Don’t turn the clock back

Ignorance of Islam

October 1, 2001. The world was expecting a strike on terrorism, starkly manifested in Afghanistan, by the US and Allies in response to the recent brutal attacks in New York and Washington. But before it could happen, there was an attack on Islam itself. The combined efforts of world leaders and that of our own to delink Islam, Muslims and terrorists have been challenged at a time that cannot be more inappropriate than now by someone who seems more concerned with his immature ideas borrowed from elsewhere rather than the integrity of humankind.

‘Islam has had a bad press,’ wrote Mr. Amulya Ganguli on the editorial page of Hindustan Times. Yes, sir, Islam surely has been confronted with a bad press, but not from now, but from its very genesis; and you are not the first person to ‘misrepresent’ (not ‘misinterpret’) it. Years have passed when the theory of spread of Islam through the sword was raised and discredited by the very people who had once raised it by calling it “one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated” (De Lacy O’ Leary, London, 1923). Similarly, the proposition that Islam inherently engenders terrorism and that all Muslims are terrorists and barbarians has also been disowned by its progenitors. But just like all Muslims are not terrorists, similarly all so-called representatives of the press are not unbiased. To equate these few with all of them would be injustice to reality as would be to equate all Muslims with a perverse, handful of terrorists. There are universal traits that are above all religions and ideologies, conservatism and prejudice belonging to them. These are not the monopoly or copyright of any person or group, rather they may be found anywhere and anytime. To attribute terrorism and conservatism only to Muslims and overlook other groups is tantamount to putting curtains on truth, when others have been accused of gross human rights violation and systematic massacres across the borders. Perception is, however, fashioned by the amount of sophistication put into committing the act and keeping into consideration the status of the actor. Rest is the same, maybe worse in some cases.

Anyone having even a peripheral acquaintance with Muslim history would know that revivalists have appeared off and on in Muslim societies and brought people to the primordial teachings. Prophet Muhammad had declared: “Allah will raise at the head of each century such people for this Ummah as will revive its religion for it.” Yet my dear friend, Mr. Ganguli, believes that ‘Islam has had no reformers.’ Much research has been undertaken regarding Islamic revivalist movements by the orientalist scholars, most prominent among them being John L Esposito and John O Voll.

After displaying his utter lack of historical consciousness and contextual sense, my friend embarks on an ambitious trail of discrediting the very root Islam with leading to ‘mediocrity and galloping degeneration,’ ‘unredeemed intellectual stagnation,’ ‘wretched condition of women in Muslim countries,’ and ultimately to the use of violence and terror. But it’s pitiable that he has not even properly read Edward Said whom he quotes twice to build up his structure of distorted conclusions.

It is true that Muslims have degenerated in the past three centuries and have not been able thence to relate to the dynamics of the modern world and effectively deal with them. But this was not because they followed their religion devotedly and genuinely, but because of lack of this. Reality is just the reverse of what Mr. Ganguli has skillfully tried to paint. The glory and useful contributions of Muslims to the genesis of the modern Western world cannot be recounted here (read The Making of Humanity, Robert Briffault). But just like every civilization has a golden past, every progressive people has its share of retrogression. Wasn’t there a Golden Period of Rome, and then The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire? Who would have believed before the World Wars, that took more lives than the collective wars waged in the name of religion, that there are limits to progress and prosperity? Today, Muslims worldwide are in constant effort to genuinely redefine their religion in the light of the present circumstances within the framework of the basic tenets enshrined in the Noble Quran. Some inflexible and perverse people have used it for barbaric designs and inflicted a serious damage to the Image of Islam giving people like Mr. Ganguli opportunity to caste aspersions at the very faith. We have to realize once and for all that fundamental human problems and issues do not intrinsically change with time and space because man is the same everywhere and from all times; they simply reappear in changed garbs in various geographical locations and at different points of time. If Mr. Ganguli does not want to agree with me, then he may kindly read what Will Durant wrote in his Story of Philosophy: “… there is hardly a problem or a solution in our current philosophy of mind and conduct which they (the Sophists) did not realize and discuss.” If the problems and solutions of the Modern West could have been discussed more than 2000 years ago, then why not that of the Muslims just 1400 years ago by the Creator of mankind, as we believe? Do the universal and general laws of evolution themselves change? What Islam has taught us are the basic principles of guidance and it is the duty of we mortals to do Ijtihad (research) by defining the details according to the local conditions and exigencies of time. As far as the ‘perception’ of Islam is concerned, let my friend know that it is generally referred to as the fastest growing religion in US and Europe. The well-renowned Nobel Laureate, Sir George Bernard Shaw, prophesied way back in 1936 that the faith of Muhammad … would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today. Regarding the applicability of the faith today, he writes: “I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age” (The Genuine Islam, Vol.1, No.8). Is it inevitable then that we always remain behind the West?

So far as the question of gender in Muslim societies is concerned, one is amazed at the level of ignorance, or perhaps prejudice, displayed by the likes of Mr. Ganguli. He is unaware of the political activities going on in the continent in which he lives, let alone the real happenings in the Middle East and elsewhere. There have been women Heads of State and there still are in some cases, in Bangladesh (Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia), in Pakistan (Benazir Bhutto) twice, then in Indonesia (Megawati Sukarnoputri), in Turkey (Tansu Ciller), where my friend’s ideal Muslim, Mustafa Kamal Ataturk, abolished the Ottoman Caliphate and established the first secular state in Muslim society. In contrast, the US and France, known to be the authors of Modern Western Civilization and Emancipation of Women, like most other western nations are yet to have a woman Head of State. Rights and opportunities are counted in real terms.

At the end, I would like to humbly request my dear friend and fellow citizen, Mr. Amulya Ganguli, to avoid resurrecting issues and controversies that were originally raised by the West and then sufficiently answered by themselves later on. Please, don’t turn the clock back. 

***

By: Syed Ali Mehdi (syed_alimehdi@hotmail.com) on October 2, 2001