Contents

The Culture of Dialogue in the Islamic Heritage

Kamal Omran(*)

The issue of the culture of dialogue in the Islamic cultural heritage presents a problematic dimension that can be seen from two different perspectives: the culture of dialogue, on the one hand, and the Islamic heritage, on the other hand. Considering the two perspectives is essential since the former concept is new, connected to concepts related to modernity and originates in the West, while the concept of Islamic heritage is ancient, starting with the rise of Islam and continuing in time as long as Islamic thought is capable of recreating itself; the relationship between the two concepts is problematic.

The extrapolation of the concept of culture of dialogue is not impossible should we take into consideration the aspects of the “culture of dialogue” inherent in the ancient Islamic heritage. It is crucial that the researcher studies cultural heritage in the light of the new terminology and concepts. In doing so, the researcher should be able to adopt a critical methodology based on inquiry and exposition of the problematic issue instead of a mechanical standardization glorifying and making the elegy of the subject at hand.

Adopting a sound methodological framework in handling concepts over such issues is the only way to establish a constructive and open channel of communication between the parties to the dialogue in question. Indulging into the specific definition of concepts is not for the sake of providing details but is a manner of justifying the background from which emanates such a concept or term.

1- Definition of the culture of dialogue:

A- Theoretical overview:

Culture has been the centre of interest of many researchers and experts in the field of human sciences as a number of intellectual trends, schools and approaches sought to conceptualize the issue from a strategically intellectual point of view. Cases in point of such trends include the philosophical approach, the anthropological approach, and the sociological approach. Those approaches sought to identify the nature of the relationship between the human being and his natural, social and intellectual environments, in addition to the foundations which reflect the reality of individuals living in a social environment as the person switches from the role of “subject” to that of “agent”.

Such approaches try to investigate the depths of the human personality and to lay out the mental and emotional structures which constitute the basis of man’s behaviour in all its manifestations. It is in this respect that Ralph Linton conducted his studies, identifying the cultural foundations and mental constituents of the individual personality in particular. The basic personality is also part of the concept. Given the confusion that has surrounded the concept, it is important to draw attention to the characteristics leading to the interaction between the foundations and the constituents that link the two aspects. Such structuring link is manifested in the entire set of intermediary institutions linking the human being and the environment in which he belongs, the major functions of such intermediary institutions consisting in ensuring dialogue and communication. There may be in such approaches and modern trends means that could assist in penetrating what has been considered as a forbidden domain and disclosing its hidden labyrinths at a time when everything is a potential subject of deconstruction.

One can venture that concepts and methodologies represent important tools to stand up to the urgent and rapidly evolving phenomena. In fact, there is an opportunity to shift the focus from the ability of concepts and ideas to propose mechanisms of rapprochement and dialogue to man’s choice and will, as well as sincerity and disposition to forsake hegemonic ambitions and embrace participation and parternship.(1)

Culture is generaly held by specialists as the set of practices, traditions and beliefs inherited together with codes and rules by individuals as members of a given social group.

We can define culture as the vital battle ground of the conflicting forces of positive change, on the one hand, and those advocating a strict encapsulation in the past and contentment with the achievements of the forefathetrs, on the other hand.

Culture is a melting pot for values and ideas produced by the mind, on the one hand, and the entire physical effort and concrete action produced by material activity, on the other hand.(2)

The perception of life and existence and the ways to deal with both is a facet from which to explore the content and manifestation of culture. This encompasses all the components ensuring a given culture’s mastery of the tools of dialogue, be it among individuals or communities or societies.

To recap the talk around the culture of dialogue as a novel tool, which man endeavors to acquire and command, is by principle a phase preceding that of actual dialogue. The query concerning the characteristics of dialogue, some of which we have discussed, is tied to the likelihood of dialogue or hegemony of all societies and individuals today, considering that the nuance between the two behaviours is a very subtle one. This being said, we should wonder if dialogue is a mere superficial facet within the relationships between the various cultures(3) or does it infiltrate to a more efficient level likely to establish a vision which we can epitomize in the term “otherness”. Otherness or alteration means the propensity of culture at the level of individuals or communities and societies to accept difference. The vivid manfestation of this is the conviction that the other has the right to be different and to enjoy moral and material immunity while exercising this right. This leads us to inquire about a perspective with which to treat culture instead of indulging in definitions, since determining the perspective helps to acknowledge the plurality of the approach and methodology. Morevoer, perspectives offer a room of choice as well as for intellectual and cultural accountability, in particular.

2- Approaches to the concept of culture:

Studies related to the concept of culture, including UNESCO’s publications, refer to hundreds of definitions and identifications which make it difficult to select or choose, considering that every concept refers to a specific aspect of truth (we deal with concepts in a relative manner since each phenomenon involves a different aspect of truth) where it starts and attempts to portray its objectives. We have decided to review some of the useful approaches in this respect.

