Ideological Challenge of Islam

  Wednesday 14^th August, 6:30pm

Speaker: Nadeem Amin, Muslim Intelligentsia Project

Venue:  Char Bar, Cromer Street, Euston

Nadeem Amin hails from Slough. He is an Ex-activist of the Islamic group Hizbut Tahrir. He made his mark in debating people like Colin Defrates (Black Panther), activists from Socialist Worker, down to Christian fundamentalists. Nadeem graduated from the renowned School of Oriental and African Studies at London with an honours degree in politics & Philosophy. He has been a lecturer at Harrow and Weald College and is currently teaching at the distinguished Maidstone grammar school. He had the honour of taking a number of Shahadas. Nadeem briefly joined another Islamic group, Mohajiroun. Recently, he started the Muslim Intelligentsia Project, which is a scheme to culture a team of brothers and sisters to become debaters, thinkers, writers to counter Western kufr (disbelief) philosophy etc.

Nadeem’s talk was passionate and interlaced with ad-lib humour, which kept the audience’s attention. I can say with confidence that what Nadeem does not know about philosophy is probably not worth knowing. I have never seen so much confidence and interest shown by lecturer in his subject. He gave the content of two talks in one and a half hours!

The fact that people were interested in the presentation was evidenced by the lively question and answer session. The learned Dr.Al Massari contributed too by giving further examples of the ideological strength of Islamic thinking.

Most importantly, Nadeem dealt with issues, which required serious intellectual gymnastics on his part, but left the audience happy in the knowledge that sophisticated, intellectual kufr (disbelief) has no merit or foundation compared to Islam. He performed an invaluable service, which left the audience even more confident about their belief in Islam.

The main points of Nadeem’s talk were:

            ;      The need for Muslims to face the intellectual challenge posed by Western thinking.

            ;      How to challenge Western ‘modernity’.

            ;      How religion became discredited in the West.

            ;      The failure of Christianity in the West.

            ;      How Islam presents a rational alternative to other philosophies.

            ;      Islam and science do co-exist.

            ;      Islam re-states previous Divine revelations and is the final revelation.

            ;      How Islam differs from other faiths.

            ;      Islam is a complete way of life.

            ;      Islam does not conform to the Western idea of religion and challenges the West.

            ;      Defects of modern Liberalism and how it contradicts itself.

            ;      The Clarity and intellectual strength of Islam.

            ;      Liberalism fails to provide a measure of human progress and the lack of confidence of Liberalist thinkers.

            ;      Liberalism fails to define universal truths. Islam is the universal truth and states universal rights for mankind.

            ;      The need for a moral code and how Islam liberates mankind.

            ;      Why Muslims are seen as failures today and what Muslims can do to assert themselves intellectually.

            ;      The challenge to non-Muslims.

The Content of Nadeem’s talk:

In the West today there is a negative focus on Islam. It is presented usually as backward, illiterate, and nothing to do with today’s world. Muslims have also fallen into the trap of ‘redefining’ Islam. Generally human civilisation has needs to be fulfilled, but over the last 100 years Muslims have failed to satisfy this need.

Muslims today face an intellectual challenge. They need to discuss society and demonstrate the superiority of the thought and system of Islam.

Before proceeding further, there is need to clarify definitions: What is Islam a challenge to? Is it a challenge to Western style modernity?

There is an assumption that Western modernity presents a rational and philosophical challenge to all other cultures. However, Western civilisation is difficult to define. To challenge Western philosophy it is better to look at common factors – in essence to focus on human rationality and apply reason over other considerations.

There was a period in Western history known as the ‘Enlightenment’, which flourished in the late 18^th Century. The ‘Enlightenment’ meant that reason had triumphed over superstition. What was meant by ‘superstition’ was religion as Western societies saw it. The West decided that religious belief cannot stand up to rational thinking. In the late 17^th century and onwards, ‘religion’ for the West meant Christianity. The belief in the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, and the Bible being the word of God no longer became tenable in the light of scientific study.

Religion in the West meant that Christianity could not validate itself. The Enlightenment movement rejected Christianity. However, one cannot apply the same logic to Islam. There is a world of difference between Islam and Christianity or any other man-made faith. Islam is rooted on a different basis and can meet ‘enlightenment’ thinking head on!

Islam is not a religion in the traditional Western sense, which relegates the meaning of religion to a collection of theories. Islam states that divine revelation is only rooted in the rational process of arguments. It has a rational basis. In fact, the Quran challenges mankind to reflect and actually condemns illogical traditions simply because our fathers might have practised them. It is an ignorant thing to say that Islam is not based on sound rationality, which can stand up to the rigours of intellectual analysis.

