Civilizational Problem or Political Crisis? Comparative Analysis of Mālek

After having reached the stage where Islamic civilization delivered optimum, it started declining gradually. Nevertheless, in different epochs of Islamic history, some remarkable personalities emerged reclaiming the functionality of iḥyā; i.e., the renaissance principle. In the contemporary times, Mālek Bennabī and Syed Mawdūdī have phenomenally contributed to the Muslim renaissance discourse. Both of them have critically examined the pathology of jumūd; i.e., the tendency of stagnation in the Muslim world. Although, they identified similar causes and symptoms, nevertheless, having lived in different socio-political contexts, they came up with certain methodological differences in their approach. Both the scholars developed a systematic response suggesting a way forward--the method of renaissance. In Bennabī’s discourse, the pathology is fundamentally civilizational, i.e., crisis in the civilizational equation between man, soil and time. While in Mawdūdī’s discourse, the pathology is fundamentally political; i.e., crisis in the nature of political relation between state, society and religion. Against this backdrop, the paper contends to; first, the paper presents a brief analysis of Bennabī’s civilizational approach and Mawdūdī’s political approach in order to understand their scheme of thought while engaging with the question of jumūd and iḥyā. Second, the paper juxtaposes the three key concepts namely civilization, religion, and revival used by both Bennabī and Mawdūdī in their theoretical elaborations to outline the differences and similarities in their method of analysis.


Introduction
Civilizations rise and fall.In the context of Islam, rise and fall of nations and civilizations is a historical principle controlled by the "indiscriminate law of God." 1 There is a correlation between the life of civilization (ḥayāt al-ḥaḍārah) and the life of man (ḥayāt al-insān).The existing state of man reflects the existing state of his(er) civilization and vice versa.In a sense, man is the miniature prototype of any civilization.In similitude to man, civilization takes birth (mīlād), celebrates youth (awj), and reaches oldhood (ufūl).The Islamic civilization, like other civilizations, after centuries of social evolution, expansion and development, started revealing signs of decline by the end of the 18 th century.The function of 'transformative ethics', 'knowledge production' and 'critical thought process'-the three revolutionary essentials of Islamic civilization-observed swift diminution.Consequently, the delivering capacity: intrinsic feature of a civilization to facilitate the required conditions encouraging man's performativity, reduced to the level of inertia.Islamic civilization lost its proficiency of employing the productive synchronization of spiritual, ethical and material values into the functioning of its institutional mechanism.
The decline of Islamic civilization overthrew the dynamic physiognomies of the "magnificent past".The results were obvious; the Muslims lost the inspiring ideology, centralizing identity, shared legacy, and motivation of common defence.They allowed themselves, as individuals and societies, to be colonized.Living under the structured patterns of "colonial socialization" for decades, the Muslims, from the Middle East to North Africa and from the South Asia to Central Asia, were compelled to choose one among the two options.That is, either to normalize the colonization dynamics or to dehabitualize the colonized behaviour through critical analysis and liberation movement.Arguably, the second position was "call for renaissance" (al-nahḍah).In the recent past, Bennabī and Mawdūdī chose the second option; i.e., renaissance over normalization.In this paper my purpose is to do two things: first, present a brief analysis of Mālek Bennabī's civilizational approach and Syed Mawdūdī's political approach in order to examine their methodological engagement; second, juxtapose three key concepts; civilization, religion, and revival conceptualized and applied by both Bennabī and Mawdūdī in their theoretical analysis to outline the essential differences and similarities in their method and approach.

