Understanding Islam- social ethics context - Essay Example

Understanding Islam- Social Ethics Context Table of Contents Introduction 3 Discussion 5 1References 9 Introduction This paper takes off from the work of Reza Aslan entitled ‘No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam’ to get a grip of the Islamic religion from the perspective of social ethics. Islam is very interesting from the lens of social ethics for the way the religion defines to a large extent the moral standards of whole societies, nations and regions where Islam takes root. It is also very fascinating for the way the religion’s social, moral and ethical values stand in stark contrast in practice to those that are shared in the west, and in the rest of the world, even to Asia. Popular images in the media depict Islamic societies as somewhat restrictive in many areas, and the popular image of the veiled woman who is somewhat restricted in terms of education and economic opportunities, and is subjugated by paternal social and familial arrangements, highlights just how different the moral and ethical standards of Islam is to the moral and ethical standards of western societies especially, that are more egalitarian in contrast. Era-defining events, such as the September 11 attacks, have come to shape discourse on what the west perceives as the clash between Islam and the West, as Aslan points out (Aslan, 2005, p. xxiii). In Aslan’s book, he traces the historical roots of Islam and the intent and spirit of the originator of Islam, the prophet Muhammad, to bare in essence an ideal of society and of Islamic religion that is in fact closer to western ideals. We have for instance contrarian depictions of Islamic society in the book where the clerics do not hold absolute power, but are in a way challenged by more individual and personal interpretations of the Holy Scriptures. This is maybe similar to the tension in the Christian world between those who espouse personal relationships with God on the one hand and those who emphasize the power of the priests and of formal church hierarchy. In Aslan’s depiction of Islam too, one can see that as he points out, the prophet’s vision of Islamic society was one where men and women had more equal standing, and that there was less of an emphasis on social hierarchy, akin to the egalitarianism that pervades the west. In Aslan’s depiction too, individual values hold greater sway in contrast to the values and power of the Muslim cleric and the extremists. Of particular interest here is the depiction of Sufi mystics in Chapter 8 of the book, where Aslan shows how mystical Islam holds many things in common with an individualistic and surprisingly liberal version of Islam that is far removed from the dogmatic and somewhat closed version of Islam practiced by the clerics in Iran, for instance. What is clear from Aslan too is that within the religion, there is this great tension that defines the religion as something that is evolving and brewing from the inside, rather than static and fixed as the west perceives it to be. Be that as it may, what is clear too is that Islamic religion stands out, with its Scriptures and formal church organization, stands out as a defining institution or religion that shapes the moral and ethical code of Muslims all over the world. It is in this context that the rest of the paper looks at Islam from a social ethics perspective (Aslan, 2006; Keddie, 2005; Rodenbeck, 2005; Kornell, 2006; Shasha, 2008). Discussion Taking a step back, the reality on the ground in many Muslim states is that the Muslim cleric and the fundamentalist groups who espouse jihad as a means to justify a militant and terroristic kind of Islam seem to hold much of the power and influence in those societies. Having disproportionate |”airtime” so to speak in the western media, they come to dominate many aspects of their societies as well. Aslan steps in and says fundamentally that what the west perceives as Islam is really a small slice of Islam, sometimes a minority slice at that. In the case of Saudi Arabia, for instance, we see that the kind of Islam that has taken root in the halls of power, to define the social, moral and ethical standards of the modern Saudi Arabian state, is really not mainstream as far as Aslan defines it, but a snapshot of a small group of Muslims adhering to a more fundamentalist and restrictive brand of Islam. The same goes for Iran, where the Ayatollah was able to usurp the natural processes of social change in Islam and essentially subvert that process to suit his need to grab power and to control Iranian society in general. Yet the message too from Aslan is that Islam, as it is foisted sometimes on the populace, does constitute a kind of moral code. On the other from a social ethics perspective, that moral code is not etched in stone or something that is definitive, but is something that is for the Saudi Arabian and the Iranian example, something that is really an interpretation of Islam and the words of the prophet in the Koran. As an interpretation, moreover, Aslan shows those interpretations to be essentially wrong, where they are restrictive of women’s rights for instance, and where they prescribe violence and dogmatism. To do this, Aslan goes back to the very roots of Islam, to the Middle East prior to Islam, and to the time of the prophet Muhammad. Here he traces the theological roots of Islam and bares its soul to be somewhat liberal and aspiring to equal treatment and status in society among men and women, among other things. Aslan shows too that the modern view of the Muslim extremist as being the product