Ismail Farooqui’s Thoughts on Education- Some Reflections

More known for his world wide movement of Islamization of knowledge program, Ismail Farooqui’s primary concern was to shape and update Islamic Education curriculum for the Western world and the education in general for the Muslim Ummah. Islamization of knowledge program and his protgonism for it made him a champion of Islamization and diminished his primary concern of education of the Muslims. It must, however, be noted that his drive for Islamization was an effort of an intellectual, as he actually was, aiming to explore the reasons for Muslim’s apathy for modern education, the world over. The education system which had cultural, historical and civilization roots in the west dominated the world and was obviously not appealing to the non-west. Being external to their mindset, this system needed additional features to identify itself with the Islamic civilization and making it appealing to the Muslim people. His twelve point program as given in the Islamization of knowledge: General Principles and work plan quite intelligently the develops necessary features in the education system which on the one hand make it civilizationally acceptable to Muslims and also maintain the dynamism on the other.

Education is civilization bound

                Colonization of Muslim land and its continuation for at least two centuries was not merely a geographical annexation and political subjugation. It was also intellectual domination by the colonizers. Life as a whole was now governed by ideology, traditions, culture and civilization of the colonial people. The education system, health care, agriculture, business and trade, management and every other thing related to life was defined, formed, shaped and formulated by ethos alien. This resulted in gradual isolation of Muslims from civil life and when it became difficult to carry on, they began to adopt the western values and the system, although reluctantly. Gradually the mindset began to change. Those who could not adapt failed to take part in the onward movement of civilization and development of society. And those who did, began to lose their intellectual identity. Till recently dominant system gradually became out dated making those trained in it, irrelevant. Muslim’s earliest response to face the challenge was simply defensive. They thought it urgent and necessary to take measures to safeguard and strengthen their identity which best reflected in their religious education system carried out in institutions called madarsas.

                However, large cross-section of madarsas, which did attract students, could not make them relevant to the world. They could neither make the religious issues and questions relevant to the time nor could their religious intellectualism benefit or give direction to solving the issues of life.

                This was the scenario in which Ismail Farooqui began to formulate his ideas. Briefly he had two objectives in mind.¹

           1.       Modification of the Islamic religious education so that it could become relevant to time and make its students contemporary.

           2.       Reunderstand and research Islamic civilizational roots of disciplines which go into creating modern knowledge and system of education.

Central idea behind these two targets was to totally discard the view that Islam encouraged two systems one for the world and other for religion life. According to him Islam’s basic belief and doctrine and also its system of values, are meant to simultaneously harness the spiritual i.e. religious and the worldly needs. In fact Islam is dynamic enough to entertain the problems and issues arising in both the realms.

Tawheed, the basic ingredient

Ismail Farooqui emphasis is on the cardinal principle of Tawheed which constitute the backbone of Islamic thoughts, culture and actions. This is evident in his seminal work on Tawheed and also in the preface of his Islamization of knowledge General Principle and work plan monograph.

“The first is the unity of knowledge, under which all disciplines must seek rational, objective, critical knowledge of the truth. This will put to rest once and for all the claim that some science is aqli and some science is naqli and hence irrational; that some disciplines are scientific and absolute and others dogmatic and relative. The second is the unity of life under which all disciplines must take intro cognizance and serve the telic nature of creation. This will put to rest the claim that some disciplines are value-full while others are value-free or neutral. The third is the unity of history, under which all disciplines will acknowledge the ummatic or societal nature of all human activity, and serve the purposes of the ummah in history. This will put to rest the division of knowledge into individual and social sciences, making all the disciplines at once humanistic and ummatic.”²

The essence of Tawheed is both spiritual as well as intellectual and therefore the Islamic world-view, when dominant transforms heart and mind both, shaping religious performance of individuals and civilizatoinal growth of people and communities. In civilzational growth, the study of nature and human-nature relations and the ensuring education system are deeply impacted by the world view and this gives it a distinct character. Farooqui’s analysis of the malice of present day Ummah manifests a deep seated understanding of the implications of tawheed on thought, practice and intellection. His concern for developing Islamic identity in knowledge in general and social sciences in particular is a manifestation of this realization. Unfortunately however, the realms of knowledge which are shaped by observation and experiments and are of public utility and which require, apart from conceptual facts, functional values as well, have been overlooked in his Work Plan. No stress on functional Islamic values seems to have made Ismail Farooqui’s thoughts almost irrelevant to observational sciences. These sciences being primary source of innovations and creativity, his concern for education remains bereft of the potential necessary for civilizational and intellectual growth of ummah.

