Conservative Islam and Modernity

Abdul Al-Maudoodi often criticized modernity as illustrated throughout his correspondence with Maryam Jameelah. Maudoodi critiques modernity through the framework of of fashion, women’s roles in society, and economic development.  Additional targets of Maudoodi include the concept of nationalism and attempts to incorporate “western” ideas into Islam.  If we define all of the above statements as aspects of modernism (or at least heavily influenced by them), the logical conclusion is that Maudoodi (as well as Jameelah) is anti-modern.  At the very least, many would argue that he is a fundamentalist.  Yet, for all his criticisms on the modern world, Maudoodi is a modernist.  How is such a paradox possible? After all, this is a man who espouses an adherence to a literal interpretation of Islam. 

            If Al-Maudoodi has a problem with many modern concepts, he certainly does not have a problem with its outshoots out of intellectual, philosophical, and theological components.  For instance when he informs Maryam about his various health issues, he subtly illustrates the fact that he is taking full advantage of modern medicine and medical technologies.  He certainly does not object to modern means of communication as evidenced by his correspondence with Maryam. Transportation is not a problem for him either as he perfectly willing to travel to Africa (only his health and some political reasons hold him back).  Within his personal life, Maudoodi’s daughters are studying economics and English literature, and Maudoodi is developing a curriculum with modern components at a university in Saudi Arabia.  One may argue that this is relatively hypocritical of a man who is at heart a fundamentalist.  This misses the point.  Maudoodi is a fundamentalist and a modernist.  In fact, he represents a way for a conservative Islam and modernity to co-exist. 

            There are have been three kinds of Islam and modernity illustrated in class so far.  First, there is the complete break method, articulated by leaders and thinkers such as Ataturk ,which seeks to borrow heavily or adapt to the West.  Next there is that advocated by Farid Esack and others attempting to steer a middle road between retaining Islamic faith and radically changing it.  Finally there is the seeking of a return to the fundamentals of Islam.  Although a critic of modernity, Maudoodi certainly is not advocating its destruction.  What he criticizes is more about specific practices that he does not believe fit within an Islamic framework such as nationalism or Westernization. 

            In some way, it is impossible to find a man who is not modern.  Cultural pressures are too hard to withstand unless one completely isolates the self from society.  Even those seeking a break from modernity (think Al-Qaeda) reflect their modernity simply by responding to it.  Critics may complain about aspects of modernity but the question that needs to be asked is if anybody is truly happy with modernity.  Nothing in the world is perfect and it would be impossible to engineer a truly utopian society.  Even on the far-right of Islamic thought, organizations such as Al-Qaeda utilize modern developments such as the internet as a way of passing on information.  Modernity influences the every move of all peoples (with a few small exceptions of uncontacted peoples).  To put this into context, compare Maudoodi’s viewpoints with that of many fundamentalist American Evangelicals. Many of the arguments have a similar ring.  Few would argue that the Christian fundamentalist is modern nor that his conservative beliefs are incompatible with modern society. While Maudoodi may not necessarily think himself a modernist, he (and virtually the entire world) is one.

BDF