#asma barlas

[one-page-a-day]

Asma Barlas on the Qur'an and patriarchy (2/2)

(min. 33:46) "A lot of the misogynists in our society basically believe that the woman is biologically inferior. And some of them believe that the only role that women [must] play on earth is to be a mother and basically to serve men. But, you know, misogyny predates Islam and misogyny has beaten down Islam; misogyny sometimes has won over Islam because male privilege is much older than Islam. […]

Fatema Mernissi has done a wonderful study of how when the Quran was still in the process of being revealed to the Prophet Muhammad how the early Muslims are already busy trying to figure out how they could deprive women of the new rights that the Quran was giving them based on “Oh well, you know there's a verse which says: ‘Don't [hand] over the property to those who are weak minded.’”. So immediately they came up with the idea that women are weak minded.

But what I want to say is that these constructions of gender have nothing to do with the Quran. They have zero relationship to the Quran. I always ask Muslims to show me one verse which actually says that the different rights that the Quran gives women and men with respect to some issues are rooted in the claim that men are biologically superior [to] women or because women and men are opposites or unequal or incommensurable with each other. Not one verse says that. So, I see these differential rights as simply representing the sexual division of labor that existed in 7th century Arabia. And I believe in an omniscient God.

That is to say, I believe in an all-knowing God, and I believe that God knew that that patriarchy would not last forever and would fade away along with all of its institutions of war mongering, concubinage, multiple marriages, slavery and everything else. [The Quran] tried to ameliorate the rights of women at that time and it's enormously progressive. But it's a disservice, not just to the Quran, but to a very conception of God to assume that what was OK in the 7th century specifically based on what existed there that it should be OK now even though many of those circumstances don't exist. So, it’s a very big disservice to Islam to deny the Quran’s universalism by tying it to a 7th century tribal Arab patriarchy and insisting on reading it only through the lenses of that patriarchy, and only when it suits you." (min. 36:30)

Asma Barlas, "Riada talks to Asma Barlas on 'Believing Women in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an'", Dignified Resilience with Riada Akyol, 13.8.2020, Spotify.

[haram-jaan]

I think if I spoke about how there’s a strong and backed up opinion on how hijab isn’t actually fardh in this day and age you’d all come for me looool but the reason more people don’t believe this opinion (by a scholar) is bc the scholar is a woman herself that’s it tbh

[b-lessings]

To conservative Muslims, terms like antipatriarchal, sexual inequality, liberation, and even hermeneutics—all of which I use liberally—smack too much of the epistemology of non-Muslim Others to be safely applied to themselves, let alone used in reading the Qur��ān. Consequently, even though I engage Western/feminist thought only circumspectly, and often to differentiate and privilege what I take to be a Qur’ānic viewpoint, my language and the mere act of engagement are likely to render me a ‘‘Western feminist’’ in the eyes of those Muslims who are prone to hearing in such language, and in any criticism of Muslim men, the subversive voices of Western feminists. Mislabeling Muslim women in this way not only denies the specificity, autonomy, and creativity of their thought, but it also suggests, falsely, that there is no room from within Islam to contest inequality or patriarchy.

- ‘‘Believing Women’’ in Islam, Asma Barlas.

[inqilabi]

Hi! You made a post recently about western influenced feminism in pakistan and how we had our own traditions of resistance and I wanted to know more about what you meant... are there any readings about it that you could pleaseee link? My knowledge about feminism is recent and I am still new to it. I have a feeling my feminism is also very western branded and I want to change that 😬

Can you elaborate the abt the thing you said? I think upper class detached Pakistanis who are. For lack of better words, safe, always import this white shallow feminism instead.

Hi not sure if you sent both of these anons, but I’ll answer both here.

When I was talking about western influenced feminism, I was just thinking about just two surface things- one these sort of recent women’s marches where you see those ‘slut shaming’ or ‘whoreophobia’ signs (those terms bother me in a western context let alone a Pakistani context). And also, transactivism in Pakistan is NGO inspired whereas Pakistan already has a ‘third gender system’. And they don’t want to be seen as ‘trans’. But when you see these marches and pictures on social media, it almost seems as if you’re transported to a tropical western country lol. I mean I do like that twitter and social media has made these protests so accessible and everyone is talking about them. I definitely feel that without it, feminist activism was hush hush. Like you would have read about 1970s protests in literature may be. And was definitely the business before of only people who organized. So it has its benefits but downsides. With such large unprincipled unorganized crowds, activism loses its meaning. And quite paradoxically becomes about individualism. 

