Positioning Muslim minorities in the
21st century: the thoughts of Tariq
Ramadan and Umar Faruq Abd-Allah
Auwais Rafudeen, Institute for the Study of Current Islam (ISCI),
IPSA
An ISCI Paper
2008
© Auwais Rafudeen
Introduction
This paper seeks to locate the key challenges facing Muslim
minorities in the 21st century. It specifically examines the ideas
of two thinkers, Tariq Ramadan and Umar Faruq Abd-Allah,
who have penned some seminal books and papers in this area. Ramadan is a renowned
Swiss professor of philosophy and Islamic studies whose works have exercised a
significant impact among Muslim and non-Muslim audiences alike. In 2004 he was
listed as one of Time magazine’s 100 of the world’s most consequential people. Abd-Allah heads the Nawawi
Foundation in the
Tariq
Ramadan on charting the course ahead for 21st century Western Muslims
Tariq
Ramadan's “Western Muslims and the future of Islam” [Oxford University Press,
The meaning of
integration
Ramadan firmly believes that Muslims in the West must integrate fully and in a principled manner into the society in which they find themselves. Two fundamental theses underlie his ideas on integration. Firstly, it is not a case of relativizing Islam’s universal principles in order to give the impression of integration: “…it is one thing to relativize what I believe and another to respect fully the convictions of the Other. The post-modernist spirit would like to lead us unconsciously to confuse the second proposition with the first. I refuse: it is in the very name of the universality of my principles that my conscience is summoned to respect diversity and the relative, and that is why, even in the West (especially the West), we have not to think of our presence in terms of “minority.” What seems to be a given of our thinking: “the Muslim minority, ” ... must, I believe, be rethought.” [2004:6]
Secondly, integration must
mean independence for
Ramadan on the philosophy of Islam
The matrix for Ramadan's thinking on Western Muslims is a restatement of the essential philosophy of Islam as drawn from his reading of the classical sources. According to Ramadan, the fundamental conceptions of Creator, human being and universe underpin the conceptualization of the word Islam- the words “submission” or “peace” alone are insufficient. The concept of Tawhī d expresses the absolute Oneness of God-the First principle, Creator of all, eternally present in history and at each moment. Everything in its natural, instinctive state is submissive to and at peace with God. Humans are inherently free- they, unlike the rest of creation, have to learn with live with dignity, risk, and freedom all at once. They have to learn to recognize God. This recognition is through revelation in space –the universe- and revelation in time –Prophetic. These serve to remind people of what is beyond them, of the Creator. This quest is inherently natural-one wants to know the source and power and energy that gave life to this world.
God is One but everything in creation is in pairs, seeking the unity of their own being: heart, soul, mind and body. There is no antimony between soul and body, or faith and reason in Islam. Rather the measurement of moral categories is based on the ability of human consciousness to take responsibility for finding balance, establishing harmony and peace. Essentially, the human being is a responsible being: “the exercise of responsible education is like a virtuous and ascending circle; union, which is at the center of being, brings us towards the oneness of Being. The opposite here would be an absence of boundaries and morality, a lack of constraint, that would drag the conscience into sleep, into the vicious circle of excess, which may even extend to bestiality.” [2004:15]
A mystical strain plays a fundamental role in Ramadan's conception of the religion but this mysticism is intrinsically tied to reason and responsibility. He states: “Awareness of the divine, far from the dualist thinking which opposes “faith” to “reason”, sets in motion a quest for the original breath that cannot dispense with reason in order to successfully bring to birth a faith that is both confirmation and reconciliation.” [2004:16] And: “ The human being has an instinctive longing for a dimension that is “beyond”- this is the idea of fitra- closely bound to the covenant and testimony that human beings took with God when He said “Am I not your Lord?” As Eliade says religions “play a part in the structure of human consciousness”. Thus human beings are bound to God by a sort of original covenant to which their consciousness presses them to stay faithful. Every being is born innocent and then becomes responsible for his or her faithfulness to the covenant. Those who do not believe, the un-faithful, are those who are not faithful to the original covenant.” [2004:16]
Reason also plays a crucial role in the phenomenon of revelation. For Ramadan the purpose of revelation is to, firstly, recall and confirm and, secondly, to put right what has been modified, interpolated or forgotten. Revelation recalls four fundamental principles:
1. The Oneness of God
2. That human beings are linked to the Creator by an original covenant
3. that God has sent Prophets throughout history to inform them of the moral rules and rituals required of them
4. that one has to free oneself of all idols encountered- whether material, in fantasy or emotional.
For Ramadan, revelation presupposes intelligence. The Revelation of a text would have no meaning if intelligence- capable of grasping its meaning- were not taken for granted. This is particularly so in the sphere of social matters (muāmalāt) where the Text allows reason to derive the broad principles- as appropriate- from the Text and from the reality of the context in which it was revealed. In fact, the majority of verses demand this interpretative effort on the bases of certain well worked out methodological principles rooted in the Text, the Prophetic tradition, the Arabic language and logic.
Ramadan also characterizes the various ideological trends found among Muslims as essentially springing from different ways of reading the Quran. These trends do not constitute many “islams”as some scholars describe, but trends within one Islam since the essential principles of the religion are agreed upon by the various contenders. Further, Ramadan finds the characterization “islams” unhelpful as it blurs the reading of explicit points of convergence and says nothing about the exact and precise areas of divergence.
Ramadan distinguishes six major tendencies within Islam:
1. Scholastic traditionalism: According to Ramadan, proponents of this trend read the Quran and Sunnah by a strict reference to one of the schools of jurisprudence- codified between 8th and 11th century. There is no room for ijtihad or rereading. Their reading of the texts makes them uninterested in, or even dismissive of, any connection with the West.
2. Salafi literalism: Salafis reject mediation of schools and are concerned to follow the Salaf: the Companions and the pious Muslims of the first three generations. For the literalists the Quran and Sunnah should be interpreted without the mediation of scholarly conclaves. They forbid any interpretive reading of the text- all actions and attitudes must be justified with reference to an authentic, literalist text. They further refuse any involvement in a space considered non-Islamic, which they may still consider dār ul kufr [abode of unbelief] or dār ul harb [abode of war].
3. Salafi reformism: They also bypass the boundaries of judicial schools to find the pristine energy of the Salaf generation. However, their approach to reading is based on the purposes and intentions of the text. They believe that the application of ijtihād is a constant factor in the application of fiqh in every time and place. Though diverse, what unites Salafi reformists is a dynamic relation to the scriptural sources and the use of reason in applying the texts to new situations.
4. Political Literalist Salafism: Its proponents combine the social and political action of reformists wedded to a literalist reading of text with a political connotation concerning the management of power and the Caliphate. It is represented by fringe groups and networks.
5. “Liberal” or “Rationalist” Reformism: This trend sees itself as liberal or rationalist and has supported applying the social and political system that resulted from the process of secularization in Europe to the Muslim world. They expect Muslims to completely adapt to the Western way of life and tend to live religion on an individual and private basis. They hold that applied reason, rather than the Quran and Sunnah, must set the criteria for social conduct.
6. “Sufism”: This tendency is focused on the internal dimension of religion but Sufi brotherhoods can also have great organizational capability, and thus a very public profile. [See 2004: 24-28]
Having defined what “being Muslim” means, Ramadan then discusses the Sharī'ah which shows us how to be and remain Muslim. This understanding of Sharī'ah brings to the fore its fundamental lexical sense- “the way that leads to the spring”. For Ramadan, the Sharī'ah is the framework for the actualization of Islam’s universal principles in history and thus it is imperative to examine how it is structured, how it expresses the absolute and rationality, and the relation to time, progress, and difference.
