An insightful and inspiring article by Sophia Chawala
Islam vs. “islam” –An Expat’s Perspective on Religion and Pakistan
When I came home for spring break, my father urged me to read a pile of novels. One that I am reading right now is called “Moving the Mountain” by Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf. Responsible for the plans to build a mosque three blocks away from ground zero, Rauf seeks to improve relations between the Muslim world and the West with his novel by speaking on behalf of disenfranchised Muslims in America and around the world and by calling for a progressive, pluralistic kind of religion as a bedrock of tolerance and understanding, one that would melt away hateful stereotypes like stubborn iced snow sliding off an onrushing car and collapsing into glittery dust upon impact.
Few nights ago, amid the bombastic syncopated beats from my sister’s drum playing, the hissing of the pressure cooker from the kitchen, and the belting of debaters from Pakistani news, I was particularly engrossed by Rauf’s first chapter, which explored two sides of the Muslim-based religion: capital “I” Islam and lowercased “i” islam. The former is the one Rauf believes many Muslims today inadvertently act upon: a proper noun that calls for a solid state-of-mind, a construct of mere belief to give followers that extra pizzazz of identifying themselves from the point of view of outsiders. The latter, conversely, is the one Rauf champions. It is a verbal noun, the more humanistic approach of the religion that consists of a set of actions people should utilize as a supplement to every sect of their life. To explain the actions needed in islam, Rauf sets up an interfaith dialogue between the actions and first two commandments of the Christian faith. To believe in one God and to love others as ourselves are the core principles and intentions Muslims should always keep in mind when doing any kind of action—religious or non-religious—to ensure the best spiritual experience as possible for not only themselves, but for others as well. We gain understanding through our actions and through understanding, we could finally achieve the entity of “us”, defined not by otherness, but by inclusiveness of believers, one that steers away from establishing differences between “us” and “them” as a cause of hostility, one that fosters communities of faith as opposed to sectarian hierarchies situated in a vacuum, tightly sealed from any kind of interfaith dialogue or interaction.
Now, I am new to the realm of questioning religion. Nevertheless, Rauf’s connection managed to dazzle me to a point where all the surrounding drumming, hissing and yelling lowered to a sedative hum. For a second, I actually imagined a scene of Christians, Muslims, Jews and other faiths convening and confiding in one another to create tighter-knit bonds, deeper understandings, new crucial layers of meaning to morality and righteousness. I thought of a scene where for once political disagreements did not trump relationships with faith, which runs much deeper than any opinion or fact. Even further, I thought of a religion not named Islam, Christianity or Judaism, but just a religion known as the Religion of God.
But all of a sudden, a glare fires up in the periphery. Caustic red font splashed across the flat screen screaming “BREAKING NEWS.” It was there when I learned about mobs burning over 40 Christian houses in the Badami Bagh area of Lahore in response to alleged blasphemy towards the Prophet Muhammad. From there, my sister’s drumming crescendos into a seismic tremble, my mother’s pressure cooker hiss turns into a deafening sizzle, the voices of the news anchors became more rapt with loud, chaotic excitement. Ears shot, I looked up and down frantically from Rauf’s words to the TV screen, from islam to an obnoxiously capitalized ISLAM plastered in front of me. Then I thought to myself, where do Muslims go from here? Or put generally, where do Pakistanis go from here?
Call this coincidence painfully convenient, but it shows something that I am trying to make sense of when it comes to Pakistan, to religion, to the ways of human nature in general. I am only an expat witnessing at the periphery, fathoming the land of my parents through limited media sources and a plethora of books. I am only the novice inspector under the bridge trying to see what beams are deteriorating. I can only say so much about these riots and religious hate-based attacks on Pakistan, for the arguments against such a crime is as implicit as the dangers of fire. But what I can say is that Muslims are not the only ones marginalized in this world. Muslims victimize themselves too much and accredit themselves too much pity. Culture and colonialism has infiltrated the religion, morphing it into a fuzzy adjective. No wonder non-Muslims also extend Islam to include terrorism. These terms hurt, but we Muslims are partly responsible for their creation.
