Irshad Manji: “I do believe that moderate Muslims are part of the problem instead of the solution”

0n 23rd April 2008, Irshad Manji visited Jakarta to launch the Indonesian translation of her international bestseller, The Trouble With Islam Today. The Indonesian edition is entitled “Beriman Tanpa Rasa Takut” – and it is available in print and for free-of-charge download on Manji’s website. The Liberal Islam Network invited this brave and brilliant professor of leadership, journalist, feminist and human rights activist to a brief discussion in Utan Kayu. She spoke candidly about why she is not a moderate Muslim, the need for Muslim reform, the Quran, Arab cultural imperialism and ijtihad, Islam’s own tradition of critical thinking, debate and dissent. Here is a sample of the conversation:

What has the public response to your book been like?

Well, when The Trouble with Islam Today was published almost 5 years ago, the controversy was intense. About three weeks after the book came out, it reached number one on lists of bestselling books. This was a pivotal moment. Muslim leaders realized that people do not feel the need for their approval before reading a book like this. In fact, it was because they were condemning the book so heavily that many people decided to read it. Later on, those Muslim leaders were compelled to get involved in the debate – one they thought they could dismiss because they believe themselves to be the ones who decide what is authentic and what is not. As it turns out, people were going to read my ideas regardless of what religious leaders said. Further, people were going to get involved in conversations about Muslim reform, even without the approval of clerics.

Many younger Muslims in Canada began to e-mail me and say that they had never previously felt it possible to raise these issues in their homes, madrasahs (Islamic schools) and mosques.
They also told me that they knew they would receive criticism for discussing my ideas and for speaking their minds freely. I advised them to blame it on me whenever they were condemned by their families - that way, they would be able to have these conversations without being burdened by personal stigma attached to it. This is a risk I can take because the only approval I seek is from the Creator - and from my conscience. That’s all, the rest is politics.

After the book’s publication, I received many e-mails from young Muslims in the Middle East asking me to get my book translated into Arabic and post it in my website. They told me that this would allow them to read the book in privacy and safety. It would also give them the opportunity to share these conversations with their friends. They said, “We may disagree with your points, but at least we can have the debate once we have access to this information.” In short, these youth were eager for honest debate about Islam.

So, I got the book translated not just into Arabic, but also into Urdu and Persian. In Iran, the book is banned outright. After only eighteen months, the Arabic translation has been downloaded about half a million times. This is an indication that there is a real hunger for ideas about liberalizing the Muslim mindset. It is true that we still do not have many voices speaking up publicly, openly and loudly.
The fear that many youth feel of speaking up publicly is felt not just in the traditional Muslim world, but also in the US - among Muslims born America who are still dealing with the influence of the Arab tribal culture that is being imposed on them in their own families.

Have you ever thought about leaving Islam?

At a very young age, I began asking questions not about what I believed, but about what I was taught in madrasah. For example, I was being told that women are inferior and that is why they cannot lead prayer. I remembered watching my own mother raise three daughters to be well fed, nicely clothed, and decently housed on the salary of a cleaning lady. Even in my young years, I know it takes both brains and courage to make a dollar go that far. My mother, I felt, couldn’t possibly be inferior to a man.

By paying attention to the reality around me, I was able to see that what I was being taught in the madrasah was not faith, it was dogma. The distinction is this: faith is secure enough to handle questions and never needs to be threatened by them. But dogma of any kind - socialist, Islamic, capitalist, atheist, feminist - is brittle and rigid. It snaps under the spotlight of inquiry.

You won’t be surprised to know that, at the age of 14, after asking too many of the wrong questions - I was expelled from my madrasah. I like to joke with the atheists that getting kicked out of this particular school is all the proof I needed to believe that there is a merciful and compassionate God! [laughs]

When I was expelled from the madrasah, I thought to myself: why do I need this thing called religion? I can just liberate myself - be on my own, think critically, love the education from the public school and move forward. Then I realized: maybe what the madrasah teacher was telling me about Islam was a pack of lies. Or maybe he was just a lousy educator. In order to be fair to my faith, I knew that I needed to study Islam on my own. I needed to see the authentic personality of Islam.

