Medieval Islam: a Conflict between Reform and Revival

Islamic Renaissance and the Failure of a Reformation:

a Wrangle Between Philosophy and Religion

 Since the 1980’s, politics within the Muslim world have played a major role in developing debates over the compatibility of Islam within the modern world. Recently, the tragic events of 9/11 drew a greater attention to examining Islamic ideology, and sparked a controversy on the need for an Islamic Reformation. In light of that, Western scholars, and some Muslim intellectuals emphasized the urgent need for a comprehensive restructuring of Islam. Alternatively, religious thinkers opposed such propositions claiming their insincerity and their inherent secular and Western character. Others argue that the concept of a reformation is not alien to Islamic history. They claim that Muslims have recognized and appreciated the concept of reformation long before the Christians did. In reference to such a viewpoint, scholars questioned the triumph of such efforts and asserted their failure. Through a historical examination of Islam, scholars observed that medieval Islamic culture encompassed a discourse on the philosophy of religion. Moreover, they confirm that such a discourse articulated hopes for a Reformation. Though, they attribute the failure of that Reformation to the hypocrisy of political and religious leaders.

In the beginning, to understand the concept of Reformation, one must consider the foundations of the European Reformation. First, throughout the early medieval centuries, Europe sunk into a period of darkness and ignorance. At that time the only central authority that united most of Europe was the Papacy of the Catholic Church at the Vatican. This absence of nation-states ended when various royalties took control over different regions of Europe. Gradually, conflicts within the different states and the central church weakened the absolute authority of the Church.  This decline in the influence of the Catholic Church triggered the European Renaissance.

Furthermore, Renaissance, as defined by Margoliouth, is the “recovery of classical art (from antiquity), literature and science, which during the Dark and the earlier Middle Ages had been neglected” (p. I)[1]. During this period, great intellectual achievements have taken place throughout Italy as a result of the scientific revival of ancient Roman and Greek science. The discovery of the works of Galen’s on anatomy and Ptolemy on Geography gave the birth of new scientific revelations. Leaders of the scientific Renaissance include Galileo and Da Vinci, whose works formed the basis of modern Science. Moreover, al-Khowarismy work on Algebra, which reached Europe through the crusades, also had a great influence on the development of mathematics. In addition, the interactions with the Muslims through the conquest of Spain introduced translations of classical Greek philosophy to Europe. The Muslim scholar Ibn-Rushed, known as Averroës in the west, was the leader of the movement that developed Aristotle’s scholasticism. This humanistic revival shifted Latin literature to a new phase.

This new thriving culture emphasized critical thinking and encouraged skepticism. As a result, new interpretations of the bible and religious traditions initiated a spiritual-awakening. This free-thinking approach allowed thinkers to voice their concerns over the Church’s repressions. Additionally, political tensions between the Catholic Papacy and the various European states contributed to greater widespread criticism. Initiated by a few unorganized theologians, such as Martin Luther, a Revolution against the Church began. With the aid of religious philosophers, political leaders from Germany and England established the Reformation[2].

Accordingly, the Reformation stemmed from long periods of struggle and a series of intellectual revival, which the Christian World had to undergo to reach such a theological and political reform.  On the other hand, the existence of many revolutionary campaigns in the Muslim world makes it hard to agree on a specific period of Reformation or even to define the nature of such a reformation.  This complex and dynamic nature of political medieval Islam differentiated it from Christianity and, as a result, the nature of an Islamic Reformation would differ from its Christian counterpart. Further, Roberson explains that “Islam, as a religion, was able, through the behavior of its believer, to continually remain cognizant of the social, economic and political condition of the time it was passing through. It was like the passage of a long series of intermittent ‘mini-reformations’, all the while the basic structure of the religion was maintained including the law, rather than the experience of one great all-mighty reformation as in Europe”[3]. Here a distinction must be made between the Protestant Reformation in Europe and the Reformation within the context of Islam. First, unlike the Catholic Church in Renaissance Europe, the Muslim World lacked a central religious authority. Secondly, the continuous refusal of the Muslim community to create “further split” in it eliminates the many difficulties that the leaders of the Protestant Reformation had to face to separate from Catholicism[4].

In the context of this paper, an Islamic Reformation corresponds to constructing an inclusive humanistic approach to theology which allows intellectual criticism and, yet maintains the central structure of Islam. In other words, a Reformation must result in a comprehensive and flexible system that preserves the continual development of the economic, intellectual, social and political status of the Muslim community and the human civilization. However, there is a current debate over the concept of an Islamic Reformation. In a private meeting Mrs. Sherine Ebadi, the first Muslim women to win a Nobel Prize, expressed to me that she would rather call it an “Islamic Revival.” Her fear emerges from the fact that the term “Reformation” provokes a greater controversy and hinders the renewal of Islam, since the term is always associated with the split of Christianity. Nevertheless, the term “Islamic revival” has recently turned to a cliché that is used by various movements that extensively differ in their objective. As we will see later, Revivalism has been associated sometimes with groups that challenged efforts of Reform. Still, we can define Revivalism as movements that claim to represent the return to the ‘true and original form of Islam.’

Looking back at the roots of the Christian Reformation, we saw that the revolution was based on the intellectual prosperity of the Renaissance. Thus, to study the history of Reform in Islam we first have to examine the Islamic Renaissance.  In the context of Islamic History, Renaissance refers to the philosophers, scientists and theologians whom works have contributed profoundly to the emergence of the European Renaissance. This implies that Renaissance in the Muslim world have started earlier than that of Europe’s. Antony Black confirms: “the east was intellectually superior to the West in jurisprudence, mathematics, medicine, astronomy, and philosophy until around 1200. Early Islam was more open that pre-twelfth century Christendom to foreign and ancient ideas.”[5] The Muslims didn’t only translate Greek science and philosophy. However, they also developed it. Ibn-Sina’s, known as Avicenna in the Latin world, works on anatomy and medicine rivaled that of Hippocrates and Galen. Similarly, commentaries of Al-Faraby on Aristotle’s theories added an additional perspective to early Renaissance Italy. However, the most influential Muslim thinker was Ibn-Rushed, whose significance was even celebrated by Raphael’s famous ‘School of Athens’ painting.

To begin with, Al-Faraby is known to be the first influential philosopher of the Golden Age of Islam. As with most other Muslim philosophers, Faraby seeked education by himself; “he didn’t belong to the court, bureaucracy or any literary group”[6]. However, Greek philosophy was introduced to him through a Christian teacher of the Alexandrian school. Faraby’s revolutionary concept of the philosophical nature of Prophecy and religion meant that philosophy itself is of divine nature. While such thoughts heavily conflicted with the Sunni school of thought, Shiites “enthusiastically adopted al-Faraby’s political ideas”.  Faraby saw that “religion is an imitation of philosophy.” Moreover, because “philosophy demonstrates what religion symbolizes”, “Philosophy is ‘true education’ and the way to Salvation” [7]. In the later part of his life he wrote his most distinguished books that constituted the development of Aristotle’s work. His book, the Virtuous City, represented his detailed vision of the ideal Caliphate. Additionally, he used Plato’s work to form the basic attributes of a Caliph[8].