This country was founded as an “Islamic Republic”, a place where Muslims could become the majority by basking in a land of the religious free and by creating ideas and fostering innovations they never had the chance to do in British India. But just by looking at this title—a title that hangs above Pakistani heads like a shrill fluorescent light bulb—Islam is indeed capitalized, not only orthographically but politically as well. Pakistanis need to regain the true grasp of faith. But in order to do that, they must de-capitalize literally and figuratively, their views of religion and most importantly, their pride.
Sophia Chawala
Relevant discussion, but it would be appropriate to discuss the issue in its historical perspective.
Islam appeared in Mecca and faced a hostile milieu, to the extent that the prophet and close companions had to seek refuge in Medina.
Over the course of time and after a few battles, the prophet signed a treaty with Meccans for a pilgrimage to Kaaba. The next year he entered Mecca as a victor, with out a fight.
The process of expansion was launched slow at first, but soon gained momentum. The ostensible reason was to offer the word of God. If the messengers were ill treated, that provided justification for assault on them. Tablighis were sent to the court of Iranian king, and were insulted and driven away. Lo and behold, Iran was invaded and conquered.
Fast forward in history, Christian missionaries were sent to Africa and if met with resistance, gun boats followed.
Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf may be sincere and honest in his pleading for a pluralistic mind set, but if I was a Christian with even cursory knowledge of history, I would very wary of such gestures.
Dr. Syed Ehtisham
Mr Ehtisham,
Thanks for your invaluable insight. I understand your point when it comes to historical and political circumstances of religion.
Like I said in the article, religion should definitely not be a an entity tightly sealed in vacuum from any kind of interactive dialogue. And history and politics are indeed few things of interactive features. It also says in Rauf’s book that religions, their ethics and their laws are ever-emergent with their surroundings. The shariah, for example, is not an ancient slate of inflexible clauses, but like the United States constitution striving to adapt with change with loose interpretations. Given this de facto, it can also be argued that different priorities urged Muslims to cater t their beliefs throughout history, causing them to act accordingly so that their religion would not be sealed in that “vacuum”.
But because religion is ever-emergent with historical circumstance, as you imply it is, are we humans, then, supposed to live for the progress of ideology, or does ideology serve the human progress? This question, when looked at in light of the emergent nature of religion, is answered with yet another question: Is religion supposed to really be absolutely untouched and pure? Is it a fetus stuck in the womb of a whale (as Orwell may put it)? Can we actually practice a religion down to its very bone, devoid of any political and historical influences that have naturally tainted it?
This last question is what Rauf answers with a booming aye. he believes we muslims and non-muslims can solely zero-in on the morals and ethics that religion puts for us, for morals and ethics, according to Rauf, are much more flexible and adaptable and strict, immoral ones. But how are morals and ethics born?
They are born from political and historical circumstance themselves. They are not fairytale pieces of gleam born out of air. They are products of human scars.
What do you think about morals and politics? I would like to know everyone’s thoughts!
Religions catered and responded to norms of their time.
Unfortunately there is no provision for advance as there is in science.
People who want to amend and modify a religion, and still stay in its realm, are either not realists or practicing, I forget the term, but what Jews in Spain did when forced to convert to Christianity (a more moderate stance is Taqqayya).
Sophia Chawala’s original article and subsequent comments raise quite a few important and complex issues about Islam. Let me take up some of them and put in the center stage so that we can look at them collectively.
According to Sophia’s interpretation of Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf’s book, Islam’s basic tenets and principles can be re-interpreted and modernized in the light modern day advancement in all fields of human knowledge. We have to examine this issue whether Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf’s interpretation is a valid one or just wishful thinking.
Islam is one of the three monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam).
But Islam being the youngest of three (Islam about 1500 years old, Christianity 2013 plus years old, Judaism 3000 to 4000 years old) has some special problems to deal with. Quran was written during the life of the prophet and codified and compiled within about 30 years of his death. This creates a special problem for modernization and re-interpretation of Islam.
Judaism is much older but Moses was the first towering personality to whom Jews look up to and get their guidance and inspiration. He brought them out of the slavery in Egypt and left them wondering in the deserts for considerable period of time. Jew entered the Promised Land after the death of Moses.