The nature of the Sharī'ah
Ramadan is keen to clear up
the confusion of categories that take place around the overarching nature of
the Sharī'ah . Regarding the maxim that “Islam encompasses
all areas- thus there is no distinction between private and public, religion
and politics”, Ramadan says: “The fact that Revelation is the source of acting
in all spheres does not imply a similarity of approaches in those spheres. The
formulation of universal principles and the elaboration of a basic frame of
reference, which give “the way to faithfulness” its meaning, were produced by
human intelligence....in other words, the
Sharia, insofar as it is the expression of “the way
to faithfulness,” deduced and constructed a posteriori, is the work of the
human intellect.” [2004:34] [emphasis mine]
Ramadan sees such a view as congruent with a scholarly legacy which has painstakingly categorized the different ways of approaching the various spheres of life on the basis of detailed methodological principles. Thus, with regard to human and social affairs, “the scope for the exercise of reason and creativity is huge, in contrast with the situation in matters to do with religious practice, and people have complete discretion to experiment, progress and reform as long as they avoid what is forbidden. So the fact that the fundamental principles of Islam, and its prohibitions, are stated can never allow Muslims to dispense with a study of the context and the societies in which they live.” [2004:35]
Thus a distinction should be made between the principle and the form in which it has been historically established. Ramadan makes the crucial point: “Faithfulness to principles cannot involve faithfulness to the historical model because times change, societies and political and economic systems become more complex, and in every age it is in fact necessary to think of a model appropriate to each social and cultural reality.” [2004:36] Principles remain the same but there are diverse ways of being faithful to them. Thus with regard to dress, for example, Ramadan believes that the concern should not be with the literal dress of the Prophet dressed but with the principles that underlay his choice of clothes.
For Ramadan the tools of Islamic law that make the connection between universal principles and social realities include maslahah, ijtihād and fatwā. They invite us to reread the sources and give it the means to find an analogical scenario, or to think of a new legal development or to state a specific legal opinion allowing some adaptation. These tools constantly enable Islamic law to be relevant to its context. However, Ramadan insists that the classical strictures under which these tools fall must be respected in order to ensure faithfulness to the religion as a whole- these tools cannot willy-nilly be applied without reference to their conditions.[2004:38-51]
In this regard, Ramadan feels that the approach that calls for innovative fatāwā or a new ijtihād to meet the situation of Muslims in the West -the approach of legal adaptation- but without connecting such to Tawhid, the Islamic conception of the human being or the essence of the Sharī’ah “could soon prove to have serious limitations.” [2004:52] This unconnected approach is built on the notion of dualistic universes that compromise at their boundaries. It also entrenches the idea that Muslims are a minority “on the margin, in their societies, which will continue to be societies of “the Other” and in which they will live somewhat as strangers…” [2004:52]. It implicitly limits Muslims to aspire for integration into their environment as distinct from contribution.
Ramadan holds that while
such adaptation and protection is vital, it is just a staging post. The sources
compel us to integrate all that is acceptable in the “Other” – everything that
is not against an established principle- and to integrate it as our own. This
principle has enabled Muslims to settle in and make their own all cultures they
have come into contact with as can be seen in Asia,
1. Distinguish that which in the West is already “Islamically based” and thus completely appropriated.
2. Engage in a systematic work of selection that delineates in the West the limits to the public good and that identifies the margins for maneuvering between situations where Muslims are free to act in accordance with their conscience and the rarer ones where they must find possible legal adaptations. These tools must not only be used at the limits but “also find their place in a global vision that integrates and makes the West into an acquired territory, a land for Muslims: it is only this vision that will allow us to avoid the kind of adaptation that resembles a hodge-podge of fatawa thought up like so many accommodations largely in response to arguments from necessity (darura) in order to justify a number of legal exemptions (rukhas) to make life less difficult.” [2004:54]
With regard to the thorny issue of faith and science, Ramadan sees no conflict between the two. He proposes a methodology based on ethics to overcome the gap between the two that developed later on in Islam. The following points inform his approach in this regard:
1. That the Unity of Allah, which is the source of ethics, never implies a similarity of approaches or uniformity of methodologies
2. Methodologies are constructed rationally, taking as the starting point the object of study [medicine taking the human body as the starting point], not the relation to the Transcendent or to a system of knowledge He has preordained.
He sees his approach as firmly grounded in the classical Islamic tradition: “work on the scriptural texts, taken as an object of study in itself, demonstrated a diversity of methodologies and gave rise to a multitude of “Islamic sciences,” each having its own methodology, its field of investigation, and its limitations. Exactly the same logic should guide us in all areas of knowledge.”[2004:58]
He believes that an intellect committed to Tawhīd will produce a system of ethics built upon the meaning and finality of life. The same intellect will also “completely autonomously and on the basis of its object of study” work out the rules and methods that will set the boundaries for the science in question. Thus there is no need to Islamize the sciences or combine ethics with scientific methods. Thus ethics flows throughout all the sciences “Islamic”, human and natural, while those sciences operate independently.
A Muslim researcher would need to ensure the following:
1. There must be an active connection between the intention to study a science and Tawhid.
2. Ethical boundaries, that are rationally connected to the scriptural sources, must be respected.
3. The objectives of research must be integrated into the “way of faithfulness,” the “path to the Source.”
His methodology is neatly captured when he writes: “The scientific challenges facing the new Muslim presence that seeks to act from within, not from the margins of society and science, are to master the rules and methods of the various humanities and pure sciences, to discuss hypotheses and applications, and to put forward new perspectives. The greatest challenge is to preserve the centrality of what is essential- the connection with the Source- a sense of responsibility, and retention of an awareness of “the need of Him”, which gives birth to humility-even, and especially, in scientific activity.”[2004:61]
The above in essence represents Ramadan's broader reflections on the philosophy of Islam and the nature of its law. In his view such considerations must inform the thinking of Muslims in the West when they seriously reflect upon their position and ask three central questions: Where are we? Who are we? In what way do we want to belong?
Locating Western Muslims
With regard to where Muslims in the West are, Ramadan believes that the classical demarcations of dār ul harb [abode of war], dār ul Islam [abode of Islam] and dār ul ahd [abode where a treaty is in effect] are not applicable in present context. He develops al-Mawlawi’s concepts of dār ul da'wah [abode of invitation], which he equates to Shahādah (witnessing) and proposes dār ul Shahāda or ālam al Shahada. This, he believes, is more suited to a new world situation where the division is not between “harb” and “Islam” but between centre and periphery. Muslims settled in the West are at the very centre. This means that they must bear witness in an even more demanding way than those at the periphery. Shahādah, he states, has a two fold function, being: “a clear remembrance of the fundamental core of our identity via faith in the oneness of God and His last Revelation to the Prophet Muhammad and an elevated consciousness that gives us the responsibility to remind others of the presence of God and to act in such a way that our presence among them and with them is, in itself, a reminder of the Creator, spirituality and ethics.” [2004: 73-74] Thus instead of asking whether and how they are going to be accepted by broader society “Muslims can now enter a world of testimony, in the sense of undertaking an essential duty and a demanding responsibility- to contribute wherever they can to promoting goodness and justice in and through the human fraternity.”[2004: 77]
With regard to the identity of Muslims in the West- the “Who are we?” question- Ramadan argues that an Islamic identity has four key aspects.
