… and the launching of his new book “Islam and the Secular State“, one I’ve been anxiously looking forward to.
The event will take place at the first of several “Conversations with Champions of Moral Courage“, a project by Irshad Manji. It’s happening in NYU’s Graduate School of Public Service.
You can read more about Irshad’s Moral Courage Project here in this PDF document.
I haven’t read An-Na’im’s whole book yet, only the first chapter of it for free after he pointed out to me by email where I can download it. Nonetheless, from what I’ve read so far I know it will be super juicy.
These are some of the ideas Abdullahi presents in it:
* “I do believe that it is possible, indeed necessary, to reinterpret Islamic sources in order to affirm and protect freedom of religion and belief. This is my position as a Muslim, speaking from an Islamic perspective, and not simply because freedom of religion and belief is a universal human rights norm…”
* “The possibility of belief in anything logically requires choice in the matter, as one cannot believe in anything without the freedom and ability to disbelieve it.”
I don’t know about you but this certainly excites me - a book full of concrete Islamic arguments challenging the current Islamist status-quo of the Muslim world. Expect the event to be streamed by video at Irshad’s website soon.
UPDATE: Ali Eteraz attended the launch and live-blogged the session.
UPDATE II: Check out the upcoming conference which will feature An-Na’im’s work. It’s called Heretic Muslims - A Celebration of Heresy Conference: Critical Thinking for Islamic Reform. I love the whole idea behind the “heresy” theme. Very interesting and deeply though-provoking.
UPDATE III: Here are the highlights of the event as Irshad Manji tell us about what happened.
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
“this certainly excites me - a book full of concrete Islamic arguments challenging the current Islamist status-quo of the Muslim world”
Me 2, don’t be surprised if one or two of your fellow Muslims are not amused.
“The possibility of belief in anything logically requires choice in the matter, as one cannot believe in anything without the freedom and ability to disbelieve it.”
I don’t agree with this school of thought. Opens the floodgates IMO.
It’s assuming the average muslim has the knowledge, objectivity, overall preparation to nitpick what he/she views as permissable.
I don’t think thats the way forward for Islam and I just feel it will slowly but surely take away from Islam’s practical benefits (an underrated strength of our religion; sometimes bad on paper, but practically sensible).
AOS-
“I don’t agree with this school of thought. Opens the floodgates IMO.
It’s assuming the average muslim has the knowledge, objectivity, overall preparation to nitpick what he/she views as permissable.”
Let’s leave Islam out of it for a minute and talk about dogamatic religions in general…Judaism and Christianity included. Fact of the matter is, folk almost always find a way to scripturally support what they want to do; kill, kidnap, steal, loan at interest. A good buddy of mine was just telling me about the Shia system for legal prostitution in Iran (you become “married” for a short time). Interpretation also leads to universalism, liberalism, humility, almsgiving etc.
If I were to err…then I would “open the floodgates”. Right now average Joe Muslim or Christain or whatever if therefore reliant on imams and mullahs and priests and popes and rabbis to give them Truth…I think average Joe should have access to those opinions…but opinions they are and NOTHING else…and often these leaders are less than decent.
Me…I will take my chances on freedom to think and speak.
Salam AOS,
“I don’t agree with this school of thought.”
So do you think apostasy should be punishable then? Because to me that’s the central point of the whole matter. Too many Muslims are merely Muslims because they were born into Muslim families not because they thought, analyzed and finally arrived at a conclusion.
“There is no compulsion in religion” and hence, how can a Muslim truly belief if he or she is coerced into believing.
I don’t want to put words into your mouth bro but it sounds to me like you’re against freedom of conscience. It’s kinda like supporting arranged forced marriages.
“It’s assuming the average muslim has the knowledge, objectivity, overall preparation to nitpick what he/she views as permissable.”
Given the fact that illiteracy is so high in the Muslim world, I can see what you’re saying to some extent. However, it’s still not a solid reason as that can be changed gradually through education.
Proof? We always happily advertise that Islam is the fastest spreading religion in Europe and the United States, both places in which freedom of conscience is existent, both places in which belief is not coerced.