In Plato’s perspective, knowledge was the essential qualifier for leadership. Such view corresponded to that of the Shiites. Both Shiites and the Faraby believed that the propagation of knowledge and virtue, which is necessary to the development of the human civilization, required not only political regulations but a virtuous leadership. This “affinity between Philosophy and Shi’ism” triggered the Shiite Hamdanids Caliphate to invite al-Faraby to Aleppo. The construction of the Houses of Wisdom in Mosul, Aleppo and Tripoli shows the Shiite appreciation of Greek philosophy. Another reason for al-Faraby’s abandonment of Baghdad, which was the central intellectual city of his time, is the increasing popularity of Hanbali Sunnism.

In this regard, Ahmed Ibn-Hanbal was a theologian that initiated a movement that denied the option of innovations in dealing with religion. Unlike al-Faraby, Ibn Hanbal believed that it’s the religious duty of the people to comply with their leader regardless of his actions with the exception of apostasy and the absence of communal prayer[9]. In addition, he denigrated every form of rational speculation. His literary movement came from his rejection of the rational approach of reading the Quran. This conflict between traditional Islam and philosophy developed in the Abbasid Caliphate with the accession of al-Ma’mun. Al-Ma’mun was interested in Greek philosophy. Therefore, he attracted Shiites and Mu’tazilites, who opposed literalism. At his time, Baghdad, especially with his construction of the House of Wisdom, became the center of intellectual discourse. This approach cultivated philosophers such as Faraby and Avicenna, and equated their academic status to that of religious scholars. Alternatively, to illustrate his tolerant policies and theory of Deputyship, Ma’mun deliberately designated the Shiite eighth Imam, Ali Al-Ridha, as his successor, and retained Mu’tazilte thinkers in authoritative positions.

This spread of philosophy and Shiite teachings triggered Ibn-Hanbal to publicly expose his distaste to philosophers. He taught that philosophers blind individuals from recognizing the truth, and in this manner, they deviate people from the ‘true Islam.’ “To call a man a philosopher was still to brand him as a heretic or infidel”[10] Moreover, the fierce dispute between philosophers and Hannibal’s Sunni beliefs emerged when Ibn-Hanbal “took to the streets proclaiming that it was the duty of the Deputy to command t good and forbid the evil, that is, to enforce the Shari’a in public life”. In one way or another, this implied that Al-Ma’mun wasn’t fulfilling his duty as a Caliph. Expectedly, Al-Ma’mun responded with imprisoning Hanbal. Al-Ma’mun’s action depicts the only occasion in the entire history of Islam in which a Caliph chooses rationalism prior to religion. In this regard, one can come to see some resemblance between Philip, the Magnanimous of Renaissance Germany, and al-Ma’mun. Both championed innovative religious notions and condoned liturgical attitudes toward religion. Additionally, Al-Ma’mun’s theory of deputyship also resembled that of the small republics that existed in Italian Renaissance. In this manner, Al-Ma’mun “adopted a cultural policy that was designed to boost high culture and the intellectual standing of the Caliphate”[11].Thus, to Islamic Renaissance, al-Ma’mun was the founder. His initiative of institutionalizing philosophy as well as his interest to a multiethnic and religiously variant society corresponded to the only possible Reformation in Islam. For the first time in any Caliphate, and perhaps the only time, Al-Ma’mun, as a leader, demonstrated that “the ruler must be loved by his people and combine clemency with severity”[12].  Indeed, with severity he dealt with literalism and compassion with those who were tolerant.

As a result of the thriving intellectual culture in Baghdad, Avicenna came to being. Avicenna believed not only that philosophy can be superior to religion, but that it can interact with the human’s active intuition, which he claimed to emanate from God. In other words, Avicenna meant that regular humans can, through mysticism along with philosophy, exceed limits and possibly achieve Prophecy.  Challenges to Sunnism continued with al-Razi’s skeptics in concepts such as Revelation and Prophecy. He defied his Sunni background when “he called Socrates ‘the Imam’”, arguing that if intellectual enlightenment is sufficient to prove the existence of God, then “Prophecy and revelation are unnecessary; indeed they are harmful because they retard knowledge and cause wars”[13].

In comparison, and in the endorsement of the traditional Sunni school of literalism, Ibn Hazm composed a love story in which he tried to establish that “plain language” is the only way one in which one can understand the sacred texts.[14] Thus, Quran can only have an apparent meaning; allegorical approaches to the Quran used by Sunni philosophers were deemed unacceptable. Because of his scholar standing and his position as the Ummayed’s Vizier, Ibn Hazm thoughts on philosophy gave some legitimacy to the Ummayed’s rule in Spain. As we will see, the end of the Ummayed’s rule corresponded also to the beginning of rational thinking in Muslim Spain and the emergence of thinkers such as Ibn Tufail and Ibn Rushed.

During that period of time, particularly in the center of the Muslim World, Sunnism school of thought still didn’t prevail against the campaign of philosophy. It only became well established when AlGhazaly, around the 11th century, wrote his famous book, Destructio Philosopherum , condemning the works of Faraby and Avicenna. Al-Gahzaly got the public’s approval because he relied on his personal experience. His arguments were based upon his conversations with philosophers, Shiites, and Sufis. In addition, his book, Revival, also was revolutionary, since it’s the first time that a theologian truly criticizes the ‘Ulama in their tactics within the political authorities, which focus on the establishment of the traditional Sunni school instead on the correct implementation of Shari’a. What’s more, Ghazaly also accepted Sufi thoughts and indeed embraced them in the latter part of his life. Further, he developed the predominantly rigid nature of Sunnism to a school of thought that encourages science and mathematics[15].  This increasing flexibility of Sunnism, together with his denunciation of philosophy, distinguished Al-Ghazaly and compared his influence on mainstream Islam to that of Thomas Aquinas in Catholicism. [16] Both theologians persisted that religion and science, are in fact, related.

On the other side of the Muslim world, the fall of the Almoravids dynasty in Muslim Spain, which included the decline of the restrictive Sunni atmosphere, as well as the rise of the intellectually vibrant environment of Almohads’ Cordova promoted Averroës’ interest in exploring science and philosophy beside Islamic Jurisprudence. His natural interest in medicine gave birth to his medical encyclopedia, the Colliget. His companionship with Ibn-Tufail, a philosopher who he shared interest in medicine with, launched him to embark upon the study of philosophy. The open-minded theology of Almohads allowed him to further develop his thoughts without the usual Sunni restrictions.[17] In Europe, he was considered as the true interpreter of Aristotle. However, some Christian theologians such as Albertus Magnus, the teacher of Thomas Aquinas, deemed him “godless and the enemy of Christ.” [18] Again, this relates to the resemblance of Thomas Aquinas and Al-Ghazaly. Indeed, both of them, though advocates of science, viewed Averroes’ pure philosophy as contradictory to the nature of religion. In defense of philosophy, Averroes wrote a detailed refutation, called the Incoherence of the Incoherence, to Al-Ghazaly’s degradation of Philosophy.

