Book Review
Chasing A
Mirage – The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State.
- Author:
Tarek Fatah
-
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.,
Canada
-
Reviewed
By: Javed I.
Chaudry
Dear Farzana:
You have accused me of 'literalism' in the last
para of your post #88. You would realize inanity
of your accusation if you read my review of
Tarek's book, published on chowk.com and posted on
FoTH as well. This accusation is disingenuous.
Your posts #81, #84 & #88 bespeak an intellectual
malaise among Muslims who are trying to solve
global Islamic problems by ideological rhetoric,
convenient forgetfulness of social realities and
selectively recounting history. This kind of
reasoning adds to intellectual morass among
Muslims that already exists in abundance.
Dear Farzana: Think again! … It is just a kind
reminder. In your referenced posts, it is apparent
that you wish to suspend verse 24:02 of Koran. The
words of God in Koran that have survived the test
of time are not easy to bleach without authority.
You have to have divine standing and powers of
state to execute verdicts such as yours. I am not
sure if president-ship of a small religious
organization in Toronto called Muslim Canadian
Congress (MCC) confers such an authority on you.
It would also be important to know MCC's official
position if any verse proclaimed as ‘suspended’ by
MCC president would be a binding on every member
of MCC?
Clearly, Koranic verse 24:02 that you have chosen
to suspend is composed of two parts. One part is
an injunction. The other part is doctrinal and is
eternal. If I understand you correctly, you have
suspended both parts, including "…if ye believe in
Allah and the Last Day …." I presume you must have
thought of implications of suspending both parts
of that verse on your belief in Allah and the Last
Day.
Anyhow, I can understand your critical views about
certain Koranic verses whether they are on grounds
of temporality, clash with modernism or citation
of any number of overarching principles. But mind
it please, for suspending a verse of Koran with
temporal injunction; you will have to suspend
another verse of Koran before hand, which is
neither temporal nor constrained in sagacity. Here
is that verse:
"(15:9) We have, without doubt, sent down the
Message [Koran]; and We will assuredly guard it
(from corruption)". Yusuf Ali
You will have to suspend, discard or expunge this
verse if you wish to be taken seriously while
suspending other verses to make Koran conform to
your understanding of its “overarching
principles”! This is simple and plane.
Since your verdict of suspending verse 24:02 is
Ijtihad, it gives an impression as if you have
consciously chosen to contradict yourself in
romantic frenzy of reforming of Islam.
Contradicting oneself is not the way to reform
Islam. If I am not mistaken, you state in Post
#81, "I am not a proponent of ijtihad". How
can you say that while you are actually engaged in
doing Ijtihad? Moreover, if you read your own
book, Islam, Women & the Challenges of Today, you
will find on page 166-167 of your book,
"Ijtihad must continue if we [Muslim Ummah] are
to keep pace with the modern world…" (At the
end of my post, I am copying whole paragraph from
your book for interested readers to see that the
above reference is not out of context).
Dear Farzana: You deny being a proponent of
Ijtihad in Post 81, and yet you have guts to tell
us in Post #81 & 88 that you wish to advocate the
line of Omar Bin Khitab, which is nothing but
Ijtihad. I might have misunderstood you but it
seems there is confusion in your various
assertions. However, I am certain if you make
ijtihad whether by Omar Bin Khitab or anyone else,
a precedent in Islamic jurisprudence; you are
unwittingly paving way for proponents of Islamic
state. Law is the foundation stone of a state,
Islamic or otherwise. And, this is another
contradiction and a stark one.
Reforming religion (Islam) is job of political
forces. You know it. I find it hard to see you
instep with political-Islam. Anyhow, I realize the
fact that reform is a momentous task but I almost
forgot to tell you that reforming Islamic
Jurisprudence is not same as concocting countless
self-contradictions.
Warm regards to you and Shahid Sahib.
Tahir
Dear Farzana: Just in case you forgot, following
is a long excerpt from your book, Islam, Women and
the Challenges of Today; pages 166-167 (Underscore
is mine for reference):
"One cannot underestimate the need for fresh
Ijtihad in light of modern circumstances which
clearly demand some radical changes in thinking
and attitude. The laws of a thousand years ago do
not satisfy the needs of modern Muslim societies.
Muslims need to be reminded that these were human
attempts at understanding Divine Will in the
context of the social ethos of that time.
Independent reasoning by the fathers of
jurisprudence, however exhaustively undertaken
would still not be relevant today as it would be
confined to the mores and ethos of long ago. We
need modern attempts at understanding Divine Will
in light of the current social and cultural
milieu. Ijtihad must continue if we are to keep
pace with the modern world, and there is nothing
in Divine commandments which prevents human beings
from settling issues in an equitable way according
to the dictates of the time. An insistence even on
the Usul-ul-Fiqh, the methodology devised to
understand Divine Will, must be revisited as well,
as these too were conceived by human beings and
therefore remain subject to the limitations of
human reasoning”.