Download Shannon Sibel Problems Associated With Studying Islam as a

Shannon Sibel
Problems Associated With Studying Islam as a Whole
Islam is too diverse of a religion for anthropologists to study as a whole. It is more
effective to study Islam as a part of cultures that include the practice of it. Ethnographies depend
upon insights from members of the group being studied and Islam consists of many different
people from various places around the world who have differing versions of Islam. Culture helps
shape religion and because of this, the various cultures introduced to Islam throughout history
have helped shape Islam in ways that are specific to that particular area of the world. Writers of
ethnographies have their own biases that affect the way they interpret the culture or society that
they are studying, which leads to the presentation of different versions of Islam in the field of
anthropology as the single true version of Islam.
Islam is the second largest religion in the world. Because of this, there are Muslims in
every corner of the world. Their differing geographic locations help to shape their view of the
world and, consequently, their version of Islam. In el-Zein’s work Beyond Ideology: The Search
for the Anthropology of Islam, he discusses Clifford Geertz’s “analysis of the diverse cultural
expressions of Islam in Morocco and Indonesia” (el-Zein 1977, 230). According to Geertz,
“Moroccan Islam lacked a religious order or hierarchy which would determine who could and
could not aspire to leadership and sainthood” and Indonesian Islam “involved strict, hierarchical
order of graded spirituality and corresponding rules determining who was to attain the highest
stages” (el-Zein 1977, 231). These differences are very specific to these particular areas but they
are indicative of the diversity of practices and structures of Islam throughout the world.
Geographic distribution is not the only type of diversity that affects the interpretation of
Islam. A person’s social class can also affect how they interpret Islam. This is very clearly
demonstrated in the differences between the practices of the urban ruling elite and those practices
of the local or folk Islams. The notion of Islam of the ruling elite focuses on the readings of the
Quran and the traditions of Muhammad. In contrast, “most folk interpretations of Islam dwell
upon the meaning of natural phenomena conceived as the reflection of God and the authority of
the saints” (el-Zein 1977, 240-242).
All of this can pose a challenge to anthropologists when they are trying to study Islam in
its entirety. A major component of anthropological study is obtaining the native’s view of their
own culture. An anthropologist will be able to get an accurate description of Islam in Morocco
from talking to a Muslim from Morocco but it would not be an accurate description of all
Muslims, as evidence by the differences between Moroccan and Indonesian Islam as described
by Geertz. El-Zein talks about each individual experience containing “the universal
characteristics assigned to the religious form of experience and those particular shared meanings
which recall an entire tradition of Islam” (el-Zein 1977, 232). While it is possible to distinguish
certain traits that are a part of all interpretations of Islam, it makes more sense to study the
various different interpretations of Islam because of their many differences.
Culture shapes religion. According to Talal Asad, the variety of Muslim practices present
around the world and throughout history show which Islamic reasonings “different social and
historical conditions can or cannot sustain” (Asad 2009, 23). What he means is that Muslims
practice only the Islamic traditions that fit into their pre-existing social structure and historical
contexts. As a result, “traditions should not be regarded as essentially homogenous” but
“heterogeneity in Muslim practices is not necessarily an indication of the absence of an Islamic
tradition” (Asad 2009, 23). As stated before, it is possible to have basic traits that are a part of all
interpretations of Islam but it is more sensible to study individual interpretations of Islam rather
than Islam in its entirety because of the many other differences caused by differing historical
contexts.
According to Geertz, culture includes collective notions, images, and concepts of world
view. He also says that “culture particularly is the means of interpretation of all experience” (elZein 1977, 229). As previously mentioned, the world views of Muslims around the world differ
because of various factors, including geographic location and social class, thus creating different
cultures that shape interpretations of Islam in different ways. Geertz’s analysis of Islam in
Morocco and Indonesia illustrate the effects that culture can have on religion. Morocco’s history
“consisted of an unstable pattern of settlement and continuous feuding” (el-Zein 1977, 231). This
lead to a lack of religious order or hierarchy. In Indonesia, “the population was quietly settled in
towns or outlying agricultural villages, and their social relations were built upon a sense of order
and cooperation” (el-Zein 1977, 231). Because of this there was “a strict, hierarchical order of
graded spirituality” (el-Zein 1977, 231).
Anthropologists have their own biases that can affect the way they interpret Islam. After
receiving the native’s interpretation, anthropologists must then make their own interpretations of
Islam (el-Zein 1977, 230). According to el-Zein, the idea that scholars’ own cultural ideas and
values have influenced their analysis of Islam is nothing new. “Science is considered a mode of
interpretation and reflection on experience” (el-Zein 1977, 242). This means that one can never
completely suspend their cultural attitudes and as a result, their interpretation of Islam is biased.
He also says that the changes in the definition of the essence of Islam is a result of the changing
attitudes to religion in the West (el-Zein 1977, 242-246). This is because “one’s conception of
religion determines the kinds of questions one thinks are askable and worth asking” (Asad 2009,
16). All of these biases can lead to varying ways of interpreting Islam.
The anthropological premises discussed in Beyond Ideology and Theology: The Search
for the Anthropology of Islam could be treated in the same way that the anthropologists “treat the
tenets of Islam: as diverse, culturally relative expressions of a tradition” (el-Zein 1977, 246).
These diverse analyses “are built upon the assumption of a single, absolute reality and seek to
discover this reality in Islam” but instead they reveal the “diversity of possible definitions and
descriptions of Islam” (el-Zein 1977, 249). When searching for this single absolute reality of
Islam, anthropologists tend to regard other expressions of Islam, specifically folk expressions of
Islam, as diluted forms that are distorted by magic and superstition (el-Zein 1977, 243). Without
an agreeance on what exactly the single, pure form of Islam is, it is difficult to study Islam at
large.
Islam is an incredibly diverse religion with adherents from all over the globe. Muslims
come from many different cultures with different histories that helped to shape the versions of
Islam that are practiced in those areas. This can pose a problem for anthropologists who are
looking for a native’s interpretation of Islam as a whole. There are also biases of the scholars that
study Islam that can affect their interpretation of Islam. Many of these scholars are searching for
a single Islam but because of biases, we end up with multiple presentations of different versions
of Islam in the field of anthropology all claiming to be the true Islam. Therefore, when studying
Islam it is more practical to study Islam as a part of the smaller cultures that practice it than it is
to study Islam as a whole.
Bibliography
Asad, Talal. 2009. “The Idea of an Anthropology of Islam.” Qui Parle 17:1-30.
el-Zein, Abdul Hamid. 1977. “Beyond Ideology and Theology: The Search for the Anthropology
of Islam.” Annual Review of Anthropology 6:227-254.