Dr. Hassan Hanafi (1935-2021) is
an Egyptian thinker and one of the theorists of the Islamic left movement. He
is known for his heritage and renewal project, and relies primarily on the
methods of interpretation and phenomenology.
His life
Dr. Hassan Hanafi was born in Cairo and
graduated from the Faculty of Arts, Department of Philosophy, Cairo University,
in 1956 He traveled to France that same year at his own expense for
postgraduate studies, where he obtained a Master's degree and then a State
Doctorate from the Sorbonne University in 1966. From 1967, he worked as a
lecturer at the Faculty of Arts, Cairo University. From 1971 to 1975, he worked
at Temple University in the United States, then returned to Cairo University
from 1976 to 1981, during which time he joined the National Progressive
Unionist Party, a well-known leftist party. In September 1981, he was expelled
from the university along with other professors who opposed the peace treaty
with Israel. However, he returned to the university in April 1982. Hanafi worked
at the University of Mohammed Ben Abdellah in Fez for two years (1982-1984),
then moved to the University of Tokyo in Japan (1984-1987). He also worked as a
consultant for scientific research programs for the United Nations University
in Tokyo. Hanafi returned to Cairo in 1987, where he, along with others,
oversaw the re-establishment of the Egyptian Philosophical Society in 1989 and
has served as its Secretary-General ever since.
Heritage and Renewal Project
First: Roots
Hanafi's
heritage and renewal project dates back to his doctoral studies in Paris.
The
"Heritage and Renewal" project, as Hanafi explains, consists of three
fronts: our position on our ancient heritage, our position on the Western
heritage, and our position on reality (the theory of interpretation). Each
front has a theoretical statement. He adds, "We had defined this
three-front project a quarter of a century ago, in 1965/1966, in our three
university theses: "Methods of Interpretation: An Attempt at the Science
of the Principles of Jurisprudence," "Exegesis of Phenomenology: The
Current State of the Phenomenological Method and Its Application to the
Phenomenology of Religion," and "Phenomenology of Interpretation: An
Attempt at an Existential Interpretation of the New Testament."
(Introduction to the Science of Occidentalism, pp. 9-10)
Second: The
intellectual path
Dr. Hanafi explains how “Usul Alfiqh” was
chosen as the subject of his doctorate in Paris in 1956. He explains his
intellectual path during the formative stage, beginning with his influence by
the thought of the Muslim Brotherhood, followed by dialogue and cross-pollination
with his professors at the Sorbonne, which produced the final concepts of the
project, as follows:
I listened to a discussion between the late
Mustafa Hilmi and a student, Rushdi Rashed, now a prominent scholar in the
history of science in Paris, about Ibn Taymiyyah's critique of logic and his
attempt to establish a new logic, a critique of Aristotelian formalism and the
establishment of a sensible, materialistic, experimental logic. We were members
of the Muslim Brotherhood at the time and read Abu Alaala Ala Maududi's
"The Method of the Islamic Revolution" and Sayyid Qutb's "The
Characteristics and Components of the Islamic Concept." The obsession was
renewal, creativity, and originality. The idea that Islam is a method, a method
of thought and life, was one of the ideas we inherited from the reform
movement, as Laust noted when I presented him with the outline of my first
doctoral dissertation on "The General Islamic Method" in 1956.
After leaving for Paris that same year,
four months after graduating—between the nationalization of the Canal in July
1956 and the Tripartite Aggression in October 1956—I began to develop the idea
of a "general Islamic method", which I presented as a doctoral
project drawing on reformist sources, from Al-Afghani to Sayyid Qutb. Laust
wanted to trace it back to its historical sources and direct my studies toward
historical reformist thought, while I wanted to transcend it with more
theorizing. J.
Wahl wanted me to study Kant, who combined a priori and
a posteriori, that is, revelation and reason. Massignon, on the other hand,
wanted me to maintain my idea of a "general Islamic method" and
ground it in the science of the principles of jurisprudence, which is the
systematic study of Islam. Following the advice of Sheikh Mustafa Abdel Razek,
he asked Brunschwig, director of the Institute of Islamic Studies at the
Sorbonne, to register the project with him administratively, because Massignon
was at the Collège de France, which did not award degrees, since knowledge was
for knowledge's own sake. Brunschwig was more of a jurist than a
fundamentalist, more of a historian than a philosopher. He reluctantly accepted
the thesis, which begins with the principles of jurisprudence and delves into
phenomenology. This is what Etienne Gilson, a Thomist representative, said when
he read the thesis for discussion: “This is the first time I have seen anyone
study the revelation of Abraham in the manner of Jean-Paul Sartre, studying the
old in the language of the new.” Orientalists have noted for ten years that
only Renan, the Orientalist philosopher, supervises me because I am “an Arab
between two cultures,” and we are both Hegelian Islamists (From Text to Reality
- Part One, p. 6).
Hanafi then explains the result of this
cross-pollination as follows:
From here began the project of rewriting
the history of European consciousness from an Islamic perspective, and
rewriting the history of Islamic consciousness from the perspective of
transcendental idealism, which is the link between the two civilizations:
al-Ghazali and Descartes, al-Farabi and Kant, Ibn Sina and Hegel, al-Tawhidi
and Kierkegaard, Ibn Arabi or Sadr al-Din al-Shirazi and Heidegger. This
appeared in the trilogy of youth. "Methods of Interpretation" was an
attempt to read the science of the principles of jurisprudence from the
perspective of transcendental philosophy in its final stage, the philosophy of
consciousness in phenomenology. "Phenomenology of Interpretation" was
an attempt to reread the science of historical criticism of ancient books,
applied to the "Bible," from the perspective of the science of the
principles of jurisprudence. As for "The Interpretation of
Phenomenology," it is an attempt to transcend the dialogue of
civilizations, the double mirror, and mutual reading to a "comprehensive
science of interpretation" or "general hermeneutics," as Ibn
Sina attempted at the end of his book "Poetry," after reading Arabic
poetry from an Aristotelian perspective and reading Aristotle's Book of Poetry
from the perspective of Arabic poetry, and aspired to establish a "science
of absolute poetry" in a later generation. And as Ibn Khaldun attempted at
the end of his "Introduction," to predict a new generation that would
rewrite it and establish a philosophy of history or a science of history.
