I am delighted to be with you today at Syracuse University.
Universities are a place for dialogue and the frank exchange of
opinions. Thus, I seek your permission today to address one of the key
questions of our era, the relationship between religion and democracy.
As
you are all well aware, philosophers and thinkers have long debated
this question. In this debate, there are those who maintain that a
human being is a creation of God and has only duties in his/her
relations with the creator. Currently, some proponents of this view
are in control of certain states or lead radical movements with
transnational reach. In the position of power, such political elements
might acknowledge that a person has rights in his or her relations to
other persons, but they do not recognize individual rights in
relationship to their own authority. According to this perspective,
the preference of a majority cannot be the standard of legitimacy
since the choice of the majority can violate God’s laws. Hence, they
argue, God sent his prophets to correct the wrong doings of the people
and guide them toward the righteous path. Followers of this viewpoint
do not tolerate any opinions divergent from their own and end up
envisioning the world through the eyes of our predecessors, insisting
all along that our contemporary problems may be solved by utilizing
the intellect of the yesteryears. They even reject the right of
popularly elected representatives to enact the kind of legislation
that does not meet their approval. In their minds, the legitimacy of a
parliament is limited merely to rendering divine rules into civic
laws. Period. In other words, the parliament does not have the right
to legislate independently of divine ordinances.
A few centuries ago the European Renaissance lessened this
perceived incompatibility between democracy and religion, while
continually strengthening democracy. Yet in the Eastern world and in
Muslim countries in particular, the thorny relationship between
religion and democracy is yet to follow the European blueprint. It is
nevertheless the case today that the tangled and complicated
relationship between state and religion is fueling fiery political
disputes in the Middle East and resistance to democracy in the region
is, at least in part, due to the contention that Islam is incompatible
with human rights.
Obviously, this “Islam” is only what the state defines it to
be, i.e., its own ideology, completely discarding the interpretations
of other Muslims as to what constitutes Shari`a (or divine law). In
reality, what we have ended up with in these countries is “state
religion” rather than a “religious state.” These guardians of
state religion, who arrogate to themselves the exclusive authority to
interpret the will or intentions of God, brand whoever opposes them as
an infidel or deviant. Using this rather convenient ploy, these
demagogic politicians force their political opponents into silence,
robbing the populace of their spirit to resist. After all, ordinary
people are more willing to fight mortal rulers than to differ with the
religion of their ancestors.
In contrast to these governments, Islamic reformers and religious
intellectuals, regardless of their nationality, are a potential united
front. The formation of this multi-national coalition, backed by valid
jurisprudential interpretations, seeking guidance from the spirit of
the holy Quran, and resolving to resist oppressive regimes heralds the
emancipation of Muslims. This unified front has no name, no leader, no
central headquarters or branches, and yet it is ingrained in the minds
and sensibilities of every enlightened Muslim, who while safeguarding
their ancestral faith, also happen to respect democracy, do not
tolerate rule by fiat, and refuse to follow the misguided
proclamations of religious authorities.Islam, in its essence, is a
religion of equality. The Prophet Muhammad used to say that the elite
of his own tribe have no priority over other believers. After his
triumphant return to Mecca, the Prophet Muhammad established an
Islamic state and ruled as the political leader and law giver for a
number of years. He asked both Muslims and non-Muslims to swear
allegiance to the new faith, a practice akin to voting in our present
day and age. Some people did not swear allegiance but managed to live
freely within the boundaries of the Islamic world.
In reality, then, lack of democratization in the Islamic world does
not emanate from the essence of Islam. Rather, it is due to the
unwillingness for numerous reasons of Islamic states to embrace an
interpretation of Islam that is compatible with human rights,
preserves individual and social freedoms, and advocates democratic
statecraft. For these reasons, the dominant culture in Muslim
societies, including the political culture, is in need of overhaul and
reform ¾ in order to empower people to understand social realities
with open eyes and to write laws that are both compatible with the
spirit of Islam and address the needs of our era.
The most important step for this cultural evolution is to teach the
inclusiveness of Islamic faith. Muslims need to learn about the
dynamic spirit of Islam and to recognize that one could be a faithful
Muslim and accept modernity at the same time. We need to learn that we
can remain Muslims while embracing the principles of human rights and
democracy, and more significantly, while implementing them.
