- Bliv medlem
-
Du er ikke logget ind
Log ind Opret dig
Du er ikke logget ind
Beskrivelse
It has been argued that knowledge requires "Islamization." Presumably, this refers to "modern" knowledge. For there is a perception that "modern" knowledge is not Islamic, and therefore it might "corrupt" Muslims. There appears to be a phobia of "modern" knowledge. It seems to be overlooked that knowledge is already Islamic. What is Islamic does not require "Islamization." However, it appears that knowledge requires rehabilitation more than Islamization. For knowledge has been corrupted. This applies especially to the knowledge of revelation. For it appears that this knowledge was warped by unwarranted accretions. These accretions encompass assumptions adopted to enable the elevation of tradition to revelation. Unfortunately, the "accommodation" of tradition took place at the expense of revelation. As a result of the elevation of tradition to revelation, there was a partial re-orientation from revelation to tradition. This re-orientation appears to have resulted in a measure of disorientation. Tradition became a second focus of attention. The elevation of tradition did not stop there. In addition to becoming revelation, tradition also became a "judge" and "abrogator" of revelation. In different words, tradition was raised above revelation. In this way revelation became a "protégé" of tradition. For its part, tradition became the " warden " of revelation. This re-arrangement was remarkable, as it represented a reversal of the relationship between revelation and tradition. The reversal subjugated revelation to tradition. The reversal of the relationship between revelation and tradition was problematic, as it placed the words of Allah under the words of the transmitters of traditions. Placing tradition above revelation was expressed in the assertion that tradition "judges" revelation and that "revelation requires tradition more than tradition requires revelation. " The subordination of revelation to tradition was aided by the assumption that the use of reason is kufr and that revelation features "unclear" verses. All four assumptions flout revelation. For revelation presents itself as the furqan, the criterion to be used for judgment. Revelation also presents itself as "clear" and asks us to use our reason. The subordination of revelation to tradition reflected a remarkably "liberal" approach in "traditional" jurisprudence. We may think of the reversal of the relationship of tradition and revelation as a "theological coup d'état," with tradition emerging in the uppermost position. Traditionists faulted the Mutazilites for placing reason above revelation; but they placed tradition above revelation. In addition to facilitating the elevation of tradition above revelation, the assumptions paved the way for the application of the theory of abrogation. The teaching of abrogation further tainted the knowledge of revelation, in particular with the alleged abrogation of the peace verses by the ayah as-sayf . The alleged abrogation of these verses was tantamount to tampering with revelation. The abrogation of the peace verses robbed the religion of peace of its teaching of peace. The elevation of tradition to revelation marked the emergence of "traditional" Islam. The adoption of the teaching of abrogation marked the emergence of "political" Islam. As regeneration requires knowledge, renewal requires the rehabilitation of the knowledge of revelation. This presupposes the engagement of reason. For it is in part through reason that we attain knowledge. Hence, renewal also requires the rehabilitation of reason.