Faith, practice and spirituality: “in many debates involving sociologists and political scientists, this dimension is often forgotten, as if faith and spirituality cannot be considered as scientific data with an objective “identity.” But the word islam itself means “submission” to God, expressing, strictly speaking, an act of worship, with its spiritual horizon.” …to cut Muslims off from [faith and spirituality] is to cut them off from their very being.” [2004:79]
An understanding of Texts and the Context: “…Muslim identity…is seen to be open because it rests on an attitude of intellect that marries an understanding of the Texts and an understanding of the context. It is therefore distinguished by an active and dynamic intelligence that needs knowledge, freedom, and a sense of responsibility.”[2004: 80]
Education and transmission: Faith is a pledge (amānah) and Muslims are required to pass on this pledge to their children, their relatives and society as a whole. This links us back to the idea of Shahādah. But for Ramadan witnessing does not mean inviting people to convert to the religion: “…the idea of converting people is alien to Islam: to pass on the message is to call and invite people to a real knowledge of the presence of God and to a true understanding of his teaching.” [2004:81]
Action and participation : One acts for one’s self before God and then one is bound to move in the direction of participation- action with an other. This pivot of identity brings together the individual and social being. The implications of this central aspect of identity include: developing and protecting spiritual life, disseminating religious and secular education, acting for justice, and promoting solidarity with the needy.
Overall, Ramadan reiterates
that Muslims of Europe and
The issue of how to truly belong to Western society is a sensitive one as many Muslims might feel conflicting loyalties in this regard. For Ramadan there is no conflict between being a committed member of the Ummah and a loyal citizen of a nation state. He holds that belonging to the Ummah means belonging above all to God. This belonging illumines with a particular light each social sphere with which one becomes involved. Belonging to God means that justice becomes the criterion in supporting fellow members of one's community of faith. Further, belonging to the Ummah does not contradict belonging to a nation-state since these are two different entities: the first is primal [about being] while the second is spatial and relational [to the constitution]. Rather the real question should be to clarify the nature of the connection that exists between Islamic requirements and the concrete reality of citizenship in Western countries. After deliberating on this connection Ramadan concludes that it is illegitimate for a Muslim living in the West to act against the law. The law does not compel one to act in certain ways-even if it allows them.
The stage is now set for Ramadan to apply his vision to specific areas- in society, politics, economics and culture- that involve the life of a Muslim living in the West. He sets the stage by giving a brief inventory of the assets and deficits of Muslims in the West as he sees it. The assets include: the impressive setting up of mosques and associations by immigrant Muslims and their children, creating a dynamic sense of belonging; the increase in the active practice; knowledge becoming more widespread with Islamic resources very readily available; the general movement towards a contextualized approach to text; increasing awareness of being a citizen in the West, of one’s rights and duties in this regard; and the greater participation of women in religious discourse. On the negative side there is still a strong animus between groups based upon origin or social class; a mentality of isolation- the “ghetto mentality”- that leads to emergence of minority consciousness and implies reactiveness and an “us” versus “them” attitude; and a generally emotive rather than intellectual discourse that pervades Muslims communities.
For Ramadan, if Muslims in the West are to maintain the spirit of the Sharī'ah [the path of faithfulness to the Creator] then a new civil jihād is required. This struggle comprises the following elements:
· spiritually it is to fight against one’s ego and one’s own violence
· socially, it is to struggle for greater justice and against various kinds of discrimination, unemployment and racism
· politically, it is the defense of civil responsibilities and rights, promotion of pluralism, freedom of expression and the democratic processes
· economically it is action against speculation, monopolies and neocolonialism
· culturally, it is the promotion of arts and forms of expression that respect the dignity of conscience and human values.
These points require elaboration. Starting with the spiritual domain, for Ramadan spirituality must be intelligent and question the ethical nature of all activities. It cannot be a retreat or withdrawal, nor is it simply an exercise in managing emotions. It is truly to come back to what is essential, to be faithful. It is based on humility which serves goodness in all areas of activity as best as it can. It is an applied Sufism.
As to Islamic education Ramadan feels part-time traditional Islamic instruction in the West creates an “us” versus “them” mentality- a feeling of “otherness” . The message is uncontextualized and is often cold and austere. For Ramadan true Islamic education is:
· education of the heart, namely, God consciousness
· education of the mind- both in order to understand the scriptural sources and the environment
· the vehicle for Muslims to become autonomous in their lives, choices and management of their freedom.
Its content should, in addition to the traditional Islamic disciplines, include knowledge of the country’s language, familiarity with its history, social dynamics and political landscape. This will in fact influence the way they teach the primary textual sources.
He develops a fairly scathing critique of Islamic schools. These schools, he says, only cater for a partial percentage of Muslim children. They become schools for the affluent if not subsidized. What then, he asks, about the other children?
Further, he believes that these schools create an “artificially Islamic” environment closed off from the surrounding Western world. There is no link to society as a whole. Students do not know how to live an integrated life once they graduate from these schools. A scattering of Islamic teachings do not necessarily forge an intelligent, conscious Muslim.
His alternative is to propose a complementary rather parallel approach. This approach will establish active connections between the education given in the West and the overall Islamic message. He encourages Muslims to avail themselves of the adequate public school system. In his complementary plan “religious” education is correlated to school programs and is adapted to levels of understanding determined by patterns at school. The teaching of the Quran and other religious sciences must be made relevant to people’s experiences and activities and should be organized so as to create a 'solidarity of pedagogy' by visiting the sick, elderly etc. Further, Muslims as parents and guardians must get actively involved in the school system and its broader issues and problems. They can also make suggestions with regard to what is being taught at school.
He also touches upon the increasing role of women in contemporary Islamic discourse and public Muslim life. He marks this as the birth of an Islamic feminism: a women’s liberation movement that has happened within and through Islam itself. A growing strata of women are more knowledgeable of and actively pursue their rights. There are three characteristics of this new resurgence:
· a woman is now spoken of as a “woman” and not simply as a wife, mother etc. There is a deeper interest in her own psychology and spirituality
· it marks the emergence of a new discourse conducted by women themselves- a discourse that calls them to an active, intelligent and fair Islamic faithfulness
·
it is accompanied by
the increased visibility of women in mosques, conferences and public space
generally. A major strata of women are not shy to don
the headscarf though they adapt the hijāb
to Western dress.
With regard to the area of social commitment and political participation, Ramadan believes that Muslims are not bound by hard and fast rules in this sphere. Islam allows considerable space for the exercise of reason and creativity in this area. Muslims are only limited by the explicit prohibitions of Islamic law which, in any case, are few.
What allows the considerable space in this area is the “distinction of orders” arrived at by the Muslim body of knowledge. Muslims have no problem distinguishing between private and public, dogma and reason, religious authority and civic independence of individual. However Muslims do have a problem with “secular fundamentalists” who allow for no religion in social space whatsoever. For Ramadan Western society is not homogeneous and wiping out public religion in the name of national unity is illusory. In fact, religion has a crucial role to play since its practice is inherently social: “Being responsible before God for one's own person and to respect creation as a whole, one should offer to all people on the social level the means to fulfill their responsibilities and fulfill their rights.” [2004: 149]
Such rights are general rights of humanity and include: the right to life and the minimum necessary to sustain it; the right to family; the right to housing; the right to education; the right to work; the right to justice and the right to solidarity.
