Introduction

For quite some time now, the global Muslim ummah has been experiencing an
increasing sense of discontent. Today, many believe that the times are ripe for a major
step forward in the ongoing movement for Islam’s renewal and revival. A wide variety
of practical efforts in that direction are already underway in Muslim communities
across the globe. Despite their considerable zeal and fervor, however, there is little
agreement regarding the most effective and appropriate course of action. In most cases,
this disagreement or lack of coherence represents a state of confusion caused by a
general failure to identify the modern predicament of religion. Some say that the main
problem is our ignorance of the Islamic tradition; others argue that it is our political
fragmentation and military weakness; still others claim that it is the corruption of our
rulers and the evil designs of the US Empire. Since contemporary Muslims do not agree
on the nature of the fundamental challenge that Islam is facing, it is no surprise that
they differ so much about the practical steps needed to address it. Their efforts,
therefore, are scattered and dispersed in all sorts of directions, producing a flurry of
activity but resulting in little overall progress.

Clearly, no treatment will benefit the sick ummah unless it is based on an accurate
diagnosis of her condition. In his treatise on “Islamic Renaissance,” the Pakistani scholar
and activist Dr. Israr Ahmad attempted to do just that. He sought to identify the
essential nature of the modern predicament of religion—or, what amounts to the same
thing—the most fundamental challenge that Muslims are facing in the modern world.
In writing this treatise, Dr. Israr Ahmad wanted to single out the principal cause of the
widespread Muslim malaise in the face of modernity and of the failure of modern
Islamic movements to alleviate that malaise. In his interpretation of the Muslim
encounter with Western modernity, Dr. Israr Ahmad attempted to address some of the
most critical questions being faced by contemporary Muslims:  Why is it that sincere
and well-organized efforts to face the challenges of modernity have met with abject
failure or with only limited success? What is it that the modern Islamic movements
have neglected to take into account? At exactly what point did these efforts start to go
awry? What do we need to do in order to formulate authentic and effective Islamic
responses to the challenges posed by modernity? Where should we go from here?

In addressing these questions, Dr. Israr Ahmad attempted to take stock of what had
already been accomplished by previous generations of Muslim scholars and activists, to
isolate the inadequacies of the ongoing efforts by contemporary Islamic movements,
and to develop a concrete plan of action regarding what needed to be done in the present
as well as in the foreseeable future. Being cognizant of the various groups,
organizations, and movements that were actively pursuing the goal of Islam’s
“renaissance” in different parts of the Muslim world, he arrived at the conclusion that
something very basic and fundamental was missing in their efforts. He contended that
Muslims scholars and activists ought to disregard the leaves and the branches and,
instead, focus their energies on dealing with what constituted the root of the modern
predicament of religion. He argued that no real progress would be achieved unless
adequate effort and attention were directed at undertaking what he called “the real
task.”

About the Treatise

The purpose of this web-based commentary on “Islamic Renaissance” is to make the
arguments of the original treatise as accessible as possible to a wide range of audience.
In undertaking this project, we have been motivated by our conviction that “Islamic
Renaissance” is a highly significant and rewarding text for several reasons.

First, the contents of “Islamic Renaissance” are as relevant to the global
Muslim ummah today as they were in 1967. The passage of time has failed to make this
treatise either obsolete or redundant. In fact, a case can be made that the events and
trends of the last half-a-century have rendered this treatise increasingly
more relevant, even urgent.

Second, “Islamic Renaissance” is one of the most enduring statements of Dr. Israr
Ahmad’s thought. He wrote this treatise at the relatively young age of thirty-six, and
despite the fact that his thinking on many issues changed during the later part of his
career, he continued to express his confidence in the arguments of
“Islamic Renaissance” until the very end of his life.

Third, “Islamic Renaissance” presents many of Dr. Israr Ahmad’s most important ideas
in a relatively condensed form; a number of ideas that he developed more fully in the
later part of his career can already be found in their initial, germinal stages in the
pages of this treaties.

Finally, “Islamic Renaissance” is probably the most valuable of Dr. Israr Ahmad’s
numerous contributions. While many of his views can be challenged and debated, there
is little doubt that this particular treatise offers some of his most compelling ideas.

