Quran is Not the Source of All Problems but It Must Be Brought within the Ambit of History
By Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
31 July 2017
The healthy debate in the pages of www.NewAgeIslam.com on the historicity and authenticity of the Quran is most welcome. While agnostic Muslims like Hassan Radwan want to make the point that the Quran should be treated like any other book: created for humans and by humans within a specific context of history, believers like Naseer Ahmad root for the divine origins of the Quran. The first position leads to the possibility of critique and revision and even partial rejection of the Quranic message, the latter position, by the virtue of belief is not amenable to the idea of changing even a diacritic within the Quran.
However, the reason that Hassan Radwan gives for historicizing the Quran is simplistic and problematic. Firstly, it is not true that one cannot beat the traditionalists in the game of selective quotation from Quranic passages supporting moderate and liberal voices. Scholars, both modern (like Amina Wadud) and traditional (like Fazlur Rahman) have shown how a different hermeneutical reading of the Quran is possible: one that is consistent with a modern and liberal world-view. It is true that in most Muslim countries, such interpretations have either remained marginal or have altogether failed. But the fact that it has succeeded in small locations tell us that as a project it has much potential. Moreover, direct access to Quran is still limited in the Muslim world and most Muslims access it through various interpretations of it. If we altogether give up the task of a liberal and modernist interpretation, then it is only going to benefit the traditionalist and the extremists.
Secondly, we need to understand that interpretations that become hegemonic are necessarily a function of power. It is rather unfortunate that the balance of power in the Muslim world is in the hands of fundamentalists and there are a number of state actors who are backing this kind of reading of the Quran. The reason of controlling interpretations is not just religious but deeply political. A liberal and progressive interpretation of the Quran threatens the status quo of the distribution of power in the Muslim world which is currently in the hands of powerful oligarchs. A different interpretation of the Quran is, therefore, a much needed political project which Muslims must take seriously.
A major problem with Hassan Radwan’s analysis is that he links Islamic terrorism with a particular reading of the Quran. This is a rather simplistic understanding of an otherwise extremely complex phenomenon. There is increasing data to suggest that terrorism in the Muslim world cannot be reduced to scriptures. There are complex processes at work and each terrorist incident is an outcome of a number of non-religious factors such as deprivation, status and a perceived sense of being humiliated. Muslims become susceptible to the idea of violence also because their lands have been occupied and their resistance to this occupation has been brutally crushed for generations. The Quran may serve as a legitimating tool but is never the sufficient cause of Islamic terrorism.
But is it right to say that the Quran is the infallible word of God and the problem lies in human beings' limited knowledge in comprehending it, as commentators like Naseer Ahmad have argued? To make matters worse, there are others like Muhammad Yunus who do not see anything beyond a conspiracy to malign Islam in the writings of Hassan Radwan. So what is the problem if we accept that the Quran is infallible? The first and the most obvious problem is that this approach puts the Quran beyond the scope of a critique. Critique is fundamental to how any form of knowledge progresses. Without questioning and a ceaseless search for answers, the human project is not very different from other species with which we share the earth.
Indeed all religious projects themselves have been born out of critique: of the existing state of affairs. In this sense, Islam itself is a product of critique; of so called corruption which had set in in terms of religious and social affairs of men. But once Islam gets established, we are told that there is no longer any need or space for critique. That’s when the problem begins. Something which is itself a product of critique is now telling us that it is perfect and hence beyond any criticism! This is called orthodoxy and history is a witness that orthodoxies have only succeeded in silencing and eventually killing people. Critique is at the heart of reflection on the world. Without this exercise, the world would be poorer in terms of thoughts and ideas. A look at the Muslim world and the backwardness of its thoughts and practices will tell us that the idea of critique seems to be altogether foreign to them. Some voices which have sought to critique existing ideas and practices have been ruthlessly silenced.
The second problem with the Quran-is-infallible thesis is that it puts the text beyond the pale of history. Unlike other religions, Islam is supposed to have been born in the full light of history. Then why is it that there is so little material on the origins and the early days of this religion? What we have in the name of historical sources is largely hagiographical material written by Muslims themselves. Why is it that this material hardly gets corroborated by materials from non-Islamic sources? It should be a cause of worry for Muslims themselves and they should be at the forefront of this search. And yet we see that because of this fallacious reading of Islam and Quran being of divine origin, there is very little effort on the part of Muslims themselves to try and research Islam also as a historical artefact.
The attempt to understand the Quran as Mubeen (clear and flawless) is also problematic for the simple reason that so many commentaries written on the Quran to explicate different verses wouldn’t have been necessary if the Quran was really that unambiguous. The fact remains that scholars like Naseer Ahmed will keep on writing long articles to explicate the ‘true’ meaning of the Quran and yet simultaneously claim that the Quran is Mubeen! If the meaning of the text was so crystal clear as argued, then where is the need for such a long winding exegetical project?
There is a problem with understanding other religions as corrupted and therefore being within the matrix of history while believing that Islam has escaped this fate. This kind of reasoning is not very different from the Islamist supremacist logic that our religion is the best and that all other religions are false. Put another way, this means that only Islam is divine but other religions owe their origins because of human manipulation. We know that such kind of thinking has been the hallmark of many conservative Islamic groups but when the same sentiment gets expressed by some progressive thinkers writing on this website, then it is even more of a bigger reason to worry. Islam would be better served by the passionate human endeavour of reason and critique rather than believing that it is a fixed and frozen entity which will serve us good for all times to come.
Related Articles:
The Quran Is the Perfect, Infallible Word of God, Even If All the Muslims Misunderstand It
Arshad Alam is a columnist with www.NewAgeIslam.com
URL: https://newageislam.com/ijtihad-rethinking-islam/quran-source-all-problems-be/d/112032
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism