Anthropology of Islam: Pluralism in Islam
Muhammad Sameel 'Abd al-Haqq
The idea of pluralism in Islam centers on three main issues: syncretism in religious practice, the intrinsic ability of Islam to adapt to the various cultures it comes in contact with, and religious freedom for religious minorities in Muslim-majority societies. It also seems that marginalized Muslim groups in the so-called Islamic societies or nations are so marginalized and relegated to the periphery by the perceived “orthodox establishment” to maintain a sort of political stability. As long as the government and the ‘ulama(religious scholars) who support them don’t interfere too much with the religious affairs of these peripheral cultural groups their governance is tolerated or approved or regarded indifferently. There is no incentive to rebellion. And the Muslim governments are content to concentrate on administrative tasks as long as those on the periphery at least make an outward show of maintaining orthodox practices(orthopraxy). Yet and still there have been numerous instances of abusive governmental regimes and authoritarianism.
Socially, the idea of a pluralistic, inclusive Islam as found in countries like Indonesia, Malaysia, or East Africa is a contentious issue. Syncretistic practices are usually roundly condemned by what I call the “orthodox establishment”. In nations that are secular, as in the majority of the Muslim world, this orthodox establishment consists of the 'ulama. Usually in these governments, which are usual very repressive, totalitarian, or seen as proxies for Western governments, religion only becomes a concern when individuals, groups or movements threaten the governments political power. Egypt is a perfect example of this type. In theocratic or monarchial forms of government, the ‘ulama are either co-opted or allied with the State to form this “orthodox establishment”. Iran and Saudi Arabia represent this type.
Syncretism in religious practice refers to the inclusion of elements into the religion of Islam that are either borrowed from or influenced by non-Muslim society. It also includes situations where Islam is overlain pre-existing cultures. Usually this is referred to by the orthodox establishment as bid’ah, innovation in religious practice and kufr, deviation in correct religious belief,. These societies have existed among the Muslims since the time of the final Messenger of Islam, Muhammad(saws). Some of these practices include saint worship, certain faith healing practices, sorcery and witchcraft, astrology, and spirit possession. It can also include celebrating non-Muslim religious holidays such as Christmas, Thanksgiving, New Year’s and birthdays. Curiously, Female Genital Mutilation(FGM), honor killing, even stoning to death as a punishment for adultery and death penalty for apostasy also qualify as syncretistic practices or bid’ah, yet the critics of Islam and many traditional Muslims and Muslim extremists regard these practices as Islamic.
Islam has the intrinsic ability to adapt to the various cultures it comes in contact with. This maybe why one speaks of a Euro-Islam, a Western Islam, or an American Islam. Many scholars have suggested that there are many types of Islam, religious expressions that are unique because of the way the existing sociocultural milieu shapes Islamic experience. However, I have posited elsewhere that there can only be one Islam, especially when we understand the difference between content and container, essence and form. There is an interdependent reaction between Islam and pre-existing cultures. Both act on an affect each other, creating unique., local Islamic experience. Both those who believe that there are multiple versions of Islam and those that claim there is only one authentic Islam have difficulty reconciling their ideas with the Islamic concept that all Prophets of Islam, from Adam to Nuh to Ibrahim to Musa to Isa,(as) to Muhammad(saws) were Muslims.
How does one believe that all prophets were Muslim if the form that Islam took as a result of the Revelations each Prophet received and the teachings they expounded took different forms? And how does one reconcile the idea of multiple Islams with the other Islamic concept that Islam was in fact the religion that all Prophets taught? In an intellectual climate that accepts multiple interpretations of Islam it is possible to validate the extremist interpretation of Islam as legitimately Islamic, it seems. Often we hear pundits talk about the need to “reform” Islam by expunging extremist interpretations of it. Yet, in the mainstream mind, these are not legitimate Islamic interpretations at all. One possible answer is that Islam is inherently pluralistic, even as certain “interpretations” fall outside the possible range of legitimate Islamic expression. Inclusive and pluralistic does not mean that all expressions and interpretations are Islamic.
The issue of religious freedom for religious minorities in Muslim-majority societies is the most contentious and possibly most important of the issues related to pluralism in Islam. Theologically Islam is in fact exclusivistic. This cannot be denied. However the real question of concern is the idea of religious freedom for non-Muslims in an Islamic state. When looking at the state of Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority nations it is evident that they are treated poorly, regarded a second-class citizens, discriminated against, even persecuted in some cases. We see this happening to Christians and Jews in Iraq and Egypt and other countries of the Muslim world. It happens to Buddhists in Afghanistan, Parsis(Zoroastrians) and Baha’is in Iran, and Ahmadiyya and Hindus in Pakistan and Kashmir. Many critics of Islam look at these realities on the ground and studies of history and conclude that Islam is inherently and uniquely intolerant of religious minorities. Opinions among Mainstream Muslims range from denunciation of this behavior as unIslamic to outright denial of these realities. What does the Qur’an, the Muslim Holy Book say?