About the "Renaissance" of Islam

What is the main theme of “Islamic Renaissance: The Real Task Ahead”? As the title
suggests, the central assumption of this treatise is that there is an urgent need for
bringing about a state of affairs that the author refers to as the “renaissance” of Islam,
while its main argument concerns the practical steps that must be undertaken in order
to prepare the way towards the realization of that goal.

The meaning of the word “renaissance,” however, is not immediately obvious.
The word is considerably ambiguous and potentially misleading. For this reason, we
must begin by clarifying the sense of “renaissance” that Dr. Israr Ahmad seemed to
have mind.
     
Etymologically, the word “renaissance” comes from a Latin word that denotes the
notion of being “born again” (in the religious or spiritual sense). In common usage, the
term “Renaissance” refers to the European experience of “re-discovering” classical
knowledge, beginning in the fourteenth century, that produced a renewed flowering of
science and culture, bringing the so-called “dark ages” to an end. This particular
meaning of “Renaissance” has been dated to 1840, indicating the retrospective nature
of the historical judgment involved in the modern definition of “Renaissance.”

Given the above background, the phrase “Islamic Renaissance” in the title of Dr. Israr
Ahmad's treatise may lead some readers to assume that he is proposing for the Islamic
world something along the lines of what happened in Europe during the fourteenth and
fifteenth centuries. Some readers may also assume that the author is examining the
predicament of Islam and Muslims primarily through the lens of Western self-
understanding. It is important to point out that neither assumption is very helpful in
revealing the author’s intention.

The original phrase in the title is "nash'at-e saniya," which is an Urdu/Persian form of
what is essentially an Arabic phrase. While this has been rendered into English as
“renaissance,” we should note that terms like “rebirth,” “second birth,” and
“resurgence” could also function as more or less valid substitutes. Given the author’s
intellectual background, it would not be too far-fetched to suggest that he may have
derived both the concept and the phrase from the text of the Holy Qur’an, rather than
from European history.

The Arabic word "nash'ah" denotes such phenomena as rising, emerging, being born,
coming into existence, cropping up, proceeding, springing forth, growing, developing,
etc. This word obviously has organic, and even biological, connotations, and this is at
least partly how the Holy Qur’an employs it. The Islamic Scripture repeatedly directs
the reader’s attention to the way in which dead vegetations come to life each spring,
using this otherwise mundane observation as an argument for its claim that the entire
humanity will experience resurrection at the end of time. To drive this point home, the
Holy Qur’an uses a variety of words and expressions; these include "al-nash'at al-ula" to
denote the original creation, and "al-nash'at al-akhira" as well as "al-nash'at al-ukhra" to
refer to the “re-birth” or “re-creation” that God has promised for each individual.

It can be readily seen that even though "nash'at-e saniya" and “renaissance” are
practically synonymous, they do not share the same connotations because the
respective cultural and etymological backgrounds of the two terms are significantly
different. Despite their overlapping meanings, these terms can be seen as representing
essentially independent concepts; consequently, the notion of a “rebirth” of Islam would
have been equally meaningful even if there had been no such thing as the European
Renaissance. It is important to note in this context that the phrase نشأۃِ ثانیہ contains
additional shades of meaning that are not found in the French and English word
“renaissance,” including, for example, the idea of resurgence or rising up.
Furthermore, the usual Arabic term for cultural flowering (which is the basic sense of
“renaissance”) is an altogether different word—“nahdah.” As a modern term, “nahdah”
refers to the revival of literary and cultural activities in Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria
that took place between mid-nineteenth century and World War I. This suggests that
the semantic field of "nash'at-e saniya" is broader than that of either “nahdah” or the
usual, Western sense of “renaissance.”

What did the author himself mean by the phrase "nash'at-e saniya"—rendered here as
“renaissance”? Nowhere in this treatise did he make any attempt to define or explain
the significance of the term “Islamic Renaissance.” Yet, its meaning was very clear in
his own mind. Elsewhere, Dr. Israr Ahmad has identified the rise of Islam during the
life-time of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and the Rightly Guided Caliphs (R) by explicitly
referring to the Qur’anic phrase "al-nash'at al-ula" (“the first birth”). It is evident from
his writings and speeches that he anticipated a second period of Islam’s rise in the near
or distant future. It would have been completely natural, in this context, to identify
this second period of Islam’s rise as a “rebirth” or “renaissance.”

