Islam and Muslims in the Post Secular Society

 

By Prof. Dr. Bunyamin Duran

Tuesday, 08 April 2008 17:21

 

Islam and Muslims in the Post Secular Society

 

In this paper I will try to point out firstly the meaning of the secular and the post secular concepts and then the general principles of Islam as a world religion, and finally the ability of Muslims to participate in post-secular society through communicative action, deliberations, democratic and economic activities. At the beginning of the twentieth century Max Weber has pointed out that protestant ethics has deeply effected the development of rational capitalism. (Weber 1992) But Weber’s influence on sociologists in this area was limited. Contrary to the theory of Weber, general modernization theory assumed that religious movements, identities, and practice had become increasingly marginal and that only those religious intellectuals and leaders who attached themselves to the nation state would continue to play a significant role in public life. Casanova (1994) was one of the first to note that by the late 1970s this prevalent views was challenged through several developments: the Iranian revolution, the rise of the solidarity movement in Poland, the role of liberation theology in political movements through Latin America, and a strong return of Protestant fundamentalism in American politics. However, in the Muslim majority world, the role of religion in social and community life have never receded. (Salvatora and Eickelman, 2004, XIV)

 

Secular society

The term “secular” has different dimensions, some of them directly concerned with the industrialization, rationalization and urbanization-processes, while others concern with the lessening of influence from the church in the culture of society at large and in the public sphere. Casanova argues against the sub-thesis of secularization theory that religion is limited in the private sphere with increasing industrialization and differentiation in social life.

The role of secularization in political history is also open to debate. Within contemporary sociology of religion, there is a clear division between those sociologists who argue that feudal Europe was dominated by a religious world-view and those who argue that feudal Europe was not ‘an age of faith’. The first treat the history of religion under capitalism as a history of attrition in which, from a position of social dominance, the Church withers away under the impact of urbanization, social differentiation and modernization.

Thus there is no common agreement upon the definition of secularism, some scholars stress the aspect of freedom in which human freedom largely is attained, others stress loss of faith. In other words, conceptualization of secularization process divides sociologists into two groups: one that treats secularization as a loss of faith and authenticity; and the other regards secularization as a gain in personal freedom and autonomy (Turner 1991:134-135). In both cases secularization means that faith and beliefs are remaining in the private sphere of the individual and on the margins of society, but not in the centre and the public sphere.

 

Post-Secular Society

The term post-secular society has been used firstly by Habermas, defining the new relationship between religion and other sectors. In this new case, in contrast with secular society, religion has equal rights like other sectors. But, at the same time religion does not have the right of superiority over other sectors, as it was in the middle ages. Habermas recognizes the important role of religion in post-secular society.

According to him, religions can play a substantial role in global capitalism. It prevents the denizens of the modern post-secular societies from being overwhelmed by all encompassing demands of vocational life and worldly success. Religious convictions encourage people to treat each other as ends in themselves rather than as mere means. (Richard, 1993)

Jürgen Habermas focused on the role of religion in the modern society. In his speech of the occasion of the 2001 Peace Price, awarded by the German Book Trade, he argued that there are some conditions for participation of religious community to the post secular democratic process:

“Certainly, in the view of the liberal State, only those religious communities deserve to be called "reasonable" which by virtue of their own reasoning do not attempt to impose their religious truths by force. This reasoning is due to a three-fold reflection on the part of the faithful with regard to their position in a pluralistic society. Religious awareness must first of all deal cognitively with encountering other denominations and religions.

Secondly, it must adapt itself to the authority of sciences which have the social monopoly on world knowledge. Finally, it must agree to the premises of a constitutional State that justifies itself on the basis of a profane morality.” (Habermas, 2001)

According to Habermas there are three conditions for participation of religious community to the democratic process. I will try to analyze two of them in this article:

1. A religious community must not impose their truths to the secular community.

This means that religious community has to respect democratic values. If religious community acts with authoritarian methods and try to impose his idea by force to other secular people, democratic society must not allow its participation to democratic process.

2. A religious community has to be aware of the fact that they are living in a pluralistic society.

In fact, pluralism is not the sheer fact of plurality alone, not simply tolerance, not simply relativism, and not syncretism. Rather it involves active engagement with people. Pluralism requires that people make a genuine effort to understand their similarities and differences through encounter with one another. While recognizing the relative nature of truth, pluralism requires commitment to one’s own tradition and community. Thus religious community has to encounter with other religious communities and also secular communities.

