• 16:43
  • Wednesday ,25 September 2013
العربية

Secularism against conservatism

Moomen Sallam

Article Of The Day

00:09

Wednesday ,25 September 2013

Secularism against conservatism

Political Islamists reject secularism claiming it came to fight the Christian priesthood, which Islam doesn’t have. They claim secularism was founded to fight the domination of the Church of  Rome over every aspect of life. Thus, they claim there should be no contradiction or separation between religion and politics. 

In fact, their proposal contains many fallacies, and their practices reflect a priestly ideology that reject all different ideologies, even from other Muslims. Yet, their ideas of a civil state with an Islamic background do make sense and are accepted by many people in Egypt. However, their problem comes when dealing with the old Islamic text that was written in the sixth century.
 
The second argument, which assesses their rejection of secularism, is they think Islam is both religion and state. Islam, according to their believe, has presented laws and rules for the state, which should be followed. Otherwise, the regime would be described as “infidel”. Thus, they think that the “holy text” should be followed without thinking. This is called “the authority of the holy text”.
 
 
This is the real problem of the secularists in Egypt and other Muslim-majority countries. I mean the relationship between thinking and blind obedience to the holy text. This only could lead to the separation between state and religion. The holy text has appeared in different community and reality. Now, we face much more problems and challenges that we need modern technology to solve not abiding with the holy text. In short, we have to choose between following the text or modern technology.
 
This matter should be investigated and searched. Islamic scientists had this argument: Should they abide by the holy text no matter what happens, or should they work out their mind to develop their own solutions? Political Islamists throughout history have been against thinking, and preferred the blind obedience to easily control the people.
 
Giving greater role to thinking against blind obedience is the best way to pave the way before secularism and to separate between religion and politics. Secularism accordingly could be identified as thinking rather than following the holy text in managing the public affairs of the state.