The oft repeated Quranic verse describing religious tolerance that is rejected by Islamophobes by utilizing the idea of an-nasik wa’l mansukh is only the beginning:
There is no compulsion in Religion… [Qur’an 2:256]
Critics of Islam contend that all of the so-called” peace verses” found in the Qur’an are cancelled out, effectively abrogated by its “sword verses” or “war verses”. We will analyze the legitimacy of the Law of Abrogation in Islam in full detail in another article. But it will be briefly stated that the criticism amounts to a belief that certain verses in the Qur’an are no longer applicable, that Allah has replaced them. All of this flies in the face of actual Muslim belief, even among extremists. Muslims do not believe that the peace verses are no longer the word of Allah or do not belong in the Qur’an any longer. To get a clearer picture of the Quranic vision of religious tolerance and liberty I can list numerous verses (and their tafsir).
We have shown him the way, he may be thankful or unthankful [Qur’an 76:3]
The Truth is from your Lord, so let him who wishes believe and let him who wishes disbelieve [Qur’an 18:29]
Indeed there have come to you clear proofs from your Lord; whoever will therefore see, it is for the good of his own soul, and whoever will disbelieve, it shall be against himself [Qur’an 6:105]
But the actual verse that lays down the broad principles of religious freedom is:
And fight them until there is no more persecution and religion is only for Allah. But if they desist, then there should be no more hostility except against the oppressors [Qur’an 2:193]
Critics of Islam and extremists hone in on the phrase “and religion is only for Allah” and conclude that fighting must continue until Islam is dominant. Yet in light of the most primary method of Quranic interpretation(ta’wil), Qur’an explains Qur’an, we will see that not only does this verse completely defeat the idea of perpetual warfare in Islam, it defeats the idea that religious war in Islam is for the purpose of spreading Islam. In fact it shows that any religious war in Islam is only to prevent or fight religious persecution. Jihad is not “holy war”, as the Islamophobes contend. It also clearly shows, when coupled with verses 39- 40 of Surah 22, Islam allows religious liberty and does not countenance religious compulsion:
Permission to fight is given to those on whom war is made, because they are oppressed. And surely Allah is able to assist them-
Those who are driven from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is all. And if Allah did not repel some people by others, cloisters, and churches, and synagogues, and mosques in which Allah’s name is much remembered, would have been pulled down. And surely Allah will help him who helps Him. Surely Allah is Strong, Mighty [Qur’an 22:39-40]
As we can see Muslims are supposed to not only protect themselves from religious persecution but also protect other religious communities from harm from those who would persecute them on account of religion. The phrase “and religion is only for Allah” means that no one is to be persecuted on account of their religious beliefs and everyone is at liberty to hold whatever belief they wish. We can now conclude three things in light of this information: syncretism in religious practice is condemned as bid’ah in Isalm, Islam has the intrinsic ability to adapt to the various cultures it comes in contact with, and religious freedom for religious minorities in Muslim-majority societies, though not realized in most Muslim-Majority countries, is guaranteed by Allah through the Qur’an. Each of these ideas will be explored further in future articles.
Allahu A'lam
Comments
T.K
^??
I see a massive block of text there.
Can you summarise for us lay people please?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Yep.
Sounds interesting. But format makes it difficult to read. Well, for me anyway.
I can sure make an attempt but the summary might be long as well
..insha'Allah it will help you understand better.
Many critics of Islam claim that Islam is not pluralistic. But what exactly does that word mean? Here is an example of non-Muslims controlling and defining the "debate on Islam", as well as defining the terms of reference that i think applies also to the case of "pluralism in Islam". In the anti-Islamic climate we find ourselves in today, you will find many Muslims clamoring to convince non-Muslims that they are moderates.
In the post 9/11 climate we also find many Muslims feeling compelled to choose between seemingly irreconcilable identities. Muslims feel compelled to choose between affirming a Western and Islamic identity or a "moderate Muslim" over a "radical Muslim" identity. But what exactly is a "Moderate Muslim"? For a Westerner, many times a moderate Muslim is defined by the degree to which Muslims reject the parts of Islam that they(the non Muslims) may find unpalatable or unacceptable. This, i am sure we can see, has nothing to do with actual moderation.
