Arts&Culture | فنون وثقافة

the world of arts and culture       عالم الثقافة و الفنون

Featured | قصص مختارة

selected stories on 7iber       قصص مختارة على حبر

Have Your Say | شو قولك

be part of the conversation… شارك في الحوار

Video | فيديو

Jordan from behind the lens الاردن من ورا العدسه

Wikileaks in Arabic | ويكيليكس بالعربي

translation of cables mentioning jordan ترجمة برقيات التي تذكر الاردن

Home » Opinions | أراء, Society | اجتماعيات

Falling Behind: Religion and Education in the Arab World

February 16, 2010 32 Comments

3404803881 26c6f16f9d Falling Behind: Religion and Education in the Arab WorldPhoto by swamibu.

Written by Farida.

There are several political, social and cultural factors, which stand in the way of Arab societies from reaching the level of development in the industrialized world. The two main factors are the interpretation and the understanding of religion, and education, which is regressive and impeding making it impossible to accommodate to difficulties of this day. These two factors are the reasons for the seclusion of Arab societies from evolution and modernization. The tragedy of stagnation of the Arab world from human growth and progress, mostly due to the two factors being first religion (in its predominant understanding) and second education (in its current backwardness) have both contributed to the opposition and prevention of any kind of progress towards creativity, diversity and invention of the human mind.

One must not forget the role of the leaders, oppression, and injustice which results in an atmosphere that is negative and impeding minds from being creative. All these negative phenomena are not the problem, but rather its symptoms. The fundamental question that is at stake here is “where do we begin?”

It is important to explain on what is meant by democracy here. Democracy does not mean ballot boxes or elections. In underdeveloped and retarded cultures restricting and decreasing democracy to electoral processes and ballots results is not real democracy. The real meaning of democracy is having a democratic culture, numerous parties, dialogue, democratic institutions, and constitutional and modern laws, an independent judiciary system, low illiteracy rates and finally elections.

Most political regimes in the region expect that when people learn to question religious authorities they will eventually learn to question political authorities. Intellectual curiosity is like a germ it multiplies, it mutates and it moves from one domain to another at a rapid pace.  There are many who live in the region that express the injustices in their political regimes but they seem to have no creative solutions, solutions that emerge from mindsets that challenge authority. Obedience to religious authority often is transformed into blind obedience to political authority.

In discussing education, one has to touch upon religion which plays a major role in our societies. I will start by asking the following questions: is it possible to criticize religious education without offending people or affecting cultural symbols?  The manner as to which children are educated about religion can create a basis of their abilities in critical thinking.

In many societies religious education is a key to adult socialization. In looking at our society, analysts ignore one of the main obstacles which is fanatic religious education. Since spiritual education is in many societies religious education is a key to adult socialization. In looking at our society, analysts ignore one of the main obstacles which is fanatic religious education. Unfortunately, the problem of malpractice in religious education is counteracted since each religious community and each culture pretends that fanaticism exists elsewhere, and not in its own backyard. Dogmatic religious education is not merely an educational issue.

Religious inquiry easily evolves into political inquiry. Fanatic guidance suits fanatic regimes. Most political regimes in the Middle East expect that when people learn to question religious authorities they acquire skill in questioning political authorities. Intellectual curiosity: like a germ it multiplies, it mutates and it moves from one domain to another at a rapid pace.

When children are made to believe that their religion is the only perfect faith, their biased adaptation becomes a problem for their future. When children learn that people of other religions are condemned to go to hell, the god of these children is pictured as avenging. When children are taught that a certain community is evil because their religious leader tells them so, the children acquire the habit of immediate submission to authority. When children are forbidden to question the deeper meaning of a specific citation in their own religion, their intellectual horizon shrinks. Spiritually inhibited children are trained to suppress doubt, and grow up into adults who are incapable of driving scientific discovery and building the basis of a genuine functioning society.

A report issued in 2004 by The Arab Human Development Report observed that “communication in education is instructional, supported by set books containing rigid information in which knowledge is objectified so as to hold indisputable facts, and by an examination process that only tests memorization and factual recall”.

Schools throughout the Arab world teach students to memorize and retain answers; in return the system rewards those who are skilled at being passive knowledge recipients. If this makes those students well-equipped for anything at all, it is how to survive in an authoritarian system: just memorize the teacher’s words, regurgitate them as your own, avoid asking questions – and you’ll stay out of trouble. In the same way, the suppression of their critical thinking turns some of them into gullible recipients for religious extremism. All this put together does not prepare those children for roles as active citizens and contributors to their countries’ development. In recent years, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) released three consecutive annual reports about the Arab world. The three main problems that were identified were: limited political freedoms, a gender gap and a lack of orientation towards knowledge.

Adult literacy in the Arab world has increased from around 40 per cent in 1980 to 62 per cent in the early 2000s and school enrollment has reached 60 per cent. This has been a good improvement in education; however, 65 million Arabs remain illiterate out of which two thirds are women.

