Posted on Facebook on 6 June, 2016 Any attempt at understanding the social, religious or political behavior of human groups anywhere ultimately demands a conceptual framework which can help in defining the identities of such groups in terms of religion and/or culture. It is a historical fact that all contemporary societies have had religion, in some form or other, in the distant or recent past, as one of the basic constituents of their cultures. This is especially true of Muslim groups. Islam has been the most important factor in the making wrong to state that the centre of cultural gravity of Muslims is Islam. Therefore, in order to determine the identity of Muslim groups for the sake of understanding their multi-dimensional problems and aspects, it is essential to focus our attention on the theme of culture. Among the Muslim philosophers who have discussed the theme of culture, Ibn Khaldun and Muhammad Iqbal are most important. They both, from a philosophic point of view, have studied the basic values of “Islamic culture”. Iqbal has selected Ibn Khaldun as a model for the interpretation of “Muslim culture”. The basic ideas underlying the spirit of “Muslim culture”, according to Ibn Khaldun, are two: first, the unity of human origin and, second, the concept of life as a continuous movement in time. The process of history is not a determined one but a continuous creative movement. Iqbal comments that only a Muslim representing the cultural movement of Islam like Ibn Khaldun could have treated history as a continuous collective movement. Accepting this, Iqbal brings up Islamic faith as the source of the values of “Muslim culture”. (Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam, Chap. The Spirit of Muslim Culture) He believes that the attitude of Islam towards Time and Space is crucial in order to appreciate the spirit of Muslim culture. Stating that the spirit of Islam is essentially anti-classical, he rejects the static view of the universe which is not ‘being’ but ‘becoming’. It concentrates on the concrete and the finite. Secondly, the Qur’anic concept of the finality of prophet-hood implies that now all sources of knowledge, besides the higher mysticism, are open to man for the understanding of his outer experience through the operation of human reason. Thus, ‘Anfus’ and ‘Aafaaq’, both, are valid sources of knowledge. It would be observed that Iqbal’s interpretation of culture is more philosophical than social. He uses the term ‘Muslim culture’ in his discussion of ‘Islamic culture’. However, it is to be noted that his criticism of Spengler’s concept of culture as a specific organism, having no room for contact with the past and contemporary cultures, shows that Iqbal believes that cultures are open to external influences. If this is so, then, the question arises as to how to reconcile Iqbal’s concept of ‘Muslim Culture’ as having a distinct personality with his own concept of Muslim culture as a culture open to influences of other cultures. This question is of crucial importance in order to understand the crisis of ‘Muslim culture’ in the contemporary age. In what sense is Muslim culture unique and, at the same time, open to the impact of other cultures? In the context of Iqbal, is it possible to establish any relationship between these two theories of cultures, that is, (i) culture is always based on faith, and, (ii) culture is not essentially faith-based but is a territorial phenomenon? It is possible: Islam is a religious faith; it is also a culture. Are these two different from each other? Before answering this question, let us answer another question: is there anything like Indonesian culture, Arab culture, Turkish culture or Iranian culture? Such cultures do exist. What is it which distinguishes an Indonesian from an Arab Muslim? It is in this context that the term “Muslim culture” becomes meaningful. In fact, it is more relevant than the term “Islamic culture”——if the purpose is to understand the identities of Muslim groups living in various regions of the world. Adopting the term “Muslim culture” does not imply abandoning the term “Islamic culture”. It rather helps in establishing a relationship between the two. Let us go back to our earlier question: how to reconcile the faith-based character of culture with that of territory-based character of a culture? The Islamic/Muslim-culture duality can be explained with a diagram consisting of four concentric circles. The inner circle named ‘Islamic Culture’ is formed by cultural values rooted in certain Islamic beliefs and concepts. The outer circle named “Muslim Culture” is formed round the ‘Islamic Culture’ by certain cultural features and values absorbed from both the ‘Regional Culture’ of an area in which a particular Muslim group exists. ‘Islamic Faith’ and ‘Islamic Culture’ are of universal nature and do not change in wherever and whatever be the territory, while the nature of ‘Muslim Culture’ differs from region to region. Even in a country with a wide geographical range (like India or Indonesia), with a multiplicity of cultural streams, ‘Muslim Culture’ may exhibit different cultural traits in different regions. Thus, ‘Muslim Culture’ assumes a plural and not a singular character. In areas and countries of predominantly Muslim character, the Muslim culture circle expands and tends to covers the territorial cultural zone as well, —as in Iran, the Arab world or Turkey. In areas where they are in strong minorities, ‘Muslim Culture’ has to maintain itself within the ‘Regional Culture’ areas—as in India. The values constituting the universal ‘Islamic Culture’ can be summed up as follows: Philosophical:

1. A Dynamic concept of space 2. Unity of human origin 3. Concept of life as a continuous movement in Time 4. Use of all sources of knowledge to understand outer experience— (product of the idea of prophet-hood)

