From Reformism to Uniformism: An Analysis Quranic Fundamentalism

In Traditional Islam (TI), the Wahabist notion of the ‘firqa najiyya’ (saved sect) has rendered considerable damage to the open and tolerant attitude borne by most Muslims. Wahabis believe in the hadith of the 73 sects in which the Prophet stated that only one of the 73 will be saved and that is the one upon Quran and Sunnah. Naturally the Wahabis themselves claim to be those people even though at present they themselves are broken up into various groups. I wonder how that would fit into that hadith?

In Quranist Islam or Quranism, the story should be different. Postmodern Quranism comes at a time when Muslims are overwhelmingly following TI and it seeks to reform this situation for various reasons. As a Quranist, my reason for seeking reform would be to infuse in the Ummah a sense of direct experience with the Quran. The Quran isn’t meant to be dispensed by a few individuals for their ‘clients’ (i.e. the rest of us) but rather meant to be thought about freely and democratically.

On the whole, my experience tells me that Quranists are usually open minded and accepting individuals. They are much more partial to reading about other religions and accepting truth from any source. This is because the Quran itself is like that, very much open about diversity of opinion.

And this is why Quranic Fundamentalism (QF) is an irony. Although Quranic Fundamentalists (QFists) themselves would vehemently deny it, QF may be deemed as a part of Quranist Islam because they consider the Quran the sole source of Islam. However, instead of being affected by open and tolerant nature of the Quran, they have gone completely the other way.

QF’s ideology is clearly discernible by its language. They call themselves Muslims (which is not a problem in itself) but others are called ‘sectarians’. They consider themselves ‘monotheists’, ‘believers’ and ‘quran aloners’ whereas others are ‘polytheists’, ‘disbelievers’ and ‘god plus others’. In short, the terminology employed depicts those who are unlike QFists (which may include other Quranists as we are of a large variety) as the ‘damned’ whereas they themselves are saved.

In order to disabuse them of this erroneous position, we must explain how their above language does not reflect the Quran’s own position. If anything, the Quran is the complete opposite of this mindset as we will soon see:

1. QFists say: We are Muslims and others are Sectarians.

Firstly, we need to ask: what exactly makes a sect? If we look at 30/31-32, we will see that the words shi3ah and hizb is used. Both these words connote confrontational attitudes and even states that these people are vainglorious about what is with them.

Does this not describe the attitudes of the QFists themselves? Aren’t they being confrontational by claiming that they are simply Muslims while others are sectarian thereby denigrating the others?

Secondly, we need to ask if there is only one way to be muslim? If QFists are concerned about what the Quran says, they would not say think so. The Quran actually mentions God’s paths in plural (subulana – see 29/69). It also talks about each person having his own expression (wijhah – 2/148) and as well as disclosures and methodologies (shir3ah and manhaj – 5/48). The latter two verses ask for us to race to bring about goodness (al-khayraat).

Therefore, QFists have no cause to call anyone sectarian. Allah himself acknowledges the existence of multiple paths. At this point QFists may raise the objection by pointing to the verse that says that the only deen in the sight of Allah is islam (3/19). Indeed this is true but let us ask them, why not translate the word ‘islam’? Why look at it as a label one assumes when the Quran uses it in functional terms (such as 6/71)? The word islam refers to the acquirement of salam or peace which is fully elucidated in the Quran itself. It is a philosophy of action which has many ways to actualise.

1. QFists say ‘We are monotheists and others are polythiests’

 

This statement not only betrays a lack of understanding of the Quranic mindset but also shows a tacit acceptance of the mindset employed by TI. In the TI concept of aqeedah (a branch of the Islamic sciences in which articles of faith are articulated), Islam is seen as accepting a list of items after which one becomes a monotheist. In the same way QFists link becoming a monotheist to accepting the Quran alone as a profession of faith.  

