http://www.newstatesman.com/
Can Islam
change?
Ziauddin Sardar
NEW STATESMAN
Beslan and 9/11 are leading millions of Muslims to search their
souls. Even clerics now question the harshest traditional laws and
look for a more humane interpretation of their faith. By Ziauddin
Sardar
The Muslim world is changing. Three years after the atrocity of
9/11, it may be in the early stages of a reformation, albeit with
a small "r". From Morocco to Indonesia, people are trying to
develop a more contemporary and humane interpretation of Islam,
and some countries are undergoing major transformations.
Much of the attention is focused on reformulating the sharia, the
centuries-old body of Islamic law deeply embedded in a medieval
psychology. The sharia is state law in many Muslim countries such
as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan and the Sudan. For many
conservative and radical Muslims, the sharia is Islam: it cannot
be changed, and must be imposed in exactly the
shape it was first formulated in the ninth century. Since 9/11,
there has been a seismic shift in this perception. More and more
Muslims now perceive Islamic law to be dangerously obsolete. And
these include the ulema, the religious scholars and clerics, who
have a tremendous hold on the minds of the Muslim masses.
In India, for example, where the secular state allows Muslims to
regulate their communal affairs according to their own law, the
"triple talaq" is being changed. Triple talaq gives a man the
absolute right to divorce his wife by uttering "I divorce thee"
three times. He can do it by letter,
telegram, telephone, fax, even by text message. Quite apart from
denying women's rights, the law has inherent absurdities.
For example, as one critic has explained, "The moment a Muslim
male utters 'talaq, talaq, talaq', his wife becomes unlawful to
him, even if he has uttered those words under coercion, in a fit
of rage or a drunken state, and regrets his utterance the very
next moment." The only way out is for the woman to marry someone
else, consummate the marriage, get the second husband to divorce
her and then remarry the first husband.
But in July, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board declared that
triple talaq was wrong, promised to prepare a model marriage
contract (which would require both husband and wife not to seek
divorce without due legal process) and asked Muslim men to ensure
that women get a share in agricultural property.
These may look like minor changes, but there are enormous
implications to the board's implicit admission that Islamic law is
not immutable. Certainly, it has set defenders of the pure faith
at the throats of members of Muslims for Secular Democracy (MSD),
who are campaigning for root-and-branch reform. "Remain in your
senses," the conservative Urdu Times warned Javed Akhtar,
the poet and Bollywood screenwriter who is MSD president. "The day
is not far when you too will be counted among the infamous
blasphemers such as Salman Rushdie."
Yet in India, at least, the purists - both the conservatives and
the more aggressive radicals - are on the retreat. Uzma Naheed, an
activist for women's rights and Personal Law Board member, says
that even the religious scholars are changing. "It is not just
that a person like me is invited to address large gatherings of
the ulema in different parts of the country, where I am given a
very patient and sincere hearing. It is what the ulema themselves
have started saying in public meetings that is more significant."
In Pakistan, however, the mullahs are still predominantly hardline
and are locked in a virtual civil war with reformers. The
contentious issue here is the Hudood Ordinance, which states the
maximum punishments for adultery (stoning), false accusation of
adultery (80 lashes of the whip), theft (cutting off the right
hand), drinking alcohol (80 lashes) and apostasy (death). The
ordinance was imposed on Pakistan in 1979 by the military ruler
Muhammad Zia ul-Haq, under pressure from Islamic parties. It makes
no distinction between rape and adultery; thus women who are raped
often end up being whipped while the rapists are exonerated. Girls
who have reached the age of puberty are treated as adults. Worse,
women are not allowed to give
evidence on their own behalf. Among the high-profile injustices
was the case in 1983 of 15-year-old Jehan Mina, raped by an uncle
and his son. She was sentenced to ten years in prison and 100
lashes, reduced to three years and 15 lashes in view of her age.
In 1985, a blind maidservant, Safia Bibi, was sentenced to a
similar punishment. In both cases, the girl's pregnancy was used
as proof that the sex act had been committed but the men were
acquitted
on the benefit of the doubt. Several women have been sentenced to
death by stoning, the most recent being Zafran Bibi in Kohat in
2002, although that sentence was quickly overturned on appeal.
