Ooi Kee Beng: Thank you for taking the time
to talk to me after your very long day. Again, welcome to Penang. The point you
made in your speech today, which struck me the most, was that about the lack of
confidence on the part of Muslim societies today. I know you have talked often
about this, and you have a list of seven “C’s”, the two most intriguing of
which I find to be Confidence and Compassion. Can you elaborate on these for
us?
Tariq Ramadan: I mention the seven “Cs” in
my book What I Believe (2009). I was referring generally to Muslims
in contemporary times. I witness in my travels, be it to Africa, the
Middle East, or here to Malaysia, that Muslims today suffer from a severe lack
of Confidence—the first “C”; we are in something very close to a psychological
crisis in how we deal with our own references and our own principles.
The starting point of everything if you are
engaged in political change is to believe, and through being strongly rooted in
your own traditions, to be convinced that you have something to bring to the
discussion, and that your presence is useful and necessary. There will be no
reform and no change if you are not confident.
Common to all religions and all
philosophies is the teaching that you must start with yourself. As far as you
have to trust someone, you need the last “C” as well, which is Compassion. And
also with compassion, you have to start with yourself.
I was speaking in Kuala Lumpur a few days
ago [on Rethinking Islamic Reform at a fundraiser jointly organized
by the Islamic Renaissance Front and the Institute for Policy Research], and I
was telling the Muslims that our message is one of love and forgiveness.
We have a word in Arabic—Rahma—which means
to be merciful and to be kind to oneself; to be amending and no condemning; to
be loving to Nature. We are now coming into the month of Ramadan [starting on
20 September], a month that the Messenger, peace be upon him, called the Month
of Rahma, the month of mercy.
Muslims, I think, are often obsessed with
rules and they forget meaning, and that is why they lack confidence. They are
obsessed with limitations and they forget the ends. They lack compassion in
many of the things that they are doing. We are too quick to be judges and not
enough in being welcoming of people in our heart and with our ears.
Ooi Kee Beng: This is partly what you mean when you
talk about revolution having to come from the bottom upwards, isn’t it? You are
appealing to the individual Muslim, and to changes within him, are you not?
Tariq Ramadan: Yes and no. In understanding yourself,
you have to understand your references, your religion and the dynamics within
your society. But you should not sacrifice yourself in the name of your
community. That is why in all my lectures, I end by asking my listeners, “Take
good care of yourself.” This is important because in a movement we can all
easily get lost and end up, not as a group of activists but as a group of
agitated people. We end up with a lot of agitation and little vision. This is
connected, and of course I think revolution has to be connected in this way, to
the idea that changes to come from the bottom up.
I advocate national movements that are
based on local initiatives. In Malaysia, for example, it is important that
states and local dynamics drive changes, instead of things being imposed from
on high.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: Speaking of obsessions,
why are so many Muslims so obsessed with the Islamic state, with sharia law,
and with hudud?
Tariq Ramadan: When you are under threat, you tend to
defend yourself by referring to rules and principles, lessons and meanings that
you are familiar with. This goes for everybody, not only Muslims. The European
secular states do the same when they feel themselves threatened by immigration,
for example.
This is a natural reaction or reflex to
this. Having said that, natural does not mean it is right. I think it is wrong.
We have to go beyond that. The rational and intellectual attitude should be to
respond with meaning, to economic imperialism and other such threats.
Sharia, as I mentioned in my talk earlier,
is not a set of repressive laws; it is a set of high noble
objectives—respecting justice; the dignity of human beings, be they men or
women; freedom of expression; and equality before the law. In Malaysia, if you
want to be true to the Sharia, you start by acting against corruption.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: But in Malaysia, these obsessions have
become populist politics.
Tariq Ramadan: This is the way we react. When
people are scared, they are more emotional. And when they are more emotional,
they are less open to arguments and more open to slogans. Emotional politics
drives people not by content but by slogans—“to be harsh is to be Muslim”;
“Islamic state”, etc. They are attracted by superficial slogans. All
politicians have a responsibility here to stop this, and you as a journalist
have the responsibility to work against this. We must not play this game.
Politicians will play with the mind of voters, and journalists will play with
the minds of readers; but what they are doing in the long term is to undermine
the things that bind us together as a society.
We will not be able to write the narrative
of the future, but will instead be divided by very superficial issues.
Ooi Kee Beng: The world at large, and the Muslim
world as well, have had a period during which it had had to deal with
modernity, if I may use that word broadly. As you have rightly pointed out,
there have been many responses of very different types, which have not been
very positive. Now, in naming your latest book The Arab Awakening, are you
denoting a broad awakening from the negative effects of these responses?
