CHANGE AND CONTINUITY:

THE DYNAMICS OF INSTITUTIONAL
BEHAVIOR IN ISLAM

 

Mohammad Omar Farooq, PhD
Associate Professor of Economics and Finance
Upper Iowa University

 

 

Paper Presented to the
Twentieth Annual Conference of the
Association of Muslim Social Scientists
Detroit, October 25-27, 1991

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

I. INTRODUCTION

The issues of change and continuity (and/or stability) are crucial for every society. The pressures for change, on one hand, and stability or continuity, on the other, in the contemporary Muslim world have evolved into two conflicting set of forces that have created, and are sustaining, a general stagnation in the realm of thought and action. The behavior of the existing institutional structure reflects a lack of harmony between these two forces in Muslim societies. Building, in consonance with the Islamic world-view, a viable, prosperous, and dynamic future for the Ummah requires a better understanding of the behavior of institutions, particularly in the Muslim world.

In this paper I will briefly examine the nature of the conflict between the pressures for change and continuity as they relate to behavior of "institutions." In examining so, I will discuss (1) the relevance of the developments in modern social sciences for an Islamic agenda, and (2) a conceptual framework based on al-Qur'an that may provide some insights for developing an agenda for Muslim social scientists.

 

II. FROM SOCIAL SCIENCE TO ISLAMIC SOCIAL SCIENCE

Several stages and aspects of the development of modern social science are of especial relevance and importance to us.

a. Historical Development

i. From Social Philosophy to Social Science: The Positive-Normative Dichotomy

First, in the endeavor of understanding "social phenomena," the "primitive confusion" -- a confusion of the objective scientific with the moral and metaphysical -- has persisted for centuries. That the "normative-positive" or "What is? -- What ought to be?" dichotomy is misleading and nonsensical at best and also harmful for "social thinking" is now well recognized. Much more than "the simple curiosity about its working," it is the "urge to improve society" that has provided the impetus for the development of "social science" in the Western tradition [Myrdal, p. 9]. Normative dimension of social science is identified with "social philosophy and/or social policy," while its positive, non-normative, or value-free "objective scientific" dimension is identified with "social theory." From Aristotle to the period of Enlightenment, "social policy" all along has overshadowed "social theory" and, together, they were merged into "moral philosophy" [ibid. p. 9; Duverger, pp. 12-13]].

It was during the period of the Enlightenment, "when social sciences made the decisive leap towards modern development into full-fledged and gradually separated empirical disciplines." However, even at this stage, "no clear (methodological) distinction between theory and policy are observed" [ibid. p. 9]. Even though, much of the social sciences, similar to the natural sciences, claims to be value-free and in pursuit of understanding the "reality" as to how things are and how they function, in reality it is not so.

Recognizing the superficial nature of the "normative-positive" dichotomy ought not to lead us to conclude that positive analysis is either impossible or undesirable. On the contrary, the quest to understand the reality, the so-called non-normative, dimension of human intellectual endeavor, is an essential. However, the positive dimension is not necessarily "value-free." According to Myrdal, we all are value-loaded and value-driven in carrying out our positive analysis within that load of values.

Secondly, the endeavor to understand the social phenomena originally had been primarily oriented toward deductive, philosophical or historical approach. Western social philosophy in the Middle ages gave deductive reasoning primacy over empirical observation and experimentation [Duverger, p. 14]. Throughout the Middle Ages, Scholasticism, with its mooring in Christian religion and morality, dominated. Scientific element in their contemporary social research was hardly noticeable. During the period of Renaissance and Reformation, a period that disrupted the old intellectual framework and tradition, a concrete change in orientation became noticeable, but the "general approach remained more philosophical than scientific" [ibid. p. 14].

Thirdly, modern social science began to take its shape in the post-Reformation era in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries with a very important change of context: "Christianity ceased to be its unique foundation" [ibid. p. 14]. The "Church versus Science" conflict resulted into a disastrous separation between the intellectual realm of the worldly and of the divine. The Natural Law (and Right) Philosophy as the foundation of social studies overshadowed Christianity. It is therefore crucial for Muslim social scientists to note and understand that the development of modern social science occurred through its divorce from the moral and philosophical root of Christianity. The Natural Law Philosophy gained prominence, drawing its inspiration from the Newtonian Revolution in understanding and theorizing the physical world. Consequently, a "rigorous separation" between science and philosophy appeared [ibid. p. 15] and a gradual shift from "what societies ought to be" to "what they are" occurred.