                However most important aspect of his educational thoughts for which he used the controversial term of Islamization of knowledge, is the realization that for its non-conformity with Islamic world-view, the modern knowledge has been unable to seat itself in the Muslims psyche. For this reason there is a general lack of enthusiasm among Muslims, for participation and involvement in it. His twelve points are interesting but can’t be operative in a modern university system which is governed by a non-Islamic rather alien world-view. That for these twelve points to be really productive a alternative structure is needed to be proposed, did not occur to Ismail Farooqui and perhaps for that one reason his Work Plan soon lost steam.

       1-      Islam and Knowledge. Al Faruqi’s concept of Religion in Islamic Thought. Edited by Imtiaz Yusuf I.B. Tauris(2012)

2-     Islmaization of knowledge: General Principles and Work Plan. By Ismail Raji al Faruqi IIIT(1982

The Bridge Course- As I see it

To bridge is to let the unmeetables meet and make common the route leading to the destination. In matters academic the bridging is needed when one tradition finds it necessary to join hands with the other rather allein tradition. Bridging is possible only when the two traditions are strong enough to survive independently and in terms of commonality of goals they are not poles apart. In other words the two traditions may have harmony and be simultaneously distinct.

                In case at hand the Islamic madarsa system and the modern education represent two very strong and potential paradigms- the one having great capacity to survive even without an established support and the other guaranteeing growth and development, even if it is indiscriminate. Undeniably the two paradigms have several common points. However, their differences are basic and fundamental. First and foremost difference lie in the nature of knowledge man possesses. In the madarsa education paradigm man is considered inherently incognizant in certain areas of knowledge. The tools of knowing that he possesses do help him have exact knowledge in matters related to material world  but his own relation with this world, with his self and nature of relation with likes of him remain elusive to the forays of these tools. This paradigm impresses upon man the significance of his incognizance and the need to know it. In fact the source of knowing this unknowable realm has penetrated deep and played important role in every kind of activity be it intellectual, scientific, aesthetic, socio-economic or socio-political.

                On the contrary, modern education paradigm does not recognize any realm beyond physical tools of knowing, making the entire world of relations constructed around material means and ends. Thus the two paradigms differ with one another in terms of the world view in which, say for example, man’s freedom to think and act is a guided operation in one case and absolutely sense-perception based in the other. The two paradigms differ and overlap as well, giving rise to academic tradition having many a things common and equally many a things different. The madarsa paradigm has very strong back up of values which have roots not only in observation and experiment but also in extra-sensory sources. The modern education paradigm is, however, absolutely free from any extra-sensory source of knowing. Comparing the two paradigms in terms of few very common concepts, we can easily visualize the nature of difference and similarities in the two. Thus one finds that in one paradigm man is master of universe and in the other he is Khalifa; there is nothing beyond the world in one, there is Akhira in the other; for knowledge there is additional guidance of Wahi apart from observation and experiment which are common in both; for individual there is society; for freedom there is surrender and for Nafs there is tazkiya i.e. purification. These concepts and values distinguish the two paradigms from each other. Obviously the paradigm of modern education being already internal to that of the madarsa paradigm, the harmony between the two could be cultivated and actualized by integrating the distinguishing features with the modern one.

