|
Author: Ismail Raji Faruqi
Editor: Ataullah Siddiqui
Publishers: The Islamic Foundation
and the International Institute of Islamic Thought, Leicester, 1999, ISBN
-8603-7276-6
The very first glimpse of ‘Islam and
other Faiths’ by the late Ismail Raji Faruqi filled me with excitement
and curiosity. Here was an outstanding Muslim scholar venturing into a
field that is at once virgin and full of intellectual promise. I had read
only two books by him before: ‘Tawhid: Its Relevance for Thought
and Life’ and ‘The Islamization of Knowledge’. The contents of the former
are in tune with the tenor of the papers which comprise the present book,
being, inter alia, a philosophical statements of the unity of God and its
implications. The Muslims in the western countries are truly in great need
of studies such as the present one that would help them deconstruct and
subsequently reconstruct the role they should play as minorities.
My study of the present collection
of papers, which have been painstakingly selected and edited by Ataullah
Siddiqui, reinforced the already positive impression that I had of the
author. Faruqi stands out as one of the very few Muslim philosophers and
scholars who earnestly attempted to interact with Islam’s two sister faiths,
Judaism and Christianity, and articulated the theoretical foundations of
such interaction.
Ismail Faruqi obtained his Ph.D. in
philosophy from the University of Indiana in USA. Likewise, he spent several
years at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the foremost centre of traditional
Islamic learning. He thus had the advantage of having deep knowledge of
two different intellectual traditions, the Islamic and the Western. Enriched
by these diverse scholastic backgrounds, Faruqi attempted to articulate
the Islamic world view and to fortify it by presenting an array of rational
and scientific arguments in support of it. In the West, such an undertaking
would be extremely difficult to accomplish because people have come to
be concerned only with that which is empirically verifiable. At least this
is what all those who are part of the Western intellectual tradition are
taught to subscribe to. While reading Faruqi, I was struck by the sharp
difference between his philosophical arguments and approach and the approach
of the contemporary Western intellectuals. As religion scarcely plays any
role in contemporary Western social analysis, it was exciting to be exposed
to a profoundly scholastic work written from the perspective of a knowledgeable
scholar and thinker who strongly subscribed to a religious world view.
Faruqi spent the last part of his
life in North America where he taught at a number of Canadian and American
universities. In his early career, he seems to have been less concerned
with the spiritual aspect of Islam than in the later years of his life,
the years during which he richly contributed to the academia. These were
the years when Faruqi zealously engaged in the ‘Islamization of Knowledge’
project, the purpose being to arouse Muslims to become active participants
in man’s intellectual life and contribute to it from an Islamic perspective.
Although ‘The Islamization of Knowledge’ of Faruqi might now appear to
some as not all that mature. One has to remember what a sensation it created
about two decades ago when it was first published and found its way to
Muslim academicians all over the world. I also recalled, while reading
this book, the violent and merciless manner in which Faruqi was murdered
in 1986. I also thought how much more he could have contributed to Islamic
thought had he lived longer, being a scholar and a thinker of the calibre
and commitment that he was.
While some of the papers in the collection
are bound to be viewed in the context of the time to which Faruqi belonged,
there is no doubt that Faruqi was far ahead of his contemporaries, particularly
in the realm of inter-religious dialogue. Many of the ideas which he articulates
in the book as regards how to deal with adherents of other faiths are certainly
new and refreshing. They are also of vital relevance to the present-day
Muslims some of who have lately begun to engage in inter-faith dialogue.
Having said this, I would also like
to express some of my critical observations about the present work. I note,
first of all, that Faruqi’s papers reflect the growth and development of
his ideas and attitudes over time, and at times the change that I noticed
was, according to my judgement, not very wholesome. His papers of the 1960s
seem to be less emotional and are more in accord with the Western scholastic
tradition. But in the articles that he wrote later, especially those in
the later 1970s and 1980s, we find Faruqi emotionally involved to a much
greater extent than before. This is borne out by his writings, including
some of the papers which form part of this book. For instance, in one of
the papers which he wrote in the sixties, he says that ‘exclusivism’, so
often a mark of religion, is as bad as proselytism. Both religions assert
that they have the truth, which is logically impossible. Christianity and
Islam must be interested in each other’s claims by means of dialogue, which
is the altruistic extension of both religions. Only through dialogue will
the two religions ever be united in the religion of God (may He be Glorified
and Exalted) and truth’ (p. 241). However, in the paper entitled ‘The Role
of Islam in Global Inter-Religious Dependence’ written in the 1980s, Faruqi’s
own attitude seems to have become somewhat exclusivist. Also, his attitude
towards Judaism as a religion seems to lack the tolerance which he shows
towards Christianity. I have a strong feeling that Faruqi’s views regarding
Zionism, a political ideology, had a negative influence on his attitude
to the Judiac faith.
Another matter of interest in Faruqi’s
writings is his view of exegesis, or one might rather say, hermeneutics.
