See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327830595

Secularism and Islam

Preprint · September 2018

CITATIONS READS
0 586

1 author:

Abdul Karim Abdullah

109 PUBLICATIONS   22 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Intercivilizational dialogue View project

Islamic law View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdul Karim Abdullah on 23 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Secularism and Islam
Leslie Terebessy

Definitions
Secularism
The Macmillan English Dictionary defines secularism is the “lack of religious influence within society,
or the belief that this is important.”1

Secularization
The Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics defines secularization as the “detachment of a state or other
body from religious foundations.”2 To secularize means “to make something less religious or stop
it from being controlled by religion.”3 Secularization is the weakening of the influence of religion.4

There are those who welcome secularization. To a Muslim, however, secularization appears as
unwelcome. Muslims do not wish to become less religious or stop being guided by religion.

Secular State
According to the Macmillan Dictionary, the word secular means “not religious, or not connected with
religion.”5 The word secular is used to designate a particular kind of state. In a secular state there is
a separation between politics and religion. A secular state typically uses a political organization
known as a liberal democracy. This is a social and political system where individual liberty and human

1
Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, International Student Edition, 2002, p. 1282.
2
Iain McLean Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics, p. 445
3
Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, International Student Edition, 2002, p. 1282.
4
Secularization needs to be distinguished from its opposite, Islamization. Islamization is the processes of making the
activities of the Muslims and the state agree more closely with the teaching of Islam.
5
Loc. Cit.
rights are paramount, and where the question of who will hold the highest political offices is
decided by a majority vote.

Liberal democracy is secular by virtue of separating religion from politics. In a secular state authority
is separated into religious and worldly. In a secular state the authority of all religion, including Islam is
subject to the authority of the Constitution. Persons who hold political office may but need not be
Muslims. 6

In liberal democracies, the elected or appointed representatives of the state are called servants of the
people. The highest authority is the parliament or its equivalent. Worldly authority is vested in
elected officials, whose right to exercise power is derived from popularity.

The laws passed by legislative assemblies or parliaments are positive laws. A positive law is man-
made. Religion plays no part in the formulation or the application of positive law. The requirement
for a rule to become law is that the majority of the persons elected to serve in the legislative
assembly pass it. This means that in a liberal democracy anything may become lawful. It matters
little if a proposed law departs from the Commandments of God. Apart from objections raised
by members of the parliament or the public there are no limits or restrictions on the legislative activity of
the assembly or parliament.

State with religious foundations

The secular state has no religious foundations. The state that has religious foundations is the state
that has an official religion. A state with an official religion need not be a theocracy.7 A state with

6
Politics are the collective activities of a given community on the local, national, regional and international level. Every
community has a governing structure, ways of selecting leaders, implementing priorities and resolving disputes. The
political process is the method of establishing social priorities, choosing leaders, and implementing those priorities in daily
life. In order to ensure that helpful input by citizens is utilized, it is necessary that all citizens participate in the political
process. Each citizen should participate in his or her respective capacity, and to the best of his or her ability.
7
A state ruled by religious leaders with unchallenged authority.

2
an official religion can and should incorporate important features of representative government.8 The
state where Islam is the official religion also values liberty. The state with an official religion,
however, differs from the secular liberal democracy in that it does not assign the highest position
to freedom in the hierarchy of values.
9
For Muslims, religion is more than a set of beliefs. Religion is a way of life People guided by
religion recognize the supremacy of God. The citizens who subscribe to the official religion are the
servants of God.

Not everything can become legal in a state where Islam is the official religion. The legislative
activities of the parliament in a state where Islam is the official religion, unlike those in secular
states, are circumscribed by the need to make all legislation consistent with the Commandments
of the highest authority, the authority of God.

The intention in this paper is to consider the case for secularism or secularization10 from an Islamic
point of view. The thesis of this paper is that secularism is neither viable nor desirable, and that
the Islamic model of political organization is a better alternative.

Islam offers the only credible, viable, and sustainable model of personal and social development.11
All other models, including and especially the much-touted liberal democracy used in the
economically more developed nations suffer from a fatal flaw. The flaw is the uncertainty about

8
A government consisting of elected officials that are expected to represent the people’s interests on behalf of the people.
Representative government thus reduces the element of arbitrariness in the exercise of political power. A representative
democracy is sometimes described as the government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The presumption is that if
government is democratically elected and representative, the chances of the abuse of individuals by state authorities will
be less than under a system of government where the ruling power is not answerable or accountable to the electorate.
9
Abdullah Muhammad Zin Islamic Da’wah (Mission), p. 10.
10
We do not see any important difference between the two. Secularization tends to secularism. The difference is analogous
to the difference between liberalization and liberalism. It is the ideology of liberalism that inspires the process of liberalization.
In the same way, it is the ideology of secularism that inspires the process of secularization.
11
Cf. Gai Eaton, Islam and the Destiny of Man, p. 2.