(Feshta, The Philosopher of Resistance, p. 7)
Third: The
general framework of the heritage and renewal project
In this context of cross-pollination
between two divergent ideas, one Islamic, expressing the existence of a general
Islamic method, and the other Western, expressing modern methodological tools,
the question arises spontaneously: what is the motive behind this and what is
the goal or purpose behind it?
1 -The case
For Hanafi, as later revealed by the
project's implementation, the motivation is the existence of a fundamental
issue in Arab Renaissance thought: the transition to "intellectual"
modernity, while simultaneously preserving the essence of our Arab-Islamic thought.
This idea was presented in the Arabic Renaissance thought in various forms, the
most prominent of which was the issue of authenticity and modernity. The
response in the first phase of Arab Renaissance thought (i.e., from the first
third of the nineteenth century to approximately 1976) was mostly superficial,
in what was called "conciliation" in later writings. Hanafi believes
that it is possible to find a more profound solution through his project, and
he explains this as follows:
The issue is not "renewing heritage"
or "heritage and renewal" because the beginning is
"heritage" and not "renewal" in order to preserve the
continuity of national culture, root the present, push it towards progress, and
participate in issues of social change. Heritage is the starting point as a
cultural and national responsibility, and renewal is the reinterpretation of
heritage according to the needs of the age. The old precedes the new.
Authenticity is the basis of modernity, and the means leads to the end.
Heritage is the means, and renewal is the goal, which is contributing to the
development of reality, solving its problems, eliminating the causes of its
obstacles, and unlocking the mysteries that prevent any attempt at its
development. (Heritage and Renewal - Third Edition, p. 13)
He adds, "The issue of 'heritage and
renewal' is also a matter of reconsidering the possibilities of the issues at
hand and re-choosing according to the needs of the times. Defending monotheism
in the old way is no longer useful or desirable, for we are all pure
monotheists. However, defending monotheism comes by connecting it to the land,
and this is our contemporary crisis)” (Heritage and Renewal, p. 21).
Hanafi demonstrates his view that the shift
to modernity in thought (i.e., towards modern approaches) must be based on
theoretical foundations from within the self (i.e., heritage) in order to avoid
superficial compromise, in the following lines:
The
Ash'ari approach has been dominant for more than ten centuries. This dominance
may be one of the obstacles facing our time, as it prioritizes God over action,
knowledge, judgment, and evaluation. Meanwhile, our contemporary conscience
suffers from a loss of the ability to take the initiative from Him—in the name
of God once, and in the name of the Sultan another time. Hence, the alternative
approach, the Mu'tazilite approach, which unfortunately only prevailed for a
century or two, during which Islamic civilization reached its peak, may be more
expressive of the needs of our time and more conducive to its demands. What we
rejected in the past we may accept in the present, and what we accepted in the
past we may reject in the present. All possibilities are equal before us, as
was the case with the ancients—they accepted whatever expressed the needs of
their time. We were wrong to adopt the same approach despite the changing needs
of the present. Naturalism was rejected in the past because it threatened
monotheism and its effectiveness, but it may be accepted today because it
involves man's return to nature as a viewer of it, an agent within it, and a
discoverer of its laws, rather than separating himself from it and discounting
it by focusing on the ancient monotheism. (Heritage and Renewal - p. 22)
2- The mission
If the motive behind the project is to go
beyond the syncretic thought and the tool is modern methods, then the goal is
to arrive at new “theoretical” alternatives that are based in heritage but at
the same time give us a wider space or greater possibilities for the transition
towards modernity, as shown below:
The mission of "Heritage
and Renewal" is therefore to restore all old possibilities and even
develop new ones, selecting the most appropriate to contemporary needs. There
is no theoretical standard of right and wrong to judge these possibilities;
there is only a practical one. A productive, effective choice that responds to
contemporary demands is the desired choice. This does not mean that other
choices are wrong, but rather that they remain potential interpretations for
other circumstances and eras past or yet to come. This does not mean that the
fundamentals of religion are the same in every time and place, unchanging;
otherwise, we would confuse fundamentals with branches, religion with
jurisprudence. Monotheism is constant, but its understanding of contemporary
needs varies. Human freedom, reason, and responsibility are also constant, but
the methods of exercising them vary from era to era, from environment to
environment, and from one social situation to another. The dynamic conception
of fundamentals is also a possibility alongside the static conception of them,
and the practical conception of beliefs is also a possibility alongside the
theoretical conception of them. Hence, accusing our civilization of being a
civilization of unity not plurality, and of agreement not disagreement is a
false accusation because the most important thing that distinguishes our
ancient heritage is that it provided a set of multiple possibilities that
caused necks to fly when choosing between them. Ijtihad is not only a method in the principles of jurisprudence but also a
method in the principles of religion. Its function is not only to measure
rulings, which are actions of behavior, but also to choose theories and the
most appropriate of them according to the needs of the age. Ijtihad establishes
the scientific foundation in the science of the principles of jurisprudence
according to the individual's capabilities and establishes the theoretical
foundation in the science of the principles of religion according to the
requirements of the age. (Heritage and Renewal - p. 22)
He adds, "The mission of 'Heritage and
Renewal' is to solve the mysteries of the past once and for all, and to unlock
the secrets of heritage so that they do not reappear, sometimes on the surface
and often from the bottom. Its mission is to eliminate the obstacles to
liberation and uproot them. Unless the psychological roots of backwardness,
such as superstition, myth, emotion, deification, the worship of persons,
negativity, and subservience, change, reality will not change. It is easy to
replace a ghost with a machine and a demon with an engine, as both serve the
same purpose. The naive person's use of a machine will not eliminate his belief
in jinn and ghosts unless he is psychologically rebuilt, thus eliminating the
mysteries and secrets of the past forever." The mission of 'Heritage and
Renewal' is to liberate himself from all forms of authority: the authority of
the past and the authority of heritage. There is no authority except reason, and
no authority except that which is necessary for the reality in which we live.
