and powerful past. The model was not concerned with historical dynamism,
for it built on an essence that was also central to the overpowering discourse
of Jamml al-Dln al-Afghmnl (1839–1897) and his disciple Mu.ammad
‘Abduh (d. 1905), the Muftlof Egypt, that gave impetus to moderate Islamic
movements.^21 Very much in correspondence with the religious thought in
Iraq, where al-Afghmnlspent some time in Najaf, the emerging religio-politic
of al-Afghmnland Mu.ammad ‘Abduh, along with other Shaykhs of identical
concerns, was conciliatory in the sense that it accepted change and civiliza-
tional vicissitudes as historical processes. ‘Abduh read Guizot’s History of
Civilization. He was also very well-acquainted with Ibn Khaldnn’s (d. 1406)
reading of history and his emphasis on decline and rebirth cycles in keeping
with the dearth or presence of an empowering sense of solidarity or innova-
tion. Thus, while emphasizing the role of Islam as powerfully informing
social polity, ‘Abduh was unequivocally allied to Western science and tech-
nology, as there is no reason for European “progress to wealth and power
except the advancement of education and science,” he stipulates.^22 No won-
der ‘Abduh was actively engaged in the politics of the period and that some
of his disciples like Qmsim Amln were among the pioneering liberal intellec-
tuals. Qmsim Amln defended in two of his books the rights and freedom of
women (1899, 1900). ‘Abduh bridged the way to liberalism and became,
along with the Iraqi religious Shaykhs of the 1920 popular uprising against
the British, an influential force in the modernity trend. He and many other
Shaykhs were in tune with the liberals in their emphasis on a harmonious
navigation between tradition and modernity, a faith in science and progress,
in a manner that made use of Rifm‘ah al-Yahymwl’s (1801–1873) significant
contribution to the modernity–tradition nexus, his emphasis on reason, and
the endorsement of a “renaissance” project.^23 Their project looked upon Islam
in terms of its glorious past, specifically the first ‘Abbmsid period, 750–945,
for Yahymwlsaw it both as a model in openness to other cultures, and, conse-
quently, as capable of subsuming and applying the achievements of the
human mind. Liberal intellectuals thereafter were more attuned to material
reality, and, for that matter, were involved in the formation of the nation-state
as an anticolonial necessity and a possible stage in an Islamic or pan-Arab
entity. Whether we are speaking of public intellectuals like Ymhm>usayn
(d. 1973) or A.mad Luyflal-Sayyid (d. 1963) in Egypt, for instance, or of
Gibran K. Gibran (d. 1931) and Mikhm’ll Nu‘aymah (1889–1988) in
Lebanon, or Ma.mnd A.mad al-Sayyid (d. 1937) and Fahmlal-Mudarris
(d. 1944) in Iraq, these intellectuals accepted Western culture and education
as essential to state formation. Poets like A.mad Shawql(d. 1932) and >mfiz
Ibrmhlm (d. 1932) in Egypt and Maernf al-Ruxmfl(d. 1945), Jamll Xidqlal-
Zahmwl(d. 1936), and Mu.ammad Mahdlal-Baxlr (d. 1974) in Iraq took the
Western model for state building seriously, while opting for the redirection
of tradition away from narrow traditionalism and essentialist revivalism.
Mu.ammad Mahdlal-Baxlr was actively involved in party politics, and had
POETIC TRAJECTORIES: CRITICAL INTRODUCTION