بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم
In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful
The call to reform is one that seeks the destruction of the Religion that Allah, Holy and Exalted is He, vouchsafed to His final Apostle, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. It is a challenge to the divine wisdom of an omniscient God and the perfection of Islam:
اَلۡیَوۡمَ اَکۡمَلۡتُ لَکُمۡ دِیۡنَکُمۡ وَاَتۡمَمۡتُ عَلَیۡکُمۡ نِعۡمَتِیۡ وَرَضِیۡتُ لَکُمُ الۡاِسۡلَامَ دِیۡنًا
Today have I perfected for you your Religion, and completed upon you My favor, and am pleased with Islam for you as a Religion
(Surah 5, Ayah 3)
The present call to reform emanating from the liberal circles within our Ummah and our supposed non-Muslim “well-wishers” is not like the activity of Tajdid of the orthodox Reformers (Mujaddids), or the activity of Islah of the pious Saints and learned Ulama. Its aim is not to cleanse the Muslims of the corruptions of syncretism and permissiveness, or to reinvigorate zeal for Allah and His Apostle and strictness of compliance with the Shari’ah. Rather, the aim of the liberal reformists is to effect greater assimilation of the Muslims into the dominant world order and culture. The very narrative of liberal reform clashes with the orthodox Sunni understanding that in the Latter Days when the forces of unbelief achieve a temporary ascendancy the Believer is meant to cling to his Faith as much as possible rather than take the course of conformity to the World. Such has always been the teaching of our ancient, great Prophets and Saints. Preservation of the Faith takes precedence over material and worldly progress. Sentiments of harmony, cooperation, dialogue and reconciliation with the world of unbelief are entirely contrary to the Message of Islam. In essence, the Islamic narrative is a conservative one; conserve and preserve as much of the Tradition as humanly possible, passionately resist the direction the World wants you to take. We look to our Elders and Predecessors, meaning the Salaf, the Awliya, the orthodox Mujaddids and the conservative Sunni Ulama who keep alive their legacy for direction.
Tariq Ramadan, an Egyptian who styles himself a “radical reformist”, based in Switzerland, has been attempting to spread his wayward thought among particularly the Muslim minorities here in the West for several decades now. He is currently embroiled in serious legal troubles and criminal cases against him in the form of several accusations of rape, for which he has even been found guilty of at least one in a court of law. Therefore, while we are glad and hopeful that this will likely end his career and public activity, much of the damage has already been done. He has written many books, published many articles and been invited to countless events to deliver lectures where his direct audience are the Muslims. I am obviously not in a position to comment on the truthfulness of the allegations of a sexual nature against the man. But I can say that he is certainly responsible for having put himself in a position where such damaging allegations leading to criminal charges could be made against him. As is typical with the liberal segment of our Community, they are quite permissive with regard to the issue of ikhtilat or intermingling of the sexes, something the Shari’ah strictly forbids. And now one sees the wisdom of such a prohibition, or at least Tariq Ramadan should see it clearly now unless he is blind. This is especially so as the man has spent his entire career calling for the liberalization of the Shari’ strictures particularly with regard to women and gender segregation.
The term radical reform, which features in Tariq Ramadan’s book Radical Reform: Islamic Ethics and Liberation, is a call for a shift away from the accepted authoritative paradigm of this Religion. In orthodox, Sunni Islam, it is not only the Scripture (the Quran – the Word of Allah) and the Tradition of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, which are divinely authoritative, but authority is also delegated to the consensus of the qualified scholastic circles. Here I am referring to the Muslim judges and jurists. They collectively sit in the Prophet’s Seat and are authorized to interpret this Religion, particularly its rules and regulations. This principle of Sunni orthodoxy is what sets us apart from all the heretical and schismatic groups and individuals which profess Islam. As has preceded, the consensus of the scholastic authorities being authoritative for Muslims is delegated meaning derived from Allah’s Words:
فَسۡـَٔلُوۡۤا اَہۡلَ الذِّکۡرِ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ لَا تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ
So ask the people of the Reminder if you know not
(Surah 16, Ayah 43 & Surah 21, Ayah 7)
فَلَوۡلَا نَفَرَ مِنۡ کُلِّ فِرۡقَۃٍ مِّنۡہُمۡ طَآئِفَۃٌ لِّیَتَفَقَّہُوۡا فِی الدِّیۡنِ وَلِیُنۡذِرُوۡا قَوۡمَہُمۡ اِذَا رَجَعُوۡۤا اِلَیۡہِمۡ لَعَلَّہُمۡ یَحۡذَرُوۡنَ
Why, then, does not a party from every section of them go forth that they may become well versed in the Religion, and that they may warn their people when they return to them, so that they may guard
(Surah 9, Ayah 122)
The Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said:
وَإِنَّ الْعُلَمَاءَ وَرَثَةُ الأَنْبِيَاءِ
Surely, the Ulama are the heirs of the Prophets
