8 Tweets 32 reads Jul 03, 2023
The problem with Islamic modernism is that it is just a reconstruction of Islam within the framework of Protestant Christianity.
The problem with this is that any time you subject one system to another alien system, you have to distort the former to fit within the latter system.
So much so that the system loses its authenticity and its essence.
Also, contrary to popular belief, Islam got too enmeshed with modernity and adopted "too many of its trappings," as Dr Asad says, such that "Islam" as it was historically understood, lost its identity(ies).
The attempt to modernize Islam also has a dark past. As Massad says,
"Many saw fit to manipulate Islamic theology and transform Muslim ulamas to produce not only a modern Islam compatible with European modernity but also one that, they hoped, would weaken the Ottoman Empire."
—Massad, Islam in Liberalism, p, 69
The quote from Goldziher above is also important.
John Gray has something very insightful to say related to the point of losing the original identity of "Islam" as Asad mentions. He says,
"Fundamentalist religion is not the rejection of modernity it imagines itself to be: like Nazism, it is a peculiarly modern phenomenon. ++
Radical Islam sees itself as the enemy of Enlightenment; but Islamist though has been deeply shaped by modern Western radical ideologies-like Jacobinism and Leninism- that seeks to realise Enlightenment hopes by using methodical violence."
—John Gray, Enlightenment's Wake p.xv
The angry mob reaction towards modernism and scholars who were modernists is, I believe, precisely because modernism is an attempt to take away and transform an indigenous tradition of certain people in order to conform to the ever-changing Western standards.
As for Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, let me pull up the article by Aria Nakissa. He had pretty insightful stuff to say.

Loading suggestions...