A new internet and phone service was launched recently to answer the questions of British Muslims by scholars trained in al-Azhar University. The ‘Islamic hotline‘ (El Hatef) hopes to give answers which reflect the true understanding of Islam as there are growing fears at the radicalisation of Muslim youth. Answering various questions from relationship problems to whether violence is permissible, the hotline hopes to show Islam is not difficult to apply peacefully within the western world. The service already launched in Egypt has been hailed as a big success due to the sheer magnitude of phone calls the hotline receives.
Whereas a question and answer service which exists in different forms across the Muslim world would be a welcome tool for the ummah, unfortunately this service fits into a whole host of initiatives which serve only to distort and reform the Ummah’s understanding of Islam. Not content with bombarding the Ummah with constant criticism and debate, labelling the ummah as extreme and moderate, the Western world has increased its efforts to pacify Muslims by using scholars to convince us of a new pliable Islam. This would mean the Ummah would see no difference between Islam and western values, believing in values such as national pride rather than the bond of ummah and democracy the rule of man over hukum shari – the rule of Allah سبحانه وتعالى.
For some time moderates and Western thinkers have used the science of Ikhtilaaf (difference of opinion) to justify opinions which are at odds with many key verses of the Qur’an. Rather than argue against the opinions of those who are considered radical some have argued that there are multiple interpretations of Islam, hence whilst a radical could hold that the ummah should unite, moderates argue equally the nation state is a valid view. Such thinking has led to many moderate organisations, supported incidentally by Western money to gather as many people possible around such views.
Understanding Iktilaaf
Difference of opinion is permitted in Islam and has always occurred. This is understood from the famous hadith narrated by Bukhari about Banu Quyayzah. This was where the sahabah were sent to Bani Qurayzah by Muhammed صلى الله عليه وسلم after the battle of Khandaq (trench).
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Whosoever believes in Allah and the day of judgment he should not pray Asr except in Bani Qurayzah.”
As Asr arrived the Sahabah had had not reached Bani Qurayzah and a debate ensued with regards to the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم instruction, should it be taken literally or metaphorically – i.e. did the Prophet intend for the Prophet to hasten to Banu Qurayzah. The Sahabah who took the Prophets instruction metaphorically prayed Asr during Asr time whilst the remainder of the Sahabah took the Prophets instruction literally and prayed Asr once they reached Bani Qurayzah which was well after Esha. The Prophet did not rebuke either party when he got news of the occurrence.
It is imperative that difference of opinion is understood in an ideological context. This does not mean any individual can interpret the Shari’ah texts in whatever manner desired in order to conform to every whim or impulse. In Islam differences of opinion are permitted in areas where the Qur’an or ahadith allow such a process. The nature of the Arabic language is that one root word can have a number of derivatives therefore differences of interpretation can occur i.e. the reality of the word can be applicable upon numerous realities. There is however a restriction to this. Words in the Arabic language have two elements when anyone is looking to understand, interpret and apply. This is the mantooq (wording) and mafhoom (meaning). This means that interpretation cannot go beyond the meaning being indicated by the wordings. As an example the following verse could be used to justify homosexuality
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا
“O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you into nations and tribes in order that you may get to know one another.” [Al-Hujaraat, 49:13]
This verse is general as its an address to mankind, so it would encompass both Muslim, non-Muslim, male and female and ‘get to know each other’ could be interpreted as including sexual relationships between the same genders. However this understanding cannot be extrapolated from the wording of this verse as this contradicts numerous other verses:
وَلُوطًا إِذْ قَالَ لِقَوْمِهِ أَتَأْتُونَ الْفَاحِشَةَ مَا سَبَقَكُم بِهَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ مِّن الْعَالَمِينَ
“We sent Lut when he said to his people: What! Do you commit an indecency (lewdness) such that no one in the world has not done before you? For you practice your lusts on men over women. You are an extravagant people.” [Al-A’raaf, 7:80]
and
أَتَأْتُونَ الذُّكْرَانَ مِنَ الْعَالَمِينَ
وَتَذَرُونَ مَا خَلَقَ لَكُمْ رَبُّكُمْ مِنْ أَزْوَاجِكُم بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ عَادُونَ
“What! Of all the creatures of the world will you approach males and leave what your Lord has created for you of your wives? You are a people exceeding limits.” [Ash-Shu’araa, 26:165-166]
Hence interpretation has rules and restrictions and is not a limitless process where one can interpret however they wish.
Hence the derivation of a shari’ah rule is from only the Qur’an and to what it has indicated. We find that when a sahabah could not find a direct answer regarding a problem the sahabah would conduct Ijtihad, a specific process where they would look at the Qur’an and Sunnah in order to derive a rule for the new problem. When the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم sent Mu’adh as a qadi (judge) to Yemen, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم asked him:
“By what will you pass judgement?” He said: “By the Book of Allah.” The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “If you do not find it there?” He said: “By the sunnah of the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.” He said: “And if you do not find it?” He said: “I will exercise my own Ijtihad.” He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Praise be to Allah who has made the messenger of the Messenger of Allah to accord with what Allah and His messenger loves.” [Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi]
Today this process has been corrupted where those who seek to modernise Islam claim there can be any number of opinions and that we should try to create a new way of seeing Islam for a new time and place. Professor Anas Aboshady one of Al Azhar’s scholars, who is a regular on the hotline stated: “We are not sticking to one view, or one school of law,” he says. “What we present is what we believe is suitable to people in different times and places and let them choose which is suitable to them.” “This gives Islamic law some flexibility, so we are not changing the religion or creating new religion, but simply give people the chance to choose which is suitable to them.”