For the next 20 years I studied Islam on my own. During this time, I learned about the feminist aspects of Islam that I would never be introduced to if I had remained stuck in the Islamic schools. For example, I learned that during Prophet Muhammad’s time, there was indeed a female prayer leader- and he encouraged her.
I learnt that the Prophet’s beloved first wife, Khadijah, was the wealthy merchant for whom the Prophet worked for many years. Even according to traditional Islamic history, she’s the one who proposed marriage to him.

I have also heard about another strong woman figure, Rabiya. According to Islamic tradition, she was given her choice of four men from whom she could choose a husband. She decided to interview the smartest one -and yet concluded that even he was not smart enough for her. She chose to remain single, as the Quran gives all women the option to do.

The more I learned about the history of equality in Islam, the more I came to realize that I actually didn’t have to leave my faith in order to have integrity. What I needed to do was to use my voice – the voice I did not fight, struggle or shed blood to have. I was given these precious freedoms. I need to ask myself every single morning - what I am doing with this freedom?

Do you think you have the luxury to criticize because, as the Prophet said, there is no priesthood in Islam?

I think the statement that in Islam there is no defining authority such as the pope, and therefore Catholicism has a greater sense of doctrine has limited value. In theory, it is true. But reality remains that even today, as a Catholic, you can be a dissident. Despite of the fact that one will be criticized or marginalized, he or she does not have to worry about the safety of his or her life.

The same exists in Judaism. A very good friend of mine, a controversial Jewish filmmaker, made a very high profile film called “Trembling before God” - in which he explored how ultra orthodox Jews who are gay reconcile these two identities. He is certainly receiving hate mail and verbal abuse, but nobody has threatened his life.

In Islam, we have a deeper problem with censorship and lack of dissent than even Christians and Jews do. I am not saying that everything is wonderful in these two religions. They have their problems too, and I completely appreciate that. However, if you belong to these other religions - you can dissent without worrying about dying for it. That is not the case in Islam today. That is why I argue there is a sense of urgency in the need for reform within Islam.

How do you view the Quran, and how far do you think criticism of it can go?

I know this point makes many Muslims disagree that I am even Muslim. However, this is ok – after all, the Quran itself says that only God knows who is of true faith. I do believe that the Quran is divinely inspired. I am very willing to take that leap of faith. I cannot, using my rational faculties, claim with full confidence that Quran is divinely authored, or that it is written from beginning to end only by Allah.

The reason that I can draw this conclusion is that I am a historian. I know that the Quran was compiled, first of all, by human beings, who are fallible. Secondly, the verses or revelations that the Prophet received were then written on anything his companions could find: leaves, wood, stone and so on. So who is to say that in putting all of this together mistakes were not made?

Many Muslims do not know that Islamic philosophers have been speaking for hundreds of years about the “satanic verses”. The story of the satanic verses is that the prophet accepted some verses of the Quran he later realized were honoring idols instead of God. He removed those verses - he edited the Quran. My question is this: if a good Muslim emulates and imitates the prophet’s life and the ways of the prophet - (the sunnah), then part of the sunnah is that he edited the Quran. Who is to say that his companions did not follow that same example? Who is to say that in putting it together they did not edit the Quran?

We do not know the answer to these questions, and having no answer is exactly what keeps us humble. It should foster a sense of humility that we have limited knowledge. Therefore, we cannot pretend to be God. Only God is God.  While we are here on this earth we must create a society in which we can dissent, debate, and disagree with each other in peace, in civility and without fear. When we do that, we are paying a tribute to Allah, since we recognize that only Allah has the absolute truth.

How can reform happen? Should we go back to Islam’s primary sources, or should we just ignore them?