And yes upper class Pakistani women have access to education. And their experiences are sometimes very different, they unimaginable kind of freedom with access to wealth and education. But are also at the same time, oppressed when it comes to marriage.

anyway. Pakistan has a history of various kinds of marxist activists. A lot female activists wrote great literary works as part of that activism. Ismat Chughtai, Rashid Jahan and Asma Barlas come to mind. You can read this for background

[islamic-art-and-quotes]

Salamaleikum. Brother, I hope you are in good health. I have a question to ask if Islam is patriarchal and if it support feminism?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

Thank you. Please see my articles A woman’s worth does not depend on her accomplishments and Believing Women in Islam (2019) by Asma Barlas and David Raeburn Finn for my views. You can also find many more articles by me on my site on these pages: Islam and Feminism and Women in Islam: Answers and Rulings.

[themoonsbeloved]

Do you have any recommendations for books by Muslim women? Specifically discussions about being a Muslim woman, but if you any recs in general I’ll take them

I’ve been taking regular note of books that many Muslim feminist/activist accounts have recommended over on instagram, so these aren’t books I have been able to get yet of course, but I’d still like to give you some options: 

Its Not About the Burqa - Miriam Khan (Probably what I would recommend to you first given what you specifically want to read about)Believing Women in Islam, Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Quran - Asma BarlasMen in Charge? Rethinking Authority in Muslim Legal Tradition - Ziba Mir-HosseiniQuran and Women - Amina WadudFeminist Edges of the Quran - Aysha A. HidayatullahWomen in the Quran- Asma Lamrabet

I hope this is fine!

[balkanin]

Ponovno štampanje karikatura Charlie Hebdoa ne tiče se slobode govora

Ponovno štampanje karikatura Charlie Hebdoa ne tiče se slobode govora

Asma Barlas

Francuski satirični časopis Charlie Hebdo ponovo je na djelu: odlučio je ponovo objaviti pogrdne karikature Poslanika Muhammeda koji su isprovocirali nasilni napad na njih 2015. Urednici kažu da je “ključno“ ponovo ih štampati uoči suđenja počiniteljima tog nasilja.

Prije deset godina, 2005, danski list Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten također je objavio desetak pogrdnih karikatura…

[votenet-blog]

Letter to the Editor: Politics professor responds to Ithacan editorial

Letter to the Editor: Politics professor responds to Ithacan editorial

Author: Asma Barlas / Source: theithacan.org

Thank you for your editorial on IC Loves Israel Day pointing out that the name is politicized and misleading, hence inappropriate (April 18). I would have said as much had I accepted The Ithacan’sinvitation to share my thoughts on the subject, but I didn’t. I feel it shouldn’t fall largely to Muslim critics of Israel’s policies to do the work of…

[one-page-a-day]

21st of August 2024

I handed in my paper on women's reform in islam, focusing on Asma Barlas and amina wadud and their rereading of the Quran.

Both scholars had an enormous influence on me and I am so grateful that I got to experience both of them speaking in a conference at my university. They both opened a window in my mind to a liberating reading of the Quran that focuses on justice, mercy and compassion.

Both scholars develop their own methodology to derive gender justice as a premise from the quranic text. While wadud claims that the Quran makes no comment on gender hierarchies but rather emphasizes compassion between humans espacially between spouses, Barlas asserts that the Quran is anti-patriarchal.

From writing this paper I have learned that 'islamic feminism' is a very broad term and that the discussion of gender justice in islam has a huge history leading back to the 1920s. And that, in the end, it's not about the text, but what one makes of it. Meaning is not something that is handed to us on a platter. Islam and the Quran have no voice of their own, people have to make it speak, and this is the duty of all believers, in every new age.