ii. From The Divine Foundation to a Secular Foundation

Recognizing the existence of Social Laws -- an idea that "social phenomena have a regular character" -- was the first step toward the emergence of an "autonomous social science". These social laws were considered to be subject to natural laws of the Newtonian world. Conception of social laws, similar to physical laws, provided the contemporary intellectuals to subject social phenomena to test by experiment. However, the eighteenth-century authors did neither clearly delimit the scope of social science nor precisely articulated its purpose. The contributions of August Comte and Karl Marx were pivotal in "establishing the objective and relative character of social phenomena, essential to the constitution of sociology as a science" [ibid. p. 15].

August Comte's contribution was decisive in giving social science a positive look, Charles Darwin's in giving it an evolutionary character, and Marx's in giving social science its "purely objective base" [ibid. p. 18]. Indeed, it is now widely recognized among sociologists that "Marxism was the first complete system, the first cosmogony explaining all social phenomena. Before it they were only political syntheses: for example, Montesquieu on political regimes, Adam Smith on economics, and so on" [ibid. p, 19].

iii. From Social Science to Social Sciences

There was only a singular "social science" in the nineteenth century. August Comte and the French sociologists at that time, like Karl Marx, were vehemently opposed to the idea of "social sciences." Their consensus in reaffirming the unity of social science later did not find any following. Eventually, "Social science has splintered into more and more specialist disciplines: ethnography, social psychology, anthropology, economics, demography, ecology, linguistics, sociology of law, political science, etc." [Ibid. p. 21].

b. Current Trends and Dilemmas in Modern Social Sciences

There are several aspects of modern social sciences, as identified above under the section of historical development, that are of especial importance: (a) The positive, value-free character of social science, (b) its secular, evolutionary bias, (c) social laws as the foundation of the social phenomena, and (d) the splintering specialization of social sciences.

Modern social science has developed in the peculiar backdrop of the world-view and the intellectual tradition of the western civilization. From a panorama of ideas about human nature and human society to ethnocentricity and secularism to nature and human quest for supremacy, the social sciences have grown into fragmented disciplines without a core. Contemporary social scientists readily recognize that social sciences are torn apart due to two main problems. (1) "On the one hand are a number of very tough intellectual challenges stemming from the complexity of the social world we are attempting to study. (2) On the other there are our own diverse intellectual backgrounds, interests, and behaviors" [Blallock, p. 14]. They also show a clear awareness that understanding the social world or social phenomenon poses several formidable challenges: (1) Virtually all social processes are far more complex than we often realize. (2) Measurement problems in the social sciences are formidable. (3) Rate of change in social phenomena are sometimes far too rapid to be studied with present resources, sometimes they are far too slow. (4) There are a tremendous variety of behaviors and other phenomena we wish to explain. (5)The reality we must deal with is often fuzzy or imprecise. And (6) there is no obvious way to divide up the labor, either among the separate social science disciplines or within any one of them." [Blalock, p. 17-22] An agenda for Muslim social scientists will be no less complex, though currently the extent of awareness among those who identify themselves as "Muslim social scientists" does not seem to be at a similar level.

c. From Social Science to Islamic Social Science

Given the peculiar backdrop of Western civilization against which the modern social science, with its positivist, secular, evolutionary, splintering bias, has evolved, even to contemplate about a direct and smooth bridge from social science to Islamic social science is sheer naivete at best. Indeed, there may not be such a bridge at all, which is a fundamental weakness of the so-called paradigm of "Islamization of knowledge." Islamic social science, if there is any yet, must resolve many critical philosophical as well as methodological issues, of which the above-mentioned ones are only a small part. Even identifying the contour of such philosophical and methodological issues is beyond the limited scope of this paper. Our focus is limited to develop an understanding about the interdependence of the process and phenomena of "change" and "continuity" which is at the heart of social science.

 

III. TOWARD UNDERSTANDING CHANGE AND CONTINUITY

The history of societies and civilizations cannot be understood without an understanding of the process of change and continuity. Not to have continuity is to become extinct or to change so much so that there is something altogether new and different. This may be more applicable to animal species excepting human species. However, even in human history, there have been societies, nations, and civilizations, of which we have only ruins, memories, and records. Not to have change is to become stagnant or fossilized and then gradually become alienated from the active arena of human history. There are many primitive societies, nations, and tribes in existence that have become focus of anthropological and archaeological interest. Al-Qur'an vividly refers to those cases of virtual destruction of many societies: some of them refused to change and others failed to.

