|
Dr. Adis Duderija is a Lecturer in the Study of Islam and Society at Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. He lectures and researches on contemporary Islamic hermeneutics, progressive Islam, Islam and gender and interfaith dialogue theory. On this page you will find:
|
Our hope at Open Horizons is to be a platform for Islamic thinking of the progressive variety, offering materials available to the spiritually-interested and socially-engaged reader, Muslim and otherwise. One of our key writers, Farhan Shah, has many essays showing what a progressive Islam can look like. See Farhan Shah. Adis Duderija adds to the vision, and we hope for more Muslim writers in the future. While distinctively Islamic, much of the thinking of progressive Muslim thinkers resonates deeply with that of other thinkers in Open Horizons, some Jewish, some Christian, some Buddhist, some Secular, some spiritual but not religious.
Progressive Islam
Excerpt from Progressive Islam: Reawakening Authenticity
by Adis Duderija
As a male person of Muslim background (Bosnian Muslim by birth) and as someone who came of age around the time of 9/11, I have sought ways to understand my faith that is affirmative of Goodness and Love as well as open to potential goodness and love in every human being. This search set me off on a journey that eventually had me embark upon a career in academia and come to dedicate much of it to the theorising of progressive Islam. The fruits of this labour of love include two books, the second of which, the Imperatives of Progressive Islam was published in early 2017.
In no small measure was my journey inspired and influenced by the wonderful work done by Tikkun and the Network of Spiritual Progressives that I became acquainted with some ten years ago while researching on progressive Islam. In this article, I will draw upon my previous scholarship to provide an overview of the worldview underpinning progressive Islam, its approach to conceptualising and interpreting the Islamic tradition, its theology and its normative imperatives.
In doing so, I wish to present a less well known but no less authentic understanding of Islam that will hopefully challenge what many non-Muslims and Muslims think about what Islam was, is or can ever be.
Introduction and Overview:
Progressive Islam is an umbrella term covering approaches to the Islamic tradition and (late) modernity, which employ the words “progressive” or at times “critical” (e.g., the magazine Critical Muslim published in the United Kingdom) when labelling themselves or which fall into Progressive Islam as defined herein. The main theoreticians behind this contemporary Muslim thought are academics and public intellectuals from both Muslim majority and Muslim minority contexts and include scholars like Hassan Hanafi from Egypt; Enes Karic from Bosnia, Ali Ashghar Engineer from India; Nurkolich Majid from Indonesia, Sadiyya Shaikh, Ebrahim Moosa and Farid Esack from South Africa; Ziba Mir Hosseini and Mohsen Kadivar from Iran; Muhammad Abed Al-Jabiri from Morocco; Jasmine Zine from Canada; Hashim Kamali from Afghanistan/Malaysia; Kecia Ali from the United States; Abdulaziz Sachedina from Tanzania/ USA; Abdullahi An’Naim for Sudan; Khalid Masud from Pakistan; and Khaled Abou El Fadl from Egypt /USA to name but prominent few. Importantly, progressive Muslim academics and intellectuals include a significant number of females. Progressive Muslim thought also has a global grassroots activist presence associated with Muslims for Progressive Values, Musawah, and like-minded movements. In terms of its overall worldview, Progressive Islam is best characterized by its commitment and fidelity to certain ideals, values, practices, and objectives that are expressed in many ways and take form in a number of different themes.
These themes primarily concern issues pertaining to progressive Muslims’ critical positioning in relation to (1) the hegemonic economic, political, social, and cultural forces from the Global North, (2) hegemonic patriarchal, exclusivist, and ethically ossified interpretations of their own inherited Islamic tradition, and (3) the values underpinning both Enlightenment modernity as well as radical forms of postmodern thought. This critique, therefore, simultaneously challenges both (neo-)traditional and puritan Islamic hegemonic discourses on many issues (including the debates on modernity, human rights, gender equality and justice, democracy, and the place and role of religion in society and politics) and their Western-centric conceptualizations and interpretations, embedded as they are in the values, worldview, and assumptions underpinning the Enlightenment. One of the main concepts permeating progressive Muslim thought is the centrality of spirituality and the nurturing of interpersonal relationships based on Sufi-like ethico-moral philosophy. By this I mean an intellectualised form of Sufism that exists without the accompanying misogynist and highly hierarchical elements present in much of the pre-modern Sufi tradition. Moreover, progressive Muslims emphasise God’s universal nature and the universality of the faith itself through demonstrating God’s concern for humanity in general which as, I will outline below, leads to them to embracing religious pluralism.
