SOCIAL, ETHICAL, POLITICAL, AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF INTERPRETATIONS OF ISLAM’S FOUNDATIONAL TEXT: THE QUR’AN

7/29/2019 SOCIAL, ETHICAL, POLITICAL, AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF INTERPRETATIONS OF ISLAMS FOUNDATIONAL TEXT: T

1/45

REPORT OF THE

International

Symposium on:Social, Ethical,Political and Policy

Implications ofInterpretations ofIslams Foundational

Text: The QuranFunded by:

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs

of the Federal Republic of Germany


2/45

1

SOCIAL,ETHICAL,POLITICAL,ANDPOLICY

IMPLICATIONSOFINTERPRETATIONSOF

ISLAMSFOUNDATIONALTEXT:THEQURAN

ReportoftheSymposiumorganizedbythe

CenterforDialogues:IslamicWorld-U.S.-theWest

NewYorkUniversitysCasaItaliana

November10,2010


3/45

SOCIAL,ETHICAL,POLITICAL,ANDPOLICYIMPLICATIONSOFINTERPRETATIONSOF

ISLAMSFOUNDATIONALTEXT:THEQURAN

Copyright2011byCenterforDialogues:

IslamicWorld-U.S.-TheWest.Allrights

reserved.Nopartofthispublication

maybeusedorreproducedinanymanner

whatsoeverwithoutwrittenpermission

exceptinthecaseofbriefquotations

embodiedincriticalarticlesandreviews.

Formoreinformation,address

CenterforDialogues:IslamicWorld-U.S.-theWest

NewYorkUniversity

194MercerStreet,4thFloor

NewYork,NY,10012-1502


4/45

3

CONTENTSDirectorsPreface 4

ExecutiveSummary 7

OpeningSession 10

SessionINormativeIslamversusHistoricalIslam: 13

ACriticalDistinctionforOurTimesandtheModernEpistemologicalToolsthatMakeItPossible

SessionIIInterpretingtheQuran,Respondingtothe 26

ChallengesoftheModernWorld:

MuslimSocietiesataCrossroads

NotestoSessions 36AppendixI:ConferenceProgram 37

AppendixII:ParticipantBiographies 39

AppendixIII:MustaphaTlilisOpeningStatement 43


5/45

4

DIRECTORSPREFACE

InNovember2010when theNYUCenter for Dialogues convened its symposium onthe

Social,Ethical,PoliticalandPolicyImplicationsofInterpretationsofIslamsFoundationalText:theQuran,Icouldnothavepredictedthepowerfultransformationsthathavetaken

placeacrosstheMuslimworldthesepastfewmonths.Astheseeventscontinuetounfold,analysts and journalistshave repeatedly raised the question: what rolewill Islam play?How will Islam influence the governments and societies that blossom from these

revolutions?Thesequestionsrelateinadirectwaytothecentralquestionandchallengeof

the symposium: what are the practical implications of contemporary interpretations ofIslamsfoundationaltext,theQuran?

BelievedbyMuslimstohavebeenrevealedbyGodtotheProphetMuhammadinthe7th

century,theQuranconstitutestherootofIslamthefoundationuponwhichtheIslamic

religion (as it is practiced in various forms today) was built. Far from being a purelyreligioustext,theQuranlaysthegroundworkforethical,political,andsocialfoundations

ofsociety.UnlikeCatholicism,thereisnoonepersoninIslamictraditionwiththeultimateauthoritytomandatehowtheQurananditsethical,political,andsocialinjunctionsshouldbe interpreted. Religious schools of thought that vary widely in their theoretical and

theologicalapproachestotheQuranhavebeenestablishedthroughouttheMuslimworld,notonlyacrosstheArabMiddleEastandNorthAfrica,butalsoinCentralAsia,SouthAsia,

sub-SaharanAfrica,andChina.

Despitetherelativefreedomofinterpretationpermittedbythelackofacentralauthority,

variousgroupsandindividualsthroughouthistoryhavetriedtoclaimthatauthorityandhave prohibited different interpretations, sometimes violently. TodayMuslims andnon-

MuslimsalikearefacedwiththechallengeofMuslimfundamentalistswhoclaimtospeak

on behalf of all Muslims and who view the world through the narrow lens of aninterminableclashofcivilizationsbetweentheWestandanIslamicEast.

ThesymposiumontheSocial,Ethical,PoliticalandPolicyImplicationsofInterpretationsofIslamsFoundationalText:theQuranwasconceivedasaforumforprogressiveMuslim

intellectuals to discuss and disseminate their methods of interpreting the Quran andreflectuponthepositive,practicalimplicationsoftheirwork.Byinitiatinganintra-Muslim

debate, the NYU Center for Dialogues sought to illuminate the work of a number of

innovativeMuslimscholarswhohavefoundnewandconstructivemeaningsintheQuranthatwidenthetraditionalboundariesofIslamicexegesis.

Thesymposiumsagendawasdividedintotwosessions.Inthefirstsession,participantsdiscussedthecriticaldifferentiationbetweennormativeIslamandhistoricalIslam,aswell

asthemethodstheyemployininterpretingtheQuranasahistoricaltext.Thisdiscussionnaturallyseguedintothesecondsession,inwhichparticipantsexplainedhowtheyapply

contemporaryinterpretationsoftheQurantochallengesfacingtheMuslimworldtoday

challengessuchascurricularreformandIslamicfundamentalism.


6/45

5

Thereareseveralindividualswhodeserveacknowledgementandthanks;thissymposiumwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutthem.

First and foremost I would like to thank the symposiums participants: Robert Lee,

Professor of Political Science at Colorado College (United States); Andreas Christmann,SeniorLecturerofContemporaryIslamattheUniversityofManchester(UnitedKingdom);Abdelmajid Charfi, Professor Emeritus of Arab Civilization and Islamic Thought at the

UniversityofTunis(Tunisia);AdelRifaatandBahgatElNadi,politicalscientistspublished

togetherunderthepseudonymMahmoudHussein(Egypt);AminAbdullah,ProfessorofIslamic Studies at Universitas Islam Negari Sunan Kalijaga (Indonesia); Dale Eickelman,

ProfessorofAnthropologyandHumanRelationsatDartmouthCollege(UnitedStates);andStefanWild,ProfessorEmeritusofSemiticLanguagesandIslamicStudiesattheUniversity

of Bonn (Germany). The participants outstanding presentations at the symposium are

evidence of their rigorous research, and their firm commitment to both challengepreviously held assumptionsand broadenthe fieldofQuranic interpretation for a new

generation.As the idea of this symposium was forming in my head, I was fortunate to have the

encouragementofAmbassadorHeidrunTempel,thenSpecialRepresentativeforDialogueamongCivilizations at the German Federal ForeignOffice and now Deputy Head of the

GermanMissioninJakarta.ItwasthroughAmbassadorTempelthatwewereabletosecure

thegenerousgrantfromtheMinistryofForeignAffairsoftheFederalRepublicofGermany,which made this symposium possible. I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to

AmbassadorTempelandtohercolleagues:StephenBuchwald,JuliaFugel,ElmarJakobs,and the rest of the staff at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of

GermanyandthePermanentMissionofGermanytotheUnitedNations.

Finally, I would like to thank the indefatigable NYU Center for Dialogues staff, most

especially Helena Zeweri, until recently an Assistant Research Scholar; Reema Hijazi,

Assistant Research Scholar; Joanna Taylor, Junior Research Scholar; and Liz Behrend,Consultant.Theyalldedicatedasignificantamountoftimeduringandafterofficehoursto

ensurethesuccessofthissymposiumandIamverygratefulfortheiroutstandingworkandproudtohavethemascolleagues.Finally,ashasbeenthecasewithmanyotherreports

producedbytheCentersinceitsinceptioneightyearsago,mythanksgotoSharaKay.We

arefortunatetohaveherasoureditorialadvisorandweappreciateherintellectualandstylisticrigor.

ThepublicationofthisreportcomesatasignificantmomentinthehistoryoftheMuslimworld. Over the past twomonths revolutionshaveoverthrownold, despotic regimes in

TunisiaandEgyptandtherehavebeenwidespreadprotestsacrosstheregiondemandingchangeandreform.AsisalreadybeingseenwiththeMuslimBrotherhoodinEgypt,Islam

willbean integralpartofthe discussionasthese countries formnew governments.We

hopethatthisreport,initsvarioustranslations,willserveasavaluableresourcefortheregionsemergingleadersandpolicymakers,aswellasitscitizens,andwillaidtheregion

indecidinghowtobestconsiderIslaminrelationtogovernmentandciviclife.


7/45

6

March3,2011

MustaphaTliliFounderandDirector

CenterforDialoguesIslamicWorld-U.S.-TheWest

NewYorkUniversity


8/45

7

EXECUTIVESUMMARY

Theinternationalsymposium on theSocial,Ethical,Political, andPolicy Implicationsof

IslamsFoundationalText:theQuranwasconvenedonNovember10,2010inNewYork,NewYork,bytheNewYorkUniversityCenterforDialogues:IslamicWorld-U.S.-theWest.

Thissymposiumbroughttogetheraninternationalgroupofscholarstoparticipateinanintra-Muslim debate on the methods and practical implications of contemporaryinterpretationsoftheQuran.

Founder and Director of the NYU Center for Dialogues, Mustapha Tlili, opened the

symposiumbyremindingtheaudienceofthetroublingIslamophobicevents,inparticular

the demonstrations against the ground-zero mosque, that shook New York and theUnitedStatesinthefinalmonthsof2010.Nowmorethanever,Tlilistated,thereisaneed

for intra-Muslim debate and dialogue with the two-fold aim of challenging themisconceptionsofIslamintheWestandencouragingMuslim-majoritycountriestofacethe

problematicrealitiesoftheirownsocieties.

Before the startof the first session,Professor EmeritusofArabCivilization and Islamic

Thought,AbdelmajidCharfi,brieflyreflectedontheimportantlegacyofAlgerianscholarMohamedArkoun who had intended to participate in the symposium but sadly passed

awayinthefallof2010.

Theparticipants in the first session explored thecritical distinctionbetweennormativeIslamandhistoricalIslam,anddiscussedthemethodstheyemploytointerprettheQuran

asahistoricaltext.

Professorof PoliticalScienceat ColoradoCollege,RobertLee, presentedtheideasof the

lateMohamedArkoun.AccordingtoLee,Arkounwasprimarilyopposedtowhathe titledIslamicReason,orthemonopolisticholdofMuslimgovernments,theulama,andIslamist

movementsonQuranicinterpretation.Incontrasttothesegroups,Arkounbelievedthatthe Quran is an open and dynamic text and he argued that it should be submitted to

analysis from a variety of different literary, anthropological, sociological, and historical

perspectives.ForArkoun,theentiretyoftheQurancannotbeunderstoodascontainingasingular meaning. Instead, the truth of the Quran can be found in the plurality of

meaningsyieldedbycriticalinterpretationsofthetext.