In a report issued by the World Bank about education systems in the Arab world it disputes that “Arab countries have placed a high premium on forging a common heritage and understanding of citizenship, and used a certain reading of history, the instruction in a particular language, and the inclusion of religion in the education curriculum as a way of enhancing national identity”. Examples of these principles were provided according to the governance in an Arab country. In Syria, education provided an opportunity for the Ba’ath party to imbed its principles to the masses with its ideology through schools, and the party also established an “institute of political science” at Damascus University, providing compulsory classes in political orientation. In Saudi Arabia, education aims at “teach the Islamic faith in the younger generation and preparing them to become useful members in the building of their society”. Without a doubt, these principles have their impact on school curricula.

The Arab Human Development Report- AHDR states that “Textbooks that include politically sensitive issues usually praise past achievements and focus on self-praise in order to teach loyalty and submissiveness to the regime. It is also common to see school books with a photograph of the ruler”.

Without overemphasizing the importance of religious education in building a society, it is important to stress that religious socialization in the Arab world should introduce children to the habits of free thinking rather than position a damper that blurs facts, dulls curiosity and narrows their channels of discovery.

  • Bob

    I commend you on your courage in writing this. Anyone who studies world history knows that the Arabs made many discoveries in science and mathematics long ago. As an American I look at the Arab world and see much potential, but shake my head in disbelief that so much of it is squelched. Your article sheds light on reasons why.

  • Mohanned

    ” Democracy does not mean ballot boxes or elections.”
    I am not sure what you are alluding to. The accepted definition of democracy is simply “the will of people pursued by representatives who get elected through fair elections”. Your attempt at redefining democracy to include, “democratic culture, numerous parties, dialogue, democratic institutions, and constitutional and modern laws, an independent judiciary system, low illiteracy rates”, I would assume is possibly aimed at “tailoring” and “shaping” a society to match,and be compatible with, your preconceived image of a democratic “culture”.

    Your statement: “In underdeveloped and retarded cultures restricting and decreasing democracy to electoral processes and ballots results is not real democracy.” adds to my
    suspicions. Cultures aren't and shouldn't be described using the elitist and demeaning terms you just used. Labeling a culture reduces it to an object. Cultures whether “retarded” or not are much more complex than that. They are everything and anything. a culture is the past, the present, and the future. People from different cultures views things differently, but that doesn't make one culture superior to another. This is what labels do. They separate us. They make us different but not in a good way. So as a first step I would suggest that you should respect cultures for what they are, not for what you want them to be.

    Cultural self-flagellation might help us feel a bit better about our individual selves, but it doesn't do us any good as a society. As a matter of fact, it only makes change that much harder. The power to change societies resides not in individuals but within groups of people. Groups that belong to cultures. Change champions usually aren't outsiders, they are insiders. They are people who know the culture and respect it. They navigate through cultural barriers, maybe they go around them but never do they demolish them.

    I had to get that out of my system. Now moving on.

    Religious reform is a tough sell, at least when taken from a temporal perspective. It might take hundreds of years. We can't afford to wait that long. So education reform, in my opinion, is the way to go. We need to produce a critical mass of curious youngsters. We need to provide the legal cover for them to question anything and everything. We need to protect their minds from propagandistic forces.We need to equip them with the tools and set them free.

    My two cents.

  • faridafarouk

    Thank you for your encouragement and positive feedback Bob, I appreciate it, thanks again:)

  • faridafarouk

    The statement that I made about “democracy does not mean ballot boxes or elections” is not limited or includes only ballot boxes and elections. There needs to be other factors that would “shape” and “manage” elections. One can’t just simply say that elections are done “through the will of the people and through fair elections” what will that include?? Without elaboration the “free will” and “fairness” become vague and undefined.

    Just as I have included certain obligations for governing elections others have done the same. For instance, according to some Islamic Fundamentalists there is no connection between Islam and Democracy by stating that “democracy” is a foreign concept that has been forced upon us by the west and secular reformers. Others say that Islam requires a democratic system by arguing that democracy can be considered a requirement of Islam.

    There are a number of specific factors that Muslims provide when they explain the relationship between Islam and democracy. The first being the obligation of political engagement in mutual consultation, the second being awakened, organized and responsible. Those responsibilities include all dimensions of life, but especially the political. These factors are valid; however they are general and non-specific. On the other hand the ones I have mentioned provide examples of what elections would include.

    As for what labeling a culture as “underdeveloped and retarded”, it simply depends on how you look at a certain culture and “view it”. My understanding of a good culture is one that is open to new and different ideas, one that is able to entertain a thought without necessarily accepting it. It also includes individuals treating each other in the way they themselves would want to be treated by others when presented with similar circumstances. A culture that is open to new and different ideas. I believe that a repressive, underdeveloped and retarded culture manages to combine pervasive fear with pervasive boredom

  • kinzi

    Farida, I appreciate your candid look at some of the problems facing progress. Teaching kids that it is good to ask 'why', and teaching teachers how to answer that questions without fear or anger will do much to encourage critical thinking.