If there is a lack of balance or harmony between the forces of change and of continuity in human society, often we observe that societies stagnate or become a victim of perpetual conflict between these two processes. Change and continuity are not two substitute forces, processes, or phenomenon. Therefore, not only both are needed, but also they are an undeniable reality as a part of our existence. It is the balance in their interaction in our lives that significantly determines the course of history of a society in particular or the human civilization in general. If the world of ideas-knowledge and the world of reality are taken as two complementary, mutually-reinforcing, constantly-interacting entities that shape the course of, and give different mould to, history, then it becomes easier to realize that "change" and "continuity" are two processes about which we need so badly to develop our understanding.

How the social phenomena have evolved from the beginning of mankind? How does "social phenomena" change? How "change" and "continuity" are related? Can one be embraced without the other? Why certain social entities show greater tendency to change, while others show greater inclination to constancy and stability? All these are pertinent question that we have to face whether we are to develop an agenda for Islamic Social Science or for a comprehensive and total transformation of the Ummah according to the world-view of Islam.

 

IV. INSTITUTIONS AND SOCIAL DYNAMISM

The nature and consequences of these twin forces are crystallized in "institutions." This is an area that is often ignored in understanding and analyzing the contemporary issues and problems that societies in general and Muslim Ummah in particular face. Since institutions are at the core of the interacting process of change and continuity, better understanding of the behavior of various institutions that inhibit or enhance healthy social dynamism is crucial. What is observed quite frequently in the Muslim world is the existence of institutional structures that inhibit any healthy social dynamism, which is a clear indication of stagnation. However, a narrow view of "institutions" is often even more inhibiting. "Institutions" are not merely social and organizational structures. Yet, social change is often equated with building or adding new institutions replacing the old ones.

Building technology-related institutions in various Muslim countries is a good example. As the need for technology transfer as well as for technology generation and adaptation are increasingly recognized, Muslim countries are establishing new ministries, new committees, new institutes, and new laboratories. However, not a single Muslim country has been able to come close even to the newly industrialized countries such as South Korea and Taiwan, or even to India.

None of the Muslim countries have succeeded yet to develop an "indigenous technological capability" comparable to any of these countries. Our answer so far has been only an effort to copy others' institutional structure. During the last two decades, awareness about "appropriate technology," "intermediate technology," "technology transfer" or "indigenous technological capability" has dramatically increased, particularly through various international development organizations such as the United Nations. The effects of such heightened awareness so far have been limited to including some strong statements in "development objectives" contained in national planning documents of various countries. Beyond that, new ministries, or equivalent high level agencies or institutions, to address technological aspects have been established in virtually every Muslim country. Technology-related research institutions have propped up mostly under the auspices of the government in almost all countries. They have not made any significant impact yet on our societies. Are they expected to make an appreciable impact in near future? Probably not. In distant future? No one can offer a definitive answer. Are they adequate for the purpose of solving our problems, attaining our development objective, and meeting our aspiration for a "viable, prosperous, and dynamic future" of the Ummah? The answer is obvious--NO. Building technology-related institutional and organizational structure would not solve the problems of the Muslim countries.

Let us take another example, the case of dysfunctional political system in Muslim countries. Parallel to a large number of Muslim countries that have authoritarian, dictatorial form of government -- be it military rule, monarchy, or one party rule, there are also other countries that show a tendency toward democracy. These Muslim countries, such as Bangladesh, Malaysia, Pakistan, have basically all the components of western democratic structure. They have an electoral process, parliament or senate, political parties, etc. But they behave neither according to the standard of western democracy nor to the standard of Islam. The viability of the political systems in these countries continues to remain vulnerable where a total collapse is not impossible.

A human skeleton by itself is not a human being. The institutional structures prevalent in the Muslim world are more comparable to skeletons. Within these structures Muslim societies are constantly struggling either as an agent for change or for continuity. They continue to struggle and survive because both the forces for change and for continuity are powerful. Furthermore, the advocates of changes in the Muslim world often prescribe a total break with the past, while the defenders of continuity/stability would not tolerate even the least deviation from the same. Thus, we are still unable to resolve the conflict between the pressures for change and pressures for continuity/stability. We fail to realize that no society can ignore the need for continuity altogether. Similarly, change is the essence of dynamism, and hence cannot be ignored either.

