How do we look at a religion? As a set of rituals, dogmas and institutions? Or
as values and thought system? Some emphasise the former and others the latter.
Generally the masses of people are more concerned with rituals, dogmas and
institutions whereas the intellectuals lay more emphasis on thought system and
values, particulary on the thought system. For the masses, religion is nothing
but performance of certain rituals as laid down and to have belief in certain
dogmas formulated by the learned scholars. For them anyone who deviates from
performance of these rituals or questions any of these dogmas is a 'heretic'
worthy of condemnation.
The intellectuals may lay more emphasis on the thought system of a religion but
there are those who accept the thought system as inherited and there are those
who are intellectually quite active and consider it necessary to rethink the
thought system of the religion they have inherited. In a dynamic society ,
there are much greater possibilities of rethinking the thought system. In a
stagnant or a closed society such possibilities are smothered. The early
Islamic society was highly dynamic and full of vitalities. Islam was a great
revolution, not only religious but also social and economic. It had upturned
all old ideas and ideologies. It gave human society a new value system and
heightened the human sensitivity for change for the better. Islam put greater
emphasis on change and called everything old into question. It encouraged
people to rethink the beliefs of their ancestors. All that ancestors believed
in was not necessarily right and beneficial.
Thus in early Islam change was never thought to be a 'sin'. The Qur'an laid
great emphasis on 'ilm as well as 'amal (knowledge and practice). The Arab
peninsula was an area of darkness in many ways. Only poetry was their passion.
The other area of information they were proud of was what they called ansab
i.e. the family tree. For them the nobility (sharf) of ancestors was more
important than their own. They were greatly proud of their ancestry. Islam
changed all this. It brought about complete revolution in the Arab mind set
which spread to other areas conquered by the Arabs. The emphasis was on present
and future, not on the past. The Individual was brought at the centre, not the
tribe. The individual was made responsible for everything, not the tribe one
belonged to.
Knowledge and practice:
There was no quest for knowledge in the pre-Islamic Arabia. In fact any
knowledge except that of ones tribal ancestry was derided upon. The Qur'an, on
the other hand, put all the emphasis on 'ilm (knowledge) which is a very
comprehensive word in Arabic. 'Ilm is used for science as well. It includes
knowledge of everything created by Allah including the knowledge of creator
himself. Allah invites human beings to think, to brood and to reflect on the
whole universe, on the creation of Allah, the stars, the earth, the plants and
the animals. Also, the Qur'an lays great emphasis on induction rather than
deduction. The former leads to objective knowledge of the universe and latter
to speculation. Modern science is based on induction rather than deduction.
Also, knowledge was given further practical orientation by laying equal
emphasis on 'amal (practice). 'Ilm without 'amal was projected as bereft of any
benefit to humanity. Correct knowledge ('ilm al-yaqin) and healthy practice
('amal salih) is the most desirable synthesis. The word 'ilm al-yaqin (i.e.
knowledge with conviction) is of great value. It is thus clear that the Qur'an
neither encourages superficial knowledge nor allows its instrumentalisation.
Qur'an has been described as hudan lil muttaqin i.e. a guide for the God
fearing or the pious. Thus the term 'ilm is not only comprehensive but also
value-oriented. Knowledge must not only be true but should also be based on
conviction; it should not only advance the state of information about the
universe but should also serve the humanity.
Similarly 'amal (practice) as pointed out above, has to be nothing but salih
(healthy). The practice, based on knowledge and conviction, must promote the
health of society. What kind of revolution it was in a stagnant society of
Arabian peninsula whose whole universe was its own tribe cannot be easily
imagined by us today. It was nothing short of a total break from the past; a
break which changed the whole quality of social life and brought about
tremendous advancement in knowledge. The ritual system of Islam - 'ibadat - was
also not devoid of value-system.
Islam does not accord any priority whatsoever to race, tribe, language, creed
or colour. The Qur'an makes categorical statement to this effect (see 49:13 and
30:22). It also strictly forbade the Muslims from making any distinction
between an Arab and non-Arab and a white and a black. The Prophet, in order to
effectively demolish any such hierarchical distinctions, appointed a black
liberated slave from Ethiopia, Bilal Habshi, to give azan ( i.e. call Muslims
to prayer), a distinction, many Arabs close to the Prophet, intensely desired.
But the Prophet accorded this distinction to a black slave to emphasise the
importance of equality of all human beings.
As anthropologists tell us, in a tribal society the main fulcrum of knowledge
is knowledge of received traditions and tribal customs. Any other knowledge
which is not related to the tribe is totally meaningless. The ideas of cosmos,
creation and all related notions originate from the tribal practices. The
frontiers of knowledge, in other words, cannot transcend the boundaries of the
tribal universe. Islam, however, broke these tribal boundaries and made
knowledge coterminous with the universe i.e. the entire creation of Allah.