So it is Allah Himself Who has authorized the establishment of an institution of judges and learned scholars of the Religion. And the Prophet, peace be upon him, practically appointed learned and pious individuals from among His Companions to act as judges in lands outside of Medina, others to acts as his envoys and teach the newly converted tribesmen about the Faith and its Laws. This system of individuals and bodies representing the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, continues till this day as long as they have isnad or a connected chain of transmission that returns back to the Prophet. And we know that a similar setup existed for the Children of Israel during the Mosaic dispensation. The Prophet Moses was instructed to appoint seventy elders (Surah 7, Ayah 155). According to the Orthodox interpretation of the Torah and the Mosaic Law the seventy elders formed the first Beit Din or great court that came to be known as the Sanhedrin, of seventy-one judges, with one being the Nasi or Prince who stood in for Moses himself. This Court was considered authoritative for the Israelites and Jews in interpreting the Law. The rulings of this Court form the basis for what is called Rabbinic or Talmudic tradition, and set the Orthodox Jews (the Pharisees) apart from the schismatic factions, some of which survive today, like the Karaites, Samaritans and others who disregarded the authority of the Beit Din in favor of a strictly textualist and literalist approach. The key difference between the judicial authority in the Mosaic dispensation and the scholastic authority in this Ummah is that in the Mosaic dispensation the phenomenon of Prophesy had not yet ceased and so the authority of the true Prophet of God superseded that of the Court and the Priesthood. In theory and in practice the true Prophet could abrogate or amend some of the original laws and practices that were originally given to Moses at Mount Sinai. But in this Ummah, with the Finality of Prophesy, the Shari’ah of Islam is perfect and complete, and may not be amended in the least until the Resurrection. Another difference is that while in the Mosaic dispensation the Beit Din or Sanhedrin was a formalized body of precisely seventy-one judges, the scholastic authority in this Ummah is not an organized, formal body or council. It is the general consensus of the qualified scholars, judges and jurists in every age. Thus it spans a large number of individuals. Yet the Religion in its rulings and interpretation has been made manifest in the precedents of the early scholastic judgments of the time of the Salaf, particularly in the codification of Islamic law of the Four Imams and their Schools.
Having elucidated the nature of the authority in this Religion, I now return to the discussion of Tariq Ramadan’s “radical reform”. The basic premise of the reformist viewpoint is that the world is constantly changing and so a static tradition is not only unrealistic but impossible. But the Prophetic Tradition is unique in that it centers around a Prophet, defined as one who prophesies. The Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, not only gave us a tradition but predicted how over time radical changes would occur in society and in the world. Happily we have clear teachings from the Tradition about how to engage these radical changes, whether they are social, cultural, political, geopolitical, civilizational, technological, economic, scientific or even medical. Did not the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, say:
يَأْتِي عَلَى النَّاسِ زَمَانٌ الصَّابِرُ فِيهِمْ عَلَى دِينِهِ كَالْقَابِضِ عَلَى الْجَمْرِ
A time will come upon the people in which the one who is patient upon his Religion will be like one holding on to a burning ember
Examples of “Radical Reform” from Tariq Ramadan
Now let us examine what exactly are some of the matters Tariq Ramadan has in mind with regard to his call for a radical reform. Concerning abortion (a mere euphemism for infanticide that is surely an abomination in the sight of Allah), this reformist heretic says: “there is no formal, undisputed prohibition of abortion as most Muslims or Islamic studies researchers seem to believe” (Radical Reform: Islamic Ethics and Liberation, p.172).
Concerning the un-Islamic activity of social workers who distribute clean needles and condoms to the filth of society engaged in drug use and prostitution, he says: “Controlled needle exchanges (among injecting drug users) or taking into account the actual sexual behavior of individuals (in drug addicts, prostitution, or in general mores) are necessities of our time.” (ibid, p.181)
Concerning the Islamic lifestyle that is based on the practice of the early Muslims in the most sacred geography, he says: “This tendency has emerged in the contemporary salafi literalist trend or in some traditionalist trends—such as tablighi movements—and has gained an audience the world over, despite representing a minority. The methodology that those trends have always used in relating to texts—assimilating religious practice to its (supposedly) original cultural expression—paradoxically, but after all quite logically, enables them to face the challenge of the West’s cultural domination by promoting the return to an original culture that is also perceived as universal. To them, therefore, the aim should be not only to respect the principles of religious practice, but to live, dress, and interact with the human and social environment as we suppose the inhabitants of Mecca and Medina must have done in the light of the texts that have come down to us. This globalization exportation of a very local culture is fundamentally questionable” (ibid, p.186).