How do we then begin to understand the interactive process of change and continuity as reflected in the patterns of behavior of "institutions" in the Muslim world? "Institutions" and "institutionalization" need to be understood in a much broader context. Institutions can be considered as the embodiments of "ceremonial" and "instrumental" characteristics of a society and reflections of existing "attitudinal-cum-behavioral patterns" based on people's beliefs, folk-views, ideas, philosophy, values, traditions etc. Without affecting these patterns, social change would not be either meaningful or successful.

Ceremonial patterns of behavior manifest in status and power relationship and reflect ideas or views that lead to dogmatism. Such dogmatism produces rituals, ceremonies, and relationships that are considered sacred and independent from their ability to be relevant or to solve the problems these societies encounter. Any society that has considerable inertia based on ceremonial characteristics show deep (and often, irrational, impractical) traditionalism and remarkable resistance to change. Such groups, communities, societies, countries, continue to exist generations after generations virtually untouched by the ongoing changes around them.

"Instrumental" characteristics reveal through a much more flexible attitude toward change based on "problem-solving" as well as "goal-seeking" approach, where "warranted knowledge" is applied to the "problem-solving processes of the community." Problems of human life must be solved -- whatever works is then accepted and appropriate adjustment is made by the people. However, if instrumentality in a society were divorced from a set of values, principles, or ideas that have constancy, then that society would be vulnerable to serious consequences in the long run. In Western societies "change," instead of "continuity," is the dominant force, while "Continuity" in the form of unwarranted traditionalism dominates the force of change in the Muslim societies. However, there is hardly any society that reflects either only change or only continuity. Most often, as the conflict between these two processes and forces become long-lasting and they run into a stalemate, each builds a safe enclave consistent with its own agenda, ability, and aspirations. That exactly is the case with the Muslim world.

We have a vast proportion of the society where life stands still in seventeenth, eighteenth, or nineteenth century. These are the majority of people living in rural areas who outnumber all others in the society, but unable to move forward even when they want to. Then there is a small enclave that represents the minority in our societies, but they are powerful and dominant over others, holding the key to power, resources, and infrastructure and subject themselves to the processes of change as the wind blows from outside. Even they hardly show any originality in being a force for change. Both of these sides are in a stalemate and have comfortably co-existed in their respective enclave. The change is the dominant mode in the urban areas of most of these societies. Furthermore, whenever the forces for continuity and stability do have to submit to the forces for change, they continue to resist or show indifference to change at every step. As a result our societies show the sharply contrasting "dualism."

My choice of technological development as an illustration of our stagnant society is not an arbitrary one. Materially speaking, nothing accounts more for the changes in the human history than technology. Technology is the process related to, and result of, applied knowledge about nature and the world around us. There were many fundamental technological changes that have truly and remarkably changed the pace and course of history. Technological change continues to function as an "autonomous" force in human society. It is autonomous in the sense that human history has often taken particular route due to specific technological change that was not planned or predictable. More importantly, a deliberate or inadvertent failure of the Ummah to take the lead in this process would not stall it; others have got the taste of it and they are using to the best of their ability not only to enhance their own cause, but also to dominate others, particularly the Muslim Ummah. Furthermore, we cannot immune ourselves from the far-reaching effects of such technological change. This does not mean that western technological development has been an unmixed blessing, however.

Compared to technology as an autonomous force, affecting and being affected by change, institutions altogether are a non-autonomous force. Technological progress -- its nature, direction, and magnitude -- is less controllable. That is not true in the same way for institutions. Both institutional structure and its underlying foundation can be altered. Understanding institutions in a broader sense is crucial for this purpose.

Whatever way one explains, it is a simple, undeniable fact that the Muslim Ummah stands helpless and in disarray before the dazzling, effective, and ever-changing technological prowess of the West. Whatever the West achieved is due to a specific mix of the interactive processes of change and continuity, which is not necessarily going to be beneficial for them or for the mankind in the long run. However, I also strongly believe that our situation has reached this level due to a specific mix of those two processes and it is possible to alter this mix with an appropriately alternative mix, which must not only be effective in solving our problems and meeting our visions, but also be in consonance with the Qur'anic world-view. Indeed, Islam and solution to our problems are inseparable. Islam and the Qur'an have come to guide us in the full spectrum of our life. Not to utilize them is to do gross injustice to Islam and the Qur'an, but most importantly to ourselves. Viewing from another vantagepoint, if we believe that Islam cannot solve our problems then it becomes merely a "religion," a set of "dogma." Why should we then believe in Islam? How can we expect others to believe in and adhere to Islam? Even worse is the fact that in such case we have to seek solutions from others or other sources, as we have done and are continuing to do so.

