Book Reviews
zyxw
zyxw
zyxwv
z
zyxw
islam and Other Faiths
By Ismail Raji al-Faruqi, edited by Ataullah Siddiqui, Islamic Foundation
and IIIT, 1998,370 pp.
My first reaction to this eminent book of collected articles and lectures given
by Professor Ismail Raji al-Faruqi is one of frustration that I was not able to
meet the man. He died in 1986. I would have loved to have known him,for I
found in reading this book that so many of his thoughts and ideas coincided
with my own hopes concerning the future of Islam and its relationship with the
other peoples of the Book, especially the Christians. I was a Christian theole
gian and teacher until my conversion to Islam in 1986.
Professor Ismail's book provides a good cross-section of his contribution to
the study of comparative religion and covers a wide spectrum of interreligious
issues, spanning more than two decades of his work. Essays which deal directly with other faiths, Christianity and Judaism in particular, were specifically
selected but they should be seen against the background of his huge contribution to the study of religions through his many other eminent publications.
Here, the volume concentrateson those aspects of Islam which the Ahl al-Kitab
(the People of the Book) have in common rather than their differences.
I have long felt that this was the correct way forward. As a former Christian
who initially came to Islam by studying the teachings of Jesus rather than the
Qur'an, I was always aware of the commonality of the faith and its develop
ment through the prophets of Judaism to Christianity, to its deviation through
Trinitarianism, and through the Prophet of Islam who was sent to bring new
understanding of Tawhid and the way to find the Straight Path to God.
Therefore, I was horrified and disturbed when I ran into the walls of hostility and misunderstanding from all sides-particularly the hostility of Muslims
toward Christians and Jews, theological hostilities and racist ones, too. Much
of this was and is caused by the complete ignorance of the practicing members
of one faith for the others, a situation that will still take years to remedy.
However, scholars such as Professor Ismail are trailblazers in this field, and I
repeat my disappointment that I missed knowing him personally.
He was a Palestinian, born in 1921, and graduated from the American
University of Beirut in 1941; he served as District Governor of Galilee in
Palestine. He left Galilee as a refugee in 1948 when Palestine was partitioned;
124
zyxwvuts
zyx
The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 16:1
he completed his graduate degrees in westem philosophy in the USA and studied Islam at al-Azhar in Cairo from 1954 to 1958. From 1959 to 1961 he was
visiting professor of Islamic Studies at McGill University, where he studied
Christianity and Judaism. From 1961 to 1%3 he was a professor of Islamic
Studies at the Central Institute for Islamic Research in Karachi, and in 1964 he
was a visiting Professor at the University of Chicago. His final post was as a
professor of Islamic Studies and History of Religions at Temple University,
Syracuse. He authored, edited, or translated 25 books and more than 100 articles, was on the editorial board of seven major joumals, was visiting professor
at more than 23 universities, and established and chaired the Islamic Studies
Steering Committee of the American Academy of Religion. He was vice-president of the Inter-Religious Peace Colloquium from 1977 to 1982, becoming
one of the most visible and prolific Muslim contributorsto ecumenism.He was
also one of the founders of the International Institute of Islamic Thought and
its first president. He and his wife Lois Lamya were murdered in Chicago in
zyx
zy
1986.
Part 1 consists of four chapters: “The Essence of Religious Experience in
Islam,” “Divine Transcendence and its Expression,” “The Role of Islam in
Global Inter-Religious Dependence,” and “A Comparison of the Islamic and
Christian Approaches to Hebrew Scripture.” Professor Ismail examined religions prior to and after the Prophet Abraham and showed how the Islamic
worldview related itself both to Jewish and Christian scriptures.
From the outset, I have to admit I had problems with his work-the language
is exceedingly academic, and this considerably limits the ordinary reader’s
access to his thoughts and ideas. Professor Ismail’s world was that of the high
academic, and no doubt his audiences were better able than myself to cope with
this. However, for what it is worth, this is my major criticism of his work.
When the language level of a writer goes beyond that of his readers, it is human
nature for them to lose interest. And that is a very great pity, for his ideas are
extremely valuable and relevant.
The following sentence is a good example: “Besides being metaphysical,
God‘s ultimacy is not for the Muslim isolable from, or emphasizeable at the
cost of, the axiological . . .the value of the metaphysicalis that it may exercise
its imperativeness,its moving appeal or normativeness.” Those who can read
and understand such language with no problem should love this book. For lesser mortals, it may be noted that not all of the text is pitched at the same very
high level, and the key ideas are so important that it is worth persevering.