The subject of the role of women is perhaps that which provokes the greatest passion and indignity of the liberal reformist. A sure sign of heresy and radical departure from normative, orthodox Islam is the call for a significant change to the traditional role of women. The earliest and most radical heresies in the history of this Ummah, namely those associated with the Khawarij, were characterized by this egalitarian spirit whose logical conclusion was to challenge normative morality, patriarchal norms sanctioned by Islam and the traditional gender roles. A Kharijite faction known as the Shabibiyyah, associated with Shabib bin Yazid al-Shaybani, was led by a woman named Ghazalah. She was either Shabib’s wife or his mother, and was given the leadership of the sect when Shabib was killed. When she and her followers briefly captured Kufah, she entered its Mosque and led them in prayer! Tariq Ramadan and other liberal reformists follow in the footsteps of the Shabibiyyah when he says: “the recognition, as we have seen, of their right to sexual pleasure, of their choices regarding marriage, divorce, contraception, and abortion, both in practice and in the purposes of the Islamic message, the groundwork of elaborate discourse about women as beings, their status, their autonomy, and their legitimate aspirations” (ibid, p.212). He further claims: “keeping women illiterate and forbidding them work, reach financial autonomy, or play a social and economic role, as well as such practices as female genital mutilation, forced marriages, the denial of divorce, or restraint against domestic violence, are absolutely contrary to Islam’s message” (ibid, p.214). Tariq Ramadan goes further in shedding light on what exactly he intends by “radical reform” when he challenges even the agreed upon understanding of the divine Texts: “Such issues as the right to work, polygamy, divorce, or inheritance cannot be approached only through the study of what the texts allow or do not allow.” (ibid) Tariq Ramadan therefore makes it plain that the agenda of “radical reform” is intimately tied to feminism and so-called “progressive” sentiments regarding women. Tariq Ramadan says that in the past the scholastic authorities in Islam approached the subject of women in a restrictive way, relegating women to their relation with men, as either a mother, daughter, sister or wife. Yet this is not merely the approach of the scholastic authorities, but of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, himself, who reportedly said:
إِذَا صَلَّتِ الْمَرْأَةُ خَمْسَهَا وَصَامَتْ شَهْرَهَا وَحَفِظَتْ فَرْجَهَا وَأَطَاعَتْ بَعْلَهَا فَلْتَدْخُلْ مِنْ أَيِّ أَبْوَابِ الْجَنَّةِ شَاءَتْ
When a woman offers her five prayers, fasts in the month of Ramadan, guards her chastity and obeys her husband, then she will enter Paradise from whichever gate she wishes (al-Mu’jam al-Awsat; v.8, pp.339-340, #8805)
So the Islam of women is in fact much more simplistic than that of men. It is merely to fulfill the most basic religious obligations, especially the five daily prayers and fasting in Ramadan and to guard her chastity, which would require a greater emphasis on modesty. Other than that, a woman’s salvation essentially lies in strict obedience and subservience to her husband. It is not necessary for her to focus too much on religious studies and supererogatory worship. Those would actually be discouraged for her if they are hindering with her domestic responsibilities and attentiveness to her husband. The call for women’s liberation is one that totally opposes Islam and the Message of its Prophets. It is a call towards destruction, one that animates virtually every heretical and deviated movement that has broken off from normative, traditional and orthodox Sunni Islam. Issues like abortion, polygamy, divorce, segregation, veiling, intermingling of the sexes, and sexual morality itself are all raised and become controversial as a very consequence of women’s liberation. It is a fundamental breach of the Islamic ethics which Tariq Ramadan ironically claims to uphold as his guiding principle in navigating the issue of reform. Tariq Ramadan makes his feelings clear about the issue of veiling when he says: “They [women] must struggle against all formalist dictatorships, both that which imposes the headscarf without belief in the practice coming from the heart” (Radical Reform: Islamic Ethics and Liberation, p.221). Tariq Ramadan likewise challenges the normative situation that exists in the Mosque, saying: “Mosques today are essentially men’s places, and this does not correspond to the higher objectives of Islam’s message.” (ibid, p.222) This despite him admitting in the very next sentence: “Indeed, some Prophetic traditions (ahadith) express the idea that it is preferable for women to pray at home” (ibid). Now it should be clear to any sincere Muslim that there is a pattern to Tariq Ramadan’s call for radical reform targets everything that is right and good with the Muslims today, as opposed to the reformative work of the Mujaddids and pious Ulama who restrict their lamentations to the normalization of corruption.
To be continued إن شاء الله
No comments:
Post a Comment