What Became of Tolerance in Islam?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

"What Became of Tolerance in Islam?"

Los Angeles Times, September 14, 2001

COMMENTARY

By KHALED ABOU EL FADL

Extreme acts of violence and evil such as the recent terrorist attacks test the mettle and moral depth of societies-the society that is targeted by the violence and the society that generated it.

The Japanese stealth attack on Pearl Harbor tested both the aggressor and the victim. Pearl Harbor challenged the moral integrity of Japanese normative values, but it also tested us. We responded to an extreme act of aggression with another extreme act: We interned our Japanese citizens in concentration camps, resulting in deep fissures in our constitutional and civil rights fabric.

We do not have a good record when responding to aggression. As a society, we tend to vent our anger and hurt at our own citizens and then spend decades expressing regret and talking about lessons learned. Considering the scale of what has been called the second Pearl Harbor, I fear that there will be an explosion of hate crimes against Muslim and Arab Americans, both by police and by ordinary citizens.

Anticipating the backlash, Muslim and Arab organizations have rushed to issue condemnations of terrorism and hate-motivated violence and have gone to pains to explain that terrorists who happen to be Muslim do not represent Muslims at large, Islam or anyone else.

Nevertheless, the recent terrorist attacks mandate a serious introspective pause. As Americans, we should reflect on our own Middle East policies and the arrogance by which we deal with the dark-skinned people we collectively refer to as Arabs. Muslims, American and otherwise, should reflect on the state of their culture and the state of the Islamic civilization.

As a Muslim, I feel that the horror of recent terrorist attacks demands a serious, conscientious pause. Terrorism is an aberration, but most often it is of a particular type, an extreme manifestation of underlying social and ideological currents prevalent in a particular culture. Terrorism is not a virus that suddenly infects the brain of a person; rather, it is the result of long-standing and cumulative cultural and rhetorical dynamics.

In Islamic law, terrorism (hirabah) is considered cowardly, predatory and a grand sin punishable by death. Classical Islamic law explicitly prohibits the taking or slaying of hostages or diplomats even in retaliation against unlawful acts by the enemy. Furthermore, it prohibits stealth or indiscriminate attacks against enemies, Muslim or non-Muslim. One can even say that classical jurists considered such acts to be contrary to the ethics of Arab chivalry and therefore fundamentally cowardly.

It would be disingenuous, however, to propose that this classical attitude is predominant or even that familiar in modern Arab-Muslim culture. I like many other Muslims grew up with an unhealthy dose of highly opportunistic and belligerent rhetoric, not only in the official media but also at popular cultural venues such as local mosques. Even in the U.S., it is not unusual to hear irresponsible and unethical rhetoric repeated in local Islamic centers or Muslim student organizations at universities. It is disheartening to hear contemporary Arab news agencies, for example, refer to acts of terrorism in neutral terms such as guerrilla attacks (amal fida'i) and to suicide bombers as martyrs (shuhada).

All of this begs the question: What happened to the civilization that produced such tolerance, knowledge and beauty throughout its history? A lot has happened. The Islamic civilization has been wiped out by an aggressive and racist European civilization. Colonialism and the expulsion of Palestinians happened. Numerous massacres against and by Muslims happened. Despotic and exploitative regimes have taken power in nearly every Muslim country. Most important, however, a dogmatic, puritanical and ethically oblivious form of Islam has predominated since the 1970s. This brand of Islamic theology is largely dismissive of the classical juristic tradition and of any notion of universal and innate moral values. This orientation insists that only the mechanics and technicalities of Islamic law define morality. Paradoxically, it also rejects the classical juristic tradition and insists on a literal reinterpretation of all Islamic texts.

Fundamentally, this puritanical theology responds to feelings of powerlessness and defeat with uncompromising symbolic displays of power, not only against non-Muslims but also against Muslim women. It is not accidental that this puritanical orientation is the most virulent in flexing its muscles against women and that it is plagued by erotic fantasies of virgins in heaven submissively catering to the whim and desire of men.

This contemporary orientation is anchored in profound feelings of defeatism, alienation, frustration and arrogance. It is a theology that is alienated not only from the institutions of power in the modern world but also from its own heritage and tradition.

The extreme form of this puritanical Islam does not represent most Muslims today. But there are two ways in which contemporary Muslim culture, Arab or non-Arab, inadvertently feeds these extreme trends. First, since the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the onslaught of colonialism, Islamic intellectuals have busied themselves with the task of "defending Islam" by rampant apologetics. This produced a culture that eschews self-critical and introspective insight and embraces projection of blame and a fantasy-like level of confidence and arrogance. Second, Muslims got into the habit of paying homage to the presumed superiority of the Islamic tradition but marginalize this idealistic image in everyday life.

Muslim intellectuals justified hijacking airplanes and taking hostages. Terrorist attacks such as the 1976 Entebbe operation or the 1972 killing of Israeli Olympic athletes were justified on purely pragmatic grounds: How else are we to fight Israeli arrogance and belligerence?

The reality of contemporary Muslims is unfortunate. Easy oil money, easy apologetics, easy puritanism, easy appeals to the logic of necessity have all but obliterated the incentive for introspection and critical insight. Arab and Muslim organizations in the U.S. are right to worry about hate crimes and stereotypical projections of Muslims and the Islamic religion.

The problem, however, is that Muslims themselves responded to the challenge of modernity by stereotyping and then completely ignoring their own tradition. It is not surprising that some extremists have taken this tendency to its logical and heinous extreme.

Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl (born 1963 in Kuwait) is a professor of law at the UCLA School of Law where he teaches Islamic law, immigration, human rights, international and national security law. He holds degrees from Yale University (B.A.), University of Pennsylvania Law School (J.D.) and Princeton University (M.A./Ph.D.). He also received formal training in Islamic jurisprudence in Egypt and Kuwait.

Professor El-Fadl was appointed by President George W. Bush as a commissioner on the US Commission on International Religious Freedom. He advocates a strong support for human rights and sat on the Board of Directors for Human Rights Watch. Dr. El-Fadl currently serves on the on the Advisory Board of Middle East Watch.

He is a prolific author and prominent public intellectual on Islamic law and Islam.

Bibliography

* The Search for Beauty in Islam: Conference of the Books (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2006)

* The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists (Harper San Francisco, 2005)

* Islam and the Challenge of Democracy (Princeton University Press, 2004)

* Democracy and Islam in the New Constitution of Afghanistan (Independent Publication, 2003)

* The Place of Tolerance in Islam (Beacon Press, 2002)

* And God Knows the Soldiers: The Authoritative and Authoritarian in Islamic Discourses (UPA/Rowman and Littlefield, 2001)

* Speaking in God's Name: Islamic law, Authority and Women (Oneworld Press, Oxford, 2001)

* Conference of the Books: The Search for Beauty in Islam (University Press of America/Rowman and Littlefield, 2001)

* Rebellion and Violence in Islamic Law (Cambridge University Press, 2001)

[justashooter 430]

"it's my fault. I did it. i made muslims into terrorists. I am a white man."

happy now?

[desert_fox 32]

"it's my fault. I did it. i made muslims into terrorists. I am a white man."

happy now?

you infidel.......!!!!

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Another quality post Sofyaa!

I think Shooter stopped reading before the end though if he concluded the authors were blaming 'others' solely.

This is the sort of information I always appreciate from you. Thank you!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

You're welcome. This author was one of the first prominent American Muslims to denounce the terrorism of 9/11. An extremist in his youth, he has written several books and many articles in opposition of radicalism in the name of Islam, and continues on with his work despite poor health and death threats against himself and his family. His books are beautifully written, relatively easy reads for the layman and very informative. I recommend them to anyone who wants to know more about Islam and Islamic law. Unlike Islam hating, sensationalist posers presented as experts by Right wing bloggers and talk sow hosts, here is a true scholar of Islam worth your time attention.

Edited September 20, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

"it's my fault. I did it. i made muslims into terrorists. I am a white man."

happy now?

Careful, someone my issue a Fatwa against you.

[웃 910]

San Francisco, 2009:

[웃 910]

[ready4ONE 5,400]

I will try to find some of his books.

[justashooter 430]

Careful, someone my issue a Fatwa against you.

let them come in peace. they will go in pieces.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

I thought this was a thread asking about http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/274541-tolerance-in-islam/--my bad!

[1HappyGuy 45]

So, if I read Professor El-Fadl correctly, it is a group of extremists that have essentially hijacked the Islamic religion and that the majority of Muslims don't believe in these extreme values or beliefs. And yet, we are still suppose to believe that Islam is a religion of peace because someone says that's the true message of Islam.

Can you see why so many Americans have a problem with this? If true Islam does not call for the destruction of non-believers, why are Imam's professing this philosophy allowed to continue carrying their message to the masses?

I think this might fall under the category, "If you aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem".

Obviously there is a great deal of misunderstanding between Muslims and western cultures. I think part of this can be traced back to the Palestinian problem. This was the result of an attempt to correct a wrong with another wrong. But regarding the Palestinian's, they did not understand western culture when it came to trying to resolve the loss of the Palestinian state after the exodus for Israel. If the people of Palestine had tried peacefully to resolve their wrongs, particularly with the American people, they may have found out that Americans will take up the plight of peaceful people that have been wronged. It might not have happened overnight, but we have a way of listening to people trying to resolve their differences, peacefully.

Unfortunately, that is now a mute point.

[BishopM 114]

I will try to find some of his books.

The good Professor has an immense series of lectures online for free downloads. Lecture Series_Free Download

[Saddle Bronc 124]

So, if I read Professor El-Fadl correctly, it is a group of extremists that have essentially hijacked the Islamic religion and that the majority of Muslims don't believe in these extreme values or beliefs. And yet, we are still suppose to believe that Islam is a religion of peace because someone says that's the true message of Islam.

Can you see why so many Americans have a problem with this? If true Islam does not call for the destruction of non-believers, why are Imam's professing this philosophy allowed to continue carrying their message to the masses?

I think this might fall under the category, "If you aren't part of the solution, then you are part of the problem".

Obviously there is a great deal of misunderstanding between Muslims and western cultures. I think part of this can be traced back to the Palestinian problem. This was the result of an attempt to correct a wrong with another wrong. But regarding the Palestinian's, they did not understand western culture when it came to trying to resolve the loss of the Palestinian state after the exodus for Israel. If the people of Palestine had tried peacefully to resolve their wrongs, particularly with the American people, they may have found out that Americans will take up the plight of peaceful people that have been wronged. It might not have happened overnight, but we have a way of listening to people trying to resolve their differences, peacefully.

Unfortunately, that is now a mute moot point.

fixed

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Mythbusters