It is also to liberate our contemporary conscience from fear, dread, and
obedience to authority, whether it be inherited or transmitted, whether it be
the authority of tradition or political authority. The mission of
"Heritage and Renewal" is to unleash the stored human energies
trapped between the old and the new, just as man is trapped in Christian
theology between Adam and Christ, between sin and redemption. (Heritage and
Renewal, p. 52)
More specifically, the goal chosen by
Hanafi, which he believes achieves the desired objective (transcending
syncretism through "theoretical" renewal from within), is to
transform the sciences based on revelation (the Holy Qur'an and the Prophetic Sunnah)
into a science (or an interconnected system of sciences) in the modern sense
based on reason and experience. Hanafi presents this concept in the following
manner:
"Heritage
and renewal" does not imply any tendency to reconcile the old and the new.
Reconciliation, in this sense, is an unscientific endeavor, subject to the
personal mood of the researcher, the prior choice of the philosopher, or based
on whims that undermine the objectivity of both the old and the new—the third
party upon which reconciliation is based. Rather, "heritage and
renewal" means reconstructing the sciences of goals using all the means
available to the age—purely environmental means resulting from our contemporary
culture and the needs of the age. If reconciliation deals with two things as
the subjects of reconciliation, "heritage and renewal" deals with one
thing: the ancient heritage. Exposing this heritage to the needs of the age
does not mean reconciling the two, taking a part of one at one time and a part
of that at another. Rather, it means that the demands of the age are the basis
of interpretation. There is no horizontal relationship in which the two parties
are placed on the same level, but rather a vertical relationship in which the
needs of the age are placed as the underlying foundation, and then heritage as
the superficial foundation. (Heritage and renewal, p. 58)
He adds, "Although heritage has given
us four distinct rational sciences: theology, philosophy, Sufism, and the
principles of jurisprudence, the ultimate goal of 'heritage and renewal' is to
unify all sciences into a single science that is synonymous with civilization
itself. All sciences attempt to understand revelation and transform it into a
theory, as is the case with theology and philosophy, or into a method, as is
the case with principles of jurisprudence and Sufism. However, the ultimate
goal is to transform revelation itself into a theory, a science, a method, or,
if you will, a 'methodology'. (Heritage
and Renewal, p. 172).
Achieving this ambitious goal requires the
following: First, defining the chosen theoretical framework from the heritage
to work within. Second, identifying the chosen approaches from modernist
thought that will be relied upon. Third, using both to address the
"important" issues of the heritage—that is, those that have a
significant impact on our contemporary thought and behavior. As indicated
above, Mu'tazilite thought was the chosen theoretical framework, as were
phenomenology and hermeneutics the philosophical methods to implement. What
remains is to define the topics of renewal and the method of achieving it.
Fourth: The
general plan for the “Heritage and Renewal” project
The topics of renewal, according to the
above-mentioned objective, are by nature the topics of heritage sciences. In
order to define the nature and limits of the renewal process (i.e., the shift
toward modernity), a "subjective" (i.e., Arab/Islamic) concept of
modernity is required. This requires presenting the thought of
"Western" modernity as a subject. Finally, it is necessary to
simultaneously apply these heritage/modernist concepts to real-life issues. In
light of these requirements, the general plan for the "heritage and
renewal" project naturally emerges. Hanafi explains the elements of this
plan as follows:
"Heritage
and Renewal" is the general title of the entire project, as it addresses
not only research methods in ancient heritage, but also heritage itself as a
national problem: the problem of inherited heritage, its psychological impact
on the masses, our position regarding it, and the means of developing and
renewing it. The real battle now is an intellectual and civilizational one, no
less important than the economic or armed battle, if not its foundation. The
contemporary defeat is, in essence, an intellectual defeat as well as a
military one. The looming danger now is not only the loss of land, but the
killing and eternal annihilation of the spirit, and our drift into criticizing
the authenticity of our ancient heritage and criticizing the modernity that our
ancient heritage attempted with contemporary cultures. "Heritage and
Renewal" is the project of authenticity and modernity, which we have been
unable to achieve until now, after successive defeats, and which we have only
perceived as propaganda or pretense.
He adds, "Heritage and Renewal"
includes three sections that express our current civilizational stance and
determine the directions of study and research.
The first section of “Heritage and Renewal,” “Our Position on the
Ancient Heritage,” includes seven parts, each part devoted to an ancient
science, followed by an eighth section as follows:
Part One: The Science of The Human Being (From Doctrine to Revolution)
It is an attempt to reconstruct traditional theology. We began with
this discipline because it was the earliest Islamic science to emerge, and it
is most closely linked to the Islamic environment. Its emergence was not
subject to any external influence. Rather, it was driven by the political
events that have abounded in the Islamic world since the Fitna (discord). This
has led some to consider this discipline to be authentic Islamic thought, and
it is also the most dangerous of all the traditional sciences to humanity and
life.
Part Two: The Philosophy of Civilization (From Transmission to
Creativity)
It is an attempt to reconstruct traditional philosophy and clarify
the nature of the civilizational processes that occurred in ancient Islamic
philosophy as a result of the encounter between the emerging Islamic
civilization and the incoming Greek civilization, while addressing what has
happened in our present era since the last century in terms of a similar
situation of the encounter between the rising Islamic civilization and the
invading European civilization.
Part Three: The Method of Al Usul (From Text to Reality)
It is an attempt to rebuild traditional jurisprudence. It predates
Sufism because society's need for legislation precedes its need for asceticism.
It is the systematic science that was able to transform revelation into an
inductive, deductive method, as it is known as "the science of
revelation." It is the best product of Islamic civilization as an
independent science, expressed in a rational, scientific language.
Part Four: The Sufi Method (From Annihilation to Survival)
It is an attempt to reconstruct the sciences of Sufism as the
representative of the emotional approach, and the final emergence of man as an
independent dimension within it, and the discovery of feeling as the starting
point for establishing the science. Sufism comes last because it was a reaction
to the principles of jurisprudence, jurisprudence, and rational approaches in
general in theology and philosophy. Furthermore, it was not established as a
science before the fourth century, although in terms of its origins, it
appeared early as a movement of asceticism, worship, and regret during the
Umayyad rule as a passive resistance movement directed inwardly, upwards, not outwards,
and a forward-looking springboard. Both principles and Sufism represent
systematic thought, in contrast to theology and philosophy, which represent
theoretical thought.
Part Five: Transmitted Sciences (From Transmitted Knowledge to
Reason)
This will include a restructuring of the five transmitted sciences:
Quranic sciences, Hadith, Tafsir, Seerah, and Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh).