More than any other thinkers of his time, Averroes applied and traced his work on Plato’s politics through Islamic history. This indicated that he, unlike Faraby’s ideal vision, tried to relate Greek politics into Muslim political history in an attempt to establish a future change. His unparalleled, both in Europe and the Muslim world, feminist observations in which he attributed economic regression to the subordination of women in society, provoked religious leaders to publicly condemn him. Black explains, “Supporters of Sunni Legalism saw a clear contradiction between religion and philosophy, and they were now suppressing the practice of philosophy and persecuting philosophers, including Ibn Rushed himself”[19].  Markedly, Ibn Rushed was beyond comparison to all of Islamic thinkers. His Sunni status and his revolutionary ideas distinguish him as the supreme Islamic thinker. Being a Sunni at that time implied a certain ideology that Ibn-Rushed clearly transcended while still adhering to Sunnism. Those reasons illustrate the similarities of Ibn-Rushed and Martin Luther. This suggests the possibility of Reformation if Ibn-Rushed were tolerated.

On the other hand, the Shiite school of thought believed that philosophy and implicit understanding are the keys to the sincere interpretations of theology. Thus, the pursuit for a philosophical Islam didn’t die out with Ibn-Rushd’s sad end. In fact, Shiite theology encouraged the use of philosophy, mathematics, astronomy and science in interpreting the sacred texts. Al-Tusi exemplified that approach and developed. Tusi was born in the far eastern end of the Muslim Empire. Although he was the only thinker of his time, Tusi’s influence exceeded the boundaries of his Shiite beliefs. First, as a Shiite theologian, unlike his Sunni cotemporaries, Tusi held that Shari’a isn’t absolute, and that interpretations by the experts, who he called Mujtahids, are within the scope of the divine laws. Further, the concept of Ijtihad, which is done by the Mujtahids, “gave the Shiite legal system flexibility and dynamism; it enabled new question to be take seriously. Above all, it elevated Reason.”[20] This individual reasoning resembles democracy, as it enables dialogue over theology within the Shiite sect, let alone with other Muslim schools of thought. Secondly, his political theories also embraced an unparalleled democratic thinking within the Islamic Renaissance. Tusi proposed a political theory of love through which he “saw the rule by the people as part of virtuous government”.[21] He believed that “the love of good men for one another” blends and connects different societies into one civilization. Antony says that “this was the kind of view of human nature that one would find two centuries later in Italian Renaissance thinkers”[22] Critics believed that “Tusi transmitted elements of classical Islamic political philosophy to the early modern world”[23]. However, a simultaneous but different movement evolved in the center of the Muslim World after Tusi’s death.

Just as Hanbalism opposed Faraby and Avicenna in the beginning of the Renaissance, Ibn Taymia’s applied his dogma in opposition to al-Tusi’s and, thereby ending the Renaissance. Though he was less literal than Ibn-Hanbal, Ibn-Taymia propagated his teachings by refuting other schools of thoughts. He engaged in regular disputation with Shiite leaders. Those controversies influenced his promotion of a Sunni form of Ijtihad. However, his Ijtihad opposed any innovations. He viewed innovations as the path of deviation to the ‘errant’ beliefs of Suffism and Christianity[24]. On the political scope, Ibn-Taymia enforced Ibn-Hanbal’s theory of the religious political leader. In fact, he loathed the abstention of religious participation in political authorities. “Ibn Taymia was particularly insistent that religion cannot be practiced without state power” [25]. In fact, Ibn-Taymia was the first thinker to portray former Islamic Caliphs as exemplary political rulers. His “special admiration for the first four Deputies, and also for the Seljuks, Nur al-Din and Salah al-Din and the Mamluk Sultans,”[26] formed the basis of the modern historical view of early Islam. In this regard, Ibn-Taymia disapproved the discussion of the disputes that occurred within the early politics of Islam. Namely, he prohibited arguments over the Sahaba, or prophet’s companions; questioning the Sahaba, a Shiite practice, meant deviation from Sunnism. Thus, Ibn-Taymia was very successful in his attempts of establishing his model of religious reform. Above all, his main objective was to integrate religion in every political aspect. His ideal model of the Sahaba and the Salaf, who are early Islam’s true followers, and his proposition of Ijtihad, came to balance one another in religious-legal practice. Eventually, the beginnings of the 14^th century marked the end of the age of Renaissance within the history of mainstream Islam. In particular, the last original thinkers, Tusi, as a philosopher, and Ibn Taymia, as a religious scholar, concluded the golden age of Islam.

At the end of such a review of the complex movements during Renaissance Islam, one wonders what would have been the implications if Ibn-Rushd’s thoughts were tolerated within the Muslim community. Would it influence them as it did to their counter Christians? Although Muslim philosophers were more successful in relating Greek philosophy to Islam, than the Europeans did to Christianity, the absence of philosophical institutions which increase communication among the intellectual community made Islamic Renaissance less coherent than that of Europe. Intellectual institutions were usually built to solely encompass religious scholars whom, as usual, rejected philosophical approaches to the sacred text. Blank asserts that “most philosophers were self-educated.”[27] We probably can speculate that similar changes to that of Europe would have taken place only with the tolerance and institutionalization of Philosophy. The ruling government plays a pivotal role in determining those two circumstances.

Ironically, the absence of a single, central and tyrannical power, such as the Papacy in Europe, perhaps, made the Muslims overlook the idea of Reformation.[28] Islamic leaders didn’t take up extensive power similar to that of the Catholic Church until the end of Renaissance. Then, influenced mainly by Ibn-Taymia, all post-Renaissance dynasties, both Shiite and Sunni, became manipulated by religious authorities. Antony Blank illustrates that “Orthodox-minded ‘Ulama could charge anyone who showed independence of mind, especially if they criticized the ‘Ulama themselves, with heresy and unbelief. In such cases, the Sultan, if he were to maintain his status as religious leader, had to be seen to act. Sufis were persecuted from time to time and any one who expressed doubts about the Quran.” Even more, “1n 1580, an observatory as modern as any in Europe was destroyed, just three years after being built.”[29] Evidently, Ibn-Taymia’s spreading ideology ensured the failure of any kind of Reformation. Sultanates’ need for religion to justify their legitimacy made it difficult for the ruler to exclude religious authorities from the political realm. As a result, any scientific or intellectual development, such as the construction of institutions or the funding of research, was based on the degree of tolerance that Religious authorities rule with.

 Although not nearly as sever as the politics that followed it, Renaissance politics also abused the function of religion to justify their rule. In our former review of Renaissance leaders, we discussed three main revivalist movements: Ibn-Hanbal, Al-Ghazaly, and Ibn-Taymia. We previously saw, that Ibn-Taymia’s post-Renaissance political influence surpassed that of any other Renaissance philosophers or religious academics. Nonetheless, the other two thinkers generated critical political changes during the Renaissance.

