Muslim Heretics Conference

Islam and individual freedom

by Sheikh Ibrahim Ramadan

Beirut - Freedom is to creativity what the soul is to the body. The Qur’an affirms individual freedom and underscores its relevance as it pertains to our individual decisions. Even the pivotal issue of religion, namely faith versus non-belief in God, was left to individual choice: “Whosoever will, let him believe, and whosoever will, let him disbelieve” (Qur’an 18:29).
Thus, human behaviour in Islam is subject to a person’s discretion. Disagreement between people is therefore intrinsically unavoidable and indeed expected: “And if thy Lord had willed, He verily would have made mankind one nation, yet they cease not differing; Save him on whom thy Lord hath mercy; and for that He did create them” (Qur’an 11:118-119).
Islam does not restrict human freedom in any way but makes human beings responsible, individually as well as collectively, for the consequences of their decisions; one must think about one’s actions and consider their ramifications. The possibility of having to deal with certain consequences may seem to limit individual freedom, but it provides a deep benefit to society as it perpetually reinforces the social adage: “A person’s freedom ends where the freedom of others begins”. Were it not for this restriction, the blessing of freedom would be a curse of chaos, and individual freedom would become a nuisance to others and an infringement on their interests and choices.
But how is accountability for one’s choices enforced in the Islamic framework?
First, it is imposed through the punitive responsibility borne by an authority that handles public affairs, inclusive of the task of establishing order. Relegating responsibility to a higher authority essentially allows for the possible prevention of conflict, or its resolution should it break out. Since this disciplinary responsibility aims to preclude transgressions, it falls in line with the hadith, or saying of the Prophet Muhammad, “No harm and no damage”, as well as the Qur’anic verse: “Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors” (Qur’an 2:190).
Second, Islam places a perpetual moral responsibility upon us that relates directly to our relationship with God, who will hold man accountable for his actions on the Day of Judgement. Carrying the weight of this responsibility reminds man to abide by the values of morality, which the Qur’an promotes by promising divine forgiveness and eternal peace in heaven, as well as maintaining punitive warnings for wrong-doers. No other being has the authority to punish or forgive. Only God, in the afterlife, judges the actions and deeds of an individual. Therefore, the individual must work on purifying his soul from earthly desires and lusts, and bettering his relationship with his Creator.
Islamic views of freedom and liberty are consistent with its divine call for man to mould his behaviour and use his/her skill and art for the collective good, as well as individual bliss. Men of knowledge, science and arts enjoy a greater status in society for their ability to clarify various matters and act as the eyes and ears of society. Moreover, they have an effective role in society, and as such, their responsibility toward others becomes graver.
Poetry, writing and other forms of art are welcomed and respected in Islam so long as they do not transgress against anyone. Impinging on others would consequently trigger a punitive measure against the artist so as to preserve the moral fibre of a society against all transgressions in the name of misplaced individual freedom. No one but those with religious authority may assume an authoritative role.
Art acquires its value from the human cause it is serving. As such, the work of the innovator must support just human causes and entrench splendid and noble values. The relationship between art and man, after all, is a reciprocal one: just as man lives by art, so does art live by man. Any art that harms human ideals of truth and virtue and misrepresents society’s aspirations shall fall under the Prophet Muhammad’s dictum: “Whoever believes in God and Judgment Day shall say that which is good or shall otherwise be silent.”
In the event that a creative work transgresses against another individual or is an offence punishable by law, it is the duty of the authority to summarily take action to contain the transgression, preventing any conflict from arising as a result. It not is permissible for any person to convince others or think of himself as being delegated by God to inflict punishment or to make others accountable for their deeds.
From both a spiritual and humanistic perspective, art that does not serve human causes is ultimately beneath the standards of worthwhile creativity, and is ultimately short-lived by its very nature. Attempts to forcibly prevent or eliminate such art – what some have called “art for art’s sake” – is in any case futile and one’s energies should be channelled instead toward making positive contributions to our societies and our world through whatever means we have at our disposal. Such a manifestation of our God-given freedom of expression is of the highest order.
###
*Sheikh Ibrahim Ramadan studied at the Lebanon Azhar Institute in Beirut, and received a Higher Certificate in Islamic Shari’a and a Diploma in Comparative Jurisprudence (Fiqh) from Beirut Islamic University. This article is part of a series on freedom of expression written for the Common Ground News Service.

