Much ink has spent both by the Muslims and
non-Muslim scholars, particularly sociologist. Islamists, political scientists,
dealing with the question of relation between Religion and politics. The
traditional, or pre-modern, relationship between religion and politics was one
in which the two were closely integrated, one with the other religious beliefs
and practices entered into the heart of political process, supporting and
sustaining the exercise of power. Political concerns also, on the other hand
extended throughout the religious sphere. The two formed, in effect, one
co-terminus set of beliefs and actions it was a system in which social and
political life was touched at virtually all points by religious consideration1.
In that period Divine regulations govern economic behavior and ecclesial
centers frequently wield extensive economic power. Above all, government is
sacral. Religion and government, the two major society wide institutions of
social control form on integrated religio-polical system2. This
pattern applied to Buddhist, Hindu and Islamic societies. In the medieval West,
it was a basic feature wherever the Roman Catholic Church was in ascendancy.
The key factor lay in whether religious authority
and political authority was exercised by the same leadership or by distinct
leaders. The former we can call as ‘organic model’ and the second we can call
in Christian Western sense ‘church-state model’. In the modern world, however,
the situation is generally much changed due to the modernisation and its
associate process of secularization, to which we shall return shortly. Here it
is suffice to say that steel the echo of intergraded or ‘organic model’ can be
found in contemporary patterns and assumptions. On Britain, for example, the monarch
is still technically both head of state-the political sphere-and supreme
Governor of the established Church of England. And in relatively
traditional Nepal,
King Birendra is, still seen as an incarnation of Hindu god Bishnu by the more
traditional sectors of society. Present day Saudi Arabia and Iran retains
the centrality of this religious element in their state affairs: There are no
secular constitutions. The basis of legal systems is the Shari’ah, derived from
the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (s). In Afghanistan Taliban
Government is striving to achieve that end. Pakistan which came into existence
on the plea of establishing an
Islamic state and implementation of Shari’ah, it has
not yet succeed to materialize it fully due to secularist-conservative
entanglement in the political process of Pakistan. Here in this connection it
should be mentioned that in Islam it does not matter ‘who’ rules the country,
but it does matter ‘how’ it is ruled, whether it is ruled according to the
Shari’ah or not.
The key factor to hamper the process of Islamization
or society is the secularism, imported from the western social structure or the
‘church-state model”. The key rule played in the secularization of Muslims
majority states of the world, are modernist who tried to distinguish between
Din and shari’ah, essential and non-essential, sacred and profane, universal
and particular, aspects of islam. Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan and his Alighar School in India and Muhammad Abdullah in the Middle East are regarded as the initiator of Islamic
Modernism. Without specially mentioning the secularism as the state policy,
they tried to reform the medieval Islamic law and to interpret the Qur’an and
Sunnah in Such a way that Sir Sayyid and Abduh became according to some
scholars, the champion supporter of secularist doctrine and policy.
It is to be noted that as a concept it is somewhat
controversial, being viewed by some as anti-religious (La dini) and some by
neutral and still some as being indifferent to the role of religion in social
life. Looking at its etymological dictionary meaning it is evidenced that it
was basically anti religious movement, if we call it a movement. Oxford
Advanced Learners dictionary defined secularism as “the belief that laws,
education etc. should be based on facts, science etc, rather that on religion”.
Hence secularization means, According to the above dictionary, “To remove
something from control of the church or religion”.
Eric S. Wterhouse in an article entitled
‘Secularism’, which he contributed, to the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics
defined secularism as “a movement, internationally ethical, negatively
religious, with political and philosophical antecedents”. He further wrote, “
Since it undertook to do this without reference to a Deity or a future life,
and thus proposed to fulfill a function of religions, apart from religious
association, it may be regarded as negatively religious”. He further says that
“it inherited the inevitable defects-the tendency to destructive rather that
constructive action, the wrapping influence of heated feeling, the limited
outlook and the negativism”. It has prejudice against religious implications of
life and conduct. According to him, it was the British utilitarianism who were
philosophically the sponsors of secularism.