In writing “Islamic Renaissance,” Dr. Israr Ahmad was addressing an audience
that was already familiar with the concept in question and did not need any extensive
explanation. As mentioned above, this treatise first appeared in the monthly Urdu
journal “Mithaq,” and it is relevant to note that the readership of this journal consisted
largely of individuals who were already inspired by the idea of Islam’s revival and
resurgence—particularly under the influence of the Jama‘at-e Islami—but had become
disillusioned with the existing options for working towards that goal. Moreover, the
meaning of a “rebirth” or “resurgence” of Islam was not unknown among the educated
segments of Muslim societies in the late 1960s. This was partly due to the national
liberation movements that were leading to the decolonization of the Islamic world as
well as the international initiatives of that period that were aimed at fostering unity
among Muslim nations, and partly due to the growing influence of revivalist
movements like the Jama‘at-e Islami and al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun. In fact, the discourse
of Islamic revival, rebirth, resurgence, or “renaissance” has been around at least since
the late-nineteenth century. This discourse had originated most forcefully in the
passion of a single individual, i.e., Sayyid Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (1838—1897), and
had subsequently been nurtured by succeeding generations of Muslim modernists,
nationalists, and revivalists throughout the twentieth century.

In the final analysis, however, Dr. Israr Ahmad did not explain the meaning of “Islamic
Renaissance” in this treatise simply because it was not the primary object of his
analysis. Careful readers should be able to discern that the very structure of the title
and the subtitle indicates that the author is directing the reader’s attention towards the
phrase “The Real Task Ahead” and not so much towards “Islamic Renaissance.” The
author is implying that he and his readers already agree that there is an urgent need to
work for a “renaissance” of Islam; the issue that remains unsettled, and must therefore
be addressed, concerns the practical steps that must be undertaken in order to achieve
that goal. In effect, the author wants to explain the “how” rather than the “what” and
the “why.” This means that the treatise, despite its title, is not about the “renaissance”
of Islam per se. It is, rather, about “the real task,” i.e., the prerequisite without which
the goal in question cannot be achieved. As such, this treatise is best seen as a practical
program of action—a manifesto—rather than a work of theory.

For our immediate purposes, therefore, the concept of Islam’s “renaissance” would make
most sense if it is understood with reference to the Qur’anic themes of “new birth” and
“second creation.” It is important to note that this particular usage of the term is a
modern phenomenon, despite its Qur’anic origins. Traditionally, Muslims have
preferred terms like tajdid (renewal), islah (reform), and ihya (revival) to denote
efforts aimed at making the teachings and truths of revelation more relevant in a given
time and place—all three terms being rooted in the canonical texts of Islam, i.e., the Qur’
an and the Hadith. Historically speaking, movements for renewal, reform, and revival
were launched in response to an internal or external challenge that seemed to threaten
the vitality and integrity of Islamic faith and practice, especially some form of
spiritual, moral, and social decline or stagnation. As is well known, such efforts have
been initiated countless times throughout Muslim history and, taken together, they
constitute an unbroken tradition of religious devotion and service.

In this background, the phrase “renaissance” of Islam suggests the need for efforts that
are essentially along the same lines as those of the numerous movements for renewal,
reform, and revival that were undertaken in the past. Yet, the fact remains that this
particular usage is unprecedented in premodern Muslim history; furthermore, the
concept of “rebirth” or “second birth” evokes a far more ambitious goal than what is
generally implied in the three traditional terms. As a result, the “renaissance” of Islam
seems to refer to a conception that includes the essential elements of renewal, reform,
and revival—as traditionally understood—but is also much more comprehensive and
far-reaching, even exceptional, in its scope and implications. Indeed, the argument of
“Islamic Renaissance” suggests that the modern challenges being faced by Islam today
are of an entirely different nature than anything it had faced in the past. This implies
that we must be prepared to take unprecedented steps to meet these challenges, for
unusual problems cannot be addressed by repeating the usual solutions. Since the
challenges are extraordinary, so should be the responses. For this reason, a “rebirth” is
an appropriate metaphor, since it serves to emphasize that renewal, reform, and
revival of an extraordinary kind is needed if Islam is to meet the challenges it is facing
today.

