I should begin by correcting a view that has become common among people interested in my father's life and work, that his conversion can be seen as building of a bridge between Islam and West. He has even been described by some as a European intellectual who came to Islam with aim of liberalizing it. Nothing could be further from truth. When he embraced Islam (aslama, submitted, is Arabic term) he entered a rich and complex religious tradition that had evolved in diverse ways--mutually compatible as well as in conflict with one another--for over a millennium and a half. Thus in his own life's work he sought to use methodology of medieval Spanish theologian Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm, he drew often and copiously on interpretations of nineteenth-century Egyptian reformer Muhammad 'Abduh, and again, despite strong disagreement on various points of substance with fourteenth-century Syrian theologian Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya, he attempted, like latter, to integrate reason ('aql), tradition (naql), and free-will (irada), to form a coherent and distinctive vision of Islam. His view of Sufism, incidentally, was also influenced by Ibn Taymiyya, for whom it was excess of Sufis rather than Sufism as such that was object of reproach. In fact, most of what my father published in early years of his life (Islam at Crossroads, (1) translation of Sahih al-Bukhari, (2) periodical Arafat, (3) etc.) was addressed not to Westerners but to fellow-Muslims. I would say, therefore, that he was concerned less with building bridges and more with immersing himself critically in tradition of Islam that became his tradition, and with encouraging members of his community (Muslims) to adopt an approach that he considered to be its essence. His autobiography was first publication that was addressed to non-Muslims (as well as to Muslims, of course), a work in which he attempted to lay out to a popular audience not only how he became a Muslim but also what he thought was wonderful about Islam. His translation of Qur'an into English, completed in latter part of his life, was not simply a translation: it was a detailed presentation of his final vision of Islam. My father was not a political but a religious thinker for whom Qur'an and Sunna together formed what he called the most perfect plan for human living. It was in this connection that he wrote on idea of an Islamic state, and even prepared suggestions for an Islamic Constitution in Pakistan in early yeas of its existence. These suggestions were elaborated in his well-known book, Principles of State and Government in Islam (4) But his interest in that subject declined in later years when he became preoccupied with his translation of Qur'an. (5) Like most intellectuals who have lived a long life (born in 1900, he died in 1992), his views evolved and developed through reflection and changing circumstances. I am not able to trace this development here, but I will nevertheless try, by thinking about what he said and wrote two decades after his death, to interpret and reconstruct what I believe was his vision of Islam. In doing so I will sometimes disagree with what he wrote and sometimes try to make explicit what I see as valuable but implicit in his views, and elaborate on it. The first and most important idea in my father's vision has to do with his conviction that access to Islam is based on reason, and that therefore argument is necessary to becoming and being a Muslim. When I was a boy he used to tell me that one must try to persuade other Muslims and non-believers not by force but by reason: This is what Qur'an means by saying There is no compulsion in religion (la ikraha fid-din; Q 2:255). In Qur'an, he pointed out, God always addresses human beings by appeal to reason. If you read it carefully, you will realize that Qur'an is continually engaged in argument by means of provocative questions because argument is what it expects its listeners to understand. …
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Open Access
Jan 1, 2016
Kurmanbayev K + 1
