Title
Deliberations about the term “Heretic” in the title of this Conference
We hope that the following summary of an early debate among the co-organizers of this conference is helpful in understanding the rationale of using this term, and responses to some of the objections that were raised:
AYM: Edip and I were discussing the title of this conference, and I believe it is very wrong to use the label heresy. This already establishes the concept that critical, rational thinking is heretical but also that we are focussed to be heretical. To use this title is a bit childish and shows more the concept of “a child rebelling against it parents”, it shifts away the focus of our real purpose, that is reform.
One of the main things I have learned in my short life is that you must never give your opponent more weapons to use, and this is exactly what we will do when we use the term “heresy conference”. Reformers within Islam are always easily labeled as being influenced by the West and basing all of their reformist ideas on Western values and so on. This is one of the excuses the Muslim majority gives themselves for not listening to any reformist idea, and so I soon found out that the Muslim population must be shown we don’t get these ideas from Western text books, no, we get these from the Quran itself. This is the weapon I use against their minds they tried to keep as closed as possible, they can deny Western ideas, but it is hard to deny Quranic arguments.
This is why it is really important we must use a title for the conference that shows what it is all about. Are we focussed on being heretics or on reform? Yes, many clergy call and will call us heretics, but to use this term ourselves shows we like to be outsiders and also it shows a “victim”attitude, that our arguments are weaker then that of the traditional clergy.
Ayaan Hirshi Ali also named her book “Infidel” to appease to the Western people who already have established a negative approach to Islam, and she also is a person who calls for “reform” within Islam, meaning in her words, a total deletion of Islam from the face of the Earth. To call our conference “heresy” will thus create the concept that we also want to appease the West, that we also want to reform Islam not based on the Quran but on Western seculair concepts.
Please excuse me for the long argumentation, but the title is the first people will see and is the first thing people will remember, this is why I ask for a reform of the title!
I have some humble suggestions for a title, for example:
- The Reform Conference - The Quranic Demand for Reform - Quran 2008 Conference
To put for example “Quran” or “Islam” or “Reform” in the title will create positive attention as many Muslim see these word as positive and will interest to see what we said. The term “heresy” will immediately drive them away as who wants to tell his family or local mosque commmunity that he went to a “heresy” conference?
We must attract people and we must give it a title that will make interested, not already label it.
I also urge everybody, please remove Rashid Khalidi from the mailing list as he requested this. No need to bother people who are not interested.
TH: For what its worth, I wholeheartedly agree with AYM. I think the term “heretic” has a really negative connotation (although I know its being used in a tongue in cheek sort of way). I think that we want to try and unite Muslims. We don’t want this to be viewed in the same light as last years Secular Muslim conference in St Petersburg, Fla…. The term may isolate some Muslims, and if we couch the language of the conference in a positive “solution focused” way, we may be able to capture more interest from the middle column of Muslims.
AMY: Peace, The main Muslim mind state in todays society is in many ways nurtured in a state of fear. The Muslim identity has been lost for centuries as the noble society presented in the Quran has been lost to them, and so the majority of Muslims put their faith in the traditional clergy to provide them with an identity. The concept of Islamic salvation created in the early and later Middle Ages is based on so many details and is dependent on so many factors according to the traditional understanding, created to shackle the Muslim minds, few Muslims dare to think outside of the box in fear of loosing their chance to their concept of salvation. Mixing this dependence of their identity and salvation on the clergy is one of the main factors why it is hard to reach the majority of Muslims, but at the same time the people are not blind or dumb.
They can see there are a lot of wrongs in the Muslim world, they can see the clergy is not helping and educating the people in a constructive way. So people are interested in new ways of thinking, in new ideas and solutions. But we must present these in a way, the people will not immediately feel they are risking their concept of salvation, only through this will they dare to think outside of the box.