Following Professor Lees presentation, Senior Lecturer on Contemporary Islam at theUniversityofManchester,AndreasChristmann,presentedtheideasofMuhammadShahrur

whowasunabletoattendthesymposiumforhealthreasons.OftencomparedtoProtestantreformerMartinLuther,Shahrurarguesinhisworkthatpoliticalleadersandthe ulamahavemonopolized interpretationsof theQuranandhaveused religious institutionsand

practiceinawaythatposestheleastresistancetopoliticaltyranny.However,according

toChristmann,ShahrurfirmlybelievesthatIslamcanandshouldbereformedandthatitcan provide a necessary third way between radical fundamentalism and secular

nationalism.HeenvisionsanIslamthatisentirelydepoliticized,butformsthemoralforceofpoliticsandsocietyasasortofcivilreligion.


9/45

8

Thelastspeakerinthefirstsession,ProfessorEmeritusAbdelmajidCharfi,approachesthe

Quran froma historical perspective. Heargued that the historical context in which theQuran is read and interpreted has immense implications for the ways the text is

understood.ForCharfi,thedifferinginterpretationsthathaveemergedthroughouthistorynecessarilysuggestthattheQurandoesnotandcouldneverhaveonesingularmeaningor

truth.Charfisummarizedhissubsequentargumentsinthreemainpoints:

MuslimsinterpretingtheQurantodayneedtoacknowledgethelimitsimposedbytraditionalexegesis.

The relationship between exegesis and jurisprudence should be reversed. Inother words, traditional exegesis should not inform contemporary

interpretationsof theQuran,but insteadcontemporary interpretationsof the

Quranshouldpavethewayfornewformsofexegesis.

Finally,CharfiarguedagainstastrictlylinearinterpretationoftheQuranastherevelations were assembled according to length and not according to acontinuousnarrative.

Thepanelistsinthesecondsessionfocusedonhowtheycombinetheorywithpracticeto

addresschallengestheMuslimworldisfacingtoday.

Politicalscientistandauthor,AdelRifaatpresentedonbehalfof MahmoudHussein,thepseudonymunderwhichhepublisheswithco-authorBahgatElNadi.Intheirmostrecent

bookPenserleCoran(GrassetetFasquelle,2009),theauthorsseektoexposethehistoricity

oftheQuranusingtheoriginalsacredtexts,especiallythetestimoniesoftheCompanionsof the Prophet, in order to prevent radical fundamentalists and other literalists from

claimingthathistoricityisimposedontheQuranby foreignintellectualtraditions.Rifaatcitedthreemainexamplesofthishistoricity:

TheQurandistinguishesGodfromhisWord.GodiseternalbuthisWordistime-boundanddependantuponthecontextinwhichitisrevealed.

GodisconstantlyindialoguewiththeProphetandtheCompanionsandHeallowsforexplanationbasedonthecontextofthesituation.

Finally,Goddoesnotweigheachofhisrevelationsequally.WhatGodsaysinoneverseisoccasionallyabrogatedinalaterverse.

AminAbdullahwasunfortunatelyunabletoattendthesymposiumbecausehisrequestforanentryvisatotheUnitedStateswasrejected.His ideaswerepresentedbyamemberof

the NYU Center for Dialogues staff. As a professor of Islamic studies at the Universitas

Negari Islam Sunan Kalijaga in Yogyakarta, Abdullah has spearheaded many curricularreform efforts includingmoving oversight ofhis IslamicUniversityfrom theMinistryof

Religion to the Ministry ofEducation when hewas the universitys president. Abdullahexplained that many Islamic universities in Indonesia are now required to integrate

multidisciplinary approaches into their courses, including using social science

methodologiestointerprettheQuranandothersacredtexts.Heacknowledged,however,that many departments still remain rooted in traditional methodologies and practices.


10/45

9

AbdullaharguedthatthemainprojectforthefieldofIslamicStudiestodayiseliminating

misunderstanding and mutual suspicion between Islamic Studies, Islamic Thought andIslamicReligiousKnowledge.

In his closing remarks, Mustapha Tlili underscored the need for a stronger dialogue

betweentheWestandtheMuslimworld.HeencourageduniversitiesandscholarsintheWesttorealizetheimplicationsofthisdialogueandtoengagetheirpeersintheMuslim

worldinordertocontinuethelong,andtoooftenobscured,historyofintellectualcross-

fertilizationbetweentheMuslimworldandtheWest.


11/45

10

OPENINGSESSION

OpeningRemarks:MustaphaTlili,FounderandDirector,NYUCenterforDialogues

(U.S.)

MustaphaTlili, thesymposiumsorganizer,welcomed participants and remarked on the

particularimportanceandtimelinessoftheevent.Thispastsummer,theQur'anwastobeburnedbyanobscurepastor ofa non-denominational church inFloridauntilPresidentObamaandotherU.S.administrationofficialspersonallyintervened.Evenmorerecently,

NewYorkCitywitnessedhugedemonstrationsforandagainsttheso-calledGroundZero

mosque. Misunderstandings about the Muslim faith abound in the West. Meanwhile,Muslimsthemselves,intheU.S.inparticular,donotseemtoagreeonwhatbeingMuslimis

about.Thosewhospeakintheirnameareoftendrivenbyaquestforpower,andprojectconflictingimagesofIslamanddifferentunderstandingsofitsholytexts.

TheabsenceofacentralauthorityinIslamictheologyandtraditionheightenstheanxietiesof Muslims and non-Muslims alike regarding Islam, Tlili explained. History tells us,

however, that the search for a universally recognized truth has been part of Islamictraditionsincetheadventofthefaithmorethan14centuriesago.ToTlilismind,ifyoustrip Islamic history of its competition for political power, what remains can all be

articulated in terms of interpretation of the faith, its tenets, and its underpinningfundamentaltextsaboveall,theQur'an.

Whatmakesthe currentmomentunique, Tlili continued, is theweight and challenge ofglobalization, which requires the Muslimworld toconfront its realities to look in the

mirrorofmodernityandanswerthequestionofhowtobeMusliminthe21stcentury.IntheflatworldoftodayincontrasttothetimesofAl-Mu'tazila1andAl-Muwahiddin2

information is transmitted globally in an instant. The Muslim worldcan no longer hide

certaintruths,hesaid,aboutitslackofeconomicdevelopment,education,women'srights,freedomofexpression,ruleoflaw,andregardforoursharedhumanity.

TliliclaimedthatwhileIslammayhaveabadnameintodaysworld,it'snotallthefaultofitsenemies.Islam,forhim,iswhatMuslimsmakeittobeand,thus,theimportanceofthis

symposium: how we interpret the Qur'an is not simply a matter of piety. It has realimplicationsonhowMuslim-majoritysocieties,whetherthoseofyesterdayortoday,build

states, economies, ethicalsystems, legal systems,andrelationshipswiththenon-Muslim

world.ThescienceofQur'anicinterpretationhasevolvedthroughthecenturies.But,ifweadmitthatit,asanyscience,reliesonintellectualtoolsandcategories,weshouldnotTlili

saidhesitatetoapplythemodernhumanandsocialsciencestoitsinterpretation.Infact,

thisis,accordingtoTlili,themostimportantchallengethattheMuslimworldfacestoday.

Tlilithenpausedtomournthedeathsoftwomajorthinkerswhohadplannedtoattendthesymposium: the first, his former teacher, dear friend, and colleague, MohamedArkoun

(1928-2010),whopassedawaytwomonthsago,andthesecond,theothergiantofmodern

Islamicthought,ProfessorNasrAbuZayd(1943-2010),whopassedawaylastspring.Tlilihopedthesymposiumwouldpayhomageto theirlives,theirintellectualstruggles,andto

the extraordinaryimportanceofthe bodyofrigorousresearch they left behind.Healso


12/45

11

acknowledged two other important absences: the Syrian thinker, Muhammad Shahrur,

authoroftheseminalbook, TheBookandtheQur'an:AContemporaryReading,whowasprevented fromcoming forhealth reasons,andMohammadAminAbdullah,the eminent

IndonesianscholarofIslamandoftheQur'an,whowasdeniedanentryvisatotheU.S.

Tlili concluded by stating that as intellectuals, the participants foremost duty was torigorous and clear thought. Piety serves its purpose,he said, but critical intellect has adifferent function one in which the sacred becomes an object for rigorous and clear

examination.Witheverythingthatweknowintheworldtoday,mustIslambesimplythe

Islamofpiety?OrcanitbetheIslamtowhichAbdelmajidCharfi,MahmoudHussein,AminAbdullah,MuhammadShahrur,andthelateMohammedArkounandNasrAbuZaydapply

thetoolsofcriticalthought?HesubmittedthatthisisthepreeminentquestionfacingthesymposiumandtheMuslimworldtoday.

In Memory of Mohamed Arkoun: Abdelmajid Charfi, Professor Emeritus of Arab

CivilizationandIslamicThought,UniversityofTunis(Tunisia)

Dr.Charfi,ProfessorEmeritusofArabCivilizationandIslamicThoughtattheUniversityofTunis(Tunisia),spokeinmemoryofMohamedArkounasarespectedcolleagueandvaluedfriend.Charfidescribedhisdifficulty inpreparing thisspeech,bothbecauseof theclose

natureofhisfriendshipwithArkoun,andbecauseoftheeruditionofArkounswork.

Charfi knew Arkoun for four decades and they often met in Paris and at academic

conferences in Europe and the Middle East. When Arkoun would visit Tunis, Charfiwelcomedhimasahouseguest.Drawntogetherbyintellectualaffinityandasharedloveof

longwalks,theyenjoyedfrankdiscussionsonarangeofpersonalandprofessionalmatters.Charfi learnedto recognize the fragility and anxietyArkounhidbeneathhis intellectual

brilliance.

CharfidescribedhowArkounsbackgroundandpersonalexperiencesinformedhisfriends

academic perspective. Arkoun acquired French nationality after Algerian independence,

whenhewasdismissedfromhisuniversitypostinAlgeriaonthegroundsthathisteachingwassubversive.Thebenefitofthisexperience,Charfipostulated,wasthatitgaveArkoun

the opportunity to combine intimate knowledge of both Islamic and Western cultures.Despite living in France, Arkoun always identified as Kabil, Algerian, and Maghrebi.

Moreover, his encounters with authorities from the Front de Libration Nationale in

Algeriataughthimtoremainalooffrompoliticalrhetoric.Instead,headoptedanoverviewof the problems in Maghrebi societies and sought to analyze their underlying causes.

BecauseArkounavoided takingapublicpositionon suchpoliticalmatters,hewasoften

reproachedforlackingcompassion.Yet,asCharfiwitnessed,Arkounwasconsumedbythetopicshestudiedandbelievedthathisworkwascapableofeffectingchange.

Charfi commented onthe difficulty ofdiscussingArkounsworkdue to its richnessand

depth.Leavingmorein-depthtreatmenttopresenterslaterinthesymposium,Charfisaid

hewouldlimithiscommentstoafewaspectsofArkounswork.HefirstnotedArkounsbrilliantspeakingabilityinthreenon-nativelanguages:French,English,andArabic,which


13/45

12

he learned relatively late in life (at the age of 17). He then outlined Arkouns primary

contributionstothehistoryofIslamicthinking.