Mālek Bennabī's Civilizational Approach
Mālek Bennabī (1905-1973) was a renowned Algerian thinker.He is believed to be the second systematic civilizational theorist after Ibn Khaldūn (1332-1406). 2Bennabī wrote on diverse issues such as philosophy of history, social thought, social and historical change, and culture, nevertheless, theorization of civilizational question occupies centrality in his entire scheme of thought.His critical enquiry into the universal laws, existing conditions of culture and rapidly changing social structures in a systematic civilizational framework make him methodologically unique.Bennabī witnessed the consequences of decline of the Muslim Algeria.This led him to identify and approach the causes of the Muslim decadence and, simultaneously, to conceptualize the cycle of rebirth of the Muslim civilizationthe renaissance dynamic. 3In Bennabī's frame of reference, lack of taraqqī (scientific advancement), taqqadum (material development) or dawlah (political state) is not the whole Muslim problem, but rather, part of the problem.The Muslim problem, in Bennabī analysis, is entrenched in the uncritical understanding of the 'social change' and its impact on human performance.In Bennabian context, the appropriate approach to problematize the topic is civilizational because, as he claims, "the problem of any people is but that of its civilization." 4Inferring, to have the critical assessment of their problems, the Muslims seriously need to understand their civilization: its values and its morals, its intellectual and social foundations, and then examine their own psycho-behavioural equation vis-à-vis those referential values and foundations. 5 establish man's relation with civilization, Bennabī formulated his famous civilizational formula: "Civilization= Man+Soil+Time".In Bennabī's equation, man, soil and time are the "rudimentary capital" of a civilization. 6Bennabī identifies man as "the fundamental condition of all civilizations." 7mplying, only man (insān referring both genders) has been blessed with the ability to trigger the 'action of change' while as other factors such as soil (turāb) and time (waqt) facilitate the medium wherein which the change takes place.According to Bennabī, the Muslims face the abysmal backwardness because they "no longer know how to apply their genius to the given conditions of soil and time." 8ennabī's renaissance theory is suggestive of "inside to outside" change, resulting in the transformation of an individual (farad) first, followed by the collective.Bennabī has criticized those Muslim reformists who emphasized to change the milieu-the victim of the change-rather than the man-the creator of the change. 9In Benlahcene's analysis of Bennabī's 'realm of figures', man naturally comes out to be, as I call him, the "carrier element" of a civilization.Thus, if man's action is positive, there will be harmony in the movement of civilization and concordance in its objectives.But, in the otherwise situation, there will be pandemonium and destruction. 10nnabī condemns the cultural aggression of the West, but he believed that the problem was more of the internal conditions; i.e., weak 'social relations network' of colonized subjects.He coined the term "al-qābilīyyah li al-istām'ar" translated as 'colonizability': the tendency to get colonized, to describe that internal problem.Thus, to Bennabī, "colonizability" of the Muslim mind is a major factor that allowed the colonizers to control the colonized Muslim subjects. 11To examine the dynamics of 'colonizability', it is imperative to understand Bennabī's three stages of civilization namely the spiritual stage, the rational stage and the instinctive stage.In the spiritual stage, man's natural instincts (fiṭrah) are controlled and streamlined under the guiding principles of religion through "organic synthesis." 12n the course of synthesis, according to Bennabī, homomatura (man of natural instincts) is transformed into the "conditioned man." 13 This stage, according to Bennabī, is the stage of dynamic transformation that marks the beginning of the "historical action".Applying this principle to Islamic civilization, Bennabī regarded the period between the first waḥy (revelation) at Hirā to the battle of Siffīn as the spiritual period of Islamic civilization.And, this stage, according to Bennabī, is the soul of the Islamic civilization. 14ter completing the spiritual stage, society moves into another stage called as rational stage.During this period, civilization flourishes in art and science.Rationality predominantly controls the human behaviour.This period, according to Bennabī, is the epitome of glory in the life of a civilization.Nevertheless, spiritual forces start losing their control and natural instincts start gaining freedom in this stage.Moreover, social functions are set free and man starts losing balance over his vital energy while performing social action.Applying this principle to Islamic civilization, Bennabī considered Umayyad period as the rational period of Islamic civilization. 