In a given interoperation of the Qur'an one can produce plural approaches, in which Muslim people make a genuine effort to understand their similarities and differences through encounter with one another. There are a lot of Islamic values which are computable with plural and democratic situations.

 

Islam and democracy

Before starting to analyze the Islamic democracy firstly we have to introduce some assumptions. First of all there is no identity between secularism and democracy.

Although secularism is an ideology, democracy is a political system. Democracy is a fluid system that has the ability to adopt to various societies. (Feldman, 2003, 31)

Second assumption is that there is no conflict between the sovereignty of God and the people. God’s sovereignty is a theological sovereignty, although the sovereignty of people is a political and a social sovereignty. One has to distinguish between theological and political sphere. (Nursi, 1993, 71)

To be able to understand the position of Islam toward democracy, we have to point out some important points. Firstly we shall briefly analyze the general characteristics of the Qur’an and than general methods of reading of the texts by different Muslims scholars, and finally which tendencies are appropriate for co- existence in post-secular society.

 

The general characteristic of the Qur’an (Major Quranic Principles)

All religious texts are very flexible. The flexibility of texts emerges from the linguistic character of the text: all texts have both very clear and metaphoric verses.

Generally both types of verses are conflicting with each other. For example some passages emphasize the power of God, while others stress the freedom and responsibility of people. Likewise some verses explain the oneness and unity of God, while others express an anthropomorphic God. This case is valid for all economical, political and human activities. For example some verses stress the absolute sovereignty of God, others point to domination of the people in the political and economic sphere.

This characteristic of the Qur'an gives very important initiative to intellect of people. Based on this characteristic Maxim Rodinson has said that the rationality of the Qur'an seems rock-like (Rodinson, 1980, 90).

That is the reason also for the forming about of innumerable fiqh (jurisprudential), philosophical, mystical and thought-schools in the Islamic history. The forming process of a given school nearly as follow: every scholar has a certain pattern in his own mind, which is composed of different elements such as cultural, economical, historical, political and so forth. When he tries to demonstrate his idea by referring to holy texts, he can take the verse, which supports his idea as a base and interpret another verse, which seems to be opposed to his own idea. Thus, some passages can be the base for some movement, while others can use the same passage as secondary material. For example, the verse that supports freedom of choice for people, has been used by the Mu`tazila-school as a bases, others have been interpreted in the light of the first kind of verses; a second kind of verses have been used by the Ash`ari-school as base, while other verses have been interpreted. (Fakhr al-Din al-Razi , 1993, v. 4, 186)

Thus it can be said that the characteristic of the Qur'an is appropriate to support a post secular life. That is based on rereading of the Qur'an.

 

Muslim scholars and democracy

There is no given political pattern in de Qur'an and in the Sunna. This issue is left to the initiative of the human being. But this doesn't mean that there is not any principal which related to the political organization. There are many issues in the Qur'an and in de Sunna about general political principals. The main problem is the problem of interpretations of the Text.

The relationship between Islam and democracy is strongly debated among the people who identify with the Islamic resurgence in the late twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first. Some of these Islamists believe that “democracy” is a foreign concept that has been imposed by Westerners and secular reformers upon Muslim societies (Esposito and Voll, 2001). They often argue that the concept of popular sovereignty denies the fundamental Islamic affirmation of the sovereignty of God and is, therefore, a form of idolatry.

Many prominent Islamic intellectuals and groups, however, argue that Islam and democracy are compatible. Some extend the argument to affirm that under the conditions of the contemporary world, democracy can be considered a requirement of Islam. In these discussions, Muslim scholars bring historically important concepts from within the Islamic tradition together with the basic concepts of democracy as understood in the modern world. (Feldman, 2003, 31; Lewis, 1996; Soroush, 1999, 122-124)

Those scholars, who have democratic sensitivity, interpret all Texts in the perspective of democratic values. When Turkish scholar Said Nursi (1878-1960) was asked to compare between early Ottoman authoritarian regime and new democratic regime, he argued that the democratic regime is ten times closer to Islam than any authoritarian regime. According to him the public opinion, tendencies of society, consensus of community are basis elements of Islamic religion.

Actually one can find a strong emphasis on the democracy and open society in the early writings of Nursi. According to Nursi the dominant factor in the time of authoritarianism was power; the one who had the power, sword and tyranny was the one who had the social prestige. However, the centre and zeal of time of democracy are intellect, knowledge, truth, public opinion and law. Only one who has knowledge, intellect, and a bright heart is the one who has prestige.