A non-Muslim may ask you "do you reject jihad and Shari'ah?, and use your response to determine whether you are a "moderate Muslim". Likewise, in the same vein of non-Muslims defining the terms of debate with reference to Islam, it is often stated that Islam is a very intolerant faith, the opposite of pluralistic. Islam is seen as inherently intolerant, religiously, socially, culturally, and politically . And it is claimed that we will see this intrinsic intolerance manifest itself wherever we find Muslim societies, especially in Muslim-majority nations.
What i have tried to do is give an introduction to the subject of pluralism in Islam from an Islamic perspective. The three main issues i have identified and briefly explained are syncretism in religious practice, the ability of Islam to adapt to pre-existing cultures, and the treatment of non Muslim minorities in Islam and Muslim-majority polities.
Syncretism refers to adding religious practices into Islam from non-Muslims. Both practices seen as bid'ah and acts that are considered kufr fall into the category of syncretism. Some of these practices include saint worship, certain faith healing practices, sorcery and witchcraft, astrology, spirit possession, Female Genital Mutilation(FGM), and honor killing. It can also include celebrating non-Muslim religious holidays such as Christmas, Thanksgiving, New Year’s and birthdays. Muslims do not believe stoning to death as a punishment for adultery and death penalty for apostasy qualify, even though these practices are not found in the Qur'an.
I introduced the concept of “orthodox establishment” to show that the idea of syncretistic practice is rejected by Muslims. So in essence, theologically speaking, Islam is not pluralistic at all. But those belonging to other religions shouldn't see this as a problem. All religions have tried to maintain a sort of integrity, an orthodoxy. So why is Islam singled out for being theologically "intolerant"? Something else is going on here.
Socially, 'ulama as well as governments tolerate syncretisitc, peripheral communities as long as they make an outward show of maintaining orthodox practices(orthopraxy). This is done to maintain a sort of political stability. As long as the government and the ‘ulama(religious scholars) who support them don’t interfere too much with the affairs affairs of peripheral cultural groups their governance is tolerated, approved, or regarded indifferently. There is no incentive to rebellion. This does not deny that there have been numerous instances of abusive governmental regimes and authoritarianism.
Culturally, Islam has the intrinsic ability to adapt to the various cultures it comes in contact with. This has led many scholars to suggest that there are many types of Islam, religious expressions that are unique because of the way the existing sociocultural milieu shapes Islamic experience. El-Zein says that there are many Islams. However, Akbar Ahmed contends, and I agree, there is one Islam but many Muslim societies. Inclusive and pluralistic does not mean that all expressions and interpretations are legitimately Islamic.
The issue of religious freedom for religious minorities in Muslim-majority societies is the most important of the issues related to pluralism in Islam. The real question of concern is the idea of religious freedom for non-Muslims in an Islamic state. When looking at the state of Muslim minorities in Muslim-majority nations it is evident that they are treated poorly, regarded a second-class citizens, discriminated against, even persecuted in some cases. We see this happening to Christians and Jews in Iraq and Egypt and other countries of the Muslim world. It happens to Buddhists in Afghanistan, Parsis(Zoroastrians) and Baha’is in Iran, and Ahmadiyya and Hindus in Pakistan and Kashmir.
Many critics of Islam look at these realities on the ground and studies of history and conclude that Islam is inherently and uniquely intolerant of religious minorities. Opinions among Mainstream Muslims range from denunciation of this behavior as unIslamic to outright denial of these realities. I listed several quotes from the Qur'an that prove that Islam supports respect and fair treatment for religious minorities. Islam also rejects religious coercion and religious persecution, thus advocates religious liberty. This is more than just "tolerance" and exemplifies the Islamic concept of pluralism. However most Muslims do have the desire to see Islam as the dominant religion in the world, which is normal for any true believer of any religion.
As my conclusion I state:
"As we can see Muslims are supposed to not only protect themselves from religious persecution but also protect other religious communities from harm from those who would persecute them on account of religion. The phrase “and religion is only for Allah” means that no one is to be persecuted on account of their religious beliefs and everyone is at liberty to hold whatever belief they wish."
We can now conclude three things in light of this information: 1.syncretism in religious practice is condemned as bid’ah and kufr in Islam, 2. Islam has the intrinsic ability to adapt to the various cultures it comes in contact with, and 3. religious freedom for religious minorities in Muslim-majority societies, though not realized in most Muslim-Majority countries, is guaranteed by Allah through the Qur’an. So Islam is theologically "intolerant"; socially, culturally and religiously tolerant. The question i have deliberately avoided addressing is "Is Islam politically intolerant?". That deserves it's own treatment, so i avoided giving it cursory attention here.
Allahu A'lam
Interesting.
