Urgent Need to Establish the Science

of the
Fundamentals of the Intellect ‫)اصول العقل‬
Najah Kadhim*

1. Introduction

There is an urgent need to allow the intellect to take its rightful place in the sciences,

activities and lives of the Muslims.

Historically – during the Middle Ages, to be precise – the intellect was allowed

only a limited role, apart from the period of the Mu‘tazilite School and the brief

period of the “Muslim Renaissance”, as termed by some modern Muslim

researchers.1 This was in contrast to the role of the intellect and reason at the dawn of

Islam. Since then, the status role of naql (transmission by a chain of reliable

witnesses) as the ultimate tool for determining the original sources of Islam has

become increasingly dominant. over the years up to So much so that at present, in

the twenty-first century, when it now reigns supreme and exerts decisive influence

over the lives and work of Muslims throughout the world.

In the opinion of some Muslims, such as the Salafis, not a single letter of the

heritage (turāth) should be altered in any way. Or, in plain words, that is, the lives

and works of Muslims should be governed completely by imitation. The method of

Naql - faithful transmission, without any interpretation and commentary, of the

words and deeds of the early generation of pious and righteous predecessors – is the

most reliable method of reaching back to their practice (Sunna). The Salafi believe

that their illustrious founders, former leading lights, such as Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah
and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab, were next close to God and beyond time, and

therefore worthy of emulation. Some of them insist that these forefathers of Salafism

had already found all the future answers.

The logical question here is: Can the word of humankind be equated to the

Word of God?

As Muslims, we believe that the Word of God in the Holy Book of the Qur’an

is divine. We also believe that the authentic Sayings of the Prophet are also divine.

Nevertheless, the world of humankind carries the stamp of history, that is, it is said,

considered and applied at the always situated in time. It is influenced by the

circumstances prevailing at the a historical time. In other words, the human world is

always changing. Clearly, then, one must insist that the context of the social, political

and historical factors of former times is different from that of today.

Another important question can be posed here: Does the Salafi way of

thinking, based on an obsession with a return to the past, represent only the extreme

stance in the Muslims world, does it come from a vacuum, or is it in fact a

manifestation of a general pattern, a central norm?

The answer, in my opinion, is that there is a strong similarity between the

official or traditional Islam and that of the Salafi thought, where an emphasis on the

faithful tool of transmission of texts takes precedence over the use of the intellectual

effort of understanding them. In addition, both yearn for a return to the past, as

represented by a deep strong nostalgia for an earlier, pure and perfect age.

The result today is that we have acquired a ‘culture of heritage’ that has even

triumphed over the Qur’anic Text. This turāth culture however breeds points of

difference contention, leading to division and conflict among Muslims. A fiqhi

discourse and a turāth culture, based as they are on narrow religious or sectarian

perceptions and motives, and beliefs, have provided the justification for killing

fellow human beings, whether Muslim or not. Thus, from out of ignorance and

misreading of faith misinterpretation , Islamic history has continually repeated itself.

Cloaking the work of men (or Islamic scholars) with an aura of eternity has produced

an extremely suppressive submissive attitude to intellectual and moral authority. It

has paved the way for a collective imitation mentality among by Muslims, who,

unaccustomed to using their having avoided the use of the intellect for so long, are

now appear to be unable to think creatively or laterally or stretch and expand the

space span of their reality. Their way of life, long deprived of the liberating influence

of the intellect reasoning, is now quite far from the spirit and original intention

(maqsad) of the Holy Qur’an.

2. The Qur’anicView: Text and Intellect

The Qur’an takes an inter-connected and balanced view of the past, the present and

the future. Its emphasis on the past is to enable the human mind to learn from the

lessons of history. Indeed, during the twenty-two years of his mission, the Holy

Prophet was educated with the tales of the earlier prophets so that he could apply

their principles to his own historical mission. stage of history. The tool of

transmitting these tales was used not only for consolidating the Divine values of truth

(‫ )حق‬and justice (‫)عدل‬, but also for learning from other people to form what could be

called an “accumulation of experience and knowledge”. In some cases, this

knowledge could be applied where the circumstances were appropriate. Where the

circumstances were not appropriate, then this knowledge was to be put aside and

another solution sought and applied.

 More importantly, the intellect should be used in planning and preparing for the

future. The Prophet was working not only for the present but also for the future. He

referred to his future followers as brothers (and, in this context, sisters), in contrast to

his contemporary followers, who were called Companions. Indeed, Islam came as a

social revolution, bringing a new order that entailed looking into the future that is,

understanding the past and using the present to link it to the future. Muslim society

changed rapidly in the early days and established a very dynamic community. This

policy validated the change of circumstances in the present and its bearing on the

future, and confirmed that the current and future directions are just as important as

those of the past. This policy breathed life into the religious rituals and gave them a

meaning that was relevant to people’s daily lives. By so doing, a balance is

maintained between tradition and social justice, and a kind of dynamism is activated

with its far-reaching implications for both. The useful aspect of idealism, as implied

in the Qur’an, is to set the best possible example as the standard towards which both

society and individuals should aim. Achieving this objective entails looking into the

future and having the necessary vision of motivation to activate the workings of the

society. The implementation of this policy strengthens the relationship between

Intellect and Text, between Reason and Revelation, and balances the dialectic nature

of the two, that is, the balance of the absolute and relative terms, the source and the

way to the source, and a comprehensive vision on one hand and the focus on a

particular detail on the other.

The Qur’an clearly promotes this policy, for on numerous occasions it uses

phrases such as “Do you not think” ‫ ) )أفل تتفكرون‬and “Do you not contemplate”
 ‫ ?))أفل تعقلون‬The Holy Book indicates that thinking (‫ )تفكككر‬is the first stage of

considering a matter the cognitive appropriation of reality. Intellectualizing

Intellection (‫ )تعقكل‬is a higher level, where the mind (‫ )عقكل‬is employed to produce

rationality and reasonableness from through a deeper analysis. The tool of

transmission is used by the Qur’an to analyse the past and produce principles and

rules for humankind to learn, and the tool of the intellect to look into the future and

apply the lessons that have been learnt. The essence of the Qur’an and the Day of

Judgment is a future trend. The Holy Qur’an believes that the future is the real

dynamo of human activity in every walk of life.

