Relationship between Mahdawiyyah , Fundamentalism, and Modernism

Relationship between Mahdawiyyah, Fundamentalism, and Modernism

In his survey about contemporary intellectual movements in the Islamic world in the 9^th article of his book, "The Need for a sacred Science,” Dr. Nasr explains that two intellectual approaches have been influential in the Islamic world for the past 1/5 centuries. One has been Fundamental Religious Reformism, and the other Modernism. He added a third movement, Mahdism, in his interview with Voices Across Boundaries magazine. About Fundamentalism and Modernism, he states: Two calls from the Islamic world have been echoed more than others in the past 1/5 centuries, and could easily have been heard in the West. One call has been for fundamental religious reformists and the other for modernists. The first one includes the Wahabi and Salafi Schools which are resistant to Westerners and want to generalize Islam all over the world, and the second is for modernists who have supported science and technology since the early 19^th century.[i]

In his interview with Wanda Raumer Taylor, the editor in chief of Voices Across Boundaries, Nasr also said that Muslims have tended towards three theories about their state of crisis and backwater as compared to the West:

1. This great defeat is a sign of the end of the world and of Imam Mahdi's appearance.

2. Muslims haven’t properly obeyed Islamic principles and must return to true Islam and live by its rules.

3. The Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) must match himself with the modern world to overcome its privilege.

Nasr believes that these interpretations led to three intellectual movements: 1. Mahdism or Messianic movements 2. Fundamentalism like Wahabism in Saudi Arabia  3. Modernism, like the Young Turks or Arabic Liberalism. These thoughts were once attractive in the 19^th and early 20^th century and after World War II which, in the second instance, led to Mahdism, Modernism and Fundamentalism.[ii]

Unfortunately, the term ‘Fundamentalism’ has been applied by Easterners, too. The term was first applied by Westerners when describing Christian Fundamentalism but was subsequently taken up by every Islamic movement that mooted return to the Islamic religion, and opposition to certain influences of the West. Nowadays, the term Islamic Fundamentalism has an inappropriate meaning to the point of being interpreted with an insulting inference in political literature, so Traditionalists have used this term in an attempt to separate Traditionalism from any insulting connotations.

Dr. Nasr considers Fundamentalism a consequence and natural outcome of Modernism and a reaction against Intellectual Extremism and says: Many existing movements in the Islamic world are either in favor of Modernism or against it, the second are called Fundamentalist; Fundamentalism is the other side of the coin to Modernism. We don’t have Fundamentalism during the Seljukian or Safavid time. The Fundamentalism phenomenon is a reaction against modernism yet there are a considerable number of points where both of them are similar in many aspects. The first point of similarity is that they don’t criticize technology and modern science, but rather they swallow it like a whale at sea swallows water; the second point is that both of them don’t consider Islamic art and Islamic traditional civilization at all and the third point is that both of them are enemies of the spiritual, internal aspect of Islam. So if we retain the force of Sufism, it will have an impact on ordering equilibrium in the Islamic world.[iii]

He believes that Traditionalism believes in command and mystical interpretation of religion and doesn’t have a superficial look at religious tenets, so while Traditionalism and Fundamentalism are faithful to the Islamic holy text like the Qur’an and Hadiths, the Traditionalists, like Nasr, accuse the Fundamentalist interpretation of Qur’an and Hadiths as an ideological and instrumental application, and interpret verses and traditions for their desire and political goals. In his book, Traditional Islam in Modern world, Nasr says: A common aspect of Traditionalism and Fundamentalism is that both of them accept Qur’an and Hadiths, and place emphasis on religion yet they have many differences. As has been previously elaborated, traditions help people grasp the genuine meaning of holy verses and sacred texts in order to understand with wise interpretation; some Fundamentalist movements apply verses of Qur’an and interpret them as a license according to their own goals, which is often incompatible and alien to the correct interpretation of the Qur’an. Regarding the shar’iah, the genuine traditions (sunnah) -  contrary to many common Fundamentalist  schools not inspired by divine authority but rather implementing external pressure based on fear of human totalitarianism - emphasizes belief, and harmony between the religious commands and prioritize a balanced judgment that is meant to complete the deficiencies of human world.[iv]