First, Hanbalism, as the first enemy of philosophy, played an important role in developing the thoughts of the other two movements that followed it. To philosophers, the Sunni movement represented incoherence and contradictions. Moreover, Hanbalis claimed that human intellect cannot justify everything in the world, and, in fact, is not supposed to. Most of the time they would say “ask not how”[30]. Their belief that Shari’a’ law is the divine law that guides human behavior, implied that “To be moral one virtually must be Muslim”[31]. This theory shattered the unity of the Muslim community because it made Islam exclusive to a school of thought and alienated non-Muslims from the rest of the Muslim community. After all, “within the Caliphate itself were many people who had not embraced Islam, for instance Christians, Jews, atheists, Mazdaans, idolaters, Buddhists, Gnostics, and son.”[32]Conversely, philosophers believed that religious differences among a community rather promote discussion and mutual gain of knowledge. In contrast to philosophy, Ibn Hanbal’s approach to leadership made Sunnism a perfect religious system that can maintain its structure through the dynamic nature of Muslim politics. The Suljks exploited such ideology, especially in dealing with their Shiite enemy, the Buyids dynasty.  With the accession of the Al-Qadir, the first Seljuk Caliph, execution of non-Sunnis such as Mu’tazilites and Shiites became the essential tool to end theological and philosophical disputations. Sourdel comments on the reference of Suljks to themselves as the ‘champions of Sunnism’, “No one can tell how sincere their Sunnism was, but what is important is that they could not claim to dominate such a vast empire without taking up a stance on religious questions.”[33]

Secondly, al-Ghazaly represented a more moderate, and different approach to traditional Sunnism that is far from literalism. In fact, al-Ghazaly accommodated science and increased the capacity of developing the Shari’a within Sunnism. Since he lived in a Shiite dominant Egypt under the Fatimid rule, it was hard for him to share his teachings with the public. However, his renewal to Sunni thinking and his strong arguments against philosophy captured the attention of several political authorities outside of Egypt. Particularly, al-Ghazaly paved the roads to the accession of the Ayyubid dynasty in Egypt. “The Ayyubids were devoted advocates of political Sunnism, and collaborated with the ‘Ulama.”[34] In fact, Saladin, who is the founder of this dynasty, was proclaimed as “the restorer of Sunnism in Egypt”[35]. He radically eradicated Shiites and their philosophy in the fear of threats to his new empire.  In this regard, Sourdel argues that it was only until he established his Muslim Empire that Saladin thought of recapturing Jerusalem. Sourdel also confirms that Saladin had to engage in a counter-crusade due to the fact that his denial to the religious leaders’ demands for the restoration of Jerusalem would threaten the legitimacy of his kingdom[36].  

Clearly, each of the three thinkers had a distinct approach to the character and nature of the Islamic Law, which depended on his current environment. This demonstrated Islam’s capability of diverse interpretations even in the most traditional Sunni school. Such tolerance can also differentiate it from medieval Christian Catholicism. In the case of Islam, one can generalize that Muslims during the Renaissance didn’t experience radical narrow-minded manipulations of religion, as the Christians did in Europe. Hence, they believed that neither Muslims nor Islam needed a reconstruction.

Again, ruling kingdoms exploited the people’s faith in the integrity of Islam, and have always sought to contain knowledge and setup limits to intellectual upbringing. Unlike religious authorities, their motives were insincere and far from any concerns with preserving religious authenticity. Incidentally, in an interview on U.C. Berkeley’s TV channel, Tariqh Ali, editor of the New Left Review, said “I really do not believe that they want citizens in this world to think. They don't want that. They want a population which is more or less servile, which listens to them, accepts all they say, a population which is obsessed with consumerism and fornication, and carries on doing that. That they don't mind at all. That's fine. But anything beyond that which challenges them, they more or less stopped.”[37]

In addition, some ruling dynasties in the Renaissance made extensive efforts to establish intellectual institutions. However, their intentions weren’t genuine. For example, funding institutions and promotion of learning were at the heart of the Shiite Fatimid rule. In fact, the first university in the Muslim world was built by them. Through the endorsement to learning, Shiite Fatimids found a diplomatic strategy that stabilizes their rule over the predominantly Sunni Egyptians. Unlike the Seljuks, Fatimids intelligently used the propagation of their teachings in converting Egypt to Shiite majority. Tariqh Ali confirms this in his analogy of such intellectual manipulation to the recent collapse in the media. He says “Channel 4, which was set up in 1982 to be an innovative, critical television channel (it was set up by Parliament) -- by the middle to end of the nineties had collapsed. A lot of experimental, very good work was done, but then it came to an end and it's almost as if one can trace this end to the collapse of the communist enemy; that with the ending of that, it's almost as if the rulers of this world, the dominant capitalist world, decided, ‘We don't need to educate our citizens so much. We have nothing to be worried about. If you educate them too much, give them too many opportunities, make them too vigilant and alert, they might actually turn on us.’ I'm not saying this is how they thought it concretely, but certainly that's how it seemed to one, that that's what they were trying to do. The dumbing-down seemed sudden, that one day the networks were actually quite intelligent, and then six months later everything had disappeared.”[38] Surprisingly, the dynamic tool that served political changes in the medieval ages (i.e. heresy), is still used, and serves similar purposes.

Evidently, a true Reformation is one that develops within ethical politics. In other words, regardless of their differences, all Renaissance philosophically-based political theories were based on the notion of the supremacy of knowledge and virtue. Clearly, their theories only serve as ideal paradigms that, in reality, cannot be fully applied. Whether now, or in the medieval ages, politics have always lacked virtue. Apparently, philosophers themselves realized the practical failure of their idealist theories which is a clear answer to why they avoided any actual discussion of the politics of their time. Yet, adopting a philosophical outlook on religion carries with it a persistent hope for a virtuous civilization.

In view of that, I believe that if Ibn-Rushed and Al-Ma’mun coexisted, just like the case with Philip and Luther, then mainstream Islam of today would be certainly different than it is now. Our examination to the Renaissance period shows that the concept of an Islamic Reformation is rooted within the history of Islam. It’s neither a product of modernism, nor Westernization. In addition, it became evident that an Islamic Reformation shouldn’t necessarily result in secularism. In fact, rational reasoning and religion, as Faraby argued, are one entity. However, what hinders a Reformation is the abuse of censorship. In reference to our former discussion, we saw that censorship was misused by both politicians and theologians because it limited intellectual discourse. The former used censorship to guarantee authority and the latter used it out of ignorance. In addition, one must be careful not confuse Reformation with modernist movements. While Reformation can correspond to certain religiosity, modernism entails secularism, and therefore is more anti-religious. Again, the currently increasing popularity of an Islamic Reformation is the excessive censorship that religious authorities and governments impose on the people. The frustration and anger of Muslims all over the world expresses how they are fed up with religious deceit and government fabrication. This growing dissatisfaction might one day develop into a Reformation. Incidentally, Reformation within Christianity didn’t occur until the 16^th century, meaning 1600 years after its birth. Interestingly enough, the Muslims have just celebrated the 1427^th anniversary of the establishment of their religion. Based on this and the Muslims’ increasing frustration, one can predict that Islam is on the verge of a new age: the age of Reformation.

---

[1] Mez, Adam. The Renaissance of Islam. New York: AMS Press Inc, 1975. Page I

[2] “Renaissance.” In: Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance

[3] Roberson, B. A., The Shaping of the Current Islamic Reformation, Portland, Oregon: Frank Cass Publishers USA, 2003. Page 5.

