Mainstream Islam maintains that the Muslim message is a message from God brought forth through the prophet Mohammed and that it is universal and applicable for all times and places. There are certainly some sticking points in the core message's universality when it is approached through rigid classical Islamic jurisprudence. But the sticking points are shockingly sparse when compared to the Bible. It is in "Sunnah" or prophetic tradition that Islam's claim to universality faces its real challenge.
Sunnah, or traditions of the prophet are a set of actions, habits, morals, and rituals that are attributed to the prophet Mohammed through his contemporaries. The science of "Hadith" or sayings of the prophet is highly involved, but also trapped in its own internal logic. The main interest of Hadith is canonizing those sayings of the prophet that are authentic and tracing their oral lines down to his contemporaries.
Through Sunnah, Islam gets some of its central rituals such as the Muslim prayers and the pilgrimage to Meccah. A lot of very critical components of Islamic theology and catechism are also derived from Hadith. But these days, the majority of daily references to Sunnah consider habits and traditions that affect daily life. These are not questions of morality or ethics, just issues of how one dresses or acts. Growing a beard is one example, dressing in a white gown and wearing sandals is another, eating with one's hands while sitting on the floor is a third. While the practice of these traditions is not mainstream in Egypt, their "righteousness" is considered a self-evident truth by the majority. And other, more diluted forms of such traditions are mainstream, for example wearing a Saudi style gown to Friday prayers instead of all the time, eating with one's right hands instead of eating on the floor, etc. In all cases, the righteousness of the tradition is based on the fact that the prophet did it.
These habits have become front and center issues for Islamists as Wahabism rose to the forefront of traditional Muslim societies. The MB, eager to adapt to any form of Islam that seems to be winning have adopted the centrality of these issues without adopting them, while Salafists have made them life and death issues. It becomes a complex issue of identity crisis, post-colonial complexes, and political maneuvering.
But at the end of the day, these superficial traditions pose a very serious question about the universality of Islam. The theory is that Islam is universal and true because it came directly from God and because its message is distilled and simple. As proof of this, the conflict between the message of Islam and the society in which it was delivered is always brought forward as proof. And one has to admit that if Islam were only a political and social movement intended for the Arabian nomads, its content would have been a lot less confrontational to them.
But the dress code, beards, and eating habits that Salafists proclaim as prophetic revelation were the norm in the society of Hijaz where the prophet delivered his message. The prophet did not wear thobes or grow his beard or eat with his hand sitting on the ground because there was anything sacred about any of that, it was because that's what everyone in his society did and had done for generations. These traditions were the most conformist and non-confrontational of anything that the prophet did. So if the eating and dress traditions of Arabia are to be considered sacred, then we have to consider the society of western Arabia before the prophet to be sacred and divinely inspired. For it was not the prophet, but his ancestors that made up these traditions. In other words, if the message of Islam were revealed in central China, would the prophet also have worn the dress of people in Western Arabia? Or would he have worn Chinese garb and eaten with chopsticks? In that case would Chinese dress and chopsticks be sacred traditions that all Muslims would have to follow? And would that make Chinese society sacred? If it is not possible that the prophet could have delivered his message in China or anywhere other than Western Arabia, then how is the message universal?
This may seem like a superficial issue, but if one digs deeper it is indicative of a serious crisis in Muslim societies. The mixing of Islam as a religion with Arabian habits and traditions is unprecedented in its depth and reach. And the impact on the faith of young Muslims is not always positive. Perhaps what Islam needs is a novel sort of fundamentalism, one that insists on purifying the religion back to its fundamental principles. Wahabism claimed to be doing so, sterilizing Muslim societies from Ottoman cultural traditions. What they did in effect was replace local cultural traditions, with which Islam coexisted for centuries, with the culture of the capital of Mohammed Bin Abd-Elwahab.
Sunnah, or traditions of the prophet are a set of actions, habits, morals, and rituals that are attributed to the prophet Mohammed through his contemporaries. The science of "Hadith" or sayings of the prophet is highly involved, but also trapped in its own internal logic. The main interest of Hadith is canonizing those sayings of the prophet that are authentic and tracing their oral lines down to his contemporaries.
Through Sunnah, Islam gets some of its central rituals such as the Muslim prayers and the pilgrimage to Meccah. A lot of very critical components of Islamic theology and catechism are also derived from Hadith. But these days, the majority of daily references to Sunnah consider habits and traditions that affect daily life. These are not questions of morality or ethics, just issues of how one dresses or acts. Growing a beard is one example, dressing in a white gown and wearing sandals is another, eating with one's hands while sitting on the floor is a third. While the practice of these traditions is not mainstream in Egypt, their "righteousness" is considered a self-evident truth by the majority. And other, more diluted forms of such traditions are mainstream, for example wearing a Saudi style gown to Friday prayers instead of all the time, eating with one's right hands instead of eating on the floor, etc. In all cases, the righteousness of the tradition is based on the fact that the prophet did it.
These habits have become front and center issues for Islamists as Wahabism rose to the forefront of traditional Muslim societies. The MB, eager to adapt to any form of Islam that seems to be winning have adopted the centrality of these issues without adopting them, while Salafists have made them life and death issues. It becomes a complex issue of identity crisis, post-colonial complexes, and political maneuvering.
But at the end of the day, these superficial traditions pose a very serious question about the universality of Islam. The theory is that Islam is universal and true because it came directly from God and because its message is distilled and simple. As proof of this, the conflict between the message of Islam and the society in which it was delivered is always brought forward as proof. And one has to admit that if Islam were only a political and social movement intended for the Arabian nomads, its content would have been a lot less confrontational to them.
But the dress code, beards, and eating habits that Salafists proclaim as prophetic revelation were the norm in the society of Hijaz where the prophet delivered his message. The prophet did not wear thobes or grow his beard or eat with his hand sitting on the ground because there was anything sacred about any of that, it was because that's what everyone in his society did and had done for generations. These traditions were the most conformist and non-confrontational of anything that the prophet did. So if the eating and dress traditions of Arabia are to be considered sacred, then we have to consider the society of western Arabia before the prophet to be sacred and divinely inspired. For it was not the prophet, but his ancestors that made up these traditions. In other words, if the message of Islam were revealed in central China, would the prophet also have worn the dress of people in Western Arabia? Or would he have worn Chinese garb and eaten with chopsticks? In that case would Chinese dress and chopsticks be sacred traditions that all Muslims would have to follow? And would that make Chinese society sacred? If it is not possible that the prophet could have delivered his message in China or anywhere other than Western Arabia, then how is the message universal?
This may seem like a superficial issue, but if one digs deeper it is indicative of a serious crisis in Muslim societies. The mixing of Islam as a religion with Arabian habits and traditions is unprecedented in its depth and reach. And the impact on the faith of young Muslims is not always positive. Perhaps what Islam needs is a novel sort of fundamentalism, one that insists on purifying the religion back to its fundamental principles. Wahabism claimed to be doing so, sterilizing Muslim societies from Ottoman cultural traditions. What they did in effect was replace local cultural traditions, with which Islam coexisted for centuries, with the culture of the capital of Mohammed Bin Abd-Elwahab.
No comments:
Post a Comment