[Reader-list] Reform now! (Nadeem Paracha advises Muslims)

[TaraPrakash]

Only if we knew how are hindus defined by the pitying folks. Shame on 
communalism that keeps rising again and again on this list.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Aditya Raj Baul" <adityarajbaul at gmail.com>
Cc: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 5:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Reform now! (Nadeem Paracha advises Muslims)


> Pity the Hindus don't even have a Nadeem F Paracha
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Kshmendra Kaul <kshmendra2005 at yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
>> Reform now!
>>
>> by Nadeem F. Paracha
>> 07 15th, 2010
>>
>> The twentieth century was a dynamic epoch for ideology. Some of the most 
>> invigorating (and controversial) ideological experiments were conceived 
>> and implemented, reaching a peak in the 1970s.
>>
>> Twentieth century ideology was a product of Modernism a direct off-shoot 
>> of the ‘Age of Enlightenment’ (in Europe) where science and reason were 
>> established as primary systems of thought over superstition, organised 
>> religion, feudalism, and monarchism.
>> Rational humanistic ideologies such as Marxism/Communism, secularism, 
>> democracy, and socialism were all early products of Modernism that looked 
>> forward to a world powered by rational thought, science, and industrial 
>> development.
>>
>> Also emerging from these set of Modernist criteria was the concept of 
>> nationalism and capitalism that replaced monarchism and feudalism.
>>
>> By the early twentieth century, various Modernist ideologies clashed 
>> among themselves with the Marxists on one side trying to implement 
>> Marxism as a ‘scientific,’ economic and political system that would lead 
>> to equality and progress, and the bourgeoisie-driven capitalist 
>> democracies pushing forward their favoured system as a rational political 
>> expression against feudal exploitation, organised religion and 
>> dictatorship.
>>
>> This gave birth to the notion of social engineering, in which mass 
>> numbers of people were mobilised and hastily made to conform to the 
>> political and economic ideals of Modernism. This mobilisation did witness 
>> rapid industrialisation, scientific progress and social mobility, but at 
>> the same time the economic tensions and social ruptures it caused also 
>> resulted in certain disasters, such as the economic collapse in 
>> capitalist democracies (the United States and Europe), violent purges 
>> against millions of people in the communist world (Soviet Union) and the 
>> rise of fascism (in Germany and Italy).
>>
>> Modernism’s demise came sometime during the 1970s – a decade that saw the 
>> widespread intellectual revolt against the concept of the Modernist 
>> meta-narrative. The revolt was led by the so-called ‘post-modernists’ who 
>> began to render the all-encompassing nature of Modernist ideology as a 
>> destructive force. Post-modernists also attacked the implementers of 
>> Modernist ideology as being coercive agents of social and political 
>> engineering that suppressed the common wisdom and moorings of localised 
>> cultures.
>>
>> As post-modernist thought evolved, Modernist meta-narratives like 
>> Marxism, Fascism and colonial capitalism was gradually replaced by causes 
>> based on the genius of localised cultures. Anthropological sources 
>> replaced ancient written sources to determine history; an emphasis on 
>> pluralism and diversity became the focal point of democracy while 
>> multiculturalism overtook the notion of universalism and cultural 
>> homogeneity.
>>
>> So how did the Muslim world react to Modernism?
>>
>> Islamic Reformism (in the Modern Age):
>>
>> Modernist thought emerged when the Muslim world was facing a decline (in 
>> the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries). Its empires were collapsing and 
>> being run-over by European colonialism. Two strains of Muslim response 
>> emerged: The first advocated the absorption of Modernist ideas such as 
>> rationalism, science and ‘secular education,’ within the Islamic cultural 
>> fold.
>>
>> These reformists tried to prove (both, through historic as well as 
>> scriptural reasoning) that the essence of Islam was based on rational 
>> thought and action, and was also compatible with scientific study and 
>> progress. Keeping in mind Modernism’s emphasis on universalism, they 
>> began to see the Muslim people as a homogenous collection of people 
>> (Ummah).
>>
>> This strain of reformism gave birth to modern nationalistic movements 
>> (such as in Turkey), where the ‘decadent’ monarchical past was done away 
>> with and replaced by secular Turkish nationalism based on developmental 
>> economics. In places like Iran and Egypt regimes under Reza Phelvi and 
>> Gammal Nasser adopted Modernism’s industrial development models as well. 
>> This reformism was also witnessed (during the Ayub Khan dictatorship and 
>> the Z A. Bhutto regime), led by groups of people steeped in nineteenth 
>> century versions of modern reformist Islam in the subcontinent, and, in 
>> case of Bhutto (and Egypt’s Nasser), hybrid socialism.
>>
>> However, the reason this reformism when put into practice failed to 
>> revitalise the Muslim world was because although its implementers adopted 
>> Modernistic notions such as industrial progress and nationalism, they 
>> failed to implement those elements that help such notions sustain 
>> themselves politically and socially.
>>
>> For example, industrial development and modern education were attempted 
>> without allowing a vibrant democratic culture to prevail. This created 
>> dictatorships which were always venerable to becoming myopic and elitist 
>> at the first sign of economic and political failure.
>>
>> This happened in Iran (during the Islamic Revolution), Egypt and Pakistan 