Secularism owes its name and in large measures its
existence to the life and labors of George Jacob Holyoake (b.1817) who coined
the term in 1850 from Bradlaugh, who along with Charles Watts, G.W. Foote and
other atheists were identified with secular movement. Secularism is wholly
unconcerned with the theological world and tilt interpretation. Hence,
historically “secularism has been intermingled with atheism throughout its
course”. Though Hoyoake tried to compromise between theism and atheism,
Bradlaugh “considered that secularism was bound to contest theistic belief and that
material progress was impossible to long as superstition so powerfully
manifested itself. Bradlaugh holds that the attempt to ignore rather that
denies religion is impractical, because religion embraces both secular and
spiritual concerns.
The author of the article said, “it is an impossible
proportion to maintain that there may be a God, but that he does not concern
material existence”. He argues that one who believes in God, “it will be
sufficiently incontinently inconsistent to neglect the implication of his
belief upon conduct”. He opined, “it is for this reason that a secularism which
does not include a definitely anti-religious theory is bound to fail”, Now he
came to the conclusion that:
For this reason it does not seem apparent that
secularism is destined to survive as a theory of life and conduct, and must be
regarded as a movement arising out of, and passing with, the condition of its
time. Whiles its ethical aims were honorable, it lacks an adequate basis upon
which to establish itself as a permanent feature of human thought3.
During its hundred and fifty years of development,
the term secularism has taken different facet and meanings 4. Some
sense of its multi-dimensional use can be traced if we distinguish some of its
constituent parts as delineated by K. Dobbelelaere:
1. “Constitutional
secularization: the process whereby the official character and goals of the
stage cease to be defined kin religious terms”.
2. “Policy Secularization: the
process whereby the state ceases to regular society on the basis of religious
criteria, and expands the policy domains and specific provision of the state
into areas previously the reserve of the religious sphere”.
3. “Institutional
Secularization: the process whereby religious structures lose their political
saliency and influence as pressures groups, parties, and movements”.
4. “Agenda Secularization: the
process whereby, issues, needs and problems deemed relevant to political
process cease to have overtly religious content, and whereby solutions
developed to resolve those issues are no logons developed to resolve those
issues are no lounge constructed on the basis of religious principles”.
5. Ideological secularization:
the process whereby the basic values and belief systems used to evaluate the
political reels and to give it meaning case to be couched in religious terms5”.
When the political power reformulates its power in
new (secular) terms and religious leaders defines and constructs their new and
somewhat different relationship with society and the state, it creates tension
in the society. Amidst this tension there arises three models of polity as
proposed by K. Modhurst in an article entitled “Religion & Politics: A
Typology”, Contributed to Scotish Journal of Religious Studies (1981). The
first he calls “ The confessional polity” where political leaders continue to
legitimize their rule in religious terms; equally, religious leaders mobilize
support against threats to their communal hegemony. Colombia and Iran and some
respects Ireland too offered as contemporary examples.
A further pattern arises when secularization removes
religion as the major basis of the political system and the state comes to view
the forces of religion as just one group among, many contesting for power.
Medhurst calls this pattern as “religiously neutral polity”. Here religious
groups or parties become pressure to defend and promote their interest, i.e.,
religion.
Medhurst final model is the “anti-religious polity”.
This represents and activity on the part of the state to eliminate any religious
presence within political arena. Albenia is an example of this model. Here in
this model society and polity were to be reconstructed without any religious
institutions, symbols of practice. Commenting on this model Dr. Moyeser wrote:
Yet these various attempts to eliminate religion have
failed. Indeed, in some instances, political oppression seems to have the
opposite of the intended effect.
Even in liberal-democratic politics, he says, it is
by no means clear that religion and politics to continue to lose mutual
relevance. Hadden and shape go so far as to purpose a cyclical theory of
secularization in which the process of removing religion from society contains
the seeds whereby religion is eventually revived and revitalized6.
They say that this worldly, secularized answers to the meaning and purpose of
life are alienating and unsatisfying Reviewing the country studies of Europe,
Africa, U.S.A. and Asia which were made by different scholars of religion and
politics, George Moyser came to this conclusion that,
In short, the age of anti-religious polity is
largely dead in Europe. A new age, in which religion can once again operate as
a relatively legitimate political force, seems to have dawned7.
