Among the slew of disturbing reports on the Islamic State (IS) of late, two mainly have caught public attention in the country recently. One is the case of local students being recruited for the militant group in the Middle East, now known for their atrocities against others and even fellow Muslims.
Another is that of the foreign speaker, regarded as a liberal Muslim, who was denied entry into Malaysia for his ideas that contravene the accepted norms and principles of Islam.
In reality, both represent two streams of ideologies that influence a significant number of Muslims. In trying to serve Islam in their own ways, the implications of their thinking nevertheless seem to be contradictory to each other. One attempts to interpret Islam in a narrow spectrum based purely on the interpretations of certain textual and literal injunctions in the Qur’an, while the other deconstructs the religious basis and opens up the interpretations of religion as wide as possible. In terms of religious reference, one is taking revelation strictly as the point of reference, while the other is using reason as the ultimate source to readjust the principles of religion. It is, as some coin it, the conflict between literalism and liberalism in religion.
In the discussions of channels of knowledge in Islamic theology, apart from sense perception, both reason and revelation are among the valid channels of knowledge. Nevertheless, they are not to be taken independently since the relationship between the two is complementary rather than contradictory.
As far as revelation is concerned, only when one takes some verses from revelation literally, without looking at their holistic relation with other verses, as well as their contextual relevance with surrounding situations which are mainly based on rational consideration, that one will be highly inclined to resort to extreme interpretations. Similarly, when one is entirely dependent on pure reason and sets aside the true message of the revelation will one also prone to fall into extremism in interpreting religion.
The spirit of harmony between reason and revelation is clearly reflected in the Islamic tradition. In the discipline of tafsir (interpretation of the Qur’an), for example, the role of reason in understanding the text is strongly emphasised by many scholars.
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, for example, the esteemed Muslim theologian and jurist, put ten rational criteria to ascertain a particular text, while Ibn al-Jawzī had rational agreement as one of the conditions to determine the authenticity of a hadith.
Moreover, in Islamic theology, scholars have employed abundant rational proofs in proving many doctrinal principles.
In addition, in the history of Islamic intellectual tradition, rational sciences had bloomed as part of the important basis of the development of Islamic civilisation in all aspects.
Scholars like al-Ghazali even placed logic as an important prerequisite to Islamic jurisprudence. Thus, jurists who do not know logic, according to al-Ghazali, cannot practise proper jurisprudence.
Through this celebration of rational thinking, no doubt the room for religious extremism can be lessened, and rigidity and narrow-mindedness in understanding religion will be reduced.
On the other hand, as the basis of the Islamic religion, revelation still anchors its understanding including rational endeavours. The Qur’an, being the revealed Divine source, has to be the starting point of religion which binds reason in discussing religious matters.
All of the ethical principles and legal injunctions decreed by God in the Qur’an, thus, also set the Holy Book as His limits. Therefore, it would be considered extreme if one were to alter, modify or change those limits by narrowing down, pushing, or deconstructing them.
As a definition, extremism is an end of anything, the highest degree of something; or, the farthest possible position. It means that there must be the centre where the true position is situated. Based on this centre, any action that moves farther from the centre, either to the left or right, is considered extreme.
Such is the description for Muslims, termed in the Qur’an, as the people of the middle position (ummatan wasatan) precisely because they don’t and should not move from the centre to the either extreme. Moreover, the centre is a set of limits of the religion that must be adhered to. Those who exceed beyond the limits are regarded by the Qur’an as taghut, extremists who are always prone to deconstructing the values of religion by going against them. Indeed, the Qur’an states that the role of the prophets are those who call people towards submitting to God and reject taghut, “We have sent to every nation a prophet, saying ‘worship Allah and reject those who go beyond the limits’” (The Bee Chapter, verse 36).