This lecture seems to be divided into 3 sections. In the first section, Akyol mentioned the experience of his pilgrimage in Mecca, which aroused his curiosity about tradition and the Islamic core. In the next section, Akyol states that local traditions such as the segregation of women and honor killing do not represent the core of Islam and gives several examples to support this point. The final section is the main content of this lecture. He explains how Islamic modernism initially took shape, then declined and eventually became revived in Muslim countries.
Akyol found a contradiction between religion and tradition when he went on a pilgrimage in Mecca. In Saudi Arabia, separation of the sexes is strictly observed; however, in Kabbah, the holy place of Islam, there is no separation of the sexes and men and women pray side by side. Akyol tracked the Qur’an, the original scripture of Islam, and he realized that this tradition is not described in the Qu’ran. The practice of seclusion of women was a later development of Islam, which deprived from a mix of Byzantine and Persian cultural traditions.
To clarify the differences between tradition and Islam, there are many notorious examples reflecting that local practices have contradicted Islamic values, such as female circumcision and honor killing, which are local traditions and have nothing to do with core Islamic values. Additionally, Akyol points out current Islamic issues, such as punishments for alcohol drinking and apostasy are not attested in the Qur'an. These ruling were instituted in the medieval period of Islam as interpretation of doctrine but not from the early scriptural core of Islam.
Akyol states that the interpretation of Islam is in fact flexible. In the late 19th century, Muslim intellectuals reinterpreted the scripture in the form of modernism. They admired the values of democracy, science and technology in Europe and rediscovered these concepts, or at least concepts consonant with them, have always existed in the Qur’an. This doctrine is called Islamic modernism. The Ottoman Empire was influenced by this thinking and made a series of reforms, which can be seen as a form of proto-democracy at that time.
However,the trend of Islamic modernism sharply declined with the growing of Islamism in the 20th century. Islamism was quite popular in Muslim countries because this ideology triggered Muslim anti-Westernism in the period of western colonialism. But after the decolonization of Muslim countries, secular dictators suppressed Islamism and Islamists fought back in a reactionary way, which caused a vicious cycle. Only Turkey could escape from this vicious cycle and represents the resurgence of Islamic modernism because Turkey has the first free election in the Muslim countries, the majority of moderate and pious Muslims to support their government to join in the EU integration and most importantly, the value of Turkey has inspired many young Arab to fight for freedom in the Arab Spring.
Critique
Akyol makes an explicit point in the beginning of the lecture that tradition cannot be justified in the name of Islam. Local practices like the seclusion of women, and honor killing are not mentioned in the Qur’an. These practices, on the contrary, were shaped by local traditions and culture, irrespective of religion.
Secondly, Akyol gives a historical overview of the concept of Islamic modernism, pointing out that it flourished in the late 19th century, declined in the 20th century in the wave of Islamism and dictatorships and has been eventually revived in the early part of the21st century. Although Akyol makes a basic outline regarding the Islamic modernism, there are some points that Akyol does not clarify clearly.
One point that can be clarified is the relationship between Islamic modernism and Islamism (Political Islam) are not entirely contradictions. To some degree, both share more similarities than differences. In fact, the strategies of Islamism are multiple rather than monolithic. In Akyol’s presentation, it seems that he categorizes Islamism as a radical ideology that intimidates Islamic modernism.However, the concept of modernity is also embraced in Islamism. In fact, as Peter Mandaville states, modernity is the main precondition for the emergence of Islamism as a distinct political strategy.[1]Therefore, as the proponents of Islamism were influenced by the doctrine of Islamic modernism, Islamic modernism and Islamism can be seen as having the same political ideology in this respect.
Secondly,Akyol did not give a complete picture when he described the decline of Islamic modernism. To my knowledge,Islamic modernism was not overshadowed by Islamism but rather by Arab nationalism. Since the end of WWII, the Arab nation-states have emerged in the Middle East, and Egyptian president Gamal Nasser promoted the idea of“Pan-Arabism” to unite their citizens and to defend against westernhegemony.Pan-Arabism was prevalent in1950s-1960s but it collapsed after Israel defeated the Arab alliances in 1967's Six-Day war.
Finally, in Akyol's speech, Turkey, which is the only country to have escaped from the "vicious cycle" of Islamism and authoritarianism, is poised to play a leading role to revive the Islamic modernism. Although Akyol did not overtly claim that Turkey would be a key country to lead Muslim countries, this speech implies that Turkey can and should have the ambitions to restore the glorious Ottoman Empire! [2]
[1] Peter Mandaville, Global Political Islam (NewYork: Routledge Publishers, 2007,) p.57.
[2] The Ottoman Empire was a great power of the world in 16th -17thcentury. Since the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1922, Turkey as a secular country has maintained good relationships with Western countries. However in recent years,we can see Turkey adjusts its foreign policy, which is called Neo-Ottomanism and has intimated with Arab countries. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Ottomanism.
留言
張貼留言