اندیشهفلسفهخردگفتگوحکمتمعناپرسشفرهنگ
Religion
From Which Angle Do We Look?!
Ambiguity over the identity of 'us,' the interpretation of Islam, and the contradiction between revival and novelty have challenged the project of 'reviving a new Islamic civilization'; civilization-building is an endless process, not a linear project with a finish line.
The March 1st episode of Zaviyeh, featuring Reza Babaei and Mehdi Aboutalebi, was held. This debate-style program aired with a focus on the revival of Islamic civilization and was, of course, worthy of numerous observations.
In this note, I will attempt to, in a way, critique the framing of the issue in this discussion, namely "the revival of the new Islamic civilization," and consider its possibility or impossibility:
- Mr. Aboutalebi repeatedly used the pronoun "we" in this program. For instance, he said we want to build a new Islamic civilization. For me, as a viewer, the meaning of the pronoun "we" is unclear. Who are this "we" and what exactly is their identity?! In this expert's statements, the meaning of this pronoun is so ambiguous that perhaps he himself is unaware of the semantic aspects of this usage.
- Another point is that Mr. Aboutalebi fell into a major conflation of issues throughout his discussion. Which reading of Islam does he mean by Islam?! Let me put it this way: does he want to revive Islamic civilization or Shiite civilization?! I doubt that Mr. Aboutalebi intends to revive Sunni civilization and wants to revitalize this part of the faith as well?!
- Another point is that reviving a civilization that existed in the past will no longer be new. This revival is a kind of return to the past. Proponents of this project must clarify their position on this issue: what exactly do they want?! Do they want to engage in Islamic revivalism or Islamic creationism?! If their intention is the revival of Islamic civilization, then why call it new?! And...
- In this project, or whatever else, the main weakness is the "Dear Uncle Napoleon" reading of the modern world and its vast blessings. Proponents of such a project consider the modern world a virus carrying disease and view it with utter skepticism.
- The fifth point concerns Mr. Aboutalebi's project-like understanding of the issue of civilization-building(?!). He has assumed that one can have a linear reading of civilization and achieve it by devising and passing through several stages. The author believes that the issue of civilization-building is an endless processual pursuit, and no endpoint is conceivable for it at all. For, devising an endpoint and arriving at a new civilization precisely (as Toynbee would say) signifies the beginning of its disintegration and collapse, and it will thus proceed to nowhere.
In conclusion, it is necessary to state that the author is more aligned with Mr. Babaei. Truly, "the issue of reviving the new Islamic civilization" seems vague and impractical. In this project, neither the matter of "which Islam?!" is clear, nor is the distinction between wishes and realities. In the author's view, merely holding low-impact conferences cannot carry our burden or sweeten the palate of civilization-builders. And...
.
.
From Which Angle Do We Look?!
Author: Hossein Pourfaraj
.
.
Discussion3 comments
تمدن آن نیست که با خون دل آید بکنار، بلکه هر تمدنی که با کمترین هزینه و اجبار، و بالاترین اختیار و فایده، جمعیت فراوانی را پوشش دهد درین مناقصه و مزایده تمدنی، پیروز میدان میشود. ( همانطور که هنر گوتیک قرون وسطایی، قافیه را باخت ). وگرنه چه فرقی میکند که پس از گودزیلای ژاپنی و هیتلری، هیولاهای آفریقایی و خاورمیانهای نیز بهانه جنگ سوم را رقم بزنند؟!
واقعا این دست یادداشتها را برای چی منتشر میکنید؟ فقط میخواهد بگوید از طرف من »ما« نگویید. حیف وقتی که از آدم میگیرد
ممنون از نکته سنجی تان. انشاألله به دست ایشان هم برسد.