The Shari’ah texts have been defined by the classic scholars ‘as the speech of the legislator with regards mans actions.’ Hence unlike Western legislation and civil law that proceeds on the basis of understanding an issue and then looking at whose freedom was denied or exploited, Islam on the other hand does not deduce legislation from the reality. Hence any scholar wanting the know the hukm shari on an issue would understand the reality of the issue and then find the shari’ah rule that has addressed it. To find the most suitable rule, to find the easiest rule or to look for the lesser of two evils is not referring to the rule of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. Hence statements such as making Islam suitable for whatever situation a Muslim finds themselves in is not searching for Allah’s rule.
This is clearly opposed to the way of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم who changed the reality in accordance with Islam rather than changing Islam to fit the reality. When the quraysh offered the Prophet power, women and money he saw did not compromise call to the deen of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, he replied:
“By Allah, if they were to put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left on condition that I relinquished this matter, until Allah has made it triumphant or I perish therein I would not relinquish it.”
This and other examples show how the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم always sought to make society conform to Islam not for Islam to conform to the reality. From the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم actions we can see he strove to use his life to worship Allah سبحانه وتعالى not to find ease.
The idea to reform Islam is merely an exercise in showing how Islam fits in with western ideas of freedom. The relentless attack on Muslim women from their dress to home and public life aims to force apologetic Muslims to conform to the idea of equality. When asked about whether the traditional Islamic rule that woman should travel only with their husband’s permission applies in modern in the West Professor Aboshady explained to the BBC:
“the rule was designed to protect women at a time when travel was dangerous. In Britain that no longer applies…..true Islamic teaching was designed to make life easier for Muslims and for the non-Muslims with whom they live.”
What we find with this rule is that although some tangible benefits may be achieved, in no way was a reason given for the rule. This is like many rules where tangible benefits are achieved such as praying being good for the body, fasting being good for ones digestive system and pork being bad for consumption. If this reasons were taken as the basis of such rules then, those who exercise regularly would relieved from praying Salah, those who are young with a good digestive system would not need to fast and if one cleaned a pig thoroughly they would be able to consume it. The rule for the presence of a mahram when a women travels if her journey – this is the time taken for her to get to her destination – if longer then a day then she must have a Mahram with her. (Some scholars have said two days journey whilst others have said 3 days, and there is legitimate iktilaaf on this matter). The tangible benefits achieved are not the basis for the ruling.
The backers of the Islamic hotline believe it is an idea that can help defeat the radicals and their austere vision of Islam.
Instead of using the Qur’an and Sunnah to understand what Allah سبحانه وتعالى says on the matter, Professor Aboshady applies his own ration when looking at Islam’s view on women. In his attempt to be progressive he has ignored that not only did Allah سبحانه وتعالى liberate women but the whole of mankind from their own whims. Where human beings are left to seek their own benefit only oppression comes. In the west women are still being paid 23% less than men who do the same job, while half of women in England and Wales have experienced domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking in their life time.
Furthermore, projects such as the ‘Islamic Hotline’ are in line with the west’s plan to reform Islam as outlined in the 2005 RAND report by Cheryl Bernard – ‘Civil Democratic Islam. Partners Resources and Strategies.’ This report openly states the plan to support the Modernists against what they term as fundamentalists. Some of the measures in their plan are:
– Publish and distribute their works at subsidized cost.
– Encourage them to write for mass audiences and for youth.
– Introduce their views into the curriculum of Islamic education.
– Give them a public platform.
– Make their opinions and judgments on fundamental questions of religious interpretation available to a mass audience in competition with those of the fundamentalists and traditionalists, who have Web sites, publishing houses, schools, institutes, and many other vehicles for disseminating their views.
– Position secularism and modernism as a “counterculture” option for disaffected Islamic youth.
– Facilitate and encourage an awareness of their pre- and non-Islamic history and culture, in the media and the curricula of relevant countries.
– Assist in the development of independent civic organizations, to promote civic culture and provide a space for ordinary citizens to educate themselves about the political process and to articulate their views.
In summary the process of interpretation or understanding texts is a very precise science. Like any process it is regulated by strict protocols and procedures. This is akin to conducting a scientific experiment; it would require knowledge of materials, methods, formulae and equations. All those moderates who believe the deen can be changed from time and place, they should understand that the deen, the Islamic culture and many of the sciences we have today was developed by scholars of the past, who believed Allah’s deen could solve all issues. This is the only way forward.
A detailed exposition of the attempts to reform Islam is presented in the Khilafah.com publication ‘Islamic Reformation’ – The battle for hearts and minds