The Trouble With Irshad Manji

I once wrote to Manji and got a response from her. Here is my mail and her response:

My post:
``As another queer Muslim who considers herself
moderate, I find a
fundamental failing in your analysis. The trouble
with Islam is the
trouble with ALL the religions. That the history of
Islam is
unpleasant is a fact, but that doesn`t mean it is so
because the
teachings are flawed. Islam`s history is tainted
because it became
more a struggle of power, and this is true for every
religion. You
have specifically held Islam culpable by claiming
that is the only
religion in which literalism is mainstream. But no
other religion is
free of that.`` - Dazed

Irshad responds: You say no other religion is free
of literalism. I
agree. But not being free of something is very
different from being
saturated with it. Moderate Christianity is not free
of literalism
yet neither is it steeped in literalism. I
illustrate this point
over and over again in the book.

For example, you`ll recall that I once hosted a
program called
QueerTelevision. When I aired anti-gay comments from
Bible-citing
Christians, other Christians would be sure to follow
up with rival,
more compassionate, less literal interpretations.
That NEVER
happened when Muslims bawled me out. Apparently,
there was no
question that they spoke for Islam. All of it.

It`s not that every last Muslim objects to
homosexuality. The
problem runs deeper: even `moderate` Muslims are to
believe that the
Koran is the final manifesto of God`s will.
Consequently, most
Muslim `moderates` don`t know how to pierce the
literalism of
Muslims extremists. With few exceptions, Islam`s
`moderates` wallow
in their own literalism by refusing to question
whether the Koran is
completely authored by God. The same, I would humbly
submit, cannot
be said for moderate Christians and Jews today.

But we`ve been through all of this before, havent we?

1. Authenticity: What positions and methods of interrogations mark you as an ``authentic`` Muslim? What is ``trust`` code for? If, for example, James Baldwin asks the Black American community to seriously grapple with and acknowledge their homophobia, how reasonable is it to ask what Baldwin as a gay African American progressive has done to ``deserve`` the trust of the Black world? In fact, the irony is almost too much to countenance-it is the belief in my bones that the institutionalized and mainstream Islam needs to ask itself what it has done to deserve the trust of millions of young women who are deemed ``different``, and therefore unequal.

2. Scholarship: If Manji is approaching these issues from a position based in a secular framework, how is her scholarship lessened? Who are the women Muslim scholars and where is the acknowledgement in our mainstream circles of their discourse? Does Manji draw on them? Do her arguments echo the conclusions or concerns that Muslim women scholars have publically expressed?

3. Validated/Invalidated Narratives: Why should Manji`s narratives be excluded from the larger discourses that the ``Muslim`` world participates in? Arguably Manji represents a growing demographic: young, progressive, feminist, gay or inclusive, educated Muslim women. Some of us have serious reservations about our pious Muslim brethren and sistren, particularly when the hierarchies of oppression and inequity seem to replicate themselves over and over.

4. Israel: I recently attended a blistering reading given by the poet Aharon Shabtai who was extremely critical of the various conservative positions that the Israeli govt was taking. My Jewish (formerly anarchist) friend leaned over to me and said, ``His poems get published in Ha`aretz-can you imagine the New York Times ever daring?`` And the audience of thousands were receptive to his ideas-which in some ways used Jewish terminology and mythology in less than adoring and genuflective manners. If OUR practice of Islam is so reasonable and accepting, why cant we understand that Israel is not all settlers? Why must we only listen to ``good girls``? To what extent is the insistence of the ``good girl`` another kind of sexism?

#18 by Saminasha

+++
Why must we only listen to ``good girls``? To what extent is the insistence of the ``good girl`` another kind of sexism?
+++

THere are plenty of ``bad girls`` who make more sense and challenge the Mullahs in a better fashion than Irshad Manji. These ``bad girls`` are more knowledgable, authentic and courageous than the shallow, intellectually dishonest Manji types.