It is also very interesting to note that the Arab world which had never known
beyond tribal customs and traditions, became the fore-runner in the world of
jurisprudence. We may have several problems today with the Shari'ah
formulations. But, the juris corpus of Islam, was a highly progressive body of
laws in those days.
Justice:
The notion of justice is very central to Islam (5:8). And it is justice in its
absolute and varied sense. The Qur'anic notion of justice is quite
comprehensive. No Muslim jurist could ever ignore the significance of justice
in his legal formulations. But how justice was understood to have been done has
of course been debatable. There may be arguments about how justice was thought
to have been done in medieval ages and what is modern notion of justice. But
that does not reduce the significance of justice as a Qur'anic doctrine. The
relativity of medieval notion of justice and its modern notion is
understandable.
The Qur'anic notion of justice was not tribal but universal. And this made all
the difference. The Qur'anic notion of justice is so universal that it laid
down that even the enmity with any one else should not come in the way of
dispensing justice (5:8). In a tribal society justice was confined to within
the tribal limits. There was no question of justice vis a vis other tribes.
Islam, on the other hand, lays down that justice be done even to an enemy. The
Qur'an gives the principle of justice as a norm; the legal doctors applied it
to various issues which arose from time to time, according to their own
ability, understanding and socio-cultural background.
It is necessary to understand that it is justice which has to be rigorously
applied to all the issues in framing laws. It is the very foundation of the
juris corpus of Islam. It is more central than the corpus of laws inherited by
us. As the legal doctors applied the notion of justice in keeping with their
own circumstances we must rethink the issues in Shari'ah laws based on the
notion of centrality of justice particularly in the sphere of family laws.
Women:
Here we would like to point out that the position of women in the Qur'an is not
subordinate to that of man. Certain verses (like 4:34) are used selectively,
and out of context, to project subordination of woman to man ignoring several
other verses (like 2:228, 9:71, 33:35 and others) which clearly indicate
equality of man and woman. The verses 9:71 and 33:35 are quite central in this
respect. In verse 9:71 men and women are not only shown each others friends but
also charged with equal responsibilities of enjoining good and forbidding evil,
keeping up prayer and paying the poor-rate (zakat). How could then women be
inferior to men?
Thus we should not hesitate in having a second look at the Shari'ah laws which
have in built medieval biases towards women. The Qur'an was the first scripture
in the world to accord equal dignity to man and woman. Prior to Islam even
great Greek philosophers thought that animal and women have no soul and hence
women deserve no legal rights. Women could not inherit, let alone holding
property in her own right, even in Roman law, prior to Islam.
The spirit of the Qur'an is more important than the opinions of medieval legal
doctors and hence entire corpus of Shari'ah laws in this regard should be
re-examined and re-thought. Also, as pointed out in some of my books (Rights of
Women in Islam, The Qur'an, Women and Modern Society and Status of Women in
Islam) there never was unanimity on these issues among the legal doctors
themselves. The opinions differed from one legal doctor to another and on
several issues even the disciples differed from their masters. While some legal
doctors do not even admit women's evidence on hudud matters, others, like Imam
Abu Hanifa, maintain that a woman can even become qadi on the basis of verse
9:71. The Shari'ah laws as formulated by early Muslim fuqaha' (i.e. legal
doctors) need to be thoroughly reviewed. The centrality of justice must be
asserted.
Rationality:
Knowledge, as pointed out above, was quite central to Islam. Some of the
'ulama, however, confined knowledge to knowledge of din (i.e. religion of
Islam). But there is no strong evidence in the Qur'an or sunna in this respect.
It is product of theologians' own mind. Since theologians were primarily
concerned with religious or theological matters, they tried to confine
knowledge to theological issues alone. Imitating these theologians many people
still argue that 'ilm should be confined to the 'ilm al-din and reject other
spheres of knowledge. But this view is no more a central view in the world of
Islam today.
In fact this view that knowledge in the Qur'an is confined to the knowledge of
din did not go uncontested even in the early history of Islam. Knowledge from
different sources and from different fields was not only accepted by early
Muslims but was also creatively advanced by them. The entire corpus of Greek
knowledge in various sciences, mathematics and philosophy was transferred into
Arabic language and passed on to Europe. No wonder than that H.G.Wells, the
noted British historian, has described Arabs as foster father of knowledge. The
Europe had lost contact with the Greek treasure of knowledge and they
re-established contact with it only through the agency of Arabs. The House of
Wisdom (Dar al-Hikmah) established by the Abbasids fulfilled this task.
The Muslims assimilated this knowledge and also enriched it immensely. Their
own contribution in enriching the Greek knowledge acquired by them was no mean
contribution. Also, they imbibed knowledge from other sources as well i.e.
Persian and Indian sources, besides their own Islamic sources. The Mu'tazila
were a party of rationalists who gave primacy to reason. For them reason was
the test of faith and not vice versa. Thus if reason holds something good,
Shari'ah will also hold it good. The Asha'irah, on the other hand, held
something good because Shari'ah held it good even if reason contradicted it.