Now, I'll be preparing my essay on the topic of commemorative culture and the ethical implications of the imperative "Remember!". In our seminar we have talked a lot about german commemorative culture, but I might pursue a different path and put my focus on palestinian commemoration. I was waiting for an opportunity to dive into palestinian history anyways.

[haram-jaan]

Hiii idk if you’ll remember but a while ago you mentioned this women scholar and how she said something along the lines of women not needing to wear hijab, can you please tell me her name

Asma Barlas

[inqilabi]

I think it would be a good time to mention, if there are newer followers, that I believe Islam is a patriarchial religion, particularly as codified and interpreted by the main classical jurists. Like I haven't blogged about that in ages so .. but I am very much fond of female Muslim scholarship that challenges that. Like Amina Wadud, Kecia Ali, Asma Barlas, Ayesha S Chaudry etc and would highly recommend that everyone read their work.

*don't reblog cos I also don't want no muslim haters lol*

[we-would-just-be-robots]

Discuss the concept of gender justice in relation to qur’anic passages about rights and responsibilities of men and women

In this essay, I will be looking at the rights and responsibilities of men and women in accordance to Islam. To do so I will look at Qur’anic verses that are used in reference to the rights and responsibilities of women, and a variety of secondary sources. Asma Barlas identifies two key questions in relation to gender justice and the Qur’an, Does the Qur’an ‘condone sexual inequality or oppression’, or does it ‘permit and encourage liberation for women?’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 1)

Asma Barlas states that ‘a definition of patriarchy is fundamental to being able to establish the Qur’an as an antipatriarchal’, or a patriarchal, text. (Barlas, 2002, p. 12) and offers two definitions, a specific and a universal one. Barlas’ specific definition assumes that there is a real and a symbolic continuum between God, or Allah, and fathers.  The specific definition has a father-right theory, which also extends to husband’s claim on his wife and children. The Qur’an was written in a society that functioned via this traditional form of patriarchy. The classical definition speaks of patriarchy in a historical sense, referring to a past culture and using it as an explanation for what may be contained in the Qur’an.

The broader definition that Barlas offers sees the Qur’an’s teachings as being universal. In this definition, the father rule has ‘reconstituted itself’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 12) into a political system which privileges males. This system operates off of three major claims, that ‘essential ontological and ethical-moral differences between women and men’, ‘these differences are a function of nature/biology’ and that the Qur’an’s different, unequal treatment of ‘women and men affirms their inherent inequality.’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 12) The broad patriarchal definition is more applicable to modern Islamic cultures.

It’s important to consider the political context before Islam was introduced. The description Daniel Brown gives of it make it seem rather grim for females, he points to things such as female infanticide being denounced ‘harshly and repeatedly’ (Brown, 2003, p. 26) and any woman who did survive to adulthood belonged to her father, only to later belong to her husband. Women had ‘no economic or social independence or rights’ (Brown, 2003, p. 26). Additionally, poetry at the time portrays women ‘primarily as sexual objects’ (Brown, 2003, p. 26), further diminishing any value women have that isn’t to serve men. The introduction of the Qur’an could actually be seen as quite beneficial, for women of the time, as it ‘not only repudiated female infanticide’ granting more of them a chance at actually surviving, ‘but gave women economic and legal status independent of their husbands and guaranteed daughters a share of inheritance’ (Brown, 2003, p. 26) so was a big step forwards, for the time. Cook notes that Khadija was an important and wealthy widow around the time Islam was introduced to the area, and she was powerful enough to employ Muhammad as her agent, and was the one to propose marriage to him. Cook points to Khadija as evidence that some pre-Islamic women did quite well for themselves, but this doesn’t mean that the society wasn’t completely horrific for women, it’s just a rare occurrence.

Asma Barlas, in response to her earlier question asking if the text is ‘sexist and misogynistic’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 1), presents evidence to support this view. For example, she references the Qur’an’s different treatment of women and men in regard to issues such as marriage, divorce and inheritance. Barlas places the blame for misogynistic readings of Islam on exegetes and commentators rather than the Qur’an’s teachings. In particular, Barlas points to the ‘Golden Age of Islam, which coincided with the Western Middle Ages’ as being a particularly ‘well known’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 9) time of misogyny, during this time many secondary texts were produced, these texts were influenced by men’s ‘own needs and experiences while either excluding or interpreting . . . women’s experiences.’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 9). The erasure of women’s experiences and voices in the secondary texts are often mistaken for a lack of representation in the text itself, and allows for a ‘striking consensus’ amongst Muslims when it comes to women’s issues.

