Muslim Heretics Conference

Book Review

Reformist Voices of Islam—Mediating Islam and Modernity

Thursday, December 03, 2009 09:25:21 PM, Yoginder Sikand ummid.com

More Book Reviews

Book says, Islamic feminism, based on firm conviction about fundamental equality: Unlike secular feminists, these ‘Islamic feminists’ seek to argue for women’s equality and gender justice wholly through the framework of Islam, broadly defined…. Read Full

Book smashes India’s “Islamic terrorism” myth

Saiyid Hamid: Muslim face of India

Muslims and Media Images: News versus Views

Google Translate My Page

Gadgets powered by Google

‘Reformist Islam’, today an oft-heard slogan, is notoriously difficult to define, for it can mean different things to different people. Recent years have witnessed the sudden burgeoning of volumes on the subject, but this book is not just a repetition of what has already been written before.

Ambitiously global in its scope, it brings together writings by well-known Islamic scholars and activists, each of who provides a broad survey of ‘reformist’ Muslim voices in the part of the world that they are most familiar with—Shireen Hunter, editor of this book, on Iran, the noted Egyptian scholar Hasan Hanafi on North Africa, Riffat Hasan on South Asia, Martin van Bruinessen on Indonesia, Farish Noor on Malaysia, Recep Senturk on Turkey, Farhad Khosrokhavar on Europe, and Tamara Sonn on the United States.

These writers deal with a number of other contemporary Muslim scholars and scholar-activists, outlining their own and varied approaches to the question of reform in Islamic thought. These are simply too numerous to name, leave alone discuss, here, but they all share certain common methodologies and, to an extent, goals.

Firstly, these scholars all insist that what they are engaged in reforming is not Islam itself, but, rather, certain aspects of commonly-held human understandings of Islam. They see their task as seeking to revive what they regard as more authentic understandings on these issues.

Secondly, they are profoundly dissatisfied with the approach of the traditionalist ulema, wedded to the doctrine of taqlid or imitation of jurisprudential precedent, of the ulema allied with state authorities (who generally do their bidding) and of radical Islamists.

Thirdly, they all advocate ijtihad or creative reflection on the primary sources of the Islamic faith—the Quran and Hadith or Prophetic traditions, although they differ as to the extent they believe ijtihad is permissible and on the qualifications needed to engage in this exercise.

Fourthly, they stress the crucial distinction—often ignored by many traditionalist ulema as well as doctrinaire Islamists—between the shariah, as the divine path, which they regard as God-given and, therefore, perfect, and fiqh, human efforts to understand the shariah and express it in the form of rules, which, being a human effort, is fallible. Unlike the shariah, which is eternal, fiqh can, and indeed, should, change in response to new conditions as well as the expanding body of human knowledge, they unanimously insist.

Fifthly, many of them claim (an argument many other Muslims would differ with) that certain aspects of the Quran and the Hadith, mainly dealing with legal matters, are context-specific, and hence may not be applicable, at least in the same way, in today’s vastly different context. These include, for instance, certain injunctions related to women and non-Muslims or to criminals.

Sixthly, several of them argue for what could be called a ‘values-based’ reading of the Islamic scriptural tradition, stressing the relative importance of the spirit over the letter of these texts.

Using these methodological tools, these ‘reformist’ Muslim scholars revisit traditional Islamic as well as modern Islamist thought, dealing with a wide range of issues: women’s rights and status, relations between Muslims and people of other faiths, madrasa education, international relations, economic and political institutions, secularism, democracy, citizenship in a modern state, war and peace, and so on. In the process, they articulate alternate Islamic understandings on these subjects that depart considerably from traditionalist as well as Islamist positions, and that appear much more socially-engaged and contextually-relevant.

For those eager to hear ‘progressive’ Muslim voices on a whole host of issues of contemporary import (and strategic interest), this thoroughly engaging and immaculately-researched book simply cannot afford to be missed.

Name of the Book: Reformist Voices of Islam—Mediating Islam and Modernity

Edited by: Shireen Hunter

Publisher: Pentagon Press, New Delhi (www.pentagon-press.com)

Year: 2009

Pages: 322

Price: Rs. 995

ISBN: 978-81-8274-3

Reformist Voices of Islam—Mediating Islam and Modernity | ummid.com

The problem with Rifqa Bary

December 2, 8:36 PMRichmond Muslim ExaminerAyesha Noor

Previous

16 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Richmond Muslim Examiner. Read Examiner.com’s terms of use.

Email Address
  Include other special offers from Examiner.com
Terms of Use

Rifqa, a born Muslim American teen, converted to Christianity and was allegedly threatened with death by her parents. She insists on saying that the Qur’an commands her parents to kill her. In her interview, she says, “You dont understand, Islam is very diffrent. If they love Allah more, they have to kill me, my blood is Halal now, because I have turned to Christianity, its honor killing, its in Quran, you dont understand”. Rifqa Bary is absolutely right when she says, “you dont understand.” However, the one not understanding what Islam teaches is herself and those who want to kill her (if any).
The alleged punishment of apostasy in Islam has no basis in the Quran and was not practiced by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). There is not a single verse in the Qur’an which commands the killing of someone who reverts from Islam. In fact, the Holy Qur’an announces the freedom of religion by saying, “there is no compulsion in the religion” (Holy Quran 2:257).
One definite verse that refutes the death penalty for apostasy is as follows:
“Surely, those who disbelieve after they have believed and then increase in disbelief, their repentance shall not be accepted. and these are they who have gone astray. As for those who have disbelieved, and die while they are disbelievers, there shall not be accepted from anyone of them, even an Earthful of Gold, though he offer it in ransom. It is these for whom shall be a grievous punishment, and they shall have no helpers.” (Holy Qur’an 3:91, 92)
This probably is the most conspicuous verse about apostasy. Can someone even refer to a hint of killing in this verse?. If anything, it promises the life of an apostate by saying “then increase in their disbelief”. If they were to be killed immediately then how could they increase in their disbelief? There are at least seven verses in the Qur’an that refute the alleged punishment of apostasy in Islam. On the other hand, not a single verse goes in its favor.
Advocates of the penalty of death for an apostate base their argument on the following verses:
But if they repent and observe Prayer, and pay the Zakat, then they are your brethren in faith. And We explain the signs for a people who have knowledge. And if they break their oaths after their covenant, and revile your religion, then fight these leaders of disbelief— surely, they have no regard for their oaths—that they may desist.’ (Holy Qur’an 9:11-12)
This is the summit of their argument and even that goes against them. First of all, the fighting is supposed to be against the leaders of disbelief rather than the individuals. Secondly, the purpose of “fighting” is revealed in “that they may desist”. So, if they were to be killed then how will they ever get a chance to desist. Most importantly, critics and ignorant alike forget the very following verse which further qualifies verses 11 and 12. “Will you not fight a people who have broken their oaths, and who plotted to turn out the Messenger, and they were the first to commence hostilities against you?”
The focus is to only fight those who were first to be hostile towards you. Is this not a policy America enacts? Or, any nation of the world? Does such a nation exist that allows another nation’s attack, and does not respond? Why then, when the Qur’an mentions a law adopted by every government of the world, do people take issue?
Misinterpretation of patent Quranic verses by Muslim Ulema have not only lead to the unjust killing but have also distorted the image of Islam. Mis-interpreters of Islam are the real enemies of Rifqa Bary, not Islam itself.

For more information on this issue, please refer to:

http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Apostasy-in-Islam.pdf
http://www.askislam.org/religions_and_beliefs/islam/question_823.html

The problem with Rifqa Bary