|
“My Islam” on the Internet
|
|
|
In
2002, the total number of Internet users in the Arab world was 7.5
million
|
I
went to the lecture, maybe not even with the intention of reviewing it, and here
I am. What I came out with—despite my observation that most of the audience
did not understand the lecture for what it was, or appreciate the genuine sense
of subtlety and profound research talent—was an intellectual “itch.”
Despite the distance that could be sensed between the subject matter—“Islam
and the Internet”—and the distance that the paradigmatic subtext of the work
had traveled along in its inherent chain of thought, the work proved to be well
constructed; as its intellectual foundations were solid enough to take the
argument to a high dialectical edifice.
The
lecture, which took place on October 10 at the Goethe Institute, the
German
Cultural
Center
in
Cairo
, as a part of the German Festival filled the lecture hall completely.
How
could a topic like “Islam and the Internet” knock with a subtle hand on the
high doors of pressing debates such as “modernism and traditionalism,”
“personal judgment,” “individualism and personal interpretation of
text,” “virtual Ummah,” “the referential position of scripture, text,
and individuals,” “role and qualification of a scholar,” and many more?
Although the research did not go outside the Muslim electronic existence on the
World Wide Web, the reflections of all such ideas on the realm of the work was
noticed. Is the Internet an actual reflection of the Muslim reality? Or, is
reality reflecting itself on the Muslim Internet? Is the “online” a direct
indication of the “offline”? Or is “online” contributing to things going
“offline” (as the Internet comes with inherited values, generated from its
modern, Western designation)?
Dr.
Albrecht Hofheinz, a subtle and sober voice, who I had the pleasure of meeting
after the lecture to discuss his work, revealed interesting findings. His
lecture brushed away many general assumptions about the issue at hand; mostly
relating to the sensationalist—to say the least—“terrorist” Web sites.
What was even more interesting was his introductory remark that only the
Internet, unlike the introduction of other technological advancements, such as
the television, was not received with jurisprudential debate concerning its
validity: Its scope, impact, and lawfulness has not been debated amongst Moslem
scholars, unlike its technological sisters that, throughout history, were
received by a thorough debate on their bearing and their impact on the quality
of the Muslim individual in relation to his God, which ultimately determines
their position.
In
spite of the lack of scholarly attention, the cultural and moral dimensions of
the Internet have been the subject of heated debate in many circles. Hofheinz
mainly focuses on “The Internet and the Change of Moral Values in Arab
Societies.” Because the economic benefits of the Internet, in his view, were
never seen as problematic, his main interest in the Arab use of the Internet
focuses more on the sociological. Against the falsehood of equating the Arab and
Muslim use and development of the Internet as “e-jihad,” he tries to unearth
the actual, true effect of the Internet on Arabs, especially in relation to
Islamic interests, and how this is affecting moral values.
Amongst
the top 150 most popular Arab Web sites, there are 50 religious ones. Arabs seem
to have a vivid interest in religion. This number is not matched by any other
country or region in the world, including the US, where religion plays an
important role in many aspects of society.
Statistically
speaking, as Hofheinz’s research shows, in 2002, the total number of Internet
users in the Arab world was 7.5 million, which is 3 percent of the Arab
population. By the end of 2005, the number is expected to reach 25 million,
still only 8 percent of the Arab population. In particular, Egypt and Saudi
Arabia will be mainly responsible for this growth. However, economic factors
will hinder further increase of this percentage; according to Hofheinz, a
maximum of 15 percent is the highest that could be achieved, considering the
socio-economic reality.
As
he asserts, the Internet, in essence, is a medium for the younger generation.
And, of course, as youth constitutes a phase of moral and intellectual formation
and development, the cyber-impact could be intensified, especially when dealing
with a topic as sensitive as religion. The work deals with how the inherent
values of the Internet are reflected on the Muslim cyber-existence. The main
users of the Internet are middle-aged professionals, but now include many other
social groups. For them all, the Web seems to be a particularly suitable space
for the process of “socialization”—the main reason for the change of
values in the Arab world. The findings that more women are using the Internet
than men, that more and more people with a low educational background go online, and
that most users belong to the urbanized population, surely contribute to this
change in values.