>> (during Zia-ul-Haq’s regime) where the state based on modern reformist 
>> Islam, failed to implement related Modernist ideas like democracy. 
>> Consequently, in the event of the state’s economic and political failure, 
>> it turned inwards, replacing politics based on Modernist meta-narratives 
>> with a parallel meta-narrative formed by conservative Muslims.
>>
>> The second strain of reformism in the Muslim world that took place at the 
>> arrival Modernism advocated Islamic traditionalist thought as a reaction 
>> to Modernism. As opposed to using rationalism and contextual-ism to 
>> interpret religion and law, it encouraged the textual (literal) reading 
>> of the Quran and Shariah. It also rejected nationalism, claiming that 
>> nationalism is opposed to Islam which is universal and has no borders.
>>
>> This strain of reformism consequently gave birth to puritanical and 
>> radical ideas such as Wahabism and Salafia-ism – ideas that manifested 
>> themselves as thought and policies that rudely retarded reformist Islamic 
>> social and political discourse in countries like Pakistan, Egypt, Sudan, 
>> Algeria and Afghanistan, triggering the emergence of violent 
>> fundamentalist movements.
>>
>> Islamic Reformism in the ‘post-modern’ age, some suggestions:
>>
>> - While formulating Islamic laws, a rationalist and contextualist 
>> approach to Islamic sources should be taken, keeping in mind Islam’s core 
>> values, i.e. justice and mercy.
>>
>> - Purpose of Islamic legislation regarding punishments should be to 
>> reform people and not to exact revenge.
>>
>> - We should define Islam in such a way that it does not undermine its 
>> global standing.
>> - One cannot force someone to become a believer.
>>
>> - Islamic rules should always meet the following three criteria: 
>> Compatibility with reason; compatibility with the requirements of 
>> justice; compatibility with the requirements of (modern) times and people’s 
>> preferences.
>>
>> - Most current Islamic rules regarding women’s rights do not meet the 
>> criteria of either justice or rationality and therefore should be 
>> reformed.
>>
>> - No religious principal should be imposed by force, because Islam has 
>> declared that there is no compulsion in faith.
>>
>> - Democracy is the best system of government in today’s conditions.
>>
>> - Islam has neither proscribed nor prescribed a particular form of 
>> government. It only wants to ensure that governments, whatever their 
>> form, are based on justice.
>>
>> - Islam should not be identified with politics because political Islam 
>> has led to repression, disregarding the people’s constitutional rights 
>> and encouraging religion’s abuse for individual and group advantage.
>>
>> - Quran is a book of guidance. So neither fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) 
>> nor government can force people to observe rules intended as guidance, 
>> because judgment, punishment and reward in this respect belongs to God.
>>
>> - All administrative and political matters are human affairs and hence, 
>> not subject to religious rules.
>>
>> -Religious extremism should be condemned. It is caused by: *exaggerating 
>> what is prohibited; * a literalist (textual) reading of religious 
>> sources; ignorance; and the myopic anathematization (denouncement) of 
>> so-called sinners that leads to intolerance, arrogance and 
>> self-righteousness.
>>
>> - Jihad is a means, not an end. It does not permit self-destruction and 
>> it does not legitimise killing civilians.
>>
>> - Preachers are spiritual guides, not judges (and vice-versa).
>>
>> - Islam and Islamic law should be understood and implied by each 
>> generation according to its own conditions.
>>
>> - The gates of ijtihad should be swung open.
>>
>> - Shariah was formulated according to conditions of a particular time and 
>> place. It is man-made. It needs to be updated, refreshed and revitalised 
>> through ijtihad and according to the needs of the time.
>>
>> - Power of Islamic legislation should flow back to the people from the 
>> hands of ulema, politicians and the clergy.
>>
>> - Islam is represented by the people not by political parties, 
>> organisations, or the clergy because Muslims commune directly with God.
>>
>> - The usage of hadith in legislation should be handled carefully and 
>> critically because many are unreliable and difficult to authenticate.
>>
>> - A dynamic reading and understanding of Islam should be encouraged 
>> because a stagnant, conservative and traditionalist reading are against 
>> the spirit of the religion.
>>
>> - A lack of official clergy in Islam makes it most compatible with 
>> secularism.
>>
>> - Islam provides the ethical basis of a society, while government is 
>> based on rational premises. Thus, there is no need for the caliphate as a 
>> model for the exercise of power.
>>
>> - State/government has political functions; religious functions belong to 
>> the people according to their own will, need and consensus.
>>
>> - To avoid dictatorship, repression, state coercion and stagnation, 
>> Muslim political systems must not rest on theological foundations.
>>
>> - Everything under the unity of God is plural. There is only one God, but 
>> many kinds and types of Muslims. Nobody but God can determine exactly who 
>> or what a real or true Muslim is, and/or who or what a kafir or an 
>> ‘infidel,’ is.
>>
>> (Nadeem F. Paracha is a cultural critic and senior columnist for Dawn 
>> Newspaper and Dawn.com.)
>>
>> http://blog.dawn.com/2010/07/15/reform-now/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________
>> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
>> Critiques & Collaborations
>> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with 
>> subscribe in the subject header.
>> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with 
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>