Above all, Charfi said, Arkoun was adept at deconstructing established dogmas andcritiquingseeminglyself-evidentbeliefs.Evenifonedisagreeswithhisconcepts,or finds

them destabilizing, one cannot remain untouched after reading an Arkoun text, Charfiobserved,forArkounsapproachencouragesreaderstothinkcriticallyforthemselves.

Arkoun employed ideas from the modern social sciences and also developed his own

concepts, many ofwhich Charfi said have become indispensable for understandingreligioningeneralandtheQuranandIslaminparticular.Someoftheseoriginalconcepts

havebeenpopularized,suchasdemythication,demysticationanddemytholigization,aswellas unthought and unthinkable.3 Other concepts have met with objection. For example,

Arkounsadmonitionstotransgressanddisplacecertaintheologicalconstructspreviously

regardedassacredhavebeenwidelyresisted.Notably,Arkounbelievedthatreligioustextsmustbere-interpretedinanewlighttoovercometheearlyofficialclosingofthe mushaf

thestandardizedcollectionofQuranicversesinasinglevolume.Charfi concluded by summarizing the implications of Arkouns approach beyond its

importance to Islamic studies alone. Arkouns assessment of the need to criticize andquestion everything is relevant, Charfi said, in a modern world characterized by

dehumanization and the creation of docile consumers. Regardless ofwhetherweagree

with Arkouns own ideas, he continued, believers and nonbelievers alike must takeresponsibilityfordevelopingtheirownintellectualandspiritualpotential.Charfisuggested

that this is where Arkoun has often been misunderstood. Olivier Carr, for example,comparedArkountoSayyidQutbinhisfundamentalistfixationonoriginaltextsandin

hisclaimsabout theperformativenatureofprophetic religious discourse..4 Indeed,both

Qutb and Arkoun see the Quran as unique in being highly performative and all-encompassing. However, Carr attacked Arkoun for rejecting positive rationalism and

questioningtheoriginaltextasaproductandsourceofreligion.


14/45

13

SESSIONINORMATIVEISLAMVERSUSHISTORICALISLAM:ACriticalDistinctionof

OurTimesandtheModernEpistemologicalToolsthatMakeItPossible

Tlili introducedthesession,creditingmodernepistemologicaltoolswithmakingpossiblethecriticaldistinctionbetweennormativeandhistoricalIslam,adistinctionfoundinthe

workofbothArkounandCharfi.TliliintroducedRobertLee,ProfessorofPoliticalScienceatColoradoCollege,aseminentlyqualifiedtopresentArkounswork.Leeisimmersedinthe intellectual world of Islamic civilization, Middle Eastern societies and Islamic

intellectualmovements.Fromthisperspective,andasatranslatorofArkounswork,hehas

muchtosayaboutArkoun.

TheIdeasofMohammedArkoun:RobertLee,ProfessorofPoliticalScience,Colorado

College(U.S.)

Leebeganbyclaimingthathewasill-suitedtospeakonArkounsbehalf.Asastudentofthe

politics of the Middle East, he said, he lacked the insight to Arkouns work thatphilosophers,anthropologists,semioticiansandhistoriansofIslamhave.However,hehas

readmuch ofArkounswriting, heardhim lecture, translated one of his books, writtenaboutthepoliticalimplicationsofhiswork,andenjoyedhisfriendship.

LeedefendedArkounagainstclaimsthathewasanuncommittedscholar;despiteArkounspostmodernistterminology,hispassionandthevolumeofhisoutputbeliedadeeplyfelt

commitment.

LeeexplainedArkounsoppositiontowhathecalledIslamicReason,theapplicationof

methodologies, based on Greek logic, which contributed to rigid orthodoxies in Islam.Arkoundecried themonopolization of religious interpretation bymodern governments,

the ulama Muslim leaders classically trained inQuranic interpretation and Islamist

movements,allintheserviceoftheirrespectivepoliticalprojects.Thoughhesympathizedwithreformers,healsocriticizedthemforfailingtoaddresstherootoftheproblem:the

repressionof innovative thought in theMuslimworld. Becauseof thesepositions, some

perceivedArkountobeagainstIslamitself,andfewMuslim-majoritycountrieswelcomedhimtospeakorsellhisbooks.

ItismoredifficulttounderstandwhatArkounwasforthanwhathewasagainst,Leesaid.

Leebelievedhimtobeanidealist,motivatedbyfaithinthetruthofhisideasandintheir

ability to resurrect a unified Muslim consciousness, or perhaps even a unified humanconsciousness.

Arkounexpressedthisideathroughtheterm remembrer,whichLeetranslatedasputtingbacktogether.ArkounhopedhisideascouldhelpmaketheMuslimconsciousnesswhole

again,andinclusiveofallbelievers.ArkounextendedhisinclusivenesstothePeoplesoftheBookmeaningMuslims,Jews,andChristianswhohesawasfundamentallyunited

inbelief.

Asking how Arkouns treatment of the Quran fit into his objective of putting back

togetherIslam,LeepointedtothecriticaldistinctionArkounmadebetweentheprophetic


15/45

14

moment of Quranic revelation, and the ensuing compilation of themushaf, or Closed

OfficialCorpus(inArkounsterminology).Becauseofthegapbetweenrevelationandtext,ArkounapproachedtheQuranictextasaliterarydocumenttobeanalyzedwithmodern

interpretivetools,inordertoremembrerthetruthofthepropheticmomentthatprecededit.

Lee used two examples of Arkouns exegesis to illustrate his application of theory inpractice: the Fatihathe statement of faith that begins the Quranand Sura 18 (The

Cave).

Summarizing Arkouns readingof the Fatiha, Lee emphasized hismultilayeredanalysis.

Arkoun applied linguistic, historical, and anthropological analyses to understand thelanguageofthetext,itschanginginterpretationsovertime,andthesocietyinwhichitwas

revealed.Arkounconcludedthatthetextholdsapluralityofequallyvalidmeaningsand

thatthetruthisfoundininfinitepluralityitself.

Lees second example, The Cave, yielded a different set of observations from Arkoun.Observingthatthelongsuradoesnotcohereinthemeornarrative,Arkounproblematizedtraditional readings, such as al-Tabaris, which sought a unified interpretation. Arkoun

blamedsuchforcedreadingsonIslamicReason,whichsacrificedrichsymbolisminfavoroflogicandrationale.

Basedonhisownreadingsofthetext,ArkounconcludedthatQuranicinterpretationanditsedificeofIslamicReasonhavehistoricallybeenrelatedtoworldlypowerstruggles.By

contextualizingthoseinterpretationsinhistory,withoutdenyingtheirvalidity,hesoughttoliberatetheQuran.

LeesconcludingremarksdrewattentiontotheintellectualrisksArkountookbyattackingthe inherited tradition of interpretation, aswell as contemporary political regimes and

movements that appropriate religion for ideological aims. Opposed to these abuses of

Islam, Arkoun urgedMuslims tochallenge received knowledgeand reopen the realmofideas that Islamic tradition has rendered unthought and unthinkable, such as the

distinctionbetweenthecompiledQuranandtheoriginalrevelation.Arkounbelievedthat,throughreassembling(remembrer)Muslimtraditionbyacceptingallitspastandpotential

iterations,thePeoplesoftheBookandhumanityasawholecouldbebroughttogether.

The Ideas ofMuhammadShahrur (Syria):AndreasChristmann, SeniorLecturer in

ContemporaryIslam,UniversityofManchester,U.K.(Germany)

ThankingLeefor anilluminatingpresentation,Tlili introducedMuhammadShahrurasathinkerinthesamespiritasArkoun.ShahruristheauthorofTheBookandtheQur'an:A

Contemporary Reading, one of the most widely disseminatedand controversialcontemporary books on interpreting the Quran. Though the Syrian thinkers work

representsadifferentschool,Shahrur,likeArkoun,appliesthetoolsofcriticalthoughtto

theQuranandthetraditionofinterpretation.TliliexplainedthatShahrurwasunabletoparticipateinthesymposiumbecauseofhealthreasons,andinvitedAndreasChristmann,

Senior Lecturer in Contemporary Islam at the University of Manchester, to present


16/45

15

Shahrurs ideas in his place. A scholar of Islamic civilization and thought, Christmann

publishedanEnglishtranslationofShahrurswritingsin2009.5

Christmann opened his presentation with a brief overview of Muhammad Shahrursbiography and professional background. Shahrur was not trained in traditional Islamic

studiesorinthemodernstudyofIslam,butisaretiredprofessorofsoilengineering.HislaymansQuranicinterpretations,whichChristmanncharacterizedasmodern,scientific,liberal, andprogressive, are therefore from a quitedifferent perspective than the usual

scholars.

Christmann contextualized Shahrurs work in contemporary Islamic discourse by

explaining that it respondstoboth radical Islamists,who politicize Islamfor right-wingideological aims, and to Leftists andsecular-nationalists,who seek to eliminate religion

frompubliclife.ShahrursinterpretationsoftheQuranoffera thirdalternative:anIslam

that isprogressive and liberalandwhichhebelieves should be the source ofuniversalmoralvaluesandthefoundationforpoliticalleadership.

Christmann proceeded to summarize Shahrurs work by distilling it into ten theses,drawing a comparison to the Ninety-Five Theses of Martin Luther and suggesting that

Shahrursworkhas thepotential to similarly reform institutionalized Islam. Christmannnoted thatmany of Shahrurs readings of the Quran entail redefining Islamic terms as

universalethicalprincipals.

Christmann articulated a first thesis that he determined to be the most prioritized of

Shahrursideas:thenecessityofseparatingstateandreligion,whilereinvestingpubliclifewith Religion. Christmann used lowercase religion to denote Shahrurs concept of

historicalandinstitutionalIslam,asdistinguishedfromReligion,capitalized,whichrefers

to Shahrurs ideal of a universal civic religion. The separation of state and religion,Christmannclarified,means thatstate authoritiesmustnotmanipulatereligion fortheir

political agendas, nor should institutional religion co-opt state power in pursuit of

theocracy.Shahrurisconcernedthatcombiningstateandreligion(dinwa-dawla)obstructsreligious freedom by privileging one religious faction over others. Yet he is equally

concernedbytheprospectofstatewithoutreligion(dawlabidundin),whichhebelievesleads to authoritarianism. Instead, the moral values of Religion, writ large, should

reconnectstateandsociety.

