Response to a blog comment on Originalist vs Modernist approach

Question:
Here you say that one should follow the Originalist approach and be blind to the current modern values of society - however in your other articles it seems that you’re taking some other stance, e.g. in your essay about Human Rights, you’ve mentioned this about injunctions about women’s status compared to men:

“since it was to be only one station towards the ultimate goal of complete equality of both sexes in all respects, the bridging role of Islam between dark ages and the era of enlightenment has been completed and therefore Islam has outlived its utility in this field of human interest as well”

This is clearly the Modernist approach, and inconsistent with what you’ve posted here. The Originalist approach, being blind to the current moral values of the society, cannot say that Islam has outlived its utility because we’ve passed the era of darkness and contemporary society has more rights for women [compared to 700AD]. If you were following the Originalist approach and being “strictly loyal to Quranic text”, you must agree to whatever is present in the original text of Quran without prejudice to what rights women currently have, so you must agree then that women should not have equal rights as men, particularly in the case of testimony in financial matters, inheritance laws, divorce laws, roles in marriage, to name a few - I’m sure you and other readers know of several other verses in the quran too which talk about disparate rights.

You may very well say that these rights are to protect woman’s honor or to keep the society and family institution stable [a totally separate debate whether that actually is the case], but the point remains that they are no longer equal rights.

Response:
Assalamo Alaikum Riz

You made me really nervous by quoting the passage from my article. Of course, the passage is mentioning the Modernist approach. If you kindly read the article again, or at least the the portion of it where it has been written, you would notice that it has not been mentioned as my opinion but as the opinion of the protagonists of human rights. I have criticized and rejected that approach.

As for the issues you have raised, we must keep discussing them in the light of Qur’an and sunnah. The Originalist approach is not a name given to a set of verdicts on Islamic issues. It is basically an expression of commitment to keep the Qur’an and sunnah aloft. In the process of doing so in the right spirit, opinions on individual issues could change. Moreover, people belonging to the Originalist approach can disagree with each other on the interpratation of Qur’an and sunnah. The difference is not in the verdicts quite as much as it is in the mindset: A traditionalist is not prepared to accept Qur’and Sunnah as the undisputed sources of Islamic knowledge alone; a Modernist is prepared to change the meanings of the text without any textual justifications. It is only the Originalist who is determined to ensure the superioirity of Qur’an and sunnah over all other sources of knowledge.

[This is Dr. Khalid Zaheer's response to a blog comment.]

Views: 453