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    There’s quite a lot of truth in what you’re saying. Truth that we sometimes find more convenient to overlook, but I beg to differ with a few points.

    There’s always the fight between Islamists and the rulers, like Jamal Abdel-Nasser assassinating Sayed Qutob, and the situation between “Al Ikhwan Al Muslimeen” and the Egyptian government. It’s obedience to religious authority that gives political authority headaches, not its questioning! Don’t forget that (though in decline) a major player in the politics of the Arab world in the second half of last century was the communist party. Let’s just say politics and religions don’t mesh together.

    Are we allowed to question democracy? Or is it now like the church when Galileo said the earth was round?

    Do you believe in, let’s say, angels? Is your mind or are your senses able to perceive their existence? Would any type of observation or study be able to conclude their existence? When do we stop questioning and start believing? Is it ever better to accept than to question? Is the human mind able to know what’s best for it ALL the time? If yours and mine are, does everyone in the world know what’s best for them? Wasn’t there a time where the whole world thought smoking was good for a person’s health?

    Didn’t communists think communism is the only perfect system? What about liberals? Don’t they think democracy is the only perfect system? Does the American educational system not instill in children that democracy is the ONLY way to go? Doesn’t it instruct that it is the only system for development and all others are 3rd world? Isn’t that fanatic democratic education, or fanatic communist or atheist education? What’s the difference between war in the name of democracy and war in the name of religion?

    Why is it ok for people who are advocates of questioning everything to call people who accept religious authority the reason for regression, and whenever people who accept religious authority criticize democracy they are extremists? Isn’t criticizing democracy an act of free critical thinking which you claim religion, or the way it is understood, suppresses? Isn’t taking democracy as the only way for the success of nations a bit fanatic itself? Isn’t historical evidence good enough to prove that nations can thrive (whether religious or non religious) without democracy? (By the way I think democracy is great! I just want to make a point)

    Aren’t advocates of democracy biased towards it? Isn’t their thinking affected by that bias? Aren’t they conforming to another system that, in some ways, dulls curiosity and narrows channels of discovery? Aren’t we taking UNDP reports for granted? Do we question them?

    In your opinion, can religion itself (any religion) ever be a supporting factor for development? If your answer is no, are others allowed to disagree and still keep your internal respect and not be called fanatics? Is it the understanding of religion, or religion itself that you believe causes problems?

    Haven’t there been clerics that made enormous scientific discoveries that point to extreme creativity, Mendel for example? Haven’t there been a lot of discoveries and creativity in the old Islamic Civilization in the areas of math, engineering, medicine and chemistry and the list goes on? I doubt Mendel the priest ever questioned his faith, yet his discoveries are still taught nowadays.

    On another note, I agree with you on our educational system; a lot of urgent work is needed there!

  • faridafarouk

    Generally speaking, although Islamists are usually enemies of the regime, the government often favors their activities over those of liberals since the Islamists often but not always advocate similar ideas that reinforce the regimes’ positions. Moreover, the Islamists’ strength also frightens people into supporting the regime. For instance, speakers of Islamic extremism are given a free hand to spread their ideas by all means (as long as they are not overly critical of the regime). On the other hand, Islamist preachers use the medial such as satellite stations to condemn liberals and reform while not being allowed to voice negative remarks toward the regime.

    The Arab world is certainly captivated by two powers: political regimes and the clerics. No matter how you look at things you will see that there is an alliance between the political leadership and the religious authority.

    Given the fact that the main struggle was between the regimes and the Islamists, liberals needed to consider taking sides. If they feared an Islamist takeover would lead to an even less free society, they might side with the government against the Islamists. The fact that the regime would reward them for doing so and that most reformers had a relatively Westernized, secular worldview; at least compared with the average in their society; dividing them from the Islamists were additional incentives. Another possible choice was to side with the Islamists against the regime. This decision arose from a deep hatred for the regime and has often failed to create a long lasting alliance.

    Arab countries use Islam as one of their main pillars for maintaining power. No matter what shortcomings exist in the society, no matter how slow the pace of development, no matter how low living standards, and no matter how often the government fails, the regimes remain in power. Of course there are risks involved in this use of Islam by providing traditional interpretation of the religion. One important outcome is a country that is stagnant with very slow if any progress at all. Yet the regimes are ready to accept this cost.

    The other is that the very same strategy helps legitimize Islamist movements that want to undermine and overthrow the existing government. The governments try to manage this problem by using clerics supportive of the status quo to issue definitions of Islam in line with the regime's interests. They also run campaigns to distinguish between the “proper” pro-government Islam and “mistaken” Islamist interpretations.

    These efforts are not altogether effective. In sum, the regimes are riding a tiger, which provides them with more benefits than costs but which may someday turn against them and devour them.