In the past three years, protests against the Hudood Ordinance,
which was never popular, have reached a crescendo. The Joint
Action Committee, a network of NGOs which has held a string of
demonstrations across Pakistan, says that these "laws have not
only given a bad name to our religion, but defamed Pakistan in the
world". Though he has often promised to repeal the laws, the
country's military ruler, General Pervez Musharraf, always caves
in under pressure from puritan Islamist parties. "No one can
deny," he told a recent meeting in Karachi, "that we have to
adhere to the Koran and the example of the Prophet Muhammad. The
question is of correct interpretation."
He wants the
Council of Islamic Ideology to decide on the issue. And the
mullahs who dominate it have never previously voted for justice
and women's rights.
However, they cannot be left out of the equation. For the vast
majority of Muslims, changes to Islamic law have to be made within
the boundaries of the Koran's teachings if they are to be
legitimate. Without the co-operation of the religious scholars,
who bestow this legitimacy, the masses will not embrace change.
This is where Morocco has provided an essential lead. Its new
Islamic family law, introduced in February, sweeps away centuries
of bigotry and bias against women. It was produced with the full
co-operation of religious scholars as well as the active
participation of women.
Morocco retained much of the colonial legal system that France
left behind, but, in family law, followed what is known locally as
the Moudawana - the traditional Islamic rules on marriage,
divorce, inheritance, polygamy and child custody. At first, King
Mohammed VI had to abandon plans for change because, protesters
claimed, he was trying to impose secular law and western
culture on Morocco. In spring 2001, however, he set up a
commission, which included women and was given the specific task
of coming up with fresh legislation based on the principles of
Islam. Given enormous impetus by 9/11 and its aftermath, it
produced a report that many see as a revolutionary document. The
resulting family code establishes that women are equal partners in
marriage and family life. It throws out the notion that the
husband is head of the family and that women are mere underlings
in need of guidance and protection. It raises the minimum age for
women's marriage from 15 to 18, the same as for men.
The new Moudawana allows a woman to contract a marriage without
the legal approval of a guardian. Verbal divorce has been
outlawed: men now require prior authorisation from a court, and
women have exactly the same rights. Women can claim alimony and
can be granted custody of their children even if they remarry.
Husbands and wives must share property acquired during the
marriage. The old custom of favouring male heirs in the sharing of
inherited
land has also been dropped, making it possible for grandchildren
on the daughter's side to inherit from their grandfather, just
like grandchildren on the son's side. As for polygamy, it has been
all but abolished. Men can take second wives only with the full
consent of the first wife and only if
they can prove, in a court of law, that they can treat them both
with absolute justice - an impossible condition.
Every change in the law is justified - chapter and verse - from
the Koran, and from the examples and traditions of the Prophet
Muhammad. And every change acquired the consent of the religious
scholars. Even the Islamist political organisations have welcomed
the change. The Party of Justice and Development described the law
as "a pioneering reform" which is "in line
with the prescriptions of Islam and with the aims of our
religion".
Elsewhere, the
focus is not so much on Islamic law as on Islam as a whole. In a
general election last March, the Malaysian prime minister,
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, argued that Islam was almost totally
associated with violence and extremism and needed to be formulated
anew. He called his new concept "Islam Hadhari", or progressive
Islam. It was pitted against the
"conservative Islam" of the main opposition party, the Islamic
Pas. For the first time, the governing coalition won more than 90
per cent of federal parliamentary seats. Pas, and its version of
Islam (full implementation of the sharia, without modification; a
leading role in the state for religious scholars; and so on), were
routed.
Badawi, who is a trained religious scholar, took the term "hadhari"
from Ibn Khaldun, the 14th-century Muslim historian and
founder of sociology. The term signifies urban civilisation; and
Islam Hadhari emphasises economic development, civic life and
cultural progress. When Muslims talk about Islam, says Abdullah
Mohd Zain, a minister in the prime minister's
department, "there is always the tendency to link it to the past,
to the Prophet's time". Islam Hadhari gives equal emphasis to the
present and the future. "It emphasises wisdom, practicality and
harmony," says Zain. "It encourages moderation or a balanced
approach to life. Yet it does not stray from the fundamentals of
the Koran and the example and sayings of the Prophet."
