Thursday 23 August 2012

Culture vs Religion?

I constantly come across Muslims who think that culture and religion are two different things, very much assured that culture serves as the culprit for every single thing that goes wrong in Muslim societies. At a friend's bridal shower recently, for instance, I heard two girls talking to each other, one of whom was saying to the other, "Yeah, in my family, it's only Islam, alhamdulillah. There's no culture whatsoever." And the other responded in awe: "Wow! Lucky you! And that's how it should be, you know." I smiled in response to this interesting and common conversation among Muslims.

We make it seem like culture has absolutely nothing to do with our religion (in our case, Islam) or how it is implemented in our society. However, in terms of how Islam is practiced (not necessarily how it should be), our cultures have everything to do with the practice of Islam. Let’s wonder for a moment why Islam is practiced so differently in Indonesia than in Iran or Egypt or Saudi Arabia; let’s wonder why it’s practiced far more differently in the U.S., Canada, and Europe than in Pakistan, India, or Malaysia; let’s wonder why the practices of the Muslims in China and Japan are not the same as those in Iraq, Syria, or Bangladesh. For instance, a Pakistani Muslim who moves to the U.S., starts attending the mosque or otherwise learning Islam soon discovers that many things she/he was taught was un-Islamic are actually Islamic or Islam has a neutral position on it. Muslims from other countries experience the same epiphany. Is it because there is no "culture" in America? No. It is because there is no one culture in America.

Many consider this the "beauty" of Islam: it can be integrated into any belief system, interpreted in a million different ways (even if they're opposite – though this is not unique only to Islam), and practiced in any society and time and culture. Throughout Islamic history, we can spot any point in time and ask what Islam meant for that specific period of time and for that specific region. Today is no exception, and if this breaks our hearts and makes us go, "OMG OMG OMG!! This is not good! We must do something about it!" we're fooling ourselves and wasting our time on something that we don’t have any power over.

So, really, who are we fooling when we lie to ourselves that Islam and culture are two different things? Just ourselves.

Religion and culture are very much embedded into each other and have a strong and indelible influence on one another. Islam – rather, religion in general – is a theory, a theory that can be put into practice in many, many different ways, often being mingled with the original practices of the society that eventually embraces that religion. One of those ways is by interpreting it in a way that it fits our social norms that existed long before the religion ever invaded our land. The reason for this does not require a genius or a scholar to figure out: Religion needs to be practical, and whichever of its laws and routines are not practical for a certain society, that society will not hesitate to reject them. To ask a people to completely rid themselves of their previous customs, no matter how much they may be "clashing" with the religion they are compelled to accept, is silly and impractical. Looking into Islamic history and the beliefs of the people we call the pagans of Arabia, we notice that a lot of the rituals we have to perform during Hajj are actually derived from pre-Arab customs but were simply incorporated into Islam once they were re-interpreted to fit the standards of the Islamic/monotheistic concept of God and divinity and worship. (The concept of dowry is another example. It was simply made by claiming that it is to help the woman, though it can also mean other things … including some bad things, that is, such as: A man is paying a certain amount of money to the bride so that he can sexually own her for the rest of her life, or so that he can expect her obedience. This is how Muslim scholars in medieval and classical times interpreted the dowry. But today, how many Muslim women, especially in the west, are willing to see it this way?)

So we cannot expect people to give up every single one of their custom that they so cherished before they had to accept Islam, even if those practices clash with our understanding of Islam. It is only natural for them to keep some things from their past and accept new ones from the religion they have been introduced to, or to just mix both or re-interpret their older beliefs and practices so they can be explained from their new perspectives.

For example, on the treatment of women: there are teachings in Islam that, if interpreted from a a certain perspective, do in fact support the mistreatment of women in Muslim cultures. The “Islamic” concept of divorce is one (if interpreted literally, the woman has to go through hell to get a divorce; so why bother divorcing at all? And the four Sunni legal schools aren't very helpful either:  they all differ significantly, such that, according to the Hanafi law, a woman cannot leave the marriage even if she is being abused or her husband is not fulfilling his duties as a husband or even if he goes missing--the wife has to wait until the husband would die a "natural" death or wait until he would be 104 years old to get a divorce! But Shafi’ law is more women-friendly when it comes to divorce: She can divorce her husband if he fails to provide for her and her kids financially, if he beats her, or even if she’s just unhappy.

Another example might be the Islamic teaching that education is compulsory upon every Muslim. Depending on how and where we were raised, we might interpret the word "education" differently--from no schooling but "education" about domestic work to 10th grade or high school to being able to obtain a PhD or moving alone to another country for higher education, and so on.

Although the formation and development of law is a separate topic than the notion of culture versus religion, the point here is that how we understand Islam is based on the assumptions and beliefs we are raised with. The scholars who interpret the religion for us are no exception: they, too, are children and products of their own cultures, and this is why a scholar from Pakistan is likely to give you a different "Islamic" opinion on, for example, how marriage relations are to be conducted versus how a Muslim scholar born and raised in Great Britain might. It is an unfair mistake to assume that one is more right than the other just because one might give an opinion that we were raised to believe is "Islamic" while the other is not.

Is this to mean that it's Islam's fault? Not necessarily, because, as aforementioned, Islam is a theory; it becomes practice only once it is interpreted AND then implemented. So it's not necessarily Islam's fault but the fault of the interpretations, though often inexorably stemming from the literal text of the Quran itself. 

