Maqasidization of Knowledge:
The Next Evolution
From Islamization to Integration to Maqasidization
SOiM - SAHYA'A OTHMAN ISLAMIC MANAGEMENT CENTER
OCCASIONAL PAPERS SERIES 1447.3
Summary
2.1 Introduction: The Search for a Framework
In the last half-century,
Muslim scholars have wrestled with the question: how can Islam guide modern
knowledge? The challenge is immense. On one side lies the vast legacy of
the Islamic intellectual tradition; on the other, the dominance of Western
secular sciences. The gap between the two has produced intellectual
fragmentation, confusion, and dependency in Muslim societies.
Three responses have
emerged across the modern period: the Islamization of Knowledge, the Integration of Knowledge, and now, the Maqasidization of Knowledge. Each represents
a stage in the intellectual journey of Muslim thought.
This chapter traces these
movements, showing their origins, strengths, and limitations — and finally
argues why Maqasidization is the necessary evolution for today’s age.
The chart in Figure 2.1
illustrates the historical progression of intellectual approaches within the
Muslim scholarly world. Beginning with the movement for Islamization of
Knowledge in the 1970s–1980s, it transitioned to the paradigm of Integration in
the 1990s–2010s, which sought to harmonise Islamic and conventional sciences. It
is proposed that today, the framework of
Maqasidization, which is built on these efforts by rooting knowledge in the
higher objectives of Shariah (maqasid), ensures that knowledge is directed
toward action, justice, and mercy for humanity.
Figure
2.1: Timeline of Approaches: Historical, Progression Approaches within Muslim Scholars
2.2 Islamization of Knowledge: The Early Response
Origins and Vision
The call for Islamization
of Knowledge (IOK) arose in the late 1970s and early 1980s, led by scholars
such as Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas (Malaysia) and Ismail Raji
al-Faruqi (USA). Their concern was that secular Western sciences, taught in
Muslim universities, were alien to Islamic values and undermined Muslim
identity.
- Al-Attas emphasised ta’dib (disciplining the soul through education), seeking to “dewesternize” knowledge and rebuild it upon tawhid.
- Al-Faruqi called for restructuring disciplines so that their foundations were rooted in the Qur’an and Sunnah. His Islamization of Knowledge project (IIIT, USA) sought to produce new textbooks in all fields — sociology, economics, psychology — from an Islamic worldview.
Achievements
- Sparked global awareness of the problem
of secular knowledge.
- Inspired institutions such as IIUM
(Malaysia) and IIIT.
- Produced early theoretical works and
conferences.
Limitations
- Overly abstract: Calls to “Islamize” disciplines often lacked
concrete methodology.
- Resource-heavy: The vision of rewriting every textbook in
every discipline was impractical.
- Fragmented impact: After four decades, Islamization projects
remain limited to academic discussions, with less practical transformation
of societies.
Table 2.1 summarises
the strengths and weaknesses of the Islamization of Knowledge movement, which
gained momentum in the 1970s–1980s. While it revived Islam’s centrality in
modern scholarship and inspired academic reforms, it often remained abstract,
overly critical of Western knowledge, and failed to translate effectively into
global academic or policy influence. These limitations explain the eventual
move toward Integration and later Maqasidization as more practical paradigms.
Table 2.1: Strengths
& Weaknesses of Islamization of Knowledge
|
Strengths |
Weaknesses |
|
Reasserted Islam’s relevance in modern
knowledge |
Abstract focus, limited practical application |
|
Revived tawhid (unity of knowledge) as a
guiding principle |
Overly critical of Western knowledge without
alternatives |
|
Challenged secular dominance in academia |
Insufficient institutional follow-through |
|
Motivated Muslim scholars to rethink curricula |
Failed to influence global academia |
|
Sparked
institutions like IIIT and academic reforms |
Did not connect
strongly to policy or action |
Chart 2: Islamization
of Knowledge reinvigorated Islamic scholarship but lacked the practical,
action-oriented framework necessary for sustainable transformation. Its
strengths and weaknesses highlight why later paradigms emerged.
2.3 Integration of Knowledge: The Second Phase
Origins
By the 1990s and 2000s,
many Muslim scholars recognised the difficulties of Islamization. A new
approach emerged: Integration of Knowledge (IOK2). This was promoted by
scholars like Hashim Kamali and institutions such as the International
Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) and the International Institute of
Islamic Thought (IIIT).