[4] Safi, Omid. Encyclopedia of Religion, Modernism: Islamic Modernism. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2005, under the subtopic of “An Islamic Reformation?”

[5] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. Page 57.

[6] [6] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. Page 61

[7] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 63.

[8] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 63.

[9] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 37.

[10] Patricia Crone, Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd UK, 2004. Page168.

[11] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 26

[12] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 27

[13] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 63.

[14] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 83

[15] Franco Cardini, Europe and Islam. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers Ltd USA, 2001. Page 92

[16] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 106

[17] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 117

[18] Franco Cardini, Europe and Islam. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers Ltd USA, 2001. Page 92

[19] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 124

[20]  Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 150

[21] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 150

[22] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 147

[23] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 152

[24] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 153

[25] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 153

[26] [26] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 157

[27] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 60

[28] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 143

[29] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 215

[30] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 83.

[31] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 84

[32] Maurice Lombard, The Golden Age of Islam. New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company USA, 1975. Page 97.

[33] Dominique Sourdel, Medieval Islam. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul USA 1983. Page182.

[34] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 109

[35] Antony Blank, The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge Publishers USA, 2001. page 144.

[36] Dominique Sourdel, Medieval Islam. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul USA 1983. Page183.

[37] Ali, Tariqh. Islam, “Empire and the Left” In: Conversations with History. The Institute of International Studies, University of California at Berkeley. May 8, 2003

http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/Elberg/Ali/ali-con0.html

[38] Ali, Tariqh. Islam, “Empire and the Left” In: Conversations with History. The Institute of International Studies, University of California at Berkeley. May 8, 2003

http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/Elberg/Ali/ali-con0.html

Bibliography

1. Black, Antony. The History of Islamic Political Thought. New York: Routledge, 2001.
2. Lombard, Maurice. The Golden Age of Islam. New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company, 1975.
3. Crone, Patricia. Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2004.
4. Roberson, R.A. Shaping the Current Islamic Reformation. Portland, OR: Frank Cass, 2003.
5. Cardini, Franco. Europe and Islam. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 2001
6. “Renaissance.” In: Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance

Alternative Spring Break - Freshmen Year

Last year I had the privilege to join the highly selective Tulane Alternative Spring Break program. The program required not only an excellent academic performance, , but also an experience in community service and social communications. There were three different destinations that the program aimed to serve. Each destination had its unique need of support. Having a former experience with painting schools in New Orleans and with Habitat for Humanity, I looked for a new social concern to explore, which was homelessness. The Atlanta group was the one who is supposed to deal with homelessness. The trip was not only an illustrative guide to the issue of homelessness but also a remarkable odyssey to the true meaning and value of diversity.

Before the trip, I had to go through classes that aim at raising one’s awareness of homelessness in America and particularly in New Orleans, and Atlanta. During the Atlanta trip, which was about a week long, I was exposed to an array of social services that play an important role in improving the life of the homeless. Activities ranged from serving and sleeping in homeless shelters, working in a food supplier organization, to cleaning public parks which homeless people consider home.

While I was walking down the business district of downtown Atlanta, I noticed the paradox that life could bring about because of socioeconomic differences. Just as hundreds of business people rush, wearing their sunglasses, at noon to get a lunch break from their apparently hectic schedule, a few feet away, dozens of homeless people lie in the shadow of trees laying their cheeks opposite to the businessmen. Both attempt to escape reality by maneuvering their eyesight. Among the homeless were a group of five people gathered around a chess board. Deliberately, I took advantage of the game and I approached them. The group welcomed me and offered me an invitation to take part in the competition. 

The group consisted of a Mexican, two Black males, a White man, and a Black lady. Carrying out conversations with them was easy relative to the circumstances. As a result of their spontaneity, I was able to learn some Spanish, find out about the Christian evangelical approach, hear a political dispute, and listen to some Jazz music with an emotional meaningful solo. Despite their great differences and difficult situation, the group managed to successfully live in harmony. The personal affect of what I saw in that cold afternoon will remain a depiction of the warmth of diversity. This allowed me to look at the homeless in admiration rather than pity.

On the other hand, the selection of group members embedded in me a deep appreciation of cultural nuances.  Each member contributed an exceptional and distinct impression which inspired the group to work harder. We were a group of 15 people who came from all over the United States. Daily, we hold a nightly discussion that begins with a personal reflection and develops to a warm dialogue. I clearly remember that each member of the group had a reasonable argument on approaching the homeless. Although it was an intensive debate, the various perspectives resulted in a vibrant productive discussion.

I realized that creating a diverse society isn’t impossible. However, with diversity comes the massive task of acceptance and appreciation of difference. My Atlanta trip influenced me to broaden my perspective and elucidated the notion of the acceptance of the other. Both of those qualities are needed to structure a society that is formed of small distinct units, just like a mosaic. Hence, solidarity emerges to ensure the harmony of the blend.

Managing a country is similar to managing our Atlanta group. Individuals, who form the group or the country, should be aware of the final objective. The manager of the group plays a vital role in enforcing the objective and, in turn, exploiting differences of opinions. The Atlanta trip encouraged me to look at my life from different angles; it made me be more flexible. After the trip, I have a better conception of diversity and its implications on society. Now, I plan to implant such an idea in the mind of every Saudi Arabian individual.

Joseph and the Coat of Many Colors

The story of Joseph and his brothers conveys how uniqueness and exceptionality can exclude you from the mainstream. Instead of admiring his distinctive merits, Joseph’s brothers attempt to outcast their brother because of envy. On one hand, in the beginning of the story, Jacob’s preference of Joseph over the rest of his brothers triggered envy in Joseph’s brothers. As a result, the only action that they can take to get rid of this predilection was to eliminate Joseph. On the other hand, later on in the story, we can see how power, like the media, can manipulate and distort reality. The wife of Joseph’s boss seduces him to sleep with her. However, when seen by her husband, the wife claims that Josephs have raped her. Here we can see how people in the tower, who hold the power, can exclude a group of people regardless of the reasons.

The Obligation of Funding Qualified Faith-Based Organizations

Since the 1880’s, faith-based organizations have played a major role in providing social services to those in need. Recently, with his faith-based initiative proposition, President Bush triggered a huge controversy on the legitimacy of funding faith-based organizations. On one hand, proponents contend that the initiative represents an acknowledgement of the distinctive, and vital welfare work that faith-based organizations offer to the American society. This recognition includes allowing the faith-based organizations to have equal funding opportunities as other nonsectarian groups. On the other hand, many challenge the initiative by pointing to its future adversaries as well as its unconstitutionalities.  They claim that the initiative incorporates an explicit violation of the civil rights, and allows religious organizations, mainly Christian, to have a greater authority over the government, which intrudes the separation of church and state. Regardless, it is the government’s duty to subsidize qualified faith-based organizations provided both the organization’s consent to the civil rights, and forswear to discriminatory actions. This obligation hinges upon the benefits that these organizations contribute to the welfare of the American society such as presenting social, and medical support to the underprivileged.

