Search

This chapter provides an overview of Islam's historical experiences in interreligious dialogue through highlights of its 'golden ages' in this particular domain of multicultural societal living within its civilization. It examines these golden ages in interreligious dialogue in three notable geo-cultural and historical settings--Muslim-ruled Spain, Chinese Islam in Ming-ruled China, and Indian Islam under Mughal rule--following an introductory discussion of Muslim exemplary treatment of non-Muslims during the rule of the first four Caliphs succeeding the Prophet Muhammad. On the basis of this discussion the author concludes that it is generally the case that interreligious dialogue and cooperation presents itself as a necessary contributory factor of the Golden Age of all religiously pluralistic societies, especially of Islamic civilization.

The main aim of this article is to discuss the meaning and characteristics of Islamic civilisation and its global presence, particularly in the field of knowledge culture. Since both terms have been contested in contemporary scholarship to the point of their critics denying epistemic legitimacy to the concept of Islamic civilisation itself, the article devotes a lengthy discussion to defending its continuing validity and legitimacy. The most serious challenge comes from the concept of world-system developed by a number of Western thinkers, especially Immanuel Wallerstein. The article also explains the meaning of a civilisation’s global presence, which it argues exists at three different levels, namely territorial presence, cultural presence, and intellectual-spiritual presence. It argues that in the case of Islamic civilisation, its global presence exists at all the three levels. Since knowledge culture is presented as the very heart of Islamic civilisation given the fact that Islam claims to be the religion of knowledge, the article provides an introductory discussion of some important aspects of knowledge culture originating from Islamic civilisation that have become accepted through the West as integral parts of our common modern civilisation. The article concludes with suggestions for further studies and research on the theme of Islamic civilisation’s global presence but from new perspectives in the light of new realities in intercultural and inter-civilisational relations.

Ovaj rad predstavlja sintetičku studiju o filozofskim stajalištima al-Farabija i Ibn Halduna iz klasičnog islama te Arnolda Toynbeeja i Samuela Huntingtona s modernog Zapada o temi znanosti o civilizaciji. Na temelju aristotelovske ideje o istinskoj znanosti, ovaj članak dokazuje da su al-Farabi i Ibn Haldun bili istinski utemeljitelji znanosti o civilizaciji. Reformuliranjem tema koje tvore predmet ove znanosti, koju je definirao al-Farabi, Ibn Haldun ju je odjednom učinio razumljivijom i izumio je nekoliko novih znanosti kao njezinih ogranaka. Unutar epistemološkog okvira Ibn Haldunove nove znanosti o civilizaciji, Toynbee se poduhvatio istraživanja komparativne civilizacije, što tek treba zadobiti status znanosti. Nadalje se pokazuje da bi Huntingtonov mogući doprinos znanosti o civilizaciji mogao biti u konceptu politike civilizacije. U ovom stoljeću rafiniranija znanost o civilizaciji može nastati samo ako se sintetiziraju civilizacijska stajališta ovih i drugih mislitelja., This article presents a synthetic study of the philosophical views of al-Farabi and Ibn Khaldun from classical Islam and Arnold Toynbee and Samuel Huntington from the modern West on the subject of civilizational science. On the basis of the Aristotelian idea of a true science, this article argues that al-Farabi and Ibn Khaldun were the real founders of civilizational science. Through his reformulation of the topics constituting the subject matter of this science as first defined by al-Farabi, Ibn Khaldun immediately made the science more comprehensive and created several new sciences as its branches. Within the epistemological framework of Ibn Khaldun’s new civilizational science, Toynbee developed the study of comparative civilization, which is yet to attain its true status as a science. It is further argued that Huntington’s possible contribution to civilizational science would be through the concept of politics of civilization. A more refined civilizational science may only emerge in this century if the civilizational views of these thinkers and others are to be synthesized., Cet article présente une étude synthétique des perspectives philosophiques d’al-Farabi et d’Ibn Khaldoun issues de l’islam classique, et celles de Arnold Toynbee et de Samuel Huntington de l’Occident moderne. En se basant sur les idées aristotéliciennes de la science vraie, cette article démontre que al-Farabi et Ibn Khaldoun ont été les véritables fondateurs de la science de la civilisation. En reformulant les thèmes qui constituent l’objet de cette science définie par al-Farabi, Ibn Khaldoun l’a aussitôt rendue plus compréhensible et a créé de nombreuses sciences nouvelles qui consistent en des ramifications de cette science. Dans le cadre de la nouvelle science de la civilisation d’Ibn Khaldoun, Toynbee développe une étude comparée des civilisations, recherche qui doit encore atteindre le statut de science. Plus loin, il est montré que l’éventuelle contribution de Huntington aux sciences des civilisations pourrait se situer dans le concept de la politique des civilisations. Une science de la civilisation plus recherchée pourrait émerger au cours de ce siècle à la condition de synthétiser les diverses perspectives sur la civilisation de chacun des auteurs., Dieser Artikel präsentiert eine synthetische Studie der philosophischen Ansichten von al-Farabi und Ibn Chaldun aus dem klassischen Islam sowie von Arnold Toynbee und Samuel Huntington aus dem modernen Westen zum Thema Zivilisationswissenschaft. Auf der Grundlage der aristo telischen Idee einer wahren Wissenschaft vertritt dieser Artikel die Ansicht, dass al-Farabi und Ibn Chaldun die eigentlichen Gründer der Zivilisationswissenschaft waren. Durch seine Neu formulierung der Themen, die den Gegenstand dieser Wissenschaft bilden, wie sie zuerst von al-Farabi definiert wurde, machte Ibn Chaldun sie abrupt umfassender und schuf mehrere neue Wissenschaften als ihre Zweige. Innerhalb des epistemologischen Rahmens von Ibn Chalduns neuer Zivilisationswissenschaft trieb Toynbee die Erforschung der komparativen Zivilisation voran, die ihren wahren Status als Wissenschaft noch zu erlangen hat. Es wird weiterhin argu mentiert, Huntingtons möglicher Beitrag zur Zivilisationswissenschaft würde in dem Konzept der Zivilisationspolitik liegen. Eine raffiniertere Zivilisationswissenschaft könnte sich in diesem Jahrhundert nur dann herauskristallisieren, wenn die zivilisatorischen Blickwinkel dieser und anderer Denker synthetisiert werden.