Still,
the Arab Internet is a not a mass medium for private use. However, for a special
part of society who are intensively using the Net, namely students and graduates
of higher education, journalists, civil servants, politicians, parties,
activists, big companies, its effect is becoming more instrumental. The use of
the Internet started for the purpose of communicating with relatives abroad.
Now, it is these same people who rely on it for a long term experience for two
purposes: gathering information and communication. A third use, which seems
exceptionally popular amongst Arabs, is the discussion forums. The three main
(“golden”) taboos here are religion, politics, and male-female relations.
Islamists and nationalists seem to conquer the floor of the debates, creating an
“Islamist nationalist debate,” which is not a new discursive product,
but one that reinforces itself from the offline mass media. Also, information
gathering from non-local and critical sources (like Al-Jazeera and the BBC) is a
popular motivation for going online.
As
for the general picture of the majority of Islamic sites, they are moderate and
reformist. They predominantly consist of non-political Salafie
neo-fundamentalist voices and opinions that call for moral reformation. This
Islam seems to flourish on the Net because of the funding coming from the
“oil-money Islam,” generated by the wealthy Gulf. Hofheinz emphasizes that
the much less popular “militant” message is mainly related to the occupied
territories, such as Palestine and Iraq. Even for Arab activists, Cyberspace is
still no more than a source for research, not for mobilization of common
interests. We are reminded that the majority of Arab Web surfers are in fact not
politically minded at all.
It
is no wonder that the Internet is very popular amongst the youth. The
possibility of transformation through the use of the Internet will depend on how
the content and means of communication will acquire greater meaning in the
socialization of the youth and the formation of their opinions. Especially in
the formation of opinion, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and UAE take the lead (the last
two especially for financial reasons). This is proven by the fact that most of
the Arab Web sites, religious or otherwise, originate in or are funded by
resources from the Gulf. Reality shows that although, theoretically speaking,
the Internet is a medium in which people with little knowledge can publish their
opinions, in practice, economic force is stronger in determining who has a voice
and an audience.
One
can conclude that the essence of Muslim cyber-presence seems to conform to
axioms and the conditions that created electronic space; modernity’s
commitment to mass communication. As a state abstracted by values such as
individualism, religious freedom, and freedom of expression, among many others,
its products necessarily inherit such values. The products of modernity, for
better or worse, are not value free. The values of modernity slip,
intentionally or unintentionally, into the intellectual and technological
products under the modern condition. These products represent the conditions
they were created in. To be aware of that, to see the effects of that, to deal
with that—in one way or another—is the heart of the matter. Let us now have
a closer look at the biggest Islamic Web sites in the context of this thought.
It
is not a coincidence that the biggest Islamic Web sites are subscribers to
modernist Islam. The neat looking and high-tech Web site of popular numero
uno preacher Amr Khaled (amrkhaled.net) comes to the forefront. It is second
to IslamOnline (IOL). After Amr Khaled has been the star of many shows on
numerous satellite channels, the cable network seems not to be enough. Amr Khaled’s Web site,
too, tops all. The Web site, a byproduct of mass education, fragmented
knowledge, reverence for the printed word, and an avant garde setting,
enjoys incredible and ascending popularity. With its positivist and dynamic
message and socially conscious discourse as its essence, it easily won the top
position.
Our
Web site, IOL, conquered the top of Muslim online positions. The original
message of IOL is to offer a portal for modernist and activist Islamic
discourse. In theory, this discourse, reformist in nature, tries to find a
middle ground between modernity, with all its axioms, and Islam, with both its
principles and various understandings of those principles. IOL now offers many
streams of thought within modernist Islam, more diverse than that of Amr
Khaled’s and other Web sites. In a meeting with Dr. Hofheinz, Hisham Ja`far,
the editor-in-chief of the Arabic section of IOL, explained to the researcher
that IslamOnline has managed not to be merely a Web site associated with the
thoughts of Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the chairman of the board. It has become a
“reference for discourse,” a modernist, liberal, and reformist one. With
activism being at the heart of the Web site, IslamOnline tries to reach out to
the “sociological” backdoor of the Internet, bringing together many voices
and efforts.
