Editorial 

An extensive corpus of literature on the phenomenon of the Islamic 
movement as a reaction to modernization and modernity has appeared dur-
ing the past two decades. In this important category of research, Islamic 
discourse and its sociopolitical impact may be explained in tenns of the 
growing sense of alienation and exclusion generated by the changes of 
modem times. As a result, a dichotomous model of analysis has been 
widely employed in many of the recent approaches to Islam and Muslims, 
a model that pits the "modem," "progressive," and "rational" against the 
"traditional," "reactionary," and "emotional." 

In contrast, only a few attempts have been made to understand con-
temporary Islamic discourse(s) and movements as the quintessential prod-
ucts of the modernization process in the Muslim world. The case for this 
alternative, though complementary, approach can be formulated on the 
basis of a sociocultural analysis of the views and backgrounds of modem 
lslamists. 

For more than thirteen centuries of its history, Islam was defined intel-
lectually and practically by the ulama class. This vital and pervasive social 
force, although open and accessible to various sections of society, was not 
without its own boundaries in the areas of culture, education, or piety. 
Progressively, of course, and for reasons that cannot be dealt with here, the 
ulama class was transformed into an established social institution and pre-
served by families with long scholarly traditions and a complex network 
of a particular kind of power. 

Twentieth-century Islamists are, by and large, graduates of modem 
(western?) schools who have received intensive training in modem disci-
plines and methodologies. Their breeding milieu, in most cases, are mod-
em urban centers in the Muslim world and modem social classes. Thus 
they have little to do with the ancient institution of the ulama. In fact, their 
advent has marked an era of decline for the ulama class. Traditional Islam, 
or that of the ulama, has been and will always be a strong tributary to con-
temporary Islamic thought and its world vision. But the latter's idioms, 
logic, symbols, structural relations, inner dynamics, and ultimate goals are 
necessarily of modem geneaology. 

In this issue of AJISS, A. I. Tayob presents a brilliant study on the 
"Paradigm of Knowledge of the Modem Islamic Resurgence." Grounding 
his analysis on Foucault's themes of power relations between disciplines, 



knowledge, and modem society, and on Kuhn's discussion of paradigm 
and paradigm shift, Tayob embarks on a compelling journey to unmask 
the intellectual system of modem Islam. Tayob observes conclusively that, 
as a paradigm, this system "has the power to legitimate, explore, and 
exclude." A. A. Abdel Rahman ("An Islamic Perspective on Organiza-
tional Motivation"), L. Safi ("Leadership and Subordination: An Islamic 
Perspective"), and M. I. Anjum ("An Islamic Scheme of Equitable Distri-
bution of Income and Wealth") are all Muslim social scientists with a spe-
cial focus on the Islamization of Knowledge concept. Their approach to 
their subject matter is rooted, on the one hand, in Islamic texts and tradi-
tions while, on the other hand, it branches out to respond to the demands 
and imperatives of modem times. More importantly, one can discern eas-
ily in their essays, as well as in that of T. J. al 'Alwan1 ("Missing Dimen-
sions in Contemporary Islamic Movements"), the evolving convergence of 
Islamic thought and the study of Islam, as the borders between the two 
fields are becoming increasingly insignificant. 

This issue's final article is by M. A. Chaudhary, who writes on 
"Orientalism on Variant Readings of the Qur'an: The Case of Arthur 
Jeffrey." With a great deal of patience and erudition, Chaudhary dissects, 
questions, and responds meticulously to the old-fashioned orientalists' 
analyses of variant Qur'anic codices. No less important is Chaudhary's 
mastery of Qur'anic Arabic and his knowledge of the early Islamic geo-
cultural environment. These features distinguish this pertinent contribu-
tion within the field of Qur'anic studies. 

We would like to take this opportunity to clarify a matter in the last 
issue. Dr. Zafar lshaq Ansari, who authored the article "Islamic Thought 
in the South Asian Subcontinent: The Eighteenth Century," extends his 
deepest apology for an error committed in his paper. Dr. Ansari has 
informed us that the idea of the seminar arose in several discussions with 
his colleagues but that the actual statement was drafted by Professor 
Muhammad Khalid Masud of IIU Pakistan's Islamic Research Institute. 
He not only ably expressed the basic idea of the seminar but also added a 
great wealth of detail. It is a contribution for which the credit should go 
to him. We would also like to mention that the research note 
"Islamization of Social Sciences in Nigeria: Problems and Prospects," 
which appeared in the last issue, had a co-author whose name was omit-
ted: Umar Chika Aliyu, Lecturer, Department of Economics, Usmanu 
Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, Nigeria. 

In conclusion, we would like to inform our contributors once again 
that they must follow the manuscript guidelines outlined at the beginning 
of this journal. Such articles will be given precedence over all others due 
to the time required to prepare each issue of the journal. 

Basheer Nafi