Argumentations of Nursi about open society ad democratic values are very similar to the argumentation of Karl Popper. (Popper, 1994, 95-169) For example, he did not only offer a democratic system which is limited to governmental structure but a system which is valid in all sectors of life, in knowledge, in family, in religious community and in all sectors of management. (Nursi, 1993, 60-61)

Also the Tunisian Islamist leader and political exile, Rashid Ghanoushi argued that:

“If by democracy is meant the liberal model of government prevailing in the West, a system under which the people freely choose their representatives and leaders, in which there is an alternation of power, as well as all freedoms and human rights for the public, then Muslims will find nothing in their religion to oppose democracy, and it is not in their interests to do so.” (Esposito and Voll, 2001)

Depending on the idea of Nursi and Ghannushi we can easily say that democratic system is necessary and applicable for all Muslim countries. The interpretations of these two scholars indicate that democracy and the principles of Quran are compatible. This can be the religious justification for Muslims who are living in Europe and America to participate in all democratic processes and join the mainstream of democratic and open society.

 

Applicability of Islamic law to a democratic society

It is very beneficial here to remember some basic principles, which are the essence of Islam, derived from the spirit of the Qur’an: the protection of the soul, intellect, religion, property, and offspring. All regulations and laws must be harmonized with these principles. Otherwise they become invalid. There is a consensus among Muslim-scholars on their necessity. The rejection of one of them is accepted as a rejection of all of the Qur’an.

There is a harmony between main aims of the Islam which is mentioned above and the idea of Habermas which entails transformation of religious argumentation into secular argumentation to participate to the democratic deliberation. Because the protection of the soul, intellect, religion, property, and offspring are secular aims.

These are of course universal principles, but the main problem here is their applicability in different times and different places of the social, economical and political fields. How can these be actualized to different fields in different times and different places? Are there some sub-principles in the Islamic law, which are applicable to real daily life?

Of course there are other sub-principles, the so-called al-Ijma (consensus) al-maslaha al-mursala (the common good) and istihsan (individual preference), which are accepted by some Muslim law-schools as important sources for social and economical life. (Zaman, 2004, 129-152; Ramazan, 2004, 38-39)

First of all al-Ijma is a basic source of Islamic legislation. Al-Ijma is realized by the consensus of the majority of well-learned scholars according to the Hanafi-school. Some scholars argued that not only the opinion of scholars, even not only the opinion of Muslims, but at the same time the opinion of all members of society, including non-Muslims has to be regarded in the formative process of consensus. (Levy, 1979, 178-179)

Indeed, Islam attaches very much importance to general tendency of society. Prophet Muhammad emphasizes the consensus of society saying that: ‘the community will not agree on error.’

In my opinion, the principle of al-Ijma is very similar to the communicative action theory of Habermas. This principle can be used as a religious source to legalize the post secular deliberation-process.

The maslaha as a legislative source is close to natural law in the western sense. In my opinion, the principle of ‘common good’ can be used as a modern source of legitimacy for all situations, which are beneficial to Muslim-society. The benefit of a situation can be determined by referring to the basis principles. If a situation provides for Muslim individuals protection of life, intellect, religion, property, freedom and offspring, that can be seen as a maslaha situation. And living in such a society can be regarded as an Islamic living. Depending on the principle of maslaha it can be argued that living in a post secular society is a very legal situation.

Another Islamic principle, which is parallel to the post-secular communicative action principle, is the mutual consultation (Musjavare). In fact, the principle of mutual consultation is a significant fundamental institution of the Qur’an.

‘They conduct their affairs by mutual consultation’ (Qur’an, 42/38)

This text is clear about the fact that the affairs of the society are to be decided through mutual consultation. This mutual consultation means that all people have to participate in the deliberation of common problems to find a good solution. A good solution can be understood as a just one. Justice was not precisely defined in the Qur’an, but used as abstract concept. This means that the finding of a solution which is based on justice is left to the reason and experience of society.

‘O ye who believe, stand out firmly for justice, as witness to God even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin.’ (Qur’an, 4: 135)

Deliberation has to be based on civil argumentation; all participants have to propose their arguments supporting reasonable and valid evidence to influence other participants. Therefore one can produce a suitable doctrine from the Qur'an which makes all democratic deliberations possible. Also one can say is that there is no oligarchic and authoritarian tendencies that emerge from the Qur'an.