Fatima Mernissi provides a similar approach, she focuses mainly on secondary texts, and claims that the misogynistic traditions sprout from either fabrications or a misunderstanding regarding the context of the Qur’anic verse. In particular, she singles out Abu Hurayra as being especially bad for fabricating, and claims that many intellectuals ‘sold themselves . . . to politicians who were trying to pressurise the collectors of religious knowledge to fabricate traditions that benefited them.’ (Mernissi, 1992, p. 45). She gives an example, the Qur’anic verse 33:53 which is often used to support the seclusion of women, ‘When you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition.’ (Qur’an, 33:53), according to Mernissi the context for this is that the Prophet had just married, and needed personal space, and talking from behind a partition is likely a matter of respect. Mernissi rejects traditions which are contrary to her view under the belief that the Prophet had such a positive record in his treatment of women that any evidence to the contrary is not evidence at all. Daniel Brown criticises Mernissi for ignoring more problematic Quranic verses which contain clear patriarchal statements and instead focuses on Hadith. Mernissi’s thesis also implies that ‘Muslim community was able to completely depart from the spirit of the Prophet’s teaching remarkably short order’ (Daniel Brown 295), but this isn’t hard to believe considering that pre-Islamic Arabia was likely even more misogynistic than the misogynistic traditions Mernissi rejects.

Brown also looks at the approach of another Islamic feminist, Amina Wadud. Wadud takes the opposite approach to Mernissi, choosing to focus more on the Qur’an than on secondary texts like Hadith. Wadud takes on passages that seem to establish the superiority of men over women, like Quran 4:34, which states that ‘Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred one of them over another.’ (Quran, 4:34) The interpretation Wadud takes from passages like these are that they represent a responsibility between men and women in society, and that they don’t represent men’s superiority over women. Further in the verse it gives instructions on how to punish a rebellious wife, ‘banish them to their couches and beat them.’ Wadud interprets this as ‘prohibiting unchecked violence’ (Wadud 76) against females, as it presents other punishments that are meant to be used before physical violence. This interpretation still permits physical violence against women, even if as a last resort, which a majority of modern views, especially western ones, would find inappropriate. Brown explains Wadud’s approach as restricting  the meaning of passages with negative implications for women by saying they refer to specific contexts, and shouldn’t be universalised, however the Qur’an is the words of God, and ‘one cannot get much more universal than that’. (Brown 296)

One view that is pushed by Islamic feminists, is that the Qur’an may actually ‘permit and encourage liberation for women’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 1), as mentioned previously various commentators believe that the Qur’an has been misinterpreted to enforce patriarchal beliefs, but the Qur’an ‘can be read in multiple modes’. Muslim theology makes a distinction between divine speech and the earthly realisation, to avoid ‘collapsing God’s Words with our interpretations of those Words’ (Barlas, 2002, p. 10), this view can be supported with a verse in the Qur’an which warns against confusing the words of the Qur’an with those of readings of it. There are some parts of the Qur’an which can be hard to blame on readings or certain interpretations, for example the verse mentioned earlier clearly permits beating someone’s wife.

The next part of this essay will look at various verses of the Qur’an and analyse their implications for women, and look at approaches from various commentators. The verse mentioned repeatedly before, verse 4:34, quite clearly states that men are preferred over women, and they are the ‘managers of the affairs of women’ (Quran 4:34). For what reason are men seemingly preferred to women? Cook cites a commentator named Ibn al-Arabi, who says God’s preference is due to the intellectual superiority and the superiority in religious performance that men have over women, another commentator Hawwa says that ‘it is clear that a man is to rule over his wife’ (Cook, 2000, p. 39) citing reasons such as men’s superiority in terms of intellect and judgement. Taken at face value the verse ‘endorses male dominance’ and gives ‘the husband a right . . . to beat a rebellious wife’ (Cook, 2000, p. 38) Michael Cook comments that the view of male dominance is a common one, especially in monotheistic religions, however permitting violence against one’s wife is much rarer. It could be argued that Islam does genuinely view this as an undesirable last resort, The Prophet reportedly never beat a woman, and even banned the practice among his followers until he was told that it was ‘producing an undesirable shift between husbands and wives’ by his companion Umar. (Cook, 2000, p. 105)