15Finally, the civilization enters into its last stage, the instinctive stage.Since in this stage, social action is controlled by individualistic natural instincts, therefore, this period is marked by corruption and moral weakness.Society loses its streamlined character and natural instincts, applying Bennabī's expression, "no longer functions as a harmonious whole." 16Consequently, in the absence of moral function, members of society become absolutely free and society plunges into a worst state of lawlessness and chaos.The creativity and scientific temperament stops.Society becomes arrogant, ignorant and sterile.According to Bennabī, instinctive phase marks the loss of efficacy in the individual and collective behaviour and civilizational cycle ends.Applying this principle, Bennabī proposed that fourteenth century was the turning point of the decadence of Muslim civilization. 17According to Bennabī, the man of this stage is "man outside civilization" (al-rajul khārij al-ḥaḍāra). 18e brief discussion on Bennabī's thought underscores that it is the "man of ideas" who makes the civilization and not the reverse.Bennabī asserts, accumulation of things (takdīs) or race for scientific advancement and material development is not the real solution (al-ḥal al-ḥaqīqīyah), but rather it is superficial understanding of the problem which might provide a short-term solution.Nevertheless, it will create more problems instead of solving the problem in the long-term reference.Therefore, the process of renaissance has to start by critically analysing the problems of man, particularly his moral, social, intellectual and psychological problem, within the framework of civilizational conditions he lives.

Syed Mawdūdī's Political Approach
Syed Abul 'Alā Mawdūdī (1903-1979) was an "influential Islamist voice" 19 "systematic thinker" 20 and "leading interpreter" 21 of the Islam of modern era.Mawdūdī wrote almost on all subjects concerning the various aspects of Islamic way of life.Being trained in the traditional Islamic sciences, Mawdūdī' distinguished himself among his contemporaries by championing the "systemic approach" to Islam.He called for the revival of Islam, not as a ritualistic faith, but rather as the dynamic system of thought and action (niẓām al-fikr wa al-'amal). 22The systemic framework, according to Mawdūdī, is not his own innovation, but rather it is mentioned by God Himself that He perfected the religion (takmīl al-dīn) and conferred it as the perfection of His blessing (itmām al-n'imah) on Prophet Mohammad. 23In Mawdūdian interpretation, here "perfected the religion" means making Islam "the complete system (niẓām) answering all the questions of human life." 24In his analysis of the causes of the Muslim decadence, Mawdūdī asserts that the Muslim decadence began when the majority of the Muslims started treating Islam as a "ritualistic religion".That is, Islam, instead of being a dynamic social function, was reduced to few individualistic forms of worship ('ibādah).He argues, such "ritualistic understanding" (al-fahm al-sh'ā'irī) of Islam allowed infiltration of superstitious and irrational beliefs and disintegrated the Muslim intellectual milieu.As a result, Islam lost the determining position that it hold previously in socio-political matters.Moreover, according to Mawdūdī, it led to a far-reaching catastrophe, separating religion (dīn) from state (dawlah).The political institutions became corrupt and spirituality turned into a deadwood.This "internal crisis", in Mawdūdī's appraisal, unlocked a "welcome door" for the West to rule the Muslim East.Subsequently, Islam merely remained a factor in defining one's nominal identity. 25 the Mawdūdīan discourse, the problem of the Muslim decadence cannot be solved unless the Muslims reclaim the lost political legitimacy of Islam.To conceptualize this idea, Mawdūdī extensively wrote on political issues such as the concept of state, principles of legislation and execution, rights and duties, meaning of citizenship and civil society from the Islamic perspective.He criticized the contemporary political theories such as secularism, democracy, nationalism, capitalism, communism, and monarchism while using revelation (waḥy) aided by reason ('aql) to formulate his argument.For Mawdūdī, all these isms, having developed in a certain Western context, have no idea of spirituality and invalidate the role of divine guidance (ḥidāyah).Thus, instead of unravelling human sufferings, these formulations exceptionally added to the deepening of the problem.