ThesecondthesisChristmannenumeratedwasShahrursobservationthatHistoricalIslam

(religion)hasbeenpoliticizedandde-moralizedbytheulama.ToachieveUniversalIslam

(Religion), Shahrur contends, itmust be de-politicized and re-moralized. According toShahrur,thereligiousclasseshaveinterpretedIslamicbeliefsandpracticesinwaysthat

impose the least resistance to political tyranny and despotism. Christmann describedShahrursthirdthesisashisproposedsolution:civilsocietyandcivilReligion.Objectingto

Islamist calls for achieving the Islamization ofMuslim society by collapsing public and

privatespheres,Shahruremphasizestheimportanceofasphereofcivilsocietythatcanoperatealongsideprivatereligionandpublicpolitics.Thisspherewillprovideanethical


17/45

16

modelthatovershadowsbothstatepoliticsandprivatereligionwhileallowingdissentand

freedomofthought,speechandreligion.

According to the fourth thesis Christmann described, in order to achieve this solution,religiousreformmustprecedepoliticalreform.BecauseShahrurbelievesthatbothpolitics

without religion and politics with the current form of Islam lead to authoritarianism,religious reformmustcome first. Shahrurenvisions religiousreformasthereshapingofIslam into a civil religion, inwhich freedomof thought, human rights, democracy and

socialjusticearevaluedasreligiousimperatives.

Inhisfifththesis,ChristmannclarifiesthatShahrurdoesnotviewthisreligiousreformasa

newinterpretationof Islam,butastherecuperationofessentialQuranicprinciples thathavebeenobscuredbytraditionalIslam.ShahrurdrawsadistinctionbetweentheIslam

passed down by religious scholars and the Islam found in the text of the Quran. This

Universal Islam of theQuran, according to thesis six, does not include the sunnaof theProphetstoriesof theProphetslife,apartfromthepropheciesthatbecametheQuran.

ShahrurseesIslamasanaturalreligionforallhumankind,whilethe sunnaareboundtoaparticulartimeandplacethatcannotbeacceptedasnormative.AbandoningthesunnaandrelyingonlyontheQuran,ShahrurconcludesthatIslamhasonlythree,notfive,pillars:

beliefinGod,beliefintheLastDay,anddoinggoodwork.

Christmanns seventh thesis discussed the distinction Shahrur makes between general

Religion,whichisglobal,humananduniversal,andparticularreligion,whichreferstospecificculture-andcontext-boundinstitutionalreligions.AccordingtoShahrur,thelatter

isagainsthumaninstinctandthereforeunsuitableforbeingthereligionofpubliclife.Itistheformer,therefore,thatshouldbepoliticizedandpublicized.

Moving from the general to the specific, Christmann illustrated how Shahrurs viewsonreligionare reflected inhisviewsonreligiouslaw,religiousdutiesand jihad.Hiseighth

thesis addressed Shahrurs treatment of sharia Islamic law which Christmann

describedasbeingattheheartofShahrursreformproject.Observingthat sharialawandhududpenaltiesarenotfixed,Shahrurconcludesthatsharialawonlyreferstotheupper

and lower limits ofhuman legislation. Therefore, sharia can and should to Shahrursmindbeimplementedeverywhere,butshouldbelimitedtotherequirementthathuman

societies legislate laws to uphold justice, equality and morality. Specific laws, such as

criminal, family and commercial law, should remain the provenance of parliamentarylegislation.

Inhisninththesis,ChristmanndescribedShahrursreinterpretationoftheslogan, Al-'Amrbi al-Ma'ruf wa al-Nahy 'an al-Munkar, which is frequently used by Islamists to justify

religious policingandtheir literal implementationof sharia rules.6 Bycontrast, Shahrurdoesnotseethephraseaspertainingtoindividualconductinmattersregardingdress,but

as a general imperative to care about the democratic norms and liberal values of civil

religioninsociety;inshort,asanobligationofgoodcivilcitizenship.HethereforeplacesNGOsandhumanrightsgroupsunderthisrubric.


18/45

17

Lastly, Christmanns tenth thesis articulated Shahrurs interpretation of jihad as a non-

violentfightagainstpoliticaltyranny,injusticeandtheoppressionofhumanrights,aswellas the duty to do charitable work for ones family, neighborhood and society at large.

Christmannsummed it upas human rights jihad: the religious obligation of good civilcitizenship.HefurtherexplainedthatShahrurarrivedatthisviewbyreinterpretingijtihad

notasmartyrdombutastheprocessofgivingwitness.JihadfisabilAllahthusbecomesastruggle for the sake of Gods covenantwith humankind, rather than a military fightagainstkufrdisbelief.

AbdelmajidCharfi,ProfessorEmeritus of ArabCivilizationand IslamicThoughtat

theUniversityofTunis(Tunisia)

TliliobservedthatChristmannspresentationprovidedanaturaltransitiontoAbdelmajidCharfis intervention in the discourse onQuranic interpretation. Professor Emeritus of

Arab Civilizationand IslamicThought,University ofTunis, Charfi distinguishesbetween

Islamashistoryandasmessage.Thatdistinctionismadepossible,Tlilicontinued,bytheapplicationofcriticaltoolsborrowedfromthehumanitiesandsocialsciences.BothArkoun

andShahrurarriveatthesamedistinction,yetCharfihasdedicatedmostofhisscholarlywork to this particular issue. Moreover, Tlili stressed, Charfi is the head of a school ofthoughtandhasmentoredanentiregenerationofyoungscholars,equippingthemwiththe

tools ofmodern critique. Tlili concluded by highlighting Charfis important book, IslamBetweenMessageandHistory(LIslamentrelemessageetlhistoire),translatedintoFrench

in2004andEnglishin2009,andencouragingalltoreadit. 7

Charfibeganbydiscussinghisinitialapproachtothetopicofthesymposium.Hefirsttried

to list all the social, ethical and political implications of interpreting the Quran as afoundationaltext. Yethe immediatelyrealized thisapproachwasfutilebecauseMuslims

livingunderdifferentconditionsnecessarilyapproachthetextfromdiverseperspectives.

Asanexample,CharficomparedawealthyyoungMalaysianmanwithapoorNigerian,oraSaudiwomanlivingintribalconditionswithanIranianwhohasinternalizedthedominant

ideologyofthetheocraticstate.Eachwouldclearlyarriveatadifferent,evencompletely

contradictory, interpretation. The only trait shared among them is the influence of aparticularsocial,political,andculturalcontext.Basedonthisobservation,Charfirevised

his approach, deciding instead to focus on the historical and epistemological aspects ofinterpretingtheQuran.Withthisframework,hesoughttoavoidtime-boundpolemicsand

encompasstheentirerangeofinterpretation,fromextremismtomysticism.

Charfi pointed out that,while itmay seemnatural to acknowledge the external factors

affectinginterpretation,infactthisnotionisinformedbymodernlinguisticsandsemiotics.

Moreover,hesaid, itcontradictstraditionalassertionsaboutQuranic interpretationthatareupheldbytheoverwhelmingmajorityofMuslimstoday.Hedescribedhispresentation

as an attempt to reveal truths often overlooked and clarify the terms of debate aboutQuranicinterpretationanditslegitimacy.

Beforedelvingintothesetruths,CharfinotedthatitisfirstnecessarytounderstandtheroleoftheQuraninIslamandthehistoryofQuranicexegesis.Toillustratetheimportance

of the Quran, he contrasted it with the Bible in Catholicism. In Catholicism, church


19/45

18

teachingsinformtheunderstandingofthegospels,whereas,inIslam,theQuranictextis

sacred and preeminent.Charfi asked rhetorically:domodernapproaches, suchas thosethatuserecentlydevelopedcriticaltools,thereforechallengethesacrednessofthetextor

itsinterpretations?Inanswer,hearguedthateventraditionalinterpretationwasbasedoncontemporary culture andhistorical conditions, contending thatmodern readers areno

different.Takingahistorical view,Charfi said, it ispossibletoseethetwo-stage processwhereby

Islam evolved from a spontaneous, oral, prophetic message into an institutionalized,

dogmatic, and ritualizedreligion. Charfi said that thisprocesswas drivenbythe ulama,whosereadingsoftheQuranwereinflectedbytheirparticularsocialposition.Unlikethe

majorityofMuslims,theulamawereurban,hadadirectrelationshiptotherulingpower,and were heavily influenced by Greek philosophy. By the 11th or 12th Century, their

Quranic readings, rooted in their specific class interests, were firmly established. This

resulted,accordingtoCharfi,intheformationofSciencesoftheQurantheopinionsandmethodsoftheulamathatgounquestionedasorthodoxy.

Charfi opined that the entrenchment of orthodox interpretations abrogated alternatereadings. Becoming aware of the historical processes by which such interpretations

evolvedallowsustoconsiderthoseotherpossibilities.Charfioutlinedthreesuchalternatereadings: theQuran ascreated, the theory ofrevelation,and the idea that the Quranic

messagecanstandalonewithoutthehadith(storiesoftheProphetslife).

According to dominant Muslim belief, the Quran is the uncreated word of God. In an

alternateinterpretation,CharfiproposedtheideathattheQuraniscreated,explainingthatthisviewwouldacknowledgethetextshistoricalaswellasdivinedimensions.Ratherthan

assumingtheQuranexistsoutsideofhistory,suchareadingwouldallowQuranicmoral

injunctionstobeunderstoodinlightoftheparticularhistoricalcontextinwhichtheywererevealed.

The second idea, which Charfi described as having been rejected by orthodox belief,pertainstothetheoryofrevelation.TheProphetistraditionallyunderstoodtohavebeena

passive recipient of Gabriels message. An alternative, Charfi suggested, would be tounderstandhisroleasactive,implyingastageofmediationbetweenthedirectwordofGod

andtheQuran.Inanotherformulation,Charfiadded,wemightdescribetheProphetsrole

asexpressingthedivinemessageinhumanlanguage.

Finally,CharfidescribedthepossibilitythattheQuranicmessageissufficientwithoutthe

hadith of the Prophet. Though today this idea is widely considered heretical, it hadproponentsinearlyIslamichistory.Charficlaimedthatthisideawassuppressedbecause

theQurandidnotprovideananswertoeveryproblemencounteredinMuslimsocieties.Socialinstitutionswereformedtolegislateforsocieties,andthehadithprovidednecessary

religiouslegitimacy.

Charfinoted thatthese threepositionscanbeconsideredfromaperspectiveofmodern

rationalitywithoutbeingseenasanattackonthesacrednatureoftheQuran.Yettheyare


20/45

19

oftensuppressedforbreakingwithorthodoxbelief.Thus,inCharfisview,theyarefertile

avenuesofinquiryandconsistentwiththespiritofthetext.

CharfireasonedthattheQuranshouldnolongerbeconsideredatextoflaw,butatextoffaith. Indeed,despitetraditionalassertions to thecontrary,Quraniccommandmentsare

primarily moral in nature and not legal. Legal commandments in the Quran, Charficontinued,respondedtoconcreteproblemsinthecontemporarysocialorder.Forexample,whentheQuranportraysthelawofretaliationasnecessary,itmustbeunderstoodina

context inwhich the statedid not have amonopolyon violence. Such commandments,

Charficlaimed,arethereforenotahistoricalornormative,andMuslimsshouldremainfreetolegislateonthebasisofgeneralQuranicvaluesratherthantakingliterallythespecific

casesdepictedinthetext.