Christianity is a completely different case. Christ was crucified, when he was just 30 plus years old. All four books of New Testament (John, Luke, Mathew, Mark) were written after his death. Christians were persecuted for considerable period of time until Christianity was adopted by Emperor Constantine (name does not matter – it can be corrected). Christianity got political power about 200 years after death of Christ.
Islam is a different story. Islamic dogma as well as political structure was fully established during the life of Prophet of Islam (SAW). This makes the separation of Church/Mosque and State extremely difficult in Islam. But modern Islamic scholars have to find a way to resolve this dilemma dexterously.
In Judaism the reform movements are successful or even possible because of historical reasons.
Islam is straitjacketed because of its past as most of the political facts and religious principles are properly documented.
Let me take few points from Dr. Syed Ehtisham’s scholarly comments.
Dr. Ehtisham writes: “Religions catered and responded to norms of their time.
Unfortunately there is no provision for advance as there is in science.”
I fully agree with this point.
Then he says:
People who want to amend and modify a religion, and still stay in its realm, are either not realists or practicing, I forget the term, but what Jews in Spain did when forced to convert to Christianity (a more moderate stance is Taqqayya).
It would be much better if Dr. Ehtisham would have explained the term “Taqqayya”. Most probably it is an Arabic term, and I do not know the exact meaning of this word.
As Sophia has asked all TF USA affiliates to participate in this discussion, we should rise to the occasion and contribute to this intellectual endeavor to the best of our abilities.
Before I ask you all, to ask your loved ones to participate in this discussion,
I would ask my loved ones to come forward and say something about Sophia’s article.
I would ask Saeed and Irfan to come forward and make initial comments.
I am confident you (Saeed & Irfan) can handle this challenge yourself.
If you need any help, let me know. As I told you before you cannot learn anything in life without making mistakes.
Dr. Ehtisham’s comments will be analyzed later on.
This is just setting up the stage.
Please note this comment should not be judged using any scholarly standards.
It is written by a person who has very little knowledge but has intense desire to develop intellectual skills and seek the betterment of fellow Muslims.
nSalik
All religions are tethered to their historical roots. The challenge for the generations that follow is to find relevance of the eternal truths to their lives and times. Islam is no different. It has gone through various eras and developed various schools of thought ranging from strict interpretation to broader nuances drawn from both scriptures and sunnah. Islamic civilizations reached their heights when they were inclusive and tolerant. The more recent history is one of intolerant exclusivity drawn from a historical milieu that does not exist. The challenge is to find the relevance that looks forward and not backwards. Modern Muslims need to find the paths of their enlightened forefathers.
Noor uncle, thanks for inviting me to comment on this and yes, you don’t need my permission to drag me in to anything 🙂 I’d love to be part of this discussion as this is one of my favorite topics to talk about. I’d like to thank Sophia for introducing me to “Moving the Mountain”. I’m sure it will be a great read.
Every time, we hear news on some terrorist attack or burning houses or disrespecting women in “Islamic” countries, our first reaction is always “what’s wrong with Muslims and Islam”. Than a debate starts until the next incident. Now just because it’s an “Islamic” state doesn’t mean it’s “islamic”, does it? To me, Islam is a “man” made religion whereas islam is God’s religion. I have been looking for a way to explain this and now this “I” vs, “i” fits perfectly with my definition. Just like other things man has created, Islam can’t scale with evolving social needs.
I do not agree to the comparison between islam (note the i vs. I) and other religions. Please allow me to share my thoughts on this before I get to the other points in the article.