 

V. CONTINUOUS CHANGE: A QUR'ANIC CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Al-Qur'an presents a panoramic, but summary view of human history in terms of both the process of change and continuity. For both of these processes, the Qur'an identifies institutions and institutionalization as two interrelated phenomena, the first being the outcome and the other being the process. On one side, we encounter in the pages of the Qur'an different Qaums having different preoccupations or problems. Although the root problem may be common for all of the societies, it manifests in different ways. From the other side, we encounter different Rasools who came with different Shariah and/or Kitab. All of them reflect certain change. The process of revelation as well as the chain of succeeding Shariahs culminated in the final revelation of the Qur'an and the Risalat and Shariah of Muhammad (p). Both in the Qur'an and the preceding Books and Shariah, there were some core message and ideas that clearly show the process of continuity at work. The changing aspects reflect the Qur'anic attestation to fact that human society does and must go through certain change. Since human history would be always parallel to the process of "continuous change," Islam and the Qur'an do leave the room for and emphatically recognize the positive role of Ijtihad.

The Qur'an calls for Iqamah of Deen. The term that may best convey the imports of this expression is "institutionalization." When the Qur'an talks about Iqamah of Salat, it does not talk about merely establishing a routine and arrangement for worship. It actually calls for "institutionalization" of salat, that is, taking salat and establishing it as a consciousness building and behavior shaping activity. In absence of that our ritualistic Ibadah becomes divorced from our practical life. In the same way, when Qur'an talks about Iqamah of Deen, it does not merely draw attention to establishing a legal framework and system, it rather calls for institutionalization of the way of life, where organizational structures and social relationships become carriers or manifestations of the living reality of Islam. What the Qur'an offers is a set of core ideas, values, beliefs that should serve as our anchor or compass in our life. However, we do not get frozen in the frame of history. With every society we move and change, but with a sense of purpose and direction that is unique to Islam.

With this balance of mix between the interactive forces of change and continuity in mind, I now turn to the discussion about a Qur'anic framework that may provide us with some insight. Muslims everywhere are looking forward to a positive change in their society. To have such change that is meaningful and consistent with the Islamic world-view we need to focus on, among other things, two specific aspects -- Technology and Institutions. Such change must also provide appropriate level of stability and continuity in our society based on the core values and ideas contained in the Qur'an. Instead of concentrating our efforts to build institutions in a narrow sense, which is simply scratching the surface, we need to alter the very foundation of these institutions.

To understand the underlying foundation that enhances or inhibits technological progress, we need to pay attention to the following things.

a. Attitude toward change:

That change is the essence of dynamism for any society, and as such, for Muslims as well is a view not well appreciated by the Muslim mass. The traditional religious establishment that shapes and dominates the views at the grass-root level often shows reactionary response toward the ongoing changes around them. Having a positive attitude toward change does not in any way imply that you go along with the wind and particular wind that blows from the West in our time. Having a positive attitude toward change means leading ourselves in improving our life in every possible way on a continuous basis. In the age of automobile and aircraft, Muslims cannot be effective using ox-cart and camels. Muslims lose confidence in themselves when their own homes are lighted by electricity invented by the West, their lives are safer using vaccines invented by the West, their clothes are made by factories designed according to the West, their development plans are drawn up according to the Western models, or when their educational institutions merely serve as the conduit of Western ideas. From material dimension to social life, everywhere we see gradually we are being deeply touched by the ongoing changes around us, but we do not want to take the initiative based on and guided by the Qur'anic dynamism in our lives.

Allah has put in place certain laws guiding the social processes (Sunnatullah) that, according to the Qur'an, does not change1 -- they provide the continuity and stability to our continuity. We do not have a proper and adequate understanding of such "ways of Allah" (sunnatullah) to develop policies and programs relevant for our lives. Much less, of course, is our ability to offer an alternative explanation of the development of human society as to how it has developed in an autonomous way. Muslims summarily agree that the history of human society is the history of Islam and its struggle with its opposing forces in every society. That amounts to a belief, not an explanation.