This will eliminate outdated material that has become meaningless, such as
verses whose readings and rulings have been abrogated, or the history and
compilation of the Qurans. Furthermore, significant topics will be highlighted,
such as the reasons for revelation (the priority of reality over thought),
abrogating and abrogated (time and evolution), etc. As for Tafsir, it will also
be reconstructed, moving beyond longitudinal interpretation (surah by surah,
verse by verse), and instead transcending linguistic, literary, and
jurisprudential interpretations, etc. Thematic interpretation will begin by
describing the structure of feelings and their position in the world with
others and among things. As for Hadith, feelings—the narrator's feelings—are
analyzed through narrative methods, then moved beyond them to rational and
sensory criticism of the text. In Seerah, there will be a shift from the person
to speech, eliminating personification and the worship of the person in our
public life. As for Islamic jurisprudence, it will be reconstructed, giving priority
to transactions over worship, and to state systems over personal status law.
Part Six: Mathematical and Natural Sciences (Revelation, Reason,
and Nature)
This section reconstructs the mathematical sciences—algebra,
arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music—to discover the directives of
revelation to consciousness that led to theoretical discoveries in these
sciences. Consequently, the function of monotheism in consciousness is
understood in the search for the paradoxical and the transcendent, and what
this signifies in terms of continuous progress in scientific research. The
natural sciences—chemistry, physics, medicine, anatomy, botany, zoology, and
pharmacology—are also reconstructed to understand the function of revelation in
directing consciousness toward nature and analyzing its laws. This is what has
been called, in our modern studies, the history of science among the Arabs.
These are the Islamic sciences that also arose by directing revelation toward
the rational and the natural. The mission of this section is to transcend the
formal and the material and return to the conscious.
Part Seven: Humanities (Man and History)
It reconstructs the sciences of psychology, sociology, politics,
history, geography, language, and literature, so that the function of
monotheism in the feeling and its direction towards the human, the individual,
and the social is recognized through them. Although these sciences had
previously appeared in the four religious sciences, they attempted to be
independent sciences based on research and investigation without relying on
transmitted arguments. The task of this part is to understand how revelation
directs the feeling towards the human and how revelation itself can be
transformed into a human science.
Part Eight: (Man and History)
It is an attempt to describe the construction and development of
Islamic civilization while establishing the unity of sciences in ancient
heritage, transferring Islamic civilization to a new phase, and transforming
its historical image from the cave civilization to the arrow civilization, from
the circle to the line, and from the top to the front. Man and history are the
two dimensions hidden in our ancient heritage that are evident in the present
age. The goal of "Heritage and Renewal" is to uncover man in ancient
heritage, establish him in the consciousness of the age, and place him in
history. We will look at civilization as a whole in its first phase in which it
arose and developed, then in its second phase in which it began to live on its
own in the age of explanations and summaries, then in its third phase since the
era of religious reform in the last century, the revival of heritage in this
century, and the establishment of a comprehensive renaissance represented by
the harbingers of reform and revival.
Section Two: Our Position on Western Heritage
This section aims to restart the process and establish a new
Islamic civilization, in addition to the Islamic civilization we inherited.
This is because we are in an era similar to the ancient era, when our nascent
heritage confronted the incoming Greek heritage.
Section Three: Theory of Interpretation
This section aims to reconstruct the two civilizations mentioned in
the previous two sections, starting anew from their earliest origins in
revelation, i.e., in their holy books. "Heritage and Renewal" is, in
fact, an attempt to rebuild civilization by returning to its source in
revelation, or to reinterpret revelation as it is by returning to current human
civilization and freeing it from its ancient historical stagnation. This is
equivalent to "Qur'anic Sciences" in our ancient heritage. The
ultimate goal is revelation itself and the possibility of transforming it into
a comprehensive human science. This can only be achieved through a "theory
of interpretation" that is the logic of revelation. (Heritage
and Renewal - pp. 176-183).
Fifth: Suspicion of project classification
Within this framework, how can the project be
classified? Islamic in terms of its subject matter, or modernist
"Western" in terms of its approach? In an interview with the Kuwaiti
magazine Al-Arabi, Hanafi explains, in response to a question about classifying
his project within the New Salafist movement, saying,
For me, there are many classifications. For the
Salafis, I am a Marxist. For the Marxists, I am a Salafist. For the government,
I am a Brotherhood communist. Classification itself has advantages, of course,
one of which is scientific. Muslims began the sciences by classifying them.
However, its drawback is that you have to place the new thing in a framework of
old drawers. Therefore, it is only new in terms of its material, that is, it is
not new in terms of its type. The new product is what transcends the old
classifications and drawers. The new product must create its own drawer. My
classification as a new Salafist is to distinguish me from Ahmad ibn Hanbal,
Ibn Taymiyyah, Rashid Rida, etc. Salafist because the old heritage is a
psychological reserve for me. New because I am concerned with the issues of our
time. In the end, I am a (new Salafist). For the Salafis, I am a Marxist
because I only use the methods of social analysis, which are old fundamentalist
methods, but they do not know. For the Marxists, I am a Salafist because I use
the old heritage and do not break with it. This vision is more realistic than
Marxism, because Marxism is a utopian vision that does not begin with an
analysis of reality. Had they analyzed social reality, they would have
discovered the presence of ancient heritage. However,
classification, in any case, does not bother me, as there are so many similar classifications
that have been said.
His approach
The project relies primarily on the
phenomenological approach and textual interpretation. Both are used to analyze
the intellectual structures of the heritage (textual interpretation) in order
to use them to analyze the emotional structures of the masses
(social/psychological analysis). Hanafi explains this as follows:
Heritage and renewal
express a very natural position, as both the past and the present are coexisted
in the feelings, and describing the feelings is at the same time a description
of the psychological stock accumulated from the heritage in its interaction
with the present reality, a projection from the past or a vision of the
present. Analyzing heritage is at the same time an analysis of our contemporary
mentality and an explanation of the reasons for its obstacles, and an analysis
of our contemporary mentality is at the same time an analysis of heritage,
since ancient heritage is a main component of our contemporary mentality, and
thus it is easy for us to see the present in the past, and to see the past in
the present. Heritage and renewal together establish a new science, which is a
description of the present as if it were a moving past, and a description of
the past as a lived present. (Heritage and Renewal - p. 19)
He adds, "If it is asked: Does
"Heritage and Renewal" present a method, establish a science, or
discover a field? It is said: Every renewal is difficult to classify into a
method, a science, or a field. The method is itself a science because it is the
foundation of science, and if science is the foundation of science, then it is
a field, the field of foundation. Analyzing direct reality and seeing the
heritage within it, or analyzing the heritage as a psychological storehouse of
the masses, is at the same time a socio-psychological method. Psychological
because it is based on analyzing people's feelings and behavior, and social
because it aims to analyze reality and to what extent these structures are
based on other psychological structures of the masses. Since these
psychological foundations themselves arise from a cultural heritage, it is
necessary to analyze this heritage and understand the circumstances of its
emergence. "Heritage and Renewal" then covers three fields:
1-
Analyzing the ancient
heritage, the circumstances of its emergence, and understanding its path in the
cultural feeling.