Terming a conference as “heresy” is immediately a threat for to many Muslims as “heresy” is equal to loosing the chance for salvation in their point of view. This is important to understand if we truly want to reform the Muslim mind over the world. We must show them that reform is the way to salvation for mankind, for the solutions to their problems. People must see we try to present practical solutions based on the Quran, solutions that they miss in the current state of thinking.
We must been seen as problem-solvers, givers of solutions, those that use the Quran to solve the current problems of humanity, this is how people must view us. To act and even label ourselves as rebels, heretics, “enemies” of the traditional clergy, all of these will not help our cause at all…
May I quote Muhammed Asad:
“I had no illusions as to the present state of affairs in the Muslim world. The 4 years i have spend in those countries had shown me that while Islam was still alive, perceptible in the world-view of its adherents and their silent admission of its ethical premises, they themselves were like people paralysed, unable to translate their beliefs into fruitful action. But what concerned me more than the failure of present-day Muslims to implement the scheme of Islam were the potentialities of that scheme itself. It was sufficient for me to know that for a short time, quite at the beginning of Islamic history, a successful attempt HAD been made to translate that scheme into practice; and what had seemed possible at one time might perhaps become really possible at another.
What did it matter, I told myself, that the Muslims had gone astray from the original teachings and subsided into indolence and ignorance? What did it matter that they did not live up to the ideal placed before them by the Arabian Prophet 13 centuries ago-if the ideal itself still lay open to all who were willing to listen to its message? And it might well be, I thought, that we latecomers needed that message even more desperately than did the people of Muhammed’s time. They lived in an environment much simpler than ours, and so their problems and difficulties had been much easier of solution. The world in which I was living-the whole of it-was wobbling because of the absence of any agreement as to what is good and what is evil spiritually and, therefore, socially and economically as well. I did not believe that individual man was in need of ’salvation’: but I did believe that modern society was in need of salvation. More than any previous time, I felt with mounting certainty, this time of ours was in need of an ideological basis for a new social contract: it needed a faith that would make us understand the hollowness of material progress for the sake of progress alone-and nevertheless would give the life of this world its due; that would show us how to strike a balance between our spiritual and physical requirements; and thus save us from the disaster into which we were rushing headlong.”
FT: I am generally not the type to quell discussions, however the name of the conference is ” A Celebration of Heresy Conference: Critical Thinking for Muslim reformation” . First batch of organizers of this conference have decided on the name and theme. And it will not change. I will be more than happy to attend conferences named more friendly, organized by others.
There is a lot that has to be done and we can not be like the great Mullah Nasredin who was planning what to buy with proceeds of the jar of Honey that he had found, while waving his walking stick around the jar. We all know what happened next.
My personal goal as somebody who is putting a lot of effort on this is NOT to UNITE MUSLIMS or solve Muslim’s or humanities problems. I have enough problem with my own affair.
I like to ask you if you find something in common with what has been posted on http://www.hereticmuslims.com/ and would like to help please stay on and I am grateful.
AYM: Salaam, I do understand the concept behind the title and I know I’m just an outsider who hasn’t participated in organizing the conference, so who am I to make such a request? But still I believe the title will create misunderstandings among people and will also block important people from coming. I of course respect your decision and see if I can attend the conference. Sincerely, Arnold Yasin Mol, DRC, Ourbeacon
AJ: Salaam all, I actually agree with Arnold on the title. I know people who have decided not to put their names on because of the title. However, I also know that there are different goals for conference organizers. If I was organizing one, I would be interested in bringing in other Muslims so that we can understand each other better and hope to have more muslims understand why it is important to focus on the Quran. I am more interested in building bridges with other muslims, may not be realistic, but that is how I think that change would occur. My two cents. Thanks, Aisha
EDIP: I have mixed feelings about the title. But, reading F’s letter summarizing the purpose of the conference, title current title serves such a purpose.
Though the word heretic has a repelling effect on some, it attracts many, especially the young and restless:). I think this conference will attract those free minds who are not scared from public labeling. It will also attract those who are on the edge in terms of their theological convictions.