God’s islam is not a proper noun, it’s a noun, which means submission. One who submits to God is called “m”uslim not “M”uslim, which is also a noun not a proper noun and it means submitter. God says, “Indeed, the religion near Allah is submission. And not differed those who were given the book, except after came to them knowledge, out of envy among them…. 3:19”. This is a very important statement, which needs to be recited at 100k ft elevation while carrying no traditional and cultural baggage on our backs. This tells me that God’s religion has always been islam starting from the first messenger/person on earth. Followers of islam have always been called muslims as there are references in Quran of previous messengers and their followers calling themselves muslims not “Muslims”. This will also be very clear by looking at the names of most of the religions/sects as they are after personalities/regions. Judaism from Juda, the 5th/6th brother of messenger Joseph, Christians from Christ, Hindus from Hindustan, Budhaism from Budha, Sikhism from being students of Guru etc. Same thing we see in Islam as there are Hanafi from Imam Abu Hanifa, Shafii from Imam Shafii, Maaliki from Imam Malik, Hanbali from Hanbal. If history is any indication then some more years down the road, these will turn into their own “religions”.
The above reference was made just to support my next claim. Since God’s islam has always been there from the very beginning, it is applicable to any society with any social norms without a single modification. I’d go actually as far as saying that the definition of Mo’min is that he/she is always in sync with the current environment. God’s religion liberates the mo’min as it removes compulsions and rigidity. If there is a law of God we can’t apply to our current state then there is something wrong with our interpretation and understanding of that law not the law itself.
What is needed is understanding and implementing islam and move away from Islam and Islamic teachings. Because Islam cannot be de-capitalized. It will have as many conflicting versions as there are different traditions following it. I can’t practice Arab version of Islam in Pakistan or any other place. But I can practice islam everywhere without sacrificing any of my liberties and rights.
Irfan I think you have yourself a good blog post to share! Thanks for your insightful analysis and counter-arguments on the Islam/islam sittuation.
You know, your comment reminded me much about a video made by a comedian named Baba Ali. Baba ali is an Iranian American that converted to Islam about 2 yers ago, and he made a video about this same issue: can Islam really be de-culturalized to the point where we muslims can practice it to the very core? He vehemently said absolutely we can by simply excercising the “lower-cased i” islam, teach our children a set of actions as a SUPPLEMENT to life.
But I too had a slight problem at Ali’s claim, for he seemed to rainbow over the elements in between: the history, the politics, the culture. Maybe Islam really cannot be decapitilized because since people see it as a “set of actions” as a SUPPLEMENT to OTHER SECTS IN LIFE, maybe that would explain why people intermixed it with these things, so that they CAN find a way to apply it as that supplement to their lives!
Think about this: in 1917, there was a sub-movement in the Bolshevik Revolution called the Waisi movement. This movement consisted of Muslim farmer who eventually fell into the Bolshevik movement to liberate themselves from the Russian king. When communism came to rise, however, Muslims didn’t appreciate the atheistic element of it, but at the same time they didn’t want to lose the economic and social benefits of it. So people like Parvez, Ghulam Ahmad and so on tried to align Quranic and Socialistic principles to create a socialism ENHANCED by Islam. Islam was supposed to be the supplement, not the major driver!
It’s fascinating how these intermixings morphed some creatures of their own, causing a huge backlash from orthodox muslims and decries for the return of the “true” islam. But what exactly is the “true” islam if so many people in fact used it as a supplement to many ideas they didn’t want to give up?
Hehehehe, I know, the comment turned into sort of a blog post. I’m just way too passionate about this topic 🙂
You’re absolutely right. We use islam as a supplement instead of a major driver. I think the reason is our indifference towards religion. It’s more of a set of rituals with absolutely no connection to the real world.
So, what is a true islam? True islam never ages. It is never irrelevant. It forces you to question and analyze. It solves problems for mankind, which we dont have any knowledge of. It’s a framework, which creates boundaries where unrighteousness is OB (out of bounds). It’s super easy and logical . It increases the success rate. It brings perfection. It pushes you to innovate. It liberates.
How to follow it? Have a restless desire to find out the truth. Traditionalism coupled with arrogance is its worst enemy. Stay away from this combination. Question every single ritual that just doesn’t make sense. NEVER let a mullah own your belief. If you do everything right, it all works out in the end.
Irfan wrote “I think the reason is our indifference towards religion. It’s more of a set of rituals with absolutely no connection to the real world.”
Which rituals you are referring to – ‘ with absolutely no connection to the real world’.
Then Irfan wrote at the end “If you do everything right, it all works out in the end”
If one does everything right, it works out in the end only for Muslims or anybody in the world.