2-
Analyzing the
psychological structures of the masses and to what extent they result from
ancient heritage or current social conditions.
3-
Analyzing the structures
of reality and to what extent they arise from reality itself and its degree of
development, or whether they arise from the psychological structures of the
masses, which in turn arise from the ancient heritage.
If
we wish, heritage and renewal seek to move from the sociology of knowledge to
the analysis of mass behavior, i.e. from the humanities to national culture and
from national culture to the social and political revolution. (Heritage and
renewal - p. 26).
First: Phenomenology
and emotional experience
The phenomenological element in the
"Heritage and Renewal" project is quite clear, as it includes
well-known methodological elements, namely, working to uncover the presence of
phenomena in consciousness through intentionality, adopting the steps of
suspending judgment, construction, and then discovery. Hanafi defines the
phenomenon as follows:
The truth is that the phenomenon is neither
formal nor material, but rather a conscious phenomenon. That is, the
infrastructures—social, political, and economic—and the superstructures of
theories, opinions, and legacies have been unified into conscious structures,
which are the actual structures that determine the behavior of the masses.
Reality outside of consciousness is empty, and theory outside of intention has
no action. Rather, actions and facts are determined by their being structures
of consciousness. Ancient heritage is part of the structures of our
contemporary conscience and one of its components, just as reality is another
part and one of its other components. The idea that the masses believe in turns
into behavior, and the reality that people live turns into participation.
(Heritage and Renewal - p. 53)
It is clear that relying on this approach
leads to the "disclosure" of contents of conscious (unconscious)
structures that may conflict with the prevailing perception (that needs to be
changed) of the same topics and issues. Hanafi realizes that this can lead to
opposing reactions and anticipates the expected reactions by responding to them
based on the same approach, i.e., phenomenology/hermeneutics, as follows:
If it is said that "heritage and
renewal" will inevitably lead to atheism because it means prioritizing
reality over thought, giving history precedence over revelation, and
eliminating the independence of beliefs as subjects with their own theoretical
internal validity regardless of their connection to practical reality. We say
that the concepts of atheism and faith are theoretical concepts that do not
express anything realistic because what some people think of as atheism may be
the essence of faith, and what others think of as faith may be atheism itself.
In addition, the concepts of atheism and secularism that arose in other
civilizations and were rejected by our ancient heritage and some modern reform
movements are, at their core, renewal, which is the content of our ancient
heritage. The meaning of atheism in Western civilization means faith in our
ancient heritage. (Heritage and Renewal - p. 61)
Discovering new levels of analysis -
(feeling)
By applying this approach to heritage, it
becomes possible to renew it through the final process of the approach, which
is the process of discovery. Hanafi explains this as follows:
The ancient heritage can be renewed by
uncovering modern levels of analysis that are still hidden within it. There are
general levels shared by the inherited sciences that can be uncovered and are,
at the same time, a requirement of the times. If the logic of linguistic
renewal has given us a tremendous ability to express the inherited meanings and
ideal structures locked in traditional language, then modern levels of analysis
provide us with a fertile field in which the fertility of heritage is revealed.
By the level of analysis, I mean the perspective from which heritage is viewed.
This can only be achieved through a contemporary vision. Heritage can be read
from several possible perspectives, and renewal is the re-reading of heritage
from a contemporary perspective. This does not mean that ancient readings are
wrong or that
future readings are improbable; they are all correct. However, the mistake lies
in reading heritage by contemporaries from a non-modern perspective. Herein
lies the error—the error of not being contemporary. The most important of these
levels is feeling. Feeling is a more specific level of the human being, more
important than the mind, more precise than the heart, and more neutral than
consciousness. It reveals a modern level of analysis that is implicitly present
within the traditional sciences themselves, but due to the circumstances of
their emergence, it was not placed in the forefront, nor was it given the
necessary priority. Rather, it is understood implicitly and read between the
lines. (Heritage and Renewal -
p. 132).
The texts of revelation themselves
originated in feelings, either in the general, comprehensive feeling, which is
God Himself, or in the feeling of the one to whom it is sent and in which it is
announced, which is the feeling of the messenger or the feeling of the
recipient of the message, which is the feeling of the ordinary person who might
feel a crisis and call for a solution, and then revelation comes confirming
what he asked for. (Heritage and Renewal - p. 135)
Second: Reliance
on linguistic interpretation
The
second aspect of Hanafi's approach is the process of interpretation and
changing the language that expresses heritage. The primary motivation for this
is the inability of traditional language to express the new content produced by
phenomenological analysis. Hanafi explains this in detail as follows:
The change in traditional language does not
occur out of a desire for innovation or due to learning from a modernizer, but
rather it is a linguistic and intellectual necessity combined. This is because
traditional language reaches a stage in the development of civilization at
which it is no longer able to fulfill its function of expressing and
communicating the intended meaning to others. This is due to the vast time gap
between traditional language and modern research and the contemporary reader.
Traditional language appears to be plagued by some defects that hinder it from
fulfilling its function of expression and communication. These defects appear
now as flaws, although in the past they were distinctive characteristics that
played a role in expression and communication. The most important of these are:
1-
It is a divine language
in which words revolve around "God," even though He takes on multiple
meanings according to each science. He is "the Lawgiver" in the
science of the principles of jurisprudence, He is the Wise in the science of
the principles of religion, He is the First Being in philosophy, and He is
"the One" in Sufism. The term "God" is used by everyone
without prior definition of its meaning, whether it has an independent meaning
or what the speaker intends by using it. In fact, the term "God"
contains an internal contradiction in its use as a linguistic material for
defining meanings or concepts, and as an absolute meaning intended to be expressed
with a limited term, because:
A- It
expresses a requirement or a demand, and does not express a specific meaning,
i.e. it is an existential cry rather than a meaning that can be expressed with
a word of language or a mental image. It is a reaction to a psychological state
or a feeling rather than an expression of an intention or a communication of a
specific meaning... God is a word with which we express cries of pain and
shouts of joy, i.e. it is a literary expression rather than a description of
reality, and a constructive expression rather than a news description. All of
humanity is still trying to search for the meaning of the word "God",
and the more you search, the more opinions become diverse and conflicting.