If such education was to become prevalent among Muslims, the
custodians of religious states would be compelled to respect the
rights of their own people and would be prevented from imposing their
personal beliefs on the masses while calling it divine order. We are
now witnessing how a number of Islamic governments silence any idea
they do not like, branding any criticism against them as
“apostasy” and “blasphemy.” These governments regard
themselves as God’s representatives on earth. Naturally, then, any
criticism of their actions or beliefs is mislabeled a critique of
Islam per se. This is a rather convenient excuse to silence
freedom-seekers and intimidate Muslims¾accusing them of not having
firm religious convictions and being wishy-washy in matters of faith.
In this ambiance, freedom-seeking Muslims, who are only criticizing
the wrong-doings of their rulers, suddenly find themselves caught in a
web of accusations, fearing the charge of apostasy, and thus
refraining from any type of protest.
Alas, authoritarian regimes manage to hide behind the shield of
Islam and continue to oppress their citizens. Muslim intellectuals
should try to connect with the Muslim masses, through any means and
methods available, and familiarize people with the dynamic spirit of
Islam. These intellectuals should subsequently expose the false claims
of the despotic rulers in such a way that mass audiences can
understand and relate to their words and ideas. We should bear in mind
that criticizing the policies of self-proclaimed Islamic states will
not be effective and will not resonate with the majority of the public
unless the critics can point out how the actions of the ruling elite
has deviated from or violated the core foundations of Islam.
We need to make Muslims aware that Islamic states, or for that
matter Islamic groups, do not have the key to paradise, and that
taking action in the name of Islam does not necessarily make that act
“Islamic.” Only when this mode of thinking becomes prevalent will
we see the emergence of moderate Islamic movements rather than
terrorist organizations. This seems to be the solution for more than a
billion Muslims, one-sixth of the world’s population, who are
simultaneously interested in remaining loyal to their faith as well as
being worthy of living in better conditions.Democracy and human rights
are the common needs of all cultures and societies. Respecting life,
property and human dignity is praiseworthy in all cultures and
religions. By the same token, terror, violence, torture, and
humiliation of human beings is considered unbecoming in any society or
religion. Those who, in the name of cultural relativism, refrain from
implementing democracy and human rights are reactionary tyrants who
disguise their dictatorial nature behind a cultural mask to violate
the rights of their citizens.
Whether we like it or not, the general phenomena of globalization
includes the globalization of war and peace. You need not be involved
in a war to recognize suddenly that its repercussions affect you as
well. Consequently, if we desire a peaceful world, we have to struggle
for it, both in our own nations and elsewhere. We have to encourage
the development of global perspectives and broaden our concern for
peace and human rights beyond the borders of our own societies. As we
are witnessing these days, you who live in America cannot remain
indifferent to violations of human rights in Afghanistan and
Palestine. We are all passengers on the deck of a single ship that is
sailing toward a more peaceful and civilized harbor. We have to be
aware that damage to one part of the vessel can endanger the rest of
it. The destiny of any human being has become intertwined with that of
all others. One cannot wish to enjoy the advantages of the world while
depriving others. We should consider others as partners in the destiny
we wish for ourselves. Let us be kind to one another while constantly
reminding ourselves that kindness is the only commodity that does not
diminish as you spend it.
Those who seek their gains in the flames of war find it
advantageous to misrepresent Islam. They gather support for war on the
basis of the claim that Middle Eastern, especially Islamic culture is
incompatible with Western civilization. They use the blameful acts of
individual Muslims or groups of Muslims as reflective of Islam. Islam
is not a religion of violence and terror. The killing of any human
being in the name of Islam is an abuse of Islam. Do not attribute evil
deeds committed by individuals or groups to the whole of Islam –
just as we did not attribute the evils of the Bosnian war to
Christianity, a religion whose message of peace and reconciliation was
born by Jesus Christ. In the same manner, the Government of Israel’s
rejection of numerous UN resolutions and the events taking place in
that corner of the globe should never be equated with Judaism. We
still remember that Moses was a messenger of God who stood up for
justice.
We must distinguish between humanity’s own mistakes and the
religions and cultures to which we belong. Cultures are not in
conflict with each other, but have much in common. Let us speak about
shared values, not of differences. Let us not justify war. No one will
emerge victorious from such horrors.
With hopes of love and affection for you and all the citizens of
the world. Thank you.