                In this scenario the bridge course stands for a conscious effort to let the distinguishing features of madarsa education impregnate the modern paradigm. To be honest the bridge course, in its present format, does not inform us on this objective. It seems that the students from madarsa stream are ready to accommodate the wisdom of modern paradigm. Unfortunately, however, the adherents of modern system, in spite of realizing the need and rationale of madarsas paradigm, are unable even to admit it. They are ready, rather enthusiastically, to impart to the madarsas students whatever they have but are not yet convinced to begin a dialogue between the two paradigms. Thus the bridge course may be only partially beneficial. Maybe more fruitful to the madarsas students as it help them recognize the forgotten dimensions of knowledge which not so long ago flourished in their system but have now been taken over by the protagonists and system of the modern knowledge. But there in strong likelihood of the would-be madarsas based scholars getting lost into the labyrinth of modernity. It is more likely because its paradigm dominates, flourishing and producing results. Most intelligent way of coming out successfully in this venture of bridging is to begin with common point and a healthy criticism of both. Hope it works.

THE FIRST MUSLIM: THE STORY OF MUHAMMAD BY LASELY HAZLETON

Reviewed by:

Dr M Zaki Kirmani

The First Muslim: The story of Muhammad by Lasely Hazleton is an Atlantic Book product of 2013. Quite a challenging work really for Muslim Scholarship by a Western Scholar of Jewish origin. The book can well be described somewhere between love, and objectively imaginative analysis of, a human being who was adorned by divine care and chosen as a prophet. Lasely’s is a successful narrative of this unique character, as it strikes wonderful balance between what is from divine and what is on account of  human  imperfection and frailties . It has been a very difficult task  indeed  as most of the books on Seerah by  Muslim scholars  have generally been not so successful in defining Mohammad. They have been overwhelmed by the idea of his divine protection, realizing little that it becomes a psychological barrier for emulation by common human folks. His entire achievements become God’s acts and even his sufferings and sacrifices sometimes fail to impress upon because of this underlying divine patronage. On occasions I have personally experienced and even harbored such feelings towards prophet and prophethood. This rather over emphasis on divine relation of Muhammad serves to dampen our attachment with him. And constant Quranic reminder that God has sent you a prophet, from amongst you and in him is the best model for you to emulate, fails to unfold its real meaning. Ironically, popular books on seerah in Urdu and English, authored by Muslims fail to pay attention to this aspect. Conscious or unconscious emphasis on divine patronage no doubt succeeds to strengthen our faith in Muhammad’s prophethood but emulation of his actions becomes a distant objective. This is here Lasely Hazleton is spectacularly successful and easily establishes her superiority over several Muslim biographers  of the Prophet.

                An orphan even before birth and the story that Abdul Muttalib, the grandfather, was about to sacrifice his father Abdullah, and then very early departure of his mother must have played very important role in his upbringing and making him more serious and sober than the children of his age. This is so natural and close to our general experience and observation that one hasn’t got to be a future prophet for such a character in early age. Desirous of marrying his first cousin Umme Hani, but finally settling with a forty year old widow throws ample light on the nature of his ‘desire’ and a longing for someone to take care of him; which he missed in the childhood. Khadijah sufficed him both as till she was alive, Muhammad needed no other.

                Lasely throws ample light on the religio-social structure of society Muhammad was born in. Significance of forefathers, and the role of elders of the clans in pagan religious doctrine that thrived in then Makkah and tribes around,  in providing protection to its members is explained in an easily perceptible manner. Abu Talib being the leader of Hashmiete clan, the protection Muhammad enjoyed was a part of tradition of social structure of Arabs. Life threatening situation he faced on the death of Abu Talib, which became severe when Abu Lehab, the new leader, withdrew protection on him was primarily responsible for his journey to Taif. This narrative is so comprehensive and impressive that increased vulnerability of Muhammad to the tyrannies of Quresh makes it a human need to search a new protector. His journey to Taif was a desperate attempt of a man in danger and under threat. Described as a journey for Dawah by majority of biographers, fails to evoke the feeling that Lasely’s narrative does.