3
the difference between right and wrong – called nihilism – that permeates the secular consciousness
and its manifestations of personal and political reality.

Globalization of Secularism
Secularism has been widely accepted in the West. It is being promoted around the world, especially
in the Islamic world. Secularism is part of a bigger message. This bigger message is secular humanism.
Secular humanism is not just an ideology. It is a way of life. As such, it competes with the Islamic
way of life.

The promotion of secularism is taking place under the banner of democracy, freedom and rights.
The arguments that have been used by philosophers to advance the cause of secularism in the
West are being used in the Islamic world. Freedom and human rights are affirmed, the
mistreatment of women is raised as an issue, and the necessity for tolerance is asserted.

Resistance to secularism
There is resistance to secularism in the Islamic world, both as a principle and a way of life. This
resistance is entirely justified. It is based on the perception that it is not possible to subscribe to
secularism without abandoning one’s attachment to Islam. Either man or God is the highest
authority. We cannot have it both ways. Secularism advocates an anthropocentric view of the
universe. It asserts the supremacy of man. Muslims acknowledge and accept the supremacy of
God.

Roots of Secularism
Renaissance, Reformation, and the Scientific Revolution
Secularism originated in Europe. The influence of institutionalized religion during the Middle
Ages in Europe was strong. Ecclesiastical authorities aligned themselves closely with the European
monarchies. The divine right of kings became an accepted dictum. Dissent was not tolerated.

4
The suppression of reason, the misuse of religion, and the oppression of the people by
authoritarian regimes culminated in a series of reactions. During the Renaissance, people began to
look to the achievements of the Islamic world, then at its pinnacle, in an attempt to reinvigorate
their own communities, atrophied and made stagnant by the oppressive practices of the
ecclesiastical and political authorities.

The Scientific Revolution was an attempt to free the human mind from the tyranny of persons blindly
opposed to scientific inquiry. The Reformation signified an attempt to correct the distortion of
religion by ecclesiastical authorities. During the French Revolution, people began to demand an end
to the abuses by political authorities.

Enlightenment
The Enlightenment was an attempt to consolidate the achievements of the preceding upheavals. Part
of this effort was an attempt to design a new society. The most distinguishing feature of such a
society was that the society would be based on reason rather than faith.

To construct a society based on reason rather than religion, the domain of reason or science had
to be firmly demarcated from the domain of religion. The supporters of the new order asserted
that scientific and religious knowledge are fundamentally different kinds of knowledge. Science
and philosophy represent human knowledge while religion represents revealed knowledge.

The separation of science and religion was in part an attempt to guarantee science the freedom of
inquiry without interference from religion. Secularism arose in part out of the desire to free
scientific and political activity from the constraints, real or imaginary, imposed by restrictive
interpretations of religion.

In the new society, science was elevated at the expense of religion. Religion was banished to the
realm of privacy, while science was given a free rein. Religion would play no significant part in the
new society. Only human reason and rationality would be allowed to have a say in the organization

5
of the state. This was the beginning of secularism. Historically speaking, secularism represents the
victory, in the sphere of politics, of human knowledge over revealed knowledge.

The ideology of the Enlightenment differs profoundly from the Islamic conception of the
relationship between reason and faith. According to the thinkers of the Enlightenment, reason is
incompatible with faith. To them, faith is fundamentally irrational. In this, the thinkers of the
Enlightenment erred. Faith is rational, and science is perfectly compatible with revelation. The
creation of the universe and all that exists is evidence of the best science, the science of the
Creator. Islam does not teach that reason and science are incompatible. Islam teaches that faith is
rational, grounded in revelation. Evidence for their faith includes the Qur’an and God’s creation.
The Qur’an calls people to the Islamic faith by appealing to their reason. The act of faith is a
conscious, rational act.

Not only was science disconnected from religion. Politics also had to be disengaged from religion.
As long as political authority remained subservient to religion, scientific inquiry would be
constrained by the need to conform to the dictates of religion. In order to separate religion and
politics, an argument was advanced according to which religion is a private matter.

Justification of Secularism
Secularism is good for progress
The progress of secular countries is often contrasted with the scientific and economic
backwardness of Muslim countries. Since under a secular system scientific inquiry may proceed
with minimal resistance from religious authorities, a secular system is more conducive to the
development of science and technology than a political system where religion has a public
function. Thus, the solution to the scientific and economic backwardness of the Muslim countries
is to adopt a secular system.

