Posted on by Kit

The Asri problematique and the rise of denominational Islam?

By Azly Rahman

The current uproar over the arrest of Dr. Asri, former Mufti of Perlis interests me. I am not particularly interested in the political and ideological dimension of it; rather in how this issue will develop in this hypermodern country plagued with internal contradictions. “The center cannot hold” as the Irish poet W.B. Yeats once said, and “Things Fall Apart” as the title of the great African novel of Chinua Achebe suggests – these describe the Malaysian theological dilemma, a dilemma that has a history and a future.

Malaysian Muslims are yet faced with another challenging situation; one which presents an interesting extrapolation of the historical dilemma the Muslims have been facing intellectually. Coming soon would be a public intellectual crisis that involves the Grand and subaltern voices in Islam. Those of the Wahabbi, Salafi, Sunni, Syiah, Sufi, and the “denominations derived from traditional and indigenous practices” (the tariqats primarily) will come out in the open to assert the “truth-ness” of their perspective and practice of Islam.

Essentially now, Islam seems to have many ‘denominations’ based on cultural, geographical, political, economic, and intellectual factors—as a consequence of globalization. Muslims are all part and products of the various authorships of these ‘denominations’ — thanks to the power/knowledge matrix of the evolution of Islam. These denominations are even mutating, depending on class and consciousness of the adherents.

On a crude psychological plane in Malaysia, here is the situation, stated in simple terms:

The subaltern voices in Islam are clashing with each other. Examples abound. The Sufis are saying that the Wahabbis are on the wrong path, the Wahabbis claim they are preaching the one and true tauhid and that Sufism is a strange invention, the Shiahs in Iran are probably building more powerful weapons against the Sunnis the Mid-east over, the Malaysian government is propagating Hadhari and the halal hub in a haram casino-capitalistic environment, the Malays have produced their own messiahs or Rasul Melayu (Malay prophets) and their variants of Ayah Pins and their Sky Kingdoms, the anti-hadiths are roaming cyberspace declaring themselves Quranic-only Muslims, the liberal Muslims are at loggerheads with the strict ones bent on moral policing, the gangsta-rapper-Busta Rhymes-type Muslims are angry with the soft-spoken Raihan-acapella-type- Muslims, the Sisters in Islam are angry with the Malaysian Brotherhood of Islam or the Ikhwanul Muslims, the Death Metallists are having a field day with all these chaos amongst Muslim ideologues, the Catholics are fighting in court over the issue of the “Allah” ban, the whirling dervishes are still whirling…. it is a postmodern situation in the field of Islam in Malaysia. I hope this is a useful sketch of the postmodern Muslim condition.

Are Muslims then better off reading the Quran hermeneutically? Is it better for them to remove themselves from the philological, historical, and most importantly cultural context, take the scripture in whatever meaningful language it has been translated into, and take only the spirit of it, and like a Prometheus unbound, soar to greater theological heights? This is a challenging question.

Or maybe religious sentimentality and critical sensibility must come from one’s own exploration using a triad of sense awareness, intellect, and intuition, drawn from purely cultural sources? — We can then be free from cultural biases and these “geographically and politically- bound” schools of thoughts?

In that case then we will be going into the realm of what I consider “truly spiritual democracy” and use reason and rationality to read the Quran (or any religious text) for that matter. Will the collection of hadiths be necessary anymore? I think this question has been answered by the subaltern Muslims that has already begun their systematic critique of the narratives of the Great Prophet.

There is a growing number of Muslims who are beginning to assert that the highest faculty is human reason, which we must exercise in order for us to be truly human. This is the essence of the Enlightenment and of the Renaissance in that only through reason and feeling that we can arrive at an understanding the meaning of who we are. Some say through lots of zikir, chanting, and even dancing (whirling dervishes included) that one can reach what needs to be reached mystically. The dancer danceth the dance of the dance itself (like what Michael Jackson lived for, maybe), and in his/her dance, as she whirls and twirls, he loses himself into the abyss of nothingness … profound … even looking from the outside.

But in all these and applicable to all religions, the question remains: at what point is innovation in religion allowed, acceptable, and tolerated? At what point is the “denominationalization” of Islam acceptable without the religion being demonized by those who think they have understood the Divine presence but actually clutched by the Devil’s right hand?

We are prisoners of language, trapped in a prison-house of language. We can avoid the answers but we can never run away from more questions. Like in the song Hotel California (by the California rock group Eagles) that goes “you can check out anytime you like but you can never leave”.

Perhaps, in all these lie a possible marriage between philosophy and religion — finally. In Malaysia though, is this at all possible?