About the Commentary

The commentary being presented here is an attempt to explain the contents of "Islamic
Renaissance" and to expand upon their significance. The need to produce a commentary
like this arose due to a number of factors. To begin with, while the logical structure of
“Islamic Renaissance” is simple and elegant, the text offers certain obstacles that make
its arguments difficult to apprehend. For instance, the text of “Islamic Renaissance” is
very concise with minimum repetition. The author makes no effort to present detailed
evidence, cite other scholars, or to periodically recapitulate his position. Part of the
difficulty stems from the fact that Dr. Israr Ahmad was more of an orator by
temperament than a writer, let alone an academician. As such, he was not used to
spelling out his thoughts on paper in the thorough and detailed manner that we expect
from professional scholars. Instead, much of his written legacy is in the form of brief but
highly dense essays that many lay readers find uninviting and even impenetrable. To
compensate for the brevity and density of his essays, Dr. Israr Ahmad would often
elaborate upon his own writings in his widely-attended lectures and public
presentations. He was an accomplished performer of the oral discourse and a virtuoso in
the art of didactic speech. As a result, the numerous audio and video recordings of his
speeches are significantly easier to follow, and much more popular, than his relatively
few writings. In effect, the full import of his essays remains relatively difficult to grasp
without the help of his own elaborations.

Like Dr. Israr Ahmad's other writings, the brevity and compactness of “Islamic
Renaissance” present a serious challenge to readers who are not already familiar with
his thought. The sympathetic reader finds it difficult to fully appreciate his arguments
without repeated analytical readings of the text; such readings require a high level of
interpretive skill that many of them do not possess. On the other hand, the critical
reader is likely to object that the sketchy evidence given in the text does not support the
author’s bold contentions. Since Dr. Israr Ahmad attempts to make an argument in this
treatise that virtually spans the globe and covers five hundred years of history, the
terseness of his writing style forces him to generalize and oversimplify in a way that is
unacceptable in contemporary scholarship. For instance, his critique of what he calls
“Western thought” lacks supporting evidence; his understanding of the motives of
colonial policies is based almost entirely on the case of the British in India; he discusses
several varieties of Muslim initiatives and movements but does not provide detailed
evidence or explain exactly how he arrived at his judgments. From an academic
viewpoint, perhaps the most significant weakness of this treatise is the author’s failure
to consider alternative viewpoints and possible objections to his own contentions. The
resulting lack of nuance makes the treatise an easy target for criticism, which, in turn,
renders the value of his contribution even less likely to be appreciated.

In this context, our commentary is meant to provide some of the tools necessary for
facilitating the readers’ full engagement with the author’s arguments. Specifically, the
commentary is intended to accomplish the following:  (1) to interpret the author’s
meaning in a reader-friendly style that is more suitable for a broad range of audience;
(2) to place some of his propositions in their respective socio-historical contexts; (3) to
introduce certain nuances and qualifications in order to refine and clarify the author’s
meaning; (4) to add certain details and other references for a deeper and richer
appreciation of his arguments; (5) to address some of the questions and criticisms that
may arise due to the brevity of the original text; and (6) to augment the author’s
presentation by citing relevant developments that have taken place since the treatise
was first published.

It is important to clarify that our commentary is not merely exegetical. We have
undertaken not only to explain Dr. Israr Ahmad's intended meanings, but to also extend
their significance and implications beyond the relatively limited framework of his
treatise. In other words, we did not restrict the scope of the commentary to an
explanation of the author’s own thinking, but, in addition to that basic task, we have
also attempted to elucidate the subject matter from a number of additional perspectives
that the author did not take into account. Consequently, this commentary should be
seen as an “interpretation” that reflects not only the mind of the original author but
also, to a significant degree, the mind of the commentator. Whether our attempt at
expanding the scope of the discussion is justified, and to what extent, is for the readers to
decide.

While the commentary adds some detail and nuance to the original text, it is not
intended to substitute first-hand research. Readers should not take the interpretation
given here as the absolute final word on the significance and implications of
the treatise, but only as a useful starting point. Indeed, “Islamic Renaissance” is a text
that does not present itself as the last word on the topic; instead, it invites the readers—
both explicitly and implicitly—to embark upon a life-long journey of inquiry and
appropriate action. We encourage the readers to use our interpretation of “Islamic
Renaissance” as a roadmap that may help them navigate an unfamiliar terrain, and
not as a final destination to be reached.
Islamic Renaissance
The Real Task Ahead