In no small measure was my journey inspired and influenced by the wonderful work done by Tikkun and the Network of Spiritual Progressives that I became acquainted with some ten years ago while researching on progressive Islam. In this article, I will draw upon my previous scholarship to provide an overview of the worldview underpinning progressive Islam, its approach to conceptualising and interpreting the Islamic tradition, its theology and its normative imperatives.
In doing so, I wish to present a less well known but no less authentic understanding of Islam that will hopefully challenge what many non-Muslims and Muslims think about what Islam was, is or can ever be.
Introduction and Overview:
Progressive Islam is an umbrella term covering approaches to the Islamic tradition and (late) modernity, which employ the words “progressive” or at times “critical” (e.g., the magazine Critical Muslim published in the United Kingdom) when labelling themselves or which fall into Progressive Islam as defined herein. The main theoreticians behind this contemporary Muslim thought are academics and public intellectuals from both Muslim majority and Muslim minority contexts and include scholars like Hassan Hanafi from Egypt; Enes Karic from Bosnia, Ali Ashghar Engineer from India; Nurkolich Majid from Indonesia, Sadiyya Shaikh, Ebrahim Moosa and Farid Esack from South Africa; Ziba Mir Hosseini and Mohsen Kadivar from Iran; Muhammad Abed Al-Jabiri from Morocco; Jasmine Zine from Canada; Hashim Kamali from Afghanistan/Malaysia; Kecia Ali from the United States; Abdulaziz Sachedina from Tanzania/ USA; Abdullahi An’Naim for Sudan; Khalid Masud from Pakistan; and Khaled Abou El Fadl from Egypt /USA to name but prominent few. Importantly, progressive Muslim academics and intellectuals include a significant number of females. Progressive Muslim thought also has a global grassroots activist presence associated with Muslims for Progressive Values, Musawah, and like-minded movements. In terms of its overall worldview, Progressive Islam is best characterized by its commitment and fidelity to certain ideals, values, practices, and objectives that are expressed in many ways and take form in a number of different themes.
These themes primarily concern issues pertaining to progressive Muslims’ critical positioning in relation to (1) the hegemonic economic, political, social, and cultural forces from the Global North, (2) hegemonic patriarchal, exclusivist, and ethically ossified interpretations of their own inherited Islamic tradition, and (3) the values underpinning both Enlightenment modernity as well as radical forms of postmodern thought. This critique, therefore, simultaneously challenges both (neo-)traditional and puritan Islamic hegemonic discourses on many issues (including the debates on modernity, human rights, gender equality and justice, democracy, and the place and role of religion in society and politics) and their Western-centric conceptualizations and interpretations, embedded as they are in the values, worldview, and assumptions underpinning the Enlightenment. One of the main concepts permeating progressive Muslim thought is the centrality of spirituality and the nurturing of interpersonal relationships based on Sufi-like ethico-moral philosophy. By this I mean an intellectualised form of Sufism that exists without the accompanying misogynist and highly hierarchical elements present in much of the pre-modern Sufi tradition. Moreover, progressive Muslims emphasise God’s universal nature and the universality of the faith itself through demonstrating God’s concern for humanity in general which as, I will outline below, leads to them to embracing religious pluralism.
Three Kinds of Muslim Theology Today:
Progressive, Purist, and Ritualist
Adis Duderija
Every religious tradition in human history has highly valued, and continues to value, three things: knowledge, good deeds and spirituality (as performed through religious rituals). It is important to explore (and this is the aim of this short article) the relative importance placed on these three pillars of religious tradition one vis-a-vis the other.