The Qur'an also clearly delineates the responsibility of the Muslims that they must (meaning a religious duty) strive to "change" their conditions whenever their is a genuine need and scope for such change.2 In this context, if change is taken in the sense of improvement, then there would never be a time or situation where there would not be a need or room for improvement. This is precisely the reason change is not merely a process to be adopted only when we want to make a transition from a bad situation to good situation, it also means from a good situation to a better situation. Our attitude to change should not be merely in response to the changes we see around us. We should be taking the lead in bringing positive, healthy, and meaningful improvement in the world - beginning, of course, with ourselves.

b. Attitude toward Inquisitiveness and Understanding

Change or improvement cannot be possible without a positive attitude toward inquisitiveness and understanding. The attachment and adherence of the Muslim mass with Islam is without adequate understanding. Often it is a hereditary identity that we carry over generations. We ask those who are exposed to the changing world around us not to ask "too many questions," not to be inquisitive, not to ask why or how. We ask them to be faithful believers. We do not want them to develop the reasoning power as an integral part of the Muslim personality and intellect. The obvious result is alienation. Islam does discourage those meaningless inquisitiveness that are characteristic of those who are deliberately trying to avoid the truth and responsibility. Such was the case of the Bani Israil when they kept inquiring about the specifics of the cow they were commanded to sacrifice.

Inquisitiveness is the gateway to understanding. Question is the only way to seek answer. Satisfying our mind, intellect, and reasoning power is not only not discouraged by Islam, it is presented as a precious process exemplified in the case of Abraham (a), when he asked Allah to show him how would He bring the dead back to life.3 Ibrahim's (a) inquiry was not driven by disbelief or skepticism, but he wanted to see a demonstration, an evidence, a proof. Allah did not reproach him for wanting so, nor did He deny him from what his sincere, inquisitive mind wanted to know. We shun our children's questions. Teachers in schools in most Muslim countries discourage our inquisitiveness. Most of our religious scholars characterize such inquisitiveness among us as sinful. We cannot change or improve our conditions without asking questions, without being inquisitive, without satisfying our understanding. We cannot even catch up with others in science; much less can we excel, because we simply are inclined to learn about contributions of others. We do not want to understand, we do not want to assimilate that understanding in our stock of knowledge, and we do not want to push the frontier of knowledge further. We simply want to ride on others' quest for knowledge and understanding.

c. Attitude toward Success and Result

So many times a day, a Muslim gives or hears the call toward success (Falah).4 Indeed, the Qur'an is constantly calling us to orient ourselves to success and result.5 "Success in Aakhirah" is the motivating force for a Muslim. Yet how little we are success- and result-oriented in this life, as if these two are contradictory. We want to be successful in the life hereafter, but not in this world. Of course, "success" for Muslims in this life does not mean earning fame, or wealth, or recognition, or status. "Success" in this world means in the entire spectrum of life doing things efficiently and whatever we need to do, excelling others in doing so. Muslims cannot be permanently in the category of "users" of technology, students of science and technology, adapters of modern tools and machineries, followers of the west in their education and institutions. "Hasanah" of the life hereafter is not a substitute of the "Hasanah" in this world.6 They are interdependent. This is important because the Qur'anic mission for mankind cannot be fulfilled without Muslims becoming result-oriented in this life as well. Our success in the life hereafter would not be possible by submitting to the man-made miseries, humiliation, suffering, and oppression in this world.

d. Attitude toward Problem and Solution

The worst part of "ceremonial" approach to our life is that we turn our actions and worship into rituals and our ideas, beliefs, or views into dogmas. On one hand, we, as a society, have any and every problem that we would like to have them solved. On the other hand, we believe the Qur'an is a Guide (Huda) and Healing (Shifa'), but are unable to use the Qur'anic guidance to solve our problems. Indeed, we often resign when we encounter a problem and do not view it as a duty and obligation to face these problems with confidence, determination, and creativity. The problems of the Ummah are getting bigger and more complex as time passes, but we are simply at a loss regarding confronting these problems. How widespread is our poverty, how poverty leads to many other problems in our societies, how illiteracy creates misery for people, how much and why deprivation exists in our societies, why do we have high infant mortality, how difficult is the life of rural women in our societies, why our industrial setups are so inefficient and comparatively less productive are all genuine questions to be raised about the problems that exist in our societies. Westerners who make us a case of study know and understand our problems better and more than we do. Instead of developing an appreciation about the nature and extent of problems, we only concentrate on "dogmatic" views.