Howie, Drima…salam to both
I think that the best way of correctly interpreting and enforing Islamic laws as per the Hadith and the Quran is to provide an environment with a knowledge and authority hierarchy which enables the correct application of Islam. That would mean any Islamic scholar with ill intentions, or lack of knowledge, will be held accountable and appropriately undermined.
My concern is that by delegating too much authority to individuals to re-interpret and arrive at their own conclusions, you are undermining important elements of Islam; reliance on more knowledgeable people for teachings and interpretations and accepting that not all Islam makes sense as per what is percieved as common sense. I think it ties in with the concept of avoiding letting your ego come in the way of being a good muslim (read about Islamic Psychology to get a feel for I mean by that). Soon you’ll have people permitting stuff, give you some nice way of how they arrived to their conclusion, then followers who find it convenient jump onto the bandwagon.
Now, the PROPER conventional method I am aware of for reaching a ruling is Quran-Hadith-Ulama-Yourself, with movement from one to another when inconvlusive.
Am I against freedom of concience? Absolutely not, but at the same time I respect the fact that I should not allow my suspicion of the current crop of Islamic scholars and extreme way of life in 3rd world Islamic cultures (FORCED marriages, extreme punishments with no proper state/rule/authority to enforce a correct way of life, etc.) to affect my judgement with regards to how to seek knowledge and teachings. The thing that strikes me about all these critics of muslims or Islam (Irshad Manji, Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi) is that their views revolve around an unhealthily reactive state of mind. They seem to have been subjected to a tough, incorrect and unrealistic Islamic upbringing and their theories are just a reaction to all that, as opposed to a concience effort by them to change what they went through (don’t mean you Drima btw).
What’s the suitable environment I talk of? Controversial, but I think it’s a state with proper application of Islam across the board. With that I mean social life, political rule, economic practices…the whole nine.
You mentioned converts in Western countries, but isn’t converting and then knowing how to practice Islam correctly with regards to everyday life a bit different?
I’ve lived in a Western country for about 8 years now, and those converts I come across are highly critical of these western cultures and really do seem to have a thirst for Islamic knowledge with a good reliance on good sources of info.
My personal reasons why I have a problem with the AOS approach:-
1) Assumes that the average Islamic scholar/ulama/self-important self-appointed pompous misogynistic prat has the knowledge, objectivity, overall preparation to nitpick what he/she views as permissible. Oh yes, and they DO nitpick.
2) If the entire body of the “authority hierarchy” are already self-important self-appointed pompous misogynistic prats with ill intentions and lack of knowledge in the first place - as is usually the case these days - how would they ever find wrong with their own kind and therefore hold them accountable? Who are THEY accountable to? Where’s the transparency in this process?
3) Authority hierarchy - therein lies the problem. There was never supposed to be a hierarchy in Islam. There was never supposed to be an intermediary between the individual and God. It’s up to you to define your relationship with your creator.
4) “the PROPER conventional method” - who said it was the proper way?? Did God tell the scholars that? Just because something is conventional doesn’t mean it’s right.
5) What is so wrong with people “permitting stuff” if it applies to their own personal lifestyle and doesn’t harm others? If they derived their conclusions through their own logical thought processes and reasoning, and found that it was the best way for them to personally live their lives as a Muslim, who are we to say that it’s wrong and has no validity and that they are lesser Muslims? As long as they don’t try to impose their interpretation onto others (as the scholars do), they should be left alone to practise Islam however they see fit. After all, if they really didn’t want to follow Islam at all they wouldn’t have to call themselves Muslims - oh but wait, most of us don’t even have that option, do we? You know, Drima makes a good point - if there was no coercion in Islam, this sort of problem wouldn’t even arise.
The problem is that too many Muslims follow the AOS line of thought and believe that Islam needs to be dictated to them. If Islam really was the Divine Truth, wouldn’t it be able to sort itself out on its own without humans having to bludgeon others with it? I fail to see the logic in this approach. I resent being told by people that I can’t interpret Islam for myself, that I should “rely on more knowledgeable people” - who said they were more knowledgeable? Didn’t God (if there is one) give me my own brain to think with?
Personally, I’m tired of Muslims thinking they constantly need to control people. This is exactly the reason why we’re in the mess that we are today.
