 |
Dr. Jamal Badawi |
Like previous RAND reports, or for that matter their echoes in the worlds of media and politics, the latest RAND report embodies a central problem in US-Muslim world relations. The problem is that it does not realize that it is not helpful to define Muslim's before letting them define themselves first if the organizers of the report ever want to understand Muslims' views. Nor is it helpful to resort to self-serving arbitrary, undefined, and stereotypical, and often times superficial classifications of other people.
Some of the terms used in this and other reports are comparable to Islamic terms such as "wasatiyyah" (being justly balanced), which is stated in the Qur'an as the hallmark of the Ummah; likewise, the term ghuluw (exaggeration or going to extremes), which is condemned in both the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
However, when the approximate English equivalents such as "moderation," "extremism," and "radicalism" are used in the RAND report[s], there are at least two problems. The first is the lack of clarity as to how the writers define their terms, beyond the lexical meaning, explicitly or by implication. For example, some see a "moderate Muslim" as one who "toes the line" of the policies of one government or the other. Such definition may not necessarily be stated explicitly but is clearly implied in the implicit "political dictionary." The second problem is the condescending attitude of using yet undefined or vaguely defined terms to classify a complex and non-monolithic Muslim world, which - in spite of its diversity - is joined together and has been joined together for 14 centuries by universal common denominators. Such denominators include the revelatory nature of the Qur'an as the supreme source of Islam and final arbiter of any dispute or question as to what is Islamic and what is not.
Believing in the Qur'an as the word of Allah implies accepting and attempting to abide by Shari`ah. Even among some Muslims, Shari`ah is often confused with jurisprudence or fiqh. Shari`ah refers to the ethical values and guiding principles and objectives that are clearly discernable from the primary sources of Islam, the Qur'an and the Sunnah. It does include some explicit injunctions, but it is not identical with jurisprudential interpretations. While rejection of Shari`ah is tantamount to rejecting the Qur'an and Sunnah, revision of some older interpretations and/or engaging in new ijtihad (legal-religious reasoning) is not only permissible but also desirable. Needless to say that ijtihad must be based on deep knowledge, specialization, and observation of both the high objectives of Shari`ah (maqasid) and the proper scholarly methodology of interpretation.
Now, to define a moderate Muslim as one who rejects the basic pillars of Islam, one who rejects Shari`ah and its inclusiveness to all aspects of life (including governance), and who rejects the Qur'an as the word of Allah, thinking that he or she is qualified enough to copyedit Allah's book , is indeed a great travesty. More troubling is when some people wrapped up in their prejudices, lack of understanding, and - in some cases - deliberate disregard of any logical and objective bases for classification of others, are driven by political ambitions and possibly hegemonic attitudes.
For one, I do believe in the imperative of dialogue between the Muslim world and all other faith communities. I do not believe in the inevitability of the "clash of civilizations." I believe, rather, in the inevitability of cooperation of civilizations. That cooperation must be based on equality, fairness, and mutual respect for the particularity of others, rather than trying to force others or mold them according to one's own liking.
To my humble understanding, as I spoke recently in Melbourne, there is a considerable area of reconcilability between many central Western values and Islamic values as embodied in the high objectives of Shari`ah. It is a common but erroneous myth that Western values of freedom, human rights, democracy, or equity between genders are all the opposite of authentic normative Islamic teachings. There may exist degrees of incompatibility between the core of these common values and actions of Muslims and others. There may also be some incompatibility between how various communities interpret those values.
There are two central choices facing humanity today: The first is to continue to perpetuate unnecessary enmity, selfishness, dysfunctional struggle for control, wars, bloodshed, and destruction; the other choice is to work together, as Allah loves for us to accept unity in diversity and accept diversity in unity and consider this as an element of enrichment and mutual benefit. That later choice is the only acceptable one to me.
|
what is this?
This widget will help you to store, organize, search, and manage your favorite online content through a range of social bookmarking services. These services permit users to save links to websites that they want to remember and/or share. These bookmarks are usually public, but can be saved privately, shared only with specified people or groups, or shared only inside certain networks. Authorized people can usually view these bookmarks chronologically, by category or tags, or through a search engine. Most social bookmarking services also permit their users to vote and rank public bookmarks to determine which are the best ones according to the number of votes they get.
|