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

The way Islam is practiced in the States vs Iran vs Pakistan has nothing to do with the culture one comes from. One of the major reason for these differences is the sect one belongs to. Even within a certain sect, it further depends on the Aalim one follows (one could be Hanafi, Shafi', Maliki or Hanbli). Why is it practiced differently in the States is merely because living in a society where non muslims are in majority (notice I didn't say multicultural, although it is but that's not the point) makes one think about their religious beliefs and this changes the way things are done (mostly the non-religious cultural things are left out by this individual).

The un-islamic things one comes to learn are NOT because they are part of Islam but because they are a part of the culture and society one grows up with. Take music for example. Rabab and Mangay (typical hujra music) has been part of the Pashtun culture for centuries but has one ever questioned its Shari' status? Sometimes these things are even not in accordance with Islam but people turn a blind eye because it is just more convenient to do so. To say that it was ever part of religion is wrong in my opinion.

The Quran doesn't cover every single detail of how one should lead a life, that is why we have the Sunnah of our Prophet (pbuh). Religion is not convenient - that is the whole point of it, if you start adding things to religion just because they are convenient, then where do you draw the line?

The divorce issue - has nothing to do with culture like you mention yourself. Its more to do with which sect/subsect one follows and to say that the teachings/interpretations of these Imams are influenced by culture is wrong in my opinion. These Imams merely tried to compile Hadiths to approve/disapprove issues that arise with time. How much were they influenced by their culture in their interpretation? Wallah-o-Alam.

One the question of scholars from Pakistan or GB, again it depends on the "Scholar" you are talking to. In Pakistan we have a habit of making every other person a "Scholar" and believing blindly in whatever he/she has to say. In GB on the other hand, the scholar knows that he will be questioned if his teachings are not logical (again like I said it is because people are living in a non-muslim society and question things) instead of just accepting them for what they are.

Anonymous said...

Btw Whatever plugin you are using for comments is broken with Firefox and Chrome. You might want to update that.

I couldn't post the comment using firefox and chrome, gave up but then thought I should use Safari. Only works with Safari for me.

qrratugai said...

Thank you so much for your insight, Khanspiracy (nice name ;) I like it!)

Your point about how it's nothing to do with culture is not convincing for me. I disagree almost completely that it's more about sects and the school of the thought than about culture. Most of our sectarian and school differences are actually not that serious (a few are, and I'll be happy to give examples if necessary), but most are so minute and have nothing to do with practice--they're more theoretical.

You said that the "multicultralism" of the U.S. isn't the point, or a part of the point. There, too, I disagree: I think it explains perfectly why Islam is practiced so differently here. You go to a mosque with more than just one ethnic group (e.g, South Asian Muslims with Nigerian Muslims with Egyptian Muslims with Saudi Muslims and so on), and you're absolutely shocked about how they view different things or even how they pray or what they think is appropriate and inappropriate during prayer. You got a gathering with a similarly diverse group of Muslims, and you're just amazed at the diverse ways Islam can be understood.

Religion is not convenient? ... Are you sure about that? :) I think God would disagree! In fact, Qur'anic verses that point to the fact that religious guidelines are NOT there to inconvenience us or to make our lives more difficult are often used to justify why the practice of Ijtihad needs to be revived. Do you want to imagine why this is so? (I don't want to assume you don't know.)

Hadiths and divorce ... can you compile me a few hadiths that talk about how divorce is to be dealt with, initiated, etc.? The fact actually is that over 90% of Islamic law is the scholars' opinions and views about how things should be; less than 1% is probably the Qur'an (if at all), and the rest is hadiths. I'm supposed to be writing about this these days, but I haven't really had the chance to sit down and do this. Meanwhile, however, you may visit this blog -- I hope to do this within the next 2 weeks or so, inshaAllah: http://islam-and-gender.blogspot.com/2012/03/islamic-law-and-women-part-i.html


I love, love, LOVE your point about how we make everyone a scholar in Pakistan! It's very true. How do you define a scholar? What do you think a person has to do in order to become a scholar? ... Aaaaand what do you think of Zakir Naik? :D

Thank you again for your feedback! Absolutely appreciated.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the detailed reply. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on some of the points :)

Re the hadiths on divorce, I was actually discussing the same issue with some of my friends here (Swiss, Egyptian, Turkish). I was amazed at how all of us didn't have a clue about what the Quran or Sahih Hadiths have to say about it and it was more of what was being practiced around us. In our conversation/comparison I think our version (practiced in Pashtun areas/most of Pakistan I think) was the harshest of all, so I came home and read Sahih Bukhari's "Book of Divorce". It does shed some light on when and how to divorce, but I couldn't find any references to the practice of saying "I divorce you" 3 times. From what I understood, it is quite a lengthy process and there is room for reconciliation and discussion. Merely saying the words three times is more of a cultural thing than Islamic.

As for Aalims/scholars... well, I think we over-value the opinion or scholars. Most of us (even the most educated people) believe that whatever a scholar says, is the final word! But then why did God give us the ability to think, read, comprehend and reason? I personally believe in going back to the Source i.e. Quran! Even some of the Sahih Hadiths are debatable because, let's face it, they were compiled centuries after the passing away of our Holly Prophet (pbuh) and to deny the fact that things get corrupted as they are passed down from one human being to the next is totally absurd in my opinion.

As to what I think of Dr. Naik ... well, I don't know about his Niyat (only Allah knows) and Allah alone can judge him in the right way but in my humble opinion (and it's just my personal opinion of him) he is the kind of person who will do anything to win a debate! He will twist facts and has some extreme views. He can be rude and aggressive to put his opponent on the back foot and sometimes his views are totally illogical and absurd.