Islam is not frightened of science. On the contrary, it encourages scientific study, so that those with sense will understand more of Allah’s power as they learn more about the natural world. Islam encourages rational thinking!

The West was responsible for the heretical disfigurement of the message presented by the prophet Jesus (peace be upon him (pbuh)). Islam rejects: the divinity of Christ; the Trinity; crucifixion and resurrection.  It believes in the previous messages. It is not a new religion. The basic fact that Allah is one was stated by all previous revelations. However, The previous messages were not protected by divine decree, as we know from the history of the Torah and the Bible.

Islam is the final embodiment of previous Divine messages, but free from errors. Other beliefs have partial truths only. Therefore, how does Islam differ from other faiths?

It is a system of life and is a means of achieving human fulfilment. It encompasses a comprehensive way of life, which follows therefore that it is inherently both social and political. As Islam is a complete way of life that is the reason why it is viewed as ‘fundamentalist’ in the West.

The West portrays religion as a private matter only. However, Islam refuses to fit the Western category of religion. Consequently, it receives bad press in the Western media.

The West’s assumptions are incorrect. The challenge of Islam is the challenge to the Western understanding of Islam, which requires a critique of ‘Liberalism’, and is the basis of Westernism.

Liberalism has its own history. Modern Liberalism is based on the understanding of human knowledge. Liberalism also says that human reason alone cannot establish absolute moral and political truth. Human reason by its very nature is flawed. It will be tainted by cultural and personal feelings. In Western liberal society, anyone who says he has a positive truth is automatically seen as narrow minded, e.g. when Muslims declare Shahada (declaration of faith). Liberalism dislikes any belief, which asserts to be the absolute truth. Therefore, Western societies have rival moralities – contingent on history, society and culture. There are contradictions to liberalist thinking. On the one hand Liberalism says there cannot be ‘absolute truth’, and at the same time it constructs itself to be the ‘absolute truth’! It has become a dogmatic belief in itself and at the same contradicts itself.

Although people may differ it does not mean there is no absolute truth. Liberalist ideology contradicts itself when it claims that everything in terms of morality is relative, because by that logic then all Liberalist claims are also relative and fail to be the absolute truth too! Therefore, Liberalism defeats itself.

In contrast to the ambiguities inherent in Liberalism, Islam has absolute morals, which are clear and uncompromising.

However, Liberalism does have some truth to it when is asserts that human reason by itself cannot establish the absolute truth. Islam says the same thing, but Muslims receive guidance from Allah, who has set the boundaries of right and wrong.

Liberalism also states that there cannot be progress if there is absolute truth. However, Islam has a different view of progress.

Liberalism cannot measure human progress. For example, liberals agree that Human Rights legislation is progress. However, if in 50 year’s time, if these Human Rights laws are repealed then according to Liberalism that would also be progress because it was enacted by majority decision. Therefore, Liberalism fails.

Islam has the absolute truth because it gives us the ability to measure progress by enabling us to decide on what is right and wrong.

Liberalism locks people into semantics. Even a non-Muslim thinker such as Dostoyevsky said, “If there is no God then anything goes.” He was correct, because values must be rooted in foundation. Liberalism has no foundation. It is facing a crisis. It is even worried about condemning the Fatwa on the apostate Salman Rushdie. The recent upsurge on outwardly confidence by Liberalism in fact hides anxiety from within itself. Liberalists are saying they have no idea on what authority they have their values. They admit that even their faith and their civilisation is without rational foundation. Their society creates negatives because they say what they are against, not what they stand for!

Liberalism asks constantly what it should tolerate. By comparison, Islam states what can be tolerated. Western society states that everyone is guaranteed rights. Therefore they are tolerant. However, who decides what should be tolerated?

Nadeem quoted an article by an atheist thinker from the University of Calgary, who said, “We can show by reason that we act in a moral way. But pure reason will not take you to morality.” This indicates the confusion in the minds of Liberalist thinkers.

Science is the new god of Liberalism, as anything, which is valid, must be rooted in science. The West has perpetuated the myth that Islam is antagonistic to science. On the contrary, historically, Muslims were pioneers of scientific discovery, e.g. in the spheres of astronomy, mathematics, physics and medicine etc. The European Renaissance was influenced and fuelled by Muslim scientific knowledge. This has not been broadcasted so much due to the decline of Muslim influence.