    I am by no means stating that there haven’t been tremendous discoveries made by Muslim scholars and scientists between 7th and 13th centuries, during “The Golden Age”. The system was encouraging the study of science rather than stifling science. At the time, Muslims scholars made huge advancements in different areas including medicine, astronomy, botany, physics and mathematics. Unfortunately, for several centuries now, the entire region has been witnessing a stagnation in sciences, inventions and discoveries.

  • Mohanned

    You are contradicting yourself. Religions in general try to define the outcomes beforehand. Islam for example is aimed at providing “guidance” to everyone for everything. You being “specific” doesn't make your arguments more valid or “right”. Shaping elections is the responsibility of those who want to get elected. The “shape” the outcome by persuading the electorate. No entity should have the power to and shape and define the outcomes of an election.

    On the issue of “good” culture. You are also contradicting yourself. You have a preconceived image and based on that you reduce other cultures to being retarded. How do you define a “retarded culture”? Some behaviors within a culture might be unacceptable,but that doesn't give you the right to label the culture and everyone who identifies with it as being “retarded”. By doing so, you are no different from the fundamentalists who label others as infidels or lost souls.

    On a side note, your reply to my first comment doesn't include a rebuttal. You simply restated the theme you had in the original piece.

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    You've skillfully managed to miss the essence of what I was saying, but I won't push it or even try to elaborate. A lot of the facts in your reply are true, but that wasn't the main point, you didn't contest what I had to say.

  • http://bambamworld.com/ bambam

    Since you didn't get the reply you wanted….
    Isn’t criticizing democracy an act of free critical thinking which you claim religion, or the way it is understood, suppresses? Isn’t taking democracy as the only way for the success of nations a bit fanatic itself?
    Democracy is not a static system and certainly not much of a system really.You can't indoctrinate poeple in a set of rules and tell them thats democracy. What you do is tell people they are able to shape the world according to their desire if they convince enough people to agree with them. So you can criticize democracy, deconstruct it, reshape it the only corner stone it has is the ability to express yourself and that everyone should be equal in their access to the system.
    Now religion is not exactly open to criticism (at least not since the 16th century), actually it was more progressive in the past some might say, and certainly does not view everyone as equals…
    So holding on to religion as the only true path is simply an act of desperation, religion and politics have never really worked well in the history of the world. People have a misleading platonic idea about how the caliphates ruled and their relationship to religion. Religious piety has always been the mirage of the opposition always trying to achieve it but whenever they get the chance to they opt out.

  • http://bambamworld.com/ bambam

    You know where this post goes wrong? at the introduction! Now its lovely to tout religion and education as the solution for all the arab world woes but in reality thats akin to saying that only if the world didn't have wars it will be all better. It's a nice thought but entirely naive.
    This is a culture that has lost faith in all systems and recluded to a system that flourished in an agrarian world and trying to apply it to an industrial age. The whole premise has more than just a problem of education or fanaticism, it's a problem of hope.
    The whole idea of critical thinking and creativity is mostly a product for those who can afford it, and very few people in the arab world have the luxury to do so because they are worried about living too much.
    As for education, thats a change that takes somewhere between 20-40 years, and religious reform takes about a 100 years or so… good luck waiting for change to come, the fact of the matter is that most of us don't have that time and are already living on borrowed time.

  • faridafarouk

    I am actually nt contradicting myself at all, for any kind of system to work be it democracy or anything else there needs to be a set of rules governing that system in order for it to succeed. I chose to call it “shaping” someone else might refer to it as components of a certain system…we are allowed to choose different labels for different things

    As for the fact that I am calling a certain culture a retarded one, that also stems from the perspective as to which I am looking at it and from my end I see it as retarded and regressed…afterall this is an opinion column and I am voicing the way I see it:-)

  • faridafarouk

    Though I did kind of touch upon your questions, here is a better explanation I hope of my views:

    Fanaticism is just fanaticism and that's what gets people killed. No one excuses those recent psychopaths for their evil deeds, but atheism doesn't deserve to get blamed. Religion's defenders are better off pointing to the way that many religions have been moderating into more humanistic and democratic forms. Neither atheism nor religion, by themselves, kill people. Fanaticism, the drive to absolute power, kills people. While religions historically are proven facilitators of fanatical intensity (far more than atheism ever possibly could).

    Where religious authority is concerned along with the blind support of the people, obedience is built into the very nature of authority — if I have authority over you, I can expect that when I make a decision you will go along with that decision regardless of whether I explain it to you and persuade you that it is right. In turn, your acceptance of me as an authority implies that you have already agreed to be persuaded implicitly and won’t demand explanations and reasons. So long as the authority is acknowledged as legitimate, obedience is not achieved through threats or external force; instead, it is achieved through willing cooperation and a desire to help the authority figure to achieve his or her goals. Those conditioned to obey do not ask whether orders are rational or irrational.

    I dont think religion and development can be addressed simultaneously. In my opinion, religion is a very personal issue to individuals and is a sacred relationship between that individual and the creator. I disagree with the idea of a religion being “a way of life”.