About Middle Eastern countries, India, Egypt as well
as many other African countries, and the United States, he says that studies
reveals the fact that a theistic and secularized state socialism have largely
collapsed. Religion continues to play a very powerful role in all countries of
the world, particularly in Islamic world. About India he comments that “ All in
All, Indian politics will no doubt continue to be heavily influenced by
religion as the country moves forward through the myriad problems of social and
economic and cultural change”8. Now let us turn to the problem of
Islamization. What is meant by Islamization,’ What is method? What is real
impediment to thepath of Islamization? What is its remedy at the present
jucture of our history? These are the questions we are supposed to answer if we
like to do some justice to this paper. But the span of the paper will not allow
us to go into the details. However, we shall try to present the issue in a
headline manner to provoke the discussion from the learned audience and
participants present here in this august occasion.
Islamization means three things:
I.
To implement the Islamic laws and values, as thought by the Qur’an and
Sunnah, into the society. In a word, implementation of the Shari’ah into the social milieu.
II.
To Implement the Islamic values to the new and new issues and
situations arising out of encroachment of Western institution and values into
our society. Here Islamization of society means the implementation of Islamic
social values into the non-Islamic structure of the society.
III.
Abolition of those practices and institutions from the society, which
are unIslamic.
It is, therefore, needless to say about Islamization
about society where the Islamic values are already in operation and are in
practice, such as in Iran and Saudi Arabia. Hence implementation of Islamic
values are required where there is no practice of Islamic value at all or where
some institutions and practices are Islamic and some are not. The last
alternative is the fact for the most countries for the Muslim world. Since in
this age of modern method of mass communication of mass media, non-Islamic
cultures and practices constantly pouring our territory, this is the time to
remain constantly on guard against this encroachment of alien cultures,
practices and values. But it is almost impossible to deter this flow of
cultural encroachment unless the heads of states take the initiative. Here lies
the reason for inevitable necessity for the formation of an Islamic state. In
this age of democracy, making of a state Islamically founded is an impossible
task unless Muslims are majority and they desire to make it so. And the
creation of this desire to live Islamically is the function of Da’wah. In order
to set mankind on the right path and provide a positive orientation in the
present morass, we must rediscover real Islam, which is correctly ever present
in the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet. To create a religiously based
social order is not an easy task, and human history knows how difficult it is
and how perennial a desideratum. Islam is a practical remedy for human ailment
and a recipe for how man may transcend his banalities and create a positive
human brotherhood. The factors that stood in the path of creating this viable
social order are many. Let us mention below a few key factors.
1. The first
and foremost factors are secularism: A Muslim as a Muslim
cannot
believe in secularism. In any one of
the meanings mentioned above, Islam is incompatible with secularism. No Muslim
who believes in an Al-Mighty God can consistently say that for a good part of
my action is not concern of God. No Muslim can say at the same time that I am a
Muslim and I want to remove the religion from the society. Akber S. Ahmed may
be quoted in this connection:
‘Secular’
and ‘Muslim’ are by definition incompatible as any dictionary
will
confirm. There can be no Muslim without God-just as there can be
no
Christianity without Christ, Buddhism without Buddha, Marxism
without
Marx9.
2. Lack of proper Knowledge of
Islam: From the beginning until the Western colonialism-which began to extend
its grasp throughout the world since the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries,
‘Ulama (fuqaha, Muhadditun, and Mufassirin) were the torchbearers of Islamic
science and technologies. But those glorious days of Muslim history turned
backward when Muslims became very much involved in power mongering forgetting
the real source of power-knowledge and hikmah
(science and technological know-how).
3. Introduction of Western
liberal/secular education: The Muslim society unreceptively adopted the western
liberal education without giving due weight to the teaching of the Qur’an and
Sunnah.
4. Material Prosperity of the
West: Some modernist Muslim became fascinated to the western way of thought and
action by seeing the material prosperity of the west particularly after the
renaissance10. (a team which, I think, should not be applied to term
is, according to some thinkers, nahda
which literally means the actualization of the potentialities latent in the
child. Hence Islamically it means to actualize all potentialities latent in
Islam into the society). The renaissance of the west was characterized with the
same ultimate principle, which inspired Greco-Roman antiquity, namely, the man
is the humanistic. This humanism dethroned the god of Christianity and replaces
him with man. Although the main élan of Islam is also humanistic but this
humanism is guided by God not by man.