For To take an example: Surah Yusuf (12) tells the tale of Prophet Yusuf, whose

management planning for the future, to use a modern jargon, saved Egypt from an

acute economics crisis. Another example is found in Surat al-Rūm which states:

Alif, Lam, Mim. The Romans have been defeated in a nearby land. However,
although they have been defeated, they will be victorious in a few years’ time.
Allah’s is the Command in the passt and in the future. On that day, the believers
will rejoice. (30:1–4)

Here, the Qur’an is telling the Muslim community in Makkah, whose members were

feeling depressed at the defeat of the Roman Christians by the Persian Zoroastrians

unbelievers, that the Romans would defeat the Persians in a few years’ time, thus

referring to the future with some good news. Of course, during the present stage,

both tools (past and future) should interact and complement each other.

There are over 300 Quranic verses that call people to think, intellectualize, and

remember or to test prove the truth and denounce ing the falsehood on the grounds of

reason.

Also the first revealed verse in the holy Quran was to “read”, as reading is

associated with thinking that necessitates the use of the intellect.

Wisdom (hence the connotation to reason) is one of Allah’s attributes character and

his name, The Wise (al-Hakim) names and to be is at the centre of gravity of the

Muslim belief. believe.

3. History and the Intellect

In a Any study of Islamic history would confirm it is apparent that the tool method of

transmission by Naql has been a very dominant the predominant element of Muslim

scholars. The only exceptions are the era of the Mu‘tazilites, which lasted a short

while period during the early years of Islam, and the Middle Ages, which gave us

created Ibn Rushd (Averroes), Ibn Bajjah, Ibn Khaldum, Ibn Miskawayh and many

others.

In the brief era of the Mu‘tazilites, who were protected by the Abbasid Caliph,

al-Ma’mūn (813 AC), there was widespread use of the intellect – as it was understood

in those days – and many fresh novel ideas were produced. The negative aspect of

that period was the Mu‘tazilites’ imposition of their creed ideas and approach on the

general public. The intellect (or mind) and force are not compatible or go together.

Further, this policy became an ideology, rather than culture, to be imposed on

people. The policy resulted in an equally strong opposition to the Mu‘tazilites during

the reign of the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mutawakkil (247 AH/847 AC). It was the era that

introduced witnessed the consolidation of the tool methodology of transmission

(Naql), which has remained a dominant element of the Muslim world to the present

day.

In response to the Mu‘tazilites, Shaykh Ibn Hanbal ordered people not to

investigate or discuss matters as he considered these things as controversial. Further

controversy, in his view, was equivalent to heresy. Thus, people submitted

completely to the religious scholars and merely imitated them.

After the early adoption of science and knowledge by Islamic civilization,

especially during the Abbasid era of al-Mamūn, and the enormous amount of transla-

tion completed by Dar al-Hikmah, there appeared signs of degeneration in the

Muslim Ummah. The collapse began in the early fifth century AH, as is evident in

Imam ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Gilani’s book, al-‘Itiqad [The Beliefs], which lays particular

emphasis on creeds. By the end of the century, Imam Abu Hamid al-Ghazali was

preoccupied in waging a campaign against the philosophers, as described in his

famous work, Tahafut al- Falasifa [The Incoherence of Philosophy]. Nevertheless, it

is significant that although al-Ghazali rejected philosophy, he still supported the rele-

vant use of logic and its principles, considering it an admirable element of thought.

Al-Ghazali’s student, Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi, on the other hand, rejected all

the great literary works of al-Jadid, al-Mas‘udi and many others. These developments

were the starting-point of the period of rejecting al- bid‘ah (innovation), during

which Ibn al-‘Arabi encouraged Muslims to despise al-Jadid and others, calling them

“the innovative deceivers”. Meanwhile, he asked Muslims to boycott the people of

“religious ignorance”, who had no other task than “making sins appealing to the

public”.2

Anything that did not conform to the views of the ‘ulama’ (Islamic scholars) or

imams was considered bid‘ah, as described in Imam al-Shatibi’s al-I‘tişām. In his

work, Imam al-Shatibi stated that bid‘ah was the assertion of the intellectuals:

for the intellect is not independent, of course, and cannot be formed without an
established a priori, rather, it depends totally on a presupposed a priori and
there cannot be any other presupposition without the fundamental acceptance
of Revelation (wahy).3
He also said that” intellect is not to be imaginative in vision unless (it?) is to be imagined

by Naql”4,5

According to the ‘ulama’, bid‘ah was “inventing on matters that have not been intro-

duced before”. This could be in “manifest error” if it was unintentional, or as a result

of “disbelief in Shari‘ah and those who implement Shari‘ah if it was intentional.6

Yet Bid’ah is derived from the Arabic word aba’adah, innovation. And Quranic

verses state “Badi al Samawat wa al-Arad (2:17, 6:101) meaning Allah as the

“innovator of heaven and Earth”.

The era of rejecting bid‘ah was followed by that of denouncing Sufis as

unbelievers. The leading figure in this campaign was Ibn al-Jawzi, an adherent to of

Ibn Taymiyyah. In his book, Ţalbis Iblis, he condemned Sufis as “criminal infidels”

and accused them of promoting forbidden unlawful practices. The period was

dominated by the ideas of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, which resulted in lethargy of

scholarship. During this stage of Islamic civilization, few important intellectual

works and critical commentaries were produced. As the originator of Salafi thought

in the early eighth century AH, Ibn Taymiyyah rejected philosophy and logic,

believing that both disciplines contaminated and debased Islam. His student,

al-Suyuti, followed in his footsteps. Al-Suyuti was famous for his outright rejection

of logic, eliminating in his turn the discipline of kalam (Islamic theology). Also he is

the originator of the statement that became widespread afterwards “whoever uses

logic is therefore a heretic”- .‫من تمنطق فقد تزندق‬.

In Muslim Spain, Abu Ashaq al-Malaki of Granada (d. 790 AH) and Ibn Rajab

al-Hanbali in Baghdad (d. 795 AH) consolidated the attitude of the defective present

and the perfect past. 7 Ibn Rajab entitled his book ‫فضل علم السلف على علم الخلف‬
[Preference Superiority of for the Science of the Predecessors over the Science of the

Followers].

This work confirms the ideas of al-Shatabi as found in his book (Muwafaqat-

‫ )ٺﺎﻗفاوم‬which states that religious science (‫ )نﻳﺩلا ﻡولع‬is far more important than life

secular sciences (8?(‫ ﺎﻳنﺩلا ﻡولع‬He also believed that the life secular sciences did not

produce the same depth and consolidation of the knowledge as was handed down

from earlier scholars.9 Abu Aşhaq al-Malaki reached a similar conclusion that useful

science was limited by what had been passed down from the leaders (imams) of the

Predecessors. This shows the prevalence of a culture, within among the Ummah, in

which two scholars from two places who that were different in environment, culture,

Islamic sect and geographical location and sectarian loyalties, were both guided

mainly by the tool of Naql (transmission), while and downplayed the role of ‘Aql in

human affairs. disregarding the intellect of the human being.