This could be accomplished both comparatively (i.e. across different religions) and well as within the various strands of a particular religious tradition. It could also be examined chronologically tracing any possible patterns or shifts in patterns. An examination of this ‘prioritising’ is useful as it would give us an insight into the ‘ideal’ types of theologies prevalent among the adherents of religious traditions and perhaps be used as a method for developing typologies of theologies.
A prioritising of the relative importance given to one of the pillars in relation to the other can be best illustrated with the following example. Imagine you had six hours a day to dedicate to expanding your knowledge (not necessarily religious in the narrow term of the word but inclusive of it), doing good deeds or engaging in spiritual rituals? Percentagewise how would you ideally divide this time up? The answer to this question would, in my view, be indicative of the type of theology you subscribe to.
In what follows I‘d like to briefly identify and discuss three different ‘ideal types’ of theologies prevalent in my religious tradition of Islam today through the lens of this triad of knowledge-good deeds- spirituality.
Of course, there is a rich history of ideas pertaining to this problematic in Islamic history, especially in relation to the definition of faith/belief (iman). The views on this problematic can be conceived as a kind of a continuum. On one side there were Muslims who insisted that good deeds (including the normatively prescribed rituals) were an essential prerequisite of iman with the implication that the failure to perform them was tantamount to apostasy- a crime many considered to be punishable by death. On the other side there were those who subscribed to the view that a tacit or a verbal expression of proclaiming the faith was considered sufficient to be part of the faith community. My intention here is not to revisit these debates, but to describe in broad contours, some of the contemporary theologies among Muslims, and some of their implications in relation to issues such as nature of revelation and scripture, and the relationship between law and ethics.
One such theology I call progressive. Progressive theology gives priority to orthopraxis over orthodoxy. This means that it considers performance of good deeds more important than acquisition of knowledge leading to ‘correct‘ faith/belief or that of engaging in ritual. For this type of theology, the human and the human condition are the primary focus. The discussions pertaining to how to arrive at ‘correct belief’, those centring on nature of God and its relationship with the cosmos and the living creation are interesting but of secondary importance. Instead, the alleviation of extreme poverty, being on the side of the displaced, marginalised, stigmatised, and the downtrodden is considered the purpose and the primary function of religion. It is also viewed as an essential prerequisite leading to orthodoxy.
This theology, in my understanding of it, holds that humans experience the Divine most readily and immediately through their interactions with other human beings, rather than by contemplating abstractly on the Divine, observing nature, or engaging in various spiritual exercises (i.e. ritual). Moreover, this orientation favours inductive over deductive reasoning/thinking, because its foundation and starting point is the world of the human condition with its incredible diversity (including the religious) and complexity which makes it very difficult to think in binary terms (e.g. having salvation –not having salvation). Furthermore, by giving primacy to good deeds and to the human and by being less concerned about knowledge leading to ‘correct’ belief, this theology is also more likely to be egalitarian eschewing any form of hierarchies, most notably those based on gender, sexual orientation, race or ethnicity. In addition, it is more likely to be open to and accommodating of the idea of religious pluralism, i.e. the premise that none of the reified religious traditions made in the crucible of history (as well as those in the present and the future) are capable of objectively and fully capturing the Divine, thus none can claim monopoly over God. This, in turn, translates into the notion that, according to this progressive theology, the idea of God is not fully graspable to the human either through his intellect, mind, reason or the ‘heart’.
It follows from the progressive point of view sacred scriptures cannot offer us humans an unequivocal, clearly accessible and once-and-for-all valid understanding of God through the simple process of reading/interpretation. Instead, the progressive point of view considers the human interpreter and her subjectivities and contingencies as most significantly determinative of the process of interpretation, envisaged as a never ending dynamic process that continually evolves with reason. There is, in other words, an organic and dialectical relationship between revelation and reality.
Furthermore, this theology gives precedence to reason-based ethics over law. It insists that law must be in constant service of ethics and that law ought to evolve with evolving ideas about ethics as developed by humanity - and in the post-revelatory period this evolution is exclusively driven by reason/intellect. Put succinctly, this theology embraces and even thrives on pluralism, diversity and what’s fundamental to all of it, uncertainty.
