Can all regional expressions of Islam be considered perfectly legitimate? Or only the Saudi / Wahhabi interpretation is the sole legitimate Islam? Professor Tariq Ramadan, who clearly is the foremost theologian of a 21st century Islam, says, “To be Western Muslims is to confront reality with all its challenges and, sustained every day by the ‘need of Him,’ to take on all our responsibilities” (Western Muslims and the Future of Islam by Tariq Ramadan, OUP 2004 p223.) In other words, accept other societies’ experiences in their struggles against oppression and for freedom and justice in all aspects of life. This acceptance has both historical and theological support. In Muslim history, everything that was not in conflict with the core Islamic beliefs was both acceptable and desirable as it was seen to be in conformity with Islamic tenets. This principle served as the basis for appropriating much Greek thought during the 10th through the 13th centuries. It also legitimized regional expressions of Islamic ideas according to custom.
Historically, Sunni Islamic theology, or a standardized set of interpretations and meanings, evolved in response to prevailing conditions. The dominant need to unify people under a common banner lead to particular constructions or interpretations of Islam, for example, the sanctification of the four khalifas. Their aura was endowed with elements of divinity; sometimes their edicts exceeded limits imposed by Rasul-e Akram himself, thus overruling him in effect. All ideological conflicts of the time had political power as the central motivating force. That conclusion leads to the view that, essentially, Islam is in the spirit of the five pillars of Rasul-Allah’s religion, not in the pursuit of power or organization of society, least of all in seeing the 30 years of Prophet’s rule as a golden paradigm, the model to recreate, and not just to take inspiration from.
A Shi’a ideology evolved in parallel, in response to the basic historical events. At least the Shi’a contention had the merit of a succession principle, lineage, at its heart, a principle followed by all the monarchies and dynasties throughout history to this day, including the Saudi monarchy.
Regardless, the Shi’a-Sunni divide has been a congenital defect of Muslim societies. But what does it have to do with today’s world? Nothing and everything. Nothing because, ideally, society’s concerns today ought to be entirely about jobs, schools, hospitals, roads, safety from crime, trash collection, and inflation. Not about a 7th century power struggle, trying to determine now who was right, Banu Umayya or the Ali partisans? The Shi’a-Sunni conflict has everything to do with modern life because Saudi Arabian billions are at work in the poor countries of Africa and Asia, and even in Europe and America, winning goodwill for the Saudi royalty, thus ensuring its security, the security of its system, keeping actual and virtual slaves and prisoners within its borders. The poor folks, organized as Boko Haram in Nigeria, Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and now the new caliphate proclaimed by the ISIS, have dreams of re-enacting 7th century Mecca and Medinah in their midst, thanks to the oil wealth.
In the Indian Subcontinent, the sectarian conflict never was brutal, historically, although prejudice against the minorities was widespread. Yes, there were a few urban centers where violence against the Shi’a was common, but not in the general population from one end to the other.
Indian Islam evolved in a dialogue with the seers of the Vedic civilization. Nizamuddin Awliya of Delhi was among those who engaged in such a dialogue and appropriated the knowledge of the Vedas, and then presented them in the most Islamic terms acceptable and comprehensible to the common folks. That’s how Islam was spread by other giants like Nizamuddin. Moinuddin Chishti was doing the same thing in Ajmer, and Gesu Daraz in Gulberga in the south. Legend has it that Nizamuddin sent 900 of his disciples throughout India to mingle among the people and preach by example. The local populations responded. This is exactly how the Sufi version of Islam spread all across southeast Asia and western China, or Xinjiang.
Indian Islam evolved a language, a literature, music and art all its own, over time. Similar processes occurred in Balkan Europe and much of Africa. The egalitarianism and generosity of heart promoted by the spirit of Islam were very attractive in new lands, or wherever Muslims went to live, and trade and marry and pray. Some elements indeed were common to the Muslim civilization from Jakarta to Casablanca and still are. They have spread far and wide in Europe and America.