 

Islam and religious pluralism

Most of Islamic theology is based generally on monoculture of Muslim or on multicultural life in which non-Muslim societies are living as a minority. Another assumption was that state and religion is identical; to refuse religion would mean to refuse the state, too. But this situation usually changed in modern times. In Europe constitutionally secular state is a predominant kind of state. In this state a lot of cultures, religions and sects do coexist. The style of relations between state and religion are not a kind of fusion and complete integration or a complete antagonism but generally a separation with various degrees of strictness or cooperation. Thus the post secular Islamic theology has to take this situation into account. In this process all verses of the Qur'an which proclaim multicultural and multi religious social life must be put forward.

Actually one can find in the Qur'an many texts which are proclaiming multicultural and multi religious social life.

We sent to you (Muhammad) the Scripture with the truth, confirming the Scriptures that came before it, and final authority over them: so judge between them according to what God has sent down. Don’t follow their whims, which deviate from the truth that came to you. We have assigned a low and a path to each of you. If God had so willed, He would have made you one community, but He wanted to test you through that which He has given you, so race to do good: you will all return to God and He will make clear to you the matters you differed about. (Qur'an 5/48)

There are a lot of sentences in that verse which refer to plurality of religions. The first sentence begins by placing the Book of truth that has been sent down to Muhammad within a series of books containing guidance and light: the Torah and Gospel. It is significant that God sent the Qur'an not to abolish previous revelations but to confirm them. The third sentence tells us that each community has received its own law and path.

The second part of the verse begins with theological reminder: if God had wanted, He could have made a human community without differences, and the next sentences that indicates that Gad has willed the differences and He will judge in the end.

We can say that these verses offer a theological reason for the fact of religious pluralism. Valkenberg argued that Muslims are able to make better sense of religious plurality than Christians based on these verses. (Valkenberg, 2006, 151)

 

Islamic theology and Religious Pluralism

Classical Islamic theology generally has formulated according to mono-culture and mono-religion, Muslim culture and Islam. There is no systematic Islamic theology which is based on multicultural and multi religious life. There are only some scholars such as Said Nursi who try to develop a multicultural and multi religious theology in which all members of religions can coexist in harmony.

We can here analyze briefly the idea of Nursi about plural social life. According to Nursi every age has a special paradigm in which certain values are dominant and valid. In every age some values raise, and subsist other values which were predominant. In the middle ages, for example, religious values were predominant factors in social and political life. All relations among people and states were determined by religious and religiously oriented ethical values. But in modern times the economy, political regime and security, in place of religious values, has become determinant factors for interrelations between people and states. Actually in the modern period the economical welfare, the freedom, the participation of people to democratic process has become basis elements of modern paradigm. Reading of the Texts has necessarily to change; there is a difference of reading Texts in a period in which religious values were predominant versus a period in which economical and political aims become determinant, like it is nowadays. (Nursi, 1993, 70)

Thus the rights and responsibilities of minorities according to Nursi must be regarded in the perspective of democratic values. These minorities, Christians and Jews, can be, for example, governor and Member of Parliament in Muslim society without any restriction. They can participate in all deliberations and in all democratic processes. (Nursi, 1993, 61-62)

When he was asked about equality between Muslims and non-Muslims in Ottoman Society he answered saying that equality can be in rights and in responsibility, because there is no discrimination about right and responsibility in Islam, Sultan and slave have equal right. Differences can be in quality. Some people can be virtuous than other. This is valid in social life, but can not be reason to discrimination in social life. (Nursi, 1993, 68)

According to Nursi, coexistence with Armenian people, for example, is not a negative matter for Muslims, but a positive issue; because Armenian people, who are living in Ottoman State have a well-developed culture in economy and in arts. They are also well-educated and well-illuminated people and they usually assimilated the values of freedom and democracy. For this reason they are a very strong nation. Muslims have to take ideas from Armenians such as rational thinking, idea of positive nationality, tendency of development and justice. They are widely spread nearly in all countries.

They are well-integrated to all countries, and attained a lot of experiences about science, economy and development. They will return to Ottoman State and add their values to Ottoman economy and scientific. (Nursi, 1993, 68)

Unfortunately with the tragically events in the period of First World War the project of Nursi could not be realised. But this project can be a very good model for Muslim-Non Muslim relations in multicultural and multi religious European society. From Nursi’s point of view, Muslim scholars have to develop a new model in which Muslims can coexist with other people in harmony and peace. The Islamic University of Rotterdam can contribute to this important mission by elaborating on the ideas of Muslim scholars that are open to democracy and religious pluralism, like Nursi.