Mawdūdī's political theory is based on the fundamental doctrine that religion is inseparable from politics.According to this definition, it is impossible for the Muslims to perform any sort of revival (iḥyā) or reform (iṣlāh) outside the circle of faith.And, faith could not become a determining force without a faith-based political structure.Therefore, for Mawdūdī, to be a Muslim is to create and live under an Islamic state, for ultimate sovereignty rests in the divine order. 26He further asserts that true Islam would become an ideal, incapable to function as a system and as a civilization, if it does not have its own laws and an authority enforcing those laws.He criticized the "non-political" and "maw'ūd" (reward) approach of prominent ulama such as Mawlānā Ashraf 'Alī Thanvī, Mawlānā Manzūr N'umāni, Mawlānā Ḥussāin Madnī, and Mawlānā Abul Hassan 'Alī Nadwī of his time on the grounds that their apologetic attitude brought more disgrace to Islam instead of making it practically a relevant "system of life." 27Having traced the history and method (manhaj) of the Prophets, as he claims, Mawdūdī asserts that establishment of an Islamic state is not maw'ūd; i.e., something given as a reward, but rather it is maqṣūd; i.e., the objective.Affirming his idea of Islamic state, he writes: "So, the end objective of the mission of the prophets has been to establish hukūmat-i ilāḥiyah (God's Sovereignty), and give effect to that entire system (nizām) of life that they had brought from God." 28 Mawdūdī centralized his political theory around the concept of hakūmat-i ilāḥiyah (God's Sovereignty), which he later renamed, on the consultation of Mawlānā Amīn Aḥsan Islāḥī, as iqāmah al-dīn (the establishment of the religion).According to Mawdūdī, iqāmah al-dīn would not be practically possible unless individual (farad) submit his personal and public life to the commandments of Islamic shari'ah. 29Elaborating on the theory of iqāmah al-dīn, he maintained that iqāmah al-dīn revolves around the three fundamental principles; tawḥid (Oneness of God), risālah (Prophethood) and khilāfah (vicegerency).In the words of Vali Nasr, "it was khilāfat that governed the intellectual and practical formulations on which Mawdūdī based the working of the state (Islamic state)." 30Mawdūdī calls this system of government as "theo-democracy" that is, a form government which is elected by the people but it operates under the guiding principles of shar'iah.Mawdūdī, much before Egyptian Syed Qutub, introduced the term jadīd jahillīyah (modern ignorance) to describe the state of socio-political affairs in the Muslim world on the grounds that these so-called Muslim states lack Islamic political principles. 31wdūdī wrote extensively providing religious basis to his political ideas.For example, he argued that the acts of worship ('ibādāt) are important because they serve as means of preparation (tarbīyah) to achieve the "higher objective", which is to establish the Law of God. 32Similarly, he views the Holy Qur'an as the "revolutionary message" to be read, understood and implemented.He retained the systemic language in his magnum opus exegesis of the Holy Qur'ān namely Tafhīm al-Qur'ān (Towards Understanding the Holy Qur'ān).In his controversial work, Qur'ān Kī Chār Bunyādī Iṣtilāḥain (The Four Basic Qur'ānic Terms), Mawdūdī challenged the orthodox meaning of the four basic Qur'ānic terms; ilah (divinity), rabb (lord), 'ibādah (worship) and dīn (religion).He presented them in a renewed explanation fitting to his systemic framework.For example, the term dīn in Mawdūdīan context is an "all embracing ethos" that includes politics on the top.Similarly, 'ibādah does not just connote to praise of God (in words or numbers) and seek salvation, but rather it is "revering, serving and obeying God in our whole lives." 33In his other significant works such as Al-Jihād Fil Islām (Jihād in Islam), Mas'alayie Qawmīyat (The Question of Nationalism), Islām Kā Niẓām-i Siyāsat (The Political System of Islam), Khilāfat-o-Mulūkiyat (The Caliphate and Kingship), and Tajdīd Wa Iḥyāy-i Din (History of Revivalist Movement in Islam), Mawdūdī reiterated his standpoint that one-time panacea for the Muslims is to replace the "absolute sovereignty of people" with the "absolute sovereignty of God." The brief discussion underlines the fact that in Mawdūdī's systemic framework, Islam essentially demands a "socio-political revolution", creating conducive circumstances for individual's spiritual and moral development.The foundation of the "socio-political revolution" for Mawdūdī is the Qur'ānic injunction that "you should establish religion and make no divisions in it." 34It is within this reference, Mawdūdī wrote about "social transformation," and "revival of Islamic political system."

Key Concepts used by Bennabī and Mawdūdī: Comparative Analysis
Bennabī and Mawdūdī both were raised in critical socio-political circumstances.Their fellow countrymen had started normalizing the cultural, scientific, and political superiority of the West.It is under such harsh conditions, Bennabī and Mawdūdī developed their thought.They both wrote books, articles and gave lectures over wide-range of subjects, criticising the Muslim status quo, political corruption-internal problems-and cultural aggression of the "colonial powers"external problem.Since, both were concerned about the renaissance of the Muslim world, therefore, primary focus was on those concepts and terms which were relevant to their scheme of thought.In this section, I compare three key concepts; civilization, religion, and revival applied by both Bennabī and Mawdūdī to engage with the problem of decadence and renaissance of the Islamic civilization.

Concept of Civilization
Bennabī adopted etiological approach in his civilizational research.This approach allowed him to critically examine the performance of human societies and changing dynamics of civilisations. 35ennabī primarily developed his thought around the civilizational question and other socio-political issues were discussed within that reference. 36He defined civilization as "[the] sum total of the moral as well as material conditions which allow a given society to provide each one of its members with all the social guaranties necessary for his development." 37According to Bennabī, for a nation to understand its problem and resolve it, it is quite important to comprehend the construction of its civilizational elements.In this context, Bennabī's understanding of the Islamic civilization is basically the diagnosis of the diseases in the Muslim world.In contrast, Mawdūdī's approach to civilization is more theopolitical.He asserts that a civilization comprises five elements: concept about worldly life, (ii) the aim of life, (iii) the fundamental thoughts and beliefs, (iv) the training of individuals, and (v) the collective system. 38In Mawdūdīan context, civilization itself has no power to control the rise or fall of a nation; rather, it is the nature of relationship with the belief ('aqīdah) and the system (of thought and action) emanating from it that controls the 'rise and downfall' of a nation.According to Mawdūdī, in compliance with Bennabī, conglomeration of arts and architecture, material manifestations of social life, style of culture and political conduct does not construct the essential core of a civilization.These structures evolve through historical process and represent different contours of development.They are not the actual creative values, i.e., the soul of civilization.For Mawdūdī, the soul of civilization is its system of belief.He was critical of the orientalistic position that the Arabs selectively collected materials from other civilizations and combined them to construct their own civilization.He argued that, the layout, the style of construction, and the purpose and its suitability to its purpose is essentially its (Islamic civilization's) own.However, the criticism Mawdūdī presented is more of theological nature.In Mawdūdīan context, Islamic civilization actually represents a broader version of the Muslim society, which employs articles of faith as its foundational basis. 39 Bennabī's theorization, civilization follows the cyclic course.It starts its journey from taking birth (mīlād) -the "spiritual stage"-, reaches to youth (awaj) -the "rational stage"and then finally there comes the oldhood (ufūl) -the "instinctive stage."In each stage, civilization produces men of different characteristics and capacities.Bennabī's famous civilizational equation (civilization= man+soil+time) suggests that the two sides of the equation are directly proportional to each other.That is, if a civilization fails to deliver to provide necessary conditions, man would not be able to make effective use of soil and time (in their social meaning).Similarly, if man fails to revive his ideas, he would not be able to revive his action (while utilizing the conditions of soil and time) which, in turn, would halt the progress of civilization. 40Mawdūdī also believed in the cyclic movement of civilization, however, he provides a different paradigm.For Mawdūdī, God has put permanent laws or sunnatu Allah out there in the cosmos.Everything, from the sub-atomic to huge celestial bodies, is subject to His divine Law.Mawdūdī extends the interference of "God's Law" into the sphere of human action and theorizes that "ups and downs of our history, our rise and fall, our progress or decay…are controlled by the same unavoidable and indiscriminate law of God." 41 Thus, in Mawdūdī's paradigm, it is imperative to have the deep analysis of man's relation with "God's Law" in order to examine the rise and fall of nations and civilizations.In view of Mawdūdī's analysis, the present wretched conditions of the Muslim nations are due to their negative relation with the "God's Law".