32 Replies to “The Asri problematique and the rise of denominational Islam?”

  1. Welcome back Azly, let’s hope this article fares better than its predecessor.

    “a consequence of globalization”
    The denominations are a consequence of geographical isolation, surely? Globalization is the medium for the friction between them, isn’t it?

    “There is a growing number of Muslims”
    What makes you think this is true? Didn’t Islam have at least one Golden Age in the past? I used to namecheck very many fine academics in my lectures on algorithms (al-Khwarizmi gave us al-jabr). I’m certain that their gifts to the sciences were at least partly based on reason, and that there must have been a prevailing atmosphere of reason in which they did it – these things are rarely accomplished in isolation.

    The same argument is often used for evolution, as though we are the prize at the top of an unadulterated climb up the ladder of Intellect. My opinion is that Man’s intellectual faculties could have peaked quite some time ago – all that evolution really rewards is fecundity, and it has been some time since intellect was strongly correlated.

    Are reasonable Muslims on the wax or the wane? I read so few of them, I wouldn’t like to hazard a guess at the slope on the graph. Please, if you’re out there and feel you fit the bill, make yourself known. Thank you.

  2. D’oh. It’s the ‘same argument’ as the one I omitted – that things steadily improve over time. Decay is the natural process. It takes considerable effort to bring about Order, and considerable effort to maintain it or increase it. We are not machines, we are inconstant, imperfect flesh and blood in all our gorgeous variety. As the effort we expend on Order wanes and waxes, so our constructed environment worsens and improves.

    People may tell you that we’re on a glorious path that leads to better and better things with every passing year, but it’s wishful thinking – at best. You can look back at history and believe you are better off than your forebears were, and for many – perhaps even most – measures it will be true. But the improvements didn’t ‘fall out of the sky’ – they’re the result of sometimes lethal expenditures of energy by individuals and groups.

    Past improvements are no guarantee of future ones. Anybody who has ever bought into a few Unit Trust schemes will be acutely aware of that!

  3. Doesn’t LKS have better things to publish??? And of course this issue has nothing to do with a particular ethnic which DAP is stand for… which is more important to DAP??? Dr Asri’s petite issue or massive traffic jam issue in Penang????

    LKS can see a louse as far away as China but is not aware of an elephant on his nose…..its about time for him to retire……Tun Dr Mahathir, Tun Abdullah Badawi..Ling Liong Sik..Lim Kheng Yeik…Ong KT and many more had stepped down…like what being mentioned earlier…people with obsolete political thinking is no longer pertinent in this era….

  4. I have always been confused by Azly’s writings. For this one, I read it first in its entirety and felt that I do not really understand… then I re-visited a few paragraphs and…

    Wah-la! I think I got it! I think Azly is asking if it is possible (with the rise of so many denominations and even innovations) that Islam in Malaysia will evolve into a higher level wherein the practice is more philosophical than ritualistic.

    It is indeed possible but the following must first reach a “critical mass”…

  6. ///possible marriage between philosophy and religion — finally /// Azly Rahman

    What exactly this means?

    Lets assume that “philosophy” means holding (in Azly’s words) “the highest faculty is human reason, which we must exercise in order for us to be truly human.” It means demanding proof; following an argument wherever it inexorably leads, whether leading to pleasant or unpleasant feelings – the main gravitational pull here is towards ascertaining the unvarnished truth.

    On the other hand, lets assume “Religion” is a fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a group of people; that these set of beliefs concern the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, and in many but not all cases involving devotional and ritual observances; also that there is moral code governing the conduct of believers – but central to everything is belief in the Creator. Because of this central belief, Religion is primarily structured on faith including what we learn from the sacred texts and holy books.

    “Possible marriage between philosophy and religion” is not exactly one existing without the other. They often exist side by side. In some societies, especially secular ones, religion is placed in private realm, and ‘philosophy” or reason projected more in public realm. Other societies, there is no such clear demarcation. The individual within it relies on both faith and reason depending on what matters.

    If by “possible marriage between philosophy and religion” Azly means, not just their co-existence (which is everywhere), but societies and men endeavoring, and encouraged to endeavour with equal emphasis in the equal progress and development of both Philosophy and Religion, then I am not exactly enthusiastic about the potential and success of an equal marriage.

    I would imagine that if you look at societies around they either emphasise one or the other, therefore the commitment to and progress of philosophy/reason as a basis of structuring human and societal affairs will see the concomitant diminuition of the influence of Religion – and vice versa!

    It is laudable to want to marry philosophy (reason) and religion (faith) but will they be equal partners with equal powers or one will soon dominate the other?