 

Islam and Interfaith Dialogue

Actually, there are a lot of common religious and ethical principals among Muslims, Christians and Jews. For example, belief in one God is a common among Abrahamic believers. Common belief in God could be the base for better understanding and mutual solidarity between those three religious communities. All three of them would not understand their essence completely without looking at the other two religions, according to Hans Küng. We shouldn’t consider each other as “unbelievers”, “renegades” or “backward peoples”, but as “brothers” and “sisters”, or at least cousins, under the one and same God (Kung, 1981, 268;Goddard, 1998, 103).

Starting this common point we may cooperate in more fields of social and cultural life. Firstly we must realize interfaith dialogue depending on Abrahamic general principles. This good-will will at the end produce a social climate in which interfaith learning can be possible.

Here rises a crucial question: does the Qur’an provide the needs of dialogue among Muslims and non-Muslim peoples? What is the fundamental approach of the Qur’an to the dialogue? Do we have a right of interpretation of some verses, which are opposed to the dialogue? Do we have also, a right to prefer some verses in the place of others?

 

The Qur’an and the interfaith dialogue

In spite of a few verses, the Qur’an is an important religious source for supporting the interfaith dialogue and learning.

Based on the Qur’ans’ verses we can attain stages of dialogue as follow:

1. Meeting,

2. Learning of the common principles together,

3. Mutual confidence,

4. Socio-economic relations.

In the first stage the dialogue necessitates the mutual meeting and communication; because there couldn’t be realized a dialogue and encounter without meeting and communicating. The following verse encourages communications and meeting among people:

‘O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely the most honorable of you in the sight of God is the most pious of you. Indeed God is All-knowing, All-Aware.’ (49/13)

The meeting and encountering are necessary human actions to eliminate doubts and ambiguity among people and to establish a feeling of security among them. The encountering is also the first step towards mutual respect among people. It is important to note here that the meeting and encountering process is different from an ordinary and superficial conduct and contact, but it means a realization of mutual deep relations and an actual learning process.

In the second stage the dialogue necessitates the searching of common principles among believers. It is evident that the unity of God is the common principle among Christian, Muslim and Jewish people. For this reason the Qur’an calls all believers to union in the common principles. (Qur’an, 3/64)

According to the Qur’an the God of Christians, Muslims and Jews is the same God:

“And do not dispute with the people of earlier Scriptures, save in a good manner; except with those of them who do wrong, and say: we believe in what has been revealed to us, and what has been revealed to you, and our God and your God is one, and to Him do we submit.” (Qur’an, 29/46)

In the third stage the Qur’an encourages individual dialogue among believers by marriage. In my opinion, the best way to realize dialogue among different religious persons can be found by way of marriage. The Qur’an allows the marriage of Muslim men with Christian and Jewish women.

“All that is good and pure has today been permitted to you, and the food of the people of the scripture is permissible to you, and your food is permissible to them, and you are permitted to marry chaste believing women and chaste women from among the people who were given earlier scriptures….” (Qur’an, 5/5)

 

The dialogue with unbelievers

In fact, Qur’an encourages dialogue and good discussions, not only between Muslims and other god-fearing people, but also with unbelievers.

There is an interesting verse in the Qur’an, which explains the style of relationship between Moses and the Pharaoh of Egypt that is an appropriate religious source for us, as a method of religious dialogue and discussion. According to the relevant verse, God had ordered to Moses and his brother Aaron (Harun) to go to the Pharaoh of Egypt and to speak to him in a gentle way:

“Go both to Pharaoh, surely he has become inordinate; then speak to him (mildly) a gentle word, perchance he may mind or fear.” (Qur’an, 20/43-44)

Another verse of the Qur’an advises Muslims to realize good relations with all societies of those who have not a hostile feelings against Muslims:

“God forbids you not with regard to those who have not fought you in the cause of religion, nor expelled you from your homes, that you should be considerate and deal justly with them, surely God loves the just.” (Qur’an, 60/8)

This verse has to be regarded as a theological guaranty for the political and social peace and harmony between religious and secular societies.

Developing an interfaith dialogue paradigm To be able to develop a common interfaith learning paradigm, we must firstly establish a strong theological base to interfaith learning and common working. In order to realize this aim we must return to the true religious sources and explain religious texts in the light of dialogue.

In this process we can benefit from some Muslim, Jewish and Christian scholars such as al-Ghazali, Nursi, Martin Buber and Hans Küng. However we are aware of the fact that there are very different scholars among all religions. While some of them support interfaith dialogue and solidarity, others do not. Thus we should regard only positive scholars in this area.

