Rebellion and Violence in Islamic Law

Rating:
Summary: Rebellion Is Not Violence
Review: ...

I must admit that I approached this book with the recent events that led to the September 11 attacks in mind. I was hoping that the book will provide us readers with an understanding as to why Muslims resort to violence.

Understandably, the book did not satisfy that given that it was written prior to the events abovementioned. So if you are like me, looking for some answers about Muslims and violence as played out recently; I am afraid the book is not for you.

This is a book for the academic community and it is a great contribution in that regard. Just like the author said in the introduction, there is not enough literature on the subject (as secondary works), although it appears from the sources cited in the book that Muslims have given great concideration to the topic.

The value of the book is in its role in connecting Islamic politics (the caliphate) and jurisprudence (fiqh). The book also succeeded in unearthing the many Arabic resources that have dealt with the topic of violence and rebellion in Islam. But in doing so, I believe the author, in his attempt to chart new territory, confused many concepts and boxed together elements that ought not be put in the same basket. Here are just some of the problems that did not help in grasping the themes or bridge them with the primary sources:

1. The long footnotes: the author uses very long footnotes wherein he engages in stating opinions that require more analysis and explanations. Some of the footnotes should not have been there at all, other footnotes should have been placed in the body. Examples: pp. 8, 9, 17, 26, 36, 53, 69, 83, 88, 107, 139, 239, 285, 326.
In other other situations where a footnote is need, the author simply avoids referencing some claims and generalizations that he makes about key concepts. A key example for instance is his definition of rebellion and his introduction of the Arabic concepts baghy and muhaarib... he defines them and states the legal rule rearding such acts, but he neglected to footnote his source if there were any... (see pp. 32)
lastly, some time the author states an opinion, and places a footnote in support of it, upon checking the source, I failed on many occasions to see the relationship between the though/theory and the sources indicated in the footnote. They are simply mistakes, or totally mis-understood by the author.

2. factual inconsistencies: while stating the rule concerning the rebels and the various groups, he argued that Islamic law does not call for the killing or destructionof rebels. This is historically incorrect. The author is either attempting to soften Islamic law on rebellion or is oversimplifying the legal rules.

3. Method and approach: the author optd to discuss the theme in a timeline framework. That approach caused him (intentionally or not) to overlook many instances of rebellion in islamic history. The topic would have been better served if the author presented real cases of rebellion and political violence instead of a timeline of the concept.
4. Like many books on Islamic law, this book also ignores the Shi`ite point of view. The work is exclusively focused on Salafi thought. Isma`ilis and Zaydis and other denominations were briefly mentioned. However the major concept of khuruj was ignored or played down despite its centrality in Shi`i theology and jurisprudence. Despite that most of the resources are from Sunni works, the author goes further to reserve on full chapter for the Sunni position. Even the books history written by Sunni historians referred to khuruj as a form of rebellion, but the author inexplicbly chose even not to discuss the case of Hussein and his murder that was sanctioned by the Sunni establishment and Caliphate.

In short, this is good start, but it is hardly a reference on rebellion and violence in Islamic law...

Rating:
Summary: Islamic law Books In The Spotlight
Review: Although Islam remains an all-inclusive faith with answers to all sorts of questions, the longevity of the Islamic style of governance and the rise of political Islam in modern history brought the discipline of Islamic Law to the forefront once more. As a result, Islam is being judged and appraised based on its contribution to the legal field more than its input in any other area of knowledge. Modern scholars are deeply divided over the authenticity and applicability of Islamic law principles. The recent publications are good barometers of the attitudes towards Islam in general. This review is intended to give interested readers some idea regarding some this and other important books and some background information about the influential authors active in the field of Islamic studies.

One could divide the modern authors into four major tendencies based on the background and ideas as expressed in their work and through their contact with the larger community of readers of Islamic publications and followers of Islamic faith.

Before we move on to these divisions, let's remind readers that Muslim scholars have generally held the view that Islamic law is based on the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the ijtihád of the renowned Islamic scholars. They insist that all laws are based on the two primary sources (Qur'an & Sunnah) and whatever is not addressed therein was examined by the Mujtihids.