The two key problems between Judaism with Islam were firmly addressedthat a scripture (specifically, the Torah) that was open to various sorts of formal criticism should be maintained as divine revelation, and that the Jewish
zyxw
zyxwv
zyxw
z
zy
z
zy
Book Reviews
125
doctrine of election (being a “chosen race”) is biological (thus being unethical
and racist). The texts of the Torah,Psalms, and Prophets are human and historical and do not escape the relativities of history. There are enormous dangers in tying God to the fate and vicissitudes of a particular people-not least
of which is the concept of God being in some way the “Father” of those people, and the expectation that He will maneuver historical happenings to reward
or chastise those people. When things go wrong, God‘s transcendence goes out
the window, and God is questioned, criticized, complained againstds if He
had “let them down,” or withdrawn Himself from them or abandoned them, or
even that He had died. As Professor Ismail put it, ethnocentrism denies humak
ity the possibility of rising to the ethical consequences of transcendentalism @.
29).
Jesus rejected not only the idea that Jews are the special children of God, but
ill of God was his
that the descendence bond counted at all. Whoever did the w
brother, sister, and mother (Matthew 12:48-50). God is good to all indiscriminately. He saw ethnocentrism as “shutting up the Kingdom of Heaven against
people,” which together with the Jewish custom of calling themselves the children of God, he found odious and intolerable (John 8:44,47).
Professor Ismail then points out the influences of Hellenistic Gnosticism and
the popular mystery religions of the Mediterranean world as influences that led
Christians away from pure monotheism as revealed by Jesus. The crucified
Jesus stepped into the place of the immolated savior-god, and severe asceticism
and self-renunciation and mysticaVemotiona1 experiences took precedence
over good ethics. A good discussion of the Islamic doctrine of transcendence
follows, plus some very interesting side lights into the world of Islamic art and
artistic expression.
Chapter 3 begins by raising some points that I found invaluable-that the
respect with which Islam regards Judaism and Christianity, their founders and
scriptures, is not just courtesy but an acknowledgement of their religious truth.
In this, Islam is unique, for no other religion in the world has yet made belief
in the truth of other religions a necessary condition of its own faith and witness.
God is identified as the source of all three religions; Islam reaffirms the same
truths as presented by all the preceding prophets-their revelations are one and
the same as its own.
Together with Hanifism, the monotheistic and ethical religion of
pre-Islamic Arabia, Judaism, Christianity and Islam constitute crystallizations of one and the same religious consciousness whose essence and core
is one and the same. (p. 75)
126
zyx
zyxwvuts
zyxwv
zy
zyx
zyxwv
The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 1 6 1
That this has not been properly realized by perhaps the majority of Muslims is
one of the world’s major tragedies and problems.
Islam granted the maximum respect and concession than can ever be given
from one religion to another by recognizing the concept of tuwhtd, and thereby the one God,of other religions. Muslims should be the assistants, friends,
and supporters of the adherents of the other religion-erences
should be
considered domestic disputes within the same religious family and should be
surmountable.
The phenomenon of prophecy is universal and has taken place throughout all
space and time. Every human has the capacity to understand transcendence,
and is responsible for his or her own deeds. How then do people’s beliefs differ? partly they differ because God Himself revealed Himself in different ways
and different thought-forms to different peoples according to their circumstances. Partly, the differences come about by human weaknesses and errors
and the less pleasant tendencies of humans in their selfishness and lusts for
power.
Professor Ismail points to the responsibility of Muslims in their societies to
see that all non-Muslims have their rights properly protected-they are never,
ever, to be coerced into believing what they do not believe. So long as they
remain loyal to the Islamic state, their right to believe what they like is actually part of Islamic faith and duty. For centuries, Jews and Christians (and other
religious ummahs) lived and prospered in peace under Islam. He concludes that
the Pax Islum‘cu was universal and recognized the legitimacy of every religious community and granted each the right to order its life in accordance with
its own religious genius, so long as that Par was preserved.
part 2 collects together his writings on the dialogue between Islam,
Christianity,and Judaism. He points out the responsibilities of Muslims toward
non-Muslims living in a Muslim-majorityenvironment.
There is a most interesting discussion on din ul-fitruh, or natural religiothat which belongs to Man by virtue of his humanity. Man is not fallen, but created to be viceregent. Far from creating humans hopelessly unable to M i l l His
will and thus to achieve salvation, God has created them in the best of forms
and endowed them with all that they need. Humans are not born in sin or in any
theological predicament, but God demands positive, affirmative action
designed to remold individuals and their created environments. There is no
predicament from which a person may not extricate himself or herself by his
or her own effort, and all are capable of achieving the highest righteousness.
