Islamic logic

I learned about Marina Mahathir's article (6 May, 2006) from Anasalwa, as contained in her post "What Does Iqraq Mean to Muslims?." I liked Marina's article because it echoes my thoughts on Islamic hooliganism, especially the part about The Cartoons.

Something else struck me about Marina's article.

Thus far there have been very few Muslim men [nor Muslim women, either, I would add — D.] in the international media who give a good impression. We might argue that the Western media selects who they interview in order to perpetuate stereotypes, which is true and that is a problem for all of us. A man or woman who looks like the archetypal wild-eyed conservative is far more telegenic than someone who looks like everyone else. Channel surfers are far more likely to stop at the sight of someone they think of as alien to their culture than if they see someone too similar to them. To stop this means having to make a concerted effort to come together as one community and decide on a sophisticated media strategy. But sadly coming together as one united community is a challenge in itself.

The line I want to highlight is "someone who looks like everyone else".

In terms of outward attributes: it's not possible for all Muslims too "look like everyone else" because some have chosen to mark themselves with distinctive clothing in public, say, with a head scarf. You could argue that a circumcized penis is a mark of disctinction as well, although it's not often you see a person's penis in your everyday rambles; so perhaps a circumcized penis is not too big an obstacle to looking "like everyone else" as, say, wearing a head scarf in public. Also, some Muslims eat and drink only certain things, which marks them when they gather to eat and drink with non-Muslims.

But in terms of attributes of personality, such as intelligence, humour, kindness, generosity, honesty, integrity, and so on: yes, it's possible for every one of us to match up, attribute for attribute, with non-Muslims.

What causes us Muslims the most problems in presenting a unified image to non-Muslims is that we can't agree on the outward attributes of a "good" Muslim. So I propose that we at least agree on the inner attributes of a good Muslim. Agreed?

+ + +

But wait, what's that you say? A person can't have certain inner attributes without demonstrating certain outward attributes? Oh, I see what you're saying — you can't say someone has integrity if they pledge to fast during Ramadan but they don't follow through [okay, I buy that]. And you can't say that a woman has integrity if she doesn't veil her body with baggy cloth [well, not sure about that one]. Or you can't say a society has integrity if its members don't uphold the apparently Qur'anically sanctioned Family Law provision enabling men to take on four wives [now that's something I absolutely do not buy].

So you see, Muslims will never agree on a definition of what a "good" Muslim is. We say there's a link between inner attributes and outward attributes, but we can't agree on the validity of some links.

I don't see the logic, and I doubt I'll ever see the logic, behind such things as:

A woman's integrity being linked to the visibility of her body.
A harmonious society being linked to enabling men to take on four wives.

And that's just two things, so far.