Aziz and Razib have previously discussed whether there is value in using the analogy of Protestants and Catholics to discuss Shi’a/Sunni differences.
I have to come down on what I think is Razib’s side of that debate, that I don’t find much value in the analogy, although maybe talking about the differences between Protestant and Catholic practices, structures, and beliefs is a way to start talking in general about the ways in which religious traditions can differ using examples with which people may be familiar.
A much more common post-9/11 attempt to analogize Christian church history with Islam and Muslims is the oft stated call for Islam to have a reformation. The underlying assumption here is that it was the reformation in Christianity that allowed Christians to adapt successfully to modernity.
Again, I would have to say that this analogy is not very helpful, except in as much as it opens up the discussion to the various constituent components of the tension between modernity and traditional religion.
However, I have always found it strange that there was not more discussion making the analogy which actually is useful although of course like any analogy limited. The different possible approaches for a religious tradition in coming to terms with modernity are most easily understood by looking to the Jewish tradition of Orthodox, Reform, and Conservative approaches as well as all the various twists on those three main distinctions that have developed.
The most important limitation on the analogy I see is that I think the fact that a Judaism is not a universal or proselytizing religion, but is in fact viewed in modern times as an “ethnic” or “national” group, perhaps fundamentally changes some dynamics.
However, and perhaps they know this very well, but I rarely see it articulated, those both within and without Islam that call for “reformation” are not really calling at all for anything like the Protestant reformation of Christianity but are in fact calling for a Reform Islam movement that would resemble Reform Judaism.
Just one further side note, I know that Shaykh Yasir Qadhi, who I think will be a very important figure in the future intellectual development of Islam in America from one side (the Orthodox or Modern Orthodox one) of this discussion, I know has taken careful note of the intellectual and social evolution of the Jewish community, especially here in America and I know sees many important lessons for the Muslims. As one symbolic indication of this, he has actively and consciously began adopting the using the term “Orthodox Muslim.”
I think these concepts open up tons of interesting discussions. Has anyone seen this analogy discussed in any detail. Does anyone agree with me about how interesting it is?

Tariq Nelson 11:28 am on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
I know that there are also some Muslims that want to see the development of a “Muslim ethnic group” in which if you come from a Muslim background you are Muslim regardless of one’s belief or level of practice. (This is why the term “Muslim-American” is being pushed by some)
The problem with this is that a person like Razib would be Muslim and a person like me would not .
I don’t see how Muslims can ever be an ethnic group like Jews.
abunoor 11:55 am on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
I agree that Muslims should not be thought of as an ethnic group, Tariq.
I still think you (and I) would be considered Muslims if such a phenomenon developed however, because I think the purpose of it would be to include not to exclude.
So, yes, it would include someone like Razib, but this is a rare case because relatively few people still openly and explicitly identify themselves as atheists.
The question is, once you start stressing that Islam is not an ethnic group (which of course I agree with) the questions immediately become very controversial — what do we do with Muslims who do not make salat? We cannot say that the ethnic model has ZERO relevancy because no Muslim believes that people born in Muslim families have to take shahadah to become Muslim, so this is a clear sort of ‘ethnic’ qualification of Islam.
So, a person who comes from a Muslim family will be identified as a Muslim unless he or she explicitly declares otherwise. Also, anyone who takes shahadah and follows some kind of recognized tradition in Islam will be considered a Muslim.
I think the thinking framework I talked about above helps in thinking about the issues. From an Orthodox perspective,there has to be some definition of a basic level of belief or practice that identifies one as a Muslim. As I mentioned above, this is complicated however by the fact that Orthodox Muslim opinion clearly would hold people born and raised in a Muslim family to be assumed to be Muslims, and it would be very rare in our situation (where the state does not claim to be “Islamic”) where there would be any authority to remove that designation. So, while one of the Orthodox Muslim opinions is that a person who does not make salah is not a Muslim, there is no authority to apply this general understanding to any individual case. People who are scared of Orthodoxies (the Reform types) will basically gravitate to either an ethnic and/or self-definitional model of who is a Muslim, and for the reasons I’ve identified above rarely in practice will this conflict with the Orthodox understanding.