    There are somethings inherently difficult to bridge. Can Reason – demand for proof – be reconcilable with Faith? Can scientific truth be reconciled with scriptural proof (say Darwin versus Adam & Eve)? The Faithful will also argue that the infinite reality of God will always exceed the grasp of reasoning of finite human beings as our reason is pale in comparison to God’s wisdom as revealed in the sacred text. The Philosopher/Logician will question every faith like for example the ‘First Cause Argument’ – where the Faithful will say everything has a first cause and the Universe was created by creator, and the Philosopher will retort back following that reasoning “that everything has a first cause” then who created the Creator and so on ad infinitum…..

    So for these reasons, it is hard to see how philosophy and religion can “marry” in the sense of having every one and every society developing and emphasizing both, ensuring that both progress in equal pace together at same time. It also means that one has to or is forced to choose and place emphasis (wisely or otherwise) on one over the other because over time the one chosen will soon marginalise the other, as examples all around us tend to show. It is not so easy to have one’s cake and eat it too, so to speak.

  7. Looking back to history, despotic kings and leaders had emphasised Religion over Philosophy. It was self serving: when they controlled the religious leaders they hoped with their help they could easier control the populations that were religious. If Philosophy and Reason were emphasized, the population or significant portions would soon question whether these rulers had the right or deserved to rule.

  8. Jef,
    Azly’s article resulted from the arrest of Asri who (from what I read in the news) encourages Muslims to think and not follow blindly. As philosophers are truly deep thinkers, I think Azly is probably referring to Philosophy inspired by religion as in Religious Philosophy. It is a more progressive form of Islam, if you like…

  9. “even dancing … one can reach what needs to be reached … loses himself into the abyss of nothingness … profound “
    Yay for the ‘House Nation’ – sounds like Azly has been there too!

    Isn’t Azly asking for whether it’s possible to have separate kinds of Islam in Malaysia? Am I wrong, or is there currently only a single brand permitted? Is that it? Azly wants Orthodox Islam, Unorthodox Islam, Mosque of Malaysia Islam, Mohammed’s Witnesses, The Mosque of Sciencology, etc? I am mostly ignorant on religious matters – I’m dimly aware there are different kinds of Islam, but is it quite as lively a denominational landscape as in Christianity?

    I feel like I need more information to understand fully what Azly is suggesting. Or can that request be even answered – is the question of denominations problematic, in itself?

  10. lkt-56,

    I think you’re right that “Philosophy” in Azly’s term is not (Reason over everything else type) of philosophy but the type of Philosophical thinking that is inspired and directed by Religion, and retaining its broad basic framework subject however to certain latitude of rational interpretation and leeway in some areas). Is his idea akin to former premier’s Islam Hadari?

    The problemetic part is whether Azli can explain how he intends to demarcate within the framework of Islam what areas of beliefs and rituals within it that rational/philosophical principles have application and what other core areas they have no application (or is he saying anything can be interpreted philosophically?); and whether once this process is started, will it eventually affect the integrity of the entire framework (held together in seamless web of inter-connected ideas) making adherents lean towards the “Reason over everything else” type of philosophy or otherwise waning in their overall religiosity all round??

  11. cintanegara need to show he is always smarter than LKS..and teaching a seasoned politician….long before he was born…what to publish and what to say.
    He is ready to be active in politics… to take on the likes of LKS..easy meat to him…any taker?
    Azly post?…why always confusing..and on Islamic mattes..I guess he knows what is good for Muslims here.
    To me..not important ..when UMNO keep showing they are above God and they make the laws and rules…to suit their whims and fancies..to protect them from being proven so unlawful…so godless.
    All we know…everything done here…especially on Islamic affairs and teachings are mixed up with dirty race politics…one way or another…to win votes…and if this post is about how great Malaysians’ reputation to the Islamic world….don’t make me laugh.
    Certainly the Islamic religion is going down into the drain…just as Buddhism and Christianity in the past…all over the world…when they dominated the world with their said religion.
    In Malaysia..good and sincere Islamic faith interpretations and demands to guide Muslims to see more TRUTHS..are mixed with..to serve the Devil..to do the opposite…which actually build up a sizable Muslim hypocrites.. .and these people are the most sinful Islamic teachers and leaders you can ever find in the world..using religion to play dirty politics.
    Prove what I said is not true…than we can discuss what is good for the souls…in all religions.

