Brief Introduction

(Re)defining "fundamentalism" ...

Law Is Central

As we've argued, law is the blueprint for restoration (restored society).

 

Literalist interpretation assumes that it provides a "clear path" or structure.

Fundamentalists see the differentiations of law from politics as a grave threat to religion in society, and they often focus their struggle on the institutions that make laws (i.e., parliaments or, in the United States, the Congress) and on the highest levels of the judiciary, which set the standards for the interpretation of laws: the Supreme Courts. (Brekke)

Christianity encountered "problems" when it originally made divine law redundant (not entirely coexistent) with political laws (cf. Rom. 13:1-7; Mark 12:17).

 

 

Consequently, existing political laws must be reinterpreted or changed according to the "verbal law" of Christian ethics and, for some groups, the written law of the Old Testament.

 

 

The absence of a central, written law emphasize the need for a central theology/creed and method of interpretation.

Islam views political law as coexistent but subordinate to religious law. The former must operate fully within the parameters of the latter.

 

Religious law is the framework within which all other law and behavior should legitimated as "moral" behavior.

The study of law is similarly influenced by the Western point of view, by Western philosophy, Western history, Western law, and Western society. For law is a reflection of society or is produced by it; and society is the offspring of all these factors. Thus, in order to build up a sound Islamic doctrine, we must teach Islamic law in a broad general way before beginning to teach any other legal system. The teaching of Islamic law must be firmly in the control of Muslim professors, and the Western point of view must not be allowed to obtrude, except at the stage of specialization. And similarly, the study of law in general must not be opened up till that same later stage. (Sayyid Qutb)

When we have achieved our goal of proper intellectual orientation, we are still confronted by that of the specific legal enactment that will ensure a sound form of Islamic life and which will guarantee social justice to all. In this question it is not possible to take a stand purely on the form of the original Islamic life; rather we must utilize all possible and permissible means that fall within the general principles and the broad foundations of Islam. Nor must we be afraid to use also all the discoveries that man had made in the way of social legislation and systems, so long as the principles of these do not run counter to the principles of Islam, and so long as they are not opposed to its theory of life and mankind. We must include these in our legislation so long as they conduce to the true welfare of society, or so long as as they ward off any impending evil. (Sayyid Qutb)

Within a century after Muhammad's death (632 C.E.) there developed a clear hierarchy of power (including law) with separation between jurists and the "wielders" of power (such as caliphs, sultans, etc.).

 

General expectation: political leaders should comply with the religious and legal interpretations of the jurists to maintain legitimacy.

Impact of modernization (and rising fundamentalism?):

• Malaysia: sharia courts were subordinated and regulated to secular counterparts (dual court system)
• Egypt: sharia system was not abandoned entirely but a synthesis between these and civil courts was developed.

• But growing secularism in Egypt led to increasing emphasis upon Islamic State (note Muslim Brotherhood [Hassan al-Banna]; Sayyid Qutb).
• 1956-70: Gamal Abdel Nasser = president (emphasized secularism and pan-Arabic struggle against Western political dominance)
• Muslim Brotherhood was banned, leaders imprisoned. Sayyid Qutb was active during this time.
• Qutb was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood and advocated violent revolution against non-Muslim rulers.

Following Egypt's defeat to Israel in the Six Days War (1967), there occurred a growing trend in those who believed Egypt had "lost its moral way" and advocated a return to Islamic values.

Pakistan

Following the creation of Pakistan in 1947, Maulana Maududi was one of the most important voices criticizing the government for not creating an Islamic State.

The source of Islamic law is God and the revelation he has given to humankind through his messengers, the last of whom was Muhammad. By surrendering his will to God, a person becomes a Muslim and effectively enters into a contract with God, Maudadi claimed. Being a Muslim, and being part of Muslim society, is a deliberate choice, he asserted, and when people make such a choice, they also accept God's classification of good and evil, right and wrong, and the laws God has made: the sharia. If an Islamic society adopts any system of life other than the sharia, the contract with God is broken. (Brekke)

 

A unified society rather than a fragmented one will be the best resistance to the ever growing trend of militant extremism in Pakistan. Religious tolerance and moderation are the key words towards de-radicalization in Pakistani society. (Javaid)

 

Is this view western or universally true?

What problems exist with Javaid's statement:

 

Various political parties, religious groups, sectarian groups, media and civil society need to develop consensus on the complete rejection to militarism in society. There is need to shun off petty differences on religious and sectarian basis.

 

But in what ways might he be right? Does our theory help highlight main issues that support Javaid's point here?

Identify key issues, terms, and concerns. Define key issues, et al. Identify key statements that support or provide possible criticism to our theory. State whether you agree or disagree with our author (and why).

 

1. What are the roles of Taliban and Al-Qaeda?
2. What is the role of madrassas? (What were they? What did they become?)
3. What are the reasons for religious fundamentalism?

Israel and Judaism

Zionism includes:

• Those that envision the restoration of the "biblical State of Israel"
• Those that view Israel as a Jewish State (with "Jew" defined in more secular terms)

The Six Days War (1967) ignited messianic zionist sentiment (for some).

And for a "high school" history with maps:

Is religious extremism the problem in finding peace among countries in the Middle East?