Willow 12:03 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
I’ve seen this too. It was especially prevalent in the progressive movement. Freaked me out a little bit.
razib 12:15 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
my parents are muslim. but in america most people assume before inquiring than i’m hindu, because i’m brown (obviously i don’t “dress muslim” or have a beard or something that would clue people in). i have to point this out to ikram saed whenever he claims people perceive me as muslim no matter what i say; tell that to the guy who makes sure i get a vegetarian plate at the party out of “sensitivity”!
i don’t care if muslims “claim me,” it’s their business. some hindus have said i am basically hindu since i’m an atheist of south asian origin, and so a carvaka. again, it’s their business.
razib 12:41 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
I don’t see how Muslims can ever be an ethnic group like Jews.
all jews share some genetic similarities. they’re diverse, but not THAT DIVERSE. additionally, before the holocaust 90% of the world’s jews were yiddish speaking ashkenazim, or their recent descendants. even today 80% are in that group. muslims are more balanced in their diversity, there’s no “core” muslim ethnicity (south asians are the most numerous, but i doubt middle eastern muslims would want to cede ground archetypical status based on numbers
abunoor 1:00 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
Razib,
I have no interest in ‘claiming’ you against your will, but I will NOT let the Hindus have you. In any event, if the Muslim orgs want to keep claiming there are 6 or 8 or 10 million Muslims in the U.S., they have to not only claim you but all of your friends as Muslims just because they know you.
Beyond that, however, there must be some reason why you’re posting on TalkIslam.
By the way, since I’m new here, are there any other posters who are “not” “Muslim”?
By the way Razib, I saw a post during the windup of the election where your boy Reihan Salam referred to himself as a Muslim or American Muslim or something like that. That’s the first time I’d seen that. Obviously he was buying into the ‘ethnic Muslim’ bit, I guess. (I’ve never actually seen him discuss his own religious views, but I’ve read quite a bit of his writing and although I knew he was from a Muslim background(the name’s a pretty big tip off) I’d never seen him self identify as a Muslim before.)
Tariq Nelson 1:07 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
Here in the United States, I think that Desis and Arabs will share the archetypical status. (In fact, if you look at the media narrative on Muslim stories, they already are) If they are speaking of “Muslims” they are referring to someone that is either Desi or Arab. Outside of that, they will add some other designation “African-American Muslim”, “Latino Muslim”, White Muslim”, etc.
I still think that it is much more accurate to define people by their actual ethnicity instead of trying to make Muslim into an ethnicity. Pakistani-Americans should be referred to as such. Arab-Americans should be referred to as such and so on without any religious assumptions being made
Which is exactly why the Muslim ethnicity movement will either fail or become synonymous with actual ethnic groups – Desi and Arab.
Human beings want to be able to put ethnicities into boxes. Certain language. Certain culture. Even a certain look. You just can’t do that with Muslims
Willow 1:50 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
Salaams AbuNoor: There are a few non-Muslim posters here. Besides Razib, there are Kaitlin and Lawrence. They’re here because they have a vested interest in/can contribute valuable points of view to the discussion of modern Islam.
razib 1:51 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
By the way Razib, I saw a post during the windup of the election where your boy Reihan Salam referred to himself as a Muslim or American Muslim or something like that. That’s the first time I’d seen that. Obviously he was buying into the ‘ethnic Muslim’ bit, I guess.
he’s pretty much an ethnic muslim, or a cultural muslim, or whatever that is. we’ve talked about this. i don’t identify as a muslim at all. he kind of does, but he’s not particular muslim on religious grounds.
razib 1:57 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
They’re here because they have a vested interest in/can contribute valuable points of view to the discussion of modern Islam.
yeah, thaz y i’m around. aziz is a friend, an we’ve been talking about islam & stuff since 2003. i’m interested in religion more generally. i’m not an atheist who thinks most people will ever be atheist, so i’m vested in figuring out how people arrange their lives….
abunoor 2:12 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
Wa ‘alaykum as-salaam Willow
Jazzak Allahu Khayr for the info.
I look forward to benefitting from and increasing my understanding of everyone’s unique perspective and insights before I slowly but surely overwhelm them with the force of my intellect and my continuing refusal to accept any dominant mainsteam viewpoints and the correctness of my own strange worldview becomes increasingly obvious to all.
