The saying that 鈥楾he pen is mightier than the sword鈥� accurately describes the life-story of Sayyid Qutb ( 爻賷丿 賯胤亘 ); who was an Egyptian prominent revivalist, ideologue, thinker, and a leading intellectual of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (al 'Ikhwan ul- Muslimun) in the 1950s and 60s.
He is best known for his work on redefining the role of Islam in social and political change, particularly in his book Ma'alimu fi-l-Tareeq (Milestones). But the majority of his theory could be found in his extensive Qur'anic commentary(tafseer) : Fi zilal il-Qur'an (In the shade of the Qur'an); the noteworthy multi-volume work for its innovative method of interpretation; which contributed significantly to modern perceptions of Islamic concepts.
His early life was spent in an Egyptian village. Then he moved to Cairo where he received his university education between 1929 and 1933, and where he started his career as a teacher. During his early career, Qutb devoted himself to literature as an author and critic. Writing such novels as Ashwak (Thorns) and even elevating Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz from obscurity. In 1939, he became a functionary in Egypt's Ministry of Education (Wizarat ul-Ma'arif ). From 1948 to 1950, he went to the United States on a scholarship to study the educational system, studying at Colorado State College of Education (Now the University of Northern Colorado).
It was during this period that Qutb wrote his first major theoretical work of religious social criticism, al-'Adala Tul-Ijtima'iyyatu Fil-Islam (Social Justice in Islam), which was published in 1949, during his time overseas.
Though Islam gave him much peace and contentment, he suffered from respiratory and other health problems throughout his life, thus he never married.
Qutb was extremely critical of many things in the United States: its materialism, brutal individualism, merciless economic system, unreasonable restrictions on divorce, sick enthusiasm for sports, "animal-like" mixing of the sexes (which went on even in churches), and lack of support for the Palestinian struggle.
Qutb discovered -very early- that the major aspects of the American life were primitive and "shocking".
His experience in the United States is believed to have formed in part the impetus for his rejection of Western values and his move towards Islam upon returning to Egypt. Resigning from the civil service, he joined the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1950s and became editor-in-chief of the Brothers' weekly al-'Ikhwan ul-Muslimun, and later head of the propaganda section, as well as an appointed member of the Working Committee and of the Guidance Council, the highest branch.
The discussion about the difference place of religion in islamic government versus christian government was truely eye opening. Required reading for anyone dealing in islamic nations.
To be clear I am not Muslim. This is for a pols research essay comparing Qutb's political thought with that of Rousseau.
While certainly radical in the final edition, Qutb's critique of liberalism, socialism, imperialism and neocolonialism remains insightful and refreshing. Chapters 3-5 in particular are worth a read for anyone interested in political philosophy and critical accounts of the enlightenment from outside the west.
I don't know what to say about Qutb's book, really, except I suppose it was interesting to encounter a form of social criticism that is based in a framework of values so alien to my own. I was interested, for example, by his idea that it is impossible to understand Islamic culture in terms of non-Islamic perspectives such as Marxist social criticism, but that was about as far as I could agree with anything that he said. Beyond that, there is simply nothing in the book that one can accept, unless one is already convinced that the revelation of the Prophet in the Qu'ran is the final word.
It's difficult for me to understand, even intellectually, how a writer could be so bolstered against any possibility of self-criticism, and that's where we simply fundamentally differ. From my frame of reference, Qutb's view is circular, and crudely so. Islam is the great message of history, and if there are periods of Muslim history in which things didn't go so well for most of the people, it's because they weren't Islamic enough, or because they were the wrong kind of Muslim. So the Qu'ran has everything you need, and it's very clear about what man is to do, except for all of those Muslims who keep getting it wrong.
Something is wrong with them, I suppose. But then something is wrong with everyone, which is the greatness of the Qu'ran, and of God's mercy - anyone can simply embrace Islam, and you will be lead out of error and into redemption. Except for all those Muslims who get it wrong, and therefore experience war, poverty, and terrible inequities and injustice.
So yeah, you can play that game, if you want. I'll be over here, while you do.
Islam as an all encompassing system makes a lot of sense in theory and in many sections this book perhaps is unfairly vilified. Qutb presents an Islam that sounds no different than what an Ibn Al Arabi might express. Its simply "Orthodox Islam". However the problematic sections while small in print, are extremist and total in expression and vague enough to allow any interpretation. The most problematic are those that sanction force to keep society in line.
There is a natural law that we follow simply by breathing and nothing you or I do can change the fact that we need air. That's where God is. By nature we extend that to every area. Yet the problem with Islamic states of any kind is who gets to decide the laws and perhaps more importantly the interpretation and enforcement of said laws. For there's always interpretation and that's where the evil resides as we can see with Islamist movements today. Of course this is also true with a Jewish state forcibly keeping out Arabs and Muslims or a Christian state "blessed of God and on a shining hill" bombing those who don't believe or speak like them. So with this view it's easy to say that religion and politics don't mix yet we all take our belief systems to every election and our individual worldviews combine to give us our leadership.
How should an all encompassing way of life look when your neighbors dont want to go along with it? If you say they should be forced then perhaps re-examine your belief system. This is worth a read even if you find much to disagree with.