The Quran however, has nothing to do with this mindset. It does not even have the word monotheist (muwahid)! If one were to probe deeply, the closest one would come up with is the example of Ibrahim in which he is said to be ‘essentially not of the polytheists’ (maa kana min al-mushrikeen – 16/123). Ibrahim does say ‘I am not from the polytheists’  (maa anaa min al-mushrikeen – 6/79) but when does he say this? When he had achieved complete dissociation from his society (inni bari’un mimma tushrikoon – 6/78). Can any of us say the same thing? We are all trapped in the grip of modern living and the power of the false god firaun (symbolic of the total power of statehood). Only the superficial deduction of the QFists would pronounce that we are of the same deen status as Ibrahim. ‘Deeni haneefa’ (as it appears in 10/105 and 30/30) is something Allah instructs us to aspire to, not a label we take. The next section below will elucidate this further

1. QFists say ‘we are believers and others are not’.

 

Once again, the Quran does not support with this extremist language. As we have seen above, the Quran allows for plurality in how one goes about expressing islam. In the same way, it has 88 calls for those who have believed (yaa ayyuha alladhina amanoo) yet nowhere in these calls does it instruct us to call ourselves ‘believers’. Why is this the case? Because belief is something within the heart as 49/14 shows and it is invisible to others. It does not suit at all the judgemental nature of QFists.

Conversely, only once does it instruct us to say ‘oh disbelievers’ (ya ayyuha al-kafiroon – 109/1) but to whom exactly? If we read the rest of chapter 109, it is for people who have completely dissociated themselves from ibadah or the service of Allah. The service of Allah in the Quran has four times been mentioned next to doing goodly deeds (2/83, 4/36, 6/151 and 17/23) which is a very strong emphasis. How then can we deem anyone who performs any acts of goodness to be disbelievers?

Unfortunately QFists have imported mindsets from some varieties of Traditional Islam (TI) as well as from Fundamentalist Christianity. This exclusivist mindset considers belief as something tied to an object of faith. In the case of TI, it is the whole historical phenomenon of Islam, for Fundamentalist Christianity it is the sacrifice of Jesus and for QF, it is the Quran itself. You become a believer by accepting the Quran alone. However, the Quran itself does not promote such a mindset. Nowhere does it paint itself an object of faith at all. It is possible to reject ‘signs’ (ayat) but signs are something one experiences, not something forced down our throats by QFists.

1. QFists say ‘we are quran aloners and others are not’

 

This statement is only true on a superficial level. While Quranists as whole acknowledge that only the Quran can articulate islam, that is where the unity ends. We are still left with the question of interpretation. We tend to see QFists quote the Quran and ‘throwing’ it at others to impute them as disbelievers and hypocrites but this only shows how superficially the Quran is treated.

The Quran isn’t just read but interpreted. Unfortunately, QFists do not tend to see this and think by simply professing ‘quran alone’, they have understood it fully. The Quran simply does not see itself as a ‘one-off’ reading. Rather, it tells the reader to not rush to see what the signs point to (20/114) and to keep seeking knowledge to elucidate the text (41/3). Becoming Quran-alone in one’s approach to islam is merely the beginning to a more coherent reading.

By this reasoning as well, QFists should not vilify Quranists who interpret differently from they do. QFists use terms such as ‘satanic’ for Quranists who reject certain interpretations or paradigms. Such a mentality truly fails to understand the processual nature of reading the Quran. Reading the Quran is a process in which one continuously reads the book and finds greater and greater lucidity. Therefore, it is simply the height of arrogance to say that ‘Quran alone’ means anything on a salvation level. Interpretation is still an issue and only those who are superficial or live in delusions think otherwise.

Postmodern Quranism, which is my term for Quranism in an internet age, has unlimited potential to change the face of Islam for better as well as to offer humanity solutions for its current problems. However, in order to do this, we must first adopt the same mindset as the Quran. There is no use in being Quranists if all we do is simply remove elements of Traditional Islam but leave its mentality intact. Quranic Fundamentalism is a product of this mentality and threatens to destroy what could be a potentially transformative movement in the world.

Advertisement