The central theme of this study is the question of turath (cultural heritage) as perceived by contemporary Arab thinkers since the Arab defeat by Israel in 1967. The diverse understandings of turath have raised various questions with respect to it, yielding a plethora of opinions that make it difficult to come up with a common definition. This unstable view of the phenomenon has led to what may be called "the problematic of turath." This study asks whether turath has the roots of the problematic or whether it is mainly the positions on it that have led to its problematization. An attempt to explore the term reveals that the contemporary meaning assigned to turath is ideological in nature, such that it is perceived as a tool for either progress or decline. To understand how this ideologization operates, the study looks at two antithetical positions on turath: that of the Islamic-modernist, H&dotbelow;asan H&dotbelow;anafi (b.1935) and that of the secular-modernist, Adonis (b. 1930). Their positions are described in the light of their intellectual and ideological backgrounds, and analyzed in view of their primary texts. The study concludes that their "imagined" visions of turath reflect biased thinking, an understanding of turath that is adapted to their own ideological stance. As an Islamic phenomenologist, H&dotbelow;anafi perceives Islamic revelation as a phenomenon present to consciousness, regarding it as authoritative due to its presumed "uncorrupted" character. This makes it suitable to any place and time and renders it the only legitimate source for renewal and progress. However, the fact that he feels a rereading of turath is necessary to achieve this goal reflects a paradox in his discourse, whereby the same turath becomes simultaneously the chief problem and the chief solution for Arab-Muslim society. By contrast, Adonis, as a secular deconstructionist, looks at the inherited turath as a "text" with a static/dynamic dualism, and tries to show that the static elements of turath, which always appear stable, logical and capable of achieving progress, make it otherwise. For him, divine revelation --- which is responsible for the predominance of the static and hence an obstacle to human freedom, creativity and progress --- must be deconstructed. This paves the way for his own agenda of replacing the static, i.e., religious elements, with dynamic or secular elements, which alone can enable the reconstruction of a new civilization. But in the process, Adonis may only be replacing the religious with the secular and merely setting in place a new static dimension.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis compares and contrasts the responses of Hasan H&dotbelow;anafi (Egypt, b. 1935), Muh&dotbelow;ammad `Abid al-Jabiri (Morocco, b. 1936) and Nurcholish Madjid (Indonesia, b. 1939) to the slogan "Back to the Qur'an and the Sunna," a slogan that many modern Sunni reformers consider as the ideal solution to the decline of Islam in the modern age. The comparison is analyzed in the light of H&dotbelow;anafi's three dimensional Islamic reform project known as Heritage and Modernity ( Al-Turath wa al-Tajdid). Their responses to the factors that have led to the decline of Islam in the modern age will be compared from the perspective of the first and second dimensions of his project, which examine the implications of the classical Islamic and Western heritages, respectively, for the reform of Islam. It is, however, in the context of the third dimension of H&dotbelow;anafi's project, which deals with the theory and practice of interpretation, that we will examine their hermeneutics of the return to the Qur'an and the Sunna. In the process we will demonstrate how their respective backgrounds, political influences and concerns have led each of them to adopt a position that is, at one and the same time, radical and traditional.