Weed in our backyard: Reflection on muslim contemporary issues

support.

INTRODUCTION

Not in the name of Islam, Not on my behalf…etc. We are getting accustomed to hearing such statements from Muslim organisations as well as individuals, especially those living in the West. Recent and current acts of violence committed by some Muslims, locally or internationally, are forcing certain questions upon the followers of Islam as a whole. Their very faith and what it stands for is being questioned. The absolute hot topic that is presently discussed is the stand of Islam regarding peaceful co-existence with the ‘other’. Many are asserting that Islam is incompatible with that concept.

There is an understandable feeling among the majority of Muslims of being unjustly treated in this regard; firstly by not separating a faith as such from the conduct of its followers and secondly by judging the whole Muslim People by what a tiny minority among them is doing.

The above statements, in quotations, are attempts on the part of those who feel the necessity of both distancing themselves from those acts and of affirming the real position of their faith on matters that are contested. As the following pages will show, I also prescribe to those statements; hence the title of this work.

I believe that Islam, like all other faiths, must not be held responsible for the misconduct of those who claim to be its followers. And I share the concern with the majority of Muslims whose moderate belief and conduct is being hijacked by the grand public shows of the extremists among them. It is through these spectacular actions that they try to silence the moderate understanding of Islam or religion as such and to gradually establish a firm control over the masses. This desire for controlling others manifests itself in many ways, some direct others not so, as the following discussions will reveal.

But most importantly, I believe that Muslims and only Muslims have the responsibility and duty to clean up, so to say, their own house. Because of deliberate and indeliberate distortions, misinterpretations and misrepresentations, their ideals and practices have for ages been growing apart to the extent of nonrecognition.

The conduct or rather misconduct that is based on these distortions is unfortunately becoming a cancer in the ‘body’ of the Muslim people as the discussions below will show. The loss of balance in understanding as well as practicing the teachings of Islam is not confined to one issue, religion and politics; it rather includes all matters of Muslim concern. Hence, the topics of discussion in this book are only a ‘starter’. They are essays I have written at different occasions and can be read separately from each other.

The status of woman in Muslim societies is increasingly pressing for clarifications. Her situation and its implications are given priority in this work, and discussed in chapter one. The second chapter deals with the issue of confusing religion with politics, a dangerous cocktail, which has begotten its natural outcome namely, extremism. Suppression of reason, another manifestation of extremism is discussed along with its historical background in chapter three. By claiming exclusive right to truth, many so-called believers of all faiths have monopolised God; only their respective faith is true. Muslims’ share in this distortion of the concept of God is discussed in chapter four. Is it true that once you choose to be a Muslim, you have ‘cast your last card’ as far as your freedom of faith is concerned? This thorny matter is dealt with in chapter five. Chapter six and seven are intended to give the reader a broad contemporary religious, political and popular background of the current radicalisation waves in the Middle East and elsewhere. And lastly the possibility of Muslims and non-Muslims living side by side in peace is taken up in chapter eight. This chapter appeared earlier in my previous work ‘Making sense of Islamic law’. I have made a few changes to it. And added two new topics namely, Muslims in Diaspora and the misconceived concept of ‘Jihad’.

The point of departure for the discussions ahead is the assumption that different Muslim cultures through history have done much damage to the teachings and ideals of Islam. The problem is, however, that the very practices that I, and the majority of Muslims, may call wrong and not Islamic can be fully justified and recommended by others, due to their interpretation of the same faith, we share. But Islam and Muslims are not alone in this; followers of other faiths or ideologies are also known to hold divergent, or even contradictory, opinions. The Purpose of this work is not to unite these opinions. That will be a futile pursuit. For, difference of opinions is natural. It is even desirable, as long as it does not discard reason. This work aims rather at exposing those cultural deviations so that the ideals of Islam can be manifest.

Hopefully, this will help in re-establishment of the badly-needed principle of moderation and balance, in Muslim conduct, which according to Qur’aan 2:143 should be their defining characteristic.

1:‘THE WOMAN CARD’

I am not against Islam. It is part of my identity, but it is also time that educated women read the Koran for themselves and make their own interpretations of it, not live with the misinterpretations of Islam that go against their rights, which is happening so much now.

Risha, Jordanian woman, in Price of Honour.

Nothing could summarise better the narrations you are about to read in the following pages.