                Gap of two years between first and second revelation and consequent psychological distress and pain Muhammad experienced is beautifully explained in terms of pure human experience of the joy of being chosen and the agony of being neglected and ignored. The revelation, as recorded by eye witnesses, being a body shaking experience can’t, in normal circumstances be yearned for. However, the accompanying joy of being chosen by God, long delay in resumption of communication with Him raised many questions in Muhammad’s mind. The thought that perhaps he has now been discarded was so agonizing that he even thought of ending the life itself. This be it,the episodes of migration to Madina, battles fought there, and then the policies of interaction among different people residing in the new city, all exhibit a character, wisdom, insight and intelligence of extremely high and extraordinary superior degree. In spite of divine assurance of help and protection, nothing super-natural was seen when Muhammad and his followers were in distress or faced trouble during individual or collective struggles. By so doing, individual traits and qualities were encouraged to grow and attain highest possible standards leading to the most perfect character in history. Super human characters never evoke a longing for emulation. They can be models only when they are from amongst human beings and experience humanly. Miracles do not help build humans rather they restrict their dependence on something other than knowledge and intellect. That is why Muhammad and his followers were always encouraged for self belief which was nothing but belief in God.

                This book by Lasely Hazleton superbly describes Muhammad’s successes and failure of his humanly life both in Makkah and Madina and thus makes him most distinguished character in history. However, being a Jewish author and of Western origin, the kind of reverence that Muslims have for Muhammad in particular and other prophets in general, should not be expected of her. But there is nothing derogatory either. Another, rather more important aspect of the book is related to certain controversial references some of which are unknown, and some others have not been taken seriously by majority of Islamic scholars and historians. For example on page 97, she says that in a meeting with the elders of Quresh Muhammad declared Ali, a ten year old young lad then, as his successor and asked everybody present, including Ali’s father, to follow him. That not only it bears no reference of source, it also seems unfounded and totally out of place, because neither it was an occasion for such a declaration nor was the environment suitable for such utterance. Massacre of Qureyz, as an aftermath of the battle of trenches, on the decision of Saad bin Maaz(p. 234) has been a debatable issue among the historians. Lasely however thinks that Muhammad found it difficult to himself take such a hard decision and conspired with Maaz to do the job.  Unfortunately Lasely fails to point out that Maaz’s decision was in conformity with the cherished tradition of Torah. She also fails to realize that the behavior of Qurayz during the battle of trenches might have done havoc to Muslims of Madina. Their total disregard to their contract with Muhammad to stand together with Muslims in the event of attack from enemy was bound to invite reaction from the emerging political authority.

                Similarly she seems selective to mention that Muhammad chose to meet the delegation of Najran Christians only in the company of Ali, Fatima and their two sons with their heads covered under the cloke, and this made them believe in the truth of Muhammad. There are other reports which suggest that the delegates asked him several questions and went back without declaring their conversion. They were convinced though but declared only after going back home and narrating their experience to the elders of their community which they were representing.

                There are more such examples going against generally accepted opinions. However, overall narrative is highly positive. If at all she has gone against, that is based on her unbiased and unprejudiced understanding of the event under consideration. She is at her best in her criticism on the Satanic Verses and the stand taken by William Muir and Salaman Rushdi. Acknowledging the possibility of Satanic intervention in the revelation, she reinforces Muhammad’s credibility as a prophet, by mentioning that he himself accepted and acknowledged such a possibility but explained how to differentiate the truth with the falsehood.

                As said in the beginning, this book projects Muhammad as a human being, fallible and prone to mistakes as humans are. This is just in accordance with the Quran which says that you have been sent with a prophet from amongst you and that he is the best model for you. A fallible human being can emulate only an individual who is like him. A super human can’t be an attraction for him.

                Lasely Hazleton says that Muhammad was gifted with a great quality of converting his mistakes into success and failures into opportunities. She does take Muhammad as a prophet but truly in the tradition of the Bible of our time. The standard of dignity and reverence, Muslims may find wanting. Overall it is superb narrative and highly inviting to love him more and seeking to emulate him. Perhaps no such book can be found in Urdu, I am sure.   

INTRODUCING THE ALIGARH SCHOOL ON ISLAM AND SCIENCE HARMONY DEBATE

By- Dr. M. Zaki Kirmani

Debate on Islam and Science is as old as western imperialist influence on Islamic world which owed to the multifaceted decline of Muslim nations accompanied with development of science in the West. The Islamic world that dominated the scene till 16^th century had already begun to witness  western growth which soon attained parity with it. And when science became successful tool of power and domination in the hands of the West,  Islamic world had already lost ground. And with a view of remedying the situation it took long to begin the process of  evaluation and analysis.