Another couple of important verses refer to women's legal status, as mentioned earlier the introduction of the Qur’an helped to improve the rights of women. Females were granted a portion of the inheritance, however males receive a portion equal ‘to that of two females’ (Quran 4:11), so females are still viewed as less valuable. Additionally, two women are equal to one man in terms of being a witness, with the justification being that ‘if one of them errs, the other can remind her.’ (Quran 2:282). The obvious connotations of these verses are that it heavily enforces the view that ‘women are worth half of what men are’ (Brown, 2003, p. 273). A modern commentator Iqbal states that the women’s worth ‘isn’t derived from any inherent inferiority’ (Brown, 2003, p. 273), but actually comes the economic opportunities and status women are given from society, this view naturally leads to the conclusion that if women’s worth is based on society then as society changes to be more equal women should be viewed as more valuable, especially in western countries. However, this conclusion ‘clashes with a strong tendency in modern Islam which emphasises the timelessness, eternal relevance and perfection of the Qur’an.’ (Brown, 2003, p. 273) but at the same time Iqbal’s statement that women don’t have any ‘inherent inferiority’ can be supported by the Qur’an’s creation story, Wadud points out that ‘femininity and masculinity are not created characters imprinted into the very primordial nature of female and male persons’ (Wadud, 1999), and instead these come from cultural perceptions.

 The Qur’an, at face value, presents women as inferior and the property of their husbands or fathers, it devalues them in terms of independence and economic means, it restricts their inheritance and makes them appear inferior in terms of intelligence. However, certain verses of the Qur’an are clearly subject to different meanings based on interpretation, whereas others are not, it is important to not mistake interpretation for the actual words of the Qur’an though, this applies to both liberal and patriarchal interpretations. The Qur’an came about in a time of extreme patriarchy, where women seem to be without any rights, for the time the Qur’an presented protection for women by granting them independence and economic opportunities, however in the modern times with the prevalence of western feminist views the Qur’an appears to enforce patriarchal views, from how the Prophet behaved it is clear this isn’t the aim of the Qur’an and instead commentators should look for feminist and liberal verses within the Qur’an, and dismiss patriarchal ones as being outdated.

Bibliography  

Barlas, A., 2002. Unreading  Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. s.l.:University of Texas  Press.

Brown, D., 2003. A New Introduction to Islam. s.l.:Wiley-Blackwell.

Cook, M., 2000. The Koran: A Very Short  Introduction. s.l.:Oxford University Press.

Mernissi, F., 1992. The Veil and the Male Elite: A  Feminist Interpretation of Women's Rights in Islam. Reprint ed.  s.l.:Perseus Books.

Wadud, A., 1999. Quran and Woman: Rereading the  Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective. s.l.:Oxford University Press.

[islamic-art-and-quotes]

I see a lot of women calling men trash and generalising it. How right is that? And what should be a Muslim's approach towards feminism?

It is uncivilized to call any human trash. People who say that simply lack civility. For my views on feminism and the Muslim stance toward it please see my book review: Believing Women in Islam (2019) by Asma Barlas and David Raeburn Finn

[balkantimes]

O slobodi govora i 'islamističkom separatizmu'

Je li islam zaista protiv slobode govora; da li Francuska boluje od 'islamističkog separatizma', kako tvrdi Emmanuel Macron?

Asma Barlas

Odluka francuskog lista Charlie Hebdo da ponovo štampa karikature poslanika Muhammeda u septembru pokrenula je još jedan val nasilja u Francuskoj, repeticiju onoga što se dogodilo kada su ove slike prvobitno objavljenje 2015. godine. Ovaj put je vlada odgovorila na napade projekcijom karikatura na javnim zgradama, dok je predsjednik Emmanuel Macron izjavio da je islam "u krizi" i obećao je da će iskorijeniti "islamistički separatizam" u Francuskoj.