In the dialogue issue al-Ghazali and Nursi are important figures from within Muslims. The importance of al-Ghazali comes from a methodology which he developed, the methodology to be able to understand verses of the Old and New Testament. I must emphasize here that al-Ghazali was a significant expert on the Old and New Testament.

This approach is largely based on Al-Ghazali’s book Raddu’l Jamil, which is not known among Muslims anymore. Actually, Raddu’l Jamil (Duran, 2006) was an extremely strange book within the Muslim tradition. Because all books, which were written by Muslim scholars about the Bible and in general on the Christian faith, were usually written with an apologetic character. They generally aimed to demonstrate the truth of the Islamic faith in comparison with the Christian faith. Their starting point was the falsification of the Bible, and the so-called godhead or divinity of Jesus.

Actually, Al-Ghazali has a more positive approach towards the Old and New Testament. The New Testament according to al-Ghazali was largely authentic. But, there were only a few mistranslation of the Bible into the Greek language. Some problems come not from the original verse, but from mistranslations.

One of the crucial problems of al-Ghazali was the methodology of exegetics of the New Testament. In fact, this problem is the same of the Qur’an’s exegetics. Al-Ghazali has tried to apply the exegetic method of the Qur’an to the New Testament.

According to al-Ghazali, the general character of religious texts is the same; all texts have both very clear and metaphoric verses. Al-Ghazali asks there himself: how can we differentiate between clear and metaphoric verses? According to al-Ghazali the intellect is an essential criterion to separate between very clear and metaphoric. Thus, we have to interpret metaphorical verses in the light of reason. For example, ‘The Father and I are one." (John, 10/30), which express the unity of Jesus with God, can be interpreted as a unity of ethic, not a unity of essence and nature.

Al-Ghazali has argued that the using of Jesus of some special words, such as Father, Son and unity with God, is lawful and acceptable. Because, every prophet has a right to use some special concepts to explain the will of God. But, at the same time, using these words can be forbidden by God for other believers, for example using these words were

forbidden for Muslims, according to al-Ghazali. Al-Ghazali’s method can be very good method in dialogue between Muslims and Non-Muslims. Another more recent Muslim scholar who emphasizes dialogue was Said Nursi. He has explained verses of the Qur’an in the light of dialogue.

 

Friendship between Christians and Muslims

Nursi firstly draw attention to the style of genre of Muslims towards non-Muslim people. This style has to be respectful. Muslims must not say unbeliever to non-Muslim people, since this saying contains negativity. According to Nursi the term ‘unbeliever’ can be used to different human groups. First of all this term can be used for those who don’t believe in the existence of God. Thus, this term can not be used for Christians and Jewish people, because they believe in God. Secondly this term can be used for those who don’t believe in the Messenger of God, Muhammad. In this context this term can be used for Christians and Jews. Although using this term might be theologically possible, nevertheless this is socially inappropriate. According to Nursi we have to distinguish between our theological and social style of genre. Theological genre is only valid in the religious field, not in public sphere. The genre which uses in public sphere has to be social. (Nursi, 1993, 71-72)

Many years before in 1910-1911, Said Nursi was questioned concerning his desire to build of friendship with Christians. He was confronted with the restrictive interpretation that some Muslims had placed on the Qur’anic verse

“O you hoe believe! Don’t take the Jews and Christians for your friends and protectors.” (5/51)

His answer is very important approach to an interfaith dialogue. We can classify his approach as follows:

1. All absolute (Mutlaq) verses can be restricted (taqyid).

2. The time, in which the people are living, has the right of interpretation of the verses of the Qur’an. Anybody couldn’t reject interpretation of the time.

3. In the time of Prophet Muhammad, the religion has stayed in the centre of life. Other sectors of society such as economy, politics, freedom and so forth were regarded as secondary sectors. All identities have been determined by religious principles. All relations among individuals, societies and states were determined also by religious faith. But, the power of religion slowly decreased and in present time, science, economy and political sectors have become the centre in the life of societies in the place of religion. Thus, identities are in present time not determined by religion, but by secular relations such as economical, political, security and scientific relations.

4. Relations among peoples are not substantial, but ethic-oriented, that is, good relations among peoples have to come from good attributes, such as honesty, respect, solidarity, clarity, trust and so forth. Therefore, if a Christian has a good moral attribute, than he would be loved by Muslims. If he can be trusted and is hard- working, he would be a good partner for Muslims in an economic activity. If she has virtues, she would get married by a Muslim man. And the Muslim man, as a matter of course, has to love his Christian virtuous wife. (Nursi, 1995, 2004: Michel, 1999, 21-22)

Based on the general approach of Ghazali and Nursi one can produce suitable dialogue methods. There are sufficient intellectual Muslim groups in Europe which need only a theological and philosophical argumentation to dialogue. This theology has to be produced by Muslim scholars who are living and assimilating European values and norms.