Vision
Integration sought not to
“Islamize” Western sciences but to bridge Islamic and secular knowledge
systems. The aim was a holistic curriculum where Qur’anic ethics and modern
sciences complemented each other.
Achievements
- Produced textbooks that integrate
Islamic values with modern knowledge.
- Advanced fields like Islamic finance,
bioethics, and education.
- Attracted global attention (e.g., IIIT
conferences, IIUM curriculum models).
Limitations
- Conceptual vagueness: Integration often remained a slogan rather
than a concrete framework.
- Surface-level overlap: In some cases, Islamic “add-ons” were placed
onto secular disciplines without restructuring the underlying worldview.
- Dependence on Western categories: Integration risked validating secular
epistemology instead of offering an independent Islamic structure.
The following Table 2.2 provides a clear
overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the Integration of Knowledge
paradigm. Developed mainly in the 1990s–2010s, this approach sought to
harmonise Islamic knowledge with modern sciences.
While it advanced the conversation beyond
Islamization and achieved some institutional adoption, it often lacked
clarity, remained too academic, and struggled to deliver actionable outcomes in
policy or practice.
Table 2.2: Strengths
& Weaknesses of Integration of Knowledge
|
Strengths |
Weaknesses |
|
Encouraged
dialogue between Islamic and modern sciences |
Concept
remained vague, lacking operational clarity |
|
Expanded
scope beyond abstract critique toward synthesis |
More
theoretical than practical; limited impact on policy |
|
Institutional
support by IIIT and universities |
Overemphasis
on reconciling Western and Islamic categories without transformation |
|
Helped
develop curricula that included both Islamic and conventional perspectives |
Implementation
varied across institutions, with inconsistent success |
|
Promoted
global academic discourse on integration |
Failed
to inspire long-term reforms comparable to Islamic finance or halal
industries |
As could be seen from Table 2.2 the Integration
of Knowledge paradigm moved the debate forward but struggled with clarity and
practical impact. It paved the way for Maqasidization, which offers a
structured, action-oriented framework.
2.4 Maqasidization of Knowledge: The Next Evolution
Origins
In the 2010s and beyond,
scholars began shifting towards maqasid al-Shariah as a unifying
framework for guiding knowledge. Instead of rewriting disciplines
(Islamization) or merely integrating (Integration), Maqasidization
grounds knowledge in the five higher objectives of Shariah:
1.
Hifz
al-Dīn (Religion/Values)
2.
Hifz
al-Nafs (Life)
3.
Hifz
al-‘Aql (Intellect)
4.
Hifz
al-Nasl (Progeny/Future Generations)
5.
Hifz
al-Māl (Wealth/Resources)
Why Maqasidization?
- Structured & Simple: Five objectives are easier to apply than
rewriting entire disciplines.
- Action-Oriented: Maqasid link knowledge to real-world
application — policy, economy, governance.
- Universal: Values resonate beyond Muslims (justice,
dignity, sustainability).
- Living System: Maqasid are timeless, adaptable to new
challenges (AI, climate change, globalisation).
Achievements So Far
- In Islamic finance, maqasid have guided
policies that serve both Muslims and non-Muslims.
- In the halal industry, maqasid ensured
safety, fairness, and trust, accepted globally.
- In education, maqasid frameworks (such
as Cyber Education & HI-BRILLIANCE) are emerging as models for
cognitive reform.
2.5 Comparative Overview
Table 2.3 compares the three major paradigms in contemporary Muslim
intellectual history — Islamization of Knowledge (1970s–1980s), Integration of
Knowledge (1990s–2010s), and Maqasidization (2020s+). It highlights their
respective strengths and weaknesses, showing the progression from revivalist
critique to academic harmonisation, and finally to a structured,
action-oriented framework rooted in the higher objectives of Shariah.
Table
2.3: Comparative Overview of The Strengths and Weaknesses of Islamization,
Integration and Maqasidization.
|
Islamization
of Knowledge (1970s–1980s) |
Integration
of Knowledge (1990s–2010s) |
Maqasidization
(2020s+) |
|
Strengths:
Reasserted Islam’s relevance in modern knowledge |
Strengths:
Encouraged dialogue between Islamic and modern sciences |
Strengths:
Provides a clear, structured framework rooted in maqasid |
|
Strengths:
Revived tawhid (unity of knowledge) as guiding principle |
Strengths:
Expanded scope beyond critique toward synthesis |
Strengths:
Directly links knowledge to action, justice, and well-being |
|
Weaknesses:
Abstract focus, limited practical application |
Weaknesses:
Concept remained vague, lacking operational clarity |
Strengths:
Universally relevant, engaging Muslims and non-Muslims |
|
Weaknesses:
Failed to influence global academia |
Weaknesses:
More theoretical than practical; limited policy impact |
Weaknesses:
Emerging paradigm; requires institutional adoption |
Further Comparative
analysis shows how Muslim scholarship evolved from Islamization (revivalist but
abstract), to Integration (dialogue-focused but vague), and now to
Maqasidization (structured, action-oriented, and globally applicable).
