Criticizing tradition does not amount to abandoning it.

Evidence

To represent the contemporary Islamic revival (known by those who approve of it in the Arab world as as-sahwa, “the awakening”) as a form of crypto-nationalism, to refer to it explicitly by the term “cultural nationalism,” is to propose that it is best understood as a continuation of the familiar story of Third World nationalism. That proposal renders the claim by Muslim activists to be part of a historical Islamic tradition specious because, as cultural nationalists, they must be seen as part of something essentially (though distortedly) “modern.” However, the fact that those active in the revival are usually highly critical of “traditional” teachers and practices does not prove that they are really rejecting tradition. Belonging to a tradition doesn’t preclude involvement in vigorous debate over the meanings of its formative texts (even over which texts are formative) and over the need for radical reform of the tradition. The selectivity with which people approach their tradition doesn’t necessarily undermine their claim to its integrity. — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 950

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines tradition as open to internal debate and selective adaptation rather than static fidelity — a key conceptual point.
• SEED: Could seed an essay on how all identity traditions — religious, national, academic — are negotiated through internal critique, not threatened by it.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular:…, 950
• XREF: connects to: Social science used to restore tradition remains a self-undermining, merely popularized appeal. — Rolf Wiggershaus, The Frankfurt School: Its History,…, 2468; Discourse critique of progress does not condemn all change as bad. — Rebecca A. Martusewicz, Jeff Edmundson, and John Lupinacci, EcoJustice Education: Toward Diverse,…, 558