Response to ALI on Plastic Words

Assalamualikum Tip

Maybe we are splitting hairs over nothing because I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. I implied the same thing when I wrote what I wrote in our email group yesterday about our need to focus on our children's Islamic foundation so that they become Islamic Architects, lawyers, engineers etc. I've got a sneaky feeling that we are disagreeing to agree.

It's true that I read about "Plastic Words". I read it, understood it, agreed with it and thought it was worthwhile to share with my friends. I didn't just transmit it just because it was printed in a book. And, I discovered the phrase in a book by William Chittick titled "Science of the kCosmos, Science of the Soul", subtitled "The Pertinence of Islamic Cosmology in the Modern World". He has written/translated dozens of books on Sufism and Islamic Thought so he is every bit as Islamic as Syed Qutb. However, you might find him objectionable because he is a Traditionalist or Perrennialist rather then a member of Ahlis Sunnah Wal Jamaah. I didn't reveal him as the source because I didn't want people to dismiss the notion simply because it didn't come from the right source. He doesn't even have the right name!

My misgivings are proven right, at least where you are concerned. You have not addressed the message in the posting at all, choosing instead to criticise its lack of Islamic references. I could have peppered the posting with Arabic/Islamic terms like shir'k, takhtir, ihjtihad, tahqiq and taqlid, words that Chittick used liberally in his book. But I write as a lay Muslim. I don't have sufficient knowledge to use those terms comfortably. Besides, it would make me appear pretentious.

Coming to the message in my posting, it's probably unclear to some people because I did a bad precis job, trying to compress some ten pages into one. You were probably reminded of Syed Qutb because he too said Democracy is unIslamic arguing that it is not the same as the Islamic concept of Shura which means "to consult". Further, (he purportedly argued) the relevant ayat came down when the Prophet was still in Makkah so it couldn't have been in the context of forming a government.

My own layman argument against Democracy is that, while it means Government by the people for the people, it is hardly ever the case. If you consider the "one man one vote" connotation of the word, that's not what you have in a party-based parliamentary democracy like ours. Besides, is voting the best way to determine the truth?

But the most important message in the posting is this - when Ustaz Hadi proclaimed "Islam is consistent with Democracy", wasn't he saying Islam is subordinate to Democracy? Isn't that Shir'k? Wallahwaalam. Besides it could have been only what the newspapers say Hadi said.

You see, Tip, these days, nobody argues against words like Democracy, even Ulamas.
These words, Chittick argues, are "Gods of Modernity"! You can take heed of this warning or you can just dismiss it because it didn't come from the right sources.

Another portent false god is the word "science". If you want to understand its tyrannical nature, lookup "scientism" and "enlightenment" on Wikipedia.

Coming back to Qutb, Wikipedia says he was posthumously cited for heresy by University al-Azhar because of his views on using force and violence to bring about an Islamic State. Paradoxically, he was also said to be against having any form of government at all, arguing that no man should be submissive to the state and Divine Law is sufficient to govern social interactions (which is way up my alley). The point I am making here is that even if you refer to Islamic Sources, you have to, at the end of the day, use your own brain to assess what is truthful, what is not.

The real difference between us, I think, is your dogmatic adherence to the Ahli Sunnah Wal Jamaah creed that Islamic Knowledge is to be derived only from

Quran > Hadith > Ulamas

But, as Chittick points out, the Ulamas who are qualified to issue guidance based on the Quran and Sunnah are all dead. The doors of Ijtihad are closed - Taqlid! No room to think! Imam Shafie's book, written centuries ago is all you have.

I admit, I exaggerate, to drive home my point.

To contrast, I learn from all sources, from conversations, books, films and songs (even that came from a song Rosdi and Razak would recognize). Whatever I learn, I bring it back to my "Islamic Mold", based on the meagre Islamic knowledge I have. If it fits, I accept. Otherwise, reject. To put it another way, I try to maximise my Islamic'ness subject to constraints such as knowledge and context. If anything compromises the two sets of five rukuns, I reject. But of course, I am no Wali and sometimes I forget.

Of course you are like me to some extent. Otherwise you would have gone to China, not Egypt or Yemen.

Salams