Every age puts its spirit into the word and contributes from its structure to
the meaning, and meanings and structures change with the change of eras and
societies. For the hungry, God is a loaf of bread, for the enslaved, He is
freedom, for the oppressed, He is justice, for the emotionally deprived, He is
love, and for the repressed, He is satisfaction. In most cases, He is "the
cry of the oppressed." In a society emerging from superstition, God is
science, and in another society emerging from backwardness, He is progress. If
God is our most precious and valuable asset, then He is our land, freedom,
development, and justice. If God is what sustains us, is the foundation of our
existence, and protects us, then He is our bread, sustenance, sustenance, will,
and freedom. If God is what we turn to in times of distress and seek refuge in
from evil, then He is our strength, equipment, and preparedness. Every person
and every group turns to Him for their needs, and the history of human needs
can be identified by tracing the meanings of the word “God” throughout the ages.
B- It
is impossible for a word limited by its letters, structure, composition in a
sentence, its placement in a formulation, and its indication of a specific
meaning from a specific author to a reader in a specific era to indicate an
absolute, unlimited meaning that is not comparable to any tangible conception
that transcends the limits of language, structure, and formulations and
encompasses all eras and nations, eternal existence, and so on, as is always
said in the concept of God after hearing the word "Allah." It is logically
impossible to express more specifically the less specific, or the less existent
the more existent. It is a human claim and a lack of integrity for a single
writer to say that he means by the word "Allah" what he wants except
by approximation. Then why were mental images used? And why did they differ
from era to era? If language is merely a carrier of meaning, and meaning is
independent, then it can be expressed by any other word from any other era or
from any other cultural environment. The word "Allah" does not equal
its meaning in any way. It is true that the word was mentioned in revelation,
but the problem lies in understanding the word in a specific era for a specific
group in order to obtain a cultural meaning for the word. Scholars of the fundamentals
of religion are still trying to understand the meaning of the term, without
arriving at a single, universally agreed-upon meaning. Indeed, revelation
itself exists in a specific time and place, and thus, at the moment of
revelation, it too was transformed into a civilization—that is, into a human
concept that varies from person to person.
C- It
is impossible to define a comprehensive and exclusive term, since definition by
its very nature is based on specification, and the intended meaning and the
entity to be referred to are based on generality and not specification.
Specificity is based on separating a part of reality, then depicting and
referring to it through imagination, whereas generality cannot be defined in
this manner. Since "God" cannot be imagined, how can He be expressed
in a language based on imagination?
D- Since
existence is a specific, partial existence that can be referred to and
verified, it cannot be identical to the existence of God in the intended
conception of Him as a general existence. If God is not only a mental existence
but also a real existence, how can He be referred to and how is He expressed in
language? It is therefore difficult to find what is true for the term
"God," just as it has been made clear that it is difficult to find a
concept for Him. No ontological proof is useful here to prove the existence of
God, because the transition from the mind to reality is a transition from
potentiality to action that requires realization, activity, movement, and
effectiveness that are not provided by rational evidence, which does not go
beyond mere assumption and acceptance, for the sake of argument. How can He
exist in reality from His mere existence in the mind, when in both cases He is
a specific, partial existence? Conceptualization is limited by the mind because
conception is attained by definition, and existence is specific, partial, and
this is contrary to assumption.
E- No
meaning can be conveyed by the word “Allah” because the word contains so many
meanings that it denotes contradictory meanings. It is eternal, absolute,
comprehensive, and universal. For others, it is temporal, relative, partial,
moving, and changeable. For a third group, it denotes vital impulse, impulse,
and emotion. For a fourth group, it denotes history and becoming. If some use
the word “Allah” intending a specific meaning, the listener might understand
another meaning, and both meanings are included in the word. Anyone who argues
about God is merely engaging in a dialogue between the deaf.
Divine
language emerged at the beginning of the spread of civilization to express the
new religion. The word "Allah" had its ideal emotional connotation in
ancient Arabic language. However, as civilization began to develop, divine
language began to decline and was replaced by purely rational language, as was
evident in the origins of later religion and as was made clearer in the
sciences of wisdom.
2-
The ancient language was
a religious language dominated by words that referred to purely religious
topics such as: religion, messenger, miracle, prophecy. This language is
incapable of conveying its content to the present age. The traditional word
"religion" does not fulfill its function of communication. If the
word "God" contains an internal contradiction in its communication,
in addition to its conflicting meanings, all of which may contradict its
intended meaning, then the word "religion", although it can express
its intended meaning, cannot fulfill its function of communication due to the
numerous meanings that have been attached to it throughout its history of use.
These meanings sometimes conflict with its original meaning found in the
etymological meaning or in the legal technical meaning, which is the original
pre-Islamic meaning brought by revelation. Due to this load of meanings alien
to the word and attached to it, the word loses its original meaning and even
its ability to convey any meaning, even if it was its original meaning, due to
the opposing meanings attached to it. Moreover, it is impossible to give it any
new meaning because this new meaning alone cannot withstand a long history of
meanings imported into it. The term "religion" has become a one-sided
"crooked" term that only conveys one meaning, which is the
predominant one, that is, it only conveys one aspect in its extreme form, which
is the divine, supernatural, otherworldly, or metaphysical aspect. Every
religion necessarily conveys this meaning, and all the "material" of
religion is of this sample, all pointing to this one aspect. Indeed, this material
has become a selected sample and a model for all possible religions without any
classification of the types of religions into historical religion and revealed
religion, supernatural religion and natural religion, secret religion and
public religion, irrational religion and rational religion, authority religion
and individual religion, sin religion and innocence religion, ritual religion
and piety religion, priestly religion and scholarly religion, divine religion
and human religion...etc., and without any consideration for the evolution of
religion in its various stages. Because the term "religion" has many
uses and conveys contradictory meanings, it has come to refer to what it does
not intend. It refers to history more than it refers to revelation, and it
refers to the political and social history of the countries that embraced this
religion, or to the religious sciences that arose from it, and to the doctrines
and intellectual trends that were founded by some of its believers, or to a
group of beliefs that arose from certain concepts in a limited phase of it in
revelation or in our present age according to our current requirements.