          Science being the main tool of western domination, it left  muslims in grim despair and awestruck.It was not well taken even by the Islamic intellectuals. Ignoring its knowledge strength,  patriotism prevailed and they took it as a cultural legacy of the occupying nations and welcomed it neither for social benefits involved nor as a source of power to be learnt in educational institutions. It should however be noted that the Islamic legacy of Science was still a part of madrasa curriculum till 20^th century but it was not producing desirable results for two reasons. One, the process of updating the knowledge was totally absent and  two, the tradition of individual  research was on fast decline because of its increasing dependence on emerging new technology.

          Prior to the migration to the western world, Science was a part of Islamic intellectual tradition and an aspect of Islamic knowledge. History gives evidence and favours this view. Many well known scientists of Islamic era are known to be equally conversent in Islamic religious knowledge, e.g. Tafseer, Fiqh, hadith etc. Thus we assert that Science was an Islamic intellectual tradition and a direct outcome of Quranic injunctions for its followers and that today this tradition has  weakened  because of its loosening grip on contemporary  Muslim mindset. We believe that science in essence is neither western nor Islamic and when term like Islamic Science is used, it refers to history and civilizational context primarily. Recently this term has also been used for the scientific activity under the influence of Islamic World view and application and direction  of its growth under Islamic values.

          For the Aligarh School the ongoing debate on Islam and Science is not of much interest and topics related to mutual harmony, Islamic criticism of the concepts of Evolution, Creation, Miracles and Angels etc. have failed to incite the attention of its associates. From the very beginning Aligarh School has been attentive to two objectives: one, encouraging Muslims to go for education of Science and Research and two, for identifying and introducing concepts and values which motivate them to  grow science which is compatible with  Nature and human self. However, we believe that the question of compatibility is a domain of human conscience and no  decisions can be imposed from outside. What is to be explored and How and Where to apply the knowledge so obtained are value dependent questions, as a matter of fact.

          And for this  reason  scholars  like Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, Jamaluddin Afghani,  Ismail Farooqui and Haroon Yayha etc. have been of  mere historical significance for us. We are, in fact, more concerned with identifying and introducing Islamic contours   for a vigorous scientific activity in a society defined  by ever-ready - to -  be -  re-understood doctrines, and a pragmatic and intellectually dynamic system of  values.

          Aligarh School considers that listening, observing and intellection, are major sources of knowledge as propounded by the Quran and therefore what has been and is being done by the non-Islamic societies in the name of Science is not and cannot, at least in principle,  be incompatible with it. If at all there is an apparent disharmony somewhere, it may either be for our lack in doing Science or understanding the Quran. This approach is apparent in major works done by M. Zaki Kirmani, Rais Ahmad, Mr. Riaz Kirmani, and such associates as Kaleemur Rehman, Masood Ahmad and Jamshed Akhtar. Their work aim at identifying Quranic values, concepts and cultural ethos which  go into making a vibrant  Islamic Scientific culture. Jamshed Akhtar distinguishes himself by identifying Quranic ‘'information' which can help modern scientists in reunderstanding  problems which they might have left unfinished, for want of information and intellectual tools.

          Central to Aligarh School has been the Islamic World view which includes concepts and values necessary to motivate individuals and provide a supportive environment for growth of scientific activity in modern society.This School considers modern science a human attainment and a common treasurer of humanity irrespective of religious affiliation of the contributors. Its role in solving human problems makes it Islamically significant. However, its increasing involvement in exploitation and violence renders it sensitive for Islamic monitoring as well. The values and concepts culled from the Quran and Islamic intellectual and scientific heritage are expected not only to help check misuse of science but also guide in framing questions, and formulating problems for scientific research.

          Aligarh School very firmly believe, like many others, that science should not entertain those realms of knowledge which deals with 'why' and should remain attached with 'how'? This explains our apathy and disinterest in some approaches and  direction of research and study  modern science seems to be adopting. However, even such questions can not be totally shunned and deserve to be reasonably debated and openly discussed.