Islamism Modernism and Secular State (Coursework Sample)

Islamism Modernism and Secular State Name Institution Date Introduction Various ideological responses are aiming to reconcile Islamic beliefs with the modern values of the west. The new methods and rules of Islamic theology define democracy and civil rights as well as equality to promote rationality in the western states. The attempt to promote modernism has led to the issues of political arguments, and whether Quran is interpreted based on political or religious perspectives. Setting up standards to observe modernism as well as human rights has forced different political and religious activists to bring forward different arguments; where some refer from Sharia’s while others argue based on Quran concept, and there is no willingness to deviate. The issue of Islamic modernism has therefore propelled rhetoric of whether Islamic community should differ from some cultural beliefs in Sharias. To address the ambiguity, diverse theories have emerged concerning the relationship of Islamic beliefs and modernism. Constitution and the modernism The western civilization and the colonialism among the Muslim states brought about divergent movements including Secularism, Islamism, and Salafism to renovate Islamic believes in the modern world. The activist of such movement; Muhammad Abdu and Muhammad Rashid Rida insisted on the movements of modernism to promote Islamic faith as well as putting public life into reformations (Mansoor, 2015). Their main aim was to promote democracy among Islamic states, and their response towards other cultural believes. It is argued that today, Muslims have emerged to conform to democracy in most western states through a considerable influence from the constitutional mandate. The efforts of Muhammad Abdu have been actively reinforced by the Islamic Council of Europe by insisting that political power is invalid without the participation of the public; and that the community must conform to Shura to address such issues (Antony, 2011). Also, Islamic communities’ strategies are emphasized on eradication of ruling with personal discretion; arguing that there is no person allowed to rule without consultation. This is specifically pointed out through the intention of most Islamic leaders to borrow the concept of leadership from captivating chief (amir). The leaders are therefore entitled to accentuate the form of leadership about Shura as the charismatic chief did (Antony, 2011). They emphasize on ruling with virtue by considering the expectations of the community. Through this law, the Islamic community tends to adopt the western form of leadership that is based on democracy and keen consideration of human rights. The rule by one single entity or an individual leadership is a far much-forgotten case in the Muslim society. In the past centuries, they considered ruling to be entitled to a person, and the determination of who to rule was majorly based on hereditary concepts. The Islam states have moved ahead to repulse the activities of dictatorial leaders such as Mubarak in Egypt and Shah in Malaysia (Natana, 2010). Nowadays they rule with democracy; a theory which has been alleged to have been copied from the western civilizations. According to the historical facts, the civilization is particularly considered to have emerged through activists such as Rida. He majored on promoting Muslim reforms. In Turkey, he held several campaigns to restructure the rule of leadership and the role of a leader in the society by setting up some constitutions to govern the relationship between Muslims and the leadership (Hallaq, 2012). Through his attempt, it is evident today how Muslims have been reformed and bound by western civilization through adequate replication of western culture. According to Rida, he explained the parts of Sharia in detail by application of the ideas of Afghani and Abdu illustrating that the gates of individual judgment should be reopened; and that people should return to sources (Antony, 2011). By this, he promoted the first stages of Turkish Revolution that are seen bearing many fruits to the Islamic Society. Muslims can differentiate and understand the parts of Sharia so clearly. There is an evidence of distinguishing between the parts that deal with social conduct and those that deal with unchanging circumstances. Through his efforts, Muslims are well placed as opposed to their prior believes; where the Sharia was given a priority and the rights of human beings were violated because of poor interpretation of the Sharia. Parliaments are initiating democracy and the rule of justice s cropping up among Islamic states to support the human legislation. The laws of Caliph are forgotten among Islamic societies. He is no longer considered a true religious leader because of his teachings that were insignificant among Muslim states. According to Rida, he considered Caliph as a worldwide leader but not a religious leader because he could not implement religious laws to transform Muslims into the modern world (Hallaq, 2012). Caliph laws are non-existing, and the constitution has taken power to reform Muslims as a whole including their religious education. Mujtahids have taken the mandate of redeveloping Sharia on the social parts as suggested by Rida (Hallaq, 2012). They practice moral leadership among Muslims and religious guidance as opposed to the rules of Caliph in the past centuries. According to the modern Mujtahids, the constitution is given priority in their daily roles to emphasize religious faith by practicing modernism with sobriety. Elections, Constitutional interpretations, administrations, and legislations have taken the course to restructure Muslim modernism. The choices of people are based on the constitution as Rida suggested before. The past approach where leaders were recognized rather than being elected is forgotten among the Muslims. The acceptance of any citizen as a leader is based on the modern formal election criteria where the choices and decisions of people are prioritized; constitutionalism has spread especially in European states, and the Muslim modernism is replacing the ancient traditional form of leadership which was based on autocracy (Mansoor, 2015). The social, political leadership have been enhanced by offering training activities to Muslim leaders in the sense of promoting traditional orders into modern doctrines. In order to implement traditional values effectively, Rida injected more weight to the European Islamic states to formulate constitution rather than the representative government in the decisions made concerning the preservation of religious beliefs among Muslims (Natana, 2010). The effect is valid even today; Muslims are educated on their leadership roles and the response to critical issues in the society. Democracy and Modernism Sovereignty and the rule of law are practiced by Muslims today to a much wider extent as compared to the era of their forefathers. There is no evidence that all of them are practicing the principle of democracy, but a good number of Muslims who are not naïve have put the rule into practice by differentiating between inhuman and rational characters. Rached Gannouchi explained that he sees Islam being transformed into a western democracy (Antony, 2011). It is practical that most of them have acquired the modern western democratic behaviors by eliminating racial and ethnic discriminations. Democracy and human rights have been observed so far in the western communities. Muslims have embraced the culture of treating other westerners in more democratic principles. Formerly, human rights activism was left as the role of Western Christian communities. Today, Muslims are well structured in embracing human rights; considering the rights of other is evident, though it has been neglected by other Muslims on the part of the outsiders. Hasan Turabi from Sudan argued anciently that the religious belief of Islam is a form of practicing democracy. Later, he contradicted himself by arguing that the Islamic government is not a government of the people as other governments, but it is a rule of the Sharia and that the Sharia represents the conviction of the people (Mansoor, 2015). The Muslim was formerly practicing the idea. They considered Sharia more important than human rights, and failure to follow its implementations would call for the inhuman killing of the affected individuals. Today Sharia has been considered inadequate by many Muslim societies. It has undergone major reforms to avert the Muslims in line with democracy in the modern world. The Muslims political activists pass the rule of the legislature just as the western states also pass the rule of human rights. This is so much divergent from the 1980s where the Sharia was the source of all legislations (Mansoor, 2015). Today, democracy has been put into practice to model Sharia laws and help in putting them into practice. Legislations have been brought forward to eliminate human discriminations in the Muslim states. One can agree with Qutb who also suggested that the strength and importance of a nation do not rely on the institutions but the underlying principles and the virtue of the few who are in power (Natana, 2010). Settling such matters would transform everything to be under control and in a good place for the benefit of the society. The main idea is that whether the constitution is embraced or not, democracy is fundamental in the Muslim society because it preserves the Sharia laws and developing conformity with the modernism. Islamic Politics and the modernism Religion and politics have also been forms of Islamic modernism and courses of civilizations. Political icons such as Mawardi and Ibbn Taymiyya implemented unity between political and religion doctrines (Hallaq, 2012). The motive of the idea was to deliver gain into their society. Among Muslim...