1- Anthropological approach:

The most prominent aspect of this background is the global view it presents as it portrays culture as “the entire set of material and intellectual activity -irrespective of content or manifestation- inherited among individuals as members of a given community, and it is also what emanates from the human being and distinguishes him in behavior and intellect”.(4)

2- Biological approach:

It is based on genetic engineering and draws an analogy between the biological cell and cultural cell. The relationship being the heritage is the equivalent of the nucleus of the biological cell representd by culture while the succession of generations stands for the environment of the biological cell. The same is true of culture as its inherited properties cannot be safeguarded without the active involvement of the succeeding generations; adding and improving the cultural heritage incessantly. The biological theory, then, confirms the necessity of the successive generations to deploy the needed effort for safeguarding the heritage and ensuring its integrity.(5)

We have so far chosen two theories for their role in formulating a cultural perspective with a distinctive feature that ensures its ability to enter into contact with the different cultures.

Wouldn’t it be an objective approach to take a closer look at the Arabic-Islamic heritage in light of the aforementioned postulates?

3- Heritage and Inheritance

The distinction between the two concepts would one way to treat the past methodologically and safely. We have seen earlier the term “heritage” epitomize the absolute in terms of significance and perception and it is likely to be confused with sanctity including expressions and acts associated therewith. The term “inheritance” involves a different usage acquiring a new sense from its linguistic derivation, the least of which is the dynamic aspect which is inspired by the form of the passive participle mafuulun , thus hinting to the way in which the heritage or inheritance should be managed according either to the ideological view or the scientific knowledge-based view.

While adopting the concept of “inheritance” instead of “heritage”, one should distinguish between the two legislative sources which are the Qur’an and Sunnah, on the one hand, and the human intellectual production, on the other hand. The human thought is the product of religious sciences ranging from the Sciences of the Qur’an, the sciences of Hadith, Jurisprudence sciences to Islamic speculative theology (Ilm Al-Kalam). The same thing is applicable to exact sciences composed of mathematics, natural science, logic, theology and related branches.(6) “Inheritance” is what Islamic thought produced based on the fundamental sources which are the Qur’an and the Sunnah at the time of scientific fertility be it at the level of induction supported by jurisprudence tools(7) -which has not been entangled in ideological and political constraints and the like- or at the level of following the footsteps of former authorities in the various fields of knowledge and which is encompassed by the term “Ittibaa” meaning to follow suit.(8)

Dealing with heritage in the past has moved from diversity entailing difference as a source of enrichment of culture to difference as a source of stigmatisation and marginalization; this is a reality that has been confirmed increasingly as if governed by the following rules: the more time goes by the more stigmatisation and marginalization is apparent; The more the latter’s meaning becomes actual cultural features the more cultural introversion is confirmed at both the literal and figurative senses. Such a condition calls also for instilling a critical approach instead of a standardized one seeking to replace the laws that repudiate dialogue by others favouring alliance of civilizations and cultures. The essence of such cultural codes is that truth does not reside in one single aspect of human thought within the Islamic culture.

Wouldn’t it be more appropriate to divide the history of thought into two manifestly opposed phases?

a- the ancient period, ending in bloodshed leading to cultural crumbling consisting in following tradition and assuming that progress can only lead towards the worst.(9)

b- The current period in which difference is considered as a source of potentialities and enrichment of the Islamic culture from within. An enrichment that would offer various possibilities would be an approach based on scientific research and not ideological controversy.

There is no way to envision such an approach to heritage except through the scrutiny of the ready-made and handy conceptions and postulates. It would be wrong to imagine that the critical study of heritage is a sort of “self-flagellation”; as it constitutes an objective assessment in search of secure ways to cultural responsibility, following a prophet’s hadith considering that “the moderate is he who criticizes himself”.

Studying the “heritage” using the method we pointed out earlier calls attention to a specific observation - one that may be the guiding compass out of the so-called burden heritage favouring encapsulation in the forefathers’ constraining legacy, to a motivating heritage favouring the creative mind. Such an observation reveals a number of anomalies to the researcher dealing with the cultural issue in the history of Islamic thought.

- The Qur’anic Phenomenon: the major anomaly is related to the Quranic phenomenon which, like the Sunnah, is based on openness(10) and the capacity to find solutions to all sorts of problems facing mankind, irrespective of time and place. This is illustrated in the Quranic verse: “Verily this Qur’an doth guide to that which is the right path (or stable)” [17:9], which is an urge to look into the comprehensive character which we pointed out earlier.