Why Riba is prohibited in Islam, a non-Muslim can legitimately ask. Our answer is basically a few well-known views about the negative consequences of interest. We have very little empirical evidence to offer. Since Riba is haram, it must have terrible effects. Why do we not try to study these in the context of our societies as well as other societies? Who should be taking the lead in such probes? Of course, it should be by the people whom we call Ulama. If they are incapable, they are inadequate Ulama. At least, they need to encourage others to probe into these pressing issues.

Another example is related to the issue of private property. For some people private property is sacrosanct according to Islam. Whatever we do we must do without touching the basic idea of private property. Others believe that society's interest has a prerogative over private interest and government should be playing a central role in reconciling these concerns. What is lost in the debate is the actual problem. Our approach becomes purely dogmatic. The advocates of absolute right of private ownership would bring out the Qur'anic verses and Hadith in their favor, while the opponents do the same too [Farooq, 1989]. But a "problem-solving" or "goal-seeking" approach would be that let us take a look at what are the primary goals an Islamic society wants to achieve. Whatever position we take vis-a-vis the ownership and sectoral structure, based on such position, we should be able to solve our problems as well as meet our goals. Our belief and commitment to Islam should be motivating as well as enabling us to deal with our problems creatively and effectively. We need to become more sensitive to Islam as a means to solve our problem, thus we need to embrace Islam as a guiding and "problem-solving" mean at every step of our lives. We also need to be concerned about the goals of an Islamic society, thus we need to be "goal-seeking" rather than being dogmatic.

Now few more specific observations about technological progress and institutional change in our society. To make the process of technological change endogenous to our society, we need to develop a keen interest in understanding and appreciating "nature" -- the world of creations of which we are a part. We are ready to reject any evolutionary theory, but we do not have an adequately developed and articulated alternative explanation. Study closely the following verse:

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did ORIGINATE creation; so will Allah produce a later creation; for Allah has power over all things" [al-Ankaboot: 20]

While Allah is inviting us to the challenge to study, understand, and appreciate how "Allah did ORIGINATE creation," what have we to offer on the part of the Ummah from the study during last fourteen centuries as an adequately detailed and developed account for the process of originating creation? One reason that partly, but importantly, accounts for this failure is that the people we call scholars or Ulama over time have completely alienated themselves from nature. Nature is not merely to be contemplated upon, but to be experienced -- to be touched, felt, smelt, and observed. Consider the following verses of Sura al-Mulk [3-4]:

"He who created the seven heavens one above another: No want of proportion will you see in the creation of the Most Gracious. So turn your vision again: Do you see any flaw?

Again turn your vision a second time: (your) vision will come back to you dull and discomfited in a state of worn out."

The purpose of these verses is not that people would have such a believing mind and attitude that they would not even bother to look for what Allah is referring to. These verses are invitation as well as challenge to humanity to study, understand, and appreciate the creation of Allah. However, the impact of these verses on our mind has been quite the opposite. Since we believe in Allah and Allah's creation is flawless, why do we need to turn our vision toward his creation? The sad lesson is that, regardless of the reason, whoever develops a keen attachment to nature -- studies, explores, probes into -- has a different appreciation than those who simply believe in. Furthermore, our belief in the flawlessness of Allah's creation does not take us even one step to put nature to our use, as others are already doing. Technological progress and understanding of nature are inseparable. We cannot ignore the fact that those how have overwhelming technological superiority over us, they also dominate our lives in every possible way, often negatively. Technology as an autonomous force of change would continue to shape and reshape the world around us, unless we are in the driving seat of history.

The preceding discussion about a set of attitudes, views, or philosophy about change, inquisitiveness, success, solution, and nature are among some of the important building blocks of the foundation underlying our institutions. They are applicable to technology-related institutional structure as well as to all other institutions in general. Institutions are not autonomous in the sense that they are mere reflection of what we are, what we believe in and act upon, what we accept or reject, and what we value or neglect. Without making significant changes in these, the stagnation of our thought and action cannot be overcome. By changing ourselves and our attitudes, views, and values with a firm and deep root in the Qur'an and Islam, we can create a new dynamism in our life with a balance between change and continuity. Our pursuit will be continuous improvement (change).