It works out because of Laws of Nature or because of Islam.
Irfan also wrote “So, what is a true Islam? ”
Instead of answering this question Irfan says ‘True islam never ages. It is never irrelevant. It forces you to question and analyze. It solves problems for mankind, which we dont have any knowledge of. It’s a framework, which creates boundaries where unrighteousness is OB (out of bounds). It’s super easy and logical . It increases the success rate. It brings perfection. It pushes you to innovate. It liberates.”
These are just statements exalting Islam, without any logical or rational proofs.
If Irfan claims were true, Majority of Muslims would not be in this mess they are struggling to come out of it without knowing what to do.
thank you marwan. finally someone wrote something that makes sense to an ordinary person like me and asked the right questions.. i had a hard time understanding the abstract but probably incorrect statements that were being made back and forth. hopefully the answers will be clearer and practical.
Marwan, I will try to respond to all your questions with as much clarity as I can. One disclaimer: My only source for understanding and following islam is Quran. I don’t go near hadiths or sunnah. I also study other religions to compare them with quranic statements
Most “religious acts” performed by Muslims of today have little to no contribution in making them a better person. One of such acts is prayer.
4:43 – O you who believe, do not go near prayer while you’re intoxicated until you know what you’re saying…
This verse isn’t saying don’t drink, which is what it is generally interpreted as. Prayer, having the utmost importance, is being put on hold while you’re in a condition when you don’t know what you’re saying. Compare this verse to today’s prayers whether individual or congregations. Word Salaat is used, which means connection. Aqeem us salaat means establish connection. We establish connection 5 times a day using the language we don’t understand.
Q2: yes, it all works out for everyone regardless of religious affiliation. This is how God created the nature. It’s all cause and effect. Good results in good and bad results in bad
Q3: why are muslim countries suffering if islam is good?
To me, islam and muslim countries are two separate things. Those countries are still holding on to their thousands of years old traditions. They force majority of their citizens to follow their version of Islam, which has nothing to do with the version of God. Man made rules are only applicable to his current environment. They go obsolete as soon as the next generation comes. Islam isn’t a set of rules, it is a framework with limits well defined. Create any law for the betterment of current society for any culture and tradition within that framework and its islamic. I actually consider USA constitution to be more islamic than muslim countries.
All of us are living successful lives alhamdulillah and we achieved all this through very specific actions in our professional lives. We studied and worked using the proven methodologies to distinguish right from wrong. we made mistakes, corrected them and succeeded. Throughout our lives, we use methods like Process of elimination, comparative analysis, competitive analysis, building hypothesis and testing actions against them. When it comes to understanding religion, we forget all these methods that have resulted in success for us and we look at a terrorist blowing up by saying Allahu Akbar and we blame religion for it. We see someone killing in the name of blasphemy and we blame religion. I and other people like me opt out of studying religion that way.
Irfan,
You are a courageous intellectual.
I may not agree with some of your reasoning but I sincerely commend and deeply appreciate your intellectual courage.
When I say I do not agree with you I am not implying that I am right and you are wrong or vice versa. It simply means that we have to investigate and discuss further to objectively determine whose point of views are based on logically sound bases and positions.
I will try to comment on your comments in installments.
The reasons are the complexities of issues under discussion and paucity of time.
You wrote {Most “religious acts” performed by Muslims of today have little to no contribution in making them a better person. One of such acts is prayer.}
This is an amazing statement.
If one does not understand what one is saying and expect some positive results – it is sheer foolhardy, and most Muslims may be the victim of this folly.
You pinpointed some extremely important points.
You try to differentiate Muslims behavior and Islam/islam. This argument is really fuzzy and one can hear this argument among educated Muslims. Muslims normally do not trust their own intellectual prowess. When challenged they become defensive as well as apologetic.
I will take it up later on.
Let me ask you a question?
Do you think there are limits to human reasoning/logic/rationality or these are the only tools which empower human mind to solve any problem?
If you think human reasoning/logic/rationality have no limits, I salute you.
If you say there are limits then can you draw a line that human reasoning/logic/rationality cannot or should not go beyond this point?