Unlike the accepting position of the Muslims, modern scholars are becoming more and more critical not only of the historical events as transmitted in the Muslim media, but also of the content of even the primary documents which served as a source of Muslim law and creed. In the following, I will categorize some of the works and authors based on the works they have published and the reactions they have elicited.
1. The critical camp was spearheaded by the orientalist Ignaz Goldziher (Hadith: The 'Traditions', Ascribed to Muhammed, Vol. 2, Format: Hardcover, ISBN: 0873952359, Publisher: State University of New York Press, Pub. Date: June 1971) who argued that a good part of the Hadith literature-considered the canonizing feature of Islamic law-was fabricated at least three hundred years after the time of Muhammad. After Goldziher, other orientalists like Joseph Schacht (The Legacy of Islam, Format: Hardcover, 2nd ed., 554pp., ISBN: 019821913X, Publisher: Oxford University Press, Pub. Date: August 1974, Edition Desc: 2d ed), and Wansbrough (Quranic Studies: Sources and Methods of Scriptural Interpretations, Format: Hardcover, 256pp., ISBN: 0197135889, Publisher: Oxford University Press, Pub. Date: April 1977), David Powers (Studies in Qur'an and Hadith: The Formation of the Islamic Law of Inheritance, Format: Hardcover, ISBN: 0520055586, Publisher: University of California Press, Pub. Date: January 1986), and Wael Hallaq (Authority, Continuity, and Change in Islamic Law, Format: Hardcover, 284pp., ISBN: 0521803314, Publisher: Cambridge University Press, Pub. Date: October 2001) followed the same path to bestow some doubt about the authenticity and historicity not only of the Hadith but also the Qur'an. Muslim reactionaries charged these scholars of starting and intellectual crusade to discredit Islam. The fact that these scholars were all either Jews or Christians played a major role in giving credence to this charge and the writings of these authors did not go beyond Western classroom walls as Muslim readers simply ignored them.
2. The second group of scholars can be characterized as the group of "apologetic non-Muslims" or the class of intellectual activists whose aspirations to bridge the gap between the people of the various faiths may have put them on a course of reconciliation rather than independent scholarship. Among these scholars, one can think of John L. Esposito (Unholy War: Terror in the Name of Islam, Format: Hardcover, 208pp. ISBN: 0195154355, Publisher: Oxford University Press, Pub. Date: March 2002), Bernard W. Lewis (Islam in History: Ideas, People, and Events in the Middle East, Format: Paperback, 496pp. ISBN: 0812695186, Publisher: Open Court Publishing Company, Pub. Date: November 2001, Edition Desc: REVISED & EXPANDED), and may more active in their associations.
3. The third group consists of "apologetic Muslims" like Dr. Yasin Dutton (The Origins of Islamic Law, Format: Hardcover, 264pp. ISBN: 0700710620, Publisher: Curzon Press, Pub. Date: September 1999), Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl (Speaking in God's Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women, Format: Paperback, 361pp., ISBN: 1851682627, Publisher: Oneworld Publications, Pub. Date: December 2001) and the late professor Fazlur Rahman. These scholars and others like them set course to recast Islamic tradition in a positive light without offering any systematic method or theory on how to determine what is sound and what is not. At times they even bent the logic and facts to portrait the tradition in a positive light. In other instances, they argued for the good of classical Islamic thought while suggesting its shortcomings without offering a practical mechanism for differentiation between the regressive and the progressive Islamic thought. Their work can be best described as a retroactive reading of ancient materials to accommodate present circumstances without any attempt to do away with principles that prevented Islamic law from staying on its alleged "progressive path".
4. The final group is the closest of what can be described as a class of free thinkers. These are individuals who appear to be immersed in their study first and interested in reconciliation last. Based on their writings and speeches, they seem to follow their theoretical agenda even if that would lead them to rejection of "almost" sacred principles of jurisprudence and philosophy. Scholars like Dr. Ahmed Souaiaia (Islamic Law & Government, Format: Paperback, 1st ed., 281pp., ISBN: 059523173X, Publisher: Writers Club Press, Pub. Date: June 2002) and Dr. Abdolkarim Soroush (Reason, Freedom, and Democracy in Islam, Format: Paperback, 254pp. ISBN: 0195158202 Publisher: Oxford University Press, Pub. Date: September 2002) have challenged the Sunni and Shi`ite traditional thinkers respectively to force a debate on the very foundational sources of law and ethics in classical and modern Islamic thought. In addition to these two intellectually promising scholars, there are a number of other authors from Egypt and North Africa (most of whom write in Arabic or French) who are embarked on the same path and who are destined to bring fresh idea to otherwise stagnant and frozen field. Individuals belonging to the last category are genuine independent thinkers who have an advantage as they themselves seemingly come as insiders who are very familiar with Islamic tradition; yet, who are theoretically sound given there research training. How their writings will be received by the general Muslim reading public will undoubtedly determine their (and others') impact.
None of these groups of scholars can take credit for this lively discussion of Islamic law and Islamic thought. Clearly, without one, the other may have never existed as each group contributed an idea to this topic which is becoming more and more the center of the world's attention. What is positive about this debate is that for the first time, Islamic tradition is being challenged and appraised as a social phenomenon after living all these years in the privacy of the religious centers. If Islam is to emerge as a social and cultural force, it must be subjected to critical analysis; these books are only element of that process.