    Religion has been one of the biggest obstructions to scientific development and success. Medical science has faced some of the most disgusting attacks from religious fanatics hiding behind facades of morality and righteousness. Religion is now and has always been the cheapest and most effective way of controlling the masses. A negative effect that religion can have on society is often an increase in intolerance of diversity and of other beliefs. This can result in prejudice, overt persecution and even war.

    Again, all the discoveries that were made by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars during the ummayad and abbasid dynasties were achieved because there partly was a secular culture at the time.

  • Mohanned

    “Shaping” implies defining and influencing the outcomes.Again, in a democracy, the “shaping” takes place through elections. Votes are cast and the prevailing party has the power to “shape” things. I believe that your definition of democracy is a reflection of your biases and fears. As for the contradictions in your above arguments, they are still there, you are yet to provide a rebuttal.

    On a side note: I expected a more clever response than “it is my opinion”. Oh well.

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    You still say religion facilitates fanatic behavior. The point of what I was saying is that you can’t blame religion for that; the proof is having fanatic democracy and fanatic communism and even atheism.

    When you divide Muslims to Islamists and the clerics of the government, you miss the third and largest part of Muslims; the silent majority. They are not silent because they are taught to be but because they are suppressed by the systems and hated by the beard-o-phobia, and they don’t want to be problematic, and they did not choose their religion because they were indoctrinated to do so, in the end no one forces you to go to the mosque or go to Hajj, it’s an act of free will.

    You are saying religion has the blind support of people. I say democracy facilitates the worst kind of indoctrination; subliminal indoctrination. We control the media and bombard you with neatly picked information so that when you come up with conclusions you “think” it’s your own view. At least when religion does that, the message is clear. Pardon this oversimplified analogy but when a machine stops working, the guy who knows best how to fix it is the one who made it, that’s what religions are all about.

    As for religion as a way of life, it certainly is. The basic Quranic text has teachings that extend from how to wash up to how to divide inheritance to rules of war. The same text was the source of jurisdiction in the so called Islamic Golden Age, which shows that religion hasn’t been an obstruction to scientific development as you claim. If you can’t address religion and development simultaneously you will lose your audience, because those whom you want to develop are mostly religious.

    What if 50.1% of the people agree on something? What would happen to the other 49.9? Isn’t that a pitfall of democracy? I mentioned before that the majority can be dead wrong, especially when the majority is uneducated. We should stop looking at the west as having the system that provides the solution to all our problems, we are different cultures.

    How can you say so much about religion, like it doesn’t treat everyone as equals? Have you read the Tafseer of the Quran? Are you informed about the politics of Prophet Muhammad? How can you describe that as an act of desperation? How can you objectively formulate such intense views on a subject which you only know peripherally? (I’m making an assumption here) Your poetic description of democracy is what’s platonic. The democracy you speak of may allow people to choose to be judged by Islamic rule, let’s say we take a vote and people decide that Sharia is the way to go, what if that’s the desire of the majority?

  • faridafarouk

    I think that the implementation and practice of rules are clear barometers for any democracy. However, while there is no set definition of those rules governing demcoracy, there is a basic common principles including equality, establishment of law and order, application of justice and the protection of human rights, when any of those factors is violated democracy becomes shaken. Also, sustainable economic and social development requires democratic governance rooted certain laws that would include order and security, legitamcy and fairness. Those can be labelled as characteristics or rules of a democratic governance……

  • faridafarouk

    I do think that educational reform is vital for the entire region and we some countries such as Jordan, Egypt and Morocco have embarked on reforms of their educational system and are reviewing their educational strategies and policies. I do agree with the fact that people in the area have lost faith in most systems but I strongly believe that if there is hope it needs to start somewhere and educational reform sets a good base for that

    Dysfunctional education systems weaken the human capabilities of Arab youth hence undermining human development in Arab countries. I therefore strongly believe that education reform would contribute to human development on both the individual and societal levels.

    The great weaknesses of the Arab world are the lack of freedom, the lack of knowledge and the lack of womens' empowerment. Compare this to the intellectual atmoshhere of this region a thousand years ago, an atmosphere which drove forward the development of knowledge in a wide range of practical and more theoretical areas.

    In order to increase productivity, enhance participation of individuals in community affairs and improve health education must have quality. Ensuring the quality of education is the major challenge facing the Arab region. Two key components of educational quality are what is learned (content) and how well it is learned (performance).

  • faridafarouk

    As an individual living in the middle east, Islam has always been relevant to me; I have always had an interest in the religion from the time I was in school. I can also tell you that my knowledge in Islam is remarkably broad and deep and I continuously do readings and research about the religion and different interpretations of it.

    I do agree with the fact that it’s the desire of the majority that should prevail but before we can even go there we need to take something very important into consideration and that is in contrast to most religions of the world, in particular Christianity and Judaism, Islam has not yet gone through a modernization process. While Christians and Jews have managed throughout their history to reconcile religion with freedom, Muslims have not.