One such ``bad girl`` is Asma Jehangir. For over a decade this ``bad girl`` has been fighting Mullahs over honour killings and a woman`s right to choose her husband. This girl does not fight the Mullahs from the safe shores of North America. Instead she confronts Mullahs in Pakistan. She has been repeatedly shot at. Her car has been smashed dozens of times. Yet she soldiers on. Moreover, she is neither gay nor an Israeli sympathizer.

The Asma Jehangirs of this world have a greater impact than the Irshad Manjis because the former have more courage, consistency and legitimacy than the latter.

BTW, the reason Manji shall fail has little to do with her being a woman. Remember Salman Rushdie? Even he was rejected by the Muslim mainstream because he foolishly (though not unintentionally) called the prophet a child molester. The moment he crossed that line, Muslims (both educated and uneducated) rejected him as a West-pampered crackpot.

A true reformer has to be taken seriously by his constituency. And to do this, he/she needs the respect and trust of his/her constituency. Comparing Muhammad with OBL, and demonizing the Palestinian struggle... doesn`t establish that trust and respect. That is exactly why a ``bad girl`` (or boy) must have a method to her madness. Irshad Manji doesn`t.

re: #18 by Saminasha

+++
What positions and methods of interrogations mark you as an ``authentic`` Muslim? What is ``trust`` code for?
+++

For starters, one has to be fair and consistent, which Irshad Manji is not. Moreover, her lifestyle choices have limited her constituency. The mainstream Muslims abhor homosexuality and have genuine grievances about Israel.

Neocons, Hindu fundoos, Jewish rabbis and almost every religious denomination in the world condemns homosexuality. But Irshad Manji chose to single out Islam for her ire? Consistency demands that she term her book ``The Trouble with Religion``, instead of the title ``Trouble with Islam``.

Lets consider Israel. She blames Palestinians for becoming suicide bombers and terrorism. She doesn`t blame US and Israel for leaving the Palestinian population with no other choice of achieving its legitimate goals through peaceful, political means. Every time there is a truce agreement, Israel breaks the agreement by assassinating suspected militants. No trial. No Jury. Just an Israeli pilot in his F-16 decides who is guilty, and who is not. To reach across their own towns, elderly Palestinians and women have to go through dozens of checkposts and walk on foot. Every month, the IDF launches an operation into Gaza or West Bank to demolish homes of ``suspected militants``. Every Palestinian is presumed guilty until proven innocent. This presumed guilt is enough to pronounce death sentence without a trial.

Does Irshad Manji have any answer to that?

Even the most liberal Muslim will have trouble swallowing Manji`s views on Israel simply because her views are untenable on the basis of humanity.

jang
//....Maji reminds me of our own Ferzana. ...//

Apple and Pine-Apple. Manji is trying to reform muslims and rescue them out of their backward orthodox ways of life - where as farzana panders to the exact the same attributes and tried hard to sweep the muslim issues under the carpet.

Manji is a reformer and a beacon of light for muslims who may some day succeed in her mission ..... farzana works for exactly the opposite - she is a mis-guided status-qouist who blames everybody else for self-created problems of muslim communities.

UmerMurtaza

Islam is and always has been an expansionist and imperialistic faith. Seeking to deny this just makes you look stupid. That is fine. But dont deny what it is! Embrace the hegemonic and supremacist aspect of your faith and realise that if a religion places such emphasis on the submission of humanity to its creed it shall receive critical scrutiny from across the board in return...from other religions, from the secular and democratic liberal world, in short, from everybody. Muslims are no shrinking violets when it comes to pointing out the evil in the infidel world, so take it on the chin like men, dont act like poor innocent aggrieved virgins who have been accosted in the meadow whilst picking daisies.

Irshad Manji is bogus. Her thesis reads like a high school level essay. She lacks scholarship and knowledge and she is relyng on rhetoric and one liners, already popular in the media. Many people at chowk can do better job than her. Perhaps in Canada she may be something to listen to but she would fail miserably in the more competitive USA media market. People like Salman Rushdie and Ibn Warraq have done much better job of highlighting the need for reforms without bringing up more recent role of Islam in world geopolitics. Ibn Warraq`s ``Why I am not a Muslim`` is a must read for making an intellectual case for reformation independent of current political climate.