I think that we need to be proud of certain traditions within Islam that allow us to be flexible and to move forward. Ijtihad is the tradition of dynamism, intellectual and spiritual mobility within Islam. This is why I am such a huge proponent of the spirit of ijtihad.

Plenty of Muslims will say - who are you to be practicing ijtihad? Where are your credentials? The reality is that I am not calling on the ordinary Muslim to practice the legal tradition of ijtihad . I am calling on ordinary Muslims to remember that Allah has given them the permission and even an obligation to think critically. I want all people in the Muslim world, particularly women, to have the right to simply think. What they conclude using those freedoms is their business.

Many Muslims do not understand secular language like “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. An example of a human rights issue is the LGBT issue. What do you have to say about LGBT rights and Islam?

As you know, I am an openly gay. I am certainly not asking for Muslims to approve of my sexual orientation. The only two entities from which I seek approval are my Creator and my conscience.

Recognizing this, the case can be made for why Islam and homosexuality might be compatible. The Quran actually contains far more verses defending diversity than verses that condemn homosexuality. The Quran tells us that everything god created is “excellent”, nothing that god created is “in vain”, and that god creates “whom he will”.
This would tell us that The Almighty knew what he is doing when he created gays and lesbians. Therefore, when mainstream Muslims say that Islam forbids homosexuality, it suggests that they believe that God has made a mistake. Are they willing to confess that God has made a mistake?

There are three times as many verses in the Quran asking us to think, analyze and reflect, than verses that tell us what is absolutely right or wrong. We can take the principle of thinking and apply it to the story of the prophet Lut. The story of Lut is that which most Muslims use to condemn homosexuality. Scholarship indicates that the story of Lut is not about consensual homosexual relationships, but about sexual assault. We can ask questions about what is God actually condemning here - is He condemning homosexuality, or is He condemning the use of power and force in sex, including between men? My answer is: I do not know.

What I do know is that every chapter of the Quran, except one, begins by describing Allah as the Most Merciful and the Most Compassionate.  It seems to me that if we were all to care more about where the Majestic Creator might stand than where we as political human beings stand, we realize that there is plenty of room in the Quran for debate and dissent. It means that although you have the right to disagree with me, you are not allowed to harm me from being different from you.

What do you think about Muslims’ response to violent acts committed in the name of their religion?

In North America, the distinction is always made between the extremist Muslim and the moderate Muslim, and I have argued that the more important distinction is actually between the moderate Muslim and the reformed-minded Muslim. I do believe that moderate Muslims are part of the problem instead of the solution. Moderate Muslims have been pushed by public opinion to finally denounce the crime committed in the name of Islam. But they will deny that religion plays any role in violence committed in its name.

The problem with their argument is twofold. First, it is a form of dishonesty. We have seen videos of both young men and women who wanted to die of martyrs – and they quote the Quran to justify their violence. Despite of the fact that they are exploiting and manipulating these verses, the reality is that these verses exist. Therefore, religion does play a role.

When 9/11 happened, many moderate Muslims in America went on TV and said that the Quran is clear when it says - “if you are killing a human being it is like killing all humankind”. The Quran is actually saying more than that: “if you are killing a human being it is like killing all humankind, unless you are killing as punishment for murder or villainy in the land”. This exception is used by jihadis in order to justify their violent behaviors.

Second, it is also dangerous to say that Islam has nothing to do with this, because this hands our faith over to extremist Muslims. It says to the extremists: “You can define what Islam is for the rest of us. We will simply say that Islam means peace and hope that the world believes us. But we will not compete with reinterpretations of these verses because if we did, then we would be admitting that religion plays role in this and we won’t go there”. This is the moderate Muslim mindset.

That is why I am not a moderate Muslim. This shocks Americans because that is all they know about. 

