Magna Carta , John Locke and Al Ghazalli....

mbhcsf

Bankruptcy of the Liberal – Modernist Discourse
By admin - October 8, 2017

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy ... ernist-discourse-2/








The discussion regarding human rights and the rule of law has always included a reference to the Magna Carta, a charter that was signed by King John of England in 1215 after being coerced by the rebelling barons. The Magna Carta is elevated as an archetype of the earliest effort of man in establishing the rule of law. However, the history behind this is quite tragic.


After a humiliating defeat against France, King John of England forced the barons to pay for the costs of war to the extent of selling properties owned by the Church in order to fill whatever deficits were in the national treasury. This led to a rebellion by the barons and the King was on the weaker side of this dispute. The Archbishop of Canterbury took advantage of this situation and formed an alliance with the barons, forcing the King to sign a treaty that the Archbishop enacted. The King had no choice but to sign to the agreement on 25 June 1215.


In essence, the Magna Carta is an agreement that preserved the rights of the noblemen and not the general public. King John was forced to sign the charter to maintain his interest. Immediately after the King regained his political power, he nullified the charter. Hence the charter took effect only for few months, and the King died in 1216 due to unrelenting rebellion. Despite the underlying history, the Magna Carta is still venerated as the first attempt that led to the rule of law. Unwittingly, this is how Eurocentric discourse has permeated the minds of the educated masses. In relation to the rule of law and human rights, the Magna Carta is still perceived by people across the world as if it was the first attempt to establish the rule of law and that the rest of the world had never conceived of these concepts before the Europeans.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy ... ernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

As a Muslim, reading the history of Islamic civilisation, it is imperative that we learn about the Medina Charter as it was established by the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) in the year 1 of Hijrah (622 CE).
He wrote the charter as the basis of the multicultural society that he led. There was no pressure on him, and this charter persevered even after his passing, and it continued to serve as the basis for other charters that were signed by the caliphs following their conquests. Muhammad Hamidullah has correctly stressed that the Medina Charter was the first written constitution in human history.


The Holy Prophet among others introduced the ideas of freedom of religion, minority rights and the supremacy of Shari’ah via this charter. The charter not only guaranteed toleration for minorities but also protected the interests of the minorities who lived under the protection of the Islamic government.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

The world today needs more than the rule of law; the world needs a legal system that is just and can truly guarantee the interests of the people as a whole. The rule of law per se is not adequate, since the law may also legitimise oppression and discrimination. The discrimination against African Americans, which has lasted for many centuries, was made legal. Likewise, the slavery and forced labour that was enacted by the Dutch upon the people of Java, Indonesia was also legal and enshrined in the Dutch legal codes.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

Shari’ah as was introduced by the Prophet meant to guarantee public interest and was always upheld. The prohibition of liquor for example, was meant to preserve the sanity of society, which otherwise could lead to social ills and crime.
This is different from those who practice religions other than Islam and have changed the commandments that were once determined in their holy books.


Muslims today, in general, serve and pledge loyalty towards the divine instructions that have been clarified in the Qur’an. Understanding the essence and the secrets of the Shari’ah, Imam al-Ghazali (1111) rahimahu’Llah highlighted 5 objectives of Shari’ah, i.e. religion, life, intellect, property and progeny. It is argued that all good things in human life are ultimately categorised under these five Shari’ah objectives.
Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

In the 17th century, John Locke (1704) introduced the concept of natural rights, which is the basis of the contemporary human rights discourse. However, he limited them to only three essentials i.e. life, liberty and property. This is in accordance with the Western worldview that generally confines human happiness to material achievements. Unfortunately today, whenever the issue of human rights is discussed one of the names that is always mentioned is John Locke, even though John Locke only appeared almost 600 years after Imam Ghazali.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

remember Sejarah Dunia - kita pernah mendengar akan nama ini - akan falsafah yg berorientasikan kebebasan...cuma semuda usia 16 tahun guru sejarah tidak pulak ( tapi alangkah bagusnya ) memberikan konteks  atau implikasi apa sebenarnya impak di sebalik pemikiran ini dalam konteks masyarakat EU / EU community dan kesinambungan dari peradaban sebelum itu...

mbhcsf

Liberal-modernists are not aware that Locke took ideas of natural rights and limited government from the works of Muslim scholars including the writings of Imam al-Ghazali which were translated to Latin since the 12th century. Many researchers have confirmed that Descartes (1650) in fact “stole” the idea from Imam al-Ghazali in his al-Munqidh to formulate his methodic doubt that became the basis of his famous quote “Cognito ergo sum” (I think, therefore I am). The difference is that Imam al-Ghazali started from doubt to achieve truth and certainty by not limiting his sources of knowledge from sensory perceptions and reason alone but also from revelation that was brought by the prophets. On the other hand, Descartes began with doubt to emphasise the position of reason in achieving certainty on every matter.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

Western modernism exalts the rational intellect because they have lost trust in revelation and religion, due to both being synonymous with irrationality, myths and legends. A person that follows Western modernism blindly is one who does not think, does not know the difference between Islam and Christianity, assuming Islam is also irrational and filled with myths as what has happened in the West.
Recently a book written by Robert R. Reilly, titled The Closing of the Muslim Mind was translated into Malay. Robert represents the neo-conservatives who are well-known for their anti-Islamic attitude,and was previously the advisor to America’s 43rd President, George W. Bush.

This book is full of slander against the Asha’riah, the theologians of Islamic civilization, as being opposed to reason and causing the decay of science in the Muslim world. The figurehead invited to launch this non-academic book was Mustafa Akyol, a journalist from Turkey who became popular after writing about the acceptability of homosexuality in Islam. He has no scholarly Islamic training.
Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/

mbhcsf

Only those who are blind towards the history of Islamic civilization are inclined to blame Imam al-Ghazali and the Asha’irah scholars for the decline of science in the Muslim world. However, these baseless and wild accusations from some Orientalist have become a mainstay of modernist-liberals. Confusion and falsehood are disseminated with the help of foreign parties that have vested interests in abusing the concept of freedom and human rights and all those who oppose these evil efforts are dubbed as being bigoted and unjust.

The liberal and modernist discourse in Muslim societies is considered bankrupt because it relies heavily on Western thinkers who originally took the ideas from the works of Muslim scholars without due acknowledgement. They are oblivious to the fact that many of these ideas are peculiar to the Western experience and hence lacking a universal character.

The tendency to import any ideas that are demeaning to the Muslim intellectual legacy and authorities, regardless of its scientific and academic worth, is a strong proof that the propagators of these ideas are nothing but blind followers.

It goes to show that the modernist-liberalists in themselves are everything that they accused the Muslim thinkers of being.




*Prof Madya Dr Khalif Muammar, is the Director of Centre of Advanced Studies on Islam, Science and Civilisation (CASIS), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and a reader of Menara.my. This is a personal opinion and does not necessarily represent Menara.my’s stand over an issue.

Read more at: https://www.menara.my/bankruptcy-of-the-liberal-modernist-discourse-2/