5. Muslim reluctance to
knowledge: Knowledge is a lost treasure of the Muslims. They are asked to pick
it up where ever it is to be found. Muslim reluctance came in the walk of
western imperialist power when it intruded into the Muslim society. A good
number of ‘ulama’ considered the European language and technology as
un-Islamic, as it comes from those Christians who are very much critical of
Islamic institutions and practices. Then some ‘Ulama’ such as Deobandis,
decided to remain aloof from the European contact. But the Madrasha education they sponsored,
lacked modern education. Hence in the long run Muslim became ignorant of their
own heritage and high days, and their education became ineffective for the
Muslim society. If Muslim are to survive as a nation as an Ummah, they will
have to devote their full energies and capacities to cope with the western technological
progress, but not at the expense of their own faith.
6. Heads of the states are not
the Ulama and experts of the Shari’ah but the secularist and liberal minded
Muslims: It is said that Modernist Muslims are inclined to the west by
attraction and the conservative by repulsion.
Those Muslim who acqui5ed a good knowledge of western education they
became the heads of the state, administration; judiciary etc. Then they
naturally become reluctant to do the job implementation Shari’ah, abolition of
non-Islamic practices and institutions etc.
7. Conservative-modernist, or
orthodox-liberal disputes: In Muslim society though the Ulama still control
much of the public opinion, they are unable to face the western educated
liberal minded Muslims who became the leaders of the society and tries to
implement western values into the society; but ‘Ulama tries to resist this
attempt. As a result, the dispute arises between the two groups; the dispute
often leads to clash. Consequently lay Muslims become confused as to which
course they should follow.
8. Long western antipathy and
hatred towards Islam: It created a psychological barrier in the way of
Islamization of society. The western scholars are very much critical of
medieval Islamic way of thoughts and practices. This has increased considerably
by the technological development of media network. However some western
scholars now realized that the propaganda changed little Muslim attitude
towards the west, and they now begin to show some respect to the Muslim
perception of their religion, though the basic premises of the west still
remain unchanged.
9. Muslim’s lack of respect to
his own religion. This state of affairs became the best argument for the
western materialistic world against Islam: Some Muslims became very much critical
of Islam and began to question the very basic tents to Islam. For example,
Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses arose a huge controversy throughout the world
and some radical Muslims also took his side and argued in his favour. This has
increased embarrassment among the Muslims.
10.
Lack of good moral character (Hosne Khulq)’ among the state leaders of
the Muslim world: Most of the leaders who are Muslims and act as the head of
the state or the institutions are lacked of Islamic character. So those who
work under such leaders do not feel obliged to lead an Islamic way of life.
11.
Muslims against the Muslims: Western democracy and liberalism created a
system, which has scope to set a Muslim against Muslims.
12.
Christian missionary from the very early had spread a network
throughout the Muslim world to convert the Muslims into Christianity. It is
still working in the guise of N.G.Os and humanitarian activities in the third
world countries.
Now the questions remain to be answered are (i) How
to mitigate or remove these problem mentioned above? And (ii) how to start the
Islamization process? There is no easy way to answer these questions. However,
I would like to say that according to the Qur’an the virtue are coeval. They
exist side by side. When Allah (Subahanahu a ta’la) created Adam as vicegerent
of the earth, he also created a Satan and gave Satan on his request to continue
his evil doings until the day of judgment11. Allah granting of this
facility to Satan means that men will never be able to free the society from the
evil forces and secret of virtue lies in the struggle against the vices. That
is why the institution of Jihad also
will continue until the Day of Judgment, as the prophet says. If not ‘Jihad
with sword’, which according to some thinkers, is only permitted on the
condition of aggression, but Jihad
with the evil forces will continue forever. And this must be accompanied with
the proper knowledge of Din and Dunia (the world). We know that God
established the superiority of man over other forces of the world in respect of
knowledge. Knowledge is the pre-requisite for establishing a God fearing (Taqwa) and humanitarian society.
As to the second question, we have a model
sanctioned by the Qur’an: “Call to the path of your lord with wisdom
(scientific knowledge) and with good moral counseling”. This is the basic
method of “Da’wah”. The combination of the two is absolutely necessary for
establishing Allah’s rule on earth. But due to the bifurcation between the two
in our systems and the present day Madrasha education represents the second”
(good moral counseling). That is why both are unable to guide to the path of
Allah. The perfect model is the combination of the two mentioned by the Qur’an.
Some leading thinkers of the Muslim world also
suggested some method for the Islamization of society. For example, Hasan
al-Banna, the pioneer leader of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun or Egypt, in his
Risalat al-Ta’leem suggested two methods which he called maratib al-‘amal (the
level of work) and Marahil al-‘amal (the stages of work). As to the stages of
work he proposed seven basic stages for the revival of Muslims and establishing
an Islamic society.
