WHAT IS MODERNISM AND WHERE DID IT COME
FROM?
We can relate, ideologically, the modernist movement
spreading these days to one sect in the past. This sect is called the Muta'zilah,
which is dated back to the third Islaamic century. Although those people
accepted the Qur'aan and Sunnah they made ta'weel (their own interpretation
of the Qur'aan) and said 'aql (intelligence) takes precedence over naql
(guidance of the Prophet 
).
However, this school died out. The modernist movement did not evolve from
them, but they are very similar to them. The modernist movement actually
originated in Europe (middle-ages). At the time when the scientific method
came about in Spain, it was seen that what the church was teaching was
not true. This led to a slow revolt. The basic view of modernism (in all
religions) is that: the religion should change according to the circumstances,
and that it is not fixed. There is no such thing as absolute truth. The
Jewish and Christian modernist response in Europe tried to explain how
the religion was still relevant for the people. They made innovations to
keep people interested in the religion (such as singing in church, introduced
only in the 1900's). They tried to say the divine and the human is mixed
in the Bible and that the parts that are true must be the ones that are
not out of date. Also, the religion is improving over time and there is
no absolute truth in the Bible. This is the time in history when many Muslims
were looking to Europe. This led to three choices for those Muslims: accept
the West; reject the West; or mix the two (reform Islam). Those who followed
the third (the modernist) developed in, and focused on: Turkey - because
it was under British influence; and Egypt - because Al-Azhar was the seat
of Islaamic knowledge. The people of this modernist movement judge Islam
according to their 'aql. Some of their faults in regards to it are:
THE INFLUENCE OF MODERNISM IN AMERICA
Modernist are saying that the West and the world has changed, and that Islaam must become "civilized". Modernism has spread the most in the U.S. because:
In Tafseer, Yusuf Ali is the most popular translator
of the meaning of the Qur'aan, even though he denies what the 'aql can't
see (of the unseen). In seerah, one book is saying the Prophet
is like anyone else. Another tries to say the Sunnah is not for the sharee'ah
and that sometimes we have to throw away the Ahaadeeth because Allaah did
not correct the Prophet's
mistakes when he made ijtihaad. In Fiqh, modernists say interest is permissible,
In menstruation women can pray, and Muslim women can marry kaafir men.
They say the face of women was not covered until 150 years after the time
of the Prophet , even though
it existed in his time, and that women should always pray in the mosque,
even though Ahaadeeth only show women in the mosque at Ishaa and Fajr because
they could not be recognized in the dark. They also say the Ahaadeeth that
a people with a woman ruler will not succeed is not true today and polygamy
is forbidden except under certain conditions (which do not exist). Finally,
it should be mentioned that this movement is organized and has resources
such as magazines, television, conventions, and literature.
SOME OF THEIR VIEWS
Modernists influence the thinking of people, and
that person spreads their views on unknowingly. Their way of thinking is
the most dangerous thing about them. None discuss Aqeedah (belief) because
it is not important to them ('aql judges naqal). They are also trying to
remove the Sunnah and say that the system of the old muhadditheen is insufficient.
Most say (as do critics of the Bible) that we need a "higher criticism"
of Ahaadeeth and the earlier conclusions (ijmaa) of scholars are not sufficient,
yet they give no new way to judge Ahaadeeth. However, we as Muslims understand
that the Prophet was guided
by Allaah and that we may not be able to understand everything in the Ahaadeeth
with our 'aql. It is common for the modernists to question the role of
the Sunnah in the sharee'ah. One said all of the Sunnah is of this world
and not Deen, even in the Prophet's
time, therefore it is all a matter of shoora (consultation) and ijtihaad
(therefore changeable). Another says we need to make ijtihaad for what
is to be followed, and changes of time and place make Sunnah difficult
to use. All of this is mentioned to weaken the view of the Sunnah. The
Jews and Christians tried to differ the human from the divine. Modernists
try to point out the differences between the Messenger as a human and as
a Prophet. They also avoid following the Sunnah by dividing his life into
parts (imam, judge, military leader, prophet, etc.), saying some are not
divine teachings and not law. Some say everyone is free to make ijtihaad,
and later restrictions on it were imposed by the people. Another said a
ruling may change even if it is from the Qur'ān and Sunnah.
HOW DO MODERNISTS GO ASTRAY?
The observer can easily point out the following points as the driving force for this trend:
1) Their premises and assumptions are wrong Modernists look to the West and try to reinterpret the "old religion" with modern science and modern times. They assume that:
The present situation is advanced or different
(i.e. "this is not the Prophet's time!"). However, the idea of progress
and that things are better now is Marxian and Hegelian. It is against the
Ahaadeeth, as the Prophet
said each generation is getting worse. They must prove that there has been
progression (no definition of it given). Islamically the advanced society
is the one that comes closer to Allah, and understands and applies Islam
better (such as the Sahaabah). In fact, the current societies have the
things of the old societies (such as homosexuality, etc.) as mentioned
in the Qur'aan;
Religion is relative to time and place (i.e. "therefore we need to judge Islaam in light of modern science"). Modernists are "people of science" and judge Islaam according to modern science. They think that the West is based on science, but they fail to notice that not all science is based on fact. In reality, much of science is only hypothesis (not a fact). Also, every science has its own philosophy, which will lead to its own conclusions;
The way of thinking of a society is based
on (is a product of) its environment. Modernists say most of religion is
from the people and their environment and it can be judged by later times,
and Ahaadeeth are related to that time only. However, there is no proof
for the modernist hypothesis that religious truth is relative. Allah says
the Qur'aan is Haqq (truth). Modernists are saying (by inference) that
if the Qur'aan is not true now, then it was never true.
