Dialogue as a Track for a Relevant Theology

Last Updated on , 30 November -0001 00:00

But what started as a dynamic process of understanding and explaining faith, through discussion with the other, even through polemics, soon turned into a closed apologetical system, directed at the Other, here both the external Other and the internal one: the doubters from within.
Theology was soon perceived as a scholastic construct, where the new emerging theologians tried to find THE answers once and for all. Once the system was built, it became like an untouchable monument that people can only admire from without, or even from within, yet without being able to know question it or move any stone from that construct. What they could do at best, was add a decoration here and there, or make smaller copies of the monument, or more ‘modern’ copies of it, as happened in the 19th century.

Theology was therefore stuck in its own system, because the concept of this apologetic theology was that of coming up with a construct answering detractors and doubters once and for all. Whereas theology as understood today, is the process or dynamic of facing questions that grip the human being and the believer in his/her itinerary in this world, and trying to find answers by interrogating the religious texts. It is a process that should never cease, since it is always in interaction with the new givens at hand, in a world that is constantly moving. Further, it is a process that should never reach a perfect system, because once it is imprisoned in a perfect and comprehensive system, it signs the death of all mental activity to the adherents of the religious system it tends to classify.

Luckily, in Islamic history, even if traditional or official theology has been fixed once and for all, other theologies kept on emerging, whether in the sufi sphere, in the un-orthodox groups, or recently, after a long period of sclerosis, among modern religious thinkers and among female theologians.  Moved by a need to understand religion from within, or in interaction with others, these theologies should not be discarded since they come in response to growing questions in the lives of believers faced with questioning in spiritual, political, social and economic matters.

Being a dynamic process, theology is necessarily heightened in times of confrontation between cultures, because confrontation places the believer face to face with new perceptions and new questions that spring out from comparison with other systems. It is therefore in times of crisis that the human mind is the most challenged and the most creative, because a crisis is a crucial or decisive point or situation that requires being resolved.
Our day and age is at the same time a period of confrontation and a period of world-wide opening and communication, like never before. It represents a conjuncture in history where everything is possible. What I argue here is that we have now a golden opportunity, when it comes to Muslim classical and official theology, to open up to theologies from within and without, and to engage with them in a fruitful dialogue. This dialogue can preserve traditional theology by renovating it, and can give all other theologies emerging from Muslim experience due credit. Finally, in our day of communication, I argue that a relevant theology takes into account not only the diversity within by diversity without, when it dares to engage in dialogue with theologies from other religions.

I shall give here three examples of theologies in dialogue, highlighting in each case the supplementary dialogue that is demanded. In all three cases, before presenting their theology, I present the lives of the people for their life experience, where confrontation abounds in different ways, shaped their thought and theology.

1-ABDEL KADER AND THE LIVED THEOLOGY OF THE OTHER

Born in 1808, the Emir Abdel Kader, of sufi background, witnessed the invasion of his country Algeria by French troops, and became, for a period of 15 years, the leader of Algerian resistance. In 1947 he gives himself up, and is imprisoned for a period of 5 years in France. Yet he uses this time of imprisonment to engage in dialogue with Christian officials and believers. Liberated in 1952, he comes back to the east, to Turkey first then to Damascus in 1955, where he resigns from politics to pursue religious and mystical education. In 1960, after the sanguinary events in Mount Lebanon between Muslims and Christians, he senses that the crises will reach Damascus, and fears for the unarmed Christian population in Damascus. He starts writing to Muslim officials and religious leaders telling them to beware and stop their communities from what they are about to do, by preaching a return to calm, and talks with the governor of Damascus and the council of Damascus, where he proclaims:”if the city is invaded, I will place myself and my horsemen in the midst of the Christian district, and I will fight the Muslim hordes until my last breath. I will die, if need be, for the honor of Islam, whose law prohibits crimes of such nature”