By making the process of seeking improvement endogenous to our society we will be able to keep up with the world around us. By having our root in the Qur'an and Islam, we will be able to maintain continuity, and a sense of purpose and direction. We need to seek a fresh approach to our past, present, and future with the Qur'anic vision. Creation of mankind, as distinct from the Angels, was based on human's freedom to choose. Our vision of a society must set a high value on this. If we pray because our parents, grandparents, friends, and neighbors pray, then that would not have a significant bearing on our lives. However, when we voluntarily decide to pray, it has a different implication. Similarly, the institutional structure that is imposed from within or outside cannot show a level dynamism comparable to that of the one based on voluntary consent, consultation, and participation (Shura) of the people. The diversity that exists within the Muslim world as well as in the world in general can be an enriching factor enhancing dynamism or inhibiting it, based on whether people understand and appreciate this diversity as part of divine scheme. If everyone's thought, preference, want, style, and ability were identical then there cannot be any change or dynamism in the society. Diversity and pluralism also require broadness of mind and tolerance, two important characteristics of Muslim personality.

 

VI. CONCLUSION

Based on the above analysis, one can identify several aspects that should be a part of an agenda for Muslim social scientists in particular and Muslim Ummah in general. Muslims have a broad agreement that they would like to see a fundamental change in our conditions. However, what kind of change we want should be guided by Islam and by the problems that we encounter. Adherence to Islam, when it amounts to traditionalism or just continuing the way we are, would not enable us either to achieve what we want to be or to fulfill the Islamic mission -- our stagnation and subservience to the contemporary Kufr and Jahiliyyah will continue unabated. Seeking change, without accepting Islam and the Qur'an as the core that provides us stability and continuity, would create greater rift in our dualistic society and the stalemate between the forces advocating or opposing secular changes would also perpetuate.

Firstly, understanding the current views, beliefs, dogmas, philosophy that serve as the foundation of the existing institutions is a broad task for the Muslim social scientists. We do not have adequate understanding of what the Muslim people at the grass root think. Secondly, education through various media -- educational institutions, Islamic organizations, and institutions, private or public -- has to be planned to create at atmosphere for dynamism. Thirdly, to pursue any Islamic agenda objectively, Muslims should maintain a clear distance from those forums, institutions, organizations, channels, national and international, that are instruments of forces seeking the preservation of status quo.

 

References:

Hubert Blalock, Jr., Basic Dilemmas in the Social Sciences (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, 1984).

Tom Campbell, Seven Theories of Human Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981)

Maurice Duverger, An Introduction to the Social Sciences (New York: Praeger, 1961).

Mohammad Omar Farooq, "Public Sector vs. Private Sector: Policy Dynamics from an Islamic Perspective," Paper presented at a seminar of Islamic Economics Research Bureau, Dhaka, Bangladesh, March, 1989.

Antony Flew, Thinking about Social Thinking: The Philosophy of Social Sciences (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1985).

Gunnar Myrdal, Value in Social Theory: A Selection of Essays on Methodology (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1958).

William Outhwaite, New Philosophy of Social Science: Realism, Hermeneutics and Critical Theory (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1987).

Richard Rudner, Philosophy of Social Science (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1966).

 

Endnotes:

1"This was Our way with the Messengers We sent before you: you will find no change in Our ways" [al-Isra'/77]

2"Verily never will Allah change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls)" [al-Raa'd/11]

3"Behold! Ibrahim said: 'My Rabb! Show me how You give life to the dead.' He said: 'Do you not then believe?' He said: 'Yes, but to satisfy my understanding.' He said: 'Take four birds; tame them to turn to you; put a portion of them on every hill, and call to them: They will come to you (flying) with speed. Then know that Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise" [2/al-Baqara/260].

4Haiyyah alal Falah (Come toward success and prosperity), a part of Azan and Iqamah.

5Say: "Not equal are things that are bad and things that are good, even though the abundance of the bad may dazzle you; so be conscious of Allah, O you that understand, that you may prosper and succeed" [5/al-Maiyda/103]

6"'And ordain for us that which is good in this life and in the hereafter: for we have turned to you.' He said: "With My punishment I visit whom I will; but My mercy extends to all things. That (mercy) I shall ordain for those who do right, and practice regular charity, and those who believe in Our signs" [7/al-A'raf/156]

HOME
Index of my writings
Have you visited my site on Kazi Nazrul Islam?
Genocide 1971 Page?
 Hadith Humor Page?