  12. //But in all these and applicable to all religions, the question remains: at what point is innovation in religion allowed, acceptable, and tolerated? At what point is the “denominationalization” of Islam acceptable without the religion being demonized by those who think they have understood the Divine presence but actually clutched by the Devil’s right hand?// (Azly Rahman)

    Azly Rahman is trying to tell us about the root cause for the commencement of a religious persecution, which is usually related to individual’s prejudical, arbitrary interpretation on the verses written in the Holy Book. The recent arrest of Dr. Asri by Selangor’s Islamic Authority could be seen as a religious persecution. The reason for the arrest was that Dr. Asri preached in public without getting a prior consent through the approval of a permit from the relevant religious authority. Dr. Asri may by now be seeing that a theocratic state may not be truly serving the holy purpose of purifying the hearts and cleansing up the sins of the sinners. This is because the authoritarian religious officers may just be a typical sinner who cannot see the will of God. Therefore, I think Dr. Asri may be able to live a much happier life if he chooses to live like the young David.

    David was a shepherd boy and he knew the Lord. Even without a bible, he knew the Lord. I think it was when he was amongst the sheeps that he was the happiest boy. He knew the Lord enough to kill lions and bears and to slay Goliath. He was not happy working for King Saul as he was always under suspicion. He was not happy working with his Mighty Warriors as he was hunted by King Saul. I don’t think he was happy even as a King himself because that was also the period of time when he felt lonely and bored and was tempted to commit his worst adulterous sin with Bathesheba. And this caused rebellion in his family in his old age. So I think the time of being with the sheeps was his happiest moment in his life.

    Perhaps Dr. Asri should learn a lesson from the childhood life of King David.

  13. “the Malaysian government is propagating Hadhari….”

    where, where? How is Malaysia different today than before Hadhari? Has corruption, injustice, and racial discrimination gone down? From what I see, the keris was waved during the Hadhari Era. From what I see, Malaysian values have not improved one single bit from the teachings of Islam. Many are they who champion Islam but I don’t seem to see them practising its essence. Organized religion almost invariably deteriorate into blind conformance of religious rituals out of sheer habit and nothing else.

  16. /// #3 by cintanegara on Thursday, 5 November 2009 – 4:49 pm
    Doesn’t LKS have better things to publish??? And of course this issue has nothing to do with a particular ethnic which DAP is stand for… which is more important to DAP??? Dr Asri’s petite issue or massive traffic jam issue in Penang???? ///

    No, DAP does not stand for just one race.

    How petite is Asri – a size 12 perhaps? Or maybe 1.4m?

  17. ///….at what point is innovation in religion allowed, acceptable, and tolerated? At what point is the “denominationalization” of Islam acceptable…?/// – Azly Rahman.

    To whom does Azly address this question? It depends on whether there is an authority having control and final say over religious issues in this country, and if so, its stance and whether it has the power and influence to enforce that stance clearly.

    Is the PM/Cabinet/government the authority? If so to what extent it defers to the powerful muslim groups/associations? This is the question – whose power it is to dominate/dictate (in Farish noor’s words) the normative-cultural frontiers” “praxis normative/discursive space for Muslims” ??

    Yes there is an emergence of “subaltern” voices in Islam (including the more liberal Sisters-in Islam, intellectuals like Azly & Farish etc) but the issue is who has power and influence to assert a certain position. Besides the government it is the all powerful Muslim lobby groups. They are likely conservative/orthodox in stance and opposing of Azly’s ‘innovation’ and ‘denominationalization’ of Islam.

    These “subaltern” voices backed by degrees from the best of Western Universities don’t count. They are not Islamic scholars who could divine correctly the words of the Almighty. A degree from Al-Azhar University will count! Tok Guru Nik Aziz has higher standing. Definitely Perlis mufti Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin (Asri) tutoring PhD and Masters’ students in USM in Islamic studies. But even Asri ran foul of their favour if his “hermeneutical” approach challenges the orthodoxy of the wider Islamic establishment.

    At the moment Govt. appears still the dominant arbiter. (Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic affairs) brokered peace between Asri and Syarie Lawyers Association of Malaysia (PGSM). [Earlier there was a memorandum, backed by 13 Muslim non-governmental organisations, opposing the proposed appointment of Asri as the new president of the Islamic Da’wah Foundation of Malaysia on the grounds that he had insulted certain Islamic scholars.]

    The voices of these organisations are loud and strong and influence the Government (up to a point). Earlier Govt restored ban of the use of “Allah” in Bahasa version of the Bible in deference to the objections by various Islamic groups that permitting its use would anger Muslims in the largely Muslim-populated country. Police helped stopped Article 11 forum in Penang even though then govt minister (Zaid) was speaker. PGSM demanded action against Sisters in Islam and the Women’s Aid Organisation for opposing from human rights angle the implementation of Sharia/whipping of part-time model for drinking beer. So far no action yet taken by the Government.