Ramadan also outlines what he sees should be the points of reference that shape the social commitment of Muslims in the West. These can be stated as follows:
1. Moral responsibility: A state of mind that thinks of one’s responsibilities rather than rights. This starts at the individual level.
2. Respect for and promotion of rights of all and not only of one’s community. Besides legal rights, this should include social rights of disadvantaged social classes.
3. To show solidarity with the poor through feeding schemes etc.
4. Partnerships embracing a shared promotion of ethics with other religions and a shared commitment to human right.
5. Associations: Islamic organizations should develop associations that are not based simply on the Muslim identity of their founders. Rather these associations should generate encounter and dialogue with the other.
With regard to political involvement in their society, Ramadan believes that it is important that Western Muslims take a contextualized approach. Uncritically applying classical Islamic political theory will not work since such theory was formulated in a different context. Importantly, their political involvement should work for the benefit of the entire society, not just for Muslim interests, and should be an enrichment of the political process as a whole: “In practice, it is a question of acquiring means of adaptation that will enliven people’s minds and give them the tools with which to resist and reform rather than those that make it possible to survive, protect oneself, and ultimately act politically only in the name of the interests of “the Muslim minority community.” [2004: 160]
The sources for political strategy are legal tools such as maslahah, choosing the better of two goods or lesser of two evils, and looking at the intention of the revelatory texts, not necessarily their explicit message. In this regard: “Muslims have a duty to make an appropriate study of their society in order to determine the features of the common good (al-maslaha), the main achievements to be preserved, the injustices to be fought as a priority, and the means at their disposal and, at the same time, to identify the actors and the key points in the social and political dynamics of their society.” [2004: 162-163]
However, there are certain pre-conditions for such political involvement. Such involvement must, firstly, respect “the way of faithfulness” [the spirit of the Sharī'ah] which is a way that leads to more justice. Secondly, Muslims cannot work with a dictatorial government that leaves a society without rights. Finally, they must avoid being used and treat with caution interests that are not always expressed – for example, using Muslim figureheads to get the minority community vote.
With regard to citizenship, belonging to a Western society is simply to accept everything that is thrust at one. A Muslim should aspire to be an intelligent, independent citizen, not just a citizen. This implies being critical of societal conditions that impede the development of such a citizen. One cannot not expect people to vote if they live in squalor.
For Ramadan the prerequisites of an effective citizenship are as follows:
1. A citizen must have a deep knowledge of the environment, of the functioning of institutions and the political system of their countries.
2. One should have the capacity to listen to and engage with others in order to form serious, independent opinions.
3. One should participate actively in the life of the city through civic involvement.
These prerequisites are crucial in carrying forward broader social policy, rather than simply engaging in special interest lobbying or being drawn to “fashionable” movements. It will lead to a citizenry that is responsible, active and intelligent- qualities that are already part of their spirituality.
The civic ethics driven by
Islam are based on universal principles and are for human beings in general,
not for Muslims in particular. Muslims must not sustain the sense of otherness
but rather belong and commit to society in general. Throughout his book
Ramadan's refrain is: Muslims must
normalize their presence in the West without trivializing it.
Furthermore, Western Muslims must remain the conscience of the South. They must critically reflect on economic or strategic policies that suffocate whole societies as well as cultural colonization. They must challenge their governments who co-operate with dictators and fight the policies of the IMF and World Bank, defend the forgotten peoples, and challenge the clampdown on civil rights in the name of a “War against terror” etc.
Such considerations lead Ramadan to a discussion of economic resistance as a whole. In his view the world is, in economic terms, a dār ul harb. Every country has become enmeshed in the global economic system with all its injustices, its new look colonialism and long distance slavery. There exists no dār ul Islām in the economic sphere.
According to Ramadan, this malaise can only be addressed through a global Islamic approach to economics- an approach that transcends depending permanently on the fiqh of necessity or exception and which is acutely conscious of economic morality and the broader Islamic principles informing the field. As to the moral framework, its essential features are the following:
· The institution of Zakāh : This activates the moral dimension to economic activity. Crucially, Ramadan does not envisage Zakāh as simply a handout to be given ritually on a yearly basis but as an institution than develops economic independence. The recipients of Zakāh must ideally rise to become givers of this alms tax. An effective system of Zakāh can only come into being by applying a thorough knowledge of the social context and employing a strategy that leads to autonomy not continued dependence. For example, he suggests that it should incorporate providing means to buy tools or rent land.
· Non- compulsory personal expenditure
· To please God and make gifts along the way He sets us
· To struggle against egoism and acquisitiveness
· Being discreet in giving
· Collectivity: To be with God is to be with people. To possess is to share, to protect the freedom and dignity of others.
As to the economic principles they are as follows:
· Tawhīd: To know that God is truly the Owner. This consciousness limits egoistic and thoughtless exploitation of resources.
· The right to private property: This is subject to moral principles being maintained. Unjust exploitation, fraud etc. may necessitate the expropriation of property.
· Prohibition of interest: By this is meant the growth of capital through and upon capital itself. Interest comprises increasing the value of goods without performing any service and exchanges based on speculation, monopoly and other unequal conditions. This prohibition aims at developing equity, humanity and transparency and is the moral axis around which economic thought in Islam revolves. It calls believers to categorically reject an order whose sole motivation is profit and that scoffs at justice and humanity.
However, Ramadan believes that it is unrealistic to immediately break with the current system. He states that in economics radical and reasonable resistance is a process. Muslims have to first comply with the neo-liberal economy if they are going to challenge it. A total refusal to participate is the best guarantee for its survival. In a dār ul harb. compliance with a system is allowed if the express intention and commitment is to acquire the means to leave it. Therefore this compliance is accompanied by engaging in ways to create a viable alternative to the dominant system while protecting the possessions and independence of Muslims in their society. Finally, Muslims need not go it alone and should get involved with groups seeking alternative economic frameworks.
Ramadan expresses some dissatisfaction with the current state of inter-religious dialogue. He believes that these forums become closed circles of fairly open-minded specialists with ordinary believers generally untouched by the discussions taking place. For Ramadan, such dialogue must maintain an organic connection to the broader community with discussants reporting back to their constituencies. Furthermore, such dialogue must be done in conjunction with intra-communal dialogue, and this latter is indeed a rare phenomenon. He believes that inter-religious dialogue must be open and honest. In this regard he does not shy away from certain “exclusivist” sounding verses of the Quran and provides a credible exegesis of these- an exegesis that somewhat blunts this exclusivity and makes mutually beneficial dialogue possible. He also holds that dialogue must not be driven by the motive to convert others. Instead it is conducted for self-enrichment and the cultivation of wisdom. He makes the point that religions should also move beyond dialogue to shared involvement in addressing issues detrimental to religious life as a whole, irrespective of the particular religion of an adherent.
Finally, what type of culture should Western Muslims pursue? Ramadan makes the point that Islam has the ability to express its universal principles across a range of cultures. Although there are fundamentals to be respected, in the social sphere Islam is open to the cultures, customs and creativity of humankind. Consequently, Western Muslims must do what Muslims worldwide have done throughout their history: “to integrate whatever there is in the culture where they live that does not contradict what they are and what they believe.” [2004: 216] According to Ramadan, this will give birth to a European or American Islamic culture: respectful of the universal principles of Islam and sustained by the history, traditions, styles and tastes of Western countries.