This question refers to Revelation/Wahi which most Muslims believe is the ultimate guidance of Mankind.
This argument will continue.
Marwan
thanks for the clarity. your opinions seem much different now than they did before. some bold statements too.
In my mind the present discussion raises two questions:
1- Are Muslims following Islam? I agree with Irfan that majority of the Muslims are paying lip service to Islam by mostly putting all their energies on rituals( obligation to God-Haqqoq-ul Allah) and little attention to obligations to society or other human beings( Haqooq-ul-Abad, civic obligations).
2- Is downfall of Muslims because of not following Islam?
This is a debatable issue. Some even argue that the achievements of Muslims in the early period of Islam happened despite the involvement of political Islam and not because of political Islam. Political squabbles started right after the death of Prophet Muhammad (pubh) that lead to the deaths of many revered figures of Islam, and start of dynasties. It does raise the question, whether a religion should get involved in politics? The early success of Muslims was based on hard work, education, research in all spheres knowledge, open mind to accept new ideas and respect for civic obligations. These are universal values of success, not exclusive to Islam, and whoever follows it will succeed. Many Western and now few Muslim majority countries (Indonesia, Turkey, Malaysia) are following these values and are successful. All these countries have secular constitution and religion is separated from politics.These three Muslim countries are very conservative and religious, but they have realized that religion is a very private matter and should not be mixed with politics.
Fayyaz
Marwan, thanks for the compliments and yes, I’m not claiming to have the only correct opinion myself. I just have an unorthodox perspective on religion.
To your question on any limits on reasoning/logic/rationality, my answer is, it is unlimited. Humans are the best of the creations because they have the power to use their intellect. Their is a profound statement by God, 8:22 “indeed, the worst of the living creatures near Allah are the deaf and the dumb – those who not use their intellect”.
I firmly believe in revelation but is it the ultimate guidance for mankind? I don’t think so? It doesn’t tell me how to manage a project, it doesn’t tell me how to hit a straight drive for 300 yards, it doesn’t tell me how to fix my car. It’s got nothing to do with details. Like i said before, religion provides a framework to curb human enthusiasm. This framework has upper and lower limits well defined. Man is free to do whatever he wants within that framework. Out of the things man can do within the framework, there are certain things, which are just prohibited; oppression, associating anything/any person with god, immorality. These prohibitions are there to protect the social health. Than there are prohibitions to protect individual health; blood, flesh of swine, eating from an already dead animal, eating something that has someone’s name recited on it other than god. These are the only prohibitions. Everything else is halal/kosher in that framework. Let’s take an example of this framework.
Rules:
1. Oppression is Haram/prohibited.
2. Killing an innocent is like killing the whole humanity.
3. Can’t do injustice.
4. Life for life.
5. Forgiveness is more rewarding than revenge.
Scenario:
Person A is killed by person B. Relatives of person A have full right to claim the life of person B according to rule # 4. The condition is that you can’t do injustice according to rule # 3. It means, person B must die with no more pain than person A suffered with no more after effects to person B’s family. If I’m working inside this framework and playing by the rules then using my intellect (logic/reasoning/rationality), i’ll be using option 5 as that is the safest for me. If i go for option 4, i need to pay very close attention to the other 3. for option 5, its just one thing i need to do with the best result possible. Now just imagine the world if everyone was playing by the rules and using their intellect.
Looking forward to continuing this debate 🙂
Fayyaz, that is a very good point. Nowhere does religion call for an Islamic state. I’ve not found any references of having a state blessed sharia law. I strongly believe that islam calls for a secular government with equal rights for all regardless of any race, culture or religion, which an “Islamic state” of today can’t provide. I wouldn’t want someone else’s interpretation of Islam imposed on me in the name of sharia law. islam has got nothing to do with politics or state affairs. It’s not islam’s domain. islam is submission to one god alone and live your life within the scalable framework it provides. Whoever makes the best of it gets rewarded in this world and the hereafter. Man is god’s best creation and it has left the affairs of this world in the hands of humans for them to do what’s right. God still has full control and it can interfere whenever it wants and bring changes.
Irfan