Inanotherexample,Charfi pointedtothe ideaofshura, or consultation,which Islamists

now consider a central Quranic concept. Historically, because there was a separationbetweenthepoliticalandreligiousspheres,traditionalexegetesdidnottreatshuraasan

imperativeingovernance.Charfiagainpointedoutthatmodernreadingsfindinthetextwhattraditionalreadingsdidnot.

Charfi concluded by summarizing his four main points: first, that the Quran does notcontain a single meaning, but addresses readers in all times and places with multiple

meaningsthatrenewthemselvesonthebasisofchanginghistoricalconditions.Therefore,

asCharfihimselfdemonstrated, readersshouldseekahermeneuticinterpretationratherthan follow a single exegesis. Second, inorder to free Quranic interpretation from the

dogmaticstraitjacketoforthodoxy,itisnecessarytoacknowledgethelimitsimposedontraditional exegesis by the Sciences of the Quran. Third, the relationship between

exegesis and jurisprudence should be reversed. Instead of subjecting the Quran to

theologically-basedinterpretations,ashastraditionallybeendone,thetextshouldbethebasis fornew theological constructs. Finally, the linearmethodofexegesisreading the

Quranfrombeginningtoendisneitherrationalnornecessary. Suraswerenotcompiled

inorderof revelation, but according to their length. Charfi elaborated on this point bydismissingall idealogicalmodelsof interpretation, including thatofShahrur. Instead,he

admonishedMuslims to find theirown relationshipwith the Quran,a relationship thattakesintoaccounttheinteractionsbetweensacredtext,history,andtruth.Itisfutile,he

argued,toproposeideasthatareonlyvalidtoMuslimstoday,asopposedtoMuslimsofthe

future,or,forthatmatter,thepast.Muslimsmuststruggleindividuallyandcollectivelytofind a peaceful relationship with the text. The implications will differ from traditional

interpretations, which donot account for the logic of the Qurans organization and its

spiritualvalue.

Discussant:StefanWild,ProfessorEmeritusofSemiticLanguagesandIslamicStudiesattheUniversityofBonn(Germany)

Tlili invitedthesessionsdiscussant, StefanWild, amajor Arabistand scholarof Islamic

thought inGermany, tocommentonthediversematerialpresentedbyLee, Christmann,andCharfi.Wilddeclinedtosummarizewhathedescribedasanalreadycondensedseries


21/45

20

ofpapersoncomplexideas.Heinsteadlimitedhisremarkstoafewobservationsdesigned

tofacilitatediscussiononthepanelandwiththeaudience.

Referringtotheletterofinvitation,whichdescribedthesymposiumasanintra-Muslimdebate, Wild remarked that hewas glad that criterion had not been rigidly enforced,

thereforeallowinghisparticipation.Yetheacknowledgedtheimportanceofthesentimentbehindit.However,heopined,dialogueandresearcharedifferentthings.Whiledialogueisimportant,itmayhavenothingtodowithacademicresearchandmayevenbeinconflict

withit.

Turning to the subject ofArkoun,Wild discussed a pointofdifferencehehad with the

thinker.WildexplainedhisbeliefthatMuslimscholarsshouldfirstdevelopideasofhowtoapplyexegesistorealworldmatterssuchasgenderissuesandshariabeforenon-Muslims

are invited to jointheconversation. Arkoundisagreed,arguing thatMuslimuniversities

shouldstartbyincorporatingnon-Muslimideasintotheircurricula.HeadvocatedferventlyforajointeffortbyscholarsfromtheWestandtheMuslimworld.Wildjustifiedhisown

positionbypointingtothecrisisoforganizedreligioninEuropeandexpressingsympathywithMuslimscholarswhoarereluctanttofollowthepathofWesternintellectualhistory.

WildthenintroducedtheideasofthelatetheEgyptianQuranicscholar,NasrHamidAbuZayd,whoWildsaidwouldhavelovedtoparticipateinthesymposium.Afriendandearly

followerofAbu Zayds,Wild discussed Abu Zayds importance in the history of Islamic

exegesis and described the hardships Abu Zayd endured for his work, including beingaccused of heresy, having his marriage forcibly dissolved, and fleeing to exile. Wild

describedAbuZaydsapproachtoQuranic interpretationasa theoryof communicationbasedonsender(God),recipient(Prophet),andcodedmessage(Quran).

AbuZaydwasfamousforhisattempttocreateahumanistichermeneuticsoftheQuran,preferringtoexaminenotwhataverseliterallysaysbutthedirectioninwhichitpoints.

For example, where the text says women inherit half what men do, Abu Zayd saw a

directiontowardsgreaterfreedomandequalityofgenders,whenonekeepsinmindtherights women lacked at the time the versewas revealed.Wild noted that some ofAbu

Zayds books were first published in German, suggesting they could not have beenpublished in Egypt. Yet theywere also published in Syria. Wild concluded byposing a

questiontotheaudienceandpanelists:whydidtheliberalQuranicinterpretationsofAbu

ZaydfindpublicationinanoppressivestatelikeSyria?

FloorDiscussion

Tliliopenedthediscussionto theaudience.AnArabicandIslamicStudiesprofessorfromTheNewSchool(auniversityinNewYorkCity)observedthatacommonthemerunning

throughthepresentationswasfrustrationathowtheweightoftraditiondefinesMuslimlearningandpractice.Sheaskedwhetherthereisevidenceofpre-moderninterventionsin

thehegemonyofexegeticalliteratureandsuggestedthatsuchanavenueof inquirymight

bemorefruitfulifitlookedtonon-Arabiclanguageheritages.


22/45

21

Charfianswered,explainingthatscholarlyworkhasfocusedonthecircumstancesofthe

revelationbecausethatswherethegreatestamountofhistoricalmaterialisavailableforstudy. In scholarship, he said, it used to be believed that one must understand the

circumstancessurroundingtherevelationinordertounderstandtheQuranictext.Now,onthebasisofmanystudies,itisclearthatthenarrativesdescribingthosecircumstances

weredevelopedbyexegetesdecadesandcenturiesafterthefact.ReferringbacktoWildscomments, Charfi stated that he agreed with Arkoun that non-Muslim scholars shouldparticipateintheseinquiries,fortheirresearchandperspectivecanofferamorebalanced

understandingthanresearchbyMuslimsalone.

An audience member asked the panelists to discuss the extent to which new Quranic

interpretationshadmadeanimpactonthelargerMuslimworld,orwhatimpacttheymightpotentiallyhaveonsocialandpoliticaloutcomesinMuslimsocieties.

Thequestiondrewresponsesfromeachpanelist,beginningwithChristmann,whosaid itwasaverydifficultquestionbutoneoftenaskedaboutacademicwork.Hecontendedthat

it isnot possible tomeasure the effect ofwords inpractical and social terms. The onlynotablemeasureofShahrursinfluence,accordingtoChristmann,isinthenumberofhisfollowers,whichChristmannsaidwasnotlargeenoughtoconstituteasocialmovementin

theMiddleEast.Thoughinterestisgrowing,Shahrursreadership,heexplained,islargelylimited to intellectuals and university graduates, in particular natural scientists and

engineers. In sum, in Christmanns view, it is not possible to see the implications of

scholarshiponpolicies.

Wild spoke upto say hewas not aspessimistic asChristmann.He pointedout that thestrongcensorshipinmanyArabiccountriesisanindicationthatthinkerslikeAbuZaydand

Shahruraretakenseriously.WildmentionedseeingAbuZaydsbookinaJeddabookstore,

anecdotal proof that there is an audience for such ideas. He cautioned that theologicalfacultiesintheArabicworldarenotagoodindicatorofnewtrendsinthought.Explaining

that such institutions do not even recognize 19th Century reformists, Wild opined that

changeismorelikelytocomefromacademiccentersoutsidetheArabworld.

Lee had earlier described Arkoun as being pessimistic about his own influence. LeequalifiedthatdescriptionbysayinghebelievedArkounhadunderestimatedhimself.Lee

added that ifArkouns followers intheMuslimworldwere small in number, itcouldbe

attributedtothefactthathewroteinFrenchandhistextsweresodense,sohisideaswerenotaccessibletothegeneralpublic.LeesuggestedthatCharfiandotherswouldbemore

likelytohaveaneffectonmainstreamthought.

Charfi cautioned that we must distinguish between the effects of scholarly efforts in

differentMuslimcountries.HeofferedTunisiaasanexamplewherereformistapproachesaretaughtinuniversitiesandpeoplearereceptivetomodernapproachesandtheories;in

Yemen, on the otherhand, they are less developed. The greatest impediment to reform

comes from Wahhabism, a movement centered in Saudi Arabia, whose adherents,according to Charfi, use their resources to spread hostility to modernist ideas. Their

influenceisespeciallysignificantatthepopularlevel,hesaid.


23/45

22

ThenextquestionerwonderedifthelivelydebateaboutthehistoricityoftheOldandNewTestaments,seeninChristianandJewishcirclessincethe19 thCentury,hadanyparallelin

Muslimdiscourse.

Lee answered, referencing Charfis book Islam Between Message and History, which hedescribed as an argument for differentiating Islam from the message of the religion, aposition similar to Arkouns. However, Lee conceded, such an approach is not widely

embracedintheMuslimworld.

Theaudiencememberspoke again to clarifyhisoriginalquestion.Hedescribedhow, in

recent Jewish andChristian discourses, even peopleof faith acknowledgeevolutionandeclecticisminthegospels.Thereisevidenceofthesameprocessesatworkinthesuras,but

haveMuslimsbeensimilarlyattunedtothishistoricityoftheQuranictext?

Christmann answered that such work is being done in Europe, particularly in Berlin

(includingCorpus Coranicum,a research project of the Berlin-Brandenburg AcademyofSciencesandHumanitiesunderthedirectorshipofAngelikaNeuwirth),preciselybecauseitisnot yet embraced intheMuslimworld. There areMuslim scholarswho approach the

Quranusinghistoricalcriticism,suchasSayyidMuhammadAlQimni,andothers.However,they do not use such methods to the same extent as applied to the Bible by Western

thinkers in the 19th Century. The main difference, according to Christmann, is that the

Muslimthinkersstillapproachthereadingofthetextas,inCharfiswords,areadingoffaith.AtrulyhistoricalcriticalreadingwouldseetheQuranasanexpressionofhuman

traditionratherthandivineintervention,butamongMuslimbelievers,Godspowerisnotseparatedfromthatofthehistorical/human.

Wild suggested that the Wahhabi influence is partly responsible for the suppressionofhistorical criticism. Although exegesis from the 1st through 3rd Centuries incorporated

historicity, as in their treatment of abrogated verses, the tradition was not developed

further. Today, Wild said, petro-Islam controlsmuch of the intellectual production ofMuslim theological centers, not only in Saudi Arabia but in places like Bosnia and the

formerSovietUnion.