1. To reform oneself.
2. To reform one’s own family.
3. To reform society.
4. To free society politically12.
5. To establish Islamic
Government.
6. To re-establish Muslim Ummah and to revive Khalifah, and finally.
7. To lead the world and to
carry the responsibility or guiding it to the path of Allah.
As to the level of works he emphasized that Muslim
must be well-equipped with the knowledge and faith and to be ready to sacrifice
one’s life in the path of Allah.
Another model of Islamization of society was offered
by the Turkish outstanding scholar Bediuzzaman Sa’id Nursi(1873-1960). His
lifer struggle became a legend for the Muslims of Turkey13. In his
Risala-I-Nur “he attempts to cure the collective hearts, the public opinion,
and the general conscience that have been subverted by corruptive tools
accumulated and stored up for thousand years, using in the cure, the drugs and
the remedies of the Qur’an and faith” 14. The basic ingredients of
the Nursi model are:
1. To cure weakness of Iman
(faith) and development of individual conscience.
2. Islamic work must be done
with group approach.
3. Unity (a) among Muslim
individuals, (b) Among Muslim states, (c) a common fronts with other believers
against the enemies the enemies of believers.
Bediuzzaman emphasized that in the present age,
unbelief is much more common and attempts are being made to drive people away
from religion by the misguidance of technology and science. According to him,
it is therefore, necessary to study science from a religious point of view and
to study religious from scientific point of view. In other words, he advises us
to combine religious and modern science together and study them fully.
Another outstanding scholar of this subcontinent,
Mawlana Abu al-‘Ala Mawdudi, who was considered by some Islamic scholars as a
‘Mujaddid’ (renewal of the Shari’ah), said that the main aim of the prophetic
mission was the establishment of God’s sovereignty on earth. His analysis of
the contemporary situation is that the Muslim society has gradually drifted
away from the ideal pattern established by the Prophet and developed on the
same line during the period of the Khulfa-I-Rashideen. He says that the first
important change in the social body of Islam was the transformation of Khalifah
to monarchy. This brought grave change to weaken and consciously or
unconsciously a separation between religion and politics began to take place
(Secularism finds its way to Islam).
The second major change was in the system of
education. This process culminated when Muslim succumbed to the colonial power
of the west. During this period an alien system was imposed. Because of this
new system of education separation of religion and politics became almost in
integral part of Muslim society. In the post-independent phase, the new
leadership of the Muslim countries has generally gone into the hands of those
people who are product of the colonial system of education. The Muslim
countries were begun to be led by those people who have much respect for
western values. Its consequence was inevitable –the beginning of
politico-ideological rift in Muslim society. Hence, according to Mawdudi, only
remedy to this secularist situation is to revive the pattern of ‘Khulafa-I-Rashidun’, which was a perfect manifestation of
the perfect manifestation of the prophetic mission.
Now I would like to make some personal observation.
I have argued that the greatest impediment to the Islamization of society is
secularism. I have tried to show that secularism in any meaning or facets is
incompatible with Islam. I have tried to show that secularism in any meaning of
facets is incompatible with Islam. Islam is a complete code of life. There is
no distinction between public and private morality. There is nothing private or
exclusively private matter in Islam. For everything done or believed man are
responsible to God. To Muhammad (s) religious life was not a part time thing.
Every ‘Ibadah has social implication
and every social matter has religious to perform it in congregation, it places
emphasis on increasing brotherhood and fellow feeling among the Muslims. Above
all, the Qur’an says, prayer prohibits you from adultery, reprehensible action
and injustice. (Q.29: 45)
Likewise distribution of Zakah among the prescribed
personal and the association of Fasting in the month of Ramadan with Sadaqat
al-Fitra, and the institution of Hajj and the distribution of the meat of the
sacrificed animal, all have deepest social implication. That is the lord of the
world”. (Q, 6:162) Moreover, there is no more personal thing than one’s own
body and life. You have eyes but you cannot look to a foreign woman with ill
motive; you have hands but you cannot beat any one as you like; you have legs
but you cannot enter into anybody’s home without his prior permission. Your
life is more personal then anything else, but you cannot kill yourself.