Table 2. 4.: Comparative
Analysis Shows Maqasidization is more Structured, Action Oriented &
Globally Applicable
|
Dimension |
Islamization (1970s–1980s) |
Integration (1990s–2010s) |
Maqasidization (2020s+) |
|
Focus |
Re-Islamize disciplines |
Bridge Islamic & secular |
Grounded in the maqasid objectives |
|
Method |
Rewrite textbooks |
Integrate curricula |
Apply the maqasid filter to knowledge |
|
Strength |
Raised awareness |
Practical overlap |
Action-oriented, structured |
|
Weakness |
Impractical, abstract |
Surface-level, vague |
Still developing, needs institutional adoption |
|
Universality |
Muslim-focused |
Broader but fragmented |
Universal appeal (justice, dignity) |
2.5.1 How Maqasidization
Works
The following simple Flow Diagram
A illustrates the process of Maqasidization. Knowledge, when passed through the
Maqasid Filter, is transformed into ethical action that ultimately leads to
social justice and wellbeing.
Flow
Diagram A: The Process of Maqasidization
Flow Diagram B: The Process of How Knowledge and Action being
Filtered by Maqsid Al Shariah
Further, the Flow Diagram B shows
the Maqasidization process, which demonstrates how knowledge is filtered through the
objectives of Shariah, ensuring ethical implementation and resulting in social
justice, in all human activities.
2.5.2 Comparative
Flowcharts: How Maqasidization Bridges Knowledge and Action
The first Flow Diagram C shows
the general process of bridging knowledge to action through ethics, while the
second Flow Diagram D highlights the unique role of the Maqasid Filter in
transforming knowledge in accordance with Shariah. Maqasidization introduces
the maqasid filter as a guiding framework to ensure that action leads to true
justice and mercy in accordance with Maqasid Al Shariah
Flow Diagram C : General
Flow
Flow Diagram D: Maqasidization Flow
2.6 Theological Foundation
of Maqasidization
Unlike Islamization and
Integration, which often appeared as intellectual strategies, Maqasidization is
grounded in revelation and practice.
- Qur’an:
Emphasises justice, mercy, and wisdom as guiding principles of law and
life (Qur’an 16:90).
- Prophet ﷺ: His governance reflected maqasid —
preserving life, intellect, family, wealth, and faith.
- Classical Scholars: al-Ghazali, al-Shatibi, and Ibn Ashur
structured maqasid as a living framework.
Thus, Maqasidization is not
merely a “theory” but a continuation of a divine framework operationalised in
the modern age.
2.7 Conclusion: A Necessary Paradigm Shift
The development from
Islamization to Integration, and now to Maqasidization, reflects the evolution
of Muslim thought in response to the crisis of modern knowledge.
- Islamization raised awareness but was impractical.
- Integration bridged disciplines but remained vague.
- Maqasidization offers a structured, simple, universal, and
action-oriented framework.
The challenge now is to
move from theory to implementation: embedding Maqasidization in curricula,
policymaking, research, and governance. This chapter lays the intellectual
foundation for that journey.
References
- Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1978). Islam and
Secularism. Kuala Lumpur: ABIM.
- Al-Faruqi, I. R. (1982). Islamization
of Knowledge: General Principles and Work Plan. Herndon, VA: IIIT.
- Al-Shatibi, A. I. (1997). Al-Muwafaqat
fi Usul al-Shariah. Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifah.
- Auda, J. (2008). Maqasid al-Shariah
as Philosophy of Islamic Law: A Systems Approach. London: IIIT.
- Kamali, M. H. (2008). Shari’ah Law:
An Introduction. Oxford: Oneworld.
- Wan Daud, W. M. N. (1998). The
Concept of Knowledge in Islam and Its Implications for Education in
Developing Countries. London: Mansell.
No comments:
Post a Comment