Charfi had a more positive outlook on the issue of historicity, pointing out that many

studieshavealreadybeenmadeontheissue.YethecautionedagainstapplyingtheBiblicalapproachofhistoricalcriticismtotheQuranwithoutaccountingforthedifferentnatureof

theIslamictext.

ACityUniversityofNewYork(CUNY)professorintheaudienceturnedtheconversation

toward literary analysis, asking whether the Qurans treatment as a literary text wasconsideredathreattoitsstatusasasacredreligioustext.

LeerespondedbyreferencingArkoun.Arkoun,hesaid,believedthattheQuranshouldbetreatedasaliterarytext.Theliteraryapproachisnotdenigratingbecauseitpreservesthe

sanctityoftheoralrevelationasdistinctfromitswritteniteration.Inthisview,thetextis


24/45

23

anavenuebywhichtobetterunderstandtheoriginalpropheticmoment.However,there

aremanywhodisagree;theyseetheQuranictextassanctified,andthereforeobjectto itbeingtreatedliketheBibleorotherliterarytexts.

Charfiagreed,describingtheQuranasatextofhumanlanguagethatmustbeapproached

throughhumanlanguage.Heagainreferencedhistoricalexegesis,explainingthatMuslimsthroughout history have analyzed the grammatical, linguistic, and poetic aspects of theQuran.Moreover,Charfisaid,notonlywoulditwouldbeimpossiblenottoapproachitasa

literarytext,butreadingitthroughthatlenshasnotpreventedMuslimsfromappreciating

otheraspects of the text.The literary aspect is only one level of analysis and does notprecludeexistential,moral,ethical,anthropologicalandtheologicaldimensions.Asapoint

of entrance into the text, linguistic analysis is less contentious than deeper levels ofanalysis, where exegetes are more likely to disagree and project their own ambitions,

concerns,andtraditionsontothetext.

ThenextquestionwasposedtoChristmannconcerningShahrursdismissalofthe sunna

(thesixththesisinChristmannssummary);howdidShahrurreconcilethefactthatGodsentabookandamessenger?IftheProphetspracticeswerehisinterpretationofhowtoliveGodsmessage,howdowe notentanglethe sunnainourowninterpretationsofthe

Quran?

Christmann explained that Shahrurs treatment of the Quranic text divides it into two

categories:oneuniversallyapplicable,absoluteand,eternal(prophethood),andtheothertemporal, historical, andrelative (messengerhood). Inhisdissectionof Islamicconcepts,

Shahrur categorizes each word as belonging to one of the two categories, thendistinguishes the eternally divine from the historically contingent. For example,

Christmannexplained,ShahrurcannotreconciletheideaofMohammedbeinghuman and

divine, for if divine, he would be a god (which constitutes shirk). Therefore, Shahrurconcludes that as a human, Mohammed and everything related to him is contingent,

historical, and temporal. Shahrur then addresses each verse in turn, showing what is

eternallydivineandwhatishistoricallycontingent,andconcludesthatobediencetoGodisdifferentfromobediencetotheProphet.

AwomanintheaudienceaskedifthinkerslikeShahrurandAbuZaydcouldbeconvinced

toappeal toa larger, less eliteaudience inorderto instigate grassrootsmovements for

reform. She argued that such an effort would defend against claims that the reformmovementisdrivenbytheWest.

Shealsocommentedthat,asasecularMuslim,sheobjectedtoShahrursclaimthatIslamhas only three Pillars of the Faith rather than five.Such arguments, she opined,werea

manipulation of language and can be blamed for alienating mainstream Muslims andmarginalizingreformistideas.SheaskedforChristmannsopiniononthisproblem.

Responding to the first comment, Christmann replied that Shahrur is aware of suchcritiquesandhasbeenaskedbyhisownfriendsandfollowerstoclarifyhisargumentsby

simplifying them and using illustrative examples. However, he added, Shahrur already


25/45

24

believesthathislanguageisbroadlyaccessible,forasanaturalscientisthedoesnotspeak

in the language of philosophers and the ulama. As for the accusation that Shahrurmanipulateslanguage,Christmannsaiditwassuchafrequentchargethatitconstituteda

clich.

InresponsetotheissueofthePillarsofIslam,ChristmannsaidShahrurwouldaskforaQuranicverse thatspecificallymentions five. Thewoman retorted, believers are thosewho believe xyz, referring indirectly to the doctrinal rational for the Five Pillars

professionoffaith,prayer,fasting,alms-giving,andpilgrimage.

Christmannexplainedthatthosearerathertenetsofaqida,whiletheexplicitmentioningof

IslamasbasedonFivePillarsisonlytobefoundinthehadith(Jibril),notintheQuran.HesaidthattheQuranicversesdorefertoonlythreeitemsofIslam,whichShahrurseesas

thePillars;heconsidersthesumoffivetobeanimposednumbernotintrinsictothetext

butattributedtoitbytheulama(throughthehadith).Christmanndescribedtheaccusationof textual manipulation as a killer argument, meaning it can be used against any

interpreterof theQuranwhosubjectivelychoosesbetween severalopinionsona givenverse.ChristmannassertedthattheaccusationofShahrurslinguisticmanipulationisweakandwithoutmerit.

Christmannthenreturnedtothetopicofliteraryexegesis,reiteratingCharfispointthatit

has a longhistoryinIslamandadesignated technical terminArabic(al-tafsiral-adabi).

Ironically,thefirstpersonwhorevitalizedthisclassicaltraditioninthe20thCenturywastheIslamistSayyidQutb,inthe1930sand40s.AfterQutbbeganusingapurelyliterary

perspective,otherschoolsfollowed.

An audience member interjected asking how Shahrur can be considered an authentic

MuslimvoiceiftheQuranitselfcomesfromGodinitsentirety?Howcanaspectsofthetextbedistinguishedashistoricalorliteraryversusdivine?

Christmann responded that the question encompassed two issues: origin andinterpretation.WithintheMuslimworld,theQuranisalwaysconsideredthedivineword

of God, Christmann agreed, even if the text also contains things that are historicallycontingent and not universally applicable. But this belief does not preclude applying

various interpretive methodologies to the text; divinity is irrelevant to the literary

approach.

Charfiillustratedthediscussionaboutlinguisticanalysiswithanexample.Observingthat

manysurasnarratethespeechofhumanpersonages,hecontendedthatthosesentencesshouldnotbereadliterallyasthedivinewordofGod,sincetheyarebeingreportedfroma

non-divinesource.

CharfialsoaddressedtheearliercommentaboutapplyingWesternmethodologiestothe

Quran.HeurgedthatwemuststopdefiningmoderncivilizationasexclusivelyWestern.While many modern ideas may have Western origins, what is more important is the

universalityofvaluessuchasfreedom, equality, justice,anddemocracy.Charfi criticized


26/45

25

the fear of Western influences, defending the universality and applicability of modern

criteria to all languages and texts. He tempered his position by agreeing that Muslimsshouldtakeacriticalpositionvis--visWesternelements,thoughnotbecauseofapparent

Westernhypocrisyinimplementingtheirownvalues.

Mostimportantly,Charfisaid,itisnecessarytobewaryoftheanti-intellectualismfoundinmuch Islamic thinking, which adheres to tradition, consensus, and what is consideredinvariableinIslam.Itistherightandobligationofeachbelievertoexamineideasthatare

consideredself-evident,andtofreehimselforherselffromtheintellectualconstraintsof

traditionalthought.

Charficoncludedhiscomments,andthefirstpanel,byreiteratingtheconnectionbetweenthemutuallyreinforcingspheresoftraditionalIslamandnon-democraticMuslimregimes,

whichrepresscriticalapproachesthatthreatentheirclaimstoreligiouslegitimacy.


27/45

26

SESSIONIIINTERPRETINGTHEQURAN,RESPONDINGTOTHECHALLENGESOFTHE

MODERNWORLD:MuslimSocietiesataCrossroads

Tlilidescribedthefocusofthesecondsessionasappliedinterpretation;anoccasiontotranslatetheideasdiscussedinSessionOnetorealworldscenarios.Beforeintroducingthe

speakers,heinviteddiscussantDaleEickelmantospeakaboutanunanticipatedabsenceonthepanel.

Eickelmanexplainedthattheemptyseaton thestagewasintendedforMohammadAmin

Abdullah,therectorofIndonesiasUniversitasIslamNegariSunanKalijagainYogyakarta.The day before the symposium, organizers learned that, despite several appeals, U.S.

HomelandSecurityhaddeniedAbdullahavisa.Eickelmanhadhopedthat,afterSecretaryof State Hillary Clintons recent apology for refusing entry to Tariq Ramadan, fewer

mistakeswouldbemadeinthescreeningofdistinguishedscholarshopingtovisittheU.S.

HeremindedtheaudiencethattheobjectiontoRamadanwasbasedonasmalldonationhehadmadetoanorganizationyearsbeforeitwaslabeledasupporterofterrorism.

Eickelman spoke scathingly about the failure of authorities to recognize Abdullahscredentials, which include a higher degree from Canada. Abdullah also succeeded in

moving oversight of his Islamic university from the Ministry of Religious Affairs to theMinistryofEducationbasedonhisbeliefthatIslamiceducationshouldbemainstreamed.

Eickelman recounted his recent visit to the university, where he saw visible efforts to

disseminatebroaderknowledgeaboutIslam, includingmaterialscensoredinmanyotherMuslim countries. Eickelman described the goal of Abdullahs lifes work as

mainstreamingIslam,andconcludedwithanapologytotheaudiencethatAbdullahwasunabletoattendthesymposium.

MohammadAmin Abdullah,Professor of Islamic Studies,Universitas Islam NegariSunanKalijaga,Yogyakarta(Indonesia)

InAbdullahsabsence,hisspeechwaspresentedbyastaff-memberof theNYUCenterfor

Dialogues. Abdullahs comments focused on the recent expansion of Islamic studies toincludenotonlyhistoricalanddoctrinalaspects,butalsoIslamasa culture,civilization,

community,andpolitical,economic,andglobalizingforce.Nevertheless,heacknowledged,many Islamic studiesdepartmentsremainrooted inuncritical tradition, often leadingto

conflictamongMuslimsofdifferentdenominationsandbeliefs.

Sohow does the fieldof Islamic studies, Abdullah asked, competewith otherscientific

disciplines in addressing contemporary issues in areas such as human rights, gender

equity,internationalrelations,andtheenvironment?ToAbdullahsmind,thisiswherethetoolsofmodernepistemologyfindtheirrelevance.HecitedtheworksofRichardC.Martin

(an outsider to Islam) and of Mohammed Arkoun (an insider) as good examples.Richard C.Martins book,Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies,8 presents Islam as a

historical entity subject to scientific study beyond sacred theological interpretation.

AbdullahcitedtheworkofKhaledM.AbouEl-Fadl 9andJasserAuda10asrepresentinganew generation of interdisciplinary approaches to Islamic studies that still rigorously

maintainthedisciplineofIslamicReligiousKnowledge,orUlumal-Diin.