While there is truth in the view that scientific progress takes place more easily when scientific
research is unhindered by resistance from religious authorities, there is in principle no reason why
6
scientific progress should not or could not take place in tandem with a strong and growing
commitment to religion. Religious knowledge and scientific knowledge are not incompatible. A
person can be an excellent professional or businessman and be a pious Muslim at the same time. We
do not need to neglect faith in order to gain mastery of knowledge of science and technology.

Those who specialize in religion should not interfere in the work of those who specialize in the
sciences. Similarly, those who specialize in the study of the sciences should conduct their work
within the parameters established by religion. They should not pursue directions of research that
are clearly contrary to the teaching of Islam.

A related argument is that the Islamic civilization fell behind the western civilization because
religious leaders were permitted to meddle in political affairs. The Islamic civilization did not fall
behind because religious leaders exercised political power. It fell behind in part because the wrong
people exercised authority. These people suppressed discouraged the pursuit of knowledge. They
prevented Muslims from acquiring knowledge, thinking that contemporary disciplines were evil.
They were not well informed. Science is neither good nor evil. It is how we use science that is good or
evil. Where science is used for the betterment of humanity, the use of science is beneficial. Where
knowledge is used to oppress people, its use is wrong.

Religion is a Private Matter

Another argument advanced in support of a secular system is that politics and religion should be
separated because religion is a private matter while politics is a public concern. According to this
argument politics and religion, like science and religion, constitute two different realms of reality.
Religion is about spirituality while politics focuses upon the material aspects of the life of the
community. For this reason, religion cannot and should not play any public role in the life of a
state.

7
It is clear that the Qur’an has much to say not merely about matters of faith but also about the
physical existence of people. The view according to which religion and politics are concerned with
realms of activity that do not overlap is therefore less than convincing.

Secularism asserts that it does not seek the separation of the people from their religion. In a secular
state, people are free to worship according to the requirements of their religion. The condition is
that they do so in private. In private means at home or in designated places such as mosques. The
fact remains, however, that in cases of conflict, the state prevails, even if it means that the person
may be forced to violate a requirement of his religion by complying with a law of the state.

But Muslims are guided by the principles of Islam during their work hours as much as in the
privacy of their homes. Islam provides guidance for the entire life of the person, including that
part of his life he spends outside of his home. 12

The prophet Muhammad is an example for Muslims to follow. If he as the leader of the Muslim
community of his time was active in the life of the community, that is in politics, the contemporary
leaders of the Muslims can and should also be active in politics. Not just any politics, but Islamic
politics. Such politics is based on the Qur'an and the authentic sayings of the prophet. Moses was
also a political figure.

Secularism and political power

The supporters of secularism fear that if religion were to be mixed with politics, the root of
political authority would be transferred from elected officials to un-elected religious leaders. The
supporters of secularism believe that the consent of the ruled is required to justify political authority.
Knowledge, least of all religious knowledge, does not entitle a person to exercise authority.

12
Gai Eaton writes “Religion cannot survive, whole and effective, when it is confined to one single compartment of life
and education.” Islam and the Destiny of Man, p. 4.

8
What is overlooked here is that being elected does not confer on the elected person any degree of
knowledge. The right to political authority by elected persons rests on popularity. Knowledge
constitutes a far better qualification for the exercise of political authority than popularity.

Political Stability

Another argument to justify secularism is that excluding religion from public life is necessary in
order to maintain peace among the adherents of different religions. According to this argument
religion is a source of division and conflict. It is a source of division because religion divides all
people into disbelievers and those that are rightly guided. It is a source of conflict because it is not
possible for these two groups to co-exist side by side peacefully. The assumption is that the
adherents of different religions are in a state of war with one another.13 Only a secular regime, by
declaring and enforcing a truce between religions, can maintain the peace among the adherents of
different religions. Indeed, the secular state claims to be the only state that allows communities of
different moral and religious persuasions to co-exist side by side peacefully.

The fact that religion is portrayed as a source of conflict rather than a source of peace is remarkably
at odds with what Islam teaches. One of the meanings of the root form of the word Islam is peace.
How can the religion that teaches peace be a source of war? Likewise, the assumption that the adherents of
different religions are in a state of war with one another is false. Islam permits, indeed requires
Muslims to defend themselves, if they are unjustly attacked. Under any other conditions, Muslims
are commanded to be at peace with non-Muslims.