This attitude was in sharp contrast with to the early period of the Prophet

(pbuh) and the guided Sahaba (Companions). The encouragement to acquire

knowledge, especially scientific knowledge, was not confined to the religious and

theological sciences as scholars and jurisprudents later would have us believe. ‘Ilm It

also included the acquisition of “earthly” knowledge, and the natural sciences that

are relevant to situation of humankind human existence on this earth. The hadith of

the Prophet (pbuh), for example, “Seek knowledge, even if it is in China”, underlines

the importance of this fact. Of course, in those early times, there were no Muslims in

China who could teach the Arab Muslims about Islam. However, what is clear from

the Prophet’s hadith is that Muslims ought to learn from non-Muslim cultures by
making use of appropriate, beneficial knowledge and by integrating it into the

Islamic way of life.

The total decline in the thought of the Ummah and the consolidation of naql

(transmission, immitation) over ‘aql (intellect reason) resulted in the disappearance

absence of the intellectual effort in seeking answers to addressing the questions of

everyday daily life, thus forcing people to accept only what had been transmitted

from the distant remote past. Such a marked change had the effect of severing

religion from all links to rationality. all rational links with religion. Intellectual effort

was now to be confined to a literal reading of the Text. Indeed, the intellect itself was

isolated from religion, which was “intellectually guarded” and could be activated

only by those ‘ulama’ who possessed the right knowledge or who had the privilege of

thinking on behalf of the rest of society10. Thus, the gates of ijtihād were closed,

creating throughout Muslim society a mentality that took every word of the Text atits

face value and followed its dictates without further reflection. This approach was

applied, in particular, to the use of qiyās, in which contemporary matters were

analysed with reference to past events. However, that it was where difficulties could

arise, for although the current problem might be the same as one dealt with long ago,

the circumstances of each were was likely to be very different.

This is Thus, over the years, the Ummah developed the Fiqhi Mind but lost the

philosophical mind.

The Quranic verses that imply that the mind could play a middle had a mediating role

to play between life and religion, philosophy and religion, divine and not so divine

sacred and profane, past and future and finally between the Text and reality history

have been distributed revealed forever. Further, the obsession with the text (in
reality, works of commentary and exegesis by past scholars) ( particular of former

scholars work, rest in peace) have implies that all further research is superfluous. the

fact or truth are already there in the text. The historical reality thus becomes

detached from the text and the thinking process has to comes to a stop since it is

already there has already been accomplished before. The Holy Qur’an, on the other

hand, urging one another for the truth. i.e. to search and seeking it urges common

search for the truth and mutual strengthening of each other’s efforts(3:103). This

necessitates thinking and reasoning. Also the holy book asks believers to always test

the truth in their lives and souls which is mentioned in a number of verses such as

(33: 8; etc)It exhorts us That is not only to seek, discover and deduce the truth but

to be innovative as well, to innovate the truth.

With the community’s loss of focus on this exhortation, Thus began the

disastrous dissolution of the interrelationship between intellect and the Shari‘ah, that

is, indeed between the intellect and life. Religion and culture were kept on moving

apart, setting the scene for the withdrawal of Islam into isolation seclusion, where it

would be practised as a defensive religion with a protective shield namely, provided

by the threat of extremism. When practised in this way, fanatics al extremists started

ranged themselves raging against the Other, whether the Other was Muslim or not,

and were severe turned even against the Muslim “self”, criticizing its imaginary

sins11

In addition, the cultural and intellectual lethargy and decline of Muslim society

were exacerbated by serious political instability in the Eastern region of the Muslim

world. During the fifth and sixth centuries AH, the region was occupied by the

Seljuqs, who waged relentless wars against the Buwayhids, resulting in the
devastation of their realm. Later, Then the Muslims were attacked by the Mongols

and the Tatars, who razed Baghdad to the ground, destroying the centre of a great

culture. This destruction was followed by the wars of the First Crusades. Finally, the

rule ole played by of the Turkish of the Ottoman Empire delivered sounded the death

knell to of the once intellectually investigative inquisitive and self-confident Islamic

civilization.

These historical events contributed to the following disasters, in fact natural

outcomes consequences of Muslim:

1. The delicate balance that clearly existed in the Holy Qur’an between the Text

and the intellect was disturbed, resulting in a distortion imbalance and

lopsidedness which later that became the norm.

2. The Religious knowledge produced by humankind humans assumed was given

a divine status and was regarded on the same level as at par with the revealed

truth of the Holy Book. of the Qur’an.

3. Concepts such as bid‘ah (innovation), jabr (pre-determination fate), qadā’

(execution of the Divine decree) and qadar (free will) and their influence on

the lives and intellect of Muslims were extended far beyond their proper limits.

The imposition of this policy denied human beings the exercise of their free

will and the ability to move forward and expand their horizons. More

importantly, it prevented them from applying their mental faculties to for the

advancement of sciences and for the acquisition of new experiences and

knowledge.

As a result, the focus was remained on the old earlier knowledge produced by

human beings, leading to a lack of any development of new knowledge and the
harnessing of ideas that did not contribute to the dissemination of the “acquired

knowledge” (‫ )المعرفككة المكتسككبة‬and the birth of the “generated knowledge” (‫المعرفككة‬

‫)المنبثقة‬. This was clearly the situation during the era of the great scholars, such as Ibn

Rushd, al-Kindi, al-Farabi and many others. Although new ideas and forms of

knowledge were emerging, the lack of a complete knowledge-system, unsupported

by a socially competent professional section of the population, and a social

professional layer to support them meant that they were unable to form the basis lay

a solid foundation for future advancement.

The huge technological transformation in the last quarter of the twentieth

century has had a marked impact on the level of knowledge and enabled it to perform

two functions11. One is the research and development activities that to produce the

“generated knowledge” and new disciplines the clear relationship between, for

example, such as genetics and cybernetics technology. The other function is to

contribute to the spread of the “acquired knowledge.12

3.1 Overall Consequences

This culture of “hibernation” had the following consequences.

• Shaping the future along the lines of the past by not allowing new horizons or

fields to emerge. It was an attempt to control future trends.

