Islam and modernity like oil and water? Think for yourself!

This post is the first in a series of seven in response to an  article by theologian Roger E Olson.  He raises the question, “Are modernity and Christianity like oil and water?”  arguing that all Christians living in modernity have been influenced by modernity in some form or another because modernity is a worldview and set of socio-cultural habits.  They have also been forced to take a position on it, either rejecting modernity totally (the Amish – although by remaining in the 19th century, it could be argued that they are still modern) or attempting to make Christianity compatible with much of modernity by shearing it of its “Hellenistic and medieval accretions” (the Fundamentalists).  This question and these approaches can be observed in Islam equally, and is a rich source of contemplation.  In this article, he lists seven ways in which the mindset of modernity is fundamentally incompatible with the mindset of Christianity.

At the root of modernity, he argues, is “Immanuel Kant’s imperative “Sapere aude!”—“think for yourself!””  He says that each individual should believe only what they are convinced about, and not what religious authorities deem correct.  In the past, religious scholars may have chosen to reject authority, but they did not make this something which anybody could do – no matter how little knowledge they possessed, or training in logic and reasoning.

In the world of Islam, we have also seen a growth in a type of reformist fundamentalism and a corresponding decline in the number of people who follow the four schools of Sunni Islam.  I remember when I became a Muslim, people would tell me that I must follow a school, but without explaining why.  I later found out that it was because of this trend developing in the Muslim world, coming from modernism, which had rejected madhhabs and claimed to go back to the earliest sources, (the salaf). They look ancient, but at the same time, they are very modern and embrace technology and the modern way of life.  We have seen people proclaiming themselves as leaders of the Muslims with no background in religious scholarship.  We all know that the Internet is full of people arguing about religion and giving their opinions and criticising people who have dedicated their lives to acquiring religious knowledge.  It is for this reason that there is the saying, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing!”

As for the idea of thinking for oneself, Islam has always encouraged this.   From the inception of Islam, Muslims were encouraged to learn how to read and write and some literate non-Muslim prisoners were offered their freedom by the Prophet in exchange for teaching people to read and write.  Memorising the Qur’an was prioritised, in contrast to Christianity where lay people were kept ignorant and forbidden from reading the bible for five hundred years, having to rely always upon their priests for religious knowledge.

There is also a difference between Christianity and Sunni Islam in that, there is no priesthood and no theocracy.  The Imam is not a priest but a leader of prayers, and a popular preacher is not necessarily a man of scholarship.  There is a high value placed upon scholarship in Islam. This is backed by the Qur’an which advises us that when information comes to somebody it should be brought to those in authority for it to be checked.  Religious authority rests with scholars, who play a similar role in day-to-day affairs as the scientific community does.  Scientists are respected, they are consulted, they have different specialisms, disciplines and areas of expertise, and they have a range of opinions.   This is the same for religious scholars in Islam.

Scholars are treated with the utmost respect, but Muslims know that the Qur’an is critical of followers of previous religions who took their priests as Lords (9:31).  In addition, the Qur’an is critical of those who blindly follow tradition which is not based upon knowledge and therefore mere superstition:

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمُ اتَّبِعُوا مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ قَالُوا بَلْ نَتَّبِعُ مَا أَلْفَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَهْتَدُون.

And if it is said to them, “Follow what Allah sent down,” they say, “Nay, we follow what we received from our forefathers.”  What? Even if their forebears did not understand anything and were not guided? (2:170)

And similarly in 5:104, Allah says,

وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ تَعَالَوْا إِلَىٰ مَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَإِلَى الرَّسُولِ قَالُوا حَسْبُنَا مَا وَجَدْنَا عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَنَا أَوَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَهْتَدُون

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا عَلَيْكُمْ أَنفُسَكُمْ لَا يَضُرُّكُم مَّن ضَلَّ إِذَا اهْتَدَيْتُمْ إِلَى اللَّهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُون.

And if it is said to them, come to what Allah revealed and to the Messenger, they say, “What we found our forebears on is enough for us.  What – even if their forebears didn’t know anything and were not guided?

And in Surah 6:148, Allah challenges those who associated partners with God (lesser gods)  to bring  proof, and then says, They are following only speculation and making up lies.

There are also numerous verses in the Qur’an asking people to reflect, to think, and to bring  proof for their assertions.

Are they not thinking about the Qur’an , and if it were from other than God they would find in it many inconsistencies (4:82)

There are eight verses mentioning the need for proofs:

“And they say, “only the Jews or Christians will enter Jannah” Bring the proof if what you say is true (2:111)

We can see from this that Islam does challenge baseless superstition, but not from pure reason alone.  It requires knowledge and proof to be brought.  This is why people who do not have such knowledge should not think that they themselves have the authority to issue radical reinterpretations and reforms.

One point of friction is that the bounds of knowledge have changed with modernity.  Revelation and intuition and metaphysics are not accepted as being about true knowledge because there is no proof in the scientific sense.  This is a narrow box to think in!   However a traditionalist might counter that a scientist is not qualified to pronounce on religious matters, because he only knows his field of science and is not an expert in theology or cosmology.  See this lecture by Said Hussein Nasr

One of the beautiful things about reading texts from Muslim writers in the Middle Ages is the way in which they set out their arguments, using logic, reason, evidence, often giving several opinions from different scholars, and then  finish by writing, “wallahu a’lam,” literally, “And God knows better.”  It showed their awareness of the limitations of our human knowledge.

I would argue that Islam is not incompatible with modernity if it is designed as rationality.  A training in logic and reasoning was a standard part of traditional Islamic education at the high school level.  However, it will take issue with an extremely narrow definition of what constitutes knowledge, a lack of respect for scholarship, and the idea that anyone’s opinion is valid even if that person has no training in reasoning and very little knowledge.

So in answer to the rephrasing of the question by Olson about whether Islam and Modernity are like oil and water, I would say that we should look at this a different way.  Islam does not have this opposition between two incompatible things.  Rather, it is like milk – an emulsion combining liquid and fat, which is both pure and beneficial to humanity.

There is a famous hadith about the Prophet, peace be upon him, being offered wine to drink and offered milk.  He chose the milk and was congratulated because had he chosen the wine, his community would have gone astray.  Perhaps this is not just about the anti-social effects of alcohol, but about the blending nature of milk.