    Islamic extremists nowadays are acting like Christians in the old ages. Muslim Sunni extremists in particular; are not waging a war against infidels only, i.e. non-Muslims, but also with the Shiites, the Sufis, the Alawites, Ismaelites, the Druze, and followers of other Muslim sects.

    During “the golden ages”, the Muslim empire encouraged learning, tolerated critical scholars, translated and preserved scientific books. Shortly after that, the West had began rising to establish societies based on personal, scientific and religious freedom, the Arab/Muslim civilization slipped into retreat. After independence of the Arab countries in the 20th century, authoritarian regimes were brought about by the West.

    Fundamentalist Muslims rediscovered Islam in the 20th century and the Muslim Brotherhood came about and preached that Islam was the solution and there was no better law on earth than the Shari’a which comprises both the Koran and Hadith.

    Influential religious establishments like Al Azhar and Wahabism oppose any reform or modernization. They rely on the Koran and Hadith as sacred scriptures, which must not be re-interpreted. Philosophy, critical interpretations are dismissed as blasphemy, and their “perpetrators” are persecuted.

    Some of my idols in Islamic thought include experts like Muhammad Arkoun and Muhammad Iqbal, who are viewed, at least in western academic circles, as modernists/reformists, have not dared touch upon interpretations of certain passages of the Quran because of fear of persecution.

    Sadly and realistically speaking, neither the Arab regimes nor their religious establishments would allow any reform of Islam in a democratic and free climate. That implies self-suicide for both. Therefore, reforming Islam will have to wait yet for two to three decades until this becomes a tangible reality. Until then choosing the Shari’a way as you called it is like turning almost every individual in the region into a suicide bomber!!

  • faridafarouk

    Also,regarding what you said about “religion not being an obstruction to scientific advancement” this may come as a surprise to you and other readers, Islamic rigidty as we know it today was far less prominent during the Islamic dynasties. Islam’s role was mainly highlighted and utilised during conflicts. In fact, there have been periods of relative secularism especially during several Islamic dynasties. These periods were windows of opportunities that allowed writers, poets and scientists, from all ethnic backgrounds, to excel.

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    Kudos on your vast knowledge of religion! Actually, my last paragraph was directed to bambam, my bad!

    Now you’re saying Islam needs modernization and before you said Islam was more progressive in the past. Well the modernization of Christianity has lead to a loss of the essence of Christianity in the west. Now, anyone who has a new Idea can start his own church, with ideas that are completely opposite to what the bible says. This, I believe, is contrary to the basis of a religion as a revelation from God. As for Judaism, extremist Jews are now in a stronger position than ever before in history. Islam on the other hand and Christianity in the Arab world have managed to endure the modernization process while keeping in close touch with their original form.

    Also, now you seem to insinuate that you don’t think it is right for Sharia to be implemented EVEN if this was a result of a completely democratic poll. This means that though you and I would definitely vote differently had there been a poll, we both agree that democracy isn’t always the solution.

    Why aren’t fundamentalist Muslims allowed to believe that there is no better law than Sharia, while communists are allowed to believe that their system is perfect?

    I respectfully disagree with what you said about influential establishments opposing modernization. Islam inherently accepts modernization and new interpretations of the Quran and this is why Islam has managed to be easy to follow through centuries. This inherent capacity for modernization is exemplified in the “Ijma’a” (The consensus of Muslim scientists as a basis for new Islamic laws). Also, Muslims believe that one of the miracles in Quran is the fact that it will remain the same till judgment day, and this resulted in many interpretations of the Quran for many centuries and, though they are different, they never contradict each other. This is why you have Tafseer Al Jalalain, and Tafseer Ibin Katheer as old but still valid interpretations and you have Dr. Mohammad Rateb Al-Nabulsi interpreting Quran in the 21st century.

    Also, democracy in some sort is an intrinsic part of Islam; we must have heard or read this part of the verse a hundred times: “وأمرهم شورى بينهم” So Islam is not just about authority and obedience. See some references for how Muslims were able to talk to their leaders such as Umar Ibn Al-Khattab. Though those were leaders, nobody feared expressing their opinions and even criticism. This is the true Islam, not extremists and fundamentalists. This is the silent majority I speak of.

    You ended your comment with a very disrespectful sentence. It’s sad that this is what we think of ourselves. Also, what proof do you have that science only advanced in the secular periods? Saying that the secular periods are the reason for excellence is you own opinion, it is not a fact. I completely disagree.

    Since obviously we will not find common grounds in terms of religion, this will be my last comment on the subject.

    Enjoy your evening!