Several results ensue from this first observation, some of which are related to the Quranic phenomenon and which we summarize as follows:

- The divergence phenomenon: this is a concept derived from a modern term yet to be confirmed that is “divergence”(11). From this concept was adopted by several trends and schools and spilled much ink as whole books were devoted to it such as Al-Milal wa Nihal of Shahristani and Al-Fasl of Ibn Hazm. Similarly, many commentaries were dedicated to this concept by Al Achaari in his Maqalat Al-Islamyine. The divergence phenomenon required a new type of ijtihad (independent interpretation of the two sources of legislation: the Quran and the Sunna) different from the Quranic phenomenon.

- The Jurisprudential phenomenon: this phenomenon represents the extreme divergences leading to fierce contention hindering any form of dialogue within the Islamic culture itself.

- The mystic phenomenon: one of the issues still enshrouded in obscurity, which needs thorough scrutiny

So, how can one switch from the conceptual approach to the problematic approach in search for the relationship between the “culture of dialogue” and the “Islamic heritage”?

It would be useful to trace the aspects of this problematic approach in some features of the basic personality of the Arab-Islamic heritage.

Such a personality presents special characteristics that can be identified by looking at the major phases of the Islamic culture:

a) The Ijtihad phase : here we consider that the mind has been enlightened through the spirit of the Islamic religion that was made clear through an urge to “read” in the first Sourate revealed to the Prophet (PBUH).

Ijtihad-based reasoning does not only seek productive thinking which produced the Sharia-related sciences,(12) but dealt with the legal sciences as well. As such, the Islamic cultural heritage has been based on the balance we pointed to earlier, existing between the legal sciences combining the Quranic sciences, the sciences of Hadith, jurisprudence and its branches, as well as Islamic speculative theology (Ilm Al-Kalam), on the one hand, and the exact sciences, such as mathematics, natural sciences, logic and theology, on the other hand. Meanwhile, the minor branches of knowledge such as magic, talismans and astrology did not have any strong impact in this phase. Here, it is worth noting that this phase led to what is termed reasoning heart which combines rhetoric/language, knowledge/intuition and evidence/logic, all favoured by positive circumstances which led to the realization of significant results, namely the potential to produce knowledge.(13)

b) The Ittibaa (following) phase: this is a period characterized by generations of disciples drawing on their school masters either in jurisprudence, speculative theology or law. Active thinking became synonymous then with what has been termed as ijtihad within a given Madhhab (school of thought) or controlled ijtihad. At this point, the symptoms of stagnation in the intellectual effort started to show.(14)

Within the same framework, we can point to the acculturation phenomenon in the first and second phases, based on cultural openness with the aim of acquiring a firm independent identity before moving to interaction with the various other peoples (Persians, Romans, Indians, Ethiopians (Ahbash) and accordingly with other religions. The knowledge-based interaction which accompanies the social interaction led to the phenomenon of intellectual production. This era was marked by knowledge production among whose features we mention the following:

- The approach which, in terms of geography, distinguishes between three ethnicities: Responding Ummah (Muslims) and the Call-targeted Ummah (non Muslims).

- The approach which sought to translate the knowledge of the Greeks and Persians. In this respect, Khalid Ibn Yazid Ibn Mu‘awiya the Umayyad, founded the first translation centre where Muslims and non Muslims came together with the goal of enriching knowledge and science. This centre prospered under the reign of the Abbasid khalif Al-Mamoun when it became known as Bayt Al Hikma (House of Wisdom). During this period, Muslim scholars did not contend themselves with revelation-based knowledge but indulged in translation and gave it the status of an independent discipline. This era was marked by two characteristics: the common human background and the scientific character of knowledge with now chauvinism or narrow sense of belonging.(15)

- The approach advocating a balance between the Sharia-based sciences and intellectual sciences as summarized by Abu Sulaiman Al-Mantiqi Al-Sijistani in his Siwan Al-Hikma, and whose comments were quoted by Abu Hayan Al Tawhidi in Al-Imtaa wa Al-Mo’anasa : “philosophy is truth, but has nothing to do with Sharia; Sharia is truth but has nothing to do with philosophy”(16). He argued that they should accordingly be used in different contexts as they both lead to divine wisdom.

c) Taqleed (tradition) Phase: taqleed in the original jurisprudence practice consists in being contended with what former knowledge represents as if knowledge reached its ideal development with the forefathers and had to stop at what they achieved. Taqleed in this sense is an obstruction of the intellect and the reasoning tools that blocks the sources of knowledge and science(17). The weight of taqleed started to bear on the Arab-Islamic culture since the fifth century A.H marked by a gradual stagnation of the acculturation process to the point that animosity was the major characteristic of the relationship between Muslims and non- Muslims. At this point, culture produced a new term distinguishing geographically between the land of Islam and the land of non-believers or the land of jihad”, hence the decrease in the peacful duality performed earlier by the Responding Ummah, and the Da’wa Ummah, that was replaced by a geographical division filled with a terminology of hatred.(18)

It might be argued that the other represented by the crusaders responded by despise and hatred, but when on earth was the Islamic cultural attitude a copy of the cultural attitude of the non-Muslims? Is it conceivable that Muslims imitate non-Muslims in a vision that preaches hatred? And how could they ignore the original values of the Islamic heritage?