Originally, faith-based organizations absorb their motivation from mission-bound principles, and guide themselves by religious beliefs. Indeed, a substantial portion of the services, and activities that they provide conveys their religious identity. In this regard, as long as they don’t utilize governmental funds for inherently religious rituals such as prayer, the current law has provisions that allow faith-based organizations to preserve their religious identities while carrying out publicly funded social programs. Moreover, faith-based initiative advocates, led by President Bush, claim that faith-based employment regulations constitute a part of these organizations’ religious identities. As a result, they believe that the government should not discriminate against those organizations that require their employees to be of a certain creed (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 150). Additionally, President Bush states that the initiative does not unfairly treat faith-based organizations better than secular ones. In fact, these organizations compete against nonsectarian ones for federal fund (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 43).

In opposition to funding faith-based organizations, critics to the initiative not only articulate the discrimination that the funding triggers, but also suspect the constitutionality of the concept of funding faith-based organizations. To begin with, civil libertarians are concerned that not jeopardizing faith-based organizations when they practice discriminatory employment actions would evoke government-sponsored discrimination. They dispute that this proposition conflicts with President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s Executive Order in 1941, which suggests that “any business, agency, or group doing business with the federal government (receiving federal contracts) must not discriminate” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 159).  The usage of government, and taxpayers’ money to fund religious activities forms another argument that opponents employ in their reasoning. For example, Wendy Kaminer argues that “the federal government is funding religious, sectarian activities in violation of the Establishment Clause, a basic violation of First Amendment freedoms.” She explains that religious organizations can use government funds in sponsoring sectarian activities such as proselytizing because sectarian groups do not distinguish between federal money, and their own money (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 178). Also, because of the greater number of Christian Organizations, some argue that the faith-based initiative would allow the government not only to discriminate against minority groups but to implicitly articulate a federal religious preference.

Apparently, the argument of both sides of the conflict encompasses persuasive but at the same time faulty reasoning. In reference to the proponents’ argument, there are two valid key-points that support their claims. First, they confirm that possessing, and conveying a religious identity through government funded programs does not contradict the law.  For instance, they use the 1996 Welfare Reform Act as evidence to support their claim: “Congress has expressly stated that a religious organization that receives federal funds through the programs covered by the Act-TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), and Welfare to Work- ‘shall retain’ their independence with respect to ‘definition, development, practice, and expression of’ religious beliefs” (Agreed Statement 18). Second, the implementation of the government’s social welfare plan necessitates the aid of other secular, and religious organizations, because it cannot, by itself, fulfill the needs of society. In his speech at the National Association of Evangelicals president Bush affirms that enhancing funding opportunities to faith-based organizations does not undermine the role of the government in providing social services, however, it enforces the governments’ functions (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 43).

And third, he would make sure that religious “proxy networks” could compete equally with secular nonprofits for public funds. Additionally, he would put performance measures in place to allow qualified and faith-based organizations to seek government funding on the same basis as any other nongovernmental providers of social services. (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 45)

As a result of this need, the government should deem religious groups as regular contracting agencies, and thus it should grant them equal opportunities to compete for federal financial resources with secular proxy networks (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 170). In addition, by comparing the religious and secular organizations, we can see that both of them have the same aims but with different motivations.

Moreover, the community services that faith-based organizations offer reach areas, and communities that the government agencies or nonsectarian groups cannot access. Rural areas residents, and usually people who are on the social fringe, are an example of communities who attribute their social welfare chiefly to faith-based organizations. Authors of Faith-Based Initiatives and the Bush Administration concur remarking that “almost everyone recognizes the important part that faith-based organizations have played, and continue to play in building ties of community in highly individualistic, and often fragmented, sections of society” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 162). In this regard, Joseph’s homeless shelter, located in suburban Richfield, Ohio, exemplifies faith-based groups which provide services that the government doesn’t offer. The shelter, run by Roman Catholic nuns from the Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine, provides medical treatments that other shelters cannot handle. The director of Joseph’s home, Sister Joan Gallagher, corroborates by emphasizing that “Cleveland has no place else for homeless men with medical problems like a broken limb or a leg burn that doesn’t require intense medical attention.” She further says that “the shelter would have to close if it couldn’t count on federal money” (Sheeran). In addition, the shelter does not discriminate individuals who are of a non-Christian faith. In fact, Gallagher comments that there is an optional prayer in the beginning of group-gatherings that is “led by herself and residents, including a Muslim and a non-believer.” What is more, the nuns who are in charge of the shelter attempted to eliminate most of the religious symbols, such as a chapel, of the shelter’s building, which used to be a religious one (Sheeran). In the same way, my experience as a working volunteer in a homeless shelter in downtown Atlanta supports the presence of faith-based organizations that favor social service over their religious mission. Although I was a Muslim, I didn’t experience any discrimination. At the same time, there was no obligatory religious activity; everything was voluntary.

On the other hand, the Pregnancy Decision Health Center, in Columbus, Ohio, is also a faith-based organization that, as mentioned in their historical fact statement, serves “21,000 women annually.” In their mission statement, the center asserts that presenting services must lack personal prejudice and discrimination against people of certain “races, cultures, and creeds.”  However, in the end of the statement, the center makes it evident that they don’t employ people of a non-Christian faith: “These values are rooted in and flow from the Christian faith of the PDHC Board, Staff and Volunteers.” Likewise, they include prayer, and church as some of the values that the center embodies in its programs (Know All about Us). Despite its valuable support to the community in its vicinity, such a faith-based organization does not qualify to receive federal fund.

Furthermore, the claim that the government should not discriminate against religious organizations that choose their employees on faith basis constitutes a major flaw in proponents’ argument.  Ted Strickland, U.S. representative of the district of Lisbon, Ohio, notes that sponsoring any organization that practice hiring discrimination, which threatens religious freedom, incites a huge revolution on the civil rights, and the First Amendment. Rob Boston, a spokesman for American United separation of Church and State, contends that religious organizations have received federal funds for decades on the basis of abandoning creed-based discrimination (Krawzak). For example, Blood and Fire, a Christian-based shelter in downtown Atlanta, requires its employees, and, indirectly, its volunteers to be of Christian faith. Besides, they have a mandatory service each night.

In comparison, while challengers to the initiative validate their opposition by pointing to possible government-sponsored discrimination, they blemish there argument with a hasty broad assumption which equates funding faith-based organizations with funding religion. President Bush “promised to fund programs, rather than religious organizations” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 43). In other words, by financially supporting a religious group, the government is not funding the organization itself; instead it is funding the individuals who it serves. The initiative is an attempt to recognize the positive role of religion in society:

Nor should it be forgotten that religiously affiliated organizations have long been awarded “contracts for service” and continue to receive substantial federal and state funding to deliver social services, build hospitals, provide instructional materials, participate in educational voucher plans, provide disaster relief, manage immigration processes, and the like. (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 162)

“In other words, assistance to faith-based neighborhood organizations helps build social capital” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 168). As an illustration, in the 2002 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which examines the participation in youth activities and substance use among youths from age 12 to 17, 63 percent of the surveyed youths said that they have participated in faith-based activities during the year; almost equally high as community-based organizations, 69 percent. More important, youths who joined faith-based activities showed the highest percentage, which is 21 percent, of youths who had no Alcohol usage in the past month among other kinds of activities. Similarly, marijuana usage in the past month among youths who attended faith-based organizations was the lowest (U.S. Dept. of Health). Accordingly, funding qualified faith-based groups could rapidly help develops a healthier society.