The trouble with Manji and likes seeking reformation is that they cant prove reformation producing a better world for Muslims. By the same token, if Muslims become modern and prosperous miraculously, the need and calls for reformation fall flat. Reformation to them is the panacea for all Muslim ills. The point reformers should be concerned most about is bringing reason and rationality to the faith and making it more in-line with the current understandings of nature, life and society. The role of religion should decrease more than reforming it.

i like what asma barlas had to say about manji in an interview with MWU:

MWU!: A recent book marketed as an “open letter to Muslims” for reform called The Trouble With Islam by Canadian journalist Irshad Manji has received a rapturous response from the intelligentsia in North America, Europe and Israel. What do you attribute the book’s success to?

AB: I haven’t read the book, so I can’t say what accounts for its success but, from some of the reviews I’ve read, one can speculate that it performs the same role as a person of color who goes around proclaiming that there is no such thing as racism or a woman who insists that there is no such thing as male domination or sexism. Patting the back of the oppressors always vindicates their sense of self.

Incidentally, Ms. Manji has listed my book in her list of recommended readings; since I haven’t read hers I don’t know whether to be flattered or dismayed.

``Islam is and always has been an expansionist and imperialistic faith.``

I believe you got lost midway between Byzantium and Persia.

--Ibn

``Mohar, there are amazing similarities between George Bush and the muslim intellectuals. They are both convinced that they are right and their ideology is perfect.``

A superfluous comparison. “Bush,” regardless of what we might conceive of him, hardly thinks like a “fundamentalist” in the sense you employ the implication. Moreover, ideological conviction is hardly confined to ``religious`` aspirations.

``It does not take rocket science to realize that the Islamic world needs some serious introspection, given that the rest of the world is virtually at war with them across the globe. However, just like a stubborn George Bush will not change policies, muslim intellectuals will not recognize any problem with their faith.``

Again, a comparison that leaves more confusion than understanding. Anyhow, it doesn`t take a kinky journalist with intrepid pretensions to underline the dire introspection absent in the assumed ``Muslim world.``

``A few more years, a couple of 9/11s and the war on terrorism will morph into a war on Islam. That would be a catastrophe for the whole world.``

Nonsense on stilts.

``How about other muslim intellectuals coming up with an alternate plan to build bridges between Islam and the rest of the world? If you want to avoid a world war, it is time to do something about it.``

If you would step out of your 2x4 ``idea-dome`` maybe you would have realized that many, more notable, Muslim intellectuals have been working arduously to implement an introspection that doesn`t leave the Muslim bereft of any meaning.

I don`t see how Irshad Manji screaming against the wind will ``bridge`` anything. If anything, she might add fuel to an already heated furnace. Then again, one might concede that Irshad Manji has a few lapdogs of her own--bone and leash at hand.

--Ibn

manji is a lesbian, fareed zakaria is a wino (a pretty good one!), ibn waraq is a self proclaimed apostate, rushdie is scared into silence - so who is going to reform islam ?

.......... verily, we are doomed

Hamidm2 (#25):

``.....- so who is going to reform islam ?``

How about you and your whisky shots...

mordant_muslim,

``many, more notable, Muslim intellectuals have been working arduously to implement an introspection that doesn`t leave the Muslim bereft of any meaning``

....... pray, who might they be ? ...... and how arduously be they working? ....... it is hard work, you know - very hard work ........ do they include qazi hussain, maulana azhar, professor ghafoor, the wahabi sheiks of the desert kigdom, the night-robed clowns of al-azhar (whoever they might be), the king of morocco, the prophet osama who is meditating in his cave, his mentor al-zawahiri who is issuing his fatwas on audio tapes, the blind sheikh of cairo who sits in a jail in upstate new york, urstruly and his sidekick echoboom on chowk, some white german convert who goes around giving lectures in muslim mosques for airfare and a free meal, the qazi`s hooded daughter, the prophetess ferhat hashmi who has succeeded her sister al-lat, the scholars who study and make bombs in the basement of the islamic university in islamabad, the judges who sit on the various sharia courts from nigeria to malaysia, the fools who sit on the council for islamic ideology, the charlatans who call themselves islamic bankers so that they can gouge the ummah, mike tyson, the prophet osama`s one-eyed brother in law, cat stevens, the shoe bomber .............. who ?!!............ who are the people who seek to carry out the reformation between the five ritual ablutions and upendings ............