In this respect, we can take the example of the difference between the first trends and madhahibs and consider their differences which may constitute a source of richness for the modern Arab-Islamic culture. The success of such an enterprise would depend on the change of mentalities which should understand that heritage is a production of forefathers who undertook the task of developing knowledge and produced it with their possible means, and that loyalty to them does not imply a naive adherence to what they produced in response to their proper circumstances, but requires us to draw on their intellectual effort which testified to their belief in the virtues of knowledge and science as illustrated by their interaction with other cultures without any complexes of inferiority.

4- Which reading to adopt?

The reading we are calling for is a commitment to a new vision that deals with heritage; a reading based on open-mindedness that favours dialogue using adequate mechanisms.

Such a reading requires that the status quo be dealt with according to a special approach taking into account the current reality. We call attention at this level to an observation of Louis Gardet in his book Les Hommes de l’Islam, considering that the history of Europe is opposed to the history of the land of Islam, and that the interaction between the Europeans and Muslims needs to be looked at in the light of historical, cultural and geographical differences between the two blocs,(19) with the aim of reaching a framework capable of:

- Translating the principle of altered into concrete action which would make transform this quality into a behaviour and a method regulating the relationship with the other regardless of race, religion or colour.

- Establishing the rational rules based on scientific research and deep knowledge about the distinctive features of the Islamic culture.

- Engaging earnest efforts to transcend the standardized glorifying discourse -by glorifying we mean the celebration of what the forefathers realized without committing to pushing such realization further.

- Drawing on the scientific by using a strict method.

- Ensuring a comparative approach to religions while respecting the internal logic of all religions, which may help overcome:

a. the psychological barriers as they are steadily vanishing;

b. the epistemological barriers as they are increasing;

c. the obstacles to scientific supports as they are being taken into account.

(*) Professor at the Tunisian University.

(1) Samuel P. Huntington; Qui Sommes Nous: Identité Nationale et Choc des Cultures: Paris 2004, pp. 40-45; Odile Jacob.

(2) Peter Berger; La Religion dans La Conscience Moderne; Essai d’analyse culturelle; trad. de joseph Feisthauser, ed. Centurion 1973, p. 556-6.

(3) S. Huntington, ibid, pp. 111-140.

(4) Peter Berger, ibid, p. 70.

(5) See: Thomas de Koninck.: La Nouvelle Ignorance et le Problème de la Culture, trad. Mansour Qadi, Beirut, p. 132.

(6) See: Abou Al Hassan Al Amiri: Al I’lam bimanaqib Al Islam, Cairo 1967.

(7) See: Mohamed Al Hajoui: Al-Fikh Assami Fi Al Fiqh Al Islami.

(8) Shoukani: Arrassa’il Assalafia.

(9) Fahmi Ja’dan: Foundations of Progress of Islamist Intellectuals, 3, Dar Achorouq, Amman. 1988.

(10) Bni Nabi Malek: Adhahira Al-Qur’anya

(11) See article by Omar beni hamadi around the Hadith, Tunis Papers Magazine, Faculty of Letters, Tunis 1981, issue 115, pp. 287-358.

(12) Louis Gardet et G. c, Anawati: Introduction à la Théologie musulmane, Paris, 1970.

(13) Ibn Khaldoun summarized the main aspects of knowledge and sciences in the Islamic culture in his book Al-Moqaddima.

(14) Sheikh Mohammed Bairam Al-Khamis considered the issue in his book: Tuhfat Al Khawass fi halli saydi bunduqi rassas, within an analytical bibliography, Bayh Al Hikmah, Carthage 1989.

(15) Moahmmed Souissi, Scholars Ethics in the End of the 4th Century and Beginning of 5th Century A.H., Al Bayrouni and Omar Khayyam, Dar Tunussia for Publishing, Libya,Tunis 1982.

(16) Abou Hayan Al Tawhidi: v.2, Al Layla 17.

(17) Shoukani: Al Qawluu Al-mufid fi Adilati Al-Ijtihadi wa taqlid, Dar Al Qalam, Kuwait.

(18) Adahabi Shams Eddine: Al ‘Ibar fi Kabari man Ghabar, Kuwait 1960.

(19) In addition to the “Rijalat Al Islam” we note: Humanisme Musulman d’Hier et d’Aujourd’hui: Eléments Culturels de Base, Tunis 1944.

Publications of the Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

-ISESCO- 1428H/2007 A.D