Discovering Islam

What is the proper relationship between revelation, reason and tradition? For this relationship was warped by the politicization of religion. Reason was subordinated to tradition which, in addition, is treated as a "judge" of revelation. This requires a reset. The repression of reason and the treatment of tradition as "revelation form God" tradition warped the knowledge of revelation. Knowledge was corrupted further by recourse to the theory of abrogation. The treatment of tradition as "revelation from Allah" produced "traditional Islam." The "abrogation" of the verses of reconciliation by the verse of the sword produced political Islam. Both misrepresent Islam as explained in the Book of Allah. Traditionists required an Islam that would pacify the masses, by making them subservient to rulers. This was expedited by recourse to traditions requiring unquestioning loyalty to tradition. Hawkish rulers required a rendition of Islam that would provide a "religious" justification for waging wars of aggression, prohibited in revelation. Mercenary ulama stepped up to the challenge and recast Islam, the religion of reconciliation, as a religion of war. The "abrogation" of the verses of reconciliation was justified by recourse to verses 9:29 and 9:05. The "religious" justification of wars of aggression catered to the expansionary agenda of rulers, within the epic struggle between the abode of peace (dar al-Islam) against the abode of non-belief (dar al-kufr). The turn from revelation to tradition was reflected in the recording of traditions. The turn was expedited by the repression of reason. Further errors encompass the perception that tradition can "abrogate" and "replace" parts of revelation. Jurists allegedly possess the power to "abrogate" and "replace" revealed rulings, too. The renewal of the umma requires a return to the Book of Allah. The rehabilitation of the knowledge of revelation requires a reengagement of reason. The "eclipse" of revelation by tradition placed revelation under the jurisdiction of tradition in exegesis, jurisprudence, and international relations. Tradition became a furqan over Allah's Furqan. Tradition superseded revelation. In exegesis, tradition is treated as "revelation from God." In jurisprudence, rulings from tradition and the ulema at times replace revealed rulings. In politics, ruling elites engaged in wars of aggression, waging jihad al-talab. Retaliation for aggression triggered the fall of the empire. The past is riddled with catastrophes. What to do? While revelation emphasises justice, ethics and reason, we are hard put to find a tradition, let alone a book on justice, ethics and rationality in the secondary literature. Bukhari features no entries on justice, ethics, or reason. What kind of Islam are we getting from "tradition"? Is it Islam without justice, ethics and reason? Is it the Islam of the Quran? Is it the Islam of revelation or the Islam of tradition? Have the practices of the predecessors eclipse the revealed word of God? Did the umma turn from revelation to tradition? Has tradition superseded revelation? Has tradition provided reliable knowledge to the Muslim umma? Does revelation expect us to follow tradition or revelation? Traditional Islam teaches that tradition "explains" and "details" revelation. This rests on the assumption that revelation is unclear and insufficiently detailed. But the Book of Allah says that it is clear and fully detailed. Rationalists were faulted by traditionists for placing reason above revelation. But the followers of tradition place tradition and the rulings of the ulema above revelation. The attainment of these "coups" was assisted by a few unwarranted presuppositions. To justify the recourse to tradition to "explain" revelation, tradition was treated as "revelation from God." For verses 44, 45, and 47 of chapter 5 say that anyone that "judges" by what Allah did not reveal is a nonbeliever, wrongdoer and a rebel, and "explaining" requires "judging."

Sdílet