    Whilst Govt may incline to nurture moderate face, it has to consider pressure from these groups. Much reposes on the balance of power/influence between central authority of the govt and the all powerful religious lobby groups having adherents within govt establishment (eg when police arrested Asri on JAIS’s complaint even the PM had a shock!)

    As what lkt-56 said in #4 Azly’s aspirations, for denominalised Islam must reach “critical mass” to be influential.

    However by the look of things, the orthodox side opposed to it have themselves reached their “critical mass”. Asri’s reprieve (no doubt due to Govt’s intervention) may be an isolated case not indicative of any reversal of the opposing side’s influence and political strength.

  19. i find them hypocrites to the highest orderla, i’ve met many muslims who don’t practice what they preach, just take a cruise downtown KL and check out the nightclubs, so many malay teenagers drinking alcohol in the public and also the veterans doing the same in posh nightclubs in hotels. clowns.

  21. lkt-56, that page starts well, but quickly loses any credibility. The author is obviously a Christian in denial!

    One modernist Muslim told me, “conservative Christians and conservative Muslims are basically the same.” I have to take strong exception to that. People who read their Bibles and really follow what Jesus taught are not trying to murder others

    I stopped reading at that point.

    I’m going to post this again, just in case anyone is confused about “Muslims kill people, Christians don’t”:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU3aQ43YkwU

    The author of the webpage lkt-56 posts is trying the same cosmetic surgery that earns the “ROPMA” tag on so many online articles about Islam. Ultra-conservatives are the same everywhere. They don’t really need religion to get away with their atrocities, it’s just a convenient excuse. Apologising for your religion – instead of outing the murderers as nothing at all to do with you – is only destroying the credibility of your religions and protecting the murderers.

    Malaysia’s unique religion problems are exacerbated – as usual – by the government interfering in what should be a highly personal matter. LKS blog regulars would do well to remember that their favourite brand of ‘hypocrites’ are not all hypocrites by choice.

  26. The Tucson Masjid site is quite interesting. Nice to see it puts the ‘Submission’ concept (and extend it to all ‘righteous’ monotheists – it’s a start…) on its front page. That and the “No compulsion” thing seem to me to be directly opposite to some of the provisions in Malaysia’s laws. Perhaps we could forego the ‘demoninationalisation’ of Islam, if there were only more Submitters and fewer Compellers.

  28. Yup. If we only have more Submitters…

    The only constant in this world is change. To be a submitter one has to accept this fact and flow with this change. The problem is we can never accept this and try to swim against the current causing ourselves much sufferrings.

    The old and weary are more likely to subscribe to being a submitter… not the young and idealistics ones.

    But then again, God or Nature (to those not religiously inclined) works in strange ways…

    There is still hope that one day those who are submitters will reach a critical mass whereupon the resulting new consciousness will lead us away from the path of self annihilation…

    I only hope that this wake up call will not be through a great disaster brought about by global warming or by a great nuclear war.

  29. “Perhaps we could forego the ‘demoninationalisation’ of Islam, if there were only more Submitters and fewer Compellers.” (OrangRojak)

    “To be submissive to God” is a religious high virtue which Islam requires all Muslims to observe. Therefore, sometimes when a lost muslim has a misunderstanding on the actual will of God and even if inside his deep conscience he may find that killing is wrong, he will still perform killing as he wishes when he misinterprets that the killing deeds are the faithful performance of “Jihad”.

  30. It’s a good point Onlooker Politics. But we can’t very well legislate for people getting carried away, can we? Extreme acts carried out through extreme convictions are not limited to Islam, nor even to religion.

  31. OrangRojak,
    The suggestion which mentions “to legislate for people getting carried away” is not only discourageable (because it will tend to restrict the freedom of religion as promised by Malaysia’s Federal Constitution), but it is also not viable (because it is not possible to set an exact set of sermons or holy book interpretations for all preachers to follow).

    We may insist that the preachers must preach true theology and must not preach false theology. However, the core question here is who shall be the best person who has the authority to determine which theology is the true theology and which ones is the false theology! In Malaysia, the ultimate power for determining the religious affairs of Islam is vested in the hands of the state rulers for the states which have a inherited royal throne and the power is in the hand of the Yang Dipertuan Agong for states which do not have an inherited royal throne. Do the Sultans, the Raja and the Yamtuan have the final say over the religious affairs of Islam? This is something which ponders our thought in view of BN Federal Government’s having already made a lot of administrative changes (such as the appointment of a Federal Minister who is in charge of Islamic affairs) which may have kidnapped or eroded the decision-making power of the rulers as the head of Islamic religion in Malaysia.

Leave a Reply