• Sanctity of the past and nostalgia for it, in other words, a backward vision in

the known direction, thus stripping the word “challenge” of any practical

meaning or value. The past (that is, previous scholarship) becomes the absolute

term of reference for the future by consolidating imitation.

• Preference for traditions over values, for values is are transcendent, above and

beyond time and place, whereas traditions are bound to time and society. This
 attitude has led to the imposition casting of a dogmatic cover trend over the

core values of Islam; or, perhaps, that of the rigidity of certain aspects of the

Shari‘ah over the practicality of creeds (‘aqāq’id)

• Most importantly, it has consolidated the general absence of intellectual effort

and initiative in the Muslim civilization. This mentality has created the view

among the Islamic schools that philosophy, logic and other sciences based on

the intellect reasoning degrade belief and faith (Iman). Since the intellect

Reason represents humankind and its existence what is characteristically

human, the rejection of the intellect is the rejection of human beings, and their

social societies intellectual and sciences. This projectionist attitude view has

indeed created a lack of trust in the role capacity of human beings to act as

God’s vicegerents on earth. , Yet, this role clearly indicated in is central to the

Qur’anic perception of man. That only God’s role ultimate might is to be

trusted disturbs the uniquely balanced relationship between God and man

humankind, which as it is projected envisioned in the Holy Book. The Text and

humankind its human reader refer to the Text and the intellect Revelation and

Reason, where the Text manifests the Word of God and the intellect of human

beings manifests the context human effort of understanding that Word.

• Last but not least, history is seen as a decline at best, or slowing down to a

complete halt, an unstoppable retardation in the eyes of the Salafis, at worst. In

this scheme of things, there is no sign of room for progress, as professed by

Islam in with its emphasis on the future bliss of man. trends. It History is not

the dynamic vehicle of human beings, carrying them forward on their journey.

through life. To put it another way, Rather, it has become a vertical movement
 in reverse gear. Looking backwards into the past and imitating the work of

known scholars have entailed de-activating devaluing the human mind and the

role of the individual’s contribution; that is, it is tantamount to the de-

contextualizing the mind of the human beings and their ability to think and use

their initiative. Furthermore, it is impeding the creation of the horizontal

structure that is paramount in twenty-first-century society owing to changes in

the global relationship and advances in telecommunications.

4. Violence and the Intellect

Feeble ideas can be easily defeated by fresh, stronger ideas. Hence, the use of force

(especially violence) to defend the feeble ideas is quite common in our societies, for,

without the support aid of violence, these ideas could not stand on their own. This

policy of violence results in a lack of creative thought, since, wherever creative

thinking manages to emerges, it is marginalized and or firmly suppressed.

Extremism is born of the neglect of represents the defeat of the mind and intellect,

which produce rationality.

These Here are some of the factors responsible for the lack of a dynamic

vision, which, in turn, fuels extremism: Salafism, the traditional Muslim institutions

and their retrograde theology, the lack of a humane political culture, and the absence

of intellectual freedom.

The first two factors confound the present situation malaise by demanding the

introduction of the Shari‘ah in its most outmoded and political highly politicised

form. The complication here is that the existing Shari‘ah is imbued with the thinking

and attitudes of Salafism, which is the idéologue du jour, for it represents the

intellectual framework as well as the over-legalization of the medieval Shari‘ah. The

term Salaf is derived from the Arabic word salif, meaning “former” or “previous”, so

Salafism that which preceded the present era proclaims allegiance to the norms of the

past and a Salafi is the one who espouses this ideology a Precedessor. Its practical

meaning, however, is the purification of Islam by returning Muslim society to what

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab, the “Godfather” founder of modern Salafi

movement and the fountainhead of its puritanical thought, believed to be its original

principles as typified exemplified by the practice of al-Salaf al-Şalihīn (earliest

generation of Muslims converts to Islam).13 According to the Salafis, the purification

of Islam is a one-way trip stepping back into history, a claim that it provides them

with the necessary support for the legitimization of their ideology. The Salafis

believe that today should be a repetition of yesterday and tomorrow should be similar

to today. This belief dehumanizes humankind, for the mind is not being never

allowed to be used to its full capacity. The context is forced to become is renounced

in favour of a stable text, thus making human beings prisoners of the past (or the

text) with no connection access to the present or the will to shape the future.

Salafism is an ideology that was established in the thirteenth century AC by Ibn

Taymiyyah (1263–1328), as mentioned earlier, and was then developed and enforced

with a violent campaign by Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab (1703–1791) in the

eighteenth century AC. Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab came several centuries after

Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (1292–1350), who had edited the works of his shaykh,

teacher Ibn Taymiyyah. However, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab went even further

in his extremism by adopting doctrines that labelled people with differing views as

unbelievers and polytheists. Even more shocking was his view that all those

individuals who fell falling into these categories were worthy of nothing less than
extermination! Their lives deserved no sancitity, their wealth could be plundered and

their families could be enslaved or killed. The legacy of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd

al-Wahab has not only survived for two centuries, but has also acquired new

international dimensions. Extremists are now distributed over the five continents and

are threatening not only non-Muslims but also the very fabric of the Ummah, which

is being destroyed in the rising sectarian discord by followers of the neo-Salafis.14

In addition, the neo-Salafis do not believe in debate or the use of the intellect,

or, as mentioned earlier, the advance progress of history. This attitude was proved

confirmed by my own futile attempt to discuss with a neo-Salafi his staunch defence

of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab and his murderous actions that contravened what

was written in the Qur’an. The neo-Salafi, who thought that Muhammad ibn ‘Abd

al-Wahab had been right all along, finally provoked my question, of whether the

Qur’an had been revealed to Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah (the Prophet) or

Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahab?!

The increasing dominance of takfir in Salafi thought – together with other

extremist practices factors – is due mainly to the lack of modern Islamic ideas, as

well as the curse of a culture that has not encouraged intellectual inquiry on the one

hand, and has promoted the use of takfiri fatwahs on the other. Although the fatwah

as an expert legal mechanism opinion is generally useful has some public validity, it

has been overused or exploited by traditional Muslim institutions to prevent the

emergence of new ideas that they have considered dangerous and un-Islamic.