The conflicts among nations are not due to differences of religion. Rather, they result from the
competition over land, water, minerals and other forms of wealth. The real sources of conflict are
the vices of greed, pride and the desire to rule people and appropriate their resources. To the

13
Gai Eaton recalls the message that was conveyed to him and his schoolmates in their history lessons: “humanity had
only gradually freed itself from the ‘fanaticism’ of religious faith and had been afflicted, century after century, by senseless
wars of religion.” Islam and the Destiny of Man, p. 5.

9
extent that religion restrains people, religion in fact reduces the conflicts among people. To attribute
conflicts among people to religion is nothing less than an attempt to slander religion.

Fanaticism
A related argument in favor of a secular system is the view that a secular system is necessary in
order to keep religious fanaticism in check. According to this argument, there are few things more
dangerous than religious fanaticism. Fanaticism does not lend itself to persuasion by reason. It is
irrational and knows no restraint. Mixing religion with politics is likely to result in intolerance,
persecution, religious conflicts and wars. For these reasons alone, any humane political system
must refrain from incorporating religious principles into legislation. Accordingly, secularism calls
for the firm separation of religion and politics.

Religious fanaticism is always a danger. Fanaticism can begin with innocuous prohibitions, such
as declaring that drinking coffee or learning English are prohibited. Scholars who make such
declarations do a disservice to the Muslim community. The Qur'an states clearly that we should
not make illegal what God has permitted. Similarly, we should not make legal what He prohibited.
Arbitrary prohibitions of this nature have resulted in the Muslims neglecting the study of the
sciences, thus resulting in their falling behind others, economically, scientifically and militarily.

Yet religion need not result in fanaticism. As long as we are committed to religion in a thoughtful
way, fanaticism will be restrained. It is when thinking stops that fanaticism begins. Besides, there
is no reason to assume that religious fanaticism is any more dangerous than political fanaticism. In
fact, there is much evidence to show that political fanaticism has been by far the most lethal type
of fanaticism.

Rights of Minorities
Another argument in favor of a secular system is that it is not possible for a state to subscribe to
an official religion without violating the rights of minorities. The failure to separate religion from
politics will result in confrontations among groups of people along religious lines.
10
The fallacy in this argument is the presumption that if a state is founded on religion, persons
subscribing to a different religion will be automatically marginalized. What is overlooked is that
the state with Islam as the official religion guarantees non-Muslim minorities the right to worship
according to the requirements of their religion. Islam properly understood and applied cannot be
a cause of abuse. On the contrary, Islam teaches restraint and provides security.

Another fact frequently overlooked in this debate that is that it is the secular states that frequently
threaten, oppress, and persecute minorities. The track record of the treatment of minorities by
secular states speaks for itself. It is a well-documented fact that secular regimes have been by far the most
extremist and fanatical in all of recorded history. We just need to recall that the worst excesses in the past
were perpetrated by Nazism. It should be clear that the combination of secularism and nationalism
constitutes a lethal mix. People who have no fear of God are prepared to go to any lengths and use any means
to achieve their objectives.

Not to be overlooked is the fact that Hitler was elected in the early part of his rule. This shows
that elections do not guarantee protection from dictatorship. An effective restraint on man's
behavior comprises not just man-made rules but the fear of God. By rejecting religion, secular
regimes have removed an effective restraint on behavior.

Crisis of Secularism
Relativism
Secularism presupposes value relativism. According to this view, it is not possible to determine
which of the religions is the true or authoritative religion. Choosing one religion over another is a
purely arbitrary act. It means, in effect, that every religion is as good as any other religion. No
religion should present itself as the true religion.

Religious relativism is an expression of an immense doubt. Religious relativism leaves a person

facing the multiplicity of religions in a state of bewilderment, telling him that even if there were a
true religion, he has no way of determining which religion it is. Even if a person chose the true
11
religion, that choice would be purely accidental. Religious relativism asserts that the human mind
is incapable of differentiating the true religion from false or distorted alternatives. Religious
relativism treats all religions as equal and as more or less contradicting each other.14

At the same time, the proponents of religious relativism advise would be seekers of guidance to
use their minds to establish their own standards of right and wrong. They are encouraged to follow
any lifestyle, as long as it does not violate the laws of the secular state.

The proponents of religious relativism discourage people from pursuing the question, which is
the true or truest religion, on the grounds that there is no satisfactory answer to this question.
Furthermore, people are discouraged from discussing this question by the supporters of
secularism on the additional ground that a public debate of this question is likely to stir up religious
strife and conflict. This question has been debated in public, and no riots have taken place.15

Religious relativism, presented as reasonable, has brought a crisis in the secular West. Immense
doubts have arisen about whether the human mind is able to distinguish between right and wrong.
It is not enough to say that we are free to establish personal standards of right and wrong. If
nothing more supports my standards of right and wrong than the simple fact that they are mine,
then such standards cannot be very firm. If I know that any other standard is just as good as the
one I happen to choose at the moment or for the moment, how strong can my commitment to
such a standard be?