Hanafi adds, "Religious
language was a primary necessity in the emergence of civilization. However, as
civilization advanced, religious language began to
decline and be replaced by purely rational language, as is the case in the
later science of theology." Since the term "religion" is
insufficient to convey its meaning, the term "ideology" is more
capable of expressing the religion in question, which is Islam, and conveying
its meaning. Revelation is a collection of ideas and concepts from which systems
and laws emerge that emerge from reality "through the reasons for
revelation" and are adapted to reality "through the abrogating and
abrogated." Their goal is to transform reality into a better one. So,
sovereignty belongs to God, meaning the realization of revelation as a social
system and the establishment of the state that expresses the political entity
of the nation. This is achieved through the believers, who are the vanguard
party, or in contemporary terms, the "proletarian" party that
implements the ideology in history.
Like
the word "religion," the term "Islam" is loaded with
multiple meanings. While it is possible, at least theoretically, to express a
meaning with it, in practice this is not possible because it has also become
loaded with countless meanings that may sometimes coincide with the original
meaning of the word. It is not necessary for these meanings to exist in the
mind of the learner or listener, but it is sufficient for them to be widespread
in the cultural environment, so that it becomes impossible to use the word to
express and convey the original meaning. It is essentially a term that refers
to a specific religion and a specific field, rather than a general term that
denotes a meaning independent of each field, such as: freedom, liberation,
equality, or humanity. Even if the word is used from its etymological meaning,
its historical meaning is stronger and more appropriate for the mind. It is
difficult to abstract the mind and free it from its common meaning and force it
to adhere to the original etymological meaning. The term "liberation"
is the new term that expresses the content of "Islam" more than the
old term. The one who submits to God first frees himself from all the shackles
that bind him, and this is the act of liberation that begins with the first
half of the Shahada, "There is no god." Once the person is freed from
the shackles, he performs the second act, which is the affirmation, "There
is no god but God." Islam is the liberation of human feelings from all
shackles of oppression and tyranny, whether material or political. The word
"peace" expresses the content of "Islam" more than the word
itself, because Islam is what achieves inner peace for the human being after
his liberation from all shackles of oppression and slavery. Then it is Islam
that achieves a unified society without classes, exploitation, or monopoly, and
thus peace arises in society. It is also Islam that regulates the relations of
nations with each other on the basis of mutual sovereignty and alliances of
peace. (Heritage and Renewal - pp. 112-116).
Third: The
relationship of the method to the West
In an interview with
Al-Arabi magazine, in response to the accusation of relying on Western methods
despite the West’s attacks on orientalism, Dr. Hassan Hanafi responds,
Your question is important, of course, and people
often ask me, after I create a work, what is your approach ? No
matter what my answer, I am the loser. If I say that my approach is analytical,
descriptive, structural, or dialectical, they will say: Then why do you
criticize the West ? You
are a son of the West. I reply: And treat me with that which caused the disease.
Nevertheless, my position remains weak. If I say that my approach is the
analysis of experiences, they will refer me to one of the Western approaches (the
phenomenological approach). I completed my first thesis on the phenomenological
approach in 1965. I have two books in French on the interpretation of
phenomenology and the phenomenology of interpretation. In any case, it seems
that methodology—which is the dominant feature of European thought—has become
the sole frame of reference for any creative Arab research.
Methodology
is, of course, important, and I wanted the methodology I referred to in " Heritage and Renewal,"
because heritage is alive as a psychological reservoir. I refer the text to the
emotional experience I experience, and at the same time, I transfer the
emotional experience to the experience of the era and the experience of society.
My
approach is an experiential analysis approach, analyzing texts as living
experiences, because heritage is still alive within us. It is therefore a
matter of re-choosing between alternatives. If that doesn't work, I invent new
ones that the ancients didn't. It is true that I have a method, but no matter
how much effort I put into it, the West has won, and the Western frame of
reference has become the constant standard for judgment. Arab research is in an
unenviable position because its creativity is always referred to Western
doctrine. We may need more time and experience until the reference centers
regarding the research issue are multiple.
Fourth: Objectivity
and subjectivity in the method
In the same interview with Al-Arabi magazine, in
response to the question:
The focus on methodological issues in your work
stems from a problematic point: objective knowledge may appear to be purely
subjective. Does the phenomenological approach negate objective reality and
transform it into an conscious reality ?
Dr.
Hassan Hanafi : there are two conceptions of the subject: the traditional
conception we inherited from the nineteenth century, i.e., the conformity of
judgments to facts. When I say: The sun is shining, and the sun is shining, the
judgment is objective; this is what is called the conformity of the world of
the mind with the world of the visible. Another type of objectivity is the agreement
of a group of people in issuing judgments; this was the consensus of the
ancients. There is a third meaning: the conformity of judgments with individual
emotional experiences, or the conformity of judgments with the general judgment
of humanity. However, if we want to transcend the last century's conception of
the objectivity of the natural sciences, which they have also transcended,
because in modern natural sciences there are no longer facts in the
nineteenth-century sense; reality and nature are merely fluctuations;
therefore, there is no objectivity, but there is relativity. As for the
objectivity I seek, it is: To what extent does what I say agree with the
analyses of others if they analyzed the same experiences and the same texts ? And to what extent is it influential
and effective in my time, that is, in resolving its main problem ? Objectivity is objectivity in analyzing shared
experiences and in their effectiveness in bringing about social change. Hence,
I have two measures of objectivity: the agreement of a group of researchers on
something, and the extent of its influence on social reality. These are two new
conditions through which I emerge from the suspicion of isolation and
subjectivity. Our traditional conception of subjectivity is also a
nineteenth-century conception, as a self without content or subject. However,
if we return to the subjective conceptions of Hegel and Fichte, subjectivity at
its highest peak is objectivity, and if the subject is conceived, then it
becomes a self.