Početkom septembra sam se u jednom mišljenju zalagala za ideju da bi trebalo biti moguće osuditi muslimane koji ubijaju ljude zbog karikatura Poslanika, dok se istovremeno priznaje kako im je namjena da prikažu spoznajnu nadmoć nad muslimanima, već ranjivom manjinom u Francuskoj i u Evropi. Također sam postavila pitanje: Je li neutaživa potreba da se recikliraju takve slike zaista vježba slobode govora? Neki kritičari čitaju moj esej kao praštanje ubistva od muslimana i osuđivanje ili neuspjeh da razumijem koncept slobode govora. U narednim redovima pozabavit ću se dvjema povezanim pitanjima: kako su muslimani došli do odbrane slobode govora i Macronovim lukavim referiranjem na "islamski separatizam".

Sloboda govora se zasniva na principu da ljudi imaju pravo izraziti svoje ideje i vjerovanja bez straha od odmazde. Međutim, iako je koncept slobode govora jasno sekularni, moderni i zapadnjački, ovaj princip sam po sebi to nije. Kur'an, također, potvrđuje ljudsko pravo da vjeruje i da proklamira različite istine bez da ih nameću drugima. On, također, poziva na obuzdavanje pred zlostavljanjem, nevjerovanjem i verbalnim napadima i zabranjuje ismijavanje božanstva druge religije. Kur'an dolazi do ovih pozicija zato što promovira religijski i rasni diverzitet.

'Onaj koji je najsvjesniji Boga'

Objava opisuje diverzitet kao znak božanske milosti. Neki ajeti kažu da je među Božijim "dokazima... raznovrnost jezika vaših i boja vaših: to su, zaista pouke za one koji znaju". (30:22). Drugi ajeti pojašnjavaju da "[je svima nama Bog] propisao zakon i pravac. A da je Allah htio, On bi vas sljedbenicima jedne vjere učinio." (5:48). Umjesto toga, iako nas je Bog stvorio od istog bića (nefsa), On nas je podijelio na različite "narode i plemena, da bismo se upoznavali". Najbolji među nama, Kur'an kaže, nije određena grupa, već "onaj koji je najsvjesniji [Boga]" (49:13).

Naravno, razlike mogu poroditi uzajamno razumijevanje ako su ljudi spremni biti uljudni i blagi u postupanju s drugima. S tim ciljem, Kur'an u više navrata upozorava muslimana da se ne raspravljaju s kritičarima, osim "na najljubazniji način" i da na napade odgovaraju samo u onolikoj mjeri koliko vam je [nepravde] učinjeno, a "ako otrpite, to je doista, bolje za strpljive" (16:125-128). Kur'an, također, zabranjuje muslimanima da ismijavaju bogove drugih ljudi, kako oni ne bi uzvratili ismijavanjem našeg Boga. Ali, sve i ako to urade, Kur'an nam ne dozvoljava da im naudimo, niti propisuje kazne za nevjerovanje, otpadništvo ili bogohuljenje. Arapska riječ za bogohuljenje, tajdif, zapravo ne postoji u Kur'anu. Važno je istaknuti da su zakoni o bogohuljenju u nekim muslimanskim državama uvezeni iz Evrope tokom ili nakon kolonijalizma.

Ako muslimani uđu u raspravu sa "sljedbenicima Knjige" – Jevrejima i kršćanima – Kur'an nas savjetuje da ih uvjerimo da mi vjerujemo "u ono što se objavljuje nama i u ono što je objavljeno vama: a naš Bog i vaš Bog jeste jedan" (29:46). A ako nas nevjernici napadnu ili izvrše na nas pritisak, možemo slijediti kur'anski savjet Poslaniku: "Reci: 'O, vi nevjernici, ja se neću klanjati onima kojima se vi klanjate, a ni vi se nećete klanjati Onome kome se ja klanjam; ja se nisam klanjao onima kojima ste se vi klanjali, a ni vi se niste klanjali Onome kome se ja klanjam. A vama vaša vjera, a meni moja." (109: 1-6).