Allaah knows best.
aziz 2:46 pm on November 12, 2008 Permalink |
For some reason the following Woody Allenism seems relevant: “I’m not a Jew, I’m Jewish.”
Perhaps we should adopt the label “Islamic” for similar reasons… RAzib, you aren’t muslim (and I”ve no interest in claiming you either
but you certainly are Islamic. Or Islamish, if you like
thabet 11:56 am on November 13, 2008 Permalink |
There will obviously be other western Muslims who will have a different view of ‘orthodoxy’, perhaps not shared by you and Yasir Qadhi.
I prefer to view Islam as a tradition in the MacIntyrean/Asadian sense. Traditions must always be under some tension, otherwise they will die.
islamoyankee 2:10 pm on November 13, 2008 Permalink |
Because I’m not clever enough to figure out how to post a trackback, I’m letting you know I published a response over at islamicate. It can be found at:
http://www.islamicate.com/islamicate/2008/11/jews-muslims-and-orthodoxy.html
Also, Aziz, I think the word you’re looking for is “islamicate.” Meaning “influenced by Muslms or Islam, but not Muslim or Islamic.”
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 4:14 pm on November 13, 2008 Permalink |
thabet, please say more…I’m not really sure what you are getting at and I don’t want to assume.
aziz 5:57 pm on November 13, 2008 Permalink |
huh. I was assuming islamicate was a verb, as in, to islamify.
abunoor 6:16 pm on November 13, 2008 Permalink |
Islamicate is a must use term to signify that one has studied Islam academically and has read their Hodgson, although he’s kind of old school by now.
islamoyankee 11:17 am on November 14, 2008 Permalink |
Abunoor, I’m curious as to what you consider a better term than islamicate? The conceptual issues that Hodgson raises, on how Muslims interact with other faith cultures, persist. I am unaware of a change in academic discourse, or a development within our own tradition, to address this concern. Nurcholish in Indonesia has been grappling with some of the same intellectual concerns, as has Soroush from Iran, but neither posited a distinct term.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 11:50 am on November 14, 2008 Permalink |
islamoyankee,
I don’t have any problem with the term and old school is no insult for me. There wasn’t much substance to my comment really, what little substance there was was simply to point out that outside of people who have read Hodgson (and obviously your blog) the term is unknown.
thabet 1:59 pm on November 18, 2008 Permalink |
Abu Noor,
I am just noting that any proposed definition of ‘orthodoxy’ will be challenged. I don’t think they are fixed labels. I don’t really buy into the divide between ‘tradition’ and ‘modernity’.
In terms of ‘traditions’, I view them as permanently under tension internally and externally. There is always debate.
Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 3:43 pm on November 18, 2008 Permalink |
thabet,
Let me just say a couple of things, which I don’t think contradict what you’re saying, but which come to my mind when I hear what you’re saying.
First, of course there will be debate and tension. There can still be an orthodoxy and still have tension within that orthodoxy regarding certain specifics. In fact, the kind of orthodoxy we are talking about here is very broad and involves questions of methodology and sources rather than specific outcomes. The clearest example is the four madhaib or legal schools. Each of these schools is universally considered to be orthodox — this does not in any way mean that there is not debate within each school and debate among the various schools. This debate certainly at certain times and places has even risen to the level of tension. So, saying that certain broad trends are “orthodox” and others are not does not imply that there is one strict list that defines orthodoxy and there is no further room for discussion.
My second point, and this may simply be a reflection of my own ignorance…is that what I think one sees in Muslims approaching this discussion for the first time is a strong tendency to see orthodox as being positive and normative. No doubt this is what someone like myself would both agree with and also desire to take advantage of by labelling strands I find to be acceptable or correct as “orthodox.” Still, this is not “all” that is going on and there is at least some room for an outside, objective picture of what have been the long term accepted understandings regarding certain issues. For example, even as someone who doesn’t necessarily strictly follow any one of the four schools of law, I can still “admit” that these are the four orthodox schools of law and even “admit” that the Orthodox opinion among Muslims has been that generally a non-scholar should follow one of these four madhabs. So, what I’m saying is that there is a resistance to claiming one’s own ideas as non-Orthodox here that one does not necessarily see among Jews at least at this point. Certainly people who follow reform Judaism believe it is a correct, and perhaps the most correct understanding of Judaism but that doesn’t mean that they can’t acknowledge that what they are following is a “reform” understanding and that they are not following the “orthodox” understanding.