Based on my own observations progressive theology of this sort is a minority theological position among contemporary Muslims, especially among the clerical establishment, but, importantly, a growing one.
The second type of theology can be described as purist. According to this theology, religion is all about correct belief (i.e. knowledge) and everything else is secondary to it. The central concern for the purists is how to, or put more precisely, from whom to, obtain the correct knowledge in order to arrive at correct faith/belief. The nature of legitimate knowledge and its sources is, thus, very specifically defined, delineated and guarded. What follows from this is the idea that this purist theology is fixed centrally on discourses pertaining to God’s essence and nature rather than being focused on the human condition. God is primarily to be found/discovered in the sacred and other canonical scriptures, rather than God being experienced through human social intercourses, or for that matter, by contemplating about/on nature and the cosmos. This is what we can call a scripturalist dimension of purist theology or scripturalism. As a corollary, scripturalism is closely linked to what could be termed positivist legalistic theology which views law as not only superior to ethics but also as the very embodiment of it. Furthermore, from the purist perspective, ethics and reason are considered as not subject to evolution and to possess potential for positive change and growth (i.e. progress). The law, according to this view, does not have a scripturally independent objective, underpinning or rationale. This theology favours, as such, deductive over inductive thinking/reasoning. In its epistemology and methods, it resembles natural sciences and eschews uncertainty. Purist theology also favours decontextualized thought and defines good deeds rather statically and literally-independent of their underlying moral trajectories. Furthermore, the ‘rights’ of God are defined often as independent of, at times in opposition to, and always given precedence over to that of the’ rights’ of humans. The purists’ legalistic theology combined with scripturalism and strong opposition to the possibility of progress defined above also facilitates hierarchical structures, especially those based on religious creed or gender. As a result, purist theology shuns religious pluralism, endorses various forms of gender inequality, favouring the prevalent social and cultural customs and conditions of the time of the religious traditions formation and makes forceful theologically exclusivist claims. The scripturalist and decontextualized dimension of purists’ theology also significantly contributes to its strong hermeneutical inclination for narrowing down of legitimate or ‘authentic interpretations of the sacred and canonical texts.
This theology, in various hues and degrees, in my view has considerable presence among contemporary Muslims.
The last ideal type discussed here is what I refer to as spiritual-ritualistic theology. Here self-introspection and deep meditative-like contemplation takes central stage in contrast to the social human condition (progressive) or that of the scriptures (purists). This contemplative quality often takes form in the engagement in elaborate rituals and recitation of sacred mantras/formulae either in isolation or in a communal setting. This sort of theology often employs the symbolism of the ‘heart’ as the locus of ‘true’ source of knowledge about God in contrast to that of the ‘intellect’ or ‘the sacred text’.
As history testifies what is interesting about this type of theology is that it can lead or be accommodative of both progressive-like and purist-like theologies. It can function within the confines of ‘the law’ in form of positivist legal theology mentioned above –therefore be purist–like- or transcend it entirely by adopting an ethically underpinned theology of the progressives.
What does the future hold for these three ideal types of theologies? Are certain types going to be more likely to capture the minds and the hearts of the people? This question, of course, remains open. However, with the rise of moral consciousness among certain sectors of the Muslim population with capacities for sharing knowledge and wisdom heightened in our small and interconnected world; and with its strong focus on the human condition, deep sharing of emotion, and the embrace of diversity; it seems that the progressive theology is best equipped for meeting the ‘religious-spiritual’ needs of those humans who identify themselves to be ‘people of faith’.
.
This could be accomplished both comparatively (i.e. across different religions) and well as within the various strands of a particular religious tradition. It could also be examined chronologically tracing any possible patterns or shifts in patterns. An examination of this ‘prioritising’ is useful as it would give us an insight into the ‘ideal’ types of theologies prevalent among the adherents of religious traditions and perhaps be used as a method for developing typologies of theologies.