As was foreseen by Abdul Kader, the events started on July 8 1960, when some Christians painted crosses on Muslim shops. In retaliation, Muslims publicly insult the cross and throw dirt on them. Ahmad Pasha, governor of Damascus, punishes the Muslims who did that by making them sweep the streets of Damascus with chains on their feet. This was the pretext that Muslim hordes took to invade the Christian districts of Damascus, pillaging, burning and killing innocent people with all sorts of weapons. Abdel Kader starts by hiding people who managed to escape in his big home and those of his fellow Algerians (the European consuls and their aids, the lazarist fathers, the Sisters of Charity. Then seeing that the Ottoman soldiers were doing nothing to stop the hordes, he goes with his horsemen to the Christian district (in another Christian district other Muslim notables were helping Christians), soon joined by Druze horsemen sent by a sheikh in Hawran who had listened to Abdel Kader. They start pulling people out and saving people from the hordes to take them to Abdel Kader’s house, then when his house was filled with saved Christians, to the citadel. 3000 Christians died during these 2 day events, but Abdel Kader managed to save 11 000.

I mentioned these events because the act of Abdel Kader is rooted in his theology, a theology that he developed from his sufi background initially then from his ongoing dialogue with the Other, the Christian from different denominations that he had met in France.

In a letter to Monsignor Pavy, the Bishop of Algeria, as a reply to the Mgr’s letter praising Abdul Kader testimony of solidarity, he says: “All good that we did for the Christians, we had to do it out of fidelity to our own Muslim faith and to respect the rights of humanity. For all the creatures are the family of God, and the most loved ones by God are those who are the most useful to His family” (quoting thus a hadith by the Prophet Muhammad)
For, according to Abdul Kader: “All religion brought about by prophets, from Adam to Muhammad, are based on two principles: the exaltation of God, the Most High, and compassion to His creatures. Outside of these two principles, there is but ramifications on which divergences are of no importance. The law of Muhammad is, amongst all doctrines, the one that shows the utmost attachment and importance to the respect of compassion and mercy, and to everything that ensures social cohesion and preserves from dissension. But those who belong to the religion of Muhammad have moved away from it. “

The example of Abdul Kader is an example of a lived theology of Islam and of the Other as seen in Islam. It could not have reached this limit had he not had numerous open dialogue sessions with faithful Christians, one of which became his dear friend, the Swiss protestant Charles Eynard, whom he calls “the loved one in God”, and the “loved one who has loved us for the sake of God’s Face”.

Following this dialogue between Muslim and Christian theology that led to a real witnessing of values and beliefs, what is needed today is a dialogue between Abdel Kader’s theology and Traditional Official theology of the other. For the thought and lived example of Abdul Kader can really help Muslim traditional officials in their struggle against extremism that is emerging within the Muslim community.

2- FARID ESACK AND THEOLOGY OF LIBERATION

If Abdel Kader’s example is that of a sufi who dialogued with the Other, Farid Esack is the example of a “modern” muslim theologian whose dialogue and struggle against Apartheid side by side with the Other led to develop a muslim theology of Liberation.

Farid Esack is a South African muslim of Indo-Pakistani descent, of very humble background, that lived in his youth terrible moments where he was with his mother and brothers thrown out of their home, because they lived in a district claimed by the white. In their times of desperation, comfort and consolation came not from their family or their fellow Muslims, but from their Christian black neighbor who was undergoing the same plight. Later Esack got a scholarship to Pakistan, where he kept on cultivating friendships with Christians, alongside his commitment to Muslim revivalist groups. And when he came back to South Africa in 1982, he was engaged, heading a muslim association called The Call of Islam, in the struggle against Apartheid alongside Nelson Mandela and Rev. Desmond Tutu. Here again he lives brotherhood with non muslims: Christians, jews, atheists, all fighting for the dignity of man. Here he is attacked by some muslims who consider that he has moved away from “piety” to activism. Esack realizes at this point that all religions are divided in two: those who support injustice and those who, in the name of a coherence of faith, fight injustice, seeing in it an insult to God. This leads him to a theological reflection, that he does in dialogue with Christian theology, namely Liberation theology  (Dom Herder Camarra, Gustavo Guttierez). (he was a member of the world parliament of religions, teacher at Western Cape University, Birmingham, Harvard, Moscow….)
Finding answers to his questions in the Qur’an, he re-examines surat al Ma’un

Al Ma’un (107)
Have you seen him who denies Religion?
That is he who repels the orphan
and does not urge the feeding of the needy.
So woe to them who pray,
those who are heedless of their prayers,
those who make a pretence,
and deny aid.

