By Karoly,
As I was listening to a Youtube video of an inter-faith dialogue organized by a Muslim Dawah organization held in Kerala one question worth mentioning was asked by a non-Muslim lady to the speaker. The question was, as there are many Muslim organizations like (orthodox) Sunni, Salafi and Jamaate-Islami which one truly represents Islam? The speaker, who is a well-known Dawah worker and orator in Kerala, did his best to explain away that these organizations do not actually represent different versions of Islam. Still at the end I was not sure if even the answerer was fully convinced about his own explanation.
Not that I disagree with him with his answer. Nor do I believe that such mainstream organizations, despite their differences in details, are not representative of Islam. At the same it may be necessary to convince ourselves first the exact place of religious organizations and the role they play in the community.
In fact we know there were no organizations within Islam in vogue either during Prophet Muhammad’s time or the time of the Rightly-guided caliphs. So in this respect such organizations may be viewed as Bid’ahs (innovations) in religion. While in general innovations in religion are looked down upon, considering the many beneficial roles played by the religious organizations to the community I guess they could be classified as Bid’ah Hasanah (Good or condoned innovation).
Let us take Kerala’s situation as a representative example. It must be realized the classification “Sunni” I mentioned earlier is not used in the classical sense vis-a-vis Shia; it simply denote those not belonging to the Salafis or Jamaate Islami. In other words a Muslim in Kerala is Sunni “by default”. Needless to say, the vast majority of Kerala Muslims are “Sunnis”. This also sometimes leaves the other two groups in a state of quandary how to describe themselves so as not to give an implication that they are not Sunnis, which of course they are.
Other noticeable feature is that the new movements have a founder and their own ideological interpretations of Islam, which however still pertains to mainstream Islam. The former of course do not have any such founder or specific ideology, and banks on people’s implied affiliation to religion based on birth. So even those without religion will well fit into the Sunni fold; and perhaps that is the greatest strength of the ‘Sunni’ fraternity.
Considering that the newer groups do not have a history of more than half a century or so even their followers are not likely to claim that they are indispensable to Islam or that they alone are the true Muslims. In fact they don’t; especially nowadays. As I read through a book enunciating the differences between Sunnis and Jamaate-Islamis by E.N.Ibrahim Moulavi, a Jamaate Islami Scholar, it was noticeable that the author was in no way trying to brand the former as polytheists or kafirs, but was just clarifying that even those arguing in our way do belong to Ahlussunnath-wal-Jamaath (Classical Sunnis).
While such generosity of spirit is apparent for newer organizations without much presence in the community, unfortunately such magnanimity is most often not reciprocated by the larger group, mostly despising the ‘Maududis’ and ‘Wahhabis’ and even refusing to recognize their entity. This is the biggest challenge to the community posed by the religious divisions, which is an inability to come together on commonly agreeable causes and even to acknowledge each other.
Speaking further on the love and cooperation between the various factions, you may find it difficult even to get an explicit certificate that one is Muslim from another, even though there are exceptions as mentioned above. Most often we see Bakrid and Eid celebrated on two or even three different days by different factions. The sun and moon rise and set here common to all Hindu, Muslim and Christian. If you can’t believe your brother in Islam even in the matter of sighting the moon, then we have to appreciate that unity between these organizations are still a long way off.
Still it must be admitted that the new organizations have made valuable contributions for the social, religious, cultural and educational spheres of the community. We could see their reforms were focused on establishment of Tawhid (monotheism) and return to the original sources of religion which are the Quran and Sunnah (legacy of Prophet Muhammad), and to free the community from bias towards Mad’habs (Schools of Thoughts), superstitions, obscurantism and spiritual exploitation by the clergy. Even though it is an irony that such noble attempts to return the community to the true roots of Ahlussunnath-wal-Jamaath have ended up in making such divisions in the community still the beneficial roles of all such religious organizations cannot be denied.
Madhabs, as we know are the theological treasures of Islam which are in fact the “religious constitutions” codified by the great Imams, which made normal Islamic life possible for the common man incapable of doing individual research in fiqh. Also we know Imams claimed they were only following the model of the Prophet to the best of their knowledge and belief, never claimed infallibility for themselves and insisted that one should always prefer better knowledge over their own if any. And we acknowledge all four mainstream Madhabs have “correct guidance”, and the differences between them lie not in the fundamentals of faith, but in finer judgments and jurisprudence.
However these plain common-sense facts were soon overlooked, and we fell for prejudices for our Mad’habs. A thing was deemed right not because it is Islam’s stance or conform to reason, but just because it is endorsed by one’s Mad’hab or any of the scholars of one’s Madhab. This gave opportunity for the clergy, additionally armed with claims of ilham (divine inspiration) and even karamat (supernatural powers), to wield influence over the laymen as an authority of religion and a intermediary to God, thus giving rise to priesthood which is the antithesis of Islam. And the common man is happy with the Mulla who is the most populist in outlook.
