Recently, there have been reports that a PhD student at Al-Azhar University (probably the most well-respected Sunni Muslim religious institution), Sheikh Mustafa Mohammad Raashed, had published an accepted thesis that ultimately declared that the hijab (headscarf) was not obligatory for Muslim women. There are skeptics about this report as the full text of thesis is not available. However, the news does bring up some interesting questions. First and foremost, even if the doctoral thesis was accepted, does that mean that Al-Azhar endorses the point of view? Just because a student publishes something, does that mean that the head jurists also accept the view and will adopt it? Keep in mind that this debate can only be had if the dissertation does, in fact, exist. There have been reports that the dissertation, and even the student, do not exist. The well-known American-Muslim scholar (who spent some time at Al-Azhar), Imam Suhaib Webb posted this on his facebook page condemning the validity of the story:
If the story turns about to be valid, I am curious to see what this means for the relationship between the student’s work and the institution. Can a PhD thesis from Al-Azhar be equated to a fatwa? If the board okays the thesis, does that mean they support the conclusion or are they merely applauding the efforts of the researcher? Let’s see how this thing plays out.
For those who are interested, here are links to some more in-depth looks at the hijab “debate”
http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2012/06/45564/hijab-is-not-an-islamic-duty-scholar/ (previous arguments used to justify that hijab is not obligatory)
http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-the-scholar/fiqh/449534-hijab.html (position of Shaykh from Al-Azhar)
This will be a brief post because not much needs to be said about the fact that my favorite member of congress, Michele Bachmann (wackjob-MN) serves on the House Intelligence Committee. I wonder how embarrassed this committee must be right now as Bachmann continues to spew discriminatory hate-filled anti-Muslim rhetoric. Her conspiracy theories get more and more absurd to the point where even speaker of the house, John Boehner has denounced her allegations. God help this country is she is re-elected. Surely, the people of Minnesota have to be smarter than this.
The state of Louisiana recently passed a voucher program that would allow for state funds to be used for religious schools. This seems to violate the constitutional principle of the separation of church and state, but Obama (and those damn liberals) have launched a war on religion, so it only makes sense to violate a core constitutional idea to make sure faith isn’t totally extinguished by that Muslim, Socialist, immigrant president.
The scenario, already humorous, became even more laughable, when Rep. Valarie Hodges (R-Watson) said she had no idea that the voucher to use these public funds for private schools included giving money to Muslim schools. She believed that the money would only be used to fund the religions of the “Founders.” (Someone should recommend that she read a biography of Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson to really see if she understands what the religious views of the “Founders” really were). Perhaps Hodges simply forgot that Islam is the second-largest religion in the world with nearly 2 billion followers. Honest mistake, right? Well, no, because she released the following statement after the passing of the bill:
“Unfortunately it will not be limited to the Founders’ religion,” Hodges said. “We need to insure (sic) that it does not open the door to fund radical Islam schools. There are a thousand Muslim schools that have sprung up recently. I do not support using public funds for teaching Islam anywhere here in Louisiana.”
Hodges turns to playing the radical Islamist card. No surprise here. All practicing Muslims are terrorists, right? If that is the case, then Hodges is funding terrorism by voting for this bill, no? Oh, wait, I forgot only Muslims can support terrorism. Congressmen Peter King (supporter of the IRA) and Newt Gingrich (applauding the MEK) can publicly hail terrorist groups without being accused of having ties to terrorism. However, when Arabs buy cell phone parts, it’s time to start finding the link to Al-Qaeda. Islamophobia is a result of ignorance, as can be seen by the actions and statements of Representative Hodges.
I recently came across an article in the Huffington Post discussing the idea of thinking of the West and Islam as having unrelated, separate histories. We seem to think of the West and Islam as being inherently in opposition. The West valuing progress while Islam valuing a seeminglystagnant tradition. Media often propagates these binaries and, unfortunately, so do our American and Muslim American communities.
As someone with a degree in the humanities, I often get into debates with friends and family over issues that often result in me being labeled “socially liberal.” Apparently, this also means that I am a “bad Muslim.” Often times, my friends and family look at me in dismay because in their eyes I have “sold out” and chosen the West over Islam, again thinking in the binary way discussed earlier. In their eyes, because I may be critical of gender segregation in Muslim spaces, that means I also value glamorizing alcohol consumption and American “hook-up” culture and my points are often delegitimized as coming from the mouth of a “western-pundit.” However, I am not stripped of all legitimacy because ultimately, I am not as big of a traitor as a sister who doesn’t wear hijab (she obviously doesn’t care about the Deen, right?) and am somewhat knowledgeable of the religion and its history.
I find it especially troubling to associate any critique I may have of my own community as solely influenced by Western thought. This is particularly troubling for me because I spent the past four years of my life writing papers criticizing White and Western hegemony, Euro-centrism in academia, and Western cultural imperialism. So no, my critiques (which are often far outnumbered by my praise) of my Muslim communities is not a result of me being “brain-washed” by “liberal” professors in Ann Arbor. I do not believe in cultural or civilizational hierarchies, so my critiques of my own community come from a genuine love and care for my American Muslim community, and not from a belief that “Western” thought or culture are somehow inherently superior (there is a difference between leftist and Western). I love the Deen and this Ummah, but that does not mean it is perfect. I want to see it progress. I want to see it be dynamic. I want us all to be more and more proud to be Muslim every day. I want us to realize that Islam is demonized and I want us to do something about it. I would like to see us combat the false dichotomy between Islam and the West and further ideas of coexistence over isolation. I want to see Muslims leading domestic social justice endeavors. We are on the right path. I love this Ummah and would like to see it become as inclusive and understanding as possible. How dare you question my commitment and allegiance to the Ummah because I discuss taboo issues and attempt to combat forces of oppression found in (but definitely not limited to) our own Muslim communities?
The fact the people are willing to listen makes me optimistic. They don’t have to agree with what I have to say, but dialogue is important. However, the fact that people are willing to listen have made me slightly more aware of my male and Sunni privilege within Muslim communities. It is a shame that those two criteria allow people to take me more seriously, but I am glad that they do allow my voice to be heard. So I would like to end by saying that we should be aware of any voices being silenced within our own Muslim communities and why they are being hushed. How can we preach inclusivity when we aren’t thinking about who is being silenced and who is producing current Islamic knowledge? I hope we can continue to think critically and keep our minds open. Let us hear the voices of all Muslims and never forget the Islamic principles of love, mercy, equality, and social justice.