Islam, pluralism, human rights

İhsan Yılmaz

I am in Rome for a two-day conference organized by the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and several civil society institutions.

Participants, who include ministers, ambassadors, academics, practitioners and religious leaders from all traditions and faiths, discussed over two days if humanity could agree on shared values on human rights, pluralism, diversity, democracy and empathy. I was asked to look at these issues from an Islamic perspective.

What I tried show in my presentation was that the religion “Islam” does not have a political agenda, has respect for diversity and acknowledges the rights of women and minority rights and one can show examples of this in history. But it should also be added that from time to time patriarchal, intolerant, traditional attitudes stemming from particular cultures or societies, not religion, were also observed. Muslims were not able to interpret their religion from a benevolent, humanistic, tolerant and universalist perspective. But these roots in the original sources can always be revisited and reinterpreted if the intention exists.

Pluralism and democratization have vernacular roots in Muslim societies as Robert Hefner puts strongly; although Islam has jurists and religious scholars, it has no pope, sacerdotal priesthood or ecclesiastical hierarchy to coordinate their actions. Thus, religious authority in the Muslim community tended toward a fissiparous pluricentrism. Many Muslims state that Islam is compatible with pluralism and democracy thanks to concepts of consultation (shurah), consensus (ijma) and independent interpretive judgment (ijtihad).

The five major purposes of Islamic law (al-maqasid al-shari’a) as developed by al-Shatibi are the protection of life/self/person (nafs), intellect/reason (‘aql), generation/procreation (nasl), property (mal) and religion (din). As can be seen, these are related to fundamental human rights and freedom. Protection of the intellect has tremendous ramifications with regard to freedom of thought, expression and religion and also pluralism and democracy. The importance of the intellect in Islamic law is also apparent in the requirement that to be a responsible Muslim, a person has to be sane and of age to make certain decisions (i.e., pubescent). Moreover, the Islamic belief that humans are here in the world so that they can be tested, and are thus given free will, the right to choose between good and bad, coupled with the legal maxim (also a verse in the Quran) that “there is no compulsion in religion,” shows the importance given to the intellect, individual choice and freedom of expression. As Fethullah Gülen states unequivocally, Islam considers a society to be composed of conscious individuals equipped with free will and having responsibility toward both themselves and others. The Quran (13:11) says: “God will not change the state of a people unless they change themselves [with respect to their beliefs, worldview and lifestyle].” In other words, each society holds the reins of its fate in its own hands. The prophetic tradition (hadith) emphasizes this idea: “You will be ruled according to how you are.” Gülen underlines that this is the basic character and spirit of democracy, which does not conflict with any Islamic principle.

Even though Islamic politics is frequently described as in some way combining “religion and politics” and in the words of Islamists, Islam is din wa dawla (religion and state), starting from the era of the Umayyads and the Abbasids, non-state structures with important functions developed. The ever-existence of independent ulama (scholars) and the development of Islamic schools of law (madhhabs) autonomous from the state were important parts of the early Muslim experience. Later, Sufi brotherhoods also emerged as important civil institutions for popular religious life. These were autonomous from the state, and sometimes in conflict with state institutions. Trying to reinvent this tradition, Gülen has recently been arguing that in this age, Islam does not need state support, which is a new ijtihad. Gulen does not oppose the idea of mutual autonomy of the state and Islam. Gulen says that “[i]f a state … gives the opportunity to its citizens to practice their religion and supports them in their thinking, learning and practice, this system is not considered to be against the teaching of the Quran. In the presence of such a state, there is no need to seek an alternative state.” Gulen has also recently stated that establishing an Islamic state is not a religious duty for Muslims and that in this age civil society can independently maintain Islamic beliefs and practices even where Muslims are not the majority.

The Quran is not a law book; only 300 out of more than 6,000 verses have a legal content, and these are mostly about family and inheritance issues. In addition to ijtihad, thanks to the tool of urf (custom), Muslim rulers have always enacted laws and legislated on many crucial issues thanks to the Islamic legal concept of maslaha (public welfare). That is why, for instance, Suleiman the Magnificent is also called Suleiman the Lawgiver or Lawmaker. Even this example is enough to show that Islamic law is mainly Muslim law (based on human agency, culture and the tradition of the given time), open to interpretation, highly flexible and dynamic. It can always be interpreted for the betterment of society and to establish a more just and equitable world where human dignity and integrity are valued and cherished, which is one of the aims of Islam, which considers humans as vicegerents of God on earth anyway.

Published on Today's Zaman, 16 May 2010 Sunday