A prioritising of the relative importance given to one of the pillars in relation to the other can be best illustrated with the following example. Imagine you had six hours a day to dedicate to expanding your knowledge (not necessarily religious in the narrow term of the word but inclusive of it), doing good deeds or engaging in spiritual rituals? Percentagewise how would you ideally divide this time up? The answer to this question would, in my view, be indicative of the type of theology you subscribe to.
In what follows I‘d like to briefly identify and discuss three different ‘ideal types’ of theologies prevalent in my religious tradition of Islam today through the lens of this triad of knowledge-good deeds- spirituality.
Of course, there is a rich history of ideas pertaining to this problematic in Islamic history, especially in relation to the definition of faith/belief (iman). The views on this problematic can be conceived as a kind of a continuum. On one side there were Muslims who insisted that good deeds (including the normatively prescribed rituals) were an essential prerequisite of iman with the implication that the failure to perform them was tantamount to apostasy- a crime many considered to be punishable by death. On the other side there were those who subscribed to the view that a tacit or a verbal expression of proclaiming the faith was considered sufficient to be part of the faith community. My intention here is not to revisit these debates, but to describe in broad contours, some of the contemporary theologies among Muslims, and some of their implications in relation to issues such as nature of revelation and scripture, and the relationship between law and ethics.
One such theology I call progressive. Progressive theology gives priority to orthopraxis over orthodoxy. This means that it considers performance of good deeds more important than acquisition of knowledge leading to ‘correct‘ faith/belief or that of engaging in ritual. For this type of theology, the human and the human condition are the primary focus. The discussions pertaining to how to arrive at ‘correct belief’, those centring on nature of God and its relationship with the cosmos and the living creation are interesting but of secondary importance. Instead, the alleviation of extreme poverty, being on the side of the displaced, marginalised, stigmatised, and the downtrodden is considered the purpose and the primary function of religion. It is also viewed as an essential prerequisite leading to orthodoxy.
This theology, in my understanding of it, holds that humans experience the Divine most readily and immediately through their interactions with other human beings, rather than by contemplating abstractly on the Divine, observing nature, or engaging in various spiritual exercises (i.e. ritual). Moreover, this orientation favours inductive over deductive reasoning/thinking, because its foundation and starting point is the world of the human condition with its incredible diversity (including the religious) and complexity which makes it very difficult to think in binary terms (e.g. having salvation –not having salvation). Furthermore, by giving primacy to good deeds and to the human and by being less concerned about knowledge leading to ‘correct’ belief, this theology is also more likely to be egalitarian eschewing any form of hierarchies, most notably those based on gender, sexual orientation, race or ethnicity. In addition, it is more likely to be open to and accommodating of the idea of religious pluralism, i.e. the premise that none of the reified religious traditions made in the crucible of history (as well as those in the present and the future) are capable of objectively and fully capturing the Divine, thus none can claim monopoly over God. This, in turn, translates into the notion that, according to this progressive theology, the idea of God is not fully graspable to the human either through his intellect, mind, reason or the ‘heart’.
It follows from the progressive point of view sacred scriptures cannot offer us humans an unequivocal, clearly accessible and once-and-for-all valid understanding of God through the simple process of reading/interpretation. Instead, the progressive point of view considers the human interpreter and her subjectivities and contingencies as most significantly determinative of the process of interpretation, envisaged as a never ending dynamic process that continually evolves with reason. There is, in other words, an organic and dialectical relationship between revelation and reality.
Furthermore, this theology gives precedence to reason-based ethics over law. It insists that law must be in constant service of ethics and that law ought to evolve with evolving ideas about ethics as developed by humanity - and in the post-revelatory period this evolution is exclusively driven by reason/intellect. Put succinctly, this theology embraces and even thrives on pluralism, diversity and what’s fundamental to all of it, uncertainty.
Based on my own observations progressive theology of this sort is a minority theological position among contemporary Muslims, especially among the clerical establishment, but, importantly, a growing one.