In contrast to Bennabī, Mawdūdī's understanding of civilizational progress in real sense has exclusively to do with Islam, as he believed that a civilised society can only be created through adopting the Islamic principles.The elements of civilization, according to Mawdūdī, will function positively if they are based on the Islamic values because all other values are corrupt and reflect temporary glory of jahillīyah.Since, Mawdūdī was more concerned about the systemic methodology; therefore, he linked civilizational elements with the articles of faith and presented a political articulation of the same. 42r Bennabī, moral factor (khulq) is the essence of civilization.In the absence of moral factor, a civilization would not be able to create the civilising milieu.Thus, political, economic, social and educational crises are basically the manifestations of the crisis-the real and core crisis.In other words, everything other than morality (linked to religion) is a product of civilization, impotent to create a civilizational change.Therefore, civilizational renewal has to start with morality. 43Mawdūdī endorses Bennabī's correlation of morality and civilizational renewal; however, his extensive deliberations on the political contextualization of Islam have undermined the scope of his moral observations.According Mawdūdī, Islamic civilization is fundamentally based on the religious values.He affirms that the basic goal towards which the Holy Qur'ān calls mankind is not the material development or scientific progress, rather it is the faith (īmān).Because faith, he further argues, builds a value-based human character in a morally upright culture.It unites people by giving them a common purpose, thought and action.For Mawdūdī, the moral code (niẓām al-ikhlāq) of Islam is universal and it ranges from the details of domestic life upto the field of international relations.This universality, in Mawdūdī's view, is a necessary condition for the progress of civilizations.He further argues, when Islamic civilization lost its moral system it, eventually, lost its original greatness. 44

Concept of Religion
Bennabī accepts the Khaldūnian view that the rise and fall of societies is primarily due to changes in their religious beliefs and ideas.Commitment to "moral function" of religion, Bennabī affirms, is the prerequisite condition for the rise of civilizations.He argues that religion functions like a "compound" that combines man, soil and time (three primary elements of civilization) and provides them direction to start and streamline the cycle of civilization. 45According to Benlahcene, religion is a "pivotal coefficient" in Bennabī's civilizational equation. 46It functions as a catalyst and a provider of the milieu wherein the other civilizational elements dynamically synthesize.Bennabī argues that it has been proved by the historical analysis that "all civilizations have their roots in religious sentiments." 47Thus, the Buddhist civilization has its roots in Buddhism, the Muslim civilization in Islam and the Western civilization in Christianity.For Bennabī, even "communist civilization" is basically a problem of Christian civilization since founding fathers of communism (Engels and Marx) have actually delinked genesis of the communist ideology from the cycle of Christian civilization. 48While accentuating the role of religion in the making of civilization, Bennabī asserts, civilization is born twice, "first when the religious idea is born, and second when the idea becomes recorded in souls, and is entered into the events of history." 49wdūdī, endorsing Bennabī, also recognizes the centrality of religion, however, in a politically conceptualized systemic framework.For Mawdūdī, religion is a "total scheme of life", a "revolutionary ideology" and a "dynamic movement" that controls the direction of social change.His approach to religion is totalistic, producing rational interdependence of Islamic morality, law, and political theory. 