|
Volume XIV (2003)
Book Review:
“Believing
Women” in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur’an
Paul Allen Williams,
Department of
Philosophy and Religion, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE
68182-0265
Barlas, Asma. “Believing Women”
in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur’an
(Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002). 254pp. $21.95 (paper).
Recent historical events have heightened international interest in the
politics of Islam and Islamic culture. Among the many areas of interest,
the status and treatment of women in majority Muslim nations is
prominent. In particular, commentators criticize such practices as
female circumcision (frequently called ‘female genital mutilation’),
stoning women for adultery, and so-called “honor killings,” in which
women are killed by close male relatives. Common rejoinders to such
criticisms include the suggestions that many of these practices have a
socio-cultural foundation not a religious one, and that women in Islamic
nations have had greater rights historically than in majority Christian
nations. These assertions and rejoinders regarding the treatment of
women is closely linked to ideological (and theological) commitments of
the commentators, hence the tone of this debate is heavily loaded, often
serving to arouse passions and not to clarify issues.
In
the midst of the public debate over these kinds of practices, more
fundamental questions about Islam and the role of women in Islam need to
be raised in a more productive manner. Such questions include the
following: Is Islam inherently patriarchal and misogynistic (as some
Muslims and non-Muslims have asserted)? Are there warrants for abusive
treatment of women in the Qur’an, in the sunnah (life and
practice) of the Prophet Muhammad as recorded in the ahadith
(stories about the life and practice of the prophet), or in the
shari’a (Islamic law)? If so, what are they? If not, what is the
basis for the oppression of women in at least some predominantly Muslim
nations? And can the discussion be rooted in language in which men and
women, Muslims and non-Muslims, participate? Or, are only certain
persons privileged to address the questions and the underlying issues?
In a
provocative new study, Asma Barlas’ “Believing Women” in Islam:
Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur’an raises precisely
these questions. As a Muslim and as a scholar, she addresses a broad
audience, including both “Muslims and non-Muslims, women and men,
believers and nonbelievers, the non-West and the West” (xiii). With such
a broad audience, Barlas endeavors to find language for engaging the
complex theological and epistemological problems inherent in these
questions. Nevertheless, she does not shy away from raising sharp
questions and asserting her answers incisively. As she states in the
opening of the Preface, Barlas’ most fundamental question is “whether or
not the Qur’an is a patriarchal text,” and her purpose is both “to
challenge oppressive readings of the Qur’an [and] to offer a reading
that confirms that Muslim women can struggle for equality from within
the framework of the Qur’an’s teachings, contrary to what both
conservative and progressive Muslims believe” (xi).
Chapter One, the introductory chapter on “The Qur’an and Muslim Women:
Reading Patriarchy, Reading Liberation,” elaborates the central
questions and theses of this work, i.e., whether the Qur’an is a
patriarchal text and whether it permits or encourages liberation for
women. In examining these questions, the author notes “two definitions
of patriarchy (as a tradition of father-rule, and as a politics of
gender inequality based in theories of sexual differentiation)” (2). In
raising and answering the questions of patriarchy and liberation, she
attempts to recover “the liberating and egalitarian voice of Islam” (4)
through a reading of the Qur’an based on two claims. First, she opens
the door for a non-traditional reading of the Qur’an by asserting,
“insofar as all texts are polysemic, they are open to variant readings.”
From the latter, she is able to distinguish between the text itself
(which is a record of the very words of Allah) and the (various)
readings of the text. Second, and contrary to the claims of many Muslims
and non-Muslims alike, she claims that, “the Qur’an is egalitarian and
antipatriarchal” (5). In order to make the latter claim, the author
insists on “recognizing the Qur’an’s textual and thematic holism, and
thus the hermeneutic connections between seeming disparate themes” (8),
thereby rejecting the tendency to read “patriarchy and sexual inequality
into the Qur’an” (7).
Although she is well versed in and directly engages feminist literature
and thought and the questions she raises are central to feminist
discourse, especially feminist literary and Biblical criticism, she
clearly distances herself from Western feminists in a variety of ways.
