Babatunde Oshinowo Jr

Babatunde Oshinowo Jr.

ISLAM

By Babatunde Oshinowo Jr.

EDGE, Spring 2004

Faith throughout history has always struck a tense cord in the minds and hearts of mankind. The stalwart belief and adherence to the precepts of one faith has always seemed lead to the misunderstanding and hatred of another. These misunderstandings have often been between not only religious bodies but also between nations and empires. All throughout ancient history, the wills of empires, justifications for wars, and the oppression of peoples have been enforced by the false interpretations of various religions. Over time, even the purest forms of religious practice have been distorted and misused by these empires for political and economical gain. From the Crusades to the Roman Empire to even today when leaders declare, “God told me to do it” as reasoning for war, men have used religion to justify actions that would otherwise seem irrational. This trend can be seen in the conflict between the west and the Islamic faith today. Recent conflicts in the Middle East and in the United States have sparked a certain fascination in America concerning the Muslim faith. Such fascination stems more from American concern over the dangers of Muslims than from a sincere attempt to understand Islam and its tolerant and peaceful principles (El Fadl vii). Most Americans are uneducated in the principles of Islam and have biased knowledge and opinions that go as far as the radical clerics and militiamen seen on television. This has led to the deterioration of rational discourse between not only peoples of differing religious beliefs but between two societies as a whole. Radical groups take center stage while more the more rational and peaceful believers in Islam are not seen. From its beginnings with Muhammad in Mecca to its present state now, the Muslim faith, in many circles, has been twisted away from its original principles to a form more radical in its application and violent in its appearance. In order to create a greater understanding of the true Islamic discipline, it is necessary to break through the current uneducated rhetoric surrounding Islam in order to look at its original form. They would see that conflict and discrimination in the name of Islam is actually contrary to the principle doctrine and that there are non-violent, tolerant Muslim practitioners.

It is essential to examine the history of Islam in order to understand its true and original form. Like many religions prevalent today, the roots of Islam stem from a troubled time in the minds of many Arabs in the Middle East. In the year 610, the city of Mecca was home to the Arab tribe known as the Quraysh. Over the past few generations, the Quraysh peoples were a nomadic tribe and fought to survive in the inhospitable environment of the Arabian steppes. Things had changed of late, however, and the Quraysh had become a successful in the trade market, which was centered in the city of Mecca. This new success, in Muhammad’s mind, had introduced them to a new kind of peril. Multi-faith expert and ex-nun, Karen Armstrong describes the situation of the Quraysh in her book, A History of God:

They were now rich beyond their wildest dreams. Yet their drastically altered lifestyle meant that the old tribal values had been superseded by a rampant and ruthless capitalism. People felt obscurely disoriented and lost. Muhammad knew that the Quraysh were on a dangerous course and needed to find an ideology that would help them to adjust to their new conditions. (Armstrong 155).

The Arab tradition had always had a strong sense of community, yet the newfound wealth present in the tribe made the old traditional ways began to seem like an inconsequential seem like a way of the past. The strong Arab community that had once been law now gave way to tribal fighting and discrimination. In addition, foreign ideas were beginning to penetrate the Arabic regions. The empires of Persia and Byzantium surrounded the Arab world. People heard stories of great wonders outside the Arabic realm and began to feel inferior as a community as a whole. Although they believed that their God was the same, Arabs began to feel that their traditional “paganism” was far inferior to other religions that they began to come in contact with like Judaism and Christianity. Arabs felt increasingly alarmed also because surrounding empires had used Judaism and Christianity to impose imperialistic regimes in the area. Different sects began to form and Arabs struggled to find a cultural identity. It was at this time that Muhammad received a “divine revelation” from God.

According to Muslim tradition, on the seventeenth night of Ramadan, Muhammad was commanded by the angel of God to “utter the word of God”. He himself originally skeptical, Muhammad, due to the angel’s insistence, began to recite scripture from God, known as the Qur’an (Koran), or Recitation. Over the next twenty-three years, Muhammad preached the message of the Qur’an to the Quraysh and the entire Arab world. This was an extremely important event not only in Islam but also in the society and culture of the Arab world. This was the first time that any kind of divine text or scripture had been written or spoken in the Arabic language. Muhammad essentially, “had become the divine envoy to the Arabs” (Armstrong 162) and Muslims saw their Arabic culture in a more valid light. It is important to note that none of the fundamental teachings of Muhammad and the Qur’an condone or support violence. In fact, as Islamic author Mohammed Abu-Nimer writes, there are several main principles from the Qur’an that support coexistence and tolerance among peoples and religious bodies (Abu-Nimer 81). One unique, often overlooked, aspect of the Qur’anic teachings comes in the message of the Qur’an to Jews and Christians. As Karen Armstrong explains, the Qur’an does not lash out against Judaism or Christianity but instead promotes the religious experience of all of mankind:

Muhammad never asked Jews or Christians to convert to his religion…because they had received authentic revelations of their own. …It is important to stress this point because tolerance is not a virtue that many Western people today would feel inclined to attribute to Islam. Yet from the start, Muslims saw revelation in less exclusive terms than either Jews or Christians (Armstrong 177).