At present Muslims in the West live in a secluded parallel reality, cut off from mainstream society and interacting within the confines of the mosque, the Islamic bookshop, the Islamic association. But they need to recognize the good in Western culture, literature and the arts. By implication “Islamic” bookshops must offer customers new literary horizons- novels, short stories, as well as works in the humanities and philosophy. The same approach should be followed with regard to music, cinema and television. However, an ethic of consumption should be observed- an ethic that critically engages the content of these forms rather than blanket acceptance or rejection. Such critical engagement requires that the Muslim is thoroughly acquainted with his environment, its psychology and its dynamics.
Thus, with regard to Western Muslim artists, they have to think in terms of their own language, temperament and tastes, not importing oriental works or blindly imitating Western forms and simply adding a sprinkling of Arabic phrases to “Islamize” them. Similarly Muslims should not simply imitate Western events such as parties by adding a few elements to “Islamize” them but should critically engage with issues such as consumerism which will still come into play under the Islamic version.
Ultimately a Muslim should develop a critical mind, make choices, contribute, renew- not imitate past or present. He or she has to confront reality with all its challenges, sustained constantly by the “need of Him”, and take on one’s responsibilities.
Towards a critique of
Ramadan
The above represents the crux of Ramadan's thinking on the Muslim 'minority' situation. While I agree with the general gist of his arguments, I feel it needs to be tempered by the following considerations:
(1) Ramadan tends to be quite dismissive of what he terms “scholastic traditionalism”- namely the body of knowledge as generated by traditional adherence to the madhhāhib or schools of law. It is indubitable that the majority of the 'ulamā originate from and perpetuate scholastic traditionalism. Ramadan's dismissive attitude not only alienates a major constituency but will also obstruct the flow of his own ideas to the broad spectrum of Muslims since it is the 'ulamā who form the organic link to the community. Further, and more seriously, I think Ramadan has failed to take full cognizance of the scholastic traditionalist worldview, the sophisticated arguments it presents for its adherence to the traditional legal schools and its innate ability to adapt its positions to current realities- and thus far from being hidebound it is vigorous and very relevant- in fact, the major form of Islamic adherence for the world's Muslims.
(2) While Ramadan focuses on ideas, it can be argued that it is the institutionalization of those ideas that will represent the major obstacle. In other words, how does one create a viable infrastructure for those ideas, a “bureaucracy” if you like, that will ensure that they will not remain ideas but become concretized and perpetuated through efficient, self-correcting, meritocratic systems. At another level, are we institutionally prepared to move beyond the “protective” phase and engage with the other in the way advocated by Ramadan? In other words, have we reached the level institutionally whereby we can disseminate sufficient Islamic education to Muslims so as to move out of “protective” phase? By all means read Descartes but are Muslims ready to separate the wheat from the chaff? A consideration of praxis would have been welcomed.
(3) In a similar vein it can be argued that Fiqh is necessarily adaptive rather than visionary in the way Ramadan sees it. One does not project a fiqh of the future- the fiqh enterprise is not built in that way. 'Ulamā work from where people find themselves. Consequently its adaptation has always been gradual rather than imposing. Equally, Ramadan talks in broad strokes about the tools available in fiqh to effect change. But while Maslahah and ijtihād are agreed upon the way they come into effect are quite complex, working in tandem with other tools and concepts that altogether might lead to more conservative outcomes.
(4)Ramadan is very sympathetic to Sufism, advocating an “activist” variety as opposed to a quietist one. However, I think he dismisses quietist Sufism too easily: people can adapt their life and influence others in multiples of small ways. And it is often these ways that are the most lasting.
Despite these reservations, I believe that the issues Ramadan bring to the fore should be prioritized and debated if Muslim minorities are to forge ahead in a systematic and goal-oriented manner, rather than just playing by the numbers or being continually forced to react and adjust because of events beyond their control.
Umar Faruq Abd-Allah: building
vibrant, engaged Muslim communities
In his work Abd-Allah stresses that the traditional Muslim way of engaging the other was one based on openness and acceptance of all that was good. Such engagement was firmly based on a thorough understanding of Islamic law. In fact, Abd-Allah calls us back to a true, full, holistic understanding of Islamic law- such an understanding, he argues, provide the essential guidelines to building vibrant Muslim communities.
Engagement with the
other: Lessons from
In his Seek Knowledge In China: Thinking Beyond the Abrahamic
Box Abd-Allah focuses on the Hui-
the Chinese Muslims proper- and how their history and cultural formation
contains valuable lessons for the way contemporary Muslim minorities can
interact with wider society. The Hui are racially
virtually indistinguishable from the Han,
He cites Dru
Gladney who argues that the Hui
experience is a standing refutation of Samuel Huntington’s thesis of the clash
of civilizations. According to
While Chinese Islam has a complex history, the Muslims were early on associated with serving under the Emperor in the imperial army. This gave the Hui a profound sense of legitimacy and self-esteem. To this day, military service remains an esteemed profession among Chinese Muslims.
The prestigious status of
Muslims was fostered under Mongol rule who further sought their full
incorporation into Chinese society. In order to uphold the dynasty the Mongol
emperors dispersed Muslims throughout
Under the Ming dynasty Chinese
Muslim culture was given a thoroughly indigenous stamp. It was under their rule
that the term “Hui” became the nomenclature for
Chinese Muslims. The Ming Dynasty did not look upon Muslims as foreigners and
continued the policy of utilizing Muslims to consolidate their power base.
Muslims continued to play their customary role as officers, soldiers, and
administrators. They also actively participated in Chinese culture, including
literature and philosophy. During the Ming period (which lasted for three
hundred years until 1644), Chinese names became the rule among the Hui. They ceased being Muslims in
But the period of Manchurian
rule (1644-1912), particularly its final decades, was a very difficult period
in Hui history. This period was marked by sustained
communal violence between Han and Hui in many parts
of
The Hui, like other religious communities, suffered greatly during the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976). After Mao’s death, the new moderate leadership of the Communist party improved relations with the Hui. They recognized the potential value of the Hui, especially in foreign relations with the Muslim world. Mosques were rebuilt, and permission to establish new ones as well as Islamic schools were also given.
After giving a historical
overview of Islam in
This mastery of both the
Islamic and Chinese traditions “permitted Muslim scholars to take
interpretative control over how they and their religion would be defined in
This, of course, is not
unique to
For example, the Hui cultivated both Chinese and Arabic calligraphy. They
translated their Arabic writings into Chinese and employed the traditional
styles of Chinese calligraphy to do so. Often, only Chinese calligraphy was
used. Chinese mosques commonly display the following Chinese ascription: “The
Primordial Religion from the Foundation of Heaven” (Kai Tian
Gu Jiao)
The Hui had to acknowledge Chinese cultural conventions and reach beyond the customary expressions of Semitic religion to communicate effectively with the non- Muslim Chinese. Thus they formulated a new symbolic universe rooted both in Islam and Eastern religion and philosophy that was more comprehensible to the Chinese mindset. Thus because the ideas of a personal God, resurrection, and Day of Judgment, for example, were alien to Chinese thought, Hui scholarship had to cultivate a very precise idiom- an idiom soaked in the Chinese universe but simultaneously true to Islam- in order to ensure intelligibility. This was needed not only for communicating with the non-Muslim Chinese, but also for many members of the Hui community who had been schooled in the Chinese tradition and were unfamiliar with customary Islamic discourse. Abd-Allah makes the point: “Had the Hui failed in the task of building cross-cultural bridges, they would have relegated themselves and their faith to obscurity.” [2006:7]
Thus they referred to God as the One, the Real, the Real One, the Real Lord, and the Real Ruler. The expressions were rooted in the Islamic tradition but did not clash with Chinese one, which regarded references to a personal God as anthropomorphic.
