Renewal of religious thought or religious discourse, which is recently raised through the media and journalism, has become quite ambiguous. Presented arguments are not grounded on sufficient academic scholarship that illustrates the meaning of renewal or identifies the discourse to be renewed! Is it true that the so-called, ‘religious discourse’ is alone the security and political cause of the crises suffered in the Arab world, or the challenges impeding its renaissance?!

A sufficient indication of muddled treatment of the topic is that you hear some voices calling for “total abolition of religious discourse as a partial cause of the crisis, or as the crisis itself rather than a solution.” Those people do not disclose the necessary logical conclusion of their claim turning Al-Azhar into a historical museum in the full sense of the word. They claim so at a time in which the East and the West now admit that Al-Azhar is the oldest and biggest world institution.

On the other hand, we hear purist voices from the other extreme calling for revival of the example of righteous predecessors and devout believers of the first three centuries of Islam alone. Those people too dream of the day that set their hands on Al-Azhar, which they believe should preach only one rigid ideology and belief and promote formalistic performance of rituals as the essence of the faith. Those people threaten the tolerance of this upright religion and Sharia that is built on pluralism and free expression of opinion in an unparalleled manner. They hate it that Al-Azhar in the modern era be open enough to promote and sustain the unanimous stance of holding on to the definitive texts and the collective principles of the faith, leaving ample room for debate on whatever lies beyond these issues among scholars. Inspired by such pluralist approach, Al-Azhar Mosque and colleges have been open to the academic study of Sunni and non-Sunni schools (Madh-habs), without detraction or dismissal of any of these Madh-habs or their leading Imams.

Through this unprejudiced perspective that accepts difference in opinions, Al-Azhar has taught the world theology and Principles of Religion, and all rational and traditional sciences.

Renewal is a characteristic feature of Islam indicated by the Prophet (pbuh) as he says, “Allah will raise for this community at the end of every century one who will renovate its religion for it”. This is the traditional evidence of necessary renewal in religion. Rationally speaking, if we acknowledge that Islam is a universal message for all people and that it is valid for all times and places and that canonical religious texts are specific (addressing specific occurrences), then renewal becomes an inevitability to detect Divine Rulings on such occurrences. The anticipated renewal should thus follow certain parallel lines:

• One linear renewal should build primarily on the Qur’an and the Sunnah, where the treasures of our heritage go in line with conceptions of the modern era. This does not mean preaching a totalitarian discourse dismissive of difference in opinion, which is unknown in any Islamic era at all. Rather, it means preaching a discourse that is not dismissive or exclusive of the other or that does not monopolize the truth.

• A parallel line should be openness to the others with the purpose of discovering common grounds that can be invested within a common cultural framework under which all peacefully coexist and search for a way to overcome the chronic disease that saps any promising energy sustaining renewal. With this chronic disease, I mean customary disagreement on “tradition and renewal” and subsequent division into,

• A current that tenaciously holds on to tradition as is.

• A Westernized current that turns its back on tradition.

• A reformist current with a subdued and even inaudible voice.

This difference is natural and acceptable. Yet, it should not turn the whole situation from an internal encounter that renders all vulnerable to a crushing external power.

Through the last century experiences, we noticed that the advocates of the first current betted on the ability to live by the narrow perspective inherited from the righteous predecessors, closing the door before the flowing waves of current civilization and culture. They, however, soon retreated without preparing the society to deal with global variables in a studied manner. The result was thus an unguarded society in face of a sweeping Western culture. The same thing applies to the Westernized current suggested by those who “turned their back on tradition” and found no harm in brazen belittling and mocking of it. They even declared that dissociation from tradition is a prerequisite.

The result was that the nation neglected them when discovering that they did not represent their hopes and aspirations but sang out of tune. This current lost the battle too and failed to solve a single problem in the society; it only added insult to injury!

As for the moderate, reformist current, we deem them the most entitled to shoulder the responsibility and carry out the task of ‘genuine renewal’ desired by the nation. They alone can renew the religion without cancelling or distorting it. Yet, this is pendent on avoiding the energy-depleting conflicts with the Rightists and Leftists.

So, it is necessary to prepare a list of the major and pressing issues on the scene. I believe we should prioritize conceptions underlying the ideologies Takfir (excommunication), violence and armed terrorist groups. Such conceptions include, to cite but a few, Jihad, the Caliphate, Avowal and Disavowal, (dualist) division of the globe into abodes of belief and disbelief. I think that the task of clarifying these issues should be a collective, not individual, intellectual obligation. It has now become too late for Individual Ijtihad (ruling), since it requires multidisciplinary and intertwining efforts.