Some critics of Traditionalism believe that the difference between Fundamentalism and Traditionalism is too small a claim, and they believe, contrary to Nasr, that Fundamentalism, like Traditionalism, also emphasizes inner interest and interpretation of religious text. Mohammad Legenhausen, one of the critics of Traditionalism, says: Genuine scholars, whether they are Fundamentalist or Traditionalist, consider interpreting Tradition as interpreting the Qur’an and Hadiths. Of course, some people write public-orientated works, and prefer writing inaccurately, even though this is not a distinguishing difference between Traditionalism and Fundamentalism. Regarding religious Fundamentalism, like Traditionalism, it emphasizes the importance of inner development and a genuine approach towards religion, and though not identical, shares some similarities to Traditionalism, albeit with a more severe attitude. On the other hand, some Fundamentalists, like some of the honorable Traditionalists, have always had a relaxed attitude in regards to the administration of religion.[v]

It is worth emphasizing that some of Nasr's tripartite analysis may be considered holistically leading to an apocalyptic belief that we have reached the end of the world, and that there is a necessity to return to the Islamic prophetic principles present at the starting point of Islam.

Dr. Nasr believes that the first analysis is the real cause for tendencies to believe in the Mahdi and Jesus. We have to say that this is not the real cause as historical experience proves that some individuals claimed to be the Mahdi and rendered their activities into a politically deviated movement. They misused the belief for the fulfillment of their own interests and to accommodate the situation for their own benefit. Accordingly, Mahdism and/or messianism became a tool in their hands to assign legitimacy to themselves and polish over the cracks in their faked authenticity. All this was meant to mobilize the masses and attract as many devotees as possible. Thus, we assume that Mahdism can serve as a natural outcome of the first analysis, and belief in the people who claim Mahdism, but it is not applicable to the leaders of the Mahdism movements as Mahdism was not their only belief, and they were often fully aware of their lies and lack of validity. Nonetheless, they knew that culture and religious literature allowed promotion of the coming peacemaker to reform the public; they could, thus, apply this religious concept to achieve their own goals. The fake Mahdist movements, thus, did not come into being because of the claims of Mahdism which believes in the end of the world, or because the Muslims accepted failure and shame when compared to the West; it was political enmities and worldly desires and whims which were the main fields of Mahdism.

It is necessary to note the Nasr's Mahdism is not in opposition to the Mahdism argument in Islamic thought, but his purpose was to highlight use of Mahdism as a tool to achieve political power or to create a political movement; the people who have an excessive Mahdism outlook legitimized their political actions and power-seeking, and knew Mahdism as an ideological tool with which to apply their desires. From the time of Kisaniye up till now this is adequate proof – it has been a tool throughout history - political activities act under the guise of Mahdism and the claim of Mahdism exhibits the Mahdism concept, like its use as a tool in historical times, illustrating the difference between Mahdism and the Mahdism discussion.

Progress according to Traditionalism and Modernism

One of the basic questions in history is will society march toward progress or slip backwards into regression. Different professors have different attitudes. In chapter 10 of his book, The Need for a Sacred Science, Seyyed Hossein Nasr presents this question for discussion and investigates into it from the traditional and modern worldviews. He believes the concept of progressive decrease to mean material and earthly progression because, after the Renaissance, the efforts of mankind and its greatest goals became the discovery of the material world, so the interpretation of ‘progressive’ was suitable for world-seekers yet this has been activated at the cost of sacred science in the contemporary world; so when viewed against the backdrop of past traditions based entirely on the heavenly revealed religions, man will only be able to view his progress in material terms in the new age: One of the effects of the disappearance of sacred science in the modern world is the appearance of unlimited progressiveness in the material realm, whose concept became worshiped as a dogmatic idea of a false religion.[vi]

The progressive imagination has coined the notion that the human being of the new era will continue to be excessive in nature and ultimately destroy his environment, against religious tradition that forbids humans the destruction of the natural world.