The Hui
also referred to the Prophet Muhammad (SAW) not by an awkward transliteration
of his Arabic name but as the Chief Servant, the Sage, the Utmost Sage, and the
Human Ultimate. Abd-Allah gives a host of other
examples: “They called the unicity of God (tawhid) Practicing One and Returning to the One. The
Qur’an was referred to as the Classic, which put it
in the same category as the revered and sacred books (called “classics”) of
ancient
Hui scholarship also chose to call Islam the Religion of the Pure and the Real [Qing Zhen Jiao]: “The words expressed the essence of Islam, avoided foreign associations, and emphasized core Chinese values, declaring Islam to be a cognate faith. The testimony of faith (kalimat al-shahada) was called the Very Words of the Pure and Real. The Pure and the Real were ancient Chinese symbols of the sacred.” [2006:8]
Abd-Allah again cites Dru Gladney who observed that by calling Islam the Pure and the Real faith, the Hui successfully appropriated for themselves the indigenous symbols of the sacred, placing them strategically at the center of the Chinese symbolic universe. In so doing Chinese Muslims demonstrated far-sighted interpretive control over their religion: “Calling Islam the Pure and the Real is an illustration of interpretative control at its best. The Pure and Real became the bedrock of indigenous Chinese Muslim culture. It played a fundamental role in forming a reciprocal Chinese-Islamic identity and enabled the Hui to gain the best of two religious traditions and the civilizations they inspired.” [2006:9]
Two Hui
scholars of the early Manchurian period, Wang Daiyu
and Liu Zhi, were instrumental in bringing about the
theoretical harmonization of traditions. Thoroughly schooled in both the
Islamic and Chinese legacies, they did not question the fundamental conceptions
of the latter and accepted them as self-evidently true. However, they did not
hesitate to find fault with the Chinese tradition wherever they held it to be
so, and did not compromise their belief in the superiority of Islamic teaching.
Their criticisms of the Chinese tradition were respectful and measured, more so
in fact than the criticisms dissenting Chinese schools of religion and
philosophy directed against each other: Wang Daiyu
and Liu Zhi focused on five central principles at the
core of both the Islamic and Chinese views of reality that established the
essential common ground between the two traditions. They argued that each of
the principles was implicit in the Islamic testimony of faith—“There is no god
but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God”: “The first principle asserted
that the oneness of God (the Absolute) confirmed that all existence is governed
by a single, supreme Reality. The second principle affirmed the continuity of
nature and the equilibrium and perfect harmony of Heaven, Earth, and the Ten
Thousand Things. The third principle was that of the
Abd-Allah
sees the Hui emphasis on the art of learning to be
human as an essential part of religion to be one of its greatest legacies for
the world today. Such a quest requires awareness of and sympathy with the
humanity of others “Wang Daiyu and Liu Zhi illustrate the possibility of escaping one’s cultural
limitations and fully discovering the self and the other. To accomplish their
task, they mastered the Abrahamic tradition and
unlocked its resources. With equal earnestness, they delved into the non-Abrahamic traditions of
Referring to Han-Hui discord of the late Manchurian period, Abd-Allah makes the observation that these were along the
fault-lines of ethnicity, class and sectarian bias, not on the basis of an
inherent clash of civilizations. Similarly: “In recent decades, many of the
bloodiest clashes have not been between civilizations but within them as
evidenced in the
Abd-Allah
feels that the history of Islam in
The need to develop an
indigenous Muslim culture and identity
In
his “Islam and the cultural imperative” Abd-Allah
again takes up the issue of diversity, relating it more broadly to the
relationship between Islam and culture in general. He makes the point that it
precisely Islam's openness to cultural traditions and its willingness to adapt
to them that lies at the heart of its long success as
a global civilization. In this way the religion could connect with local
peoples, fostering stable, confident indigenous Muslim identities and allowed
Muslims to put down deep roots wherever they found themselves. This is in
contrast to much contemporary Islamist rhetoric which in contrast assumes a
“culturally predatory attitude.” Such rhetoric has not been inspired by Western
revolutionary dialectic rather than the traditional Islamic model. However, it
is also the contemporary Islamic world's cultural dysfunction that has enabled
Islamist rhetoric to thrive. A functional culture provides social stability.
However, it can itself only flourish in stable societies and will break down
when social turmoil is rife- a turmoil that afflicts much of the Muslim world
today.
Abdullah sees much recent cultural creation taking place by
Muslims as confused and unconscious, or worse, a fearfulness
rooted in ignorance of the dominant culture and a parochial understanding of
Islam as a “counter-cultural identity religion.” This, he believes, will not
result in the development of a successful indigenous Muslim identity. Rather, a
successful indigenous Islamic culture in America- Abd-Allah's
native country- can only be brought about through a well thought out process.
In this regard, Islam's revealed law and long history as a world civilization
offer tremendous resources and latitude.
Abd-Allah defines culture as follows:
... the entire integrated pattern of
human behavior and is immeasurably broader than its highest
expressions...Beyond what is purely instinctive and unlearned, culture governs
everything about us and even molds our instinctive actions and natural
inclinations. It is culture that makes us truly human, separating people from
animals, which frequently exhibit learned behavior but lack our capacity for
the creation and adaptation of new cultural forms. Humankind has been defined
as “the speaking animal,” “the political animal,” “the religious animal,” and
so forth. But speech, politics, religion, and all essentially human traits are
fundamental components of culture, and, whatever else we may be, humankind is,
first and foremost, “the cultural animal.” Culture weaves together the fabric
of everything we value and need to know—beliefs, morality, expectations,
skills, and knowledge—giving them functional expression by integrating them
into effectual customary patterns. Culture is rooted in the world of
expression, language, and symbol. But it relates also to the most routine
facets of our activities—like dress and cooking—and extends far beyond the
mundane into religion, spirituality, and the deepest dimensions of our psyches. [2004:3]
The following observation can be made about Abd-Allah's definition: culture becomes built into
consciousness to such an extent that all spiritual and mundane attitudes
revolve around its pivot and simultaneously constitute it. It is a way of
being, a way of looking at and interacting with others built upon the
conjunction of all the components that make it up.