Meanwhile, to reinforce anti-discriminatory policies, the government must take several measures in validating financial support to religious groups which, in turn, implements church-state separation. In other words, the government should designate specific procedures that separate inherently religious activities from social programs:

However, this traditional public funding comes with restrictions. Namely, those receiving funds must refrain from direct or indirect proselytizing, they must provide services to clients irrespective of their religious affiliation or lack thereof, they must keep separate financial records, and they are required to follow all laws in regard to employment discrimination, workplace safety, and the like. (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 162)

First, religious activities should be conducted in either separate locations or disconnected times. For example, if you hold Bible study and job training courses on daily basis, then you can either hold them in the same room but at different times, or at the same time but in different rooms. Second, faith-based organizations which receive federal funds are not allowed to force individuals to participate in religious activities. For instance, while they are conducting a government funded social activity, faith-based organizations should assign a moment of silence, as an alternative to a mandatory prayer, in which all individuals have the option to pray the way each one wants with no certain obligation. This way the faith-based organizations are still carrying their religious identity, yet at the same time, they are discarding faith-based prejudice. The latter is a solution that encompasses both believers and non-believers. Nonetheless, religious groups may conduct their religious rituals as long as the organizations verify that all individuals understand that they have the option of engaging or not, and that the services that they receive are not going to be affected by their choice. Third, religious organizations which desire to receive federal funds should submit records that account for their usage of federal money. The Authors of Faith-Based Initiatives and the Bush Administration elaborate that religious groups “would have to keep separate books, obtain 501 (3) (c) status approvals, and be willing to submit to the monitoring of their finances and the evaluation of the services that they provide” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 170).

After discussing the major flaw in the argument of the opponents of the initiative, one must also accredit them for their predictions. They argue that because of Mr. Bush’s evangelical approach, and the fact that the majority of the country is Christian, the government may indirectly prefer a religion over another. According to Paul Weber, during a survey conducted before September 11, 62 percent declined funding Islamic or Buddhist groups while only 38 percent rejected funding Catholic Churches.  Furthermore, he comments that during the application process, understated discrimination could take place: “imagine there is an application from the nation of Islam, which has a long record of community service. If …the Nation of Islam’s grant applications were turned down, would it be because of the quality of their applications or their identities?” (Formicola, Segers, and Weber 66). This possibility can reverts the country to 2 centuries ago of church manipulation.

Evidently, there are some drawbacks of Bush’s faith-based initiative. However, we should appreciate the initiative’s aim of recognizing, and exploiting the benefits that faith-based organizations provide to different communities allover the country. My ambivalence towards the Bush initiative does not derogate the religious motivation of faith-affiliated organizations. Apparently, having faith enables certain people to serve their community more efficiently. Besides, the universal goal is to help improve the American society; it is not to eliminate religious identities. Actually, it is an attempt to reexamine the requirements that make faith-based groups eligible to receive federal funds. Specifically, President Bush needs to define the ambiguous unnecessary barriers that, as he claims, minimize the role of faith-based organizations in serving the American society.

Works Cited

Agreed Statement of Current Law on Employment Practices, Faith-Based Organizations, and government Funding. Working Group on Human Needs and Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, et. al. June 2003. 26 Apr. 2005 <http://www.working-group.org/ Documents/StatementOnCurrentLaw.pdf>.

Formicola, Jo Renee, Segers, Mary C., and Weber, Paul. Faith-Based Initiatives and the Bush Administration. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield P, 2003.

Know All about Us: Our History and Mission. Pregnancy Decision Health Center. 21 Apr. 2005 < http://www.pdhc.org/do/about/history.php>.

Krawzak, Paul M. “Regula, Ney, Democrats Differ on Faith-Based Hiring”. Copley News Service 16 Mar. 2005. 21 Apr. 2005 <http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe/ document?_m=d2b476d2b9dc2e511ddae022c9b3ab3f&_docnum=7&wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkVA&_md5=597eb5d56c01e19194058c413b645a7d>.

Sheeran, Thomas J. “Faith-based groups: Doing Social Work with Federal Dollars”. Associated Press 2 Jan. 2005. 21 Apr. 2005 <http://web.lexisnexis.com/universe/ document?_m=cd35cb574bd3f7dda74ea8772ba8dda3&_docnum=3&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkVA&_md5=8116e4553e0e711076baaa16ef4825e8>.

United States. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Substance abuse and Mental Health Administration. The NSDUH Report:  Participation in Youth Activities and Substance Use among Youths. 13 Aug. 2004. 27 Apr. 2005 <http://oas.samhsa. gov/2k4/activities/ activities.pdf>.

Black Power Movement and Identity Crisis in “Everyday Use”

Black Power Movement and Identity Crisis in “Everyday Use”

Through “Everyday Use” Alice Walker portrays a critical divergence within America’s Black society on the concepts of heritage, education and Black pride. Specifically, the story displays the sudden and revolutionary societal alterations that the Black Power movement in the 1960’s provoked. During that period of time, African-Americans were interested in rediscovering their roots. The story represents, through the characters Maggie and Dee, two countering approaches of dealing with the African-American past and heritage. More to the point, the mother, in her narration, attempts to reflect both her confusion of bringing together her past heritage with her recent rights as well as her rejection of the Black Power movement as an appropriate solution to that confusion.

With her first appearance in the story, Maggie mirrors the detailed physical and psychological consequences of slavery. Walker tries to convey the image of the history of slavery through Maggie’s character. First, a fire in her old house causes Maggie to suffer from scars all over her legs and arms, “she will stand hopelessly in the corners, homely and ashamed of the burn scars down her arms and legs” (47). Her body’s physical distortion reminds the reader of the African-American painful history. Secondly, her submissive, passive, diffident and easily frightened personality reveals the self-hatred that takes place after a prolonged life of slavery: “she has been like this, chin to chest, eyes on ground, feet in shuffle, ever since the fire that burned the other house to the ground.”

Dee, a photographer, symbolizes the new Black generation and the problems that they confront in their pursuit of a specific identity. Although the mother proudly utters her daughter’s determination when she said “she was determined to stare down any disaster in her efforts” (50), she condemns Dee for her egocentric, aggressive behavior as well as her vocal and demanding personality by giving details such as “she would always look anyone in the eye” (49). In comparison, the Black Power movement shares the same characteristics. This ambivalent attitude towards Dee asserts the mother’s ambivalence towards the Black power movement. On one hand she expresses her pride of the movement’s determination, on the other, she despises their aggression and uncertainty. Moreover, despite her advanced education, Dee lacks knowledge of both her American and African heritage, thereby representing the Black Power movement’s impetuosity. For example, Dee’s ignorance of her American heritage is evident when Dee responds to her mother’s question “What happened to Dee?” by saying that she “couldn’t bear it any longer, being named after the people who oppress” her (53). At this point, we see that she does not recognize that her name descends from her old ancestors and could be traced back even prior to the civil war. Similarly, Dee’s new east African name “Wangero,” her West African costume and her Ugandan greetings depicts her unawareness and misapprehension concerning her African heritage. Again, this portrays the Black Power movement as a superficial one that misunderstands the variety of cultural fragments in Africa.

