Reading the Path of Orientalists Thought

Attending a public lecture jointly organized by IAIS Malaysia and Centre for Civilisational Dialogue, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur on 21st Oct 2010. The title was The Qur'an in the Popular American Imagination delivered by Prof. Dr. Carl W. Ernst Considered as one of non-Muslim specialist in Islamic studies.

What I highlighted from his quested about outsiders reading and understands of the Qur’an are:

1. They Believe that Qur’an supports violence against non-Muslim extremist reading that favor the most violent interpretation.
2. Crude assertation doctrine of abrogation (nash) so that as word verse (9: 29) cancel all verses of peace and tolerance.
3. Belief that Qur’an commands hostility toward Christian and Jews
4. Belief that Qur’an oppress world.

It becomes our next tasks that should be evaluated for those Muslims who qualified in explaining the sign of Gods based on Qur’an and Islamic methodology in order to correct these misunderstanding in an Islamic context created a great deal of confusion in the works of Orientalists attempting to assess modern Muslim thinkers, including those who were educated in the West.

After listening his lectures and rereading on the other resources, the Carl's notion is the same as his senior such as Bernard Lewis, W. Montgomery. Actually, they were trying to question of 'reformation' in Islam with little disguised aim of changing the Muslim view of Islam and bringing it as near as possible to Christianity.

” In the always asserted in one place that Islam, like Christianity, was 'offspring' of Judaism , and in another they look 'the Judaeo-Christian inheritance Islam' as an established fact. (Historians of Middle East, edited by Bernard Lewis and P.M. Holt (O.U.P., 1962) P.2,11.)”

“W. Montgomery Watt says that Muhammad ‘was aware of the Jewish teaching’ that he ‘was trying to make his religion more Jewish’ and that the Qur’an shows dependence on ‘Blibical tradition’. (W. Montgomery Watt, Muhammad: Prophet and Statement, Oxford 1961, p.15.39) see the review A.L. Tibawi, p10”

‘A lecture in University of London deserves that the author of the ridiculous dictum that 'Islam must be baptize change in its spirit or renounce its own relevance life. (N.J. Coulson, A History of Islamic Law, Edinburg, 1964)’ it cited from A.L. Tibawi p 14.

The notion of Carl W.E that show these statements could be observed on his next coming book "How to Read the Qur'an: A Reader's Guide to the Qur'an as Literature”. However, I haven’t read it yet. I just listened on his preview on this book from the author its self. then, I could summarize that the idea still the same as his seniors said earlier in their books.

In addition, they are trying to deconstruct a new path on reading and understanding the Holy Qur’an and turn into another view of others religions especially Christian. However, Christian religion itself still have many conflict including chiefly Paul who departed from original revelation and true teachings based on it, and who began preaching a new religion which later came to be called Christianity. Hence Christianity, by virtue of its being created by man, gradually developed its system of ritual by assimilation from other cultures and tradition as well as originating its own fabrications(further reading: Islam and Secularism, p28).

Strangely, When one of the participants were asking (Abdul Karim, here) opposing and re-convincing the speaker (Carl) that Islam is conformity the previous religion of Islam (Al Ahzab: 40, here) (Al A’raf: 158,here) (Al Maidah: 48, here) .

Yet, he answered (Carl) “ignorance keeps coming up” it means that he has her own belief on how to understand Qur’an and you (as Muslims) we have your own path.

However, Syed Muhammad Naquib Al-Attas (1978) said in his book “Islam and Secularism” that those ideas could be said as the process of ‘secularization’. He said:

‘It deliverance of man ‘first from religious and then from metaphysical control over his reasons and his language.’ (p17) so he added also that secularization has its roots not in biblical faith, but in the interpretation of biblical faith by Western man (p20).

However, some ridiculous things are the non-Muslims advocates of reform that on the one hand they profess that Islam (in what sense they do not say) is too rigid and cannot be reformed in the law undermine the shari'ah (A.L. Tibawi, p6).

Al-Attas said that Islam is the subjective, personal religion of the individual as well as the objective, pervading self-same religion of the Community – that it operated as the same religion in the individual as a single entity as well as the society composed collectively of such entities. It is implicit in our exposition that Islam is both belief and faith (Iman) as well as as submission in service (Islam); it is both assent of the heart (qalb) and mind (‘aql) confirmed by the tongue (lisan) as well as deed and work (‘amal); it is the harmonious relationship established between both to God as well as to Holy Prophet (may God bless and give him Peace!); it is accepting whole heartedly the truth of the Testimony (Kalima shahadah) that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah – Islam is the unity of all these, together with what the entail, in belief and in practice, in the person of the Muslim as well as in the Community as whole (Islam and Secularism, p71,72).

I do believe that seemingly Carl missed and ignored the critical point of Islam as Al-Attas said at the first essence Muslim beliefs. If non-Muslim thinkers on Qur’an interpretations and they keep on producing their books and thought. So that we just accept it without critical view of their works. ultimately, it would lead to the Muslims reform (islah) means either ‘restoration’ of Islam to its pristine essence or ‘purification’ of the practices of Muslims from unauthorized accretions. Ironically, we are being object of reformation in the Western sense of the term and it might be possible that Ka’bah would be removed from the Mecca into the West. Then ironically, we just keep on silent and just believe it. Ho ho ho

If they did so, there is no way to believe of what he believed because he never cares of what we believed it. “To you be your Way, and to me mine (Al-kafirun: 6)”.

I agree as A.L. Tibawi said "I do not write in any retaliatory spirit and my sole aim to be the re-establishment of truth which I love more..".

Considered superficially, if history is merely information about past events...In reality it is insight and verfication, accurate discovery of origins and cause. Ibn Khaldun (d. 1406) in the Muqaddimah (Beirut, 1900), pp, 3-4. cited from the book Tibawi (1976).

Now is the time for us to stand up and become messengers and ambassadors of the truth we profess. This is the only way we will beat back the lies, distortions, and propaganda that have made even some Muslims question the possibility of a positive future for Muslims in the western world.

Note: For further reading please read these books:

• Al-Attas, S.M.N (1978). Islam and Secularism, Art Printing Works Sdn. Bhd. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

• Tibawi. A.L (1979). Second Critique of English-Speaking Orientalists Their Approach to Islam and the Arabs, The Islamic Cultural Centre, London.
  

• Tibawi. A.L (1976). Arabic and Islamic Themes Historical, Educational and Literary Studies. Luzac & Company LTD. London.