.......... verily, we are doomed

Bruce Lee,

...I see, so what you`re saying is that you don`t really have an answer. I don`t blame you...must be something in your brain washing that was particularily effective.

Umer M

Irshad Manji certainly has the right to voice her opinions. However, she if she wants to be taken as a serious critic she needs to back her arguments in a scholary manner.

I havent read her work, but from what this article says, I see that her basic premise is extremely flawed. She does not seem to know what ``ijtehad`` is. She gives it her own definition, which is totally off the mark.
According to her it is : “the Islamic tradition of independent reasoning which… allowed every Muslim, female or male, straight or gay, old or young, to update his or her religious practice in light of contemporary circumstances.”

There are certain requirements for ijtehad. And I think you should without any bias read the following. I am not attacking manji and calling her a kafir, I have no right to do so. But I would like you to see why her reasoning is flawed and that the reasons she gives are NOT reasons why Muslims are in the current state. Islam doesnt need a reformation, it needs a revival as the Prophet SAW has said. Reformation means changes, whereas a revival means bringing to life the forgotten heritage of Muslim knowledge, scholarship, and tolerance.

Ijtehad can only be practiced by a person who has a strong understanding of the Arabic grammar, Quran, and Hadeeth. Because, Ijtehad or derived decision has to be from the Quran and Sunnah, not Manjis desires and whims.

Now reading an english translation of the Quran is not equal to having read the Quran because Arabic cannot be translated and many words in Arabic can never be translated to English. Thus, an english translation is bound to lose the meanings.
Therefore, you need to know over 16 books of hadeeth with both their literal and non literal meanings. Then you need to know the Quranic Ayats so that you can relate those ayats to the hadeeths. You would also need to know the deductive principles needed to join between all the primary texts before reaching a decision.

Manji`s ``ijtehad`` is NOT based on the Quran or Sunnah, rather it is based on her desires and her way of thinking, unless she can prove otherwise. If an idea suits her, no matter how un islamic it may be, but if it helps her adjust to a situation or to her desire, then according to her it is permissible thanks to her ``instant ijtehad mix`` ... How can you update your religious knowledge and practice based on desires ? Becauase desires are based on what your ``ego``, or ``self`` wants. You should know that desires usually dont make us do the right thing, instead they make us do what is easy and not necessarily good for us. Manji does not for sure derive her judgements based on a secular argument.
Muslims should listen to the secular critic and try to understand it. But manjis critic is simply not even worth listening to. Instead, Daniel Pipes is someone the Islamic Scholars need to confront not the likes of manji`s.

However, there are many so called Imams who have hurt Islam more than any enemy. But this does NOT mean there are NO islamic scholars, mystics, and thinkers.

Saminasha je, i would classify myself as a young, secular in some cases, tolerant of others(including homosexuals), moderat muslim. Yet I do believe in the Islamic tradition, which was responsible for the tolerant societies back in good ole days:). It was not secularism, capitalism, socialism, or anything else that made these the Ottoman, Spanish, and other Caliphates and Rulers tolerant and progressive. It was their Islamic thinking and research, and the principles of the Quran and Sunnah that helped them.

Having said all that, I agree with you that their are problems in the muslim community, and they need to be solved with not only a secular outlook but also a deep understanding of Islamic History, tradition, and scholarship because we are a displaced people, a people who have no idea where they are coming from and to where they are headed.

And Allah Knows Best.

Dang, I have an exam tomorrow. Wish me luck.

Peace,
Talha

``Muslims have been throwing filth at every other religion on Earth since Muhammed saw the angel. Now they are getting upset because some people are *snivel snivel* subjecting their claims of supremacy to scrutiny. Get used to it. It will never stop now.``

There is nothing uniquely Islamic about religious polemic; nay, it was, to a more or lesser extent, part of the interfaith dialogue during the Victorian era.

--Ibn