Point 1: I have been accused of using vague expressions likea) “spiritual democracy”
Please ask Iqbal you own to disown his “vague” expression.Murad Hofffman’s concluding paragraph in Islam in the 21st century advocatesand explains this spiritual democracy and sounds like a perennialist though heisn’t known to be one b) culture being “grounded in metaphysics” –this is the most clear statement a Muslim is expected to make as part of hiscreed. Why forget my repeated use of term metaphysics as scientia sacra,science of First Principles that grounds ilm al-aqeedah? Religious roots of culture grounded inMetaphysics can’t but be unalterable against “civilizational and ideologicalformations,” – the point is well noted by Alija Izatbegovitch, among others.
Point 2: I have catalogued Islamic ideology with”majoritarianism”
This is empirical/geneological fact about appropriation ofIslam in subcontinent. All know that two nation theory and separateland/federal structure for Muslims was premised on demographic data anddistrust of minority in democracy or invoking majoritarianism.
Point 3: I have made tenuous (and self-defeating) assertionsabout Jinnah, Azad and Iqbal
I have made no assertions, tenous or tenable but onlyrecorded well known facts. I have cast no frame to frame them but only notedhow religion was invoked in divergent ways. I again affirm, with Jinah anddozens of Jinah scholars and his major biographers, that Jinah was opposed toboth theocracy and to that idea of secularization which ignored spiritualdemocracy or moral resources of Islam.
Point 4: I have adopted the term Political Islam asintellectual submission.
Expressions with similar import (al-Islam al-siyasi/deen kisayasi tabeer) have been widely used by Muslims and mainstream Muslim Ulamabesides political scientists. What a charge to accuse all of them ofintellectual submission!
Point 5: I have jaundiced view of Islamic movements.
If reasoned critical view is called jaundiced I gladly ownthe charge that applies to major Ulama and political theorists whom Iquote.
Point 6: I have bias towards perennialism?
Perennilaism is, as one of the most respected authorities oncomparative religion Huston Smith informs us, the most comprehensive viewavailable that avoids biases of exclusivists..
Point 7: Brother Umar endorses the term Islamic ideology.
The term Islamic ideology is contradiction in terms. Ideology is a loaded term from Westernpolitical thought. It doesn’t describe Islam, a religion, a metaphysic or deen.Diverse scholars have pointed out why/how it distorts Islam. The argument thatthe notion of State is Western institution incompatible with IslamicGovernance, is shown by Hallaq, for instance in The Impossible State.
Point 8: My allusionto Salafis, Ikhwan, Hamas is phoney comparison.
Did I compare them or just note that all invoke Islam forpolitical ends or politics for religious purposes thus justifying juxtaposingthem?
Point 9: I seem to deny existence of unified Ummah.
Bewildering legal and theological responses in Islamictradition are included in Islam as Imam Ashari pointed out. I have been emphasizing the point in manycolumns. So can diverse political responses be consistent with one ummahconception. My writings on Ismail Faruqi have already clarified my position onunity of Ummah. Bewildering responses is empirical fact. I wish to understandthem all and not condemn beforehand some as inauthentic.
Point 10: I homologize Ghamidi with secularism.
Really? Where?
Point 11: Ignorance of the methodological issues ofmainstream Islamic theological episteme leads me to the wrong conclusions.
Traditional Ulama whose claim to guard and understand thismainstream theological episteme can’t be disputed have faulted advocates ofpolitical Islam on theological grounds. I have only noted their point and notproposed any personal opinion.
Point 12: Iqbal talks about exclusiveness of Muslim faithand uniqueness of Ummah.
One can quote scores of verses and scores of pages from hislectures and letters, the whole of Javid Namah and the very fact that he wasessentially a Sufi thinker for instance that all militate against attributing exclusivism to him. Iqbal calledfor reconstruction of religious thought using tools of philosophy and mysticismwhile ideologues of political Islam usually suspect both philosophy andmysticism. Iqbal affirms Islam’s uniqueness and not exclusivism. Ironically theverse quoted contradicts author’s agenda as Tawheed, we all know, unites Islamwith other revealed religions such as Judaism. Iqbal denies lsamonationalism byidentifying large identity (transnational) of Islam. Iqbal would be poles apartfrom the claim of Syed Qutb that judgesevery religious or traditional or modern culture as batil or jahili. Iqbal championed revival ofMuslims/Islam and not what is called Islamism/Political Islam.
Point 13: Confounding faith, animism and totemism
Confounding faith, animism and totemism is neither intendedin nor warranted from my write up. I wish brother Umar consider reading workson theology of culture or masterly studies on religion and culture to note ifany ground for his apprehensions exists
Point 14: I am over relying on sources other than thedivine.
I should, because the Divine Book directs us all as itdirected Muslim philosophers, sages and scientists to books of self and cosmos,to numerous sciences, to history, to all “other than” divine sciences todecipher signs.
And lastly:
Dozens of studies on Political Islam have established itsproblematic understanding of both religion (Islam) and politics, discrepancies in its theory and practice, itsproblematic non-traditional kitty of concepts/tools, its counterproductivehistory and catalogue of failures and gross misreadings of world traditions andmodernity – to be analyzed in future columns.