If you enter a conventional mosque in Kerala, you have to do two submissions – one is submission to Allah and the second is submission to Mulla. Submission to Allah of course consists of the daily prayers universally accepted by all Muslims. And submission to Mulla is the additional chantings (Dhikr) and congregational supplications that follows, that are innocuous in content but are still not authorized in religion. One result of this extra piety is that the time spent for prayer is almost doubled, which is however not likely to trouble the Mulla very much who have very little else to do, notwithstanding the “dropouts” who have something.
The same Mulla may not insist much on paying zakat, as paying zakat has nothing much to do with submission to Mulla. Moreover the Mulla is aware that making such taxing demands may prompt some of the followers chanting behind to go for another Mulla who offers heaven for cheaper. Our major challenge lies in people believing that heaven can be earned through such shortcuts, rather than through services and sacrifices. (Of course these are all worst case analysis. There are certainly pious and service-minded religious scholars among the conservative as well as the liberal folds.)
In this connection I would like to point out how the educated people among even non-Muslims fare much better in realizing the true spirit of religion. I came to know about an essay competition conducted by a Muslim forum for non-Muslims on Islam; and the insights of the responders were quite impressive, which even Muslims would have found it hard to match. Here we see the power of modern education in enabling people to view things in the right perspective drawing from the original sources rather than influenced by prejudices towards any Madhab or any religious organization.
In the case of women’s reservations and such things we find even those who had once said that woman has no right to freedom and those who had denied right to property to woman and those who saw woman as just an instrument of state falling over one another to prove that they are most supportive of women’s rights. At the same time we see some of our Mullas, holding claim to an ideology which has taught the world every single right of woman, excelling themselves in denying them these same rights today going to whatever extent possible.
We behold communities having made great strides borrowing the concepts of monotheism, social equality and moral values from Islam while the originators of these ideals vie with the scheduled castes for the most backward position. Where have we gone wrong? Are the Mullas to be blamed? But hadn’t even the priesthood of other communities tried its best to resist any reforms once? Weren’t low castes who had never seen in history the hallowed precincts of the places of worships reserved only for the privileged classes allowed to enter there overcoming stiff resistance of the clergy and their community itself?
Wasn’t reservation extended to the same people once not allowed to use water from the same well as the privileged classes prevailing over extreme oppositions? If once the reward for hearing scriptures for the lower caste was pouring of molten lead in ears, now its proponents are leaving no room left to spread its message. Yes, the credit goes to the intelligentsia of these communities who had the foresight to see what is beneficial for their community and push forward the necessary reforms.
At the same time we should notice they never forgot or left their roots. Backed by their social, educational and economic progress they were able to glorify their own cultures and heritage. This should also be a lesson for those Muslim “intellectuals” embarrassed about their Muslim roots and fumbling around to prove their secularism.
The reason even the reform organizations could not make a similar positive impact in the Muslim community despite adopting many of the progressive values endorsed by modern education was they failed to get the common acceptance of the community. They were enterprises by religious scholars and hence founded on notions of salvific exclusivity. So they were representing the differences in the community rather than its common interests. While focusing on interpretations of Tawhid – a highly subjective, divisive and controversial issue throughout human history and which is the central theme dividing even the world religions – issues of education, employment, representation in governance, social and economic empowerment, political unification, protection of Waqf properties, national integration and hundred others that could unify the community were not in their formative agenda.
The last one group, miniscule and working silently, is the educational and social organizations who are at least willing to touch these problems – and notably they shirk from affiliating to any religious organization other than a general affiliation to Islam. And we have to acknowledge their contributions too. At one time when the Mullas said English was the language of the hell it was such organizations and individuals that held the beacon of light to the community. And it is a welcome thing to see our Ulema backtracking from their previous retrogressive stances and even making claims for the “reforms”. Still we know we have a long way to go.
So the answer is the educated class; the educated class and intelligentsia who discern the true needs and requirements of the community, who represent the common interests of the community, not affiliated to any religious organization and who have the foresight and wisdom to do something creative and constructive for the community form the best Muslim organization. Surely the religious organizations too have their role, especially in the perspective of ideology and religious scholarship, and for this reason religious scholars too should be rightfully enumerated in the educated class.
But when we realize that we don’t need a further Messiah or ideological breakthrough for our reform other than Prophet Muhammad and Islam it dawns to us that the relevance of individual religious organizations is only a temporary one in our pursuit of a unified, neutral and all-encompassing system.