From the viewpoint of Nasr, decrease in the meaning of progressiveness is due to the lessening of the human status in contrast with the Renaissance; the human lost his heavenly position and became known as an intelligent being desirous of increasing his awareness of nature: The basic factor that caused the new thought of man being progressively materialistic was the decrease of the human status compared to that of absolute man at the time of the Renaissance.[vii]

But contrary to modern thought, religious traditions don’t limit the meaning of ‘progressive’ to material progression and growth, and don't decrease their ideal of perfection to the material element. From the point of view of Traditionalism, and Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the human position of perfection is viewed at the start or basis of religion, while in Islam, perfection is attributed to the time of the establish of Islam and to the most complete person, the Holy Prophet of Islam, and the society in which he lived, the city of the (Rasul) Messenger, and if perfection is mentioned in regards to the future, it is attributed to the time when a heavenly-inspired person, like the Mahdi (as), will appear and fill the world with peace and justice: Islam is close to the Christian and Jewish traditions, as perfection is related to the basis of religion. The most complete person is the prophet of Islam and the most complete society is the society of Madina. Even when perfection belongs to the future, with the appearance of Soshiyant in the Zoroastrian religion or Kalki Avatars in Hinduism or the Mahdi in Islam, it is related to the heavenly interference of God in mankind’s destiny and history.[viii]

So Dr. Nasr, allocating the thought of progressiveness to material change in Western thought knew that the novel thoughts of the Renaissance had no place in Western and Eastern religions, and was limited to civilization alone; thus, if the position of man in the modern era doesn’t decrease to the material element alone, the meaning of ‘progressive’ will not be widespread. Concerning the factor which causes human determination of the modern material world to assume the progressive form, Nasr compares the meanings of Utopia that were central to the philosophies of Plato, Augustine, and Farabi, with the Utopia that was significant for Islamic philosophies; a Utopia which was higher than the material world and its cities, this Utopia is more elevated than the material world, belonging to the eighth heaven according to the view of Islamic philosophies: Traditional knowledge has always had an ideal goal for society: the City of God, according to Augustine or the Utopian city or society. However, in reality, these cities never belong to this world or at least the meaning was not known as a definition relevant to the world … the literal derivation of Utopia comes from ‘nowhere’ (in the Greek language U is the sign for negation and utopia means ‘place’). Islamic philosophies reveal Utopia to be a physical place in the eighth heaven. Utopia belonged to the worldly kingdom but was not to be fulfilled on earth unless descent of this heavenly city was destined for the earth.[ix]

While Utopia in the new order has a fresh manifestation that has transformed religious eschatology into a worldly view, and changed it into an idealistic ideology which logically results in an idealistic society and socialist or communist goals, the promoted role of Christ mutated to one of revolutionism in order to realize the ideal society, which could only be attained with violence: The role of Christ transforms the role of the establishment of God’s kingdom on earth where a complete social order exists by using revolutionary methods and violence in order to create the complete social order.[x]

It appears that Dr Nasr says religious belief in a peaceful society does not mean that it has to be fulfilled in the material sense, but indicates that the spiritual goal is higher than that of the material which schools, like communism, express in their philosophies nor does it refer to economical or worldly comfort. When Divine will is established on earth, the ideal society, in addition to economical comfort, will include a civilization full of religious and pious people who envision expression, behavior, and etiquette in the language of the prophets and the religions they brought.

Even though, like other Traditionalists, Dr Seyyed Hossein Nasr believes in, and suggests return to religious traditions, in his criticism of modernism and its philosophical elements, like secularism, he stipulates that this is no excuse to consider every bogus religion and school legitimate, and defines religions without authentic roots as fake and artificial. Dr Seyyed  Hossein Nasr, despite possessing a moderate outlook positioned between Traditionalism and Modernism, does not comply with Fundamentalism, Religious Reform, Reformism, Infra Religious Spirituality, Modernist and Extremist Mahdism, and wishes, through Traditionalism, to define Mahdism as one of the fundamental pillars of Muslim belief. He has a genuine inclination towards Mahdism as distinguished from Intellectual Extreme Mahdism who misuse this relevant intellectual ideology of Muslim philosophy as a tool of exploitation especially of Shi'ah Muslims. Seyyed Hossein Nasr is only one of the people who investigate Mahdism in their works; we can refer to Rene Guenon, Titus Burckhardt et al and investigate their thoughts on Mahdism through additional independent articles.