50awdūdī strongly criticised the confluence of traditional mystic positions on defining the role of religion; as a mere source of ecstatic experiences and produced a socio-politically functional elucidation of religious themes.He argues, the Qur'ānic term for religion is dīn which connotes "the complete way of life."It is composed of four factors: (i) supreme authority; (ii) submission to such authority; (iii) the system of thought and action established through exercising that authority; and, (iv) retribution meted out by that authority, in consideration of loyalty and obedience to it, or rebellion and transgression against it. 51In contrast to orthodox interpretations, for Mawdūdī, shari'ah is the law of the state (religious state) and 'ibādah (worship) amounts to submitting to that law.To underline the correlation between religion and politics, he symbolized the relation as "roots with the trunk and the branches with the leaves [of a tree]." 52nnabī emphasized the significance of religion in the movement of society towards civilizational progress.He argues, structural construction of any civilization cannot be based solely on the development of art, science and technology, since the nature and development of "social relationships" depend on the spiritual relation between man and God.Implying, religion is the motivation that reinforces the social relations, organizing society to take over its historical and social function, and strengthen its purpose through a shared spiritual bonding. 53He acknowledges the significance of correlating the religious factors with social associations and ascertains that any disequilibrium in that construction will lead to degeneration of civilization.Bennabī also highlighted the role of messengers (divinely chosen religious leaders) in the making of Islamic civilization.For Bennabī, while founders of Western civilization are the Greek and Roman artists, the Islamic civilization is led by the prophets and messengers.Bennabī explains the fact that the religious principles taught by the prophets under divine scriptural guidance promote best kind of morals within the society.Nevertheless, he argues, the Muslims were not able to maintain the continuity of their civilizational magnitude as they failed to allow religion to perform its "social function".Mawdūdī, by contrast, stressed the role of religion towards establishing the Law of God.For Mawdūdī, a major cause of the entire circle of societal problems is the corrupt political leadership.Supporting his argument, Mawdūdī quotes evidence from a historical idiom, "people stand by the religion of their rulers." 54He argues, unless the Muslims have a "pious leadership", the Muslim societies would not be able to revive.By referring to "pious leadership", he actually meant the political leadership that will establish the Law of God in its true spirit.He believed Islam as a source of "the just politics" which, consequently, constructs a society wherein all social associations are formulated on the basis of divine balance.Mawdūdī endorses Bennabī's observation on the role of prophets in the making of Islamic civilization.He asserts, the belief in messengers is "the soul and source of vitality" and "distinguished characteristic" of Islamic civilization. 55Mawdūdī claims that the civilizations built by the prophets are universal, altruistic and free from potential human corruptions such as bigotry, hypocrisy, and, prejudice because prophets are under continuous Divine supervision.And, prophethood enjoys opulence of religious sanctity. 56However, endorsing Bennabī's analysis, Mawdūdī argues that Islamic civilization, despite having distinctive social and moral character of prophethood, could not uphold its greatness.The reason, according to Mawdūdī, was that the Muslim political leaders abandoned the political methodology of the prophets (that is khilāfah) which was rooted in the unconditional sovereignty of God and the unconditional servitude of man.This was a catastrophic transition of the Muslim polity from khilāfah to mulūkiyah (kingship). 57

Concept of Revival
Bennabī believed that the Muslim decadence is curable since it has inherent properties of renewal.His central concern, therefore, was to identify those properties and develop a framework initiating a new cycle of growth.He believes that there is paramount need to understand and talk about the "duties" of man (Muslims in particular context) rather than "rights".He asserts that the sense of "duties" has more to do with the modification of person's individual and social behaviour. 58If the "duties" are paid due consideration, then, despite all the obscurantisms, maraboutisms, and colonialisms, the revival of the Islamic civilization will begin its course of action.Bennabī repeatedly quotes the Qur'ānic phrase: "Verily, God will never change the condition of a people until they change it themselves" to support his argument. 