ISLAM IN THE CHANGING WORLD
Reformation Through Re-application
MODERN anthropologists generally look upon religion as a social phenomenon. This is not however, a correct view of Islam for Islam is not a product of social circumstances. As a revealed religion, it enjoys the status of an eternal and sacred religious system.
Yet, there is always the question of how Islam is to remain applicable to the altered scenario of the changing times. The answer is that Islam is not a set of innumerable details. On the contrary, Islam embodies a set of fundamental values. Whatever be the conflicts brought about by changing times, they are inevitably to do with ritualistic details concerning forms—never with fundamental values.
Whatever be the conflicts brought about by changing times, they are inevitably to do with ritualistic details concerning forms—never with fundamental values.
For instance, Islam preaches Monotheism, which is as a principle and by its very nature eternal. Similarly, Islam prescribes deterrent punishments for certain serious social crimes. This again is a reality which is immutable in the face of changing circumstances. To date, no such facts have come to light that disprove this principle of Islamic law. In modern times, however, it has been opined that a need has arisen to effect reforms in Islam. This is the result of a number of current misconceptions. Presented below are a few examples which professedly relate to Islam, but which are rather human additions to Islam made by Muslims themselves. These cases ostensibly give a clear indication that there is a need for reform, but it is not the reform of Islam itself which is required, but its purification of the additions.
For instance, a section of the Muslim ulema of modern times held that the acquisition of Western sciences was un-Islamic. This was a case of the ulema having made a serious error of judgement, for Islam actually encourages progress in learning. Another common misapprehension is that in Islam monarchical rule is the preferred form of government. It is true, of course, that in later times certain Muslim nations favoured the institution of monarchy and that even today this system is extant in a number of Muslim countries. But in no way is this the result of Islamic teachings. It is, in fact, a deviation from the archetypal democracy advocated by the Prophet and his Companions. It is a matter of historical record that Islam, in its early period, set an example of the highest form of democracy. It would certainly be correct also to say that it was Islam which, for the first time in history, put an end to monarchy by systemizing politics on the democratic method.
The truth is that the examples taken from Islamic history which purport to show the necessity for reform relate not to religious but to temporal issues. Such reforms are, of course, necessary procedures, but Islamic reform per se would, more appropriately, mean the purification of Islam of external influences rather than any modification of Islam itself. It has to be conceded, however, that our understanding of Islam does sometimes has to face problems created by changing circumstances. On such occasions solutions are found by the exercise of ijtihad. Ijtihad in this case means the re-application of Islamic injunctions, rather than any reform or change in their original substance.
The truth is that the examples taken from Islamic history, which purport to show the necessity for reform relate not to religious but to temporal issues.
For instance, during the first phase of Islam, dates were based on the sighting of the moon. Now, after the discovery of new scientific methods of scanning the heavens, the calendar is based on dates determined by astronomical observations. This, however, will not result in the reform of updating Islam. It will only mean a re-application of Islamic injunctions. It is hardly proper to evolve a theory of religious reform on the basis of such examples.
Islam’s injunctions on the subject of women are often cited as being in need of reform. It is held that under the influence of ancient circumstances, women were degraded by Islam and that now, in view of recent developments, the rectification of this error on the part of Islam is a matter of the greatest urgency.
To be brief, Islamic commands pertaining to women are concerned with practical requirements rather than with establishing the superiority of one gender over another. While 'modernists' favour out-and-out equality between the two genders, Islam believes in their being equal, but different in roles. Islam’s position on this matter is that, in matters of respect, there is no difference between a man and a woman. As regards rights, too, both are treated as equals. However, for the sake of being practical, their respective roles are different.
This division between the two is not made on the basis of superiority or inferiority. It is based, rather, on biological differences. It is a fact that by birth, the female is the more delicate and emotional while the male is the tougher sex. As such, in everyday matters both have been assigned such duties as are suited to their respective biological composition. Such a division—a practical necessity—is to be found in all societies. A similar division can also exist between men and men and between women and women in relation to their biological dispositions.
Islam is a religion of nature, and just as there is no question of revising nature, neither is there any question of revising Islam.
That is why in the practical arrangements of life, each gender has been assigned a role suitable to their biological structure. This division is in no way anachronistic. It is simply in accord with nature. Nature has created certain differences between men and women by birth. This biological difference is such a decisive factor that those societies which refuse to accept it in theory are obliged in to perpetuate this same division in practice, thanks to the overwhelming pressures of nature.
In many countries in spite of complete freedom given to women, it has not proved possible to abolish this division. Till today, many extremely physically demanding jobs are largely dominated by men. Women however, have secured their place in the relatively less onerous and less stressful departments. When women, for example, can move their fingers delicately over the keyboards of computer, why should there be any mention even of them engaging in heavy manual work in factories? The realities of biology have to be given due recognition.
In short, the concept of revision is not relevant to Islam. Revision, after all, implies that out of ignorance, mistakes have been made in the laying down of Islamic precepts and that after the subsequent acquisition of superior knowledge, man is now in a position to set them right. But this is simply not true of Islam. Islam is a religion of nature, and just as there is no question of revising nature, neither is there any question of revising Islam. Re-interpretation of the scriptures may be the need of the hour, but this certainly does not mean changing the original system. All it means is a re-application of the original commands so that they may accord more exactly with the changed circumstances. This kind of fresh interpretation—always a requirement of Islam in the past—will remain a requirement in the present and in the future.