Science by itself cannot be the basis of morality. For example, the Gaia Institute has stated, “Science needs ethics, because it needs a framework to limit its applications.”

Science by its nature is based on observation. It cannot therefore, give us values. It begs the question, “Where will you get ethics from?”

Islam does provide a framework for applying science.

Democracy is a political resolution. It makes mistakes. Who is to say that the majority of people are always in the right?

If we ask why should we judge everything by Liberal morality? There is no answer. Liberalism is limited by geography and culture. Basically, the world needs a universal truth. Can you have a universal foundation without reference to a universal being? The only universal fact is that we are created beings with an ultimate purpose in life as defined in the Quran. In that system there are universal rights. Universal truths cannot be rooted in culture and history. Only something, which is based in Divine foundation, can be considered to be universal. Therefore, Islam is the divine source for the universal way of life. It tries to propagate its values and rule the world to liberate people.

Sadly, Muslims like to live in a bit of paranoia, e.g. the “West has stereotypes and they hate us (victims)”. The fact remains that there is some good in Western culture. Insights of certain philosophers are correct in certain context even when measured against Divine revelation. Certain parts of Western civilisation matches Islam. Rousseau, the famous French philosopher, said upon looking at human freedom, “The main effect of appetite is slavery, because merely following your desires and passions is tantamount to slavery.” The Quran says the same. Freedom for Muslims is not what you want to do, but what you ought to do. Mankind needs a moral code, even if it contradicts one’s instincts. Ironically, one can be forced to be free, because an individual may not realise what is good for him. Hence in Islam there is Haram and Halal (that which is forbidden and that which is allowed). Therefore, some observations of Western philosophers have common ground with Islam.

Many things in Western society are good, e.g. human rights. We benefit from the economic fruits of western society. The Muslim world today is typified by political tyranny, and corruption. ‘Muslim’ countries are in the gutter. The main reason why the global Muslim community is in that position is because of colonisation. The Muslim world was carved up and handed over to despots who act as agents stealing the wealth of the Muslim Ummah (community) for the benefit of the West. Muslims would be locked up anywhere in the Middle East for a discourse like the one at the Char Bar.

Essentially, Muslims ought to study Islam the way it was meant to be studied by throwing away culture and tradition and only take up the Quran and Sunnah as our frame of reference; otherwise we will suffer both in this life and in the next.

To non-Muslims we say, “Consider what is the truth and whether Islam has a rational argument. Hypocrisy can never be an option. Look at Islam for what it is. Ask yourself, is Islam more rationally valid? What is the truth and not what is rationally valid based on my own personal instincts. Who am I? What is the reality of human existence?”

Muslims need to have a proper rational discourse with Western thinkers. We have responsibility to share this Deen (Belief).

Some important points came out during the question and answer session. Dr.Al Massari was kind enough to answer some questions and provide valuable information to augment our understanding of Islam and Muslims. He said that historically there were all sorts of empires. All of them when they controlled other countries, e.g. Rome became great at the expense of other nations. By comparison, when Islam expanded, it developed for the benefit of everyone. Islam was never an imperialistic culture. Compare the stance of Islamic thinking to that of the frightened stand of American intellectuals today who make it their business to attack other cultures and in particular Islam (the War of Ideas being touted by Bush’s regime today).

For example, the renowned Islamic scholar, Al Beyrouni, studied Indian culture. He tried to explain in a rational fashion why Hindus have their beliefs and practices. As Beyrouni believed firmly in his ideology and had no need to attack another culture. The current American intellectual attack on Islam is the symptom of fear and a lack of confidence in their own belief system.

Throughout the ages, Muslim philosophers rationally discussed other faiths, because they were confident of their own faith. Muslims did not feel threatened by other ideologies. Western Liberals need to question whether they have evidence to support their beliefs. The First and Second World Wars were fought for Nationalism and Secularism and religion and nothing to do with it.

Can Muslims and non-Muslims co-exist? The answer is yes. These rights are guaranteed in Islam (the right to religious worship). Islam has been falsely portrayed as bigoted.

Another symptom of the West’s inferiority complex is their assertion that Islam ought to be ‘reformed’. Prime Minister Bair wants Muslims to sell their religion. Some of the Ulema have worked themselves into becoming a ‘clergy’ and have distanced themselves from the people. They have sold themselves and want to drag the rest of the Ummah down with them.

A lot of learning about the human condition is rooted in Islam. Ijtehad ceased about 200 years ago and there is not enough confidence in the Ummah today to assert itself. That situation needs to be ‘reformed’!

By:

Shahin

m.shahin@best-flight.co.uk