I hope this review will be helpful to readers who are planning on buying some books on Islam and Islamic law. It is a hard task trying to pick up a book and learn from it without knowing the general trends and the various players. Hopefully other book lovers will be able to share with us more on this or simply write their reaction to the evaluation of scholarship on Islamic law.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: I read the book cover to cover, even the exhaustive footnotes. Another masterful work by Mr Abou El Fadl.

Rating:
Summary: Sophisticated Legal History
Review: Rebellion and Violence in Islamic Law is a sophisticated work of Islamic legal history that shows Abou El Fadl's critical insight into classical sources of Islamic law and history. Surveying the field of ahkam al-bughat (the law of rebellion) in books of positive law (fiqh), and correlating that body with historical incidents of juristic endorsement of rebellion, Abou El Fadl has shown that Muslim jurists were able to participate in a dialectic of power and resistance against prevailing governmental regimes through the very instrument of the law. Abou El Fadl shows that Muslim jurists used their technical training and competence to create a legal regime that implicitly challenged the power and authority of governments to rule with impunity. Abou El Fadl's contribution to the field of Islamic law through this single book is manifold. For instance, he undermines the orientalist view that considered Muslim jurists quietists in the face of political tyranny. Rather he shows that through juristic discoursive techniques, Muslims showed their opposition to the government in subtle but effective ways. He also emphasizes the importance of understanding Muslim jurists as participating in a larger "corporate culture". Law was a distinctive field of expertise, and its practitioners were a distinctive group of people. They formed a culture that was characterized by the symbols of legitimacy and authority that comes with dealing with sacred text. And through the law of rebellion, they utilized that culture to oppose the government on a principled and legal basis.

It seems that the reviewer below did not in fact read Abou el Fadl's book. His comment is confused, unhelpful and irrelevant given the nature, topic, and argument of Abou El Fadl's book on the law of rebellion in Islamic law.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: Staggering in its use of sources, and authoritative on all counts. An incredible book and timeless resource.

Rating:
Summary: On Disingenuous Previous Reviews
Review: The previous reviews entitled "What a Shame" and "Rebellion is not Violence" harbor ill will that reveal much about the reviewers and nothing about the author nor the book. First, I cannot imagine who better to comment on the book and the author, Dr. Abou El Fadl, than his graduate students, who have obviously committed their time and intellectual energy into studying his work at a depth that few others can. By defending their teacher, they honor their teacher, and this says nothing of whether or not the book can stand on its own merits. Without question, the book stands on its own merits, or it would not have been published by Cambridge University Press, nor won the accolades of so many reviewers that it has. I don't understand why someone would be critical of a professor's students defending their professor or his work, unless that person harbored some kind of ill will towards the students or the professor.

As to the other review, the reviewer embarrassingly reveals the fact that he has not even read the book in the comments that he makes. Among the most obvious guffaws are his comments that "the work is exclusively focused on Salafi thought," and that it "ignores the Shi'ite point of view." Ali must have been reading a different book or skipped past most of the chapters, because the book does neither. Ali claims that it is historically inaccurate that Islamic law does not call for the killing or destruction of rebels. If he had actually read the book, and understood what he was reading, he would have learned he was wrong in this statement. Ali's assertions that the author misunderstood what he was doing, was neglectful, confused or oversimplifying are funny, and the examples he provides as evidence are just as funny, not to mention flimsy, ahistorical and superficial. The punchline of the book being a "good start, but it is hardly a reference on rebellion and violence in Islamic law," is particularly comical when one considers the all-star league of a scholar such as Dr. Abou El Fadl and his sterling record of publications and scholarship. In contrast, considering the quality of this reviewer's comments, it is like someone from Little Leagues trying to tell the Player of the Year how to play ball.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: The previous reviews entitled "What a Shame" and "Rebellion is not Violence" harbor ill will that reveal much about the reviewers and nothing about the author nor the book. First, I cannot imagine who better to comment on the book and the author, Dr. Abou El Fadl, than his graduate students, who have obviously committed their time and intellectual energy into studying his work at a depth that few others can. By defending their teacher, they honor their teacher, and this says nothing of whether or not the book can stand on its own merits. Without question, the book stands on its own merits, or it would not have been published by Cambridge University Press, nor won the accolades of so many reviewers that it has. I don't understand why someone would be critical of a professor's students defending their professor or his work, unless that person harbored some kind of ill will towards the students or the professor.