Social:

1. Social equality 2. Religious brotherhood (institutionalized in Ummah) 3. Mutual help (institutionalized in Zakaat, Sadaqah, Baitual Maal, etc.) 4. Hospitality

Psychological:

1. Rejection of any authority other than Allah—Tauhid 2. Tendency towards independent way of life 3. Sense of superiority based on superiority of their faith and on the past glories 4. Non-attachment to worldly wealth 5. Modesty 6. Disciplined sex-relationship and behavior 7. Cleanliness (Tahaarat)

The Muslim Culture, essentially social in character, is shaped by certain modes of thought and behavior, adopted from the cultural milieu in which a particular Muslim cultural group is located. This adoption takes place, generally, in the following areas:

1. Dress 2. Language and Literature 3. Customs—marriage, birth and death ceremonies, etc. 4. Social and religious festivals 5. Saint-worship 6. Ideas of fatalism

The frontiers of ‘Muslim Culture’ are not rigid. They are quite flexible. They contract and expand under pressure from, both, the inner ‘Islamic Culture’ circle or the outer ‘Regional Culture’ area. ‘Muslim Culture ‘Circle may expand outward by absorbing cultural values and influences of the regional culture with or without reducing the content of Islamic Culture Circle. If the pressure of regional culture is enormous over a long span of time, there is a possibility of wide outward expansion of Muslim Culture Circle into regional cultural area —as has happened in India. The size of ‘Muslim Culture’ Circle or the process of its inner or outward expansion depends on several factors. These revolve round the historical, intellectual and social preparedness of the Muslim group in the particular area. Some of important factors are: (i) the extent of Muslim urbanization, (ii) literacy, (iii) location of educational institutions in the area, (iv) economic development level, (v) political strength in the area, (vi) strength of the cultural milieu of the region, (vii) role of Muslim intellectuals and the religious elite. This theoretical framework can be conveniently applied to different stages of Muslim civilization. For instance, during the era of the Messenger, the circles of Islamic and Muslim cultures overlapped. With the political expansion of Islam in Iran, Palestine and Egypt, during the period of early Caliphate and the Umayyads, the Circle of Muslim Culture expanded rapidly. During the Abbasid period, it acquired a definite shape absorbing the Iranian cultural values and cultures in the areas of political administration, literature and social norms and customs. Muslim groups in South-east Asia absorbed various features of Hindu culture flourishing in those lands. The ‘Muslim Culture’ circles functioning in various countries and regio0ns of even one country (like India) sometimes exhibit concepts and attitudes which appear to be in conflict with the values of Islamic Culture and are labeled as bid‘aat. Hence, they give rise to a sustained conflict between the two. Recent history has exerted great strain on Muslim Culture through Regional/Western cultural values and their demands. Muslim thinkers like Jamaluddin al-Afghani, Shaikh Muhammad ‘Abduh, Syed Ahmad Khan, Ameer Ali and Zia Gok Alp attempted at devising ways and means to resolve this problem. On the other hand, the traditional Muslim elite tended just to ignore it. This produced two approaches: first, a rejection of all external or non- traditional elements, ignoring the strength and urgency inherent in these external/modern values, and, second, an acceptance of these values which sometimes make inroads into the Islamic value system. Both these approaches were theoretical and non-functional. They failed to resolve this conflict. A case in point is that of Muslim dominated Pakistan. Created out of a thousand-year cultural history has posed to the Pakistani intellectual the question of the identity of Pakistani culture, producing two points of view. According to one, the roots of Pakistan culture are in Islam and in the West-Asian history. The other point of view treats culture as a regional growth and locates the roots of Pakistan culture, besides Islam, in the history and civilization of the various geographical regions of Pakistan, itself. A similar struggle for the preservation of “Islamic culture” vis-à-vis the onslaught of Western culture and its accompanying institutions is going on in almost all Muslim lands. In order to determine the nature of this conflict a distinction between ‘Islamic” and “Muslim” cultures is necessary, as explained above. The real conflict appears to exist not between the philosophical content of Islamic culture,– which, as Iqbal puts it, is anti-classical—- and the regional/western cultures, but between the regional/western norms and “Muslim cultures”; and unless the values of “Islamic Culture” are concretized, the negative or positive value of regional/western cultural cannot be ascertained. In this context, the strength and pressures of the regional/western cultural values and institutions cannot be ignored. It has been observed that the theoreticians, in their zeal to protect their traditional or modern interpretations of Islamic culture, have ignored the actual situations faced by Muslim cultures. Development of Muslim cultures continued independent of the discourse on cultural theories among modern Muslim thinkers. Hence there is urgent need for a re-examination of the concept of culture. Finally, as the above analysis indicates, it is to be realized that the term ‘Islamic Culture’ is not meaningful; it has nothing to do with culture as we understand it. More appropriately, it should be described as “Islamic ethical values” based on certain beliefs in the Qur‘an.