In society:

Muslims have two ways of looking at their religious teachings; you can directly go to the scriptures and form your own understanding of them, which is also what the Qur’aan recommends, or you can make use of the scholars’ understanding and interpreting of the particular teaching, you are interested in. Both ways are valid but the latter, more oft, tends to reflect the spirit of the respective scholars’ time and place. This observation is important to keep in mind especially when exploring our subject matter, women in Islam.

Now, the status of women that we get directly from the Qur’aan is quite different from that, which our scholars present to us. While the former tales us that man and woman originated from the same biological entity, the latter takes the Judeo-Christian line, which says that woman came from man. The end result of the whole ‘creation story’ from that angle is that we are what we are today because woman did something unforgivable in our distant past, she disobeyed God’s orders. Hence Woman cannot be trusted. (Abbas Segujja p. 130-145). And it is here, where I believe the maltreatment of women and all restrictions imposed on her especially in societies with roots in the Abrahamic tradition, that is to say Judaism, Christianity and Islam, can be traced to. For, if woman cannot be trusted then she must be controlled, so goes the ‘logic’.

Today, some Muslim states, communities, organisations as well as individuals are increasingly playing this ‘woman card’; our women are not Muslims enough, and that is why we are where we are, it is often argued.

Following are some of the practical manifestations of this notion:

Saudi female student dies after male ambulance crew denied access. This is a headline of an article that appeared on the news site, gulfnews.com, on February 08 2014. What happened? Let us read further.

Amna Bawazeer, a Master’s student at the college of Social Studies at King Saud University in the capital Riyadh, suffered the heart attack at 11 am at the women’s college where she was finalising her course timetable for the second semester. However, when the ambulance arrived, the medics were not allowed to enter the college for two hours. The University officials argued that the ambulance staff were males and could not enter the premises as the students were not covered… In conclusion, the article provides us with yet some shocking news: In 2002, 15 schoolgirls died in a fire in Makkah after… religious police stopped them from leaving a burning building because they were not properly dressed.

Obviously the existence or non-existence of a piece of cloth on a woman’s body is more important than her own existence. Is this, dogmatic adherence to the ‘rules and regulations’ of one’s belief, what is required of a Muslim? Or is it that something bigger than just a dress is at play her? I, for one, would believe that this is about men’s wish to make it undoubtedly clear to women that it is men that have total control over women; a demonstration of power; ‘this is a man’s world’, so to say. Otherwise, why were alternative measures that could have saved lives not in place? Because alternative measures would mean putting women in charge of their lives, and that is not acceptable.

Shocking inhumane stories and atrocities like these are unfortunately not rare especially in Muslim communities or countries that brand themselves as Islamic or, even further, as upholders of the ‘true Islam’. Let me mention but a few, just to refresh the readers mind:

ASF is an organisation you probably have not heard of before but surely you have heard of the acid victims in Pakistan and elsewhere around the world. This is a crime committed by men against women for all sorts of reasons, regardless of their age. Acid is thrown in someone’s face, leaving the victim burned, maimed and disfigured, if she survives, that is. In 2012, at least 150 such cases were reported in that country but many more are never reported, and thus do not appear in statistics because victims are pressured by their communities to keep quiet. (www.asidsurvivorspakistan.org). ASF (Acid Survivors Foundation) is the organisation that is trying to address this ever-growing phenomenon in Pakistan and render help to the victims.

We have also all heard about the shooting of a young girl, now Nobel Price winner, Malal Yousafzai by the Taliban in Pakistan for no other reason but because she is a girl, who went to school.

The above incidents could rightly be dismissed as individual and isolated; they do not represent the official position regarding women. I say okay, so let us look at the practices carried out by those who are supposed to protect and defend human rights, and sanctioned by ‘law’.