And says: “Surah al Ma’un for example, supplies an interesting perception of religion by defining the rejecter of religion as ‘the one who is rough to the orphan’ and who ‘does not encourage the feeding of the poor’. From this qur’anic chapter it is evident that while religion has much to do with the worshipping of the One God, it is also very much about making the connection between that worship and the suffering of others”
Redefining what Islam is about, he asserts: “Islam as a religion is also a way of life and the ritual forms of worship are a part of religion; they are an important part, but still only a part. If our worship is not linked to our lives and to people’s suffering, then it becomes a safe part of religion, a part that all the decision makers in unjust socio-economic structures would want to encourage. The separation between this-worldly an other-worldly matters has never really struck a responsive chord in the world of Islam”

Esack adds that: “Racism dehumanizes, so do poverty and sexism. Believing in the dignity of people means being a part of the struggle to eliminate these. You cannot ‘trust’ your own community and believe that all others are not good; nor your own gender and think the other to be inferior. This is not trust but arrogance rooted in one’s own insecurity. An injury to one segment of humanity is an injury to all.”

In his struggle against all forms of discrimination, Esack reminds us of the true values of Islam, and of the number one value in the Qur’an: equity, and the struggle for it: 4:135 O ye who believe! stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin. (An Nisa’ 135); 5:8 O ye who believe! stand out firmly for God, as witnesses to justice, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to piety: and fear God. For God is well-acquainted with all that ye do. (Al Ma’ida 8)

Springing out of his dialogue with other theologies and his life struggle side by side with non-muslims, his theology and thought can be put in turn in dialogue with traditional theology, and remind us that, especially in times of confrontation, what is to be fought for is not the dignity of a given religion but the dignity of people from all religions.

3-DIALOGUE WITH THE OTHER WITHIN: BETWEEN FEMININE AND MASCULINE THEOLOGY

The 1980’s have witnessed the emergence of Muslim feminism that takes on many shapes: from work on the ground to working on texts and their interpretation. Muslim feminists are in fact faithful believers in Islam that abide by the Qur’an but that question the interpretations made by men in the middle ages of verses concerning women.

One example is Dr. Asma Barlas (Pakistani-American) the first woman in Pakistan to work in the ministry of foreign affairs, but General Dhiaul Haqq ended her diplomatic career for her criticism of the military regime. She then worked in the opposition magazine but had to leave Pakistan in 1983.  She went to the United States, where she became a University Professor and the Director of the center of studies on culture, race and ethnicity at Ithaca College, NY. For her work on women in Islam and on pluralism, Barlas has received many prizes, form Indonesia, Pakistan, the American association of women scholars and from the United Nations, Public Information Department.

In 2002, Asma Barlas published a book entitled: “Believing women in Islam, unreading patriarchal interpretations of the Qur’an”. Barlas does not want to replace the “patriarchal” system in Islam with a “matriarchal” one, she just interprets the Qur’an along its own lines. What allows her to unread male-oriented interpretations of the Qur’an, that affected perception of women as well as fiqh (jurisprudence) is the Qur’an itself, and a reconstruction of theology based on the Qur’an. She starts her thesis with the concept of God’s justice, for she believes that “it is not only in the Qur’an’s teachings about human creation, ontology and relationships that we can find liberatory potential but also in the very nature of Divine Ontology” (p.15). In the Qur’an, it is repeated on and on again that God is not unjust. Therefore, He cannot be unjust to women and treat them as less.