  • faridafarouk

    Since you are expecting a “more clever” response regarding the “retarded/regressive” culture I was referring to earlier. I will provide you with a more specific response and include defects about the culture that lead me to give it the retarded/regressive” label:

    - a lack of intellectual hospitality
    - a culture that encourages conformity and discourages diversity
    - limited tolerance if any for criticism from others
    - unidentified national identity
    - excessive adulation of the ruler
    - a tendency to indulge in excessive self-praise and to glorify past achievements as a way of escaping reality
    - the prevalence overblown rhetoric that is used to compensate for the appalling lack of concrete achievements

    I hope this is a wiser more concrete response for you:-)

  • faridafarouk

    I definitely agree with you about the fact that we will not see eye to eye when it comes to religion and this will be my last response to you regarding this post

    I respectfully disagree with you too and the fact of the matter is that the ignorance in which Islam's religious world has fallen into is one the main reasons for Islam's increasingly tragic situation. A reinterpretation of the Koran is needed but no one dares talk about it to put into effect towards new approaches in training.

    Reinterpretation is necessary also because the Quran is full of internal contradictions which have always been evident, due to the varying circumstances of the “revelations”. It is for this very reason that Muslim theology developed the science of the “revelation circumstances” (asbāb al-tanzīl) which is by now often forgotten or neglected.

    There are many intellectuals in the Islamic world who ask for reinterpretation, be applied to the Quran. But often they risk being condemned, excluded, exiled by their community. A typical example is that of Egyptian-national Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid who was deemed an apostate. Thus, in a short time, he lost his university teaching post, his wife was pressured to divorce from him (but she refused), and to save his life, he was forced to emigrate to Holland. Through God's grace, his wife was eventually able to join him in Europe where they live as exiles.

    Another problem which stands in the way of the development of Islam is the interpretation of sharia. As we all know, Sharia presents itself in daily life of Islam at the juridical level and it is based on the Quran and the Sunnah. The problem with the reading and interpretation of the Sunnah is that there are hundreds of thousands of sayings, which often contradict each other; the authenticity of the sayings are not certain, and both imams and scholars strive to apply the experiences and criteria of centuries ago to present day situations and more often than not, they struggle and oppose each other with their interpretation and understanding of it.

    As for the ignorance in which the Islamic religious world has fallen into; there have been various attempts: better training for imams and reopening the door of interpretation; in order to reduce the negative impact on the most fanatical elements of the population; recognition of human rights or at least the attempt to integrate them into Islamic principles…

    Being challenged by other cultures, Islam needs a renewal of its thinking from within, in order to regain strength. Instead, for the very reason that it feels weak, it protects itself by closing in on itself, thinking that it can save itself by going back to a “golden age” of the first caliphs. Muslim history teaches us the opposite: Islam was strongest and able to conquer when, in the 10th century, it opened itself to other cultures, in particular Greek culture, assimilating it and surpassing it. It thus offered the world its contribution in almost all sectors of knowledge, from philosophy to medicine, from technology to astronomy, etc.

    In order to get out of the crisis in which we find ourselves, we must accept the risk of abandoning acquired balances, passing through the rejection of many things, to find a new balance, unfortunately though, we are gripped by fear and this makes us lack courage and lag behind!

    I wish you a pleasant evening too :-)

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    I do not believe a reinterpretation of the Quran is needed. You believe it is needed because you do not have faith in it. The reason why there aren’t attempts to reinterpret it is not because people are afraid of that, but because those who believe in it don’t see any need! It’s the exact same with people who think that liberalism is perfect and those who think liberalism needs to be redefined.

    I do not see the ignorance in which you claim the Islamic world fallen into. In fact, the west has attempted for a long time to wipe Islam out. Having not been able to remove the firm belief in the hearts and minds of people, it has resorted to westernizing the systems. This is the cause of frustration that leads to extremism and fundamentalism.

    The Quran is not full of internal contradictions. In fact, it has none! The revelation circumstances are essential for a right understanding. When you study a scientific theory, you might not be able to understand it without a practical experiment. The circumstances are the practical experiments which lead to the result. Also, Islam, being a religion which is valid for all time and place, needed to go through a transient period of revelations before reaching the steady state. The day that the prophet (PBUH) said: “اليوم أكملت لكم دينكم” is the day it reached that state which has been valid 14 centuries ago and will still be valid without reinterpretation. The reinterpretation you are speaking of means to empty religion of any spiritual value, just so the atheists can be happy. Even Budha doesn’t come under this heavy fire! Asbab Al Tanzil is not by any means a weakness.

    Even western, secular, scientists have praised Muslims on the way they validate Hadith. This scientific way has been the reference which enabled modern science to excel. The authenticity of the sayings is classified in a beautiful manner! This classification is taken into consideration when any law is being discussed. There are no contradictions there either.

    Islam has always been a leader in human rights! Islam has managed to get rid of slavery long before the 1960s. Islam has been the most merciful world power humanity has ever known. Islam has made brothers of different colored people while we still see racism in the west up till this day. There is no need to integrate human rights in Islam; they are already there, in a better form.

    Being challenged by others is not enough reason to change your mind. Being weak at one period of history does not mean you’re done. Islam teaches us to look at the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and at the time of the caliphates and at the golden age as well as our current situation and the future! Being open to other cultures does not mean we have to adopt them.