I do believe that a substantial reform is impossible without brave reformists who are ready to question everything. Throughout history, reformists have uttered ideas that initially repelled or scared the hypnotized majorities in their “holy bandwagons.” There cannot be a slow transformation, but a shock, a radical jump, a paradigm change among Muslim masses.
Such a reform perhaps can be accomplished only by “children” who do not hesitate to scream the reality that “emperor is naked.” Yes, Muslim clergymen and politicians are naked!
ABDULLAHI AN-NA`IM: I appreciate your desire to bring Muslims together, but on what basis is that to be done? I also share the desire to build bridges, but we need to get building plans and materials ready before we can build. Consider the countless times Muslims have called for unity and reform, and nothing happened.
As I understand it, this conference is about having a candid conservation among Muslims who share some basic values and experiences, in order to “better imagine and plan” what might be done by those who wish to bring Muslims together or build bridges.
We are not saying that all other types of conferences must stop convening, or wait for the outcome of our conference. Indeed, let the sort of conference Arnold has in mind meet any time, anywhere in the world. Indeed, that sort of conferences have been meeting and will continue to meet… on this way say: let a thousand flowers bloom.
All we are saying is that the group who initiated the process of convening this particular conference believe that it is important to affirm and rehabilitate the idea of heresy in the process of developing and advocating methodologies and strategies of reform.
The conceptual point here is that since every orthodoxy started as a heresy, we need to accept the possibility of heresy for the rejuvenation of our own Islamic tradition. Not every heresy becomes an orthodoxy, but there is no orthodoxy in any religious or other tradition that was not a heresy when it started. To me this means that heresy is good, indeed necessary, and not something that I should be apologetic about. It is precisely the intolerance of heresy among us Muslims that keeps us running in circles, or rushing in every direction without understanding where we are going and why..
This may sound like theoretical abstraction, but as an American sociologist (can’t recall the name now) said: “nothing is more practical than a good theory”… we have to know where we going, and how to get there, before we begin to the process..
This is the main idea of a short interview I did with Emory in the World, Winder 2006 (of Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA) a year ago, using the exact title of the conference, “Celebrating Heresy”.. I will attach that short piece to all of you later today when I go to my office.
A: This discussion is very healthy. Your point 2 below on this being a conversations among like minded muslims makes its objective clearer to me. That is why I asked my questions earlier.
My hope is that the majority of Muslims would have a better understanding of the Quran and be critical thinkers. When I saw Islam vs Islamist, it struck me how much needs to be done to get Muslims to understand their faith, and the first step in my mind would be to focus on the Quran. In the documentary, there was an Imam in the US who picked up the Quran and was saying to the reporter that stoning is in the Quran and who are we to change God’s Law.
A: Salaam dear Abdellahi, Indeed I agree with you that any call for change is first in its heresy stage and from a sociological point of view it is indeed a fitted title. I support the effort and really hope I can come and I try to invite as many important scholars as I can. Arnold
K: The title of the conference is apt. The two main ideas are the necessity to smash the RELIGIOUSLY CORRECT ideas current in the Muslim world, and this can only be done by CELEBRATING CRITICAL THINKING. I am all for it!
ABDULLAHI: “Important people” for whom or what? Anyone who would not come because they disagree with this name is NOT important to have for THIS conference.
As Fereydoun said, this is the name of THIS conference, and we hope that many participants will find the concept interesting and title acceptable. Speaking for myself, I wouldn’t change the name in order to attract participants to a different conference than the one I agreed to co-organize in the first place. Abdullahi
AYM: To say such people are not important for this conference is in my eyes a bit to easy dismissile as there can be many reasons why certain thinkers would decide not to come, one for example, is loosing the little influence a person can have on a community , being controversial regards to traditional thinking makes it already difficult for people listening to you, joining a conference named “herecy” can make you loose any credibility with that community. These are the background factors that must be accounted for when deciding to organize a conference for people who are already seen as controversial in their society’s.