As also seen in the seven principles mentioned by Abu-Nimer, original Islam contains messages of tolerance. Many Muslims today argue that Muhammad would have included Buddhists and Hindus had he been aware of them. Also, contrary to Western belief, in the Qur’an, war is considered abhorrent (182). Through his teachings, thought, the Arab tribes were once again united in ummah or a spirit of Arab community until his death in 632. Considering the teachings of the Qur’an and the surprising similarities between the roots of Islam compared with those of other faiths, it can be puzzling to think of the reasoning behind conflicts today. Although peaceful in its origins, Islam, since the early seventh century has succumbed to many distortions, both political and economical.

The origins of distortions to the original Muslim faith are traced back to the time period immediately following the death of the prophet Muhammad in 632. Until that point, Muhammad had been the spiritual and obligatory political leader of the Arab community (ummah). Shortly before his death, Muhammad declared that his cousin and son-in-law, Ali ibn Abi Talib, was to become his successor, also known as Caliph (kalipha). It did not happen right away and Ali accepted the leadership of the other caliphs chosen. At this time, Islam was an empire unto itself and began to expand rapidly under the caliphate, a far cry from the original teachings of Muhammad. When Ali finally became the fourth caliph in 656, the tension of the Muslim community came to a head. This is the point at which the split occurs in the Islamic faith between the Shiah and Sunni Muslim groups. The two groups were at odds over how the next caliph of Islam was to be chosen. The caliph is essentially the leader of the Muslim community and has power in the decisions that guide those following Islam. Most of the differences between the two sects are derived from this sensitive issue. The Shiah (Shi’a) Muslims believed that the current caliph should appoint the successor; the caliph would be led according to divine instruction and was the only one capable of selecting a successor because the caliph, or Imam, was infallible. The Sunni Muslims considered the position of the caliph as more of a political seat that should be elected by based on their qualities, rather than by candid appointment. The Sunnis did not see the caliph as infallible or necessarily divinely appointed, but as some one who was brave, competent, and trustworthy, qualities closer to that of a political leader. The Shiah declared Ali the first Imam or leader of the ummah, while many sought other means of selecting the caliph. With the leadership of the Muslim community in dispute, the split between the Shiah and Sunnis was markedly more political than doctrinal, signaling the new importance of politics in the Muslim religion, the reverberations of which can be seen even today (Armstrong 182).

The Shiah became a minority throughout the Arab world. Their presence was mainly that of a rebellious protest group. Before Ali was named caliph, the Shiah struggled to get him appointed to the caliphate or the ruling body of Islam. In 656, when Ali was named caliph establishing the Shiah way in the leading body of Islam, a revolt took place that led to civil war. The Umayyad, who ruled the various governments, was at the head of this revolt and established their own caliphate. Ali was eventually assassinated and political power in Islam was split. While originally under Islam, it was frowned upon to coerce people into the faith, under the Umayyad, Islam was used as a means of expansion into not only the surrounding empires, but Asia and North Africa as well. Richard Hooker describes part of the distortion of Islam under the Umayyad state:

Mu'awiyya and the Umayyad, however, adopted models of kingship from surrounding peoples. They separated their court from the Muslim community and surrounded themselves with wealth and ceremony. This was a model of leadership based on the idea that authority was vested in super-normal individuals, a radically different turn of events in the Muslim world…. Under the Umayyad, then, the caliphate became something much closer to a monarchy rather than a tribal or religious leadership (Hooker).