I humbly remind the Muslims who say that my views are un-Islamic or even anti Islam – that the Quran has three times as many verses calling on us to think, analyze and reflect than verses that tell us only what is right and what is wrong. It has three times as many verses advocating critical thinking over blind submission. By that calculation alone, reinterpretation is more than just a right – it is a responsibility. Therefore I argue that reform-minded Muslims are as authentic as moderate Muslims - and maybe more constructive. We are seeking to move forward rather than just watch what is going on in the name of religion, hoping that it will just go away.

Recently, some radical elements of Indonesian Muslims pushed the government to ban the Ahmadiyah sect. How do you see that?

I think that what unites us as Muslims is the belief in one God, the God who has the full truth, and that human beings have very limited knowledge. How would I know that there is no another prophet after Muhammad? Therefore, monotheism is the key to the Islam that was established in the early period. And the Ahmadis are not violating that principle, since they believe in the one Creator, and this is exactly what Islam is.

Banning them is an active arrogance on the part of mainstream Muslims who are playing the role of God. If we believe that there is a final truth and that only God who has the authority to punish disbelievers or to reward the believers, than who are we to tell others that they are not true believers?

I realize that it is very easy to assume that I am a relativist – or to assume that with me, anything goes. But this isn’t true. There are some non-negotiable keys about being part of this faith. I would actually say that I am a pluralist and not a relativist.

A pluralist is somebody who appreciates multiple perspectives in truth. A relativist is somebody who is in favor of everything, because he or she stands for nothing. A key question for any open and democratic society is: can a democratic society produce pluralists without producing relativists? I am going to be addressing that question in my next book.

By the way, why do you put so much emphasis on Israel and Jewish issues in your book?

The simple point of raising the issue of Israel is to say that when you actually do the research, you cannot blame Israel for all of the Muslim world’s problems. Three out of four rightly guided caliphs, the successors of prophet Muhammad, were murdered by fellow Muslims. The state of Israel did not exist at that point. Bloody wars of domination were raging in the Muslim world before western colonialism and the state of Israel was born, and before the CIA, MTV, McDonalds, and Britney Spears ever existed.

I also wanted to explain why we cannot blame everything on Israel - by going there and seeing the situation with my own eyes. We Muslims have been conspiring against each other for many more centuries than we possibly can begin to hold Israel accountable for.  There is so much going on in the Muslim world that we are not willing to acknowledge. I want to show that if we keep using Israel as the excuse for why we cannot reform, we will not be able to have much legitimacy when we point fingers at the outside world.

Do you think non-Muslim can contribute to the movement for Muslim reform?

I do believe that progressive non-Muslims have a very important role to play in supporting reform-minded Muslims. It is not progressive to come from the perspective of resisting terrorism, because even if you do not mean it, you are reducing the Muslim to the status of a perceived terrorist. A progressive perspective would be one based on protecting universal human rights.
Just because a woman is born into Islam doesn’t mean that she should be denied the exact same human rights that a non Muslim has. Why should human rights belong to the west? Why should a progressive non-Muslim assume that because some Muslims do those things in a particular way, he or she cannot participate in the conversation about why stoning or female genital cutting are happening?

I know that many progressive non-Muslims are afraid that if they ask questions about what is happening in the name of Islam today, they will be called racists, imperialists, or colonialists. However, when an angry Muslim says that you have no right to be a part of that conversation because you are not a Muslim, you should ask that person a very basic question:”Why are you racially profiling me? You are saying that based on my white skin and non-Muslim heritage, I cannot play a part in this most public conversation? You are reducing me to my demography instead of elevating us to our shared humanity - and that is racial profiling. If this is wrong to do to Muslim, why it is acceptable to do to non-Muslim?”

The next question is this: “Think about the implications of the idea that you cannot comment if you do not represent. The logical implication is that we, as civilians, cannot challenge the human rights violations that are happening at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo, because we are not of military culture. How can we possibly understand what the soldiers and generals are going through?”

