U.S. and Islam Share Core Beliefs, N.Y. Imam Says
Philadelphia Inquirer, Sun, Jun. 06, 2004
By Jim Remsen, Inquirer Faith Life editor
www.philly.com/religion
In New York, 12 blocks from ground zero, is the Masjid Al-Farah mosque. Its leader is a Kuwaiti-born Sufi with a degree in physics from Columbia University and an ambitious vision for Muslim-Western cooperation.
Since the 9/11 attacks, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has intensified his peace efforts, drafting the Cordoba Initiative, which calls on moderate U.S. Muslims to organize talks with interfaith leaders and Muslims abroad about a host of issues including democracy, theology, pluralism and Mideast peace. On Tuesday, Rauf was in an interreligious delegation that met with Secretary of State Colin Powell to urge a restart to the Mideast peace talks.
Rauf spells out his bridge-building strategy in a new book, What's Right With Islam: A New Vision for Muslims and the West (Harper San Francisco, $23.95). In a recent phone interview, he elaborated on his views.
Inquirer: Readers may be surprised by your book's assertion that "America is substantively an 'Islamic' country" that complies with Muslim law, or shariah. Explain your idea of the United States as a "shariah-compliant state."
Rauf: Shariah embodies five fundamental rights, or objectives, which are deemed to be equivalent to our inalienable rights: life; freedom of religion; the right to property; family rights (the well-being of the family, the right to marry); and mental well-being. I map these to the American Declaration's "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
What we call democratic capitalism, where we spread the wealth around and the role of government is to ensure people live a dignified life and have jobs and social security for the retired and welfare programs for the disadvantaged, are all in keeping with Islamic principles. So is the idea of an independent judiciary. The earliest Islamic jurists fought and struggled for a judiciary independent of the political powers when the caliphs had the political power and wanted to coerce people....
When we say a Muslim state, it is not defined by having people ruling over it who follow the liturgy of Islam. It has to do with the principles of governance.
Inquirer: Islam traditionally divides the world into the Dar al-Islam ("the House of God," which is under Muslim rule) and the Dar al-Harb ("the House of War," which is not under Muslim control). Is your point to have fellow Muslims not see the United States as under Dar al-Harb?
Rauf: It certainly is partly that. But also, partly, many Muslims intuitively feel America is more Islamic than their own governments, but they are not equipped to explain it in the vocabulary of Islamic law. The proof they feel that way is that, in any part of the Muslim world, you'll find endless lines trying to get visas [to the United States]. People vote with their feet, and they see a lifestyle they want. If the values were different, they couldn't live here.
Inquirer: Your book calls for the United States to be a "catalyst and supporter" of reforms in Muslim countries, such as in setting up banking systems and stock markets and promoting antitrust laws. How would these square with shariah rules such as the prohibition on usury?
Rauf: The conservative interpretation is any non-zero interest is prohibited, and that has been a problem in developing capitalization in the Muslim world. Nevertheless, people get loans through what is called Islamic banking, where a loan is packaged in a different instrument. You can lease a car where there's a rental for use of the car and then for a dollar you own it. A lease is not considered a loan. Or, instead of a loan, you buy stock on a company so you can fund a contract in a way that is shariah-compliant....
In some more than other countries, there are mortgages. Malaysia, which has a robust economy, has focused on capital flows in the country and resorts to regular loans. Most scholars feel it's not allowable, but people do it anyway. It is a minority opinion that usury needs to be redefined in today's world. That it referred to very high rates of interest in the prophet's times that are not the practice today.
Inquirer: If the United States tries to be a catalyst for reform, wouldn't Muslim hard-liners see it as U.S. meddling and your proposed interfaith "peace teams" as American dupes?
Rauf: The American presence has already unleashed a tide of reform in much of the region. Even the Arab League has issued a statement about the need to expedite political and economic reform to address the needs in their societies. The perception may be that we [Americans] endorse authoritarian regimes and do not support Muslim democracies, but if the United States leans on Egypt or the Saudis to engage in a nonviolent, evolutionary process by which they broaden the base of power, with regional elections, municipal elections, a British model with the House of Lords and Commons, it would open things up a bit.
Inquirer: Wouldn't the fundamentalists push against this?
Rauf: I think that within a generation, you will have democracy in most of the Muslim world, and have women voting as well. With greater education, women want to participate. Malaysia has a democracy, and women have the right to vote there. Women's vote was considered instrumental in pushing back fundamentalist movements there. They felt the fundamentalists would reduce their options.
Inquirer: Isn't there a danger the reformers would simply be assassinated?
Rauf: There are always some crazies, but those Osama [bin Laden] has influence over would be reduced. The democratic process will attenuate them. The majority of people are in the middle and not moved by extremist positions. They want to live well, have jobs and opportunities, marry their sweethearts, and have vacations. They will vote for those things that give them that.
Contact Faith Life editor Jim Remsen at 215-854-5621 or jremsen@phillynews.com.
back to top | return to main
|
