By Mushtaq Ul Haq Ahmad Sikander, New Age Islam
15 June 2023
Who Killed Liberal Islam
Author: Hasan Suroor
Publisher: Rupa Publications, New Delhi, India
Year of Publication: 2019
Pages: 234, Price: Rs 595
ISBN: 9789353335939
Liberalism has been an enlightening value of Renaissance. Renaissance has its roots in atheism, and everything that stands antagonistic to religion. Liberalism, has been constructed as something parallel to religion. Hence, to criticize some Muslim as being Liberal is to deprive the privilege of legitimacy of religion and God consciousness. This term has been abused by the mullahs and conservative Ulema, so much that few Muslims would have the courage to call themselves as Liberals. Also, Liberalism in its spirit allows freedom and paves way for hedonism, if not restricted by Law. Religion, like any code of conduct follows certain rules, and Liberalism too has its own set of rules. But these rules have been constructed in the minds of common Muslims, as espousing and encouraging sexual anarchy, freedom without restrictions, materialism, maximizing pleasures and rebelling against God.
Can Liberalism and Islam co-exist? This question has been debated and we have contradictory and opposing views of scholars and ulema. For some they both are compatible, for others they are compatible with certain exceptions and for others they are incompatible and cannot be mixed. Hasan Suroor, a veteran journalist and progressive Muslim has tackled this question in his new work, Who Killed Liberal Islam. As the title suggests, Suroor holds Islam to be Liberal and probes this important question, while identifying and deliberating about the reasons and factors responsible for annihilating Liberal Islam. Primarily the problem is to identify Liberal Muslims and verifying authenticity of those who are commonly presented as the Liberal and progressive face among Muslims. Suroor, writes in the Introduction, “I question the authenticity of the kind of Muslims who are commonly presented as the liberal and progressive public face of the community. Yes, they are liberals, but Muslims?” (P-xv)
While further probing this question in detail, Suroor wants the reader to understand about what the Liberals have done, “The central point the book seeks to make is that the left-wing Muslim intellectuals paraded as the community’s beating liberal heart-the Muslims who write op-ed pieces and appear on TV to denounce Sharia-have in fact done more damage to the cause of Muslim liberalism than good. They are not agents of change. On the contrary, by coming across as confrontational and hostile, they have the effect of undermining the few moderates in the community who are trying to bring about change.” (P-xvi-xvii)
The debate about Liberalizing Islam for Suroor included in the work is, “the focus of my book is on Indian Muslims, I also look at the broader global debate over liberalizing Islam. Drawing on historical debates and writings, I contest the routinely made claim that a historically liberal and tolerant religion has been ‘suddenly’ hijacked by extremists, and show how, in fact, Islam lost to the hardliners very early in its history.” (P-xix)
Suroor, laments about the intellectual timidity of Indian Muslim Liberals, who in most cases indulge in self-flagellation, while maintaining silence about most pressing issues. They also opt for the path of the least resistance. The Liberal Muslims for Suroor are Mustafa Kamal Ataturk and Reza Shah Pahlavi, who chose a brand of aggressive secularism in conservative and religious societies of Turkey and Egypt. The need now is to patronize such Liberal brand of Islam, not that of self-loathing and timid form of liberalism. After, the advent of Communist revolution, which has its impact in Muslims societies too, the divide between Mullahs and Marxists became evident, although it is not valid now. Muslim Marxists tried to initiate a series of social reforms, but now there is little discussion or enthusiasm about reforms among Muslims, as they have been rendered into oblivion by more focus on identity related issues.
It is a factual reality that Islam has a chequered history, from where both liberals and extremists try to cheery pick few incidents, to construct a narrative that is flawed and non-holistic. A big event in the free India, that troubled the constitutional values like secularism and liberalism, was the demolition of Babri masjid in 1992. To construct the Muslim restraint in the aftermath of Babri demolition, as dawn of liberalism is to believe a mirage. They observed restraint and did not react violently en-masse because they had no option left, except to be patient and not react. If they had reacted violently, it certainly would have resulted in their genocide. Secularism like Liberalism is compatible with Islam, according to some scholars but not all believe so. Muslims who leave Islam, become apostates and apostasy is punishable by death. This punishment should be discarded and scrapped, as it is not needed because the era of religious persecution is over. No one should be forced to believe in a set of beliefs, even if that is Islam. Suroor and other writers who have expressed their views about liberalism and Islam, have missed to mention about the contemporary Muslim reformers like Dr Asghar Ali Engineer, Prof Amina Wadud and Dr Rashid Shaz. Also, advocating drinking of alcohol as something that caliphs, scholars used to drink does not make it lawful, legal and Halal (P-128). The priorities of Suroor seem to be misplaced, because Liberal Islam is not synonymous with being alcoholic.
Editor in Chief, of a progressive website Mr Sultan Shahin in his article observes how the liberal Muslims are tolerated in India, while exposing the hypocrisy of Jamaat e Islami, who maintain silence about the minorities in Pakistan. In India, Muslims being in minority they leave no stone unturned when there is an attack or untoward incident towards the Muslim minority, but when any similar attack is carried against the non Muslim minority in a Muslim majority country then Islamic organizations turn a blind eye to such atrocities. In the end, while probing the reasons about the failure of liberalism at the hands of Muslim Liberals, it is articulated, “Partly out of arrogance and partly naivete, they have taken on the role of great reformers without even making any attempt to engage with the community. This is typical of their crass approach and it has nearly done as much damage to the cause of Muslim liberalism as the mullahs. Their brassy rejection of Shariah and a tendency to classify anyone who disagrees with them-which means pretty much every practicing Muslim-as a fundamentalist, has made ordinary Muslims, including reform minded moderates, suspicious of the liberals. And liberalism itself has come to be seen as a threat to Muslim identity.” (P-178-179)
There are some flaws in the book, like the author believes Shah Waliullah and his movement was Wahhabi in its orientation (P-57). Wahhabi as a term has its construct in the British colonialism. Suroor is uncritically aping them, that does not augur well. The book is a good read, and the articles written by different scholars, also bring forth plurality of views.
——
M.H.A. Sikander is Writer-Activist based in Srinagar, Kashmir
URL: https://newageislam.com/books-documents/liberal-islam-irrelevant-muslims/d/129996