The Mu'tazila also gave primacy to justice along with reason. this is what the
modern rationalists also plead. Thus the Mu'tazilah were as fervent advocates
of reason and justice as the modern rationalists are. But the modern
rationalists tend to be atheists which Mu'tazilah were not. Mu'tazilah were
also known as the party of tawhid wa al-'adl i.e. party of unity of Godhood and
justice. Thus Mu'tazilah were essentially theists but also rationalists.
Islam, as all of us know, had arisen in Arabian peninsula and had its vitality
and practicability. Practical rationality remained quite central to it. But
when it spread to the ancient centres of great cultures like parts of Eastern
Byzantian empire, or Persian empire and India, it was confronted with entirely
different mind set. These great civilizations were based, as pointed out
before, on speculative reason and sophisticated intellectual achievements. This
had both positive and negative impact on Islamic thought.
Resisting outdated cultures:
The Islamic thought became inward looking on one hand, and, lost some of its
most fundamental concerns like justice for weaker sections of society. These
centres of civilization were centres of feudal culture and along with feudal
sophistication, feudal values were also imbibed. Thus what Islamic thought
gained in swing, lost in its sweep. Islam spread with great rapidity because of
its great concern with justice for weaker sections of society but now it became
an integral part of a huge Islamic empire and nearly lost its sensitivity
towards suffering of the downtrodden of the society.
The Qur'an which was so direct and simple in its teachings, became a target for
exercises in sophisticated inner meanings justifying hierarchical values which
came to be acquired through feudal cultures of Roman and Persian empires.
Monarchy became an acceptable institution and blind and uncritical obedience to
the ruling monarch on one hand, and religious establishment of the time, on the
other, became very common. Disobedience to them was construed to be
disobedience to Allah and His Book. The earlier critical faculty and concern
for justice was totally lost. It was in this atmosphere that Islamic thought
became totally stagnant and part of oppressive establishment. There is great
need to recapture its earlier vitality, dynamism and sensitivity. Critical
evaluation and not blind obedience, is closer to the Islamic spirit. What
predominates today, however, is Islamic theological thought, on one hand, and,
age-old shari'ah formulation, on the other. It has made Islamic
thought totally stagnant.
What is to be noted is that what goes in the name of theology is human
construct and divine commandments as understood by human agency under a set of
socio-cultural influences. For example, 'Ilm al-Kalam (Islamic dialectics) came
into existence as a reaction to the widening influence of Greek philosophy and
Greek sciences during the Abbasid period. This became an integral part of
Islamic theology. Kalam, undoubtedly influenced the great minds of Islamic
world of the time and also the succeeding generation for several centuries. But
now Kalam cannot be treated as unchangeable. There is urgent need for a new ilm
al-kalam in the light of modern corpus of scientific knowledge.
Advocating a change culture:
A religion consists of several sub-systems like ritual system ('ibadat),
institutional system (like zakat, etc.), thought system and value system (like
equality, justice, compassion etc.). Of these ritual and value- system are
permanent and cannot be changed under any circumstances. But the thought system
could and must change, if religion has to keep pace with time, its thought
system should change. There is misconception among Muslims about the Qur'anic
verse 5:3 (i.e. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed
My favour to you...). They think that now what we have inherited is perfect in
every respect and there is no need for re-thinking in any sense at all. Our din
is perfect. The din is undoubtedly perfect but the meaning and significance of
din should be understood properly. One cannot include the kalam, for example,
in din. The Islamic thought system has been evolved by theologians who are
human beings and no human person can ever be perfect. Human
beings think under certain influences which they cannot transcend as human
beings. All Divine commands are sought to be understood by human agents under
certain socio-cultural influences and these influences are reflected in the
religious-thought system. Once we understand this there will be no resistance
to change in the thought system. This will bring about a great revolution.
The Islamic Shari'ah is also an embodiment of Islamic values. Islamic Shari'ah
is nothing but a sincere attempt by the fuqaha' (Islamic jurists) to apply
divine commands and the Islamic values to a number of issues like marriage,
divorce, inheritance, nature of evidence, crimes like theft, rape, adultery,
division of property etc. This attempt to approach these issues in the light of
Islamic values and divine commands was also influenced by the socio-cultural
circumstances of the time. They could not have applied Islamic values and
divine commands to these issues in vacuum. There is great deal of change in
these external influences and hence many of these shari'ah formulations stand
in need of change. This change does not amount to tempering with the divine
commands but making yet another human attempt in the light of our own
experiences and our own circumstances.
If we evolve this understanding of religion the dynamics of problem changes and
religion will be even greater force to bring about spiritual transformation for
the better. Naturally there will be differences in opinion while bringing about
these changes. We should not be afraid of differences. These differences, if
honest and sincere, provide greater vigour to human thought. The founders of
the different schools of jurisprudence during the second and third centuries of
Islam were not afraid of differences. Why should we be?
Written by Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer
saiyed shahbazi
www.shahbazcenter.org
