{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1146182,
        "msgid": "japan-can-bridge-gap-between-islam-and-west-1447893297",
        "date": "2005-02-07 00:00:00",
        "title": "Japan can bridge gap between Islam and West",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "Japan can bridge gap between Islam and West Kosugi Yasushi, a professor of Islamic affairs and globalization at the Graduate School of Asian and African Studies at Kyoto University, Japan, spoke recently with The Jakarta Post's Muhammad Nafik about a possible role for Japan in bridging the gap between Islam and the West. The following is an excerpt of that interview. Question: You have said that Japan can bridge the misunderstandings between the Islamic world and the West.",
        "content": "<p>Japan can bridge gap between Islam and West<\/p>\n<p>Kosugi Yasushi, a professor of Islamic affairs and<br>\nglobalization at the Graduate School of Asian and African Studies<br>\nat Kyoto University, Japan, spoke recently with The Jakarta<br>\nPost's Muhammad Nafik about a possible role for Japan in bridging<br>\nthe gap between Islam and the West. The following is an excerpt<br>\nof that interview.<\/p>\n<p>Question: You have said that Japan can bridge the<br>\nmisunderstandings between the Islamic world and the West. Would<br>\nyou explain why you think this?<\/p>\n<p>Answer: Many Muslim countries want to have modernization, and<br>\nat the same time they want to preserve their Islamic identities.<br>\nAnd Japan has been successful in modernization. It is now one of<br>\nthe leading countries in the world. Japan's success indicates<br>\nthat modernization and westernization are not same. Japan is a<br>\ndemocratic country. When we look at Japan as a developed country,<br>\nits development is not at the cost of Japanese culture and<br>\nidentity.<\/p>\n<p>Japan has apparently succeeded in that modernization. Did the<br>\nWest have modernization? No, they didn't. What the West did is<br>\nthat they had just created their own modernity. So, it's always<br>\nconfusing that many people think that the West knows a lot about<br>\nor teaches modernization. It's wrong.<\/p>\n<p>Japan knows very well how to learn and it became an<br>\nindustrialized country by learning. In my understanding, western<br>\nelements are not necessarily modern. Japan took modern elements<br>\nfrom the West, not necessarily western cultures. When the modern<br>\nelements were taken or adopted and applied by Japan successfully,<br>\nwe can see this is really modern and universal. The problem is<br>\nthat western countries tend to mix both modern and western<br>\nelements. Of course, we should separate them completely. They are<br>\ndeeply related but they are not the same.<\/p>\n<p>How can we differentiate between these two elements?<\/p>\n<p>It can be done through adoption. You take a western thing and<br>\nwhen it is applicable and workable in other cultures, then it's<br>\nmodern and universal. Japan started modernization by adopting<br>\nother cultures. What Japan adopted and re-exported to other<br>\ncountries, especially in Asia, has worked very well. So,<br>\nmodernization must go with the needs of people in other areas.<\/p>\n<p>The West often claims to be great in modernization -- \"We have<br>\nthis and you learn it.\" Learn what? That's the problem. A thing<br>\nis good if it's in line with the needs of people. Modernization<br>\nin the western way has often not worked perfectly, partly because<br>\nproblems with its own culture.<\/p>\n<p>Could you give an example?<\/p>\n<p>Okay, democracy is good. In western and European countries,<br>\ndemocracy has cultural elements. We can take democracy as such,<br>\nbut its cultural elements may not be good for other countries. It<br>\ncould even be destructive for democracy itself.<\/p>\n<p>Many talks have been held to ease tensions or resolve<br>\nmisunderstandings between the West and the Islamic world, but the<br>\nproblems remain. What do you think about this?<\/p>\n<p>The point here is not about the conflict or dialog. I have<br>\nsaid that Japan has studied the civilizations of other countries.<br>\nWe learned a lot from China, and we also have studied Islamic<br>\ncivilization. I have a feeling that the Japanese understanding of<br>\nthe Islamic world is more balanced than the West.<\/p>\n<p>Japan has studied civilizations from around the world,<br>\nincluding Islam and western cultures, over the last hundreds of<br>\nyears. The study of the West was conducted probably over two and<br>\nthree centuries, while the study of the Islamic world has been<br>\nless than one century -- maybe 40 years.<\/p>\n<p>How does Japan study the Islamic and western civilizations?<\/p>\n<p>When we study a world civilization, we do it from itself. We<br>\ntry to listen to what it says and what it has. Nationally, when<br>\nwe study the West, we study what it is. When we study Islamic<br>\ncivilization, we do it from itself. We have studied both, Islam<br>\nand the West, and we developed our understanding based on logic<br>\nand societies.<\/p>\n<p>We listen to the Islamic world before judging. But western<br>\nOrientalists always see Islam from their own perspectives. I<br>\nwould say the best example for this is the question of<br>\nfundamentalism. This word is not recognized in Islam. It was<br>\ntaken from Christianity in North America. In Japan, we call it an<br>\nIslamic revival movement. It is defined as a movement to revive<br>\nor reactivate Islamic values and try to reformulate them into<br>\nsociety according to their understanding.<\/p>\n<p>So, Islamic understanding is probably something new and not<br>\nnecessarily traditional because it's dynamic. And people think<br>\nand try to reformulate new things based on the Koran and hadith.<br>\nThat doesn't necessarily mean their Islamic interpretation is<br>\nold.<\/p>\n<p>What do you understand by Islamic fundamentalism in connection<br>\nwith terrorism and militancy?<\/p>\n<p>First of all, fundamentalism is wrong in this sense. It was a<br>\nmovement of Protestant Christianity during the 20th century in<br>\nNorth America. Such a term does not exist in Islam. They (the<br>\nWest) brought the Christian term and call it Islamic. This is not<br>\nan understanding of what is actually happening.<\/p>\n<p>Second, fundamentalism is a term very much to do with a threat<br>\nperception. So, when the West thinks Islamic fundamentalism, what<br>\nthey think is only a threat.<\/p>\n<p>Some Muslims say, \"Let's go to the mosque, pray and study the<br>\nKoran.\" They are not fundamentalists. \"Let's collect zakat<br>\n(obligatory donation under Islam) to help the needy.\" That also<br>\nis not fundamentalism. So the Islamic revival is generally<br>\npeaceful and it's a social movement. It involves people at the<br>\ngrassroots level and they are apolitical activists.<\/p>\n<p>So when we talk about Islamic fundamentalism, we should not<br>\nlink it with terrorism and militancy. It's just a term borrowed<br>\nfrom the West.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/japan-can-bridge-gap-between-islam-and-west-1447893297",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}