Politizacija čitanja islama

Nažalost, takva učenja nisu vidno prisutna među muslimanima i postoji mnogo kompleksnih razloga zašto ljudi čitaju svete tekstove na način na koji to čine. Jedan je taj što je prakticiranje islama postalo ispolitizirano. Ovo je posebno tačno u Evropi, gdje se muslimanske manjine osjećaju opkoljeno i gdje je, posljedično tome, prakticiranje islama svedeno da defanzivni politički i/ili vojni stav protiv Evropljanja. Muslimani su, naravno, u Evropi od kako su osvojili Španiju u 8. stoljeću, ali njihovo osvajanje nikada nije porodilo ovaj "tip islama". Paradoks je u tome što je najveća žrtva ovog reduciranja religije na politiku otpora sam islam, kur'anska etika blagosti, prihvatanja i uzajamnosti. Historijski kontekst ovog oblika politizacije je evropski kolonijalizam, koji je, također, odgovoran za prisustvo muslimana iz bivših evropskih kolonija u "domovinama" ovih dana.

Ako su, naprimjer, Alžirci danas u Francuskoj, to je tako zato što je Francuska nekoć bila u Alžiru. I ne samo to, Francuska je bila/jeste odgovorna za smrt više od milion Alžiraca tokom svoje vladavine. To su samo cifre iz jedne bivše kolonije s muslimanskom većinom. Međutim, budući da su Francuzi izgleda pokopali ovu prljavu i kriminalnu historiju, nemoguće je istaknuti da Francuska nastavlja viktimizirati ljude koje je već viktimizirala u prošlosti bez da vas optuže da opravdavate nasilje od muslimana.

Mržnja spram islama u ovoj državi nije samo desničarski fenomen. On je zagarantiran njegovim izuzetnim i nepopustljivim fundamentalističkim oblikom sekularizma zvanim laïcité. Druge sekularne države osiguravaju slobodu vjeroispovijesti tako što ostaju neutralne spram religije. Ali ne i Francuska, čiji je brend sekularizma suštinski etnonacionalistički i neprijateljski prema islamu; on čak i naređuje kako bi se muslimanke trebalo odijevati u javnosti, baš kao što to čine i neke muslimanske države.

Aparthejdna kolonijalna država

Ova institucionalizirana pristrasnost spram muslimana ih je getoizirala, zbog čega je, za muslimane i za tamnopute ljude, Francuska umnogome aparthejdna kolonijalna država. Stoga, kada francuski musliman počini zločin, država tog pojedinca ne tretira kao građanina, već kao "islamistu", epitet koji označava kolektivnu krivnju i opravdava kolektivnu kaznu. Biti francuski musliman danas stoga znači nositi "obilježje množine", da citiram jevrejskog tunižanskog intelektualca Alberta Memmija, koji je primijetio težnju francuskih kolonizatora da vide Tunižane kao bezličan i "anoniman kolektivitet".

Ako se Macron brine za separatizam, mogao bi početi razmontiravanjem sekularnog, od države kreiranog aparthejda. Umjesto toga, on se ponaša kao stari francuski kolonizatori, o kojima je Memmi pisao: "Hvaljenje sebe i svojih, ponovljena, čak i iskrena afirmacija izuzetnosti svojih načina i institucija, svoje kulturne i tehničke superiornosti ne brišu temeljnu osudu koju svaki kolonizator nosi u svom srcu." Ako postoji jedna lekcija koju bi Macron mogao naučiti iz francuske kolonijalne prošlosti, to je da "ako kolonizacije uništi koloniziranog, ona također nagriza i kolonizatora".

Stavovi izraženi u ovom tekstu autorovi su i ne odražavaju nužno uredničku politiku Balkantimes.net.

Izvor

[arabyorg]

Book Review: Believing Women in Islam – Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Quran

Book Review: Believing Women in Islam – Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Quran

Muslim feminists have two tedious battles to fight: one against those who hold on to patriarchal notions within their own community, and the other against feminists who refuse any reconciliation between feminism and any ‘Abrahamic’ religion, including Islam. From both sides, they are belittled, misjudged and dismissed. In ‘Believing Women in Islam’ by Saqi Books, Asma Barlas takes on these…