Tariq Ramadan: No, I am using The Arab Awakening in
contrast to popular terms like “Arab Spring” or “Revolutions”, because I don’t
believe that what we are witnessing in Tunisia, in Libya, in Egypt, in Syria,
in Yemen or in Bahrain, are revolutions. In fact, some of them are military
coup d’etat, like in Egypt.
“Spring” is a very positive term used by
the media and others to express dynamics coming from the bottom. But what is
happening is also a chess game between new political and economics actors,
between new economic and political realities. The BRIC countries are
challenging American interests and European presence in the Middle East.
So the message of the book is to be
cautiously optimistic. What has to be taken positively in itself is of course
the shift, the mindset shift in the Arab world towards the idea that “we can
remove a dictator”, and do it through street protests. This is very important.
Now, are we witnessing a revolution—economic, political and social? I don’t see
it so far.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: State authorities and others are
saying that pluralism is a bad thing. What does this mean?
Tariq Ramadan: No, no. You can’t in a country
say that pluralism is a bad thing and try to give it your own normative
definition. Pluralism denotes a social situation where various religions and
cultures exist together.
In Malaysia, pluralism is a fact, like it
or not. You have to live with it. So, to say that pluralism is a bad thing, to
say No to pluralism, is to confuse the issue. Acting as if pluralism on
theological grounds undermines our religious preeminence is simply not correct.
I am not simply saying I respect the Christians, I respect the Buddhists, I
respect the Hindus, I respect those without religion. I am saying I respect my
religion, and so I respect others. I show confidence in my own values. It is
this state of confidence that you need to place in your way of dealing with
pluralism. In my book called The Quest for Meaning (2010), the subtitle is
Developing a Philosophy of Pluralism. You do that by saying that pluralism is a
fact.
Now you have to go beyond this fact and
manage pluralism by giving equal rights to citizens, by respecting their
freedom of worship, their freedom of conscience; by respecting the choice of
the people. You cannot say “I respect the choice and the dignity of the people,
but I don’t respect your freedom of choice and your freedom of conscience”.
That is not the sign of a society. That is
the sign of a repressive state.
You have to use the term and try to get
normative understanding. The best message you can send out is to show that you
are not scared of your fellow citizens who are not Muslims.
Ooi Kee Beng: You rightly pointed out that education
should be at the centre of this revival. But we do have a chicken-and-egg
situation here, as I am sure you would have sensed. How do you go beyond the
individual and get regimes to initiate educational systems as the main point in
the agenda, which can effectuate values such as the emancipation of women, when
these regimes are in all probability the enemy?
Tariq Ramadan: You are right. This is what I try to
say in the book. Something dangerous is happening in the Muslim world. There is
a polarization going on between the so-called secularists and the Islamists.
And both sides are taking their legitimacy by being opposed to the other side.
The secularists say to the Islamists, “You
want a theocracy; you are backward. We are the progressives; we are leading the
country towards enlightenment”. But in doing that, they have been supportive of
dictators. In doing that, they cut themselves off their own society. But
election figures now show that these people are totally disconnected from the
people. They are marginal.
On the other side, we have the Islamists
who say, “You are westernized; you are colonized; and you represent the
ideology of others. We are the guardians of our religion”. But then what you
have among them is a very superficial legitimacy.
What we end up with are not visions, but
polarization. We have to stop this and come to the real questions. This is
where we need political activists among our citizens; people on the ground
setting the priorities.
If you are serious about social justice, if
you are serious about women’s rights, it is not a matter of asking the people
to wear this and not to wear that. We have to ask, “Are we talking about
education? Are we talking about equal opportunities? Are we talking about equal
salaries for the same skills for men and women, which is essential?
It is a reform process. We need a radical
change of mindset. We need politicians who simply say “We are not into this
very superficial process of polarization. Let us go towards political visions
that we can sufficiently share.”
We have many people now seeing clearly the
prevalent divide-and-rule strategy throughout the Arab world, and of course
here in Malaysia as well. So you might have to come with a political
vision with the minimum agreement on the priorities in our societies.
And it is not about qualifying the state.
It is about promoting global education for all. This is where Buddhists,
Christians, and others can also be faithful to their ethical principles. How
are you going to have democracy if the people are not educated about their
duties and their rights? That is a contradiction in terms.
Ooi Kee Beng: That was one of the points I
appreciated most in your book.
Tariq Ramadan: Thank you.
Ooi Kee Beng: The other is this. You worry
about how ignorance is used the norm, even as a goal, instead of knowledge.
That is a danger of course. This ties in with how one is to cut through these
curtains of confusion that are in the way, and you mention cultural strength —
your Islamic references –- as a way out of this dichotomy.