59This particular Qur'ānic principle provided him with strong evidence to conclude that "internal change," which includes man's understanding and commitment towards duties, should be the basis of the Muslims revival.The principle of "internal change" describes the two concepts fundamental to Bennabī's renaissance thought.The first concept is his belief that the effect of "colonizability" will end as a result of "internal change," determining psychological response of the colonized to the colonizer.On practical level, the process of "internal change" includes mobilization of human and material resources.The second concept is that, besides material elements, there are transcendental elements that play a significant role in the process of change on all levels: individual, societal, and historical.To put it in Bennabian words, "behind the close reasons of historical events, there are farreaching ones." 60Bennabī asserts that the initial voices of revivalist movement represented by intellectuals such as Jamāl al-Dīn Afghānī, Arslān al-Kawākibi, Aḥmad Riḍā and Muḥammad 'Abdu, failed to produce any remarkable social change.These representatives of the Muslim revivalist movement lacked methodological approach vis-à-vis initiating the cycle of change.Bennabī posits that instead of recognizing the "internal problem" these revivalists frequently criticized the external factors. 61awdūdī established a religio-political movement-Jammāt-i Islāmi.Mawdūdī defined his revivalist endeavours in terms of the Islamic concept of tajdīd (revival).He applied tajdīd not just as a pure religious doctrine but, according to Nasr, as a historical paradigm to relate political demands to faith, mobilize the Muslims, and, above all, claim the authority to reinterpret and rationalize the Islamic faith. 65Mawdūdī, endorsing Bennabī, also criticized the earlier reformers such as Mujaddid Alaf al-Thānī Shaykh Sarhindī and Shah Walīullah Muḥadith Deḥlavī for their asystematic approach, more inclination towards taṣṣawuf (mysticism) and not transforming their revivalist thought into a movement. 66His critique was that these intellectuals neglected their revivalist efforts and got stuck into their miraculous claims which added to the problem of the Muslim decline in collective thought and action. 67

Conclusion
Both of the thinkers, Mālek Bennabī and Syed Mawdūdī, faced the two major challenges.The first challenge was of internal nature, conceptualized by Bennabī as "colonizability".The second challenge was of external nature, conceptualized by Mawdūdī as "modern ignorance".In the discussion of this paper, we found converging as well as diverging points between Bennabī and Mawdūdī.The major point of convergence between Bennabī and Mawdūdī is that both of them challenged conformism (taqlīd) and engagingly called the Muslim mind for self-criticism i.e. the starting pointing of decolonization.Both of them argued that renaissance is impracticable until the Muslims revive and reform religion as the guiding principle of thought and action.For both, wholesale uncritical imitation of the West is not panacea to the Muslim decadence, because the Muslim problem is not "intrinsic problem of Islam".Both Bennabī and Mawdūdī argued that the Muslim problem is essentially the problem of "nature of relation" between the Muslims and Islam.Thus, the Muslims need to make serious efforts to revive their relation with Islam morally, intellectually and scientifically.They need to adopt religion as the source of "social function" and "moral direction".The major point of divergence between Bennabī and Mawdūdī is the method.Mawdūdī's method is more of "materialistic activism-based" in nature while as Bennabī's method is more of "intellectualistic activism-based" in nature.The former's end objective is "political transformation" of the system while as the latter's end objective is "intellectual transformation" of the individual.To synthesize, renaissance has to be an evolutionary process, starting with Bennabī "moral transformation of the individual" and ending with Mawdūdī's "moral transformation of the system".Nevertheless, while integrating Mawdūdī's political ideas with Bennabī's intellectual and moral transformation, one has to be careful.In Mawdūdī's political discourse, there are certain ideas which, if not contextualized, might lead to political extremism.