The author of this article argues that - from the point of view of the ideals of human civilisation as set forth by the Qur'an - modern civilisation, which is largely of Western inspiration and making, has undergone a progressive inner decay while displaying marvels of scientific and technological achievements unmatched in human history. He sees this decay as referring to human degradation or dehumanisation. In order to address his concern, he argues for a restoration of a previously lost unity, balance and equilibrium to contemporary civilisation. He argues that Islam’s main contribution to a possible solution would be an approach based on maqasid al-shari'ah. He concludes by stating that an Islamic agenda of civilisational renewal (al-tajdid al-hadari) is ultimately congruent with civilisational renewal for humanity as a whole.

This article is intended to comment on the civilisational history of Islam in Southeast Asia. The history is explained and accounted for in terms of the three major waves of globalisation that have impacted the region since the arrival of Islam as early as the eleventh century. The first wave, itself initiated and dominated by Islam, was responsible for the introduction and establishment of Islam in the region to the point of becoming its most dominant civilisation. The expansion of Islam and its civilisation was in progress when the second wave hit the shores of the Malay-Indonesian Archipelago with the arrival of the Portuguese and other Western powers resulting in the colonisation of the region. The third wave, an American-dominated one, manifests itself in the post-colonial period which witnesses Southeast Asian Islam reasserting itself in various domains of public life. The author sees Southeast Asian Islam as the historical product of centuries-long civilisational encounters with the pre-Islamic indigenous cultures and civilisations and later between ‘Malay-Indonesian Islam’ and the newly arriving religions and cultures brought by both the colonial and post-colonial West, arguing that Islam in the region has been significantly impacted by each of the three waves.

This article seeks to present a counter view of the Western critique of contemporary Islam with specific reference to its treatment of the problem of diversity and pluralism. The prevailing Western view of Islam’s experience of diversity and pluralism is that it has failed to positively respond to this important challenge of the modern world. The basic belief underlying this view is that Islam is incompatible with modernity, political democracy, and cultural diversity and pluralism, which are generally considered as the hallmarks of modern Western civilisation. According to this view, only a radically reformed Islam can come to terms with these Western achievements. The Western critique of contemporary Islam is discussed in the context of a post-September 11 world for the important reason that it was the September 11 tragedy that generated a new phase of Western interest in Islam and fresh calls for its reforms. An influential voice in this Western critique is Bernard Lewis who, in his decades of scholarship on Islam, has consistently argued for an Islamic reformation. This article seeks to provide a critical response to the Lewisian idea of Islamic reformation, especially concerning the issue of diversity and pluralism. It argues that a new Islamic understanding of diversity and pluralism is urgently needed in this century, but this can only come about through an authentic tajdid (renewal) that offers fresh interpretations of the religion without destroying its original soul, spirit and character.