28/45

27

Abdullahs speech also covered the development of Islamic studies in the context ofIndonesia,whereinter-disciplinaryandmulti-disciplinaryapproacheshavebeenputinto

practicesincetheestablishmentofIslamicStateUniversitiesin2002.AttheSunanKalijagaState Islamic University of Yogyakarta, a new scientific paradigm called integrated-

interconnected science11

recognizes that ascholarmustanalyzehis fieldby integratingotherdisciplinesandrecognizingtheirinterconnectivity.

AbdullahsremarksthendelveddeeperintotheontologyofcontemporaryIslamicstudies,

andtheimportanceofdifferentiatingbetweenIslamicStudies(DirasatIslamiyyah),IslamicThought (al-Fikr al-Islamy), and Islamic Religious Knowledge (Ulum al-Diin). He

emphasized that Islamic Thought or al-Fikr al-Islamy has a scientific and systematicstructure,andastrongandcomprehensivebodyofknowledgeonIslam,whileUlumal-Diin

oftenemphasizescertainpartsratherthanthefullbodyofknowledge.Healsodiscussed

howcertain religiousgroups,sects,ororganizationsmayintentionallyorunintentionallyskewthisknowledgesettosuittheirownpurposesandperspectives.Inhisopinion,the

presenceof al-Fikral-Islamy,whichismorehistorical,systematical,comprehensive,non-sectarian,non-provincial,andnon-parochial,helpsstudentscomplete theirknowledgeofUlumal-Diin.

Pointing to the proliferation of Islamic scientific journals, symposiums, seminars,

encyclopedia, and new books published by both insiders and outsiders, Abdullah

concludedthattheIslamicacademicworldkeepsgrowingandfollowsthedevelopmentofresearchmethodsingeneral.HeremarkedthatcontemporaryIslamicstudies,orDirasat

Islamiyyah,alwaysusesandcollaborateswithmethodsofthoughtandresearchinsocialsciencesandcontemporary humanities to reveal Islamicreligiosity indaily life, notonly

limited in circle of foundational texts. These new approaches have surprised and

sometimes offended students of Ulum al-Diinwho are still implementing old scientificparadigms and perspectives. Some Islamic studies approaches have been criticized as

secular,liberal,apostate,andthelike.12

Looking to the future,Abdullah described themain projectof thecontemporaryIslamic

Studies as eliminatingmisunderstanding andmutual suspicionbetween Islamic Studies(DirasatIslamiyyah),IslamicThought(al-Fikral-Islamy),andIslamicReligiousKnowledge

(Ulum al-Diin). Their only true differences, he believes, are in methods (process and

procedure),horizonofobservationandtheoreticalframework(approaches),andsourcesof data. Abdullah called for the present generation of students, scholars, and other

stakeholderstounitethesethreeclusters.

Tlili then introduced Mahmoud Hussein as two men with a shared mind. Mahmoud

HusseinisthenomdeplumeofAdelRifaatandBahgatElNadi,politicalscientistswhohaveco-authoredanumberofbooksandarticles.Theirmostrecentbook,notyettranslatedinto

English, raises the implications of interpretation for the social, political, cultural, and

ethicalissuesfacedbyMuslimcommunitiestoday.TliliaddedthattheirworkalsocarriesimplicationsfortherelationshipsbetweenMuslimandnon-Muslimcommunitiesaround


29/45

28

the world, on issues ranging from the status ofwomen to freedomof expression. Adel

Rifaatgavethepresentationonbehalfofthepair.

MahmoudHussein(AdelRifaatandBahgatElNadi),Authors(Egypt/France)

OverthecourseofIslamshistory,Rifaatbegan,religiousconformityhastoooftenstifled

intellectualcuriosity.Unfortunately,inworldopinionitiswidelyassumedthatthisisanintrinsicqualityofIslam.Yetthecurrentstatedatesonlytothelast30yearsandfollowedaperiodofgreatintellectualandpoliticalprogressintheMuslimworld.DuringthisMuslim

Renaissance,thinkerswerefreedfromtheliteralistinterpretationsthathadboundthem

foryears.Itpavedthewayforthenationalliberationmovementsthatcharacterizedthefirst half of the 20th Century in the Muslim world, during which the regions emergent

middle classes adoptedapolitical discourseofsecular rationalism.Yet after aperiodofeconomicandsocialgains,theprogressivemomentumgavewaytocorruptionandunequal

development.Fromthe1980s,thetideturnedandthereligiousorthodoxythathadwaned

duringyearsofsecularizationtookholdonceagain.

Rifaatassessedthecurrent situationthus: in thisnewcentury,Muslimsareinextricablydrawn into the orbit of globalizationwhere their only hope for success is to adapt byregaining intellectual freedom and mastering the tools of criticism and innovation.

However,fundamentalistthought,whichcounteractsthoseneeds,isagaindominant.Intheface of this dilemma, Rifaat stressed the importance of recent reformist thought,which

furnishesthetoolsnecessarytoaddressthemodernworld.

Rifaat honored the recently deceased thinkers Arkoun and Abu Zayd, and welcomed

symposiumpanelistCharfiasapreeminentrepresentativeoftheirschoolofthought.HepraisedtheirrepresentationofIslamasbothadivinemessageandahumanstory,thereby

lightingapathforbelieverstocombinefaithinGodwithknowledgeoftheworld.

Suchthinking,Rifaatsaid,isconsideredbydogmatiststobeanaffronttothesacrednature

of revelation because it connects the divine with temporal events. Dogmatists react

violently to the idea that a text of revelation was influenced by its historical context.Fundamentalists refuse to debate the reformers regarding these objections, instead

condemningthereformersinterpretivemethodologiesasillegitimate.

Rifaat described Mahmoud Husseins recent work as a powerful defense of reformist

thoughtagainstsuchattacks,sinceitexposesthehistoricityoftheQuranwithoutrelyingonillegitimate,profanedisciplines.TheircritiqueusesthetestimonyoftheCompanions

oftheProphetasourceunassailablebytraditionalstandardsofexegesis.Byrelatinga

Quranic verse to the reported circumstances of its revelation, they prove that thehistoricityofrevelationisnotimposedfromtheoutside,butiscontainedwithintheQuran

andistheverywillofGod.

Rifaatexpandedonthisconclusionbyelaboratingthreerelatedfindings.First,theQuran

distinguishesGodfromhisWord;whileGodtranscendstime,hisWordistime-boundandlinkedtothecontextinwhichitwasrevealed.Second,theWordofGodisnotpresentedin

monologue,butthroughexchangesbetweenheavenandearth.Goddialoguesinrealtime,


30/45

29

throughtheProphet,withthefirstcommunityofMuslims.Third,Goddoesnotweigheach

ofhisrevelationsequallybuthastruthsofdifferentorders:absoluteandrelative,perpetualandcircumstantial.

In light of theseconclusions, Rifaat askedrhetorically how literalist dogmawas able to

imposeitselfdespitecounterfactualevidenceintheQuran?Inanswer,RifaatdescribedtheprocessoftheQuransrevelation,whichtookplaceintermittentlyoverthecourseof22years,inchangingcircumstances,andtouchedonadiverserangeoftopics.TheProphet

andCompanionsmemorizedtheserevelationsthroughrecitation.OnlyaftertheProphets

death was the Quran systematically committed towriting. Under the Caliph Uthmann,verseswerestandardizedandgroupedinasinglevolume,themushaf.Theirgroupingwas

orderednotbychronologyofrevelationbutby lengthofverse,creatingproblemsforthetextsintelligibility.Yettheliteralistapproachtreatstheorderofversesasifdecreedby

God,andthetextistraditionallystudiedinstrictlythatorder,versebyverse.

Rifaat described this approach as severing any causal link between verse and the

circumstancesofrevelation.Intheabsenceof suchconnections,manyversesaredifficultor impossible to decipher. The difficulty of findingmeaning is a feature in the earliestQuraniccommentariesandinallschoolsofinterpretation.Fromthebeginning,itwasclear

that the context of revelationheld the key to understanding, and effortsweremade toreconstruct those circumstances by gathering the testimony of the Companions. This

material, called al-asbab nuzul, is used by all exegetes and actually constitutes its own

branchofexegesis.

Given this tradition, Rifaat asked, how do literalists justify their reliance on temporaleventswhilerejecting a connectionbetween theWordofGod and humantime?Infact,

Rifaatargued,theyfailedtoexplainthecontradictionandmerelyissueddecreesjustifying

theirapproach. Thus theirwork ispremised onanapriori belief that theWord of Godtranscendstime,thoughtheyareunabletoexplainthelogicoftheargument.

Rifaat dismissed this position as outmoded. If one reads the Quran using those sameexternal sources, it is possible to use the testimony of the Companions to rationally

rediscovertheconnectionbetweentextandcontext.Theversesbecomemorethanphrasestoberecitedinorder:theyaremomentsofrevelationconnectedbytemporalcontinuity.

Rifaat acknowledged that the chronicles of companion testimony contain contradictoryaccounts,andareofdebatableveracity.Rifaatarguedthattheiranalysis,then,isataskfor

historians rather than religious scholars, who accept the authoritativeness of all hadith

withoutquestion.Rifaatexplainedthattheyareneverthelesssignificantnotbecausetheyarenecessarilyaccurate,butbecausetheyconstituteacriticalmassofevidenceregarding

thehistoricityoftherevelation.Mostimportantly,literalistscannotobjecttotheiruse.

RifaatsexamplesshowedthattheQuranhasacleartimedimensioninwhichmomentsare

relational;somearemoreimportantthanothers;anda subsequenteventmayoverrideaprecedent.Godisbothalwaysright,andyetsayscontradictorythings.Rifaatresolvedthis

seemingdilemmabyemphasizingthehistoricityofGodsdeclarations.Godsinterventions


31/45

30

exist in time, making truths relative and contingent on particular but changing

circumstances.Therefore,Quranicversescannotbereadasthoughtheyallhavethesameweight, and are absolute and eternal, for God made them situational. Lessons and

inspirationcanalwaysbefoundinverses,buttheyarenotmandatorylessonsforalltimesandplaces.JettisoningtheliteralistassumptionsabouttheQuranfreesbelieverstoreadit

notasasetofcommandmentsandprohibitions,butasaguidetohelpfindGodswayonthepathoflife.

Discussant: Dale Eickelman, Professor of Anthropology and Human Relations,

DartmouthCollege(U.S.)ThediscussantDaleEickelmanthankedTliliagainfororganizingthesymposiumdespite

thesetbackscausebyvisaproblems,deaths,andotherchallenges.

Eickelmanreflectedonbothsessionsanddrewoutthecommonthreadsrunningthrough

all of the presentations. He said each of the speakers combined thinking with practice,which is a courageous act inmuch of theMuslimworld. Even if theirwork is not fully

accepted inpublic, it isreferred to inprivatediscussions.The fearofpublic opinionontheseissuesisacharacteristicofthecurrentpoliticalmoment,andcanchangeovertime.