But I do not like to keep nagging about a detail that already has been fixed, so let’s move on to the thing that matters. Please also do not think I forget how amazing and good it is you have organized this very important and very needed conference. To long have we only touched each other through books, articles or news reports, it is time now to meet each other face to face.
AW: Thank you for including me in these discussions. I have tried to come to some resolve over the “title” and if not to be patient and see what happens. I certainly favor the comments on the blog about the secular Muslim state and I resonate with the need for open unhampered critical thinking and the freedom to discuss and act upon that critical thought.
However, I cannot resolve my personal conflict with the title and am asking that my name be withdrawn from the list of interested persons (”of importance” as Abdullahi calls them).
I know that after the civil rights movement, Black americans had to turn around the negativity of the term “black” and coined a slogan “Black is beautiful”. It became a powerful rallying cry still hailed today. If I could imagine any way to turn heresy around I would do so, but for the life of me I don’t l ike being addressed that way (and I have in quite a number of media) and I would not want to be associated with those for whom critical thinking must take on the title heresy.
What’s in a name? It really depends on the one using it.
EDIP: I too had some second thougts aboutt the title, but later I thought this way:
“I either should be free of the constraining idea of ‘what other’s would think about me’ or I should allways calculate other people’s potential reaction to my words. I prefer freedom.
Having worked in advertising industry as a copyeditor and having written several best-selling books, I know very well how to communicate with masses.
But, when the issue is about dramatic change, about call for revolution or reformation, shocking statements are the most effective. Trust me, the word HERETIC will pull the attention to our cause, and many people will learn about the message.
If people accuse me of being a “heretic”, I will simply ask them to look at Webster’s dictionary. Its Greek origin meant “the one who select” So, the meaning of the word is not bad, to the contrary, it is liberating.
As for your take on Abduhu or others, we wellcome such debates. So, you should come there and share your position with the participants and the world.
You are a real heretic, and interestingly, unaware of your herecy. Please look at the dictionary and then at the mirror:) So, please reconsider your participation to this conference…
T: I understand that this is a “closed” topic, and I have already commented on this, but I hope that A’s decision will lead to a re-think. The title is actually important, as it frames our way of thinking. She is on the forefront of this battle, and not having her participation, because of this issue is significant, and a real loss.
I have to agree with A and others who have commented about the title. The term “heresy” and “heretic” is wrong on a number of levels, and sends the wrong message to Muslims and non-Muslims. Regardless of any meaning in Webster’s dictionary, “heresy” in Islam is linked to apostasy or “intellectual apostasy” as Qaradwi has framed it. We are not apostates, we are true Muslims.
This conference should be the beginning of an effort to reach out the the middle-mainstream of Muslims, ie the majority of Muslims. Therefore, a strategic approach should be employed. We need to used inclusive terminology to ensure that Muslims are empowered to participate. Heresy or heretic is divisive, plain and simple.
Further the term will attract the wrong sort of attention. It will attract the attention of neo-conservative media outlets (as did the secular Muslim conference last year). It will contribute to an even bigger divide between reformers/activists and mainstream Muslims.
I don’t believe the title will attract young, energetic Muslims as you suggest. All of the information and data we have shows that young Muslims are more prone to accepting traditional and radical Islam. In fact, younger Muslims may be more inclined to reject the conference. By using terms like Heresy, we will only attract the same old crowd, and the same ideas.
So, I beg you to reconsider the title. The title is important, as it in essence frames everything we will do in the conference (it sets the scene so to speak). We need to get this right and we need to do it strategically. Regardless of the decision, I will still assist and work with this. And regardless of your decision, you and Abdulahi have my uptmost respect and support. So please do not take what I say as any form of disrespect.