One could argue, in this respect, that the issuing of fatwahs by Osama bin

Laden, al-Zarkawi and others, ’sentencing’ both Muslims and non-Muslims to death,

has not come about from in a vacuum. An example is the declaration by al-Azhar
Institution in Egypt in 2004. In a statement to the Press, it accused the dozen scholars

and researchers who participated in the workshop in 2004 on “Islam and Reform”,

held at the Ibn Khaldun Institute for Developmental Studies in Cairo, of being

“outsiders”, that is, outside the orbit of Islam and therefore verging on heresy

(takfir). This declaration put the lives of these participants in danger, for anyone

believing in the holiness of al-Azhar would consider it his religious duty to attack

and, if possible, kill them. The head of al-Azhar made the statement to journalists

because, in his view, although the papers and studies presented at the workshop

supported the belief in Islam and the divinity of the Qur’an, etc., their content was

outside the norm and tradition of the institution.15 It is not my intention to specifically

target Al-Azhar. is not targeted specifically by this study. It is chosen only as an

example to show that most of the Islamic religious institutions will employ the takfir

or tahrim tool to suppress any challenging ideas.

There arises the question: What is the difference between this kind of thinking,

which labels the promoters of any new ideas as “outsiders”, and that of Osama bin

Laden and his supporters? The answer is “Very little, if any.” Shaykh ‘Ali ‘Abd

al-Razzak was condemned as a traitor in the early twentieth century by al-Azhar for

writing a book in which he advocated the separation of religion and state. He was

labelled a heretic and banned from the Institution. The taboo culture (tahrim) and

takfir, which were responsible for the murder of Faraj Foda in the early 1990s, the

attempt to assassinate the eminent writer and Nobel Laureate, the late Najib

Mahfouz, and the expulsion from Egypt of Nasser Hamid Abu Zaid, are just a few

examples of the takfiri tradition put into practice.

 Where is the role scope of free choice, which was granted to humankind by the

Qur’an, in this? How can people be free to choose their beliefs in this world –

although they will have to answer for their actions on the Day of Judgment and face

the consequences in the Hereafter – if they are to be killed by those who arrogate to

themselves assume the Divine authority and mantle of Allah? The individuals who

implement these “fatwahs” must believe in their power and imagine that they can sit

on the “Throne of Allah”, deciding who lives and who dies on this planet. What is

the meaning point of the Day of Judgment if people are forced to have a certain

belief (iman)? believe and are not given the choice or the freedom to decide of their

own free will what to believe in. According to the Qur’an faith, or disbelief, cannot

be based on coercion (ikrah) and the both will be judged refers to punishment in the

Hereafter.

The culture of takfir and tahrim not only prevents the emergence of new ideas

and reinforces intellectual stagnation, but it also provokes promotes violence and

counter-violence, creating tension and resulting in sectarian infighting and the

physical destruction of Muslim society. The Lack of new ideas, reasoning, and a

humane interpretations as well as modern education in the at our classical theological

institutions will, in turn, is bound to reinforce the extremist tahrim and takifer

cultures.

Although the traditional institutions try to preach sincerely try to promote

peaceful coexistence with the Other, their outdated interpretations and the tools of

their thought do not go sufficiently deep to produce ideas and practices that can

tolerate and sustain the a modern social order. Therefore, theological reform,

intellectual revivalism and a non-violent approach are necessary as a basis for social,
economic and political reform. The old-fashioned structures, organizations and

methodologies of the traditional institutions have prevented the development of the

present modern tools or the emergence of new tools, terms and modern conceptual

frameworks. Thus, the understanding and interpretation of medieval Islam, its

worldview in general, has been consolidated in the modern civilisation. The use of

syllogistic tools, such as al-qiyās (analogy – ‫)القيﺎس‬, as explained earlier, is a clear

example. Nor has there has been any further development of al-ijmā’ (consensus –

‫) الجمﺎع‬, which continues to be used in the same manner, style and substance as in the

Middle Ages. Clearly, a tool of this kind can be useful in some respects, though not

in others. Since the nature of this tool means that its use requires intellectual

agreement, it has led to the prevention of a culture of intellectual difference that

produces new ideas or the pursuit of new horizons. Even in those Islamic schools

where the intellect is used to deduce legal evidence in fiqh, it is limited to the actions

of the Predecessors, that is, the use of consensus and its knowledge to arrive at new

legal evidence ruling.

The third cause of extremism and violence is the absence of the human

dimension in Islamic thought and theology. This is due to the culture of a static

understanding of the Text (as read and interpreted by the medieval scholars), which

has prevented the emergence of the role of humankind an appreciation of the march

of humanity and the power of the intellect in for a modern reading of the Text, that

is, for the formulation of practical knowledge and ideas. All knowledge is relative

and it continues to evolve as part of the evolution of humankind, in which a process

though which people are able to work and bring about constructive change. In the
Qur’an, God says: “O man! Verily, you are toiling on towards your Lord, painfully

toiling, but you shall meet Him” (84:6).

Thoughts and ideas, as already pointed out, cannot be weakened or destroyed

unless they are replaced with better alternatives, nor can they be imposed on other

people. The notion that Islamic beliefs can be instilled imposed by force, because

they are from Almighty God, is nothing other than the innovation of Muslims who

have not only lost the comprehensive understanding of the dialectical movement of

history but also their own confidence in Islam itself. On the other hand, however, we

do believe that Islam is eternal and complete, because it is from God, as confirmed in

the Holy Qur’an: “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message, and We will

assuredly guard it [from corruption]” (15:9). If this is so, then why should we feel so

insecure about the destiny of Islam and lose our self-confidence when dealing with

other people to the extent of wishing to imposing Islamic ideas and beliefs by force?

Salafi or traditional Islam rejects the multi-faceted readings (‫)تأوﻳكل متعدﺩ البعﺎﺩ‬,

hence, the development their ‘innovation’ of the concepts, such as the ‘fundamentals

(integrity/safeguard?PM) of the Ummah’ (‫)ثوابككت المككة‬, which are not traditionally

Islamic or Qur’anic. We are not referring here to the Qur’anic or Islamic

fundamentals, in which we, as Muslims, all believe, such as the Shahadah (‫ )شهﺎﺩة‬and

the divinity of the Qur’an. We are referring to the fundamentals (or rather, sayings)

interpretations of earlier scholars, which have become part of the Qur’anic authority

and Sunni fundmentals and which modern scholars are not allowed to revisit or

modify.