First and foremost, she speaks as a “believing woman,” that is a Muslim
woman who grounds her theoretical perspective on the Qur’an as a
revelation of God’s will. Thus, she speaks from what she construes to be
a “Quranic perspective.” In assuming this perspective, she rejects the
idea of a synthesis of Quranic and Western epistemologies (25). In
addition, she rejects a deterministic view of the relationship between
sex/gender and reading, arguing that her positions are not specific to
the fact that she is a woman (21). In these and other ways, Barlas
intentionally distances herself from Western feminists while engaging
the literature and ideas of feminism in a sophisticated and nuanced
manner.
Chapter Two on “Texts and Textualities” identifies the principal sacred
literature of Islam (the Qur’an), as well as the classical interpretive
communities (especially the jurists of the classical period, e.g., al-Shafi)
and methods, including tafsir (exegesis) and the use of
ahadith (narratives about the life and practice of the Prophet
Muhammad) for understanding the Qur’an. Barlas argues for a clear
distinction between the Qur’an (as the self-revelation of God to
the Prophet Muhammad), on the one hand, and the tafsir,
ahadith, and shari’a, on the other. This distinction is the
basis for a powerful re-evaluation of the relationship between
revelation and tradition. She argues that a relatively small group of
interpreters during the classical period accorded the ahadith a
privileged status comparable to the Qur’an, and that this hermeneutical
move on the part of those interpreters introduced the elements of the
tradition that are most oppressive of women. In addition to examining
the development of tradition in the early centuries, Barlas considers
the exegetical methods of both conservative and critical theorists in
contemporary Islam.
Chapter Three on “Intertextualities, Extratextual Contexts” goes beyond
the textual traditions themselves to the interrelationships among texts
(intertextuality) and the extratextual context, that is the contexts of
reading, especially the political context of state formation and
juridical developments during the classical period of Islamic history.
(This is the period of the Abbasid Caliphate and the development of the
four great schools of law in the Sunni tradition.) Among the issues
explored in this chapter, one might note the definition of the prophet’s
sunnah through the historically problematic ahadith, the
collaboration between the ulama (religious scholars) and the
state, and the closing of the gates of ijtihad (critical
reasoning) in favor of ijma’ (communal consensus). These contexts
demonstrate that there is a relationship between the social and
political contexts and the particular moves of authoritative
interpreters, and raise the possibility of other readings that may not
be consistent with classical tradition.
At
the beginning of Part Two, Chapter Four on “The Patriarchal Imaginary of
Father/s: Divine Ontology and the Prophets” moves into a closer reading
of the text of the Qur’an itself. Although each of the chapters in this
book begins with one or more ayah (verses) from the Qur’an, it is
in Part Two where we begin to hear more fully the richness of Quranic
expression. The author’s commitment to a Quranic epistemology leads her
to quote the Qur’an in detail, and the novice can learn to listen to the
language of the text (in the widely accepted translation by Yusuf Ali).
In the midst of
this greater use of scriptural texts, Barlas returns again to her
central argument, i.e., not only that the Qur’an is not patriarchal, but
also that “the teachings of the Qur’an are radically egalitarian and
even antipatriarchal” (93). She relies particularly on an analysis of
tawhid, the unity of God. The doctrine of tawhid rejects
associating anything with God, e.g., a spouse or a son. In fact, the
Qur’an rejects anthropomorphizing God. The Arabic word for God, “Allah,”
literally means “The God” and has no gender attribution.
In
addition to this theological analysis, the author considers the role of
prophets in the Qur’an. For example, a close reading of Quranic verses
regarding Abraham leads to the conclusion that “Abraham begins by
rejecting his father’s gods, and then his father’s authority,
calling on his father to follow him instead, challenging the very core
of father-right as it is structured in patriarchies” (111, emphasis
original). Likewise, Abraham’s submission to God’s will (not association
with God’s authority), his designation as a prophet/imam (a
gender-neutral term etymologically related to the words for community
and mother), and the near sacrifice of his unnamed son (who himself
accedes to God’s will), all emphasize the authority of God and the
rejection of patriarchy, in the sense of father-rule.