Tariq Ramadan: Yes, I highlight the fact that we keep
repeating that politics is important; economics is important. And that is all
true. But there is the third dimension that is critical in the global world,
which is culture. That is not only in the Muslim world. Of course, as a Muslim,
you need to be thinking about Islamic ethics and culture. I usually say there
is no culture without religion; and there is no religion without culture. But
religion is not culture. So there are differences, and we need to think about
that. It is important from an ethical viewpoint, and also from a cultural
viewpoint.
If you look at the Middle East and ask what
has been produced by the Arab cultures over the last half century. What? In
thinking, in sciences, in entertainment, in art, in poetry; only very
superficial stuff. And you want to celebrate and to feel good in your society;
it is essential (that excellent things are produced).
It is not enough to be a citizen. You need
to have a sense of belonging. When you travel, and people don’t talk your
language, you don’t feel at ease. You don’t have points of reference. This is
very important.
So how do you make people facing global
culture feel at home; to feel at home not with Coca Cola, but with local
drinks? Coca Cola is a way of life; and they were right in saying they were
going to fight Chinese Tea because Chinese tea is also a way of life; a way of
drinking together. It’s not Coca Cola versus Chinese Tea. It’s one philosophy
of life versus another. We need to take this difference very seriously.
Globalization is not happening only on economic terms; it is happening on
cultural terms. The world culture is another name for westernization; and
westernization is consumerism.
You have to work on creativity; you have to
work on imagination. What is the genus that is coming out of your culture? The
Arabs are not asking that. What is being done in Malaysia? When Malaysians show
me the Twin Towers and say they are as good as them, what “them” are they
talking about; what inferiority complex are they nurturing?
Let us come to what is really Malaysian, to
that which is part of the narrative, and to that which is part of the culture
here. We need to come to a very deep awareness of this kind of resistance.
You tend to react to fringe issues; and you
tend to react with prohibitions. But the issues are not central to your
culture, to your narrative. The point is what is creative in your culture. What
do you celebrate in your culture? What? I don’t know. I think this is central
to the liberation process.
Ooi Kee Beng: Yes, I would agree with you. Now,
looking at how your ideas have developed over the years, do you think that
somewhere along the way, sometime soon, you will have to develop a theory on
economics as well? As you say, democracy without economic empowerment does not
mean very much.
Tariq Ramadan: You know, I have three fields in which
I am working. I work on Islam from within; on Islamic jurisprudence, principles
of ethics, I am working on Muslims in majority societies; and I am working on
Muslims as minorities in the West.
In my book, Radical Reforms (2008),
I write about the fundamentals of Islam at the point where we are now. The
subtitle is Islamic Ethics and Liberation. So the main point is about how
we go about the process of liberation, and I mention seven case studies such as
medical science, education, gender, etc. One of them is Environment and
Economics, because this is where we have to work. This was a book full of
questions because I was setting the framework and trying to see where lie they
problems.
What I am starting to do now at the Centre
of Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE) between Oxford and Qatar, based in
Qatar, to do now is take the seven fields plus four others to analyze the
question of applied Islamic ethics. One of the fields is economics. I am not
happy with Islamic economics and Islamic finance. I am challenging this and
saying that we have to go further.
So yes, it is a field where we have work to
do, along with culture and art. Gender is another issue where I think we should
only focus on women, but also on men. We do have a big problem with men.
Ooi Kee Beng: What would you say to people who say
your thinking is reminiscent of socialism?
Tariq Ramadan: Well, I don’t have a problem with that.
You know, many Muslims already in the 1960s have been saying the socialism
actually came from Islam. As a Muslim, I am close to socialism. I don’t know
who came up with it first, but there are things…if you look at me, I am
definitely on the left-hand side of the political landscape.
Now, I am taking from my own experiences,
but also from my references. Now, there are things in my thinking that may
appear Marxist, but I did not get them from the Marxists. One can see that some
things Marx said were not far from the religious traditions. For example, we do
have the idea that the economy should be at the service of the people and not
the other way around.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: It is often said that Marx said that
he was not a Marxist. Is Tariq Ramadan afraid of and tired of being
misunderstood by others?
Tariq Ramadan: Yes I am. I see it all the time. Even
here in Malaysia, I hear people say that they are following Tariq Ramadan’s
advice, and yet what they say is not exactly what I have been saying.
I have to be exposed to this, and keep on
explaining and talking. Sometimes it is my fault. I have not explained myself
well enough. I have to be clearer and expose my thoughts better. You move
around, you speak a lot, but people may not read, and they misunderstand
without knowing it. So I have to be very cautious, and I keep referring people
to the books or my websites.