These are human-made man-made principals, fundamentals, which, if imposed

will over time , naturally prevent creativity innovation and will result in the static
societies and the role played by individuals, not to mention the further spreading of

senseless violence. Innovation is a human condition that reflects the power of the

mind – given by God – to manage His affairs on earth. Collective imitation means

that there is no the role for the individual is minimised. Innovation and creativity

enhance the interaction between the mind and reality, for the reality produces

problems arising from the social and cultural interrelationship of human beings, to

which the mind responds with solutions. However, the followers of creativity (‘aql,

intellect) are on a collision course with the followers of imitation (naql, tool of trans-

mission). As a result, the balance is disturbed, leading to extremism of one sort or

another, such as “cultural invasion” (‫)الثقﺎفكي الغزو‬. Dialogue is not allowed, and so

violence becomes the supreme stance final arbiter.

The efforts of human beings and their intellect can Human intellect and effort

enable us to move forward and expand the horizon of experienced reality. This is not

to ask Muslims to reject their terms of reference or the past, but to avoid imposing

certain aspects of the past on our modern human society. We are not asking for the

denial of the past or its achievements, but that it be put in its proper perspective. No

human being or nation can live without reference to the past, yet it is not logical to

put the cart before the horse. If we do so, then it is a feeble would be a vain attempt

to escape the reality of the present and travel backwards to the past, thus removing

our natural responsibility for future generations. As the great Chinese saying goes:

“We did not inherit the earth from our parents, but we borrowed it from our

children.”

The fourth cause of extremism is the lack of a free environment, which is

discussed in the next section.

5. Freedom and the Intellect

Human knowledge is relative and it continues to evolve as part of the fruitful

ongoing evolution of humankind, in which people can work and effect constructive

change as a result of a free environment space and constant stream of ideas; in other

words, they can expand the horizon of reality. The mind matures when it works with

others as a collective effort in an environment where the producers of ideas can

interact freely and their contributions grow to maturity. This is the importance of the

group in which awareness is collective. Hence, the need for i.e. developing the

collective intellect.

However, the Qur’an also refers to the individual dimension of humans in

numerous verses with the address: “O human/man” (‫)النسكﺎن أﻳهكﺎ ﻳكﺎ‬. This shapes the

character fosters a sense of independence and individuality that develops individual

awareness (and thus the and individual intellect). Therefore, it is important to have

possess not only collective but also individual awareness in order to develop a moral

approach to stance on life. It is the guarantee of truth and freedom. By definition, if it

becomes a bulwark against violence, it will lead to the use of the intellect in allowing

a dynamic dialogue to pursue its full course and strengthen the concept of freedom,

for dialogue is the master of all stances in a free and expansive space.

Nevertheless, freedom also means entails responsibility, for the alternative

would be anarchy. It is the mind that controls or stipulates the level of responsibility

that is necessary for freedom to exist. The Holy Qur’an assigns leadership and

responsibility to human beings, as described in the following verse: “Stop them, for

they must be asked [for they are responsible]” (37:24). Another verse states that God

has granted human beings the stewardship (khilāfah) of this earth (2:30). He has en-
dowed them with the freedom to use their intellect and judgement in interpreting

changing situations, thus allowing them much room for manoeuvre and tactful

negotiation. This endowment clearly implies responsibility, which, in turn, requires

the existence of freedom. Indeed, irresponsibility is the characteristic of an individual

who is not free. We will not cannot expect prisoners to be responsible. ? This is

exactly what Surah 37 (Surat al- Safat) is referring refers to when it states that human

beings are responsible for their actions, for which they will bear the full con-

sequences on the Day of Judgment. Therefore, if we reject the stewardship granted to

humankind, then there can be no freedom of choice. If we deny the existence of the

freedom of choice, then how can we consider human beings to be responsible for

their actions?

The mind provides the mental space, and freedom, by definition, refers to the

physical space. Where freedom exists, the mental space can use the physical space

and interact with it i.e. the mental space being projected in the actual space and

supplying the necessary conditions for mobility and direction. In other words,

freedom is dynamic, as dynamism represents movement freedom and direction. Just

as static means immobility and directionlessness. Thinking in essence is the shift or

mobility, mentally, from the known to the unknown or from the introduction to

the conclusion…etc. Without this shift or mobility the thinking process will not

take place. It is a mobility dynamic process that of which intellectualization

forms the engine of it.

Here, creativity and lateral thinking are encouraged. In other words, people are

free to meet to analyse and discuss ideas, exchange information, publish their find-

ings and make decisions without being suppressed by the government or religious
institutions. Persuasion based on the intellect reasoning is far more powerful than

emotional or physical force. It is the intellectual challenge, rather than the physical

confrontation, which promotes and strengthens the interaction of the mind and

freedom. As the first former helps in the production of ideas, application of

concepts and so, ..etc to couple the second to leads to the growth and expansion,

whereas while physical confrontation merely leads destruction. Intellect and

freedom are the two quantities that form a single pair an important equation, be

it social, cultural, economical or political equations.

It is the intellect in a free environment that enables human beings to see the

truth in all its numerous facets. One of the most difficult elements tasks of

philosophy is to define what is meant by “truth”, for it is viewed and understood in

so many different and contradictory ways. It is these differences that give truth its

multi-faceted reality. status. The ability to use the mind in a free space environment

in a search for the truth enables a fuller understanding of its meaning or and a better

appreciation of its various facets. It is the diversity of mental faculties that allows

dynamism in thinking and thus defines truth (or any facet of it) as it is perceived.

The old, static ideas and practices of human beings in any space closed

environment resemble present stumbling-blocks for thought or and act as

impediments to the free flow of new ideas. in An expansive space that thus is

essential for the intellect to function effectively. i.e. Closed environment, in

contrast, slows down the mobility process and blocks change so necessary for

the expanding space. An environment which lacks lacking new ideas and the use of

the intellect, and blocks ing the necessary dynamism and mobility of human thought

does not constitute provide any haven for freedom. Instead, it prepares the ground is
being prepared for the use of force, and imposition to thus suppressing the inherent

free nature of the humankind. It is constitutes merely that is, a naked display of

power. However, if history has taught us anything, it is that human beings can never

control power – it is power that controls human beings. Human beings can never

purify sanitize or define limit power – it is power that purifies sanitizes or defines

limits human beings. Human beings cannot change or corrupt power – it is power

that changes or corrupts human beings. Nor can human beings ascend to new heights

without the use of power. These are the weaknesses of humankind. Further the

absence of freedom paves the way for the combination collusion of intellect (in these

sense intellectuals) and with power. This is what we see clearly in many parts of the

Muslim world, i.e. namely, the combination between amalgamation of power and

irresponsibility its remorse check out, between of state and religion its moral

compass, between of politics and culture. The result is oppression the persecution

and savagery. of man to his fellow man. This is what happens today in the state of

the Muslim world today. In the past, this kind of unity was displayed in the

amalgamation of the state and church, and in the distant past, in the fusion of God (or

religion) and power that was the distinguishing trait of as were in the kingdoms of

the Babylonians, Egyptians, and so on. It is the combination of freedom and the use

of the intellect which can, given transparency and application of values and not

simply the existence of tradition and intellectual moral compass, overcome the

weaknesses of humankind. It is stated clearly in the Holy Qur’n. What is basically

meant is that the “word is the best”, in contrast to the use of speech, argument,

reasoning is always better than force. Once the non-violent approach takes root is

consolidated, then the need for force will gradually disappear. When the Qur’an
debates the various aspects of the freedom of choice, it includes the use of the

intellect and responsibility. Human freedom enables human beings to choose how

they will act, and therefore, it determines their fate. It is the intellect that provides the

meaning of responsibility in those actions that shape the fate of human beings.

It is the provision of a free space and the use of the intellect which allows

human thought to escape from the cage of ideological stagnation and range travel

further afield to seek new horizons. An independent and open space enables self-

evaluation and helps produce fresh answers to old questions. It will poses at the same

time pose new questions and beg elicits new answers, that is, freedom will be

projected comes from the intellectual challenge. The Intellect evaluates itself at new

frontiers with the all the reflection of that on freedom and vice versa that is its main

function. It is the use of the rationale reasoning that maintains assures the march of

intellectual progress without the presence of traditionalist obstacles. It is the use of

the intellect that projects demonstrates one’s humanity and independence. As ‘Aql

intellect distinguishes man from animals, so does and independence which manifests

itself in the ability of individual intellects to be different from each another. It is the

intellect that provides the strength framework for dialogue, a human characteristic

that can add to for creativity but which functions only in an environment of freedom

space where one can move freely. The combination of all these factors will enable

the contextualization of the senses, as in the Qur’anic verse: “…every act of hearing,

seeing or feeling [in the heart] will be investigated” (17:36). In other words, it is

contextualization that leads to the conceptualization of the intellectual, social and

cultural aspects of humankind in order to derive a new meaning and understanding of

the Text.
 It is the mind which, and in its ability to understand events in their context,

that prevents mental stagnation and the intellectual dormancy of the intellect and

initiative, a phenomenon which can be clearly seen today in the Muslim world,

resulting in where the death of freedom in is the final outcome. analysis.

6. Fundamentals of the Intellect (Principles of a Science of

Reasoning?) (‫) العقل اصول‬

The conflict in the Muslim world between those demanding the liberation of the

intellect and those demanding the domination of transmission is very old. It was

always an unequal conflict and was settled in the Middle Ages in favour of those who

preferred imitation and the total use reign of transmission. The emergence of uşūl

al-fiqh ( ‫ )الفقﻪ اصول‬was a necessary and creative step by the Muslim Predecessors in

interpreting and transmitting the works of earlier scholars so as to understand new

situations from the position vantage-point of the Shari‘ah. However, the limitations

of the medieval exegesis interpretation and the stagnation of its methodology and

tools stemmed from the neglect of the use of the intellect. To date, the Islamic

scholars have not matched the uşūl al-fiqh with the introduction of an equivalent

science, a science of reasoning or ‘the principles or fundamentals of the intellect’ (

‫)العقل اصول‬.

Fiqh became the centre main stage of Islamic civilization, with the

consequence that, for most of the time, the intellect was pushed to the sidelines. Fiqh

also became static, since the interpretations and studies by the scholars were very

often detached from reality, out of context, and based totally mainly on the

transmission of past knowledge. Fiqh, both as a science (theory) and in as practice,

was based on this backward-looking mode of understanding and interpretation. There

was an absence of the any organic bond between fiqhi reasoning intellect and social

reality, or between intellect and Text, or between human agents beings and their life-

world. environment.

What wee have today in the form of a Muslim intellect of is what the has been

shaped by many centuries of adherence to naql (transmission) has shaped(the rigid

picture) centuries ago and by the claim of its superiority over ‘Aql (Reason or

Intellect). In the West, on the other hand, Descartes’ theory of mind-body duality has

become given rise to with time, the idea of an abstract and mathematical intellect, as

it is well established accepted even by new philosophers, which is devoid of any

possible imagination.

Today, in the era of high technology, the manufactured products has come with

full instructions that require little efforts for thinking of thought and or analysis when

these are operated16. In other word, However, there do exist are somewhat deep

some kind of scientific patterns and technical tools for the use of intellect, for

thinking and analysis to use when one needs to operating these gadgets.

Programmed rules and software steps in dealing with the problems of advanced

equipment are therefore necessary of for the workings of the modern society.17 Also,

in the era of the multimedia, the image that has come to dominate the scene with has

a little share room for the role of the word and the reflection or imagination that is

associated with the reading process. This has produced in the advanced and

manufactured industrial world the “productive” or “manufacturing” intellect that

which uses ready-made tools or patterns of thinking.

Although the above is important, but what is really missing in this is the any

process of a deep ‘critical thinking’ which is able to operate outside the programmed
patterns or pre-arranged frameworks of the human mind. To do this is to hat is

putting put down primary fundamentals for new thinking,18 in addition to the

provision of frameworks and essential format for the new approach. This should be

the basis of what we call the ‘fundamentals of intellect’ (usul al-‘Aql) in order to

make sure ensure that thinking process does not become lazy or a routine process just

like the laziness of the ordinary human behaviour. i.e. to One must train students to

go outside these ready-made thinking tools and programmed arrangements and

fathom the contents subjectively; to explore further the huge capacity (an established

fact) of the human mind, i.e. namely, its way of formulating the question and its the

way of approaching the answer. What governs a debate to produce the required and

useful dialogue that is based on exchange of ideas and cross-fertilization of

experiences and not the dialogue of deaf which produces nothing at the end, needs to

be inquired. A fresh look at the language that reflects the process of thinking and

formulates the mind set is also needed. Is the consecutive manner of linear,

sequential mode of thinking the only logical way? In proving an equation or

identities do we always begin from the start or can we start from the end and work

our way up? There are many other steps or practices to stretch the intellect to its

fullest capacity.