Zina is a qur’aanic term denoting mutually consented sex outside of wedlock, which is not permissible in Islam. Among the different opinions regarding the penalty for zina, Pakistan lawmakers chose the one that stipulates stoning to death if the person is married, and up to thirty lashes and ten years’ imprisonment for non-married persons. Oddly, rape is also dealt with under this law and it is termed zina biljabr (Rahat Imran p. 87). That term will roughly translate as zina by force. But how can an act be mutually consented and forced at the same time. For, this is exactly what this ‘law’ says. One cannot help but speculate about the reason behind this. Was this purposely stipulated to trap/control women? I say so because according to the Qur’aan, one cannot be accused of committing zina without proof of four witnesses who can confirm the actual sex act. Now, Pakistani lawmakers require the same condition fulfilled in the case of rape. Otherwise, the case will be treated as zina. What this means is that a raped woman must produce four witnesses to prove her case if she is to avoid being accused of zina, thus criminalizing the victim. No wonder very few women will dare report a rape, and not surprisingly, rape is on increase; those sick men have learned that they can never be brought to justice. The ‘law’ is on their side. As one writer puts it, "The Zina Hudood Ordinance in particular is an issue for feminist enquiry in Pakistan as it concerns women’s legal status and rights as citizens of that country. The Islamic legal framework within which this law has been protectively placed, is blatantly gender-discriminatory in nature, and has the potential to condone and legitimise male violence against women when combined with the Law of Evidence, which becomes mandatory for the purpose of bearing witness and testifying in court." (ibid).

This so-called law was introduced in 1979, and it is still standing as of today. Apparently, both religious and political establishments see no wrong with it, despite calls from human rights organisations within and without the country to abandon it.

In neighbouring Afghanistan, one of the worst places in the world for women, the situation is even worse. Women there have resorted to suicide and self-emulation as the only way out of the misery imposed on them by their men folk. According to a report made by ‘Womankind Worldwide’, an international NGO, regarding the factors that contribute to the increase of suicides among Afghan women, four factors were observed: One, 60-80 percent of marriages in Afghanistan is forced. Two, more than half of Afghan women are married before they turn 16 to men who are much older. Three, the exchange of women and girls to resolve a crime, debt or household dispute is common in Afghanistan. And four, in most of such marriages violence is common practice. (www.rawa.org).

Among the things the term Moral Crime donates in Afghanistan’s so-called Family Law, is running away from an abusive husband. Women, who have no legal protection whatsoever against violent family members, are criminalized when they resort to the only remedy they have to save their lives. It is estimated that up to 70% of all women prisoners in that country have been imprisoned for running away from their families, and nearly all had been subjected to forced marriages or domestic violence. (Family Law in Afghanistan, www.cw4wafghan.ca) The risks these women take are enormous; the ‘legal’ system deprives them custody of their children, if they have any. And they risk their lives, if caught or return home, for disgracing their families. Here honour killing comes into play; it is death or more violence that awaits a run-away woman who decides to return home. Little wonder most of them prefer to stay in prison.

In a declaration issued by the Afgahan Ulema, Islamic Scholars, Council, made up of only men, it is stated among other things that: women are secondary to men, women should not mingle with men in public places, women should observe full Islamic dress, women should respect polygamy and Sharia divorce laws… The president of that country endorsed the declaration. (ibid.)

This is a recurring pattern in many Muslim communities. These provisions, many of which have no Qur’aanic basis, could go unchallenged only because of the grip the ‘religious’ establishment have on people. They have monopolised religious knowledge, and thus can say almost what they want without fear of being opposed or challenged.

On the western borders of both Pakistan and Afghanistan lays another pseudo Islamic country, Iran, a country reputed for its public flogging, hanging, stoning and executions of both men and women for a variety of ‘crimes’. For the purpose of this essay, only women’s plight will be highlighted here.

Iran’s 1967 Family Protection Law, which was in place before the so-called Islamic Revolution, introduced some reforms as far as women were concerned. It, for example, restricted polygamous practices, required court intervention, in divorce cases and raised the minimum age of marriage. All these were reversed immediately after the Revolution.

Today, Iran, like its neighbours, is notorious for tolerating, if not encouraging, child marriages despite its Civil Code, which states otherwise. Article 1041 of that Code leaves it to the guardian’s permission for marriages under 13 and 15 years for girls and boys respectively. (justice4iran.org). Here like anywhere else, lawmakers make concessions to the customary or local practices, knowing very well their bias nature against women. In 2012, 1,537 marriages were registered for girls below the age of 10 and 29,827 for girls between the age of 10 and 14. (ibid). It should be noted that these are the official figures; unregistered marriages can well be far beyond those figures.

An organisation that investigates and documents capital punishment around the globe has a report on women execution in Iran. One inescapable observation from that report is that most of women whom Iranian courts have sentenced to death in recent years are either convicted of murdering their husbands or of committing the so-called moral crimes. www.capitalpunismentuk.org/iranfem.html).

To me, the explanation for the above observation is quite obvious. The trauma of being married off as a child, coupled with denial of basic rights, and then subjection to constant abuse