The capacity to impart a unified sense of self and
community and consistent, well-integrated patterns of behavior is a key measure
of culture: “A culture is “successful” when it imparts an operative identity,
produces social cohesion, and gives its members knowledge and social skills
that empower them to meet their individual and social requirements
effectively.” [2004:3 ] In an American context “ a
sound Muslim American culture would allow for dynamic engagement with
ourselves and the world around us. It would also cultivate the ability to cope
with complex social realities and negotiate productively the various roles
which life in modern society require us to play, while
maintaining a unified, dignified, and self-assured sense of who we are and a
consistent commitment to the values for which we stand.” [2004:4]
Abd-Allah sees the large-scale incorporation of acceptable pre-Islamic Arab
cultural norms as almost the supreme, overriding Prophetic sunna. It importantly provided the principle of
tolerating and accommodating such norms in other cultures. The principle is
also supported by the Qur’an which orders the Prophet
“to adhere to people’s sound customs and usages and take them as a fundamental
reference in legislation: “Accept [from people] what comes naturally [for
them]. Command what is customarily [good]. And turn away from the ignorant
[without responding in kind].”[Quran 7:199]
Abd-Allah states that an Andalusian jurist and Quran commentator, Ibn Atiyya, held that this verse not only upheld the
sanctity of indigenous culture but validated everything the human heart regards
as sound and beneficial, as long as it is not clearly prohibited by the
revealed law. Further: “For classical Islamic jurists in general, the verse was
often cited as a major proof-text for the affirmation of sound cultural usage,
and it was noted that what people generally deem as proper tends to be
compatible with their nature and environment, serving essential needs and valid
aspirations.” [2004:4]
An important maxim of Islam declares that “Cultural usage
shall have the weight of law.” To reject sound cultural usage brings great
difficulty and unwarranted harm upon people. Another maxim states that “Cultural
usage is second nature.” This implies that it is as difficult for people to go
against their established customs as it is for them to go against their
instinctive natures: “Consequently, wise
application of the law required broad accommodation of local norms, which
should be altered or obstructed only when absolutely necessary. Being
attentive to local norms implies meeting people halfway and leads necessarily
to broad cultural resemblance. In this regard, Islamic jurisprudence
distinguished between subservient imitation of others (tashabbuh),
which reflects a problematic sense of one’s own identity and was generally
regarded as forbidden or reprehensible, and the mere fact of outward
resemblance (mushābaha), which was
required, recommendable, or simply neutral as the case may be.” [2004:6]
Abd-Allah makes the point that these historical and legal principles are fully manifested in the rich cultural diversity to be found throughout the Islamic world. Muslims cultures such as the Swahili, Hausa and Chinese, to name a few, were and are fully indigenous.
To apply such principles to the modern day means moving out
of a mindset that sees the Islamic legal tradition as a program of detailed
prohibitions and inhibitions. Rather, it has to be made relevant to the
day-to-day imperatives of the American Muslim with an eye to fostering positive
identity and dynamic integration into American society. Language is a key
aspect of this integration: “While cultivating sophisticated knowledge of the
Arabic tongue, we—like other non-Arab Muslim cultures before us—must embrace
our indigenous tongue, the English language, and make it the primary vehicle of
our culture.” [2004:10]
Ultimately: “Beyond identity formation, a successful Muslim
American culture would serve as the basis of social development and communal
self-determination. But this requires not only taking interpretive control of
our religion, ourselves, and our community but developing a healthy
social-psychology that provides authority without authoritarianism, continuity
and tradition without blind conformity. A successful Muslim American
social-psychology must be at the center of our culture just as it is at the
core of the most successful social classes around us.” [2004:11]
Principles underlying
vibrant Muslim communities
In what is arguably his most important paper in this regard, “Living Islam with Purpose” provides 5 operational principles for a deeper understanding of Islam that will result in personal and community growth. These principles are:
1. Trusting reason
2. Respecting dissent
3. Stressing societal obligations
4. Setting priorities
5. Understanding and embracing certain crucial legal maxims
For Abd-Allah these 5 operational principles embody the wisdom and consummate sensibility of the Prophetic teaching. They provide Muslims with the necessary skills to utilize other forms of knowledge effectively. True Islam requires intelligent followers with sound understanding. These principles, he believes, should constitute an essential element of Islamic education, especially in today’s context.
We will look at Abd-Allah’s description of these principles in detail.
1.
Trusting reason
Reason lies at heart of the Islamic worldview- all legal acts are predicated upon reason. It organizes a random universe into a marvelous sign of God and object of scientific investigation. In Islamic ethics reason is the first necessary element of moral character. Reason forms the foundation of Islamic theological and legal thought.
For the most part Islamic law is rationale-based (mu‘allal)- rulings have rationales and tangible purposes. This allows the law to be flexible and adjust to changing times and circumstances. Every ruling in Islamic law is presumed to be rationale-based until the contrary is proven. Laws require ongoing scrutiny to ensure that their application remains consistent with their rationale. “Any approach to Islam that does not cultivate and respect the free and candid use of reason is inadequate and cannot lay the foundations of a viable future.” [2007:6]
2. Respecting dissent
With regard to fundamentals Islam speaks with a monolithic voice, but in others with multiple ones. The toleration of diverse opinions is central to Islamic heritage. In fact, Islamic scholarship has cultivated a branch of knowledge, “the protocol of dissent”(ādāb ul ikhtilāf), which demonstrates how to live with and benefit from opposing points of view.
Historically, Abd-Allah reminds us, Islam’s openness to novel and often
conflicting ideas was an important part of its cultural and intellectual
success. Muslim scholarship approached scriptural interpretation in a manner
that fostered dissent and the right to respect it. They made a distinction
between the qat’ī and the zanni- the categorically
imperative and the presumptively authoritative. Abd-Allah
uses the following example: belief in a
The division between the two domains is made in terms of both transmission and meaning. The Quran is qat’ī in transmission, ahadīth may by qat’ī or zannī in transmission. Both may be zanni in meaning. This has an important implication for the understanding of the role of the madhāhib: “In essence, each school of Islamic law constitutes a working methodology for reaching valid conclusions about presumptively authoritative questions.” [2007: 8]
While it is valid for a person or school to assume presumptively authoritative elements of faith for themselves they cannot regard it as obligatory for the Muslim community as a whole. Muslims who deny this right, who expect others to renounce their dissenting secondary beliefs, become sectarian. However dissenting opinions must have solid foundations. Their arguments cannot be weak or arbitrary or founded on ignorance of the Islamic sciences. “Respecting dissent means rejecting authoritarianism; it does not mean rejecting authority.” [2007:8]
Dissent in Islam is regarded as a special mercy. Abd-Allah quotes the Caliph Umar ibn Abdul Aziz as stating that if Companions had not differed there would have been no license in the religion. In fact, debate in classical academies was a required subject in the curriculum. Dissent must not be seen as discord: traditional Islamic societies promoted unity in diversity, not uniformity. Uniformity weakens societies while dissent strengthens them. Dissent also promotes learning because it asks questions. Questioning is valid however sacrosanct a matter may be. In traditional Islamic scholarship it was a sin not to ask.
3. Stressing societal
obligations
Societal obligations are based on recognizing the sanctity of others and the importance of society.
The Quran links the sense of moral obligation with good character; disregard for others with bad character. Stressing societal obligations provides powerful impetus for social commitment and community development.
Societal obligations (al-kifāyah) are more exacting and complex than personal obligations: “Societal obligations are situational and require intimate knowledge of the community and its immediate and future needs.” [2007:15] Societal obligations secure a society’s benefits (masālih) and protect it from detriments (mafāsid). As a rule individual interests may not be promoted above group interests. For example, a society’s long term need for affordable medicine takes precedence over personal or corporate profiteering.
Muslims who are qualified to meet societal obligations must do so to the extent that they are able. The responsibility for failing to meet these obligations falls upon all members of society. Furthermore, societal obligations are expanded to include other community activities through the principle: “Whatever is necessary to fulfill an obligation is an obligation itself.”
Abd-Allah believes that while secular national and state governments meet many societal obligations, they do not meet all and when they do it is not equally well for all social and economic classes. Muslims are still responsible for the shortfall in obligations.
In the West today Muslims must identify and implement societal obligations necessary for community growth, civic engagement and environmental protection. This is not the sole domain of activists and volunteers. Abd-Allah holds that it is the neglect of societal obligations, as much as anything else, that is responsible for the lamentable state of Muslims worldwide today. Muslims have become preoccupied with individual interests and obligations losing sight of Islam’s social mission.