When it comes to with the intellect and thinking we should always move the

goal post. There is no final frontier. It is a A dynamic, evolving and ascending

intellect that evaluates itself every time reaches a specific frontier, ever deeping its

experience and employing its main mechanism, thinking, to arrive at fresh and new

understanding, perception and vision.

 The Our mental faculties enable human beings us to be aware of ourselves

themselves and others. Awareness is the charactistic of the mind and its essential

function is to draw conclusions based on former knowledge and present experience –

or vice versa. Intellectual awareness that develops into creativity emerges from

within the mind to reveal what it contains and what surrounds it. This faculty

deepens the meaning of perception. The mind also has the ability to analyse and

understand concepts such as logic, which need not be confined to the formal aspect,

that is, concerned only with form and not the matter of reasoning.19 Finally, the mind

has the ability to function as an intermediary, for it can view the way in which both

the past and the present are received so as to debate questions such as cause and

effect, metaphysics and so on.

In my view, the new ‘principles of the intellect’ should comprise the following:

• The understanding of the biology of the brain.

• The study of the intellectual sciences (‫) العقل علوﻡ‬, such as philosophy, logic and,

of course, mathematics.

• Keeping up to date with the latest theories of the definition and composition of

the mind, and continuing research in that area.

• An emphasis on science and technology, which, combined with the above

components, can generate knowledge and refine acquired knowledge.

• The need to study the time as a concept and a quantity, and its importance as

factors for the context of the mind.

• The study of astronomy and cosmology to access the most up-to-date view of

the universe.

• The study of the language and its relation to the thinking process.
• The study of the future and the attempt to draw the various possible probable

scenarios.

Future Trends

The absence of a vision of the future is the real symptom of the crisis in of the

intellect of Reason in the Muslim society. The future begins with the present, just as

the role of the present connects to the past. Future trends are simply a collection of

scenarios to be imagined and possibly achieved. Travelling to the future begins with

the present and the knowledge that we are coming from the past. The future is

frequently shaped by our current actions, just as the present was the future for those

who preceded us. Indeed, the present is the result or accumulation of the past. For

example, the earth is inherited with its changes in condition, and the nature and

content of the context is changed according to the Word of God as the Text. We can

lay the foundations for the future as we see it today, using our accumulated

experience and expertise, to avoid practices that lead to our present miserable

situation. Future trends should be one of the main components of the uşūl al-‘aql or

the fundamentals of the intellect.

1
References

Ibrahim al-Haidari, “Islam and Modernity”, Friday Note (12 January 2007), IFID Publications.
2
George Tarabishi, From Revelation to Relapse (Beirut: Dar al-Saqi, 2000), p.89.
3
Ibid.
4
al-Shatibi-Mawafcat-Dar Iha’a al-kuttb al-Arabi, Cairo, Egypt part1 , page 35-65, no history
5
al-Itisam, investigation of Mohammed Rasheed Ridha, New Riadh Bookshop, Riadh, Saudi Arabia, part 1,
page 74-76, no history
6
George Tarabishi, From Revelation to Relapse (Beirut: Dar al-Saqi, 2000), p.89
7
Jabar Asfoor, “Nazat Taqdees al Madhi-Trend of Divinity for the Past”, al-‘Arabi, no.565 (December 2005).
8
Ibid.
9
Ibid
10
Najah Kadhim, “Between Text and History: Re-establishing the Intellectual Link”, Islam 21, no.38 (2005).
11
Ibid
11
Najah Kadhim, al-‘Arab wa Aşr al-‘Awlama [Arabs and the Era of Globalization] (Beirut/Casablanca: al-Dar
al-Bayda’: Tawzi‘ al-Markaz al-Thaqafi al-‘Arabi, 2002), p.24.
12
Ibid.
13
Saeed Shehabi, “Destruction of the Islamic Architectural Heritage in Saudi Arabia: A Wake-up Call”, Friday
Note (19 May 2006), IFID Publications.
14
Ibid.
15
“Islamic and Reform” (Arabic). Workshop held at the Ibn Khaldun Centre for Development Studies (ICDS),
Cairo, 5–6 October 2004, Press Release; al-Watan al-Saudia, no.1471 (9 October 2004); al-Usbu‘ al-Masry,
Egypt (10 October 2004); and many Internet sites.
16. N.kadhim, al Taleem wadd al-Bhath al al-Almi (Education and Scientific Research), Beirut/Casablanca) Arab
Cultural Centre, 2005, P59.
17. Ibid, p60
18.ibid, p61
19
Yahia Mahmoud, “Jadaleet al-Khtab wa al-Waqak- Controversy of the discourse and Reality”, Azzaman,
no.895 (20 April 2001), p.13.

Salaams Br.
Corrections as follows:
Page 5, first column
5th line from the bottom, delete the )
Page 7, first column
9th line from the bottom, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
Second column
6th line from the top Consolidation should read as one word
12th line from the top investigate should read as one word
22th line from the top translation should read as one word
29th line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
32th line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
5th line from the bottom innovation should read as one word
Page 8, Column 1
4th line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
2nd
line from the bottom commentaries should read as one word
Second column
5th line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
14th line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
21st line from the top, there should be just one hyphen at the end of the line after al
24th line immediately after reference(8) thee should be a full stop
4 lines after the above, it should read al-Malaki
Page 9, first column
19th line from the top forcing should read as one word

13th line from the bottom reference should read as one word
Page 10, first column
25th line from the top intellect should read as one word
The very last line delete extra ( and need full stop (f you can)
Second column
17th line from the top cybernetics should read as one word
8th line from the bottom practicality should read as one word

Page 11
8th line from the top, there is an extra coma just before Yet
5th line of the second paragraph the no should not be underlined
Second column
3rd line from the bottom, morrow should read one word

Page 12, second column

3rd line from the bottom of second parag, emergence should read as one word
1st line of 3rd paragraph there should be one coma after the word argue
14th line from the bottom declaration should read as one word
12h line from the bottom holiness should read as one word
5th line from the bottom, ref 15 should be of the same font as the rest.
Page 14, second column
21th line from top and inside the bracket transmission should read as one word
Page 15, first column
10th line of second paragraph the full stop(after the word general) should not be underlined
Page 16, first column
9th line from the top, it should read as” leads to..the growth...”.
10th line from the top should read “merely leads to de-...”
7th line from the bottom, a missing word, “for thought and practice act as...”
Second column
24th line from the top and inside the bracket should read as “(in this sense..).”
Page 17, column 1
12 or 13th line from the bottom, intellectual, should read as one word
Second column
3rd line from the top, demanding should read as one word
2
3