His most important works
·
Heritage and
Renewal - 1980
Reconstructing ancient heritage:
·
From Doctrine
to Revolution (Five Parts) - 1988
·
From Transmission
to Creativity (9 parts) – 2000-2002
·
From Text
to Reality (Two Parts) – 2003-2004
·
From Annihilation
to Survival – 2008
·
From Transmission to
Reason (Three Parts), 2009-2010
The position on Western heritage:
·
Phenomenology of
Interpretation: An Attempt at an Existential Interpretation of the New
Testament (translated) – 1965/2006
·
The Interpretation of
Phenomenology: The Current State of the Phenomenological Method and Its
Application to Religious Phenomenology (Translated) - 1966/2006
·
Introduction to
Orientalism - 1991
·
Fichte , Philosopher
of Resistance - 2003
·
Bergson, Philosopher
of Life - 2008
Renaissance thought:
·
Contemporary Issues -
1977
·
Islamic Studies -
1981
·
Philosophical Studies -
1987
·
Religion and
Revolution in Egypt (8 parts) – 1989
·
Dialogue between the
Levant and the Maghreb - 1990
·
Concerns of
Thought and Homeland (two parts) - 1997
·
Generations Dialogue
1998
·
Jamal al-Din
al-Afghani - 1998
·
Religion ,
Culture,
and Politics in the Arab World – 1998
·
Time Siege (three parts)
- 2004
·
Muhammad Iqbal, Philosopher
of Subjectivity - 2009
In
political thought:
·
From Manhattan
to Baghdad - 2004
·
The Roots
of Tyranny and the Prospects of Freedom - 2005
·
Homeland Without
an Owner - 2008
·
The Three Circles Theory, Egypt,
the Arabs and the World - 2008
·
The current
Arab reality - 2011
·
The Egyptian
Revolution in its first year - 2011
Investigation and criticism :
·
Al-Mu'tamad
in the Principles of Jurisprudence by Abu Al-Hussein Al-Basri (two parts) -
Damascus 1964
·
Khomeini's Islamic Government -1979
·
Jihad of the Soul by
Khomeini - 1979
Translations:
·
Examples of
Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages - Alexandria 1968
·
A Theological and
Political Treatise, Spinoza - 1973
·
Lessing : The
Education of the Human Race - 1977
·
Sartre :
The
Transcendence of the Existent I - 1977
In English:
·
Religious dialogue and revolution , Cairo - 1977
·
Islam in
the Modern World ( Two Parts ,
Cairo – 1995
·
Cultures and Civilizations, conflict or Dialogue ? Cairo - 2005
In French:
·
Methods of Interpretation , Paris – 1965
·
The Interpretation of
Phenomenology (L'exégèse de la
phenomenology) Paris - 1966
·
Phenomenology of Interpretation, Paris - 1966
Studies about him :
o Heritage, , the West, and Revolution: A Study of Authenticity and Modernity in the
Thought of Hassan Hanafi - Nahed
Hattar, 1985
o The dialectic of
the self and the other, critical readings in the thought of Hassan Hanafi -
prepared by Ahmed Abdel Halim - 1997
o Hassan Hanafi's Philosophy, an Analytical and Critical Study - Edited
by Dr. Mustafa El-Nashar and others, 2017, New Book Publishing and Distribution
o The Revival of Nasserism - A Critical Reading
of Hassan Hanafi's Projects: "The Islamic Left", "The Science of
Occidentalism" (and Their Uncritical Readings), Martin
Rixinger (in English) - 2007
o Nasserism Revitalized – A
Critical Reading in Hassan Hanafi's Projects “the Islamic Left” and
“Occidentalism” (and their uncritical readings), Martin Riexinger, Gottingen.
o Hassan Hanafi's Approach, an Analytical and
Critical Study - Dr.
Fahd Al-Qurashi - 2012
From his articles
·
The Zionist Entity and the Jewish Question -
Al-Arabi
Magazine - 1999
·
The Future of Arab Philosophical Thought in a
Changing World: The Problem and the Solution - Arab
Affairs, 2000
·
European Consciousness and the “Mentalism” of Colonialism -
Al-Ittihad
Newspaper - 2007
·
" The Islamic Left"...and Fried Ice - Al-Ittihad Newspaper - 2008
·
The Philosophy of Freedom - Al-Mustaqbal
Al-Arabi Magazine, 2009
·
The Self and the Other... Prisoners of
Simplistic Judgments and Stereotypes - Qantara
Website - 2009
Dialogues
·
Dr. Hassan Hanafi and Dr. Wafiq
Sulaytin - Al-Arabi
Kuwaiti Magazine
·
A dialogue with the Egyptian thinker Dr.
Hassan Hanafi on the renewal of Islamic thought - Dar
Al Fikr
·
Manarat Program - Al
Arabiya Channel
Articles about him
o Phenomenology of Interpretation: A Reading of
the Analysis of Philosophical Discourse in Hassan Hanafi - Muhammad Hashim Abdullah, Philosophical
Papers Magazine
o The Problem of Renewal in the Thought of
Hassan Hanafi - Karima Karbia, Journal of Arts and Social
Sciences, Sultan Qaboos University
o The Problem of Heritage and the Other in
Contemporary Arab Thought, A Reading of Hassan Hanafi’s Thought –
Abdel
Hadi Bouhsi, Minerva Magazine
o Hassan Hanafi and the Ethics of Philosophy,
or: How Can We Be Philosophers - Mounes Bakhdara, Believers Without Borders
Foundation
o Heritage and Renewal, Project Structure and
Main Elements – Mohamed Helmy Abdel Wahab, Asharq Al-Awsat
Newspaper
o The problem of methodology in Hassan Hanafi's
thought - Mohamed
Helmy Abdel Wahab, Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper
Texts (in Arabic)
o The Crisis of Curricula in Islamic Studies - Heritage and Renewal - Part Three.
o The Determined Consciousness “Attributes” From
Doctrine to Revolution – Part Two “The Perfect Man – Monotheism” – Chapter Six.
o Establishing the structure - From text to reality – Part One, Chapter
Five.
o Interpretation -
From Transmission to Reason, Part One: Qur’anic Sciences – Chapter Three.
o Scientific Consciousness From
Annihilation to Survival, Part One: Objective Consciousness – Chapter Four.
Edited by
Samir Abu Zaid