Of course, while an Orthodox Jew may assert that they are following the “traditional” understanding…a scholar of religion will see Orthodox, Reform, Conservative, and other denominational movements within Judaism all as different responses to the particular challenges faced by the Jewish community in adjusting to post-Enlightenment, post-Emancipation Europe and then to the United States.
Allaah knows best.
A'isha 11:04 pm on November 18, 2008 Permalink |
I wish there would be a “Reform Muslim” movement, at least here in the States. I am a Muslimah and I always want to be a Muslimah, but I also have a different interpretation of the Qur’an and hadith than some people. Right now, the way things are, my only choice is to keep my mouth shut and not talk about my actual beliefs with the other Muslimahs at the masjid, or face being called an apostate and a heretic. I am not an apostate! It is not that religion is unimportant to me — my deen and iman are central to my life. I wish there was a community of Muslims more like me. They are out there, but they fear the masjid and simply stop coming to worship services, so you never get a chance to meet them. It’s sad.
svend 5:26 pm on September 27, 2009 Permalink |
Salaams,
I’m noticing this very interesting exchange quite late in the game, of course, but a few people who’ve written quite insightfully on the parallels and differences between Islam and Judaism are Tamara Sonn, William Brinner and Mustansir Mir.
I don’t think orthodox, religiously practicing Muslims should or are obliged to surrender the normative high ground as to what constitutes a Muslim in the full sense of the word, but postmodern demographic realities must also be recognized, as well. Not that it’s a particularly significant statement, but I did write something about the need for a better balancing act between upholding normative ideals of traditional Islam and respectingnon-practicing and/or “less-orthodox” Muslims’ legitimate claim to be part of Islamic civilization. http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/a/2265/
Despite the obvious and profound parallels in belief as well as practice, it can be surprisingly challenging to apply the same categories and values to both Orthodox Jewish and Orthodox Sunni thought. That’s not to say they’re not kindred (and far more so than either are with Christianity once you strip out cultural idioms), but even Orthodox Judaism is to Muslim thinking very “modernistic” in some important ways, as a reading of the as Joseph Soloveitchik’s THE HALAKHIC MAN shows. The relationship between Jews and their inherited tradition has always been extremely dynamic (unquestionably more so than Muslims).
abunoor 5:47 pm on September 27, 2009 Permalink |
Svend,
Jazzak Allahu khayr for your contribution. I’m sure I’ll have more to say on this topic in the future.
I have something to say about the point in your second paragraph but I guess I should read your link first.
About you third point, I did (try at least) to read Soloveitchik’s work but realized I would have to understand philosophy a bit better before I really understood it. I resisted studying philosophy at all for a long time, and I’m still not sure if it’s really worth my time, but its definitely necessary if one wants to understand many religious thinkers historically in the Muslim tradition as well as currently.
I think your last sentence is possibly true but in a way this is just begging the question. Muslims have had plenty of thinkers who attempted moves with regard to the inherited tradition that were extremely dynamic but often times they were not fully accepted. It all depends what is considered as part of the tradition. There have been thinkers who considered themselves within the Islamic tradition which developed doctrines of almost every conceivable variety, even those which contradicted the seemingly unalterable core of Islamic thought, challenging the oneness of God, attributing divinity to humans, declaring people after the Prophet (saw) to be prophets, declaring that the Sharia’h no longer has to be observed, etc. etc. This is without even mentioning modern secular Muslims who would challenge some of the assumptions of Islamic thought (Qur’an is literal word of Allaah, etc.)
I am not calling for including all of this as legitimate Islamic thought, but I’m just saying that if we are going to exclude certain thought as beyond the bounds of the traditiion (which I think we should) and then say that “Muslim thought” has not been as dynamic as Jewish thought we should realize that this is at least partially due to the fact that we consciously reject certain products of Muslim civilization as being outside of the tradition, or at least outside of orthodoxy.
The real difference that remains may be attributable at least in good part to the difference between the orthopraxic nature of Jewish orthodoxy and the orthodoxic nature of Muslim orthodoxy. As I said, more to come, inshAllah.