ABDULLAHI: I hope all included in this message would like to continue the conversation about the title of the proposed conference because it is inconsistent with the rationale of gathering this group to deem a subject closed by the despotic decree of some of the organizers when the rest of us are not convinced. I also hope that all who are receiving this message would want to read it and consider what I am saying because it seems that what I said earlier was not clear enough, please allow me to explain my understanding of the issue.
I agree with T that “The title is actually important, as it frames our way of thinking”, and the question for me is why I think the “Celebration of Heresy” title is important for this particular conference, and how it should frame our way of thinking in this conference. So, please bear with me as I try to explain:
First, conferences can be convened for different purposes. Since someone has to take the initiative in organizing a particular conference, the initial person or persons would naturally propose the topic they find most interesting and useful for the purpose they have in mind.
In this instance, F had the initial idea, and I agreed with him when we talked about it a year ago at Emory University in Atlanta, and others may have also agreed, so he took the next step of sending messages with the basic concept, date, location, and the process started. The group gradually started to grow, as more of us were attracted to the idea, presumably according to the concept Fereydoun proposed. The title of the conference should of course reflect the key concept or themes for discussion precisely so that other can decide whether they wish to join or not.
To state the obvious and hoping not to give reason for misunderstanding, this initiative does not claim or pretend to exhaust possibilities of good concepts, and consequent titles, for conferences. Indeed, Fereydoun has already included in the proposed program time for considering the subject, location, etc., of the next conference for this group. We may very well agree on a completely different topic for the next conference, and begin to work on organizing it, according to the terms of reference we decide for next year.
It follows from this basic proposition that the appropriate participants in one conference (and therefore important for the organizers to try to attract) are those who wish to participate in the conference, as defined in the proposal. This does not mean that the organizers think that some people are “of importance” and others are not in general, or for other purposes. Rather, it is a matter of who is important to include in a particular initiative, as distinguished from other initiatives.
From this perspective, if this conference is about “sending a message to Muslims and non-Muslims”, my response to the question of whether or not the Heresy title sends the wrong message depends on whether or not we want to send a message and what that message is.
If this conference is intended as “the beginning of an effort to reach out the middle-mainstream of Muslims, i.e., the majority of Muslims”, as Thomas suggests, then the Heresy title is probably the wrong title for this conference.
As I understand it, this conference is about clarifying our own thinking, as a group of Muslim intellectuals concerned with reform, about what we agree upon and why, before we attempt “to reach out to the middle-mianstream of Muslims,” or seek to “attract young, energetic Muslims”. I see this as an initial conversation about what is it that we would wish to communicate and how. I see it as a chance to get our own “intellectual house” in order before we invite people to visit or join us.
The fact that this conference will attract negative attention, that some people will disagree with the concept and title, is only to be expected, and we should accept. What is the point of telling people what they already know and accept? In my view, resistance is a sign of relevance, though not proof of the validity of what is being resisted. Not every heresy deserves to become orthodoxy, but everything that became orthodoxy must have started as a heresy.
This is not to say that I should seek to be controversial for the sake of standing out or attracting negative attention. It does mean that we should not shy away from saying and doing what we believe is right because others may disapprove.
Speaking for myself, I know that it is difficult for me to disagree with others in good will and grace, accept difference and dissent or take criticism of what I say or do as necessary for helping me improve my ability to be persuasive.
I also know that my intellectual commitment to human rights and respect for the dignity of others is far from being consistently reflected in my behavior, believing in good ideas does not make me good.
I therefore know that I need to work on this, to train myself on engaging in difficult debates about contentious issues. I also know that I need to educate myself and clarify my own thinking about many of the ideas I tend to assume that I know and accept.
This is why I am personally interested in working with you all in organizing this conference on “Celebration of Heresy”. Heresy and dissent against a bad idea is good, it is the right thing to do. That is why I need your support in standing by what I believe is right and good, and I hope that I will never lose the ability to be a heretic. Abdullahi