Arnthrudur Ingólfsdóttir, philosopher, interviewed Dr. Asma Barlas. Barlas will give a keynote lecture in the conference Religion and Politics of the Body on Friday 26th June.
Q: In your paper you talk about the dissonances between Muslim tradition and the Qur‘an in its claims about women‘s bodies. This is linked to your book Believing Women in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an. What are the main tenets of your interpretation of the Qu‘ran in relation to women‘s bodies, and how has the reception of your ideas varied between Muslim, secular and Christian Europeans?
Barlas: “Well, as I say in the paper, I am not a theorist of the body. This means that I didn’t look at the Qur’an with the intent of understanding its position on women’s bodies, either. I simply wanted to explore its position on patriarchy, by which I mean a sexual politics that systematically privilege males. In the process of doing that, I also realized that the Qur’an doesn’t have the same negative attitude towards the female body or sex or sexuality that Muslim traditions do. The one generalization I would make is that, in the Qur’an, the body is often a sexed body, and while it is also potentially erotic, it is never depicted as sinful or corrupting. I find that quite incredible given the long history of misogyny not just in Muslim societies but more generally as well.
As for how my ideas have been received, it depends on what I’m talking about and also on the person reading or hearing my views. Some Muslims are terribly upset to read what I have to say and others think my ideas are important (and even inspiring). As for secular and Christian Europeans, I’m not sure to what extent they are interested in my arguments about the Qur’an, outside of a very small circle of women who are themselves scholars of Islam and/ or Muslim communities in Europe.”
Q: In your paper you talk about a European obsession with Muslim bodies as a site for mapping difference. One of your examples is the post 9/11 representation of the prophet Muhammad as a terrorist. How do you argue your case that this representation has old roots in the medieval depiction of Muhammad as the Anti-Christ? What are the implications of this representation for European Muslims?
Barlas: “Yes, this is an argument I’ve made before. I am quite fascinated by the fact that the earliest representation of the Prophet was as the Antichrist, a figure that was evil incarnate and which stood for all that was anti-Christian. These days, of course, we are more likely to see depictions of the Prophet as a terrorist but I think this is just a secular variation on the medieval Christian theme. After all, today, it is the terrorist who is evil incarnate and who stands for all that is anti-Western. Of course, such a view equates the West with all that is good in the world and Islam and Muslims with all that is not. Obviously, when Muslims, whether they live in Europe or elsewhere, see their religion and themselves being depicted in such a manner, they feel both alienated and angry. Those of us who have studied the West’s history also feel outraged that this sort of displacement should happen given the nature and level of violence that has taken place in Europe and also globally as a result of European and Western policies.”
Q: One can safely talk about a currently emerging wave of women‘s and feminist interest in Islam and the Qu‘ran. This can be seen with reference to the „Third International Congress on Islamic Feminism“ which was held in Barcelona last year, or the Women‘s Mosque Movement in Egypt. How do you see the landscape of feminist interpretations of Islam and the Qu‘ran, and what would you say are the most interesting and inspiring developments? Perhaps you could give an account of the regions you are most familiar with, Pakistan and the Middle East, the U.S., Europe?
Barlas: “I think this landscape is both rich and broad, and one sign of that is not everyone who is involved in re-interpreting the Qur’an or Islam calls themselves a feminist. I happen to be one of those people. This doesn’t mean that I don’t believe that feminism has enabled sexual equality in European and Western societies; it simply means that, for women of color and women from the “rest” of the world, feminism has often gone hand-in-hand with colonialist wars of oppression and—to use an outdated term—imperialism.
As for what is most inspiring about women’s and feminist movements in Muslim societies, it is the fact that women are struggling for equality and dignity and the right to live a fully human life in ways that make the most sense to them. I am against all forms of paternalism and maternalism, so I also appreciate that women’s struggles are diverse and complex and are framed in terms of the political and social contexts in which they live. That is why I find it hard to give a thumbnail sketch of something that is so internally diverse.”
Q: Iceland has a small but growing Muslim population. What do you advise Icelanders in terms of how to proceed in the debate on Islam vs. secularism and Christianity? What pitfalls should be avoided and which examples should we consider following?
Barlas: “Well, as I just said, the social and political contexts in which Muslim women are struggling for their rights—and I include the right to live as a Muslim in Europe—are very different and, since I don’t know what these contexts are in Iceland, I want to be careful in giving advice. Naturally, if Muslims are consigned to the ghettoes and margins of Icelandic society, as they are in many European countries, it will be hard to live together amicably. At the same time, however, I think it would be equally hard if Muslims were under continual pressure to “assimilate,” which is just a euphemism for uniformity. There are many ways of being a human and leading a good life, and so we need to find something more workable than the old colonialist paradigm that sought to erase difference either by killing people or assimilating them. While I don’t have a template for how people should live, at a minimum, coexistence requires mutual respect, a willingness to appreciate difference, and an openness to dialogue no matter how inconvenient or uncomfortable.”
Q: Feminist theologians like Daphne Hampson (who says she is a post-Christian, i.e. spiritual but not a believer in the Christian dogmas) say that the Abrahamic religions cannot adapt. They are built upon the subordination of women to men, and also on men to god, through the gendered nature of their hierarchical structure. This can perhaps be seen in the father-son dogma in Christianity, the catholic rejection of women priests, orthodox Judaism’s ideas about gender roles, etc., etc. Do you think in light of such feminist criticism that Islam or any of the Abrahamic religions can adapt to modern times and modern demands for equality of the sexes?
Barlas: “In my book, „Believing Women in Islam“, I devote one chapter to discussing Qur'anic conceptions of the divine; basically, (to put it very simply) my argument is that the Qur'an does not sexualize or masculinize God and it even forbids representing God (using analogy, comparison, etc.). God, being uncreated, is unlike anything we know and hence the warning against similitude. From this I understand that, in so far as God is not father/ son/ male, God also cannot be patriarchalized. Perhaps Hampson doesn't know this.
However, the impact of Qur'anic conceptions of God on gender relationships is more complex than I can give here. In a nutshell, that argument is that Qur'anic episteme is anti-patriarchal and that, if we read the Qur'an in light of this episteme, we arrive at more liberatory readings of it, and, along with those, a different understanding of male authority, female subordination, etc.”