The discussant observed that another theme common to the presentations was thedifficulty of defining what it means to be a Muslim, for there is no agreement on the

questionamongMuslims.AlthoughthetextoftheQuranisstable,itsinterpretationisnot.

As one delves deeper, Eickelman added, even the text becomes unstable. For example,whenearlyfragmentsoftheQuranwerefoundinYemen,containingaberrationsfromthe

standardtext,theyweredestroyedatthebehestofconservativeIslamicfactions.

EickelmancomparedArkounsembraceofthemultiplicityofmeaningtoShahrurs.Both

areresolutelymodernistalthoughindifferentways.ShahrurarguesthatsincethetimeoftheProphetMuhammad,welive inapost-propheticworld.Since prophecy isatanend,

humankind must rely on reason to understand revelation. In their separateways, both

thinkers,togetherwiththelateNasrAbuZayd,illustratethattheQuranisadefiantlyopentextthatcannotbeclosedbyanyone.Onewayofthinkingaboutthedebateoverwhatit

meanstobeMuslimis toinvokeOxfordphilosopherWalterGalliesnotionofessentiallycontestedconcepts.13

Eickelmancommented that the stated intentofthe symposiumwas tofoster adialogueamongMuslims,withnon-Muslims serving asdiscussants. Thiswas also themodelthat

Wildadvocatedinhiscommentsduringthefirstsession.Yet,withoutidentifyingnames,a

reader of the symposiums transcriptwouldbeunable todistinguishMuslim fromnon-Muslim participants. All sharea passionate rapportwith the text.AsCharfi indicated, a

passionaterapportisnecessary.

EickelmanthencommentedoneffortstocensorShahrursfirstbookwhenitwaspublished

in 1990. State authorities refused to censor him, responding to Shahrurs attackers bysuggesting that they simply publish their criticisms. Eickelman also recalled the

experiencesofElNadiandRifaat,whoservedprisontimeduringtheirleftiststudentdays.


32/45

31

Their presentation today made a passionate rereading of their texts and approach to

Quranicinterpretationaccessibletoawideraudience.

Eickelman emphasized the importance of Amin Abdullahs proposition for curricularreforminIndonesia.Hispresentation,thediscussantsaid,liketheothers,remindedushow

ideasand practices are inscribed in the times inwhich they occur, and of the limits ofspeechinmanyplacesintheMiddleEast.

Finally, Eickelman suggested the importance ofwhat isnot said inpublic. The Arabian

Peninsula,forexample,hasanumberofthinktanks,buttheapproachtocriticalstudiesofreligionismorerestrained.WhilepartoftheArabianPeninsulainspiresforwardthinking,

manyGulfleadersarewaryofpubliclyattachingtheirnamestoprojectsinvolvingreligiousissuesandprefertodonateprivately.Westernersmustpaycloserattentiontogreyareas

andlayersofmeaning.For instance,if explicitfeministstatements areineffectual in the

MiddleEast,thereispossibilityinmoresubtleapproachesthatmaynotbeinitiallynoticedbyoutsiderslessattunedtotherealitiesandpracticesofcontemporarycensorship.Thusin

thenewIslamicStudies(DirasatIslamiyya)curriculumusedintheprimaryandsecondaryschoolsoftheUnitedArabEmirates,textbookimagesdepictwomenandmenasequals,atleastuptotheageofeight,withoutheavy-handedexplanationsofhowsuchimagesdiffer

frompredecessortextbooksinwhichrepresentationsofyounggirlswereabsent.ThereisastrongtraditionofsayingthingsindirectlyintheArabworldandelsewhereintheMiddle

East,andoutsiderswouldbenefitfromcomprehendingsuchlocalsocialnorms.

Tobeginthefloordiscussion,Eickelmanreviewedhismainpoints,beginningwiththeidea

thatQuranic interpretation isnotanarcanetopicbutonethatengages practical reasonandoftenoccupiesthecenterstageofpublicdebate.Ithasimplicationsforhowbelievers

think about their faith and its role in society. Because of the different audiences for

interpretation,wemusttakeanethnographicapproachandbesensitivetothegreyareas,understanding that even if ideas are not publicly embraced, they may still resonate in

private.

FloorDiscussion

Thefloordiscussionopenedwithaconversationamongthepanelists,whoreturnedtotheissueofwho isentitled tocarryon thisdebateaboutIslamandwhether theirideasare

marked by their identity as Muslims or non-Muslims. Wild responded to the opinion

expressed earlier that the commentary by Muslim and non-Muslim panelists wasindistinguishable.HereferredtoAbuZaydsdeclarationthathewouldnotlongerspeakof

Godpersebutinsteadaboutthedivine.AbuZaydwrotethathewantedtobeinclusiveof

readerswho are uncomfortable personalizing divinity. Yet,Wild contended, this notioncannotbe translatedintoArabic,bothlinguisticallyandculturally.Muslimreaderswould

notaccepttheideaandasaresult,hepredicted,thebookwouldremainun-translated.

TherewasabriefdiscussionofwhattheArabictranslationforthedivineinthiscontext

wouldbe,whetheral-ilahioral-muqaddas,untilCharfisaidthe important thingwasnothowtheconceptistranslatedbuthowit isexplained.Frequentlyintranslation,wordsdo


33/45

32

not correspond exactly, but awriter is free to develop his own critical terminology by

explaininghisuseofaword.Theimportanceisnotthetranslationbutthecontext.

Tlili spoke about the importance of the social and political credibility that come fromhavinganintra-Muslimdebate.Inthewakeof9/11andtheIraqwar,thediscussionabout

whatbeingaMuslimmeansandhowtoreconcileIslamwithdemocracyisproblematicintheMuslimworld; the impositionof these ideas fromwithout has failed materiallyandpoisonedMuslimsunderstandingofthemselvesandtheirrelationshiptothenon-Muslim

world.Forthisreason,debatesonissuesfundamentaltothefaithandtoMuslimidentity

must be nurtured from the inside to have social and political value and a chance ofinfluencingtheMuslimcommunity.Hencethe invitationto thissymposiumwasintended

to draw voices from the Muslim world and nurture this debate, but also to offer anopportunity for exchanging ideas with colleagues from the West, who share

epistemologicaltools.

The next question drew a distinction between theory and practice and the questioner

opinedthat,althoughtheideasdiscussedonthepanelshavepracticalimplications,theywereinsufficientlyillustrated.Muslimsimplementpracticalinterpretationsofreligiononadaily basis, she said,and there are vibrant interpretations in the areaofgender equity,

whichwasnotreflectedintodayspresentations.ShesaiditwasanespeciallyimportantareafordiscussionbecauseofWesterncriticism.Shesuggestedthatitwouldbefruitfulto

askhowpracticegetstheorized,ratherthanviceversa.

ElNadidisagreed thatweshould discuss the detailsand applicabilityof the Quran, for

people find in religionwhatever they are seeking. He advocated instead examining therelationshipbetweentheProphet/thedivine/GodandtheCompanions.Byaskinghowthey

treatedtheverses,wecanderiveamodelforpractice.TheCompanionsdidnotacceptthe

revelationasafaitaccompli,butdiscusseditandrequestedchanges,andGodcomplied.Ifthe Companions had freedom and authority, why must believers today see the text as

unchangeable?

Rifaat expanded on El Nadis comments, observing that practice has not remained

unchangedoverthecenturies,especiallyintheareaofgenderrelations.Asanexample,hepointedoutthattodayswomenarewearingtheveilincountrieswhere50yearsago,itdid

notexist.So,whentalkingaboutpractice,Rifaatsaid,wehavetobeawarethatpracticeis

constantly changing, especially in the last century.A change inpracticecan be justifiedthroughQuranic interpretation,andindifferentculturalcontexts,differentpracticeswill

bejustifiedbythetext.

Rifaat continued, commenting on how reformers treat the text. Despite differences of

opinion among reformers, they are united in an effort to think differently about therelationshipbetweenthewordofGodandtherealityinwhichthatwordresonateswith

humanbeings.Today, reformers confronta restrictiononcriticalthought in theMuslim

world,withanyonewhoquestionsthestatusoftheQuranasthewordofGodbeingshutoutoftheconversation.HeandElNadithereforetakeastheirstartingpointthattheQuran

isthewordofGod,yetquestiontheimplicationsofthisassumption.Accordingtoliteralist


34/45

33

thinking, sinceGod iseternal andmakesnomistakes, thenHis word is inalienable and

applicableineverytimeandplace.YetthislineofthoughtpresupposesthatGodandhiswordsareoneandthesame.RifaatandElNadisworkarguesthatthewordofGodisnot

theessenceofGod,butistime-bound.ThisapproachgivesMuslimbelieversthefreedomtotakeresponsibilityoftheirownreadingoftheQuran,andtoliveascitizensofapluralist

worldwithoutrenouncingtheirfaith.Eickelmanagreedthatgenderisacentralissue,butcautionedthatitisalsofrequentlya

conversation-stopperintheWest,wherestereotypesofwomeninIslamareentrenched.

However,therealityofgenderrelationsis farmorecomplex,hesaid.InterestingdebatesaretakingplaceintheArabianPeninsulaabouttheroleofwomen.IntheSaudipresslast

year,theargumentwasmadethattheseparationofthesexeswasbidaforbiddencitinghadiths that indicate it was not original to early Islam. Such conversations are made

possiblebytheaccessibilityofthe hadithsontheInternet.AccordingtoZibaMirHosseini,

womeninIranlearntoimitatemensvoicestobetakenseriouslyinmagazines.InKuwait,whereclassroomshavebeenintegratedsincethe1960s,peopleargueagainstseparation

bysayingthatwomenshigheracademicperformanceraisesthelevelofeducationformenaswell. On the Internet, women can enter the public spherewithout being marked bygender.

Lee,apanelistfromthefirstsession,objectedtoRifaatsclaimthatthecurrentclimateof

intellectualrepressiondatesbackonly30years.LeecitedArkoun,whocommentedonthe

problemasearlyasthe1960sandbelievedthatthesolidificationofIslamicinterpretationbeganlongbefore.LeearguedthatIslamhadnotdisappearedundersecularmovements,

mentioningbywayofexamplethattheMuslimBrotherhoodwasfoundedin1928andwasafactorinEgyptiansocietyevenunderGamalAbdelNasser(EgyptsPresidentfrom1956

to1970).Moreover,hesaid,manyMiddleEasternstatesattainedindependencethrough

religiousprojects.ArkounhimselfwasrestrictedfromspeakinginAlgeria,whereseminarswererunasindoctrinationsessionsonbehalfofthestate.Leeconcludedthattheproblem

is of long-standing duration and cannot be attributed to recent Islamist movement or

policiesoftheWesternpowersintheMiddleEast.

El Nadi clarified Mahmoud Husseins position, agreeing with Lee that Islam had notdisappearedunderNas

Documents

SOCIAL, ETHICAL, POLITICAL, AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF INTERPRETATIONS OF ISLAM’S FOUNDATIONAL TEXT: THE QUR’AN