 

Muslim in a post secular society

Good ideas and doctrines, even theological and philosophical argumentations are not enough to realize a society which is based on peace and harmony. At the same time, there has to be a sufficient sociological and personal capital to carry these ideas and doctrines.

In this respect, the sociological and theological positions of religious community is very decisive. In this context, especially the style of religiosity of religious communities is very significant. We can here analyze the religiosity of Muslim groups who are living in Europe, according to their relations with democratic values and connection with other religious and secular groups.

 

Religiosity of different cultural groups

We can make a distinction here between different kinds of religiosity of Muslims people who are living in Europe. According to my stratification, there are three kinds of religiosity. We can call these categories, instead of Gellner’s High Islam and Low Islam (Gellner, 1992), as Mosque Community Religiosity, Religious Community Religiosity and Intellectual Muslim Religiosity. The boundary between the three is not sharp, but often very gradual and ambiguous. They, at the same time, have some special characteristics.

 

Mosque Community Religiosity

First category is the category of ordinary folk religiosity. The majority of them is of rural origin and migrated from villages of non-European countries to western cities as manual laborers. They generally graduated from primary school and worked in their village as farmer, or seasonal worker in big cities. Their villages generally remained at a low level of education and Scriptural religion. The village-culture generally is dominated by magic and superstitions. But very recently, the peasants have been confronted with the Scriptural Islam and the rational religious thinking.

The integration-capacity of this group is very limited, because of the deficiency of communicative possibilities. The deficiency of communication with the social environment is an important reason for isolation and marginalization of this group. Mosques therefore, become harbors for them in order to get away from the isolation. This group forms nearly 70 or 80 % of European Muslims. They are devoted to regularity, conservatism, and cleanliness in praying and working and they follow the practical order of the core business of Islam: the creed of Gods unity, prayers, fasting, charity and pilgrimage.

Their religious sources are generally Imams, some daily newspapers and TV channels. They have not generally a habit of reading books. Their favourite worship are the five daily prayers, recitation of the Qur’an without giving importance to the content of it, going to Mecca for hajj and so forth.

 

Religious Community Religiosity

The second group can be divided into two camps, one of them can be called intellect oriented religious groups, another is the heart-oriented religious groups. The first group necessitates reading of books and listening to video-tapes and sermons, which are conducted by trusted preachers. The cultural background of the members of this group is also dominated by rural cultures and traditions. They have usually migrated from rural areas of eastern and African countries and are mostly confronted with Scriptural Islam in Europe. This group is called a Nurcu movement which belongs to the ideas of Said Nursi.

There are, of course a lot of Nurcu sub-groups. A well-known community inspired from Nursi’s writings is Fethullah Gulen’s movement. (Falkenberg, 2006)

Nurcu groups try to participate all activities, specially to interfaith dialogue activities. It is interesting to note here that many of them have not yet assimilated to urban culture. But they are at the same time, a group which can very quickly acquire an integration capacity to their environment. Their important tendency is to be enthusiastic for intellectual and academic persons.

For this reason, they try to make their children well-educated persons. In addition, they attach importance to educational organizations. They provide for themselves all financial needs for educational and other organizations.

This group may be a contact for human capital among secular and religious community in Europe and America.

Another heart-oriented group has been formed under the organizations of mystical orders (tariqa). This group more or less corresponds with the intellect and book-oriented group as far as numbers and involvement with practical Islam are concerned. They belong to Sufi-orders. Many of them stress the development of knowledge of the heart.

For them it is important to obey the spiritual leadership and to experience group spirituality and mental development. Many of them try to refine good manners, are soft spoken and do not want to be involved in intellectual debates and useless questions. In their body language they show respect to elders and learned people.

The well-known Sufi’s groups in Europe are Sulaymanci, Menzilci, Osman Tobbas Efendi’s group, Mawlavi, Sheikh Nazim’s group and Sheikh Yasin’s group. Particularly the group of Sheikh Nazim is very attractive to Europeans. Their relations with social and cultural environment are mostly very limited. They like to use all their energies to be oriented towards the purifying of their hearts.

 

Intellectual Muslim Religiosity

The main problem of Muslims in the present time is the deficiency of Muslim intellectuals. As we know intellectuals are the products of a very complex culture of big cities, not of the countryside. Because the main feature of intellectual people is the freedom and the independency.

