaran As says : [trans.] As such it could be said that if Nur Muhammad constitutes the basis for everything there is, including the presence of inspiration and religion, as well as all the prophets from Prophet Adam (as) to Prophet Jesus (as), therefore all existent religions must originate from the same source they are effusions from the one original light. (pg. 323).
See chapter seven for a discussion of postmodernism. See the article of Ulil Absar Abdalla in Harian Kompass dated 18/11/2002 and the book of Ashmawi, Saiful, and Azyumardi Azra et al, Syariat Islam, Pandangan Muslim Liberal. (Jakarta : Jaringan Islam Liberal (JIL) and The Asia Foundation, 2003) Abdullahi Ahmed al-Naim, Toward an Islamic Reformation (New york : Syracuse University Press, 1989), 186.

49 50

51

52 53 54 55 56 57

Ibid., 177.
Al-Naim, 10. Ibid., 185. Joseph Schacht, The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (Oxford : Clarendon, 1950). N. J. Coulson, A History of Islamic Law (Edinburgh : Ednburgh University Press, 196). See M. Mustafa al-Azimi. On Shachts Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence Oxford : The Oxford Centre For Islamic Studies and The Islamic Text Society, 1996) See chapter 4 : Discourse on the Reconstruction of Islamic Law.

58

You might also like