    We lag behind because we are indecisive and we do not apply Islam the way it should be applied. It is a mistake on our behalf and it is not a weakness in Islam or its pillars.

    Religion is not the reason for falling behind, it’s the path to leading the nations of the world again with virtue and peace and harmony. Muslims are not ignorant. You have a very obvious elitist attitude. Atheists have always thought they monopolize culture and basic human intelligence. You only chose to attack the Quran and the Sunnah when I said I wouldn’t reply! What does that say about you?

    Your thinking that Islam needs redefinition does not mean you can call Muslims ignorant. Why don’t you let Muslims who actually believe in the Quran and Sunnah decide whether a reinterpretation is needed? It is after all their faith. Obviously you have deep hatred for religion as a concept. If you think Quran is full of contradictions why don’t you come up with something like it, can you?

    Again, it is really low to attack the base of the belief of millions like that, and what’s worse is that you only did it when you thought I wouldn’t answer! You presented new points so that I won’t have a rebuttal?

    I thought there would be good out of discussing this matter with you. I was mistaken.

    Obviously you have deep prejudice by saying Sharia leads to turning all Muslims to suicide bombers. This is unacceptable. I tried to think well of you, but alas!

  • faridafarouk

    First of all I didnt attack the Quran or the Sunnah thats a false accusation that I will not accept!!

    Second, there is no need to call each other names, I accept and respect your opinion and I was hoping you would do the same. In a civilised discussion, people should be able to exchange views and ideas without stepping on each other's toes. I was stating my opinion but you obviously cant do the same without attacking me, you also cant accept critism and lack any kind of tolerance for other peoples' opinions that differ from yours.

    Third, I have nothing against any religion, and what I said about suicide bombers was the interpretation of what many extremists would use in explaining the religion and not necessary the religion itself

    Last but not least, I responded to you not thinking or caring whether you would respond or not! and frankly speaking I dont care to continue this discussion with you, the use of sarcasim and demeaning language is not in my nature and I would never stoop that low unlike you!

  • Ahmad Tahboub

    Saying Quran has internal contradictions is a broadside attack, whether you accept it or not.

    And yeah go on and cast me in the stereotype you find convenient. It's is easier to think religious people are intolerant, saves you the trouble of refraining from calling them ignorant and retarted.

    Don't preach manners when you stoop as low as calling an entire culture retarted.

  • faridafarouk

    Just a very quick note as I have no time to waste discussing this issue with you, I think people like you are totally intolerant of others and of any kind of criticism that part you quoted is true. As for calling religious people or Muslims ignorant and retarded, I never actually said that. So when you do want to quote me please make sure you do it correctly!! why dont you spell check what you write while you are at it as well!!

  • Reem

    It's great to see this discussion on an Arab website..I think we're making great strides simply by having these blogs available to us. I would like to go back to one of the main points and that is the need for education reform. We really need to start somewhere and I think in this google age, where a click of a button can get you thousands of pages of facts, feeding direct information to students to regurgitate for a grade simply will not do. An inquiry-based learning style is desperately needed and our students as well as our teachers need to focus on critical thinking skills and reward a problem-solving approach rather than a fact recall method base solely on rote learning. Where does this start? Everywhere! The next time a child asks you a question, reply with “what do you think?” instead of “shut up” or “because I said so.” It will surprise you how fast kids learn to use their greatest asset: the brain.

  • faridafarouk

    Reem, thank you for your comment. I think educational reform is a priority that we all need to address to make the necessary changes. Also, the teachers themselves tend to come from the more conservative families – especially female teachers. The style of teaching and the methods that are used are quite outdated….we also hear of stories of how teachers terrorize young children, just a few days ago a little boy had lost his eye after being beaten by his teacher just because he asked to go drink water!!

  • mcdermottwire

    Nice article, Farida, it's very well thought out. You're absolutely right to highlight religion and education as the two institutions that have been particularly damaging to the culture of thought in the Arab world. Analytical thinking is discouraged both by religious leaders (not just Muslim leaders, Christians too) and by varying degrees of a dated education system. As demonstrated by a few of the above comments, there's a huge sense of insecurity when you raise this issue…it's something everyone feels, but few actually admit to. Look forward to reading more of your writing.

  • Pingback: 7iber. Read it. Now.

  • mcdermottwire

    Nice article, Farida, it's very well thought out. You're absolutely right to highlight religion and education as the two institutions that have been particularly damaging to the culture of thought in the Arab world. Analytical thinking is discouraged both by religious leaders (not just Muslim leaders, Christians too) and by varying degrees of a dated education system. As demonstrated by a few of the above comments, there's a huge sense of insecurity when you raise this issue…it's something everyone feels, but few actually admit to. Look forward to reading more of your writing.

  • http://www.acnetreatmentdigest.com Nicholas King

    it doesn’t matter what religion you have, just do good and avoid evil;“