“the PROPER conventional method I am aware of for reaching a ruling is Quran-Hadith-Ulama-Yourself”
That’s what I believe too. I do not propose we throw away the Islamic tradition although I think we both agree that there are aspects of it that need tweaking. Even conservative types like al-Qaradawi admit so.
The kind of freedom I emphasize is not one focused on disposing the conventional method but one rather focused on the last step, Yourself.
At the end of the day, it’s your choice and your freedom of conscience. Right now that choice doesn’t even exist. To me *that* is the most troubling thing. Most imams won’t even be happy if you question them. Only a few cool ones and educated professors of Sharia are okay with it from my experience.
I’m not sure if you’ve read An-Na’im’s work ya AOS but I think you really should. His teacher, Taha is a great political role model to be followed but religiously speaking there are a number of areas which I admit that I disagree with.
Now here is the thing, An-Na’im isn’t proposing that we throw away the hierarchy of Quran-Hadith-Ulama-Yourself. He is simply proposing the proper way it should be implemented with checks and balances of power in place to avoid the kind of abuse we’re witnessing today in the political arena and to safeguard human rights.
At first when I stumbled upon his work, I was a little turned off by his ideas as soon as I saw the word “secularism”. However I became a fan later on after I realized that he doesn’t speak of “secularism” in the typical Western sense (and it’s important to keep in mind that different Western countries practice different forms of secularism).
An-Na’im is for separation of religion and the state but *not* religion and politics since he says the latter is inseparable. As “unrooted” as it might seem, everything he has put forward is rooted in Islamic history and tradition.
“What’s the suitable environment I talk of? Controversial, but I think it’s a state with proper application of Islam across the board.”
I understand what you’re saying but the problem is there isn’t even agreement on what the “proper application” is. Again An-Na’im is proposing a neutral system (”neutrality” is his idea of secularism) in which debate can take place to decide what this very proper application is and how it must safeguard the human rights of everyone as equal citizens of the state. He also highly stresses that laws shouldn’t be formulated and applied by reasoning that “God told us to do so” but by arguing their merits within the specific contexts and conditions they are proposed.
Oh and what Sheema said too. Just saw her comment.
“My concern is that by delegating too much authority to individuals to re-interpret and arrive at their own conclusions, you are undermining important elements of Islam”
I can see what you’re seeing to a certain point but:
1- The delegation of authority should be shifted more towards the individual because as it is now, there is way too much in the hands of the ulema.
2- It *is* very much all about arriving at your own conclusions, some or many of which will defintely be at odds with what Muslim scholars/”scholars” preach.
3- How much is “too much” authority. I think it’s irrelevant because like I said, at the end of the day it’s all about what the individual chooses and what conclusions he/she arrives at.
4- There are core aspects of Islam which the vast, vast, majority of Muslim scholars agree upon. These are important elements. Once we come to the political domain however the meaning of “important elements in Islam” becomes very vague. Who is to decide what is important and what isn’t?
Number 4 is where the abusive crap happens and gets shoved down our throats as the “Will of God” even though too often it’s just the will of some self-interested bearded guy, hungry for money and power, holding a sib7a. Al-Turabi is a perfect example.
Btw,
“The thing that strikes me about all these critics of muslims or Islam (Irshad Manji, Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi) is that their views revolve around an unhealthily reactive state of mind”
I don’t understand why you place Manji in the same category as the other two. Rushdie and Hirsi are self-professed atheists. Manji isn’t and I don’t find her to be reactive but actually very much proactive. I have some disagreements with her ideas in some areas but the end goal is precisely the same. To put an end to the coercion of Islam by bearded men who think they know better.
Like I said, I respect the tradition and in theory the idea of Quran-Hadith-Ulema-Yourself. But In practice I don’t because the last part “Yourself” doesn’t exist. Once it does, we won’t be debating this and we can all be happier.
Salam ya akhi.
Salam to both
Sheema:
1. I stressed the need for having an environment and a ruling system which would ensure that the average scholar would have the necessary qualities, and them being undermined, or possibly punished, would be part of that environment.
2. Once the good guys are in power, with good intentions, the bad ones will be singled out. Don’t get me wrong, this is no easy task! I do not expect it to happen within my lifetime (I’m in my early 20s). Also keep in mind that the environment I talk of is the IDEAL one. How we get there, and how we get the right people in power…thats another topic.