Ooi Kee Beng: I think that your approach is not
run-of-the-mill so it is harder for people to catch on. Misunderstanding is
probable.
Tariq Ramadan: Yes. Many here in Malaysia do tell me
they feel at ease listening to what I have to say. They gain some confidence.
But then, it is also easy to gain confidence and yet remain on the surface of
what I am saying.
You know, sometimes, I am more understood
by people of other faiths than I am by Muslims. They go further in
understanding the consequences of what I am saying. Muslims sometimes don’t do
that.
But that is why I have a responsibility,
and I keep writing books. I am close to 30 books now. I try to make things
clearer. I get criticized in the West for being too Muslim and in the Muslim
for being too Western.
Ooi Kee Beng: Let me say that until yesterday, I was
quite confused by this Tariq Ramadan. But today, listening to your
comprehensive Penang-in-Asia lecture, I could understand you. You made perfect
sense.
Tariq Ramadan: There is something I repeat. I like
what the philosopher Charles Taylor said of me once. You know, people were
saying that Tariq Ramadan is confusing, he says one thing here and other things
there…it sounds like double talk and there are a lot of ambiguities in what he
says. Now Charles Taylor said that Tariq Ramadan does not have ambiguous talk.
What he says is very clear but it is aid in between two ambiguous universes of
references.
Ooi Kee Beng: Yes, I do get that. I had wanted to
ask you who is it you actually talk to. Who is your target audience?
Tariq Ramadan: Everyone. I am not talking only to
Muslims. You must listen to the substance. If you one day see that the
substance of what I say to Muslims and what I say to others seems difference,
please come to me and tell me this. It would be most helpful, really.
I try to keep the substance constant. The
referencing must of course be different. I use Muslim references when speaking
to Muslims, and not to others. The level of language also differs. When I talk
to my students, I use different references than what I would use when talking
to ordinary people.
This is not always easy, and I get
criticized. You know, what I said today about how we have deal with migrants
and how we have to be self-critical does not make me a lot of friends, for
example.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: I want to ask you, to your mind, Is
there a difference between being a good human being and being a good Muslim?
Tariq Ramadan: Yes, there are differences.
Fundamentally, it is the same because our natural state is dignity. But being a
good Muslim refers to a revelation, and to things required of you. The
difference between being a good human being and being a good Muslim then, lies
in the Six Pillars of Faith, the Five Pillars of Practices. You can be a good
human being without God, but you cannot be a good Muslim without God. This is a
deep difference.
The important thing to learn here is that
the origin of goodness is not standardized. In my book The Quest for Meaning,
I say that at the summit we may have universal values, but the humility for all
of us is to accept that there are many paths to get there, not one path. No one
has monopoly over the right route.
Wan Hamidi Hamid: Are you comfortable with the practice
of adding adjectives to Islam—Moderate Islam, Liberal Islam, etc.?
Tariq Ramadan: No, I don’t use these things. I don’t
like them, but of course you do use qualifications coming from within. You can
have mainstream and less mainstream. So in my book Western Muslims and the
Future of Islam (2003), you can have literalists, you can have reformists;
you can have mystical Sufis; you can be rationalists. Not moderate, though.
Moderate in what sense? You can be liberal religiously but dogmatic
politically, and even support dictators and anti-democrats.
Liberal is a very confusing term as well.
Liberal democracy may be about human rights and such values while Liberal
economy may just be the exact opposite.
We have to differentiate between the
religious categorization and the political stance. Just because you are an
Islamist, it does not mean you are an anti-democrat; and just because you are a
secular Muslim does not mean that you are promoting democracy.
Ooi Kee Beng: You speak quite a bit on individual
dignity. Can you say something on that, in conclusion?
Tariq Ramadan: Dignity in itself is important. I is
also important when we speak of behavior we don’t like. I am asked often about
Islam and homosexuality. My answer is: Islam, like Christianity and other
religions do not accept homosexuality. But as Muslims, we need to understand
that although we don’t agree with what you do, we respect your dignity as a
person. Your dignity is not touched by the way I am dealing with you.
This is a great teaching from the very
beginning. You may condemn behaviors but be careful condemning beings.
About Ooi Kee Beng
Dr OOI KEE BENG was born and raised in
Penang, Malaysia. He is the Deputy Director of the Institute of Southeast Asian
Studies; editor of the Penang Monthly; and Visiting Associate Professor at the
Department of Public and Social Administration at Hong Kong City University. He
was also Adjunct Associate Professor at the Department of Southeast Asian
Studies at National University of Singapore (2009-2011).
No comments:
Post a Comment