Or are those three concepts, you talked about, the things which make up the pluralism in Islam :Oops: :S
But you should have defined pluralism at first to jog my memory and make everything else clearer
Also don't quite understand these
Spirit possession? :S
Huh? Is this supposed to say death punishment is allowed or isn't? And is it or isn't it written in the Qur'an :S
And when you say Non-Muslims living in Muslim countries may not be treated well but they should be - does that include Saudi, do you think? Should Non-Muslims be free to practice their own religion etc over there?
And when's the political stuff coming?
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi
"Interesting.
But you should have defined pluralism at first to jog my memory and make everything else clearer "
Well you are correct in a way. I should have defined it first. However the point was that non-Muslims are defining the terms of debate as well as redefining Islamic terms. Everything is seen from a Western frame of reference.
The definitions of pluralism I am working from are:
1.a theory that there are more than one types of ultimate reality, or valid ways of understanding reality, so every civilization should accept and accommodate this “truth”
2.a state of society in which members of diverse ethnic, religious, or social groups maintain an autonomous participation in and development of their particular culture within the confines of a common civilization.
These definitions beg the questions of, “is there or can there be an Islamic civilization?”, and “is this civilization in existence today”?
"Or are those three concepts, you talked about, the things which make up the pluralism in Islam"
Yes, the three concepts are ways of gauging the existence of pluralism in Islam
"Also don't quite understand these"
Some of these practices include saint worship, certain faith healing practices, sorcery and witchcraft, astrology, spirit possession, Female Genital Mutilation(FGM), and honor killing.
Saint worship refers to praying to those considered saints, whether dead or alive, and asking them for things. This type of adoration is reserved for Allah only, and its violation is called shirk, ascribing partners to Allah. The Sufis are commonly accused of this.
In Indonesia and among many tribal groups that maintain some form of their ancient healing practices, faith healing incorporates practices that are considered kufr, such as invoking the names other than Allah to facilitate healing.
Sorcery and witchcraft is still a part of many African tribes where casting of spells is done to achieve desired results. This is major sin in Islam, and some of these groups are Muslim.
There are tribal groups that believe we can be possessed by spirits, especially the spirits of our ancestors. Many try to channel these “spirits” for various purposes. Again this is present among groups considered Muslim.
Female Genital Mutilation is considered analogous to male circumcision and is still found among tribal groups. It is not unique to Muslims and occurred prior to the time of Muhammad(saws). There is nothing in the Qur’an condoning or promoting this practice, yet some Islamic scholars recommend it because they believe it promotes sexual morality.
Curiously there is nothing in the Qur’an about male circumcision either and it appears that Muslims adopted this practice from the Jews, through the sunnah of the Prophet(as) it is supposed. Remember that Muhammad did not bring a new religion, he was a mujadid, re-establishing the religion of Ibrahim(as).
Muslims do not believe stoning to death as a punishment for adultery and death penalty for apostasy qualify, even though these practices are not found in the Qur'an.
"Huh? Is this supposed to say death punishment is allowed or isn't? And is it or isn't it written in the Qur'an"
This is an anthropological analysis, not a theological statement. Muslims do not believe stoning to death for adultery is bid’ah, even though it is neither found in the Qur’an, but in hadith, and it is obviously adopted from Jewish practice. There is also no text whatsoever commanding the death penalty for apostasy in Islam either.
If the question is whether these practices exist in Islam today, then the answer is yes. If the question is whether they should be allowed or are they truly Islamic then that is a debate, a theological one, among Muslims. If you are looking for my personal opinion that is another matter as well.
"And when you say Non-Muslims living in Muslim countries may not be treated well but they should be - does that include Saudi, do you think? Should Non-Muslims be free to practice their own religion etc over there?"
In any Islamic state non-Muslims should be more than just tolerated. They should be respected, protected, and given the freedom to practice their own religion. I do not believe that there exists today an Islamic state. The closest we have is Iran, but Iran is theocratic and violates its people’s civil liberties all the time. This is not Islamic. So, yes, non-Muslims should be free to practice their religion in Saudi Arabia.
Many non-Muslims think of Saudi Arabia as the quintessential Islamic State, as guardian or custodian of Islam’s two Holiest Cities. However we shouldn’t be looking to Saudi if we are looking for a real world example of a truly Islamic State. The only Islamic State ever to exist was the City-State of Yathrib, now Madina of the Prophet(as).
"And when's the political stuff coming?"
The political stuff is a book in itself so I hope you understand why it will come in installments. It will be forthcoming very soon.
Allahu A’lam
Sorry,i wish i could make it more readable but,
Allahu A'lam
oohh I understand what you meant now.
I look forward to it
"How many people find fault in what they're reading and the fault is in their own understanding" Al Mutanabbi