Who are they accountable to? They are accountable to Allah. Islam stresses the responsibility laid upon scholars issuing fatwas and guidance. From my understanding, with the right system in place, any scholar with power allocated to them issuing guidance and rulings which are ill-advised and possibly out of bad intentions will be held accountable for not only his bad deed, but for what is practiced as per his/her advice by his followers.
3. I wouldn’t say its an intermediary between you and god, but the availability of good sources of knowledge and a robust and effective system of issuing rulings and guidance (amongst other things such as enforcing an economic system, justice system, etc.) Closeness to Allah is of course a personal thing, but guidance on how to become close to Allah should not be dismissed.
4. I think Drima touched on that in his comment. From my understanding, that is the structure to be ideally followed by muslims.
5. I disagree on your approach. As much as practicing Islam brings personal satisfaction, I believe that considering your community and other fellow muslims is central to it. If you choose to come up with your own way of practicing Islam, even without forcing others to follow, by strongly justifying the method by which you arrived at that personal fulfillment you will influence others within your community. You say it would not harm others, but who are you to say that?
Are we, as humans, fully conscious of how much our actions influence others? Isn’t leading by example one of the best ways of promoting Islam, if not the best?
And believe you me, having custom-made interpretations of Islam will, in my opinion, never be good. Soon you will have homosexuals justifying homosexuality, just as some justify the killing of innocent civilians.
Do you not see the need of having an effective, fair and authentic way of disputing all these arguments?
Also, relying on more knowledgeable people was never frowned upon in Islam. It’s a practice encouraged since the days of the prophet. Sure, one’s admiration of their ‘logical thought processes and reasoning’ could sound more appealing, but isn’t an important aspect of Islam the word itself, ‘Islam’. You are submitting yourself to God’s will. Do you then not think understanding Allah’s guidance in the best way possible so fundamental?
One more thing, I do not believe my line of thought is followed by many muslims. As far as I know, the setup I described is not implemented anywhere so judging it by looking at current practices is perhaps not the best way of looking at it.
Drima, interesting points you bring up. Good to know you agree on some of the things I mentioned.
My concern is this:
Many of us have become way too attached to our own line of thinking, that it clouds are final judgement. This could be due to widespread mistrust of the current crop of scholars, distancing ourself from core Islam as we fall into the trap that by being close to it we are siding with what the western media views Islam as.
The final decision is definately up to the individual, but it is important to have the best environment on offer for that decision to be more often that not the correct one. Also consider what I mentioned above, the effect and influence we as individuals have on our community is so important to me. The world is becoming more and more individualistic, with concern for those around you dwindling in importance. I think its an area ignored by many, hence the negativity associated with the concept of Sharia law for example, which tends to sound ridiculous when looking at it from that individualistic point of view. Keep in mind I am not talking of the implementation of Sharia nowadays…that’s a whole other issue.
As for Irshad Manji, I just do not agree with her approach. As far as I know, she is pro-Salman Rushdie, isnt she? She’ll write an article blasting muslims worldwide, while praising Salman Rushdie’s genius, to western news outlets. I just think you’re giving ammo to the wrong people.
Being an open lesbian and calling for Islamic reform doesn’t seem a bit off to you?
AOS,
If that is how Islam should be, then I’d like the freedom to decide that Islam (which I was born into and didn’t choose for myself) is not right for me - and the freedom to declare that I am no longer Muslim, without having to worry about being opposed and hassled and threatened. Still waiting for that to happen…
Actually AOS, the vast majority of Muslims I know here in Malaysia think the way you do, and that includes my own family.
Your approach would work in an ideal world. Unfortunately, we don’t live in one.
Salam
I think an-Naim just lost some legitimacy though with working with the likes of Manji. She is not a academic, jurist, or theologian of Muslim background. She, at best, as an entertainer/writer who passes herself off as a journalist. See for yourself. As for an-Naim, I am waiting for his book to come in. It’s on back order. I am eager to read it in its entirety before commenting.
Prfessor An’Naim, is among the best African Arab Muslim intellectualI have ever met in my life. But Irshad also is courageous and honest so I am proud of her.
Leave a Comment