As to the other review, the reviewer embarrassingly reveals the fact that he has not even read the book in the comments that he makes. Among the most obvious guffaws are his comments that "the work is exclusively focused on Salafi thought," and that it "ignores the Shi'ite point of view." Ali must have been reading a different book or skipped past most of the chapters, because the book does neither. Ali claims that it is historically inaccurate that Islamic law does not call for the killing or destruction of rebels. If he had actually read the book, and understood what he was reading, he would have learned he was wrong in this statement. Ali's assertions that the author misunderstood what he was doing, was neglectful, confused or oversimplifying are funny, and the examples he provides as evidence are just as funny, not to mention flimsy, ahistorical and superficial. The punchline of the book being a "good start, but it is hardly a reference on rebellion and violence in Islamic law," is particularly comical when one considers the all-star league of a scholar such as Dr. Abou El Fadl and his sterling record of publications and scholarship. In contrast, considering the quality of this reviewer's comments, it is like someone from Little Leagues trying to tell the Player of the Year how to play ball.

Rating:
Summary: This Work is a Milestone in the Field of Legal History
Review: This is a monumental work in legal history, Islamic or otherwise. Specifically it traces the development of the Islamic law of rebellion and brigandage through the ages in the Islamic world. In terms of its academic impact it revolutionizes the way that Islamic law is dealt with in Western academia. One of the most important contributions of this work is that it decisively argues that it is impossible to correctly understand the development of the Islamic law of rebellion and brigandage without first recognizing the practice and construction of Islamic law as features of a true jurisprudential system.

Abou El Fadl argues against paradigm of interpretation that labeled Muslim jurists who tended to recognize and legitimate rebellion against a standing government as activist while it labeled Muslim jurists who tended to legitimate a standing government, despite allegations of corruption and tyranny as quietist. The argument goes that historically speaking the early Muslim religious leaders actively participated in rebellions against perceived corrupt governments. As time went on, however, the juristic class developed a cozy, symbiotic relationship with the ruling elite. Therefore, because now the juristic class had a vested interest in maintaining the standing government, a drastic change can be noticed in the substantive content in the laws dealing with the government in the case of either rebellion or brigandage. Abou El Fadl argues that this dichotomous paradigm does not take into account what he labels the "juristic imperative." He argues that the jurisprudential discourses surrounding the issue of rebellion in Islamic law must be analyzed in the backdrop of the developing juristic culture and its particular methods of discourse. In other words a juristic culture, by its very nature, emphasizes the values of social order and stability and seeks to resolve conflict peacefully. This imperative must be taken into account when examining juristic pronouncements on the issue of rebellion. For example, does it make sense to categorize a jurist who advocated leniency in dealing with rebels, and did not consider the actual act of rebellion in morally pejorative terms as activist or quietist? Is he an activist because he does not consider the act of rebellion a sin in and of itself, or is he a quietist because he assumes that the standing government is the legitimate one? From these relatively simple and essentialized examples one can see how the dichotomous interpretive paradigm of activism vs. quietism does not make much sense when applied to perceived general trends in Islamic history. Generally speaking by examining the development of the legal doctrines on rebellion, this book explodes the interpretive myths through which western scholarship tended to essentialize the power relationships that existed between the `ulama and the rulers in Islamic history.

This work is more than simply a deconstruction of an interpretive paradigm. At the methodological level this work is a milestone. Abou El Fadl insists on the importance of engaging the "microdiscourses" in the juristic tradition to gain a full understanding of how Islamic law reacted to various historical contexts in articulating and re-articulating the law of rebellion. By analyzing the technicalities of the legal discourses in their jurisprudential context, Abou El Fadl is able to locate how Islamic law responded to changes in the socio-political nature of rebellion and brigandage in Islamic history.

I have to admit I don't understand why Mr. Charfi gave this book two stars. My intuitive suspicion is that Mr. Charfi has not actually read the book, as his review engages nothing about the book itself. I must say I also disagree with his characterization of Abou El Fadl, Yasin Dutton, and Fazlur Rahman as apologetic Muslim intellectuals. Unfortunately because Mr. Charfi did not offer any concrete reasons (he was too abstract to be meaningful) behind his placement, I cannot with certainty engage his taxonomy. I can only surmise as to what exactly he means. It is no doubt that both Fazlur Rahman and Khaled Abou El Fadl value the Classical Intellectual Islamic traditions. However I don't think that this translates into an uncritical and apologetic defense of these traditions. Anyone who has read Abou El Fadl's "Speaking in God's Name," or Fazlur Rahman's "Revival and Reform in Islam," cannot but come to the conclusion that while both of these individuals certainly respect the Islamic Intellectual Traditions, they are by no means uncritical. Both Abou El Fadl and Rahman have offered innovative solutions on methodologies that Muslims can use to overcome the distance between doctrinal positions inherited from the past and the substantive injustices that would result from continuing to adhere to these positions in today's day and age.

With that said, anyone interested in tasting the complexity and subtlety of classical Islamic law will not leave this book unquenched.

Rating:
Summary: Wow
Review: You don't have to be a fan or student of Dr. Abou El Fadl to appreciate the labor and thoroughness that went into this work.