I rarely write my own thoughts on this blog. This is gonna be weird.
Malcolm goes to Alabama, three weeks before he’s murdered and reaches out to Dr. King. King is in prison after leading demonstrations. Malcolm goes to Coretta Scott King and he says, “I want you to convey to your husband my deepest respect for him and that I am not trying to undermine Dr. King’s work. My goal is to be to the left of Dr. King, to challenge institutional racism so that those in power can negotiate with King. That’s my role.” So Malcolm understood what his role was.
Man. That is so incredible.
I recently watched a documentary with Asra Nomani entitled "Mosque in Morgantown", in which she chronicles her struggles with an extremely traditional mosque and, specifically, some of the gender issues going on there (ie, unfair/unequal treatment of women). I am by no means a fan of Nomani (and particularly not of the tactics she employs to try to accomplish her goals), but something she said during one rowdy masjid meeting really opened my eyes about her.
During a bit of a yelling match between her and other active masjid members, someone had confronted her about her tactics for bringing about change. They pushed that, had she utilized a more gentle approach, it would be far easier for her to change things and, in fact, her methods actually undermined the efforts of those who had similar goals but went about things in a different way. I wish I had her exact response (I can't find the full documentary online, unfortunately), but she responded with something along the lines of, 'you HAVE to be revolutionary to bring about change.' Through the documentary, you even see her mimicking the actions of the reformer Martin Luther by nailing something to the door of the mosque.
So what's the difference? The intentions are still there to bring about a goal that each of these individuals believe to be the best for their people. For both, goals and tactics can be viewed as questionable by outsiders, if not outright blasphemous.
It's interesting to think about in relation to some of our ALIM discussions... understanding that we each have a role in the Muslim American diaspora... where even the non-practicing Muslims can do their part to make necessary social, political, economic, etc., changes (and, in some cases, are even in better positions to do so than seemingly more religious or practicing Muslims).
In regards more specifically to the different "movements" in Islamic thought in the U.S., between the progressives, salafis, sufis, traditionalists, reformists, etc etc etc... maybe I should be worried, but I'm not. On the contrary, it's almost refreshing to see people fight so passionately for their religion... because the greatest enemy of religion isn't ignorance, it's irrelevance.
A scholar once told me that everyone feels as though they must personally protect Islam from corruption, but rarely do we realize how arrogant we are to think that God needs us to protect Islam, and that any of us would be able to do so without corrupting it ourselves.
With each of these movements... I swear, it's absolutely fascinating. I feel like there's a multi-way tug-of-war, each group appealing to a different demographic, each highlight of Islam offering something different to its adherents. Every group has its role to play, just as each individual does.
No comments:
Post a Comment