Column

Veiling can be a form of oppression if it is imposed by the authority, but it can be liberating if it is worn out of one’s personal choice and conscience. Compulsory veiling will only lead to a hypocrite religiosity, put the burden of social order unfairly on women’s shoulders, and divert people’s attention from the more important task of the state such as providing social justice and welfare.

There is not much use of forcing somebody to embrace a religion if it is not followed by his or her belief and conviction. Religion when forced, according to Jawdat Sa’id, is same as forced love. “With compulsion there is no religion, as much as with compulsion there is no love”. A true embracement of religion must be followed by a deep conviction for the teachings of that particular religion. Moreover, every person has the right to choose whether to believe or not to believe. The Prophet once offered one of his female slaves, Rayhanah binti Zaid, to convert to Islam.Yet Rayhanah preferred Judaism. The Prophet would not be angry with Rayhanah. And finally she herself decided to embrace Islam.This is an example. Even as a master, the Prophet would not force his slave to embrace religion which he follows himself.

Regardless of the assumption of Islam being too much denial or more accepting to homosexuals compared to Christianity, this writing is not intended to discuss religion and sexuality in such a normative way. It is not about to create a new theology, but rather to obtain a close-comprehensive understanding on the discourse of homosexuality based on Quranic and Biblical reading, particularly on verses that are closely related to the issue.

The debate between the secular and religious women groups heightened the controversy around Islamic feminism in the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has undergone a radical shift from a secular monarchy toward a Shia Islamic theocracy. Since the Islamic revolution in 1979, Iran established the rule of a clerical caste (velayat-e faghih) whose authority over social-political-religious system is absolute, wherein they enforced a kind of fundamentalist Islamism in both ideational and behavioral level. This is the reason why an extreme polarization occurs among Iranian scholars and activists in terms of their methodology and strategy for achieving gender equality and justice in the context of Islamic Republic.

Education is crucial to the success of such internal dialogue. The prolonged suspicion between Islamic sects has been made possible through cultivating prejudices and hostilities among new generation in schools. There is a need to develop religious education with the vision to cultivating ethics of dialogue and mutual respects between sects in Islam. New Muslim generation need to learn the language of respect instead of treating other Islamic sect as “deviant” or even “apostate”.

For many modern Muslim intellectuals who promote inter-religious dialogue, this particular verse poses an exegetical challenge. Understood literally, and without taking its context into account, would make us believe that Islam pursues an eternal conflict with Christian and Jews. The verse could feed the intolerant attitude that already exists among certain Muslim groups. Whenever the conflict breaks out between Muslim and Christian, such as one in Ambon, Indonesia, in 1999, this verse comes readily as pretext for hating Christians. The same verse has been used by many conservative Muslims to show the futility of inter-religious dialogue. Who should have dialogue with people who are never satisfied until we follow them?

We need to understand ijtihad broadly as, quoting from Dr. Khan, “freedom of thought, rational thinking and the quest for truth through an epistemology covering science, rationalism, human experience, critical thinking and so on.” (See Muqtedar Khan’s “Two Theories of Ijtihad” in his blog Ijtihad [http://www.ijtihad.org/ijtihad.htm]).

With this new understanding of ijtihad, we may say that the door of independent reasoning is no longer shut; it is re-opened again. The participants in this new ijtihad are not limited to the ulama in a traditional sense, but to include modern Muslim scholars whose academic training and specialization span a broad range of field and expertise.

Indonesia has been into democracy for almost thirteen years. It began in 1998 when thousands of students occupied the parliament which eventually resulted in the ouster of President Suharto, an autocrat who ruled the country for more than three decades. That was the beginning of democratic epoch in Indonesia.

“This piece of writing intends to put forth several fundamental inaccuracies on this tradition of pronouncing others as kafirs which has led to rampant acts of violence. First, concerns the usage of the word ‘kafir’. Defining kafir as a person outside of Islam is in fact inconsistent with the actual meaning of the word ‘kafir’ itself. Kafir means to cover or deny, hence it refers to the covering or denying of God’s blessings. In English, the word ‘infidel’ is often used to translate kafir, when in fact a more appropriate translation is to cover. Hence, the reason why Christians and Jews are simple known as ahl kitab (people of the Book) during the times of the Prophet. The concept of infidel as understood by the West is actually an unfamiliar term in Islam’s traditional doctrine.”

“A classical Islamic commentator, Ibn Jarir al-Thabari referred to an opinion which states that the inclusion of syari’ah and manhaj in the foregoing Qur’anic verse is indeed an indication of religious diversity as ordained by God. The Torah also includes the syari’at. It is also found in the Bible. And also in the Qur’an. There is however, only a single al-din (religion) which is the belief in the oneness of God and the devotion to God. As expressed by Qatadah: al-din wahid wa al-syari’ah mukhtalifah (religion is one, syari’at is diverse).”