2) The methodology they use is wrong. The methodology of the modernists is the way they mislead people to the wrong conclusions. They claim to be scientific, but they are usually inconsistent or have no proof or foundation for their beliefs. Some of the means and principles they use include:
Sunnah and Ahaadeeth. They claim the Qur'aan is authentic and they only follow "authentic" Ahaadeeth. This implies that they have a way to judge Ahaadeeth (different from that of the traditional scholars), yet most give no new way to judge Ahaadeeth, and are using their 'aql (intelligence) to determine this (like the female ruler Ahaadeeth). Modernists especially dislike Ahaadeeth which have specific meanings and prefer ones which only have general principles.
Use of weak Ahaadeeth to help their points
and arguments (while they are calling for the use of authentic Ahaadeeth).
For example, in the area of women in Islam (the two areas the modernists
try to change the most are the Sunnah and women) they like to quote two
stories from the time of Umar Ibn Al-Khattab 
1) when Umar
was giving a Khutbah he tried to restrict the amount of dowry, a woman
opposed, and Umar corrected himself and thanked the woman, and
2) Umar
appointed Umma Shifaa as
a market-regulator (used by modernist to say women can work in the government).
However, both of these stories are not authentic.
Use vague terms without defining them. Modernists use terms like democracy, freedom, and equality, but they do not define what they mean by them. The danger in using vague terms is that a knowledgeable person will pass over the word or concept, thinking they meant the Islamic or acceptable definition while in fact they did not, while others may believe what they are saying is true.
Do not present all of the relevant information that is available on the subject. That is, from Qur'aan, Sunnah, etc. They only present that which will support their views. This tactic is used to avoid unliked beliefs, so they just do not mention them.
Force their interpretation onto the text.
This is what the Muta'zila did, when they said 'aql takes precedence over
what is from the Prophet .
Many modernists say Islaam is the "rational" religion. This is true if
you mean everything is from Allah and there is no contradiction, but to
say that we can study everything in Islaam by judging it with only our
intellect is unacceptable and there is also no proof for this. To avoid
implementing what the Qur'aan and Sunnah says, the modernists say we need
to follow the "spirit" of Islaam and not worry about the laws specifically.
But it is clear from the Qur'aan and Sunnah that we are to take both. They
will argue that the text of the Qur'aan only says for women to dress modestly
and they do not like to talk about the specific details of hijaab and say
we only need to follow the "spirit" of the law.
They tend to oppose scholars by saying they meant something else. They say that the door to ijtihaad is open, which is something accepted by the Ahl As-Sunnah Wal Jamaa'. However, it is not open to everybody on any subject. Modernists claim that anyone would make ijtihaad until Imam Shafi'ee narrowed the qualifications (not true), and today anyone can do it. In one magazine, on the question of polygamy and divorce, some said that these two can be restricted by ijtihaad. They often misquote scholars and give their own meanings for what they said.
Often follow strange and rejected opinions. They try to revive some of the old opinions because they like it and say that this writer said it in the past. Modernists try to open the door to these opinions and choose what is the most suitable and easy to follow. However, we are supposed to look for the fiqh opinions that are the closest to the truth. They usually bring bad Ahaadeeth such as "The differences in my Ummah is a mercy" or reject Authentic Ahaadeeth such as the one about the breakup of the Ummah into 73 sects.
Follow their desires. They often make rulings
and Fataawaa without permissible daleel (evidence). One said music is permissible
because he did not see something wrong with it, so it is Halaal. But he
did not check what the Qur'aan and the Sunnah say about this subject.
ISLAAM AND MODERNISM
Ahl As-Sunnah Wal Jamaa' believes that there is
only one true Islaam. This is proven in Qur'aan and Ahaadeeth. One Ahaadeeth
shows the straight line as leading to Allah, and branching paths leading
off it with a devil at each one calling to it. Also, the Ummah will break
into 73 sects, and the true way is the one who follows Muhammad
and his companions. Modernists are differing from Ahl As-Sunnah Wal-Jamaa'
in:
Everything in accordance with Qur'aan and Sunnah is Haqq (truth) and what disagrees with it is false (some modernists disagree with this). Also, statements consistent with the Qur'aan and Sunnah are accepted;
Ijmaa (consensus) of the Sahābah (and early generations) is a hujja (proof) for all Muslims. Modernists say Sahaabah are men and we are men, and even matters agreed on by them are open to ijtihaad;
Anything in the Qur'aan and Sunnah cannot be opposed by 'aql, rational thought, opinion, or Qiyaas. This is supported in the Qur'aan and is not open to discussion or vote. One modernists said the cutting of the hand of the thief is a "Khomeni Islaam" and is unethical;
There are constants in Islaam related to
belief, worship, etc. and these are good, sound, proper, and correct for
all places and times. This view is accepted by the Ahl Sunnah, but not
by many of the modernists, saying that all truth is relative and there
is no constants. However, these constant principles are basic aspects of
the Ahl Sunnah and are traced to the Qur'aan and Sunnah and Sahaabah. They
are not questionable or changeable things. In many of these things, modernists
say we need ijtihaad and tajdeed.
DANGERS
CONCLUSION
