To the editors:
Ernest Gellner, whose work I have long admired, has written a spirited and intelligent review of my book, In the Path of God: Islam and Political Power ("Mohammed and Modernity," TNR, December 5). But he has confused two significant matters, which I should like to correct.
First, Mr. Gellner equates Westernization with liberalism. I argue in the book that Muslims, if they are to gain wealth and power, must accept Western ways - be they liberal, fascist, Marxist, or other. Mr. Gellner, however, omits the alternatives and has me saying that Muslims must adopt liberalism if they are to succeed. This is not so. I do not state that Muslims will choose liberalism, only that they must eventually pick one of these Western approaches.
Second , Mr. Gellner confuses political secularism with atheism. I argue that Islam is inexorably losing its historic role as a political force, just as earlier happened to religions in the West. This is not the same, however, as predicting that personal faith will weaken -which is what the reviewer ascribes to me. Elsewhere in the book, secularization is defined as a "process whereby religious thinking, practice and institutions lose social significance." Social is the key word: secularization need not imply the loss of faith.
Daniel Pipes
Cambridge, Massachusetts