Islam Hadhari - fully explained in a 60-page document published by
Badawi last month - emphasises the central role of knowledge in
Islam; preaches hard work, honesty, good administration and
efficiency; and appeals to Muslims to be "inclusive", tolerant and
outward-looking. It advocates that Muslims should attend secular
and not religious schools. Committees have been set up to spread
the message throughout Malaysia, and mullahs have been instructed
to preach it during Friday sermons.
Nik Abdul Aziz, the spiritual leader of Pas, dismisses Islam
Hadhari as "nonsense". But Muslim writers and thinkers, at an
international conference in Kuala Lumpur in August, responded
warmly. "It is certainly time," said one participant, "to change
gear and concentrate on the humanistic and progressive aspects of
Islam." As critics at the conference pointed out,
however, Islam Hadhari stops short of changes to Islamic law. And
Badawi himself is hardly a good advertisement for the concept.
Government-controlled television and newspapers in Malaysia are
full of crude propaganda. The repressive Internal Security Act, a
legacy of British colonialism, is still in force. But Badawi's
image will improve following the release this month of the former
deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, who was framed on
homosexuality charges for which he was sentenced to nine
years in prison.
While Malaysia has a top-down model, Indonesia has opted for the
bottom-up route. The reformist agenda is being promoted by
Muhammadiyah and Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), the two largest and most
influential Muslim organisations. Established at the dawn of the
20th century, they command between 60 and 80 million followers in
mosques, schools and universities throughout Indonesia.
NU, essentially an organisation of religious scholars, is usually
described as traditionalist, while Muhammadiyah, dominated by
intellectuals, is seen as modernist. Since 9/11, however, the two
organisations have acted, in some respects, as one. Both are
committed to promoting civic society and reformulating sharia.
They are campaigning jointly against corruption in public life and
in favour of accountable, open democracy. The newly formed Liberal
Islam Network - intended to resist radical groups such as Laskar
Jihad (Army of Jihad) and Jemaah Islamiyah, which was implicated
in the October 2002 Bali bombings - follows a similar programme.
Its membership consists largely of young Muslims.
All three organisations promote a model of Islamic reform that
they call "deformalisation". "The overemphasis on formality and
symbolism has drained Islam of its ethical and humane dimension,"
says Abdul Mukti, chairman of Muhammadiyah's influential youth
wing. "The first mission of deformalisation is to recover this
missing dimension." Its second mission, he says, is "to separate
the sharia from political realms". Islamic law, Mukti explains,
cannot be imposed from the top - as it has been in Pakistan - but
has to evolve from below. Indeed, the overwhelming view of
scholars and thinkers I met recently in Indonesia - including
teachers at a state religious university - was that the formal
links between Islam and politics must be
severed.
Both Malaysia's Islam Hadhari and Indonesia's deformalisation
emphasise tolerance and pluralism, civic society and open
democracy. Both are likely to spread. Malaysia is trying to export
Islam Hadhari to Muslim communities in Thailand and the
Philippines. Meanwhile, Morocco is trying to persuade Egypt,
Jordan and the United Arab Emirates to adopt its model of family
law.
Muslims worldwide are acknowledging the need for fundamental
change in their perception of Islam. They are making conscious
efforts to move away from medieval notions of Islamic law and to
implement the vision of justice, equality and beauty that is
rooted in the Koran. If such changes continue, the future will not
repeat the recent past.
Ziauddin Sardar's Desperately Seeking Paradise: journeys of a
sceptical Muslim is published by Granta Books (£16.99)
Shubhranshu Choudhary
Freelance Journalist
312, Patrakar Parisar
Sector 5, Vasundhara
Ghaziabad 201012 India
Ph - + 91 98110 66749
e mail -
[email protected]
This site is still under
construction. Please visit again for more updates.