This argument also means that Muslims in Europe and in the traditional Muslim world have no right to question US foreign policy because they are not of American culture. How do they know what American politicians are going through? Ask that person who said non-Muslim have no right to speak about Islam if he or she agrees with this argument. The answer of course will be no.

If one is serious in their support of reform-minded Muslims, then you have to be vocal. And in doing so, you create a climate of legitimacy in the west. The reform-minded Muslim can then finally be seen as authentic representative of Muslim community. By supporting reform-minded Muslim, you are immediately saying to the conservatives and the fundamentalist in the Muslim world that their voices are no longer the only ones that count for us. They now have to compete for oxygen with liberal minded Muslims in order to gain their own legitimacy.

Do you think that politics is a visible way to achieve Muslim reform?

My own belief is that politics is the least effective way to reform the Muslim mindset. In democracy, there are constantly conflicting agendas and sometimes you will be forced to dilute your integrity simply for the sake of getting elected. Can you say what needs to be said and gain the necessary momentum while you are a politician? For me, the answer is no.

My choice is to work outside of the electoral political system and have influence rather than power. Power is short and you use it at certain points to get a specific result. Influence means that people listen to you on a more sustained basis. This is good for me, because I get to sleep at night knowing that I have been honest to the world about what I believe. I do not have to be inauthentic in order to get into the next stage.

However, the world is complex, and it takes many kinds of people to make change. Therefore, if you have a particular strategy that you think can in fact be implemented by being elected: go for it! We need you! The question is this: do you have actual plans for when you get into politics? If you do not, then frankly, I think you are going to be disappointed by how little you can achieve in politics.

Finally, is Muslim reform possible?

As I said earlier, although the hunger and thirst for these ideas does exist, the fear to openly support and create an actual movement also exists.
Progress is being made, though: Once a New York Times reporter who spent six months in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan doing stories of honor killing and honor crime told me that she has been asking young Muslim women where they found the courage to speak up about these taboo issues. She told me that in many cases, they referenced the free translations of my book, which are posted on my website.

Where there is little freedom, the appreciation for this freedom is growing. This just brings me to you the Indonesia, where you have relatively more freedom than in the Middle East. I have so much hope, and it may be naïve of me. Here in Indonesia, you can come up with many fresh ideas that can be spread around the world through media and digital technologies.

I also think that the “us versus them” tribal mentality that comes out of so many countries in the Middle East will be replaced by more pluralistic thinking. Indonesia has a legacy of such pluralism.
Indonesia can become a source of new leadership not just for the ummah (Muslim community), but for all of humanity.  The very principles of Pancasila, which was so much a part of the founding of this country, are exactly the principles of US constitution.

If you think that the American ideas of freedom and democracy hold out hope for leadership, human rights, democracy, and freedom, then consider that in many ways your own charter of 1945 can do the same thing. In fact, many Americans will be breathing a sigh of relief to know and to hear that young Muslims in this country are taking the lead to restore freedom and democracy and critical thinking to political leadership. It will happen in Indonesia I believe.

But Indonesian Muslims are now is facing a great challenge - namely Wahhabi influences. You have referred to this as Arab cultural imperialism.

Yes, it is not just American imperialism that most of the Muslim in the world is facing. Actually, that is the lesser form of imperialism plaguing us today. The greater form of imperialism is this very tribal mentality that is being exported from the desert culture of Saudi Arabia. This includes the code of honor that makes women the property of the men in their communities, giving up their individuality.
It is exactly because Wahhabi colonialism threatens the kind of pluralism Indonesians value, that the urgency to counter Arab cultural imperialism is more important than ever.

In the next few years, your own government is looking to increase tourist income from the Middle East. In the interest of increasing tourism revenues, there will be many Indonesians who will be told that they must not offend the cultural sensibilities of Arab visitors. Therefore, laws will be implemented in order to restrict freedoms. It is vitally important to realize what the consequences are of not asserting pluralistic leadership.