Secularism; A Blanket Term To Cover Diverse Ideas
Khalid
M. Ishaque
The word 'Secularism' is often used, as we have already
noticed, as a blanket term to cover diverse ideas. It comes in handy for
projection of many ideas which, when clearly identified by reference to their
real antecedents would find no acceptance.
It is claimed by those committed to Marxism that
Secularism stands for emancipation of human mind from the bondage of outmoded
beliefs and practices; and that it has always been interlinked with struggle
against Feudalism. Further it is claimed that it is a militant system of
thought and action whose main object is to liberate man from the enslavement of
outmoded practices and beliefs.
Ex-facie the objectives appear laudable irrespective of
the intrinsic correctness of the claim. But the statement of claim has a dual
aspect, particularly when it originates from sources committed to Marxism.
According to Marxism the real and
iron laws governing human society are those pertaining to modes of production
and the class conflict that they generate. All the beliefs and social modes are
form of social consciousness, mere superstructures which grow upon the social
relationship determined by the modes of production. These become outmoded and
useless when any basic change in the modes of production takes place.
Religion is part of the super-structure which according
to them performed a useful function in some periods of human history but
has never become outmoded.
"Atheism", according to Marx
and Engels "is typical of progressive classes." 'Religion' on the
other hand, "is opium of the people," Marx and Engels in fact took to
task their contemporary atheists for taking the wrong road for elimination of
religion from human society, by suggesting use of direct coercive methods
against religion. To eliminate religion, Marx taught, people should first be
educated in materialistic outlook. This would lead to teaching of real
humanism, the logical basis of Communism.
In the context while recounting the outmoded beliefs
and practices which need to be rejected animistic taboos and religions are all
humped together, as chips of the same block.
Secularism becomes a 'militant system of thought and
action' when its positive contents are, according to the Marxists, provided by
scientific Socialism. 'Secularism', in other words is merely a cover for
advancement of Marxism-Leninism. How much freedom is possible in that system:
in what terms is human fulfillment visualized and what happens to individual's desire
to plan his life to satisfy his desire for efforts and self-advancement, end to
put to use his enterprise and inventiveness are matters to be separately
noticed.
In the Western non-Marxist
philosophical tradition however secularism is not even a separate heading for
independent notice. For article on the title 'Secularism'. Encyclopedia
Britannica and Americana only carry about half-column notes on this title, and
these have already been noticed.
MARX's CRITIQUE OF
RELIGION
If one were to look at the main thrust of Marx and
Engel's criticism of religion, one would notice that it was primarily a
response to the seemingly whole-hearted alliance between the contemporary
Christian leadership and the iniquitous ruling elites of the day. Marx's rhetorical
denunciation of the clerics of his day and their cold indifference to the
injustice perpetrated against the working classes of contemporary Great Britain
and Germany is apparent on every page of his articles dealing with the subject
of religion.
His most pungent remarks were reserved for those who
discovered the truth about religion by sharing the famous dictum of Tertullian
that "it is true because it is absurd." There are unfortunately many
amongst the admirers of Marx who consider his remarks as universal verities and
as an article of faith affirm, that the views and the attitudes which Marx
criticised of the Christian clerics of Christiandom of 17th to 19th century
represent the eternal essence of all religions.
Islam's attitude towards science
and scientific knowledge is and always has been radically different from that
of Marx's contemporary Christiandom. Islam was revealed in a largely unlettered
community wherin very few knew how to read and write, yet following the Quranic
injunctions in a short while the community blossomed not only as the rulers of a
vast empire but also as the intellectual elite of the world. This status the
community continued to enjoy for over a 1000 years.
The Greek and Roman heritage was re-discovered and
translated: Europe was reintroduced to scientific thought through primarily the
Muslims of Spain. The great scientists, mathematicians and philosophers of the
Muslim community were always given places of respect and honour within the
community.
Great debates and sometimes quite acrimonious, indeed
took place between the Sufi Orders on the one hand and the orthodox Ulema on
the other, yet the validity of Rationalism as such was never in issue. Even for
the most orthodox rational thought was not taboo. In fact they criticised the
Sufistic order for discarding or demeaning the rational element within the
community.
The bitter history of confrontation between Science and
Religion which characterised modern and pre-modern Europe had no counterpart
worth the name in the Muslim communities in the comparable periods.
The second point of Marx's criticism of official
Christian approach to life was its proclaimed other-worldliness which enabled
the spiritual leadership of the day and even in earlier times to turn a blind
eye to social injustices. No such criticism can be levelled against Islam.
So far as Islam's attitude towards
life of this world is concerned, it is radically different from the orthodoxy of
Marx's contemporary Eastern or the Western church. Islam indeed shares with
Christianity faith in a life after death. But the path of salvation for a
Muslim is different from that recommended by Orthodox Catholics or the
Protestants.
According to the Catholics salvation is assured on
account of the sacrifice of Christ who went through the ordeal of crucification
to save the Christians from the punishment of their sins. Martin Luther's
protest claimed that salvation came not as a result of good deeds, but on
account of faith in Christ. For both the world was an inn whose inn-keeper was
Devil himself.
For the Muslims the worldly life was a very serious
business. Doing of good deeds in the life of this world in the light of correct
relationship with God was essential for their salvation, or as a stepping stone
for the higher life that Quran promises. Allah has declared:
"Not as you wish, nor as the People of the Book
would have: Whoever commits evil he will meet his punishment. And, besides
Allah, he will find no patron and no helper. And one who doeth acts of
righteousness -- be it man or woman -- and faith possesseth, such shall enter
bliss and they shall not be wronged a straw". (4:123, 124)
One major part of the obligations of a believer on
account of his covenant with Allah was fight against social injustices. Allah
says in Sura al-Nisa:
"And what is the matter with you that you fight
not in the cause of Allah and of the weak-men, women and children - who say,
'Our Lord take us out of this town, whose people are oppressor, and make for us
some friend Thyself, and make for us from Thyself some helper". (4:75)
All good things of life were made lawful (8.32), only
their misuse by wastes, wanton display or miserliness was prohibited. They were
meant to be used and shared by the community. The good deeds, according to
Qur'an, consist in establishing justice between man and man (42:15), in aiding
and rescuing the oppressed and the enslaved. In fact the better part of Shariat
deals with estab-lishment of adal (Justice) and kindness (ihsan) within the
community. Allah has Himself characterised the mission of the Prophet in the
following words:
"He enjoins on them and forbids them evil and
makes lawful for them the good things and forbids them the bad and removes from
them their burden and the shacles that were upon them". (7:157)
Such being the main thrust of Islam's attitude towards
worldly life, nobody could in fairness level the same criticism against Islam
as being other worldly as could perhaps be levelled at the official
Christianity of the 19th century. (Courtesy: Dawn,
March 1976)
Post a Comment