Besides, when people are advised to form their own standards, they are likely to form standards
that are easy to live up to. Standards become mere expressions of personal preferences. A standard
of right and wrong that is a mere expression of personal preference is in fact no standard at all.
According to such a standard, I must only do what I already want to do.

14
“One of the principal causes of unbelief in the modern world,” writes Gai Eaton, “is the plurality of religions which
appear mutually contradictory…” Islam and the Destiny of Man, p. 6.
15
Ahmad Deedat used to debate this question at his immensely popular debates.

12
Doing away with the difference between desire and obligation in effect justifies the unrestrained
pursuit of self-gratification. Standards of right and wrong sometimes require us to do things that
may not be pleasant, or may even be unpleasant, and that we may be unwilling to do. Standards
or right and wrong may require us to go counter to our basic inclinations and animal instincts. Yet
those who advocate the abolition of the difference between desire and obligation are in effect
suggesting that we should give a free rein to our basic instincts. The sexual liberation movements
in the west have done precisely that.

Decline of standards
As a result of religious relativism and the marginalization of religion, standards have fallen. This
is illustrated by the legalization or acceptance of adultery, usury, and abortion. In order to make
these practices more acceptable, a particular terminology has been developed to describe them.
This terminology is made up of words that no longer carry the connotations of disapproval
characteristic of traditional language. Gambling, for example, is passed off as mere “gaming.”
Abortion is justified as an exercise of the “freedom of choice.” While previously these practices
were considered crimes, today in most western societies they are merely “alternative lifestyles.”

The lowering of standards has not resulted in a higher quality of life. On the contrary, the violation
of the standards supplied by religion resulted in a reduced quality of life for those who did not or
do not heed those commandments. This is plain for everyone to see, especially in those countries
that have traveled farthest to secularism.

One of these manifestations of the reduced quality of life is visible in the widespread
demoralization of people and the fragmentation of the family. Many families have become
dysfunctional and disintegrate. Yet people refer to this phenomenon, using another euphemism,

13
as a “transformation”16 of the traditional family. A breakdown is not a transformation. It is
collapse.

As a result of the crises in their families, young people have become confused and depressed. The
extent of alcohol and substance abuse reflects the widespread depression among people. As a
result of the prevailing moral confusion, people are trapped in self-destructive and wasteful
activities. Pre-marital and extra-marital “affairs” are just a few manifestations of confusion. There
is also the abuse of children. Corruption is also rampant.

Response to the crisis

The response to the crisis of secularism, that has also been called the crisis of the West, is not to
go back to ancient philosophy.17 It is not the right response because the classics, for all the depth
of thinking they have displayed within the parameters of the worldview in which the lived, had no
benefit of revelation. To go back to the philosophers when the teaching of the prophets is available
is like trying to dig a well next to a fresh and abundant stream of water. The right response to the
crisis of the West is to adopt the best and highest standards available to us. The right response is
to adopt the standards supplied by the religion of Abraham, which is also the religion of Moses,
Jesus, and Mohammad.18

Conclusion
Challenge for the Muslim world

To the extent that the Islamic world adopts the secular model, the crisis of the West may become
the crisis of the Islamic world. Avoiding falling into the trap of secularism may be achieved by

16
Another euphemism of the type mentioned earlier.
17
See the Introduction to the City and Man by Leo Strauss…
18
Insert al-Qur’an quotations.

14
remaining firmly attached to the teaching of Islam while acquiring knowledge, both revealed and
non-revealed.

For this to happen there needs to be a proper balance between religious and present-day
knowledge. The knowledge of the arts and sciences adds to our wealth. But it is religious
knowledge that enables us to use this wealth well.

15
 Bibliography
Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners, International Student Edition; Macmillan Education,
Oxford, 2002.

McLean, Iain Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,
1996.

Blackburn, Simon Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,
1996.

Asad, Muhammad Islam at the Crossroads, Fourteenth Revised Edition, Dar al-Andalus Limited,
Gibraltar, 1982.

Asad, Muhammad The Principles of State and Government in Islam Islamic Book Trust, Kuala Lumpur,
1999.

Zin, Dr. Abdullah Muhammad Islamic Da’wah (Mission), Pustaka Antara, Sdn. Bhd. Kuala Lumpur,
1995.

Bucaille, Maurice The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, A.S. Noordeen, Kuala Lumpur, 2002.

16

View publication stats