Of
course the Internet has provided an excellent opportunity to “reform” Muslim
thought; to try to marry the untrusting couple, Islam and modernity. Modern
Islam has found a new medium for itself. On the other hand, traditional Islam,
with its comprehensive and interconnected system of knowledge, uninterrupted
chains of transmission of teaching (silsilah), reverence for qualified
and authorized scholars and teachers, detachment from the worldly dimension and
emphasis on the spiritual dimension, seems to be drawn to the backstage of
Cyberspace. The silsilah has always been an institution and a major
criterion for legitimization in all traditional Islamic sciences such as jurisprudence,
Hadith, tafseer (exegesis), Qur'anic recitation and tasawwuf.
As
a medium, the Internet, with its setting and structure, seems to favor modernist
Islam. For the Internet, with its basic notion of unlimited access to all,
provides equal footing for the qualified and the commoner alike. There is now
the boundless and self-perpetuating electronic space where everyone is free to
publish their interpretation and judgment. The Qur’an and the Sunnah are being
discussed on popular forums, unlike the in the 7th century, for example, when
the discussion of such topics was confined to “qualified” and specialized
scholars. Oversimplification and then absolutization seem to be the order of the
day. This has led to what Hofheinz has termed “My Islam”: a lingo spread on
discussion forums and personal web sites wherein generalizations and statements
like “the Islam I know”… “Islam as everyone knows is” are familiar;
hence, “My Islam”.
|
|
|
On the Net, both al-Azhar and a marginal heretical group could appear to share equal status and credibility
|
The
Internet, as it gives equal access to all e-publishers, might create a virtual
but unrealistic account of both the publisher/author and readership. Having an
interactive cyber-existence for each party or person could make them look on a
par with each other. For example, both al-Azhar, the oldest functioning
university in the world and vanguard of Islamic scholarship, and a marginal
heretical group could appear to share equal status and credibility, by the grace
of having one Web site each. For someone who does not know much about the
Islamic and Muslim makeup, both could look equally influential. Moreover, any
Web page, as it comes in a technological wrapping, could bear the fake seal of
“qualification”—especially since there is no actual contact with the
author. In this, the Internet seems to further deepen the gulf between
authorship and authority.
The
values that the Internet carries are suitable and befitting to a certain Islam.
The significant point here is that, as the Internet helps create a “virtual
sense” of contact with the outside world and a sense of independence from
one’s local surroundings, it undoubtedly contributes to the weakening of the
traditional as well as the social understanding of oneself. Surely, this will be
mirrored in one’s religiosity.
Nonetheless,
Hofheinz sees that the religion of the Internet is just one offering amongst
many. That feeling of autonomy with regard to reading a text and understanding
it is what the young are trying to achieve through keeping themselves away from
the established religious authority; the same axiom of modernist Islam. In that,
an Islam based on few references (vis-à-vis that of traditional Islam which is
based on qualified and established works of successive religious scholarly
authority) is given precedence. All popular Salafie-inclined portals e-publish
such reductionist sources.
Despite
the unlimited access the Web offers, the reduction, coupled with fragmentation,
of Islam and its “re-prioritization” continues. The result, as Hofheinz
brilliantly diagnoses, is the “canonization of information” by the popular
electronic outlets. Cyber-individuality may seem to be confined to its domain;
that of the individual’s right to access and to debate. However, the
generation which is now dealing with the Internet will grow and claim their role
in affecting public life in the Arab social and religious space. Whether Arabs
realize how the Internet works as a virus that imports its integral values into
their religious thought is a question that I, for one, believe will take more
space in the future; whether in the offsite realm, or the onsite one is an
altogether different question. The Internet seems to prove itself as another
ground for the individualistic and modernist “My Islam” to stand against the
authentic “traditional Islam”.
Tarek
A. Ghanem is the editor of the Contemporary Issues Page
|