Professor Ismail suggests that the best way forward ecumenically is not to
study how far “your” religion agrees with “mine,” if at all; but to study how far
all religious traditions agree with din ul-fiiruh, the original and first religion.
z
zyxwv
zyxw
zyxw
zyxwv
Book Reviews
127
Then, instead of assuming that each of our religions is divine, as it stands
today, let us all try to trace the historical development of our religions and
determine precisely how and when and where each has followed and fulfilled,
or transcended, or deviated from, din ul-finah. Let us look at the various holy
scriptures and try to discover what changes have befallen them or been reflected in them.
Islam thus calls all to critical analysis of religious texts and of the claims of
such texts to revelation status. The biggest challenge in this respect is to
Christians, who have the feeling of the superiority of their religion ingrained in
them.
Part 3 focuses on da’wuh. The first article presents the principles and thretic aspects of possible dialogue between Christians and Muslims, and the second is a speech delivered to a Muslim audience. The most important aspect of
ddwuh work is the insistence that Muslims should not seek to enforce, trick,
brainwash, or coerce others to accept Islam in any way. The truth stands out
quite clear from error and does not need any of these tactics. Dr.Faruqi is particularly wary of Sufism, with its emphasis on altered states of consciousness
in dhikr--something shared with the emotional soul-singing of various evangelical Christian groups. Conversions and religious convictions should always
rest on reason and not on emotional “trips.”
Professor Ismail declares that the majority, no matter how large or overwhelming, have no right to coerce even a single deviationist in religion. If that
single non-Muslim adamantly refuses to accept the position of the majority, the
latter is bound by Islamic law to honor his judgement and to enable him to
exercise his convictions and to practice his faith in freedom and dignity-so
long as he does not seek to physically obstruct Muslims and Islam from their
own expression. This, he considers, is the only justification for jihad-if
the
sword is drawn in answer to a proposal to let the best argument win, then
Muslims also have the right to take up the sword until that tyranny and aggression cease.
The aim of jihad is no more and no less than stopping the violent action taken
by the non-Muslim and should stop immediately upon the cessation of their
violence. No power should try to force another into accepting Islam, except
Islam itself. Muslims should look to themselves, taking care to have studied the
background reasoning for their own beliefs, and doing their best to present a
noble and compassionate mode of life. This, in itself, is what has always
attracted the non-Muslim to Islam, and continues to do so. The best possible
ddwah is the quiet, logical reasoning behind the faith and the noble example
of M u s l i i who take their way of life seriously.
zy
z
128
The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 16:1
The Muslim who assumes that Islam is best expressed in constant prayers,
textual study, and rather superior preaching (usually to the already converted!)
is missing the point. Islam is always best expressed in kind and compassionate,
ethically pure living.
The noble Muslim attitude toward Jews and Christians and those of other
faiths is not to accuse, criticize, attack, or denigrate-------but to "live and let live."
"To you be your religion, and to me be mine." The Prophet was only a warn
er, not an enforcer. If God had wished everyone in the world to become a
Muslim, He could have done so very easily, without our help. But that is not
His will-His will is our free choice, free understanding, and free love of Him.
Indeed, in Madinah, Jewish law, religion, and institutions became a sacro
sanct trust whose protection, safe-keeping, and perpetuation became a Muslim
responsibility imposed by the religion of Islam itself; likewise, the Christians
(the example of the Arabs of Najran is highlighted-they did not accept Islam
but were granted the same autonomous status as the Jews, loaded with gifts and
sent home under the protection of a Muslim bodyguard with a Muslim states
man to organize their affairs); and as the Muslims fanned out of Arabia into
Byzantium, Persia, and India, the large numbers of Jews, Christians,
l.oroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists that came under their dominion were
granted the same recognition--<>n the one condition of keeping the peace.
There is a great deal more that can be said of the book, but these are the
major themes. I cannot express strongly enough how much I was delighted to
read it.
The text lifted my spirit and gave me fresh hope and a new exciting
world-vision that suggested a wonderful way forward for Islam. It is my
earnest prayer that Muslims everywhere will seek and find more education for
themselves, in order to break away from what gives the impression of being
highly wt-Islamic behavior to those of us who share Professor Ismail's hopes.
Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood
Researcher and Author
U.K.