The ruling body of the Umayyad is also infamous for the slaughter of the son of Ali, who many thought should be the next caliph. The initial form of Islam established by Muhammad was meant to unite a struggling people and give them a secure sense of cultural identity. Many also consider the first duty of Islam to be to create a just and equitable for all human beings, yet merely a few decades after Muhammad’s time, the true message and purpose of Islam had been twisted into an autocratic form. All throughout Muslim history since that time there has been warring and struggle, expansion and defeat, conquering and subjugation. Some would argue that Islam differs from the West and other religions because Muslims, as part of Islam, feel that it is their duty to work in the social and political sphere of society in order to work to establish a just society for all. Yet during the high point of the Islamic “empire”, political figures and leaders used Islam as a tool to subjugate whole nations under their expansionist rule. One of Muhammad’s original fears was that his people were falling away from the honorable, rich tribal traditions in favor of individual gain and power. Clearly, in the centuries following the establishment of Islam as a uniting force in the Arab world, the original precepts had disappeared in the ruling bodies of the Muslim state.

Distortions of the Islamic message date back to antiquity, but are also prevalent in the Arabic world today. The West has been all too aware of the effects of such distortions since the World Trade Center attacks on September 11, 2001. The Islamic world is in as chaotic a state as it has ever been. A far cry from the days of Muhammad, Muslims today are among some of the most oppressed and discriminated people in the world. The decline of the political power of Islam, as with any other distorted religious movement, has led to intense conflict in the region (Catherwood 141). Battles rage across much of the Middle Eastern region between Western forces and various radical Islamic sects. In times where the Islamic “empire” is no more, the state in many Muslim countries has taken over the clergy and the resources that support other jurists and those separate from a political system that had been maintaining the original precepts of Islam, reducing the legitimacy of religious authority. This has severely affected the cultural and social legitimacy of many groups in the Arabic world, which has led to many distortions of the Islamic faith. Much of the violence in the region can be linked to two major forms of distortion in the Islamic faith: the misinterpretation of the Islamic text by various radical Islamic groups and the misconception of Islam throughout the rest of the world. From the current Bush Administration to the radical militant groups of al-Qaeda and al-Sadr, it seems as if no group is capable of seeing the other in an untainted light.

The misinterpretation of any religious text can almost always be seen in the extremist sects present in a religion. Khaled el Fadl accentuates the fact that, in any religion, if the interpreters of the text are intolerant or hateful, so will their interpretation of the text be (23). Of late, such a group known as al-Qaeda has been the focus of much media and international attention. Headed by Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda has made Americans extremely aware of the depths of the convictions held by Muslim extremists. This group along with many other radical Islamic groups has come to light during a time in which the cultural and religious identity of the Muslim world is clouded amidst the anarchy in the region. Khaled Abou el Fadl gives an insight into the traits of extremist groups:

The supremacist thinking of Muslim puritans has a powerful nationalist component, which is strongly oriented toward cultural and political dominance…. It would be wrong to say that fanatic supremacist groups such as al-Qaeda or al-Jihad organizations now fill the vacuum of authority in Islam…still they are extreme manifestations of more prevalent intellectual and theological currents in Islam. (el Fadl 5,8-9)

Al-Qaeda has warped the principle teachings of Muhammad and Islam in order to suit their own political goals of supremacy in the world. Radical Muslim sects like that of al-Qaeda pull text from the Qur’an out of context as justification for the killing of all people of foreign origin in the Arab world. Without examining the complete context of verses in the Qur’an, any valid message that could be garnered from the text is convoluted into a half-truth, capable of misleading Muslims in search of meaning. Support for such groups is readily available due to the strong need for identity in the Arab world amidst the anarchy that is Islamic leadership today. Misinterpretation can also be seen in the use of the Islamic term “jihad”. It is widely referred to as a term purporting “holy war” or conflict of the like. If fact, the Qur’an proclaims an opposing picture. Jihad simply means, “to struggle for a just cause”. The actual Islamic term for “holy war” is not used in any of the Qur’anic text or by Islamic theologians. The idea of war is never even considered as something to be holy. Some would even say that the Qur’an possibly points to even the Muslim fighter as unjust in conflict (19). Hadith, or text used to interpret the Qur’an, explicitly state that war is for defense only and that innocent civilians must not be targets, but most extremist ignore the historical and social context of the Qur’an or claim that such sayings couldn’t possibly be from the mouth of Muhammad (Rodgers-Melnick). In fact, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, professor at George Washington University and contributor to the Journal of Islamic Studies, Al-Serat, states that violence is contrary to the very meaning of Islam, which means peace. He continues in his argument stating:

Finally, if by violence is meant 'distortion of meaning or fact resulting in injury to others', Islam is completely opposed to it. …Any distortion of truth is against the basic teachings of the religion even if no one were to be affected by it. How much more would distortion resulting in injury be against the teachings of the Qur'an and the tradition of the Prophet!