There was once a religion called Science
It is interesting to note that while we support their right to speak and to spread their teachings, the very same 'defenders of the faith' are not prepared to defend the right of others to criticise them when they speak falsehoods and nonsense.
Under such circumstances, it would pay for us to reflect upon these troubled times of ours, and to ask where this country might go in the future if such trends remain unchecked. The key question is this: Are we to allow a handful of self-proclaimed leaders and representatives of the faith community to dominate the discourse of the religion itself and to claim the exclusive right to interpret it for others?
Will Islam one day become the exclusive domain of a handful of Ulama who claim that they and they alone have the right to interpret it, teach it and talk about it?
These questions are, of course, not unique to Islam alone. Indeed the history of the world shows us that practically every religion and belief system has come under the dominance and control of those who sought to use it for their own instrumental ends.
History also teaches us what often happens next: the religion in question invariably grows ossified, dogmatic and rigid, and finally ends up losing its relevance in the age it finds itself in.
I wanted to raise these concerns in this article, but because the concerns go beyond Islam alone I have decided to write about the issue in the broadest terms possible. So forgive me, dear reader, if I take this opportunity to spin a fable for you. Perhaps in an oblique way it can shed some light on the subject that has been so close to my heart all this time.
Timeless and universal
There was once a religion called Science. (Well, all right - science is/was not a religion per se, but it ultimately came to be regarded as one by some.)
When this belief system first appeared in the world, it was thought to be one that was inclusive and open to all. Those who promoted this new belief system claimed that Science was a universal creed and that it did not distinguish between races and cultures, class and gender.
Science was said to be a universal language that spoke to humanity as a whole and its message and values were timeless and universal.
The masses were persuaded at first. They fell to the charms of Science and its claims to reason and truth. They genuinely believed that Science could answer all their questions and that it would lead them to enlightenment and escape from the bonds of unreason, fear and prejudice.
Science became the panacea for the ills of humanity and its proponents were seen as deliverers who would rescue all of humankind.
It was true that at first Science did live up to many of its claims. Science brought new wonders