The second type of theology can be described as purist. According to this theology, religion is all about correct belief (i.e. knowledge) and everything else is secondary to it. The central concern for the purists is how to, or put more precisely, from whom to, obtain the correct knowledge in order to arrive at correct faith/belief. The nature of legitimate knowledge and its sources is, thus, very specifically defined, delineated and guarded. What follows from this is the idea that this purist theology is fixed centrally on discourses pertaining to God’s essence and nature rather than being focused on the human condition. God is primarily to be found/discovered in the sacred and other canonical scriptures, rather than God being experienced through human social intercourses, or for that matter, by contemplating about/on nature and the cosmos. This is what we can call a scripturalist dimension of purist theology or scripturalism. As a corollary, scripturalism is closely linked to what could be termed positivist legalistic theology which views law as not only superior to ethics but also as the very embodiment of it. Furthermore, from the purist perspective, ethics and reason are considered as not subject to evolution and to possess potential for positive change and growth (i.e. progress). The law, according to this view, does not have a scripturally independent objective, underpinning or rationale. This theology favours, as such, deductive over inductive thinking/reasoning. In its epistemology and methods, it resembles natural sciences and eschews uncertainty. Purist theology also favours decontextualized thought and defines good deeds rather statically and literally-independent of their underlying moral trajectories. Furthermore, the ‘rights’ of God are defined often as independent of, at times in opposition to, and always given precedence over to that of the’ rights’ of humans. The purists’ legalistic theology combined with scripturalism and strong opposition to the possibility of progress defined above also facilitates hierarchical structures, especially those based on religious creed or gender. As a result, purist theology shuns religious pluralism, endorses various forms of gender inequality, favouring the prevalent social and cultural customs and conditions of the time of the religious traditions formation and makes forceful theologically exclusivist claims. The scripturalist and decontextualized dimension of purists’ theology also significantly contributes to its strong hermeneutical inclination for narrowing down of legitimate or ‘authentic interpretations of the sacred and canonical texts.
This theology, in various hues and degrees, in my view has considerable presence among contemporary Muslims.
The last ideal type discussed here is what I refer to as spiritual-ritualistic theology. Here self-introspection and deep meditative-like contemplation takes central stage in contrast to the social human condition (progressive) or that of the scriptures (purists). This contemplative quality often takes form in the engagement in elaborate rituals and recitation of sacred mantras/formulae either in isolation or in a communal setting. This sort of theology often employs the symbolism of the ‘heart’ as the locus of ‘true’ source of knowledge about God in contrast to that of the ‘intellect’ or ‘the sacred text’.
As history testifies what is interesting about this type of theology is that it can lead or be accommodative of both progressive-like and purist-like theologies. It can function within the confines of ‘the law’ in form of positivist legal theology mentioned above –therefore be purist–like- or transcend it entirely by adopting an ethically underpinned theology of the progressives.
What does the future hold for these three ideal types of theologies? Are certain types going to be more likely to capture the minds and the hearts of the people? This question, of course, remains open. However, with the rise of moral consciousness among certain sectors of the Muslim population with capacities for sharing knowledge and wisdom heightened in our small and interconnected world; and with its strong focus on the human condition, deep sharing of emotion, and the embrace of diversity; it seems that the progressive theology is best equipped for meeting the ‘religious-spiritual’ needs of those humans who identify themselves to be ‘people of faith’.
.
Note from Jay McDaniel. Those of us in the Open and Relational (Process) network welcome this essay by Adis Duderija as part of our ongoing attempt to present what he would call ‘progressive’ points of view of Islam and other religions. Duderija's understanding of progressive Islam emphasizes its human focus. Many in the Process tradition will want to add that, from a progressive point of view, encounters with God can come not only from human interaction but also from a recovery of felt connections with the more than human world: hills and rivers, trees and stars. The emotions involved in these felt connections include a sense of beauty, wonder, awe, and imagination -- all ways of knowing God. And we will add that the hoped-for future for Muslims and others is for the emergence of communities in local settings that are creative, compassionate, participatory, multi-religious, humane to animals, and good for the earth -- with no one left behind. But all of this seems well in keeping with what Adis Duderija and others tell us including Farhan Shah, whose vision of an ecological civilizations we share We look forward to hearing more and more.