Islamization of the majority is not state fundamentalism – Khalina Khalili

Mohamed Imran Mohamed Taib’s article on the “Islamization” of Malaysia is a good example of the free range afforded by the academic endeavor of knowledge reconstruction.

Reconstructionists can reshape history to fit the modern landscape by simply adjusting their eye-glasses.

Mohamed Imran’s article appears to be the outlet for venting-out his angst for Malaysia’s at times less-than-perfect instances of implementing the Islamic injunction for “promoting good and forbidding evil” (‘amr bi’l- ma’ruf wa nahī ‘an al-munkār).

Of course, such an injunction is common in various other religious and philosophical traditions as well.

In an effort to instill integrity and a commitment to knowledge, it is important to clarify the murky confusion that arose from a piece of writing that equates oranges with apples.

Mohamed Imran referred to the religious authorities of Malaysia as “fundamentalists”, with its presumed media-friendly connotation of being “extremists”.

Mohamed Imran assumes since one plus one is two, then a fundamentalist religious authority under the Malaysian government results in a fundamentalist country that forces Islam to be the “way of life” for everyone, the “solution” to all of the citizens’ problems and the creation of a theocracy.

He made quite a somersault to justify such conclusions.

The examples given by Mohamed Imran are not what the concept of “Islamization” represents. Islamization is a continuous process of learning and implementing the injunctions of Islam in all spheres of life.

When Allah revealed that “…This day, I have perfected your religion for you,” (al-Qur’an 5:3) referring to the end of revelation with the impending demise of the Prophet Muhammad, it was the Message that was completed.

Muslims both individually and collectively, have not perfected their understanding and implementation of this religion even to this very day.

Al-Attas is indeed the fountain of knowledge that connects today’s Muslims to their intellectual tradition by unearthing the classical works of scholars who practiced myriad “ways of life” – be it as physicians, astronomers, chemists and theologians – all within the framework of Islam.

These scholars provided true “solutions” to the architectural and economical needs of the Muslim empires - serving their governors and sultans notwithstanding whatever denominations or religions they professed.

The famous mujāhid, Salahuddin al-Ayyūbī employed a Jewish physician to care for him. Maimonides was known not only for his works on medicine, astronomy and mathematics, but also on his explication of Jewish Law.

Amazingly, Maimonides – a Jew living in a Muslim theocracy, was immensely successful as a spiritual guide for the Jewish people even to this day.

In Al-Attas’ “Islam and Secularism,” he defines Islamization as the “liberation of man first from magical, mythological, animistic, national-cultural tradition opposed to Islam and then from secular control over his reason and his language.” (Al-Attas, 1978 p.44)

Malaysians are acutely aware of the paralyzing influence of magic and animistic tradition on primitive cultures, as evidenced from our society’s preoccupation with hantu and hysteria.

Well, the process of Islamization thus far has not fully eradicated this insecurity. Mohamed Imran is right to point out al-Attas’ rejection of secularism as paramount to the Islamization of Muslims.

The author appeared defensive of the Western ideology and its promotion of secularism.

Al-Attas explained the historical origin of secularism in his book and admitted that he is in fact opposed mainly to the process of secularization (termed secularizationism), which poses a threat to Muslims and all traditional societies that maintain a balanced spiritual and physical existence.

The duality of being that secularism propagates has brought upon the West, a loss of their spiritual grasp, as evidenced from the gluttony of colonialism.

Secularism and democracy are plastic words that give the speaker a false sense of knowledge about its underlying meaning.

The true meaning of “secularism”, can be deduced from its Latin origin of “seculum”(temporal) – along with its accompanying etymology, yet a reconstructionist would say that a word takes on whatever meaning society deems it to be.

So, to follow along with Mohamed Imran’s ideology of secularism, he said that, “What the fundamentalists fear from such a project is not so much of the idea of liberal Muslims trying to “secularize Islam”, but rather, of the case of them “Islamizing secularism”..

It turns out that the “Islamizing secularism” phase has passed by the author unannounced.

Malaysia is one of the most progressive Muslim country in the world for Islamizing secularism.

The proof is in the pudding – Islamic banking, Islamic school, Islamic insurance and many more Islamic endeavours, including democracy.

Well, Malaysia has been there and done that. The real challenge now is not to Islamicize, but to bring about true justice and spiritual progress.

The banking and endowment institution and others are not Western institution per se, because money lending and endowment, educational establishment, hotel industries (caravan sarai) and hospitals were all common in medieval Muslim lands.

As Malaysia learns from her past and current failures at juggling Islam and secularism, Islamization is the dynamic stability that anchors the majority Muslim population towards perfection (ihsan) in conduct towards all members of society. – August 14, 2013.

* Khalina Khalili is a postgraduate student at the Centre for Advanced Studies in Islam, Science and Civilization at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.