Islam and individual freedom by Sheikh Ibrahim Ramadan - Common Ground News Service

Revising the hadith

A rather excited report last week on the BBC’s Today programme hailed a development that "could signal the start of a reformation" in Islam.
The possibility of an "Islamic Reformation" of the kind that launched Protestantism in Christianity sounds attractive ? at least superficially ? and it has been promoted with enthusiasm by non-believers such as Salman Rushdie. But Muslims who are actually involved in trying to liberalise and reform their religion usually regard it as nonsense.
What excited the BBC was the news that Turkey’s Department of Religious Affairs will shortly issue a revised version of the hadith, a collection of sayings and deeds attributed to the Prophet Muhammad. The hadith plays an important role in Islamic jurisprudence, particularly on matters where the Qur’an itself is silent, and it is on the hadith rather than the Qur’an that most of the silliest fatwas ? or religious opinions ? by religious scholars are based.
In the earliest days of Islam, words attributed to the Prophet were passed on by word of mouth until they were eventually written down. How many of them may be genuine is a matter of opinion, but some are certainly fakes. In his book, Progressive Muslims, Scott Kugle writes:
"… It is very difficult to establish the authenticity of most reports that circulate in the name of the Prophet Muhammad. But clearly, many reports were projected retrospectively back upon the Prophet without being reliably attributed to him. Muslims are confronted with hadith in which the Prophet reportedly speaks about issues that did not exist in his lifetime: such as the Shia-Sunni schism, various theological ‘heresies’, and even the systematic collection of hadith."
The dubious material includes condemnations of homosexuality often quoted by scholars today which, according to Kugle, did not appear until long after the Prophet’s death:
"Forged hadith reports condemning same-sex sexual relations began to circulate in earnest during the Abbasid period (750-1258 AD), when it became aristocratic and courtly fashion to own young male slaves, employ handsome wine-bearers, and flaunt same-sex romances. Many hadiths were circulated in the name of the Prophet to address these practices, as part of the traditionalist cultural war on the cosmopolitan elite of Abbasid-era cities."
In the light of such examples, Kugle argues that "reassessment of the authenticity of hadith reports is the key to legal and social reform among Muslims".
That, basically, is what Turkey?s Department of Religious Affairs has been doing. It has worked through the old collections of hadith, eliminating material that is "out of date, misogynistic or anti-Christian" (to quote the BBC’s correspondent). It has also been removing "cultural baggage" which it considers to have no sound basis in religion ? for example, the practice of female genital mutilation and a ruling that women should not travel without a man’s permission. The latter, it says, was simply a safety measure at the time that has no relevance today.
In principle, this is a valuable exercise, but it needs to be treated with a bit of caution.
In the Sunni branch of Islam (to which most Muslims belong), there are four main "schools" of law ? Hanafi, Maliki, Shafii and Hanbali. Their relative influence varies from country to country but the dominant one in Turkey is Hanafi.
One of the key differences between these schools is in the reliance they place on the ?hadith. The Hanafi school tends to be more wary of the hadith than the other schools, with the result that its judgments are often more flexible.
It’s not terribly surprising, therefore, that a critical review of the hadith has been taking place in Hanafi-dominated Turkey. There would be more grounds for excitement if it was happening, say, in Saudi Arabia where the Hanbali school prevails and scholars produce the most conservative legal judgments, often based on literal readings of the Qur’an and uncritical acceptance of the hadith.
One criticism of the Hanafi school is that its built-in flexibility has historically made its religious rulings susceptible to political influence. The Hanbali school, on the other hand, because it relies so heavily on the hadith, is relatively impervious to political influence; in Saudi Arabia it tends to control politics rather than the other way round.
In Turkey, the Department of Religious Affairs is not an independent body; it was established under the constitution to handle relations between the government and religious communities in accordance with the principles of secularism laid down by Kemal Ataturk. As a result of this background, no matter how academically sound the department’s editing and revision of the hadith may be, there will always be a question mark hanging over it ? in the minds of Muslims living outside Turkey, as well as the more traditionalist Muslims inside the country. It probably won’t cut much ice with Turkey’s Alawi Muslims either ? from the Shia branch of Islam? who are said to number around 12 million.
It’s a pity that this very necessary process of re-appraising the hadith has been tainted in Turkey by the state’s involvement. Separating the state from religion doesn’t just mean keeping the muftis out of politics; it means the government keeping its hands off religion too.
###
* Brian Whitaker is currently an editor on Comment is Free. This article is distributed by the Common Ground News Service (CGNews) and can be accessed at www.commongroundnews.org.

Media For Freedom - news, articles and views e-magazine