In the democratic West, Muslim populations absorbed the intellectual and political heritages of the host societies, including the Renaissance and the Enlightenment values, in seamless processes. Thus European Islam became distinct from that practiced in the Algerian villages or the bush country of Sierra Leone. Since democracy promotes a certain style of thinking, an acceptance of a great diversity of beliefs and practices is a prominent feature of all self-governing societies, in sharp contrast to the autocracies and kleptocracies of the Arab countries, Russia and its former provinces in central Asia. Those nations are doomed to remain parasites on the world for many more generations to come.
India has always been a democracy in this respect, despite its social hierarchies of many kinds. At least as far as belief is concerned, the Vedic civilization had upheld total freedom for individuals. It was people’s conduct that mattered. This is how it is in the materially and socially most advanced societies of the West.
India was postmodern long before the West adopted its principal policy of pluralism in matters of faith and practice.
If India is pluralist, so are almost all Indian Muslims. However, dollar-bearing winds from Arabia, or just the scent of it, are blowing through our societies. These ill winds are commonly known as Wahhabism, its origins being in the times of Mongol depredations. This monstrosity, this bad mutation of Islamic spirit, has infected many people in India and must be fought, from website, street corners and masjid minbars , or pulpits.
——-
The writer is a Washington-based freelance contributor. He can be contacted at Usama.khalidi@gmail.com
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect MM’s editorial policy.
@Usama Khalidi, Firstly, It is better you must learn and understand Islam . Secondly there is no such terminology as Indian, Western and Wahabbi Islam. Finally Islam is Islam, Islam is the first religion, which recognized, defined, practiced and preached human rights fourteen hundred years ago. In Islam, all human beings are equal irrespective of the color of their skins, their place of birth or their social status.
A glimpse of this social equality can be witnessed at the time of prayers, five times a day in mosques allover the world, where Muslims stand shoulder to shoulder to offer prayers irrespective of their social status. Many developed nations have yet to achieve the true social equality that Islam had achieved almost fifteen hundred years ago. Islam is a religion of peace, other than that is nothing but only corruption that is not at all acceptable ?
Usama Khalid,
A large section of muslims are sharing your viewpoint. The onslaught of petrodollars does not dampen the spirit of the revival of Indian Islam. Any form of extremism must be condemned and their is a big silent majority of muslims ready to come forward to fight these forces.
Thanks for the enlightened article
Mr Nazir,
Theres nothing called as indian islam or wahabi islam. Islam is based on quran & Sunnah (traditions of the prophet). M sure majority of the muslims after reading this article, rather than feeling enlightened will laugh at authors ignorance. Sufism & wahabism (term used for non sufis mostly salafis & ahle hadiths) is the creation of differnce of opinion amongst scholars. Sufis feel it is correct to call the dead people who may intercede to god on their behalf whereas non sufis feel it is wrong as dead cannot hear and Allah alone needs to be called. Sufis do not have any strong source refernce to their practice from prophets time and Wahabis claim their practice is according to the Quran & Sunnah.
Well, i would suggest you & ofcourse Mr usama khalid to go through Quran & book of hadith as well reliable books of islamic history before writing such article. Yes currently extremism in islam is a main issue and has created lot problems for muslims around the world but that does not mean to create a new version of islam called indian islam. Solution to islamic extremism to make people aware of the prophets way of life (mercy & compassion) not by creating a new version of islam
Yes Indeed I was suprised with the expression : Indian Islam.
Beside the writer must know Islam was spread by Saint Hazrat
Moinuddin & other Chisties by their Piety & blessing of ALLAH SWT that These Awalias were able to cure the ill healthy & sick people used to gather in their surrounding & as a result the Hindus had accepted Islam every day unlike in the present west, the Intellectuals are accepting Islam by the will of ALLAH through the Glorious Quran containing the Science & signs. Today, we read that there are 2.4 Billion Muslims in the world & We pray that ALLAH SWt guide them to true peaceloving & honest Muslims & true followers of Holy Prophet Mohammed MSAS to live in peace with all.