Dee’s boyfriend exists as an element that contributes to her new adopted identity. Walker expresses her contempt towards the shallowness of the Black movement’s leaders in her characterization of Hakim –a barber. Particularly, Black Muslims, who believe that Islam was their original religion before they were enslaved to come to America, led a reasonable part of the Black Power movement. Here, Hakim, by saying that “farming and raising cattle is not my style” (55), emphasizes his external Muslim image with elements such as his Arabic name, beard, and his Islamic greetings over the practical purpose of Islam. This superficial relationship to his Muslim heritage exemplifies the shallowness of the Black Power movement.

In addition, Walker utilizes Dee’s dress as a means of describing the Black Power movement: “A dress so loud it hurts my eyes. There are yellows and oranges enough to throw back the light of the sun. I feel my whole face warming from the hear waves it throws out” (52). The blurring dress and its loudness that hurts the viewers delineate the danger and the harm of the Black Power movement’s impulsiveness. However, at the same time, by saying, “as she walks closer, I like it,” Walker, again with an ambivalent outlook, expresses her partial satisfaction with the movement’s intentions. On the whole, Dee’s former disrespectful actions, which imply her renouncement of her American heritage, echo the movement’s rejection of its American heritage.

As the mother contrasts the two characters, we can deduce that Maggie’s and Dee’s dissimilar personalities account for the permanent conflict between them. Their conflict represents the clash between the ignorant past and the sophisticated present. The burning of the house symbolizes this disagreement:

Sometimes I can still hear the flames and feel Maggie’s arms sticking to me, her hair smoking and her dress falling off her in little black papery flakes. Her eyes seemed stretched open, blazed open by the flames reflected in them. And Dee. I see her standing off under the sweet gum tree she used to dig gum out of; a look of concentration on her face as she watched the last dingy gray board of the house fall in toward the red-hot brick chimney. Why don’t you do a dance around the ashes? I’d wanted to ask her. She had hated the house that much. (49-50)

In other words, Dee ignites the fire because she wants to eradicate the shameful past. Meanwhile, Maggie gets caught inside the house and stuck in the fire, meaning that she embraces and holds on to her heritage. The house represents the past and the burning personifies the Black Power movement: “No doubt when Dee sees it she will want to tear it down” (51). Each sister takes a different path: one stays in the house and holds on to her heritage and the other burns it and moves along with the revolution. “You ought to try to make something of yourself, too, Maggie. It’s really a new day for us. But from the way you and Mama still live you’d never know it” (59). In fact, Dee views Maggie because of her attitudes and appearance as a shame for the Black Power movement. In other words, Maggie is just a painful memory of the past that should be abandoned.

Quilts also contribute to the continuing conflict between Maggie and Dee, and actually function as a medium that demonstrates their divergence. Quilts, to the mother and Maggie, represent their people and ancestors, reaching out to them meant reaching out to their ancestors. In particular, it constitutes a bond among women of different generations. Thus, putting them to “everyday use” denotes a means of strengthening that connection. However, Dee’s desire to hang the quilts on the wall distances her ancestors and their past from her present reality. Specifically, her action aims to transform the quilts, which represent the past, to merely as a purpose of observation. As a result, hanging the quilts represents her attempt to fetishize the heritage and reduce it to a past experience that neither exists anymore nor contributes to her daily life “Maggie can’t appreciate these quilts! She’d probably be backward enough to put them to everyday use” (57). In this regard, she condemns her family for using them daily, and, ironically, deems them ignorant of their heritage. Similarly, the Black Power movement seeks to eradicate their past and American heritage from the African-Americans’ current lives by setting their life apart of their past.

The mother expresses her confusion about the Black Power movement by not showing any bias to either Maggie or Dee until the end of the story. This change occurs because she realizes in the end that the Black Power movement does not acknowledge the enduring hard times that African Americans had to go through in order to survive slavery and obtain civil rights. Throughout her narration, the mother contrasts and criticizes both of her daughters. At the beginning of the story, her initial indecisive standpoint towards the Black Power movement is due to her desire to reconcile her painful history with her recent rights. For example, it is evident that the mother accepts Dee as Wangero initially when she says, “I’ll get used to it” (54). But later she rejects her. Also, the way the mother uses her oldest daughter’s different names reveals the changes in her perspective of the Black Power movement.

Later in the narrative, the mother gradually shifts away from Dee until she accepts Maggie. This is because the mother’s comprehension of heritage, which comes from her love, care and respect for her ancestors, contradicts with Dee’s supposedly educated perception of heritage. Therefore, she makes her final step to accepting Maggie by giving the quilts to her. At the same time, this step also illustrates her final rejection to the Black Power movement:

It was Grandma Dee and Big Dee who taught her how to quilt herself…. This was Maggie’s portion. This was the way she knew God to work. When I looked at her like that something hit me in the top of my head and ran down to the soles of my feet. Just like when I’m in church and the spirit of God touches me and I get happy and shout. I did something I never done before: Hugged Maggie to me, then dragged her on into the room, snatched the quilts out of Miss Wangero’s hands and dumped them into Maggie’s lap. (58)

Here she makes her final decision after realizing that Maggie reminds her of her old sister “Big Dee” and her mother. On one hand, the quilts constitute a personal emotional connection between Maggie and her ancestors and heritage. On the other hand, Dee’s new name, costume, greeting, boyfriend and perception of the quilts correspond to her denial of her ancestors and heritage. Moreover, giving Maggie the quilts allows the mother to stay connected with her past, because she saw in Maggie her ancestors. Alternatively, this final scene displays the last time that she calls Dee by the name Wangero, which signifies her ultimate rejection of the Black power movement. It follows that Alice tries to conclude the Black Power movement, represented by Dee, should not define heritage, symbolized by the quilts. Yet, it should be left to the African-American society as a whole, characterized by Maggie, to judge and outline. Meanwhile, her true smile to her sister allows Maggie’s feelings of inferiority to collapse, thereby gaining confidence in herself. Likewise, her psychological agony would come to a healing point when she possesses the quilts and marries. This articulates the satisfactory life that African-Americans would have if they held on to their past and heritage.

Walker not only challenges the Black Power movement’s principles and foundations but shows the inherent dangers that the movement voices to the Black society as well. Even more important, she establishes her central theme successfully by employing the narrator’s standpoint and implicitly investigating its presentation of the cultural conflict, namely, in the characterization of her two daughters. Incidentally, through contrasting herself and Maggie with Dee the mother discloses the educational gap among them. In fact, the mother portrays education as a means of brainwashing and cultural injury: “she used to read to us without pity; forcing word, lies, other folks’ habits, whole lives upon us two” (50). She implicitly claims that her college and school education contributes to Dee’s identity crisis when she said that “Cows are soothing and slow and don’t bother you, unless you try to milk them the wrong way” (51).