I may quote now from a Christian scholar, who says,
The struggle between religion and state that marked
western development did not appear in the Islamic world, partly because no
church in the western sense developed, and partly because so much of the law
that was applied was religious law…The ideal becomes not the separation of
religion and state, but the unification of religion and state”15.
I may
conclude my paper by saying that though secularism was the outcome of some
historical situation, it could not fulfill total human aspiration. Moreover, it
had shown a serious crack in solving the moral problems. The weakness of
secularism is the strengths for conservation which believes in the unity of
divine and mundane. Lawlessness is, at present, the obverse of free secular
democracy, as we are experiencing in Bangladesh. The truth is that western
civilization is a giant now fully corroded from within. Christianity was a
spiritual force until the recent centuries, and it is the Christian West who
sponsored secularism, which is turn, devastatingly damaged the spirituality of
Christianity itself. This situation reminds us of a verse from a Persian poet.
The wonder is
not so much that you posses the
Miraculous art
of healing like Jesus;
The wonder is rather that your patient is even
More sick than
before16.
 |
1. G. Moyser Politics and Religion in the Modern World (ed. George
Moyser London: Routledge, 1991) p. 12.
2.
D. E. Smith, ‘Religion and political Development (Boston; little Brown,
1970) p.6.
3.
Eric S. Waterhouse, “Secularism”, Encyclopedia of religion and Ethics,
1949, pp.348-350.
4.
See k. Dobbelacre, “Secularization: A Multi dimensional Concept.”.
Current Sociology 29, vol. 1 (1981) pp. 11-12.
5.
George Moyser, “Politics and Religion in the modern World: an
overview”, in Politics and religion in
the Modern World, pp. 14-15.
6.
J. K. Hadden and A. Shupe, Prophetic
Religions and Politics: Religion: Religion and political order (New york: Paragon House
(1986), p.XV
7.
G. Moyser, Religion and Politics in the Modern World, p.18.
8.
Ibid.pp.19-23
References
1. Akbar S. Ahmed, Post
Modernism and Islam (London: Routledge, 1991), P. 320.
2. Sir Sayyid Ahmed Khan once
in a letter from London
to Muhsin al-Mulk, attributed the Indian peoples as dirty animals as compared
to the Western Whitman.
3. See the Qur’an: 7: 14-17; 15: 36-39 and 38: 79-82. The repletion of same
theme in three places in the Qur’an indicates the importance of this human
situation in the eyes of the Qur’an.
4. He wrote the book when Egypt was still
under the foreign occupation.
5. Bediuzzaman Sa’id Nursi was
born in Anatolia in 1873. From the beginning
of his life he was a devout Muslim. In World War I, Bediuzzaman Sa’id Nursi
served as the commander of a volunteers’ regiment in the Caucasian front and in
Eastern Anatolia. The heroism he demonstrated
in the battles was highly admired by the generals of the Ottoman Army. The
Signs of Miraculousness (Isharat ul-I’jaz), which received immense appreciation
from eminent scholars, was written during the war on horseback, front line and
trench. In one of those battles against the invading Russian forces, Bediuzzaman
and ninety other otured, He was sent to prisoners’ camp in Kostroma, Northwestern
Russia. One day the Russian Nicola Nicolaevich, commander-in-chief
of the Caucasian front and uncle of the Czar, came to the camp for inspection.
Bediuzzaman did not stand up before the general. When asked, Bediuzzman
explained the reason in this words; “ I am a Muslim scholar and have belief in
my heart. Whoever has belief in his heart is superior to the one who does not.
I cannot act against my belief”. He was court-martialed, sentences to death,
and, when the sentence was to be executed, he began his last duty, prayer,
before the shooting squad. The general witnessing the scene, was deeply
impressed, and came to Bediuzzaman, this time with an apology.
6. S. Kurter O’ Berge,
“Bediuzzaman’s Model for Islamic Renaissance”, in Al-Ittihad 15 (October 1978)
P.36.
7. Freeland Abbott, “Pakistan and
the Secular State”, in South Asian Politics and
Religion, ed. D.E. Smith (Princeton: University Press, 1966) p.359.
8. Quoted by Fazlur Rahman, “Islamic
Challenge and Opportunities”, in Islam: Post Influence and Present Challenge,
Ed. By A. Welch and Picrre Caches, (New York: State University of N.Y. Press,
1979), P.330.
*Late A.N.M. Wahidur Rahman
Professo, Department of Philosophy
University of Chittagong
No comments:
Post a Comment