A second basis for her work is the possibility of varied interpretations of verses in the Qur’an, that Qur’an and hadith confirm. She adds that: “while noting its own polysemy -i.e many meanings that can be given to a single verse -  the Qur’an confirms that some meanings … are better than others”. For instance, it praises “Those who listen to the Word and follow the best meaning in it” (az Zumar: 39:18). 

So these theological assumptions, she bases her refutation of the way Qur’anic verses have been interpreted to the disadvantage of women, reminding that the Qur’an is the only Scripture that addresses women directly:
VERILY, for all men and women who have surrendered themselves unto God, and all believing men and believing women, and all truly devout men and truly devout women, and all men and women who are true to their word, and all men and women who are patient in adversity, and all men and women who humble themselves [before God], and all men and women who give in charity, and all self-denying men and self-denying women, and all men and women who are mindful of their chastity, and all men and women who remember God unceasingly: for [all of] them has God readied forgiveness of sins and a mighty reward. (Al Ahzab 33: 35)

Likewise, the Qur’an states that men and women are equal in the story of creation, and in the story of the fall, for in the Qur’an it is not Eve who sinned first and seduced Adam but both of them are represented as having committed the fault and both of them are sent out of the Garden. Finally, the Qur’an states that all humans are God’s vicegerents on earth (khalifa)

Her reading tends therefore to be comprehensive and holistic, i.e. taking the Qur’an as a whole. In this manner, when she stresses out justice of God and gender equality as the general mood of the Quran, the problematic verses concerning women can be seen in the context of this theological fact (God’s fairness) and in their own historical context.

If we have in mind that the Qur’an wanted to give women their rights, we then understand the verses concerning polygamy as a limitation of polygamy and not as a license to marry many, in a context where men could marry up to 20 or 30 women. The verses concerning polygamy are thus a didactic way in which God’s leads men gradually to understand that God intends for them to have one wife, along the verse: “And of His signs is His creation for you of consorts from amongst yourselves, that ye may find rest with them, and His ordaining of love between you and mercy. Verily therein are signs for people who reflect.” (Ar-Rum 30:21)

Such reinterpretation, that takes into account theology and context, from a believer’s perspective, can be of great help to traditional and official Islam, if a dialogue between both is effectuated. For official Islam is under pressure from its societies to change some rules concerning women in personal statute, but they cannot do so unless they are sure they are not contradicting the Qur’an. Barlas’s interpretation, among others, can appease the conscience of Muslim officials who want to affect these changes towards a more just legislation, since it puts this change in accordance with the Qur’an’s intention and God’s will.

CONCLUSION

A relevant theology is a comprehensive theology, a theology that speaks to all men, whether black or white, male or female, rich or poor, from north or from south, from east or from west. Further, it is a theology that hears all men- and women, and children- for they have the most intelligent questions- from within and without. I gave a few examples here of what a theology in dialogue with the other can bring out. Let me reiterate what a dialogue between these theologies and traditional theology can achieve: many people in Islam today do not find in traditional theology the answers to their suffering, whether it be poverty, loss of dignity, discrimation…etc. They grow with a rage, and end up either moving away from religion altogether or finding answers to their rage in dissident Islamism movements and extremist groups that oppose themselves primarily to official Islam. And traditional official Muslim institutions, that try to spread tolerance and peace, are actually being eaten from the inside by these groups and movements that are growing exponentially in the Islamic world.

When I was offered to speak at the cultural panel, I first thought that the religion panel would have been more appropriate for my lecture. Yet when I thought of it again, I realized that it was not a coincidence, because my topic is at the core of culture. A relevant theology for the 21st century, taking into account all people without discrimination and dialoguing with other theologies in the age of communication is a cultural step that is greatly needed today to help muslims to reappropriate their religion. Allowing all these rich and different voices in Islam to enter the monument of official theology can only give it life, permit it to resonate with our time and our questions, and render it more accessible to Muslims around the world. I end with a quote from Abdul Kader, written in 1855: “Tell the one who considers his contemporaries as nothing and gives preeminence to the ancient ones: this ancient one was modern in his time, and this modern one will one day become ancient”.