Chapter Five on “The Qur’an, Sex/Gender, and Sexuality: Sameness,
difference, equality” raises the question of the construction of sex and
gender in the Qur’an. The author finds that “both women and men have the
same capacity for moral agency, choice, and individuality,” arguing that
the Qur’an “does not sexualize moral agency” and that it “appoints women
and men each other’s guides and protectors” (140). In her discussion of
modesty, she indicates that, “many Muslim men have made a mockery of its
[the Qur’an’s] teachings by acquiring harems and contracting serial
one-night marriages. . . . [M]any Muslim men have corrupted in the
extreme the Qur’anic ideals of temperance and virtue” (157). Among the
many controversial issues touched upon, she also takes up the issue of
harth, meaning “tilth” or property, a term in Ayah 2:223 that has
been used to justify men’s control over women’s sexual praxis (161–65).
In
Chapter Six, “The Family and Marriage: Retrieving the Qur’an’s
Egalitarianism,” Barlas discusses the relationship between “mothers and
fathers and wives and husbands.” It is here that men’s responsibility to
protect women, the presumed right to ‘wife-beating,’ divorce, and
polygyny are taken up in the context of the scriptural tradition. Her
clarification of these issues based on her reading (and quoting) of the
text goes a long way to undoing the apparent misunderstandings of the
meaning of the text on these matters. The reader will have to judge for
herself whether or not Barlas has indeed captured more accurately the
meaning of the Quran’s message on these matters. Among her conclusions,
Barlas asserts that, “We may also find that [the Qur’an] comes closest
to articulating sexual relationships in the kind of ‘non-oppositional
and non-hierarchical’ mode that many scholars believe can be liberating
for both women and men” (202, emphasis original).
The
closing “Postscript” recaps the historical and hermeneutic arguments of
a book which the author wrote, “in the hope that it will be among those
egalitarian and antipatriarchal readings of Islam that will, in time,
come to replace misogynist and patriarchal understandings of it” (209).
Barlas brings a mastery of both Muslim and Western scholarship to her
subject, and the clarity and incisiveness of her arguments are a
wonderful lesson in creative and principled debate about fundamental
issues in Islam. In addition to a model of scholarship, this book is a
rich resource for understanding one of the most important and most
difficult scriptural traditions. Both complex in its arguments and
challenging in its conclusions, this book is not for the faint of heart.
In the author’s attempt to be precise and to cite contemporary scholars
in detail, there is considerable repetition in the development of her
argument requiring perseverance on the part of the reader. Fortunately,
Barlas’ skill as a writer more than compensates for the reiteration of
key points. In fact, she is able to bring the riches of literary
criticism, feminist thought, scriptural studies, Islamic history, and
the Qur’an itself into a coherent, if densely argued, text.
For traditional
and progressive Muslims alike, Barlas’ argument undercuts certain
assumptions about the meaning of the Qur’an and about the relationship
between the Qur’an and the sunnah; and it also produces a new
reading of the text that contradicts commonly held conclusions regarding
its intent. Precisely because they are grounded in a close reading of
Quranic texts and scholarship, her arguments will be unsettling to those
who hold the assumptions she is challenging. Devout Muslims may have
difficulty with the distinction she draws between the Qur’an and the
ahadith, as well as the implications that distinction has for
specific practices related to women. For non-Muslims, this book
challenges both political and religious conservatives and progressives.
Simply to follow her argument, one must learn the vocabulary of Islamic
studies. And to give her a fair hearing, most readers will be required
to rethink preconceptions regarding both Islam generally and the role of
women in Islam in particular. As a “believing woman” herself, Asma
Barlas grounds her reading of the Qur’an in the Qur’an, thus providing a
valuable perspective on the continuing debates about Islam in the modern
world.
Volume XIV |
