 "Photo:")
Following the Sept. 11 attacks, many Americans used the Islamic religion as a convenient scapegoat for the political and religious turmoil that was occurring throughout the world. Since then, religious intolerance, often born from American ignorance, has escalated. Last night, in a lecture titled "Making Sense of Islamic Fundamentalism," professor Jamal Malik of the University of Erfurt in Germany hoped to alleviate such commonly-held prejudices by outlining the underpinnings of Islamic fundamentalism.
Directing most of his attention over the years to Asian and Pakistani Islam, Malik's initial research was based in both theology and sociology. Early on, Malik came across studies conducted by the German philosopher Max Weber, who believed that due to increasing industrialization and modernization, all religion in the world would eventually disappear. "Interest in religion never really disappeared in the way social theorists thought," said Malik in reponse to Weber's claims. Malik did, however, borrow many of Weber's concepts of modernization to trace the origins of Islamic fundamentalism.
Even though both Islam and Christianity have many similar roots, Islamic texts were traditionally considered to be extremely incompatible to Christian doctrine. Around the early 1920s, many Muslims strived to reestablish the basics of their religion that were lost during the years. Many new, unique denominations quickly arose as more people worked to promote this new development. Eventually, this caused the primary ideas of Islam to shift and "the religion was no longer one, monolithic idea," said Malik.
A distinguishable split in the religion occurred in the 1930s when two distinct aspects developed in the newfound ideology: indigenous, traditional ideas of Islam and colonial Islam. The new identity of Islam at that time expressed the bipolarity and tension between these colonial and indigenous realms.
"The social forces of structural differences manifested themselves in economic and political traditions that became socially discontinuous," said Malik. At a time when Muslims were trying to reestablish basic ideologies, two different structures of the religion appeared. The hostility between these two forces created greater animosity in the Islamic society as a whole. Even though these two sects had similar overlapping structures, they presented two very distinct forms of the religion.
Malik said that due to modernization, individuals are inherently given the power to choose among an increasing and often overwhelming variety of options. Malik believes that when this state of uncertainty appears in religion, it can be exceptionally dangerous. Religious movements can quickly accumulate more followers by merely offering certainty. As rapid social change occurred in the mid-20th century, old religious identities became increasingly dependent on new social relationships. At this time, Islam was quickly gaining coverts while slowly losing its authenticity.
The lack of mandate of religious customs and diffusion of Islam into modern society caused a sort of "crisis of meaning," said Malik. Muslims at the time were questioning their purpose in the world. As a result, many saw the need for a new construction of the religion that would potentially lead to a rebirth. One of the easiest ways for a new form to be negotiated was to adapt many main ideas and traditions of Islam to new ideological values. As a result of this reinvention of tradition, Muslims began to pursue immediate, easily-obtained goals and promised "a righteous society here and now," to others. With all these new changes, Islam was still deviating from its primary path. The Islamic culture was experiencing a major cultural loss, which Malik described as a "constant decay" and again attributed it to modernization.
During the 1980s, to try and save the floundering religion, Muslims decided to pull for a radical return to Islamic roots. "A moral renewal was needed," said Malik. During this time, Muslims were expected to live solely according to the prophet Muhammad. This required followers to go back to the time when the Islamic culture "fell" and practice strict tradition that was established in previous eras.
The new authoritative power initiating this retrogression did not have necessary history records to credit their movement; the fundamentalists could therefore justify the creation of their new sect. They declared that they needed a centralized Islamic state to establish a universal Islamic identity. Also, these Muslims wanted to outcast any concepts associated with European governments and religions like nationalism and democracy. "Ideas such as these have little value to fundamentalist Muslims living according to tradition," said Malik. The new nation wanted to remain untouched to decrease the risk of acquiring foreign identities that might infiltrate their tradition.
"By the 1980s, after political Islam had failed, Islamic movements ushered terrorism as the last attempt to regain lost political power," said Malik. Muslims wanted to retain their authentic traditions, but that limited the power they once had over international politics. Terrorism then ensued as a cry for more power. Malik believes that many alternatives exist for this religious movement to achieve a more powerful status, citing both territorial settlements and negotiations. Since Islamic fundamentalism has so much in common with other sects of Islam and many Western religions, Malik expressed his hope that these overlapping unions would be able to settle any future disputes that may occur.
Be the first to comment on this article!