of the Holy Scripture of Islam is false, for example (Aslan, 2006; Keddie, 2005; Rodenbeck, 2005). As opposed to the west’s view of Islam as being essentially militant and at its core essentially at odds with western ideals of individual freedom and respect for civil rights and peace, Aslan depicts the ideals of the prophet and the true heart of Islam as being deeply respectful of the individual and of liberal human values, same as in the west. This is reflected not only in the life of the prophet and in the words that he spoke, but also in the commentaries on the Koran from the early days of the religion and of the Islamic community that proceeded from the time after the death of the Prophet. Aslan does show that the evolution of the power structure in the early days of Islam led to more and more men dominating the interpretation of the Koran and in the crafting of commentaries, even as women were relegated to less important roles in the whole process and increasingly were unable to sustain their positions in the areas of Koranic scholarship and priestly work. Be that as it may, what Aslan shows by detailing the evolution of the religion and the underlying dynamic that governs the change process within Islam, is that what the west perceives to be Islam is really just a small part of Islam. This is not difficult to understand if we see Islam’s parallels in Christianity for example. The clerics can be construed as being made up of the priests in the Catholic religion for instance, with an emphasis on formal religion. Within the Catholic world, where they are dominant in a country, Catholic doctrine holds much sway in terms of women’s reproductive rights, marital rights, women’s rights, and in defining moral and ethical standards in general. On the other hand, more liberal brands of Christianity that pervades North America, for instance, would breed social moral and ethical standards that are no less strict, but offer the opportunity for women to secure their civil and personal rights with regard to divorce, getting access to education, marriage to the same sex, and the like. If in a Catholic setting, an outsider would see a version of Christianity that would tend to a greater emphasis on formal doctrine, rituals, priests, and icons for instance. This would be the same dynamic for an outsider in the west viewing Islam as it is practiced in places like Iran and Saudi Arabia from without. Aslan makes it clear that those versions of Islam are tiny slivers of a greater reality that is more dynamic and surprisingly holds many things in common with western social and cultural values. From the point of view of social ethics, therefore, it is true that Islam defines standards of right and wrong for the societies where the religion holds sway, but this is true as well for Islam’s counterparts in the west. Various flavors of Islam, some dogmatic and tending to violence, are various interpretations of Islamic doctrine, some of them having little in common with the spirit and intent of the Prophet’s words and teachings (Aslan, 2006; Keddie, 2005; Rodenbeck, 2005; Kornell, 2006; Shasha, 2008). Drawing parallels between Islam and the dynamics of Islam with the dynamics of Western Christianity is powerful, because of the way such brings home the point that from a social ethics point of view, the way Islam defines the social code of Muslim societies is perhaps no different from the way western Christianity shapes western social moral and ethical codes. Such also shows that Islam, like Christianity, is not one single reality, but has many facets. To emphasize this latter point, it is noteworthy that Aslan discusses the Sufi religious sensibility as a counterpoint to the dogmatic cleric and the militant extremist that have come to dominate imagery and stereotyping of Muslims in the west. In contrast to these two latter stereotypes, Aslan holds the image of the Muslim Sufi mystic, who would be familiar to the west as the Christian mystic who also shuns dogma and formal religious organization in exchange for more direct and personal relationships with the divine. Here the ordinary western outsider can feel at home, because the Sufi conception of the individual as being more important than the church organization, doctrine and dogma overlaps with the most cherished liberal values of the west too. Shunning formal religion, the Sufi, represented by the poet and mystic Rumi, welcomes people from all religions as equals. The Sufi vision is egalitarian and all-embracing, rather than exclusivist and divisive too. Holding up this example of the Sufi sensibility, one can see, as Aslan wants us to see, that in fact Islamic social ethics is just as multifaceted as it is in the West, occupying the spectrum from the dogmatic cleric’s to the liberal Sufi mystic’s vision, from hatred and division to love (Aslan, 2005, pp. 205-222; Shasha, 2008; Kornell, 2006). 1 References Aslan, R. (2005). No god but God: The Origins, Evolution and Future of Islam. New York: Random House Keddie, N. (2005). Taking History on Faith. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32729-2005Apr6.html Kornell, S. (2006).One World One God. Santa Barbara Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.com/news/2006/jan/19/one-world-one-god/ Rodenbeck, M. (2005). ‘No god but God’: The War Within Islam. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/books/review/29RODENBE.html?pagewanted=all Shasha, D. (2008). Book Review: No god but God (Reza Aslan). The American Muslim. Retrieved from http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/book_review_no_god_but_god_reza_aslan Read More