Implementing societal obligations today requires the development of the necessary infrastructure: “Today as in the past, Muslim communities cannot meet their societal obligations without farsighted institutional development, including the establishment of religious endowments and the employment of well-trained professionals.” [2007:16]
Abd-Allah
identifies the following as among the key societal obligations in the American
Muslim context: the development of resources that address the issues of better
social services, professional marriage counseling, the creation of suitable
financial institutions, the establishment of advanced
Islamic seminaries. Addressing societal obligations also means engaging with
social problems. In
4. Setting priorities
Islamic law sets three descending levels of priority in order to secure society’s well-being: necessities (darūriyāt), needs (hājiyāt) and complements (takmiliyyāt). Thus Muslims are able to allocate time and resources to major needs without becoming preoccupied with minor or even false concerns.
Masālih(benefits) refers to what brings about
wholeness, healthiness and wellbeing. Mafāsid
(detriments) refer to what causes corruption and decay. Benefits and detriments
are inextricably tied to concrete circumstances. Determining priorities
requires making judgments about the magnitude of benefits and detriments as
they occur in different contexts. In fact there is a special legal area, Fiqh ul Muwāzanah (Science of Counterbalancing), that deals with issues in this regard. The three
priorities are furthermore set against the hierarchy of legal goals, the most
important of which are the five major objectives: preservation of religion,
preservation of self, preservation of reason, preservation of children and
preservation of wealth. For example, in
In an ideal situation necessities (for example, having shelter), needs (having a dishwasher) and complements (having attractive interior decoration) exist side by side but it is often impossible to secure all three together in real life. In such a case lower priorities have to be traded for higher ones. For example, an Islamic seminary project (a necessity) must not be held back because of difficulty in securing scholarships (a need) or finding an aesthetically pleasing location (a complement).
Misplaced priorities in a community result from ignorance of the concept of priorities. For example, there may be an emphasis on memorizing the Quran but very little concern with teaching Arabic and basic commentary in order to benefit from the memorization. Misplaced priorities can also result from the transferal of old ways that may be unsuited to the new context.
5. Understanding and embracing crucial legal
maxims
Abd-Allah states that Muslims have to know how to utilize this important resource. It must be a key component in the community’s religious instruction. These five core maxims (al qawā’id al kulliyal al khams) stand at the centre of hundreds of others. They constitute the bedrock of the five operational principles discussed Abdullah’s paper.
The maxims are:
a. Matters will be judged by their purposes.
b. Certainty will not be overturned by doubt.
c. Harm must be removed.
d. Hardship must be alleviated
e. Custom has the weight of law.
We will look at each of these maxims in turn.
a. Matters will be judged
by their purposes (Al Umūr bi maqāsidihā)
Work (personal actions, policies, institutions) must have direction and be carried out in a way that is likely to achieve their rationale and objective. The maxim also applies to intention based acts which can transform a neutral or mundane activity into an ethical or devotional one. An example in this regard would be creating positive alternative pastimes.
The maxim also guards against the detrimental effects of acts which, even if the intention was not such, the negative effects of which can be predicted. For example, one should prevent uncontrolled eating that is sure to result in obesity.
This maxim sets the standard by which the present activities of the Muslim community must be reassessed and future undertakings strategized.
b. Certainty will not be
overturned by doubt (Al yaqīn la yazūl bil shakk)
Abd-Allah states: “This maxim means that knowledge based on valid experience and strong evidence must not be overturned by doubt and weaker considerations.” [2007:25] It concerns basic proof and resolution of conflicting claims. Certainty here incorporates reasonable opinions based on strong conjecture. Well established convictions cannot be disregarded until there is stronger evidence to the contrary. This maxim also implies the presumption of continuity (istishāb). Thus people are innocent until proven guilty. This maxim also leads to presumption of permissibility. Things are deemed to be permissible until proven otherwise- impermissibility is the exception to the rule. Embracing this maxim requires us to break out of seeing Islam as a list of do's and don'ts- where the “don’ts” outnumber the “do’s”. Abd-Allah believes that an Islamic identity so defined fosters a psychology laden with debilitations, inhibitions and narrow cognitive frames where prohibition is made Islam’s default position. Such people have problems interacting with non-Muslims or even with other Muslims who have a different way of looking at things.
On the contrary, Muslims are not required to prove that things are permissible, only claims of prohibition demand proof. Declaring things forbidden is a weighty matter. An Islamic identity based on core values and universal principles would be able to function with self-confidence anywhere and with anyone- it ceases to be psychologically vulnerable in diversity.
c. Harm must be removed
[Al-darar yuzāl]
This maxim stresses that removing harms takes precedence over the acquisition of benefits when the two are mutually exclusive. This maxim grants priority to victims of harm, injustice and oppression. In accordance with another maxim, needs will be put on the level of necessities when harm needs to be removed. It is not required that a victim prove how severe a harm is for it to be removed. For example, in spousal abuse it is not necessary to take into consideration the magnitude of the abuse- even if it is a little it must be removed. Muslims must truly acknowledge the harms that exist in their communities and remove them.
d. Hardship must be
alleviated [Al-‘usr yajib
al taysīr]
Hardship is not synonymous with difficulty. There are beneficial difficulties like working hard for success. Rather this maxim refers to detrimental difficulties. As distinct from previous maxim, hardship must not just be eliminated but replaced with something better. This requires the creation of alternatives. In Islamic law we find many examples of the application of this maxim, for example, in the shortening of prayers, the use of dust for ablution instead of water etc. The maxim also means that we must only expect the most basic obligations of religion to be fulfilled by new or lapsed Muslims- the transition should be gradual and undemanding.
e. .Custom has the weight
of law [Al ‘ādah muhakkamah]
To what Abd-Allah has already discussed about the issue we may add his following statement: “...from the perspective of Islamic law, the nature of indigenous cultures and subcultures is fundamentally linked to the wellbeing of the social groups that have adopted them. For this reason, Muslim jurists regard Islam’s endorsement of diverse cultural norms as an instance of its overriding commitment to acquiring benefits and protecting from harms.” [2007: 33]
It is wiser to leave customs unchanged in so far as possible. Unhealthy customs must be altered through wise strategies and be given time. American Muslims need to adopt good cultural norms imaginatively in order to produce what is more beautiful and beneficial than existed before. Examples of where this is already happening can be found in fashion, design, literature and comedy.
I believe that Abd-Allah’s ideas display a rich freshness that can re-invigorate the strategies of Muslim community leadership as they seek ways in which to engage with the other. His ideas also provide a practical intellectual platform by which they can carry their communities forward. They are also rest assured that these ideas are not novel ones that have little basis in the classical tradition; on the contrary, they flow from the very essence of that tradition.
Conclusion
It is clear that Ramadan’s and Abd-Allah’s
thoughts have palpable relevance for Muslims in
Bibliography
Ramadan, Tariq. 2004. Western Muslims and the future of Islam.
Abd-Allah, Umar Faruq. 2004. Islam and the cultural imperative. A Nawawi Foundation paper.
http://www.nawawi.org/downloads/article3.pdf
Abd-Allah, Umar Faruq.
2006. Seek knowledge in
Abd-Allah, Umar Faruq. 2007. Living Islam with a purpose. A Nawawi Foundation paper.
http://www.nawawi.org/downloads/article6.pdf
For more information on ISCI
and its activities visit:
Or contact arafudeen@ipsauniversity.com