The social and cultural environment of Europe, which is based on freedom and individualism can provide an appropriate climate for the development of an Islamic intellectualism. Particularly, well-educated younger Muslims in Europe can be endowed with Islamic and Western knowledge and philosophy and then form a group of new Muslim-intellectuals. A lot of students and graduated younger Muslims seem to be in the process of creating such an intellectual group.

Regarding to some active religious communities and especially young intellectual Muslims, one can assume that Muslims will be an important part of post secular society in Europe.

 

Conclusion

As the younger generation of Muslims are searching for self-identity they are engaging in the process of reinterpreting the sources of Islam. In this process of self searching they stumble on marginal voices that have authoritarian, self-righteous, other denying interpretations of Islam. There is also an intellectual engagement with Islam in Europe. The more learned scholars of Islam engage with the democratic voices within Islam and carry them to Europe, the more Muslim youth would accommodate their self identity with the multicultural European society. The process of interfaith dialogue is opening up such a process, but it needs to be intellectually supported from with the Islamic tradition to form the basis of a communicative action for Muslims in Europe.

We can consequently say that there is not any important religious impediment, emerging from Islamic sources, which would prevent living-together in a post- secular society. Even many religious principles support a life-style, which is based on post secular principles. Post-secular society also needs the principles of Islam to offset its extreme hedonistic, egoistic and materialistic tendencies. But, the important duty of Muslim-scholars who are living in Europe and America is to stress the Islamic principles, which necessitate the democratic, rational and multicultural life-style. We have to reconcile the Islam and Western civilization to attain a global security and economic welfare.

 

Bibliography

Duran, B. (2006), ‘Al-Ghazali’s Interpretation of Some Versus of the New Testament Concerning Jesus’ On the Edge of Many Worlds, ed. Freek L. Bakker and Jan Sihar Aritonang, Meinema

Duran, B. (2005), 'Cooperation in interreligious learning and teaching, based on common Abrahamic principles', Expert seminar, Leuven University, January 10-11-2005

Eickelman, F. D. and Salvatore, A. (2004), ‘Muslim Publics’, Public Islam and Common Goods, ed: Armando Salvatore and Dale F. Eickelman, Brill Leiden-Boston

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi. (1995), Tafsir' ul Kabir, v.4, Bayrut

Feldman Noah, (2003), After Jihad, Frrar, Straus and Giroux New York

Goddard, H. (1998), Christiana and Muslims, From Double Standards to Mutual Understanding, Curzon

Habermas, J. Habermas J, (1985), The Theory of Communicative Action, tr: Thomas McCarthy,v. I, Boston

Habermas, J.(2001), ' Faith and knowledge' , www. socialpolitically.ucc.ie

Gellner, E. (1992), Postmodernism, Reason and Religion, London and New York

John L. Esposito and John O. Voll, Islam and Democracy http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/2001-11/islam.html

Kung, H, (1981), Christen Zijn, (trans. P., Heldens), Eindhoven

Lewis, B. (1996), 'Islam and Liberal Democracy', Journal of Democracy 7.2, www.mtholyoke.edu/aced/intrel/blewis.htm

Michel, Thomas, (1999) ‘Muslim-Christian Dialogue and Cooperation in the Thought of Bediuzzaman Said Nursi’, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi in the view of Western Writers, Istanbul

Soroush, A. (2000), Reason, Freedom, and Democracy in Islam, tr: Muhammed Sadri-Ahmed Sadri, Oxford

Nursi, B. S., (1995), Munazarat, Istanbul

Popper, K. (2002), The Open Society and its Enemies, London and New York

Ramazan, T. (2004), Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, Oxford

Richard, W. (1993), Jurgen Habermas and Post-Secular Society, www.habermasians.blogspot.com, date of consultation, 15.02.2006

Rodinson M, (1980), Islam and Capitalism, tr. Brian Pearce, New York

Turner, B. (1991), Religion and Social Theory, Sage Pup., London

Valkenberg, P. (2006), Sharing Lights On the Way to God, Amsterdam-New York

Weber, M. (1992), The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, tr. Talcot Parsons, London

Wolin Richard, Jurgen Habermas and Post-Secular Society, Name of website, www.habermasians.blogspot.com, date of consultation, 15.02.2006

Last Updated on Friday, 13 June 2008 10:58

http://www.bduran.nl/bduran/artikelen/2-articles-in-english/40-islam-and-muslims-in-the-post-secular-society.html