Unity:
It's Ups and Downs
Perhaps
one reason why Islam can seem controversial is it's insistence that
religion should have a social dimension, that it's not sufficient to
pop off for the odd prayer then get on with the rest of your life.
(Though of course for much of it's history Christianity had a similar
insistence, and only much more recently came the notion of religion
being boxed off, a private matter.)
As
anyone who's attended one of these British Museum blockbuster shows
can confirm, they do tend to cram the crowds in. And, unsurprisingly,
a goodly portion of the attendees are the 'ethnic Muslims' which UKIP
and the EDL are always getting their knickers in a twist about. And
it is quite striking how in such a logjam situation most Muslims are
patient, considerate and scrupulously polite.
...which
may seem merely an anecdotal point. But I don't doubt that, at least
in part, being beholden to a religion enables that behaviour. It
leads to your feeling part of some kind of a society, not that the
world crushes people together but they're actually just in it for
themselves. If that's regressive, if that's (to take one of the more
pseudo-intellectual anti-Muslim arguments) “pre-Enlightenment”,
then I simply prefer regressive and pre-Enlightenment to the
alternative.
This
communalising sense is often explicitly referred to by pilgrims.
Michael Wolfe commented “everywhere else, every person looked out
for himself. During the Hajj the people looked out for each other.”
Ali Shariati internalises the experience: “you feel like a small
stream merging with a big river. You have been transformed into a
particle which is gradually melting and disappearing. That is is love
at it's absolute peak.”
The
show also quotes from Malcolm X's famous attendance in 1964 (“the
people of all races, colours, from all over the world came together
as one”), without mentioning explicitly that the experience led him
to break from the black supremacism of the Nation of Islam. It would
even be possible to argue that the root of Islam was the desire to
end the tribal blood feuds, so prevalent in Mohammed's time, by
emphasising human commonality.
Yet
is there a downside to all of this? Islam practices unity but the
word literally means submission. Unity is vital, but the cost
shouldn't be conformity or intolerance of difference.
And
it would be politically correct in the worst sense of the term to
pretend Islam is free from problems of conformity, with the treatment of women
is merely one. Among the (highly polite) crowds were classic examples
of the mismatch couple, the man in designer jeans, branded T-shirt
and sunglasses, with the woman in full burka. Perhaps I'm
ill-practised in cultural relitavism, but I just see a double
standard there.
So, how to square the ups and downs of unity? Let's start the next
section with a disclaimer. Clearly despicable is any sort of New Agey
approach, with it's consumerist, pick-and-mix approach to other
religions and cultures. Let's purloin their art and listen to their
oh-so-spiritual Sufi music, but not bother with all that tiresome
business of praying several times a day! The far-right thugs of the
English Defence League may want to destroy Islam, but at least
they're not trying to help themselves to the pieces afterwards. (In
one of those “know thyself” moments which writing stuff down can
bring, I found myself at pains not to give any unnecessary offence to
Muslims, then virtually relishing the idea of sticking it to those
bleedin' New Agers!)
Religions
and cultures should always be looked at wholesale, like those
symbolic maps, with every element forming part of the picture.
Nevertheless, I'd optimistically like to imagine a more considered
view might be able to pinpoint and take up the best aspects of a
religion. Otherwise we are stuck with a take-it-or-leave-it response,
where the entire thing must be either an eternal truth or a total
confidence trick.
It's
become a commonplace to argue that communism is really a religion.
(Admittedly, if you look at Trotskyism or Stalinism, not without
reason.) But I would argue the opposite. Religion is a
mis-representation of the sense of human community. Of
course we can sense something bigger than you or me! But
there's no need to go conjuring up supernatural deities. That
something is actually us. It's the pilgrims, not
the place, which make the Hajj. Others see things differently, of
course. But to me religion is simply communism misspelt.
...one
interesting feature of that argument is that in some senses it's the
antithesis of the standard communist view of religion, as “the
opium of the masses.” Which there may be much truth to, but equally
it raises the question – shouldn't we need more
opium right now, just when religion is in overall decline? If
religion is a mis-representation of the social instinct, then it can
also act as a barometer of the social. Hence, in our contemporary
privatised world, its signal becomes weaker.
The
last time I attended a British Museum exhibition where religion was
so central was about
Ancient Egypt. And of course few Egyptians today plan to be
mummified after death, in preparation for their bodily resurrection.
But many modern Egyptians are Islamic. The idea of
then going on to attend a show where half the crowd believe fully in
everything that's being reported... that's almost as fascinating as
the show itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment