24. Tolerance conveys, by essence, a relationship of strength whose balance is the fact of the free choice of the strongest – or of the majority – and this is tantamount to “suffering” with the presence of the other. It is the reference to the history of mentalities, societies and religion which may allow us to understand the origin of this concept. It was conceived by rationalist philosophy when it was a question of deter mining the reasonable attitude of the strongest or the majority. The pending of this approach as far as the weakest – or the minorities – are concerned is the elaboration of their rights. The positive dimension is obvious here if we consider things on the historical plane. But in the absence of a founding principle of obligation (duty), we see that these formulations have not allowed the realisation of a society in a position to manage diversity so much on the legislative as on the cultural plane. This without taking into account that they do not protect us from the excesses of intolerance that are the result of social fractures in the West (cf . below).
Part Two
The Horizons of Islam Between Man and the Community
The Horizons of Islam
As can easily be seen, social, political and economic life is directly influenced by the fundamentals which we have just analysed. Man, who enjoys a real and fundamental freedom, ought to bear in mind these dimensions of property, law and responsibility. His life is a witnessing. It is in this “landscape of meaning” that the idea of the individual is defined, and wherein the notion of “community” is born. From the latter, the general principles of law take shape. Indeed, it is one of the specificities of Islam to have engendered a mode of thought the essence of which is, before anything else, juridical. This, regardless of whether it is on an individual level, or at a worship, social, political, financial or economic level. The law, insofar as it is the codification of responsibilities, liberties or principles of co-existence, is primal.
Jurists “of the sources of law”, following the formulations developed by al-Shāṭibī in his famous book al-Muwāfaqāt, have established five principles the respect of which orientates all religious regulations. These principles, a fortiori, affect social, political and economic perspectives. The five principles in question are: religion (al-dīn), the person (al-nafs), the mind (al-‘aql), progeny (al-nasl) and property (al-māl). All religious obligations and prohibitions derive from a strict observance of these fundamental principles. 1 In fact, the legislation of the different domains of human activity should seek to preserve this basic orientation; i.e. it should act as the point of reference, as a kind of memorandum of finalities, that believers cannot afford to neglect.
I. Social Principles
If there is a domain whereby the fundamental respect of the principles so identified requires vigilance at all times, it is surely that of the social sphere. Whether at the level of worship (al-‘Ibādāt, that which relates strictly to the pillars of Islam), 2 or that of daily life, Islam is the carrier of a teaching which is entirely directed towards the collective and social dimension. This, to the extent that we can say that there is no real practice of religion without personal investment in the community. The serenity of our solitude in front of the Creator cannot occur unless it is fed by our relation with our fellow beings, this being something which is renewed daily. We understand, thus, that it is a responsibility which weighs on each individual in front of God. There exists, by extension, a determining requirement addressed to the group and to society. This is the location where the destiny of each of its members is decided. In fact, it is necessary to offer to each individual the optimum conditions which allow him to respond to his moral and spiritual aspirations.
Hence, the social dimension is undoubtedly fundamental, for upon this rests all religious and cultural points of reference. To organise the social space is to give one the means to live fully and serenely one’s own identity. Any reflection on a project of society whose aim is to pinpoint the challenges of “modern life”, whether in the West or in the East, should, without mediation, articulate itself around this space. When one considers the crises which today face the United States and Europe, whether it be unemployment, exclusion, violence and xenophobia, one realises just how urgent a rethink of “the social fact” is, and this well before any economic or political preoccupations. Let us also be clear that Asian countries, as also the countries of the South do not escape this rule either. If nothing comes “to disturb” actual by-products, the future so announced will be very sombre for all.
If we are to reverse the order of things concrete answers are what is needed, for it is not enough to present a project of a theoretical society based on general and idealistic conceptions. To refer to Islam is to describe a horizon of faith, thought, culture and civilisation. But it is not yet time to elaborate solutions. For, if the expression “Islam is the solution” is a unifying slogan, it, nonetheless, remains a slogan empty of any strategy or planning. To forget this is to come close to a trap which more than one Muslim has already become a victim of. This is often the result of thinking that it is enough to cite the sources in order to convey the dimension of their just applicability in an actual context. History should have taught us, however, that there are two ways of betraying the teachings offered by our sources. To curtail the text is the most common way; but to apply the text outside its context and orientation (qaḤd) is an even more pernicious betrayal. This because, in appearance, everything leads one to believe that one has respected the latter. Islamic window displays are dangerous, and in their superficiality they are outright lies. This formalism is one of the worst enemies of the person, who in all sincerity, wants to respect the Qur’ānic and traditional teachings. For it allows that person to apply them as they are cited, without any effort of research or great cost but with great ensuing harm.
We must warn against this tendency. It is also fitting though not to fall into the other extreme which consists of attaching little importance to points of reference and expect of Muslims – at least those wishing to remain faithful to the orientations of the Qur’ānic Revelation – to render a project outside of any predetermined finality and outside of any cultural or religious dimension. To think modernity requires that we present in a clear fashion the imperatives and priorities of the grand orientations of social action. Once this framework is laid out, it is then possible for us to suggest a perspective of enquiry for contemporary problems.
1. The Individual
As we have already noted, man is a responsible being; not only before God but also before his own fellow men. Building a society requires that one has, beforehand, specified a conception of the individual who constitutes this society. In this, Islam, as indeed have all the spiritualities and religions of the world, has stressed three fundamental principles (which are as such aspirations): the requirement of truth and transparency; the moral dimension (ethics) and the priority of values, and the imperative of respect of men and the norms of balance. Each human being has to try to live, to feed himself and to give sense to that which makes up his humanity; to acquire knowledge in order to draw near to what is truer; to give force to his values in order to achieve good; to listen and participate in order to better respect. The appeal of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to seek knowledge (“Seeking knowledge is an obligation upon every Muslim”); the Qur’ānic requirement for one to get involved in the good vis-à-vis one’s person and one’s society (“You ought to command good and forbid evil”); and finally all the recommendations for fairness and kindness that we find in the Qur’ān and the Sunna (“Speak in the best manners”, “Do not forget to treat one another with generosity, goodness, and kindness”) clearly leads us in this direction. It is, therefore, impossible to think a society without starting with the individual who should make it his business to reform his own being.
God changes not what is in a people, until they change what is in themselves. (Qur’ān, 13:11)
The change from the singular of people to the plural of individuals who constitute the former is perfectly clear