In the article, ‘Divine Transcendence and its Expressions’ while discussing
the question of God’s attributes, Faruqi says that ‘speaking, writing or
interpreting allegorically is extremely dangerous because, by definition,
it has no rules. Once the words of a language are shaken loose from the
meanings which lexicography has attached to them, nothing can stop anybody
from investing them with any other meaning’(p. 50). This statement seems
to reflect the salafi point of view with an emphasis on bila
kayf (‘without asking how’), requiring that one should not attempt
to interpret God’s attributes. To take a concrete instance: God’s Hand
has been mentioned in the Qur’an. Now, how do we interpret this?
The right attitude, according to this line of thinking, is to affirm that
God’s Hand is a reality though, as human beings, there is no way for them
to have any clear idea.
As Faruqi develops his arguments concerning
exegesis, he goes further in the same direction which makes his statements
problematic. He says that ‘exegesis, or the reading of meanings into words
not lexicographically associated with them, ruins any text it attacks.
It transvaluates its values, transforms its categories, and transfigures
its meanings’ (p.50). In this statement, Faruqi comes forth as a ‘realist
of concepts’. If he goes beyond talking about the attributes of God, as
I believe he does, how can he explain the development of socio-religious
concepts when meanings, as we know, are linked to attitudes prevalent in
a society? An example of this is the concept of qawwamah (see the
Qur’an 4:34) which has been understood in various ways, at different
times and places, depending on the dispositions of the interpreters. From
being a concept signifying male power and supremacy, it has lately come
to be understood by a number of Muslims, both men and women, to mean that
the distinct function of the males is to provide protection and service
to the family.
In view of the above, how can we decide
the ‘original’ meaning of the term qawamah? In my opinion, it is
hardly possible to find any such ‘original meaning’; it is true that we
have fragments of Ibn ‘Abbas’ early commentary of the Qur’anic
verses. Do his comments provide the ‘original meanings’ of the Qur’anic
terms and concepts? In my opinion, the answer is ‘no’, for Ibn Abbas’
commentary, notwithstanding our deep respect for Ibn Abbas (rta)
and his work, must be regarded as no more than a human attempt to understand
the Word of God. In like manner, the interpretations of the Qur’an by
scholars in the subsequent centuries which were influenced by Ibn Abbas’
or other scholars’ understanding of the Qur’an, represent, after
all, human efforts to understand the Book.
My further question on the subject is: is it necessary
that we should always look for ‘original meanings’ of the Qur’anic terms
and concepts? Is it not true that it is precisely the flexibility of the
Qur’an which makes it universal? Cultural differences have always
existed and these differences will continue to exist. The breadth of opinion
which characterizes Islamic philosophy and jurisprudence indicates
the Muslim scholars’ tolerance of each other in the relatively early periods
of our history. Faruqi’s categorical statements in this paper represent,
in my opinion, a less tolerant attitude insofar as it assumes certain interpretations
of the Qur’an to the definitive and valid for all times and places.
I have unfortunately discovered that such an attitude is fairly common
in the contemporary Islamic discourses. I believe it to be a characteristic
of the contemporary times with its stress on ‘one truth’. It is because
of this that Muslims have come to consider not only God as ‘the truth’,
but also tend to regard the way or the method they follow in their intellectual
efforts as ‘the truth’.
Notwithstanding these critical observations,
my overall impression of Faruqi’s book is a positive one. His way of analyzing
other religions, particularly in his earlier writings, in enlightening.
In this age, Muslims have to learn how to deal with other religions with
greater tolerance than they display at the present. This seems to be needed
because there are certain elements in the Islamic da‘wah (call to Islam)
in our time which are liable to hurt the sensibilities of non-Muslims.
It seems that, among other things, this has something to do with the change
during the last two centuries or so in power relations. When Muslims were
in a position of power, they had self-confidence arising from the fact
of their having an upper hand in the world. Hence, they felt no need to
artificially bolster their self-confidence by adopting cheap methods of
proselytization. In contemporary times, however, at times our low self-esteem
seems to make us disregard our own tradition of tolerance towards others,
including ‘the People of Book’. By crudely and insensitively hammering
that Islam is better than other faiths we are presumably trying to exalt
own our seemingly declining self-esteem. But we must ask ourselves: is
it justified, according to Islamic standards, to do so?
These questions came to my mind in
the course of reading the book, and I believe it is of great value for
Muslims to seriously engage in such questions. They are today in the midst
of a great change and in order to build up a strong Muslim Ummah it
is imperative to address fundamental issues such as how we should deal
with human beings of other faiths or with people who have no faith at all.
To return to the book, I would like
to compliment the editor for writing a very useful ‘introduction’ to Faruqi’s
life and thought. This considerably facilitates the reader in following
the contents of the book. For let us not forget, Faruqi’s language tends
to be both abstract and highly intellectual.
This, of course, is in addition to
some complex and subtle ideas and concepts which have been discussed in
the book, and which might not be quite easy for an ordinary reader to understand.
‘Islam and other Faiths’ is a book which should find
a place on every Muslim academic’s bookshelf. It would also be highly interesting
for those non-Muslims who are concerned with the study of religion. For
Faruqi was one of the few Muslims who took pains to write extensively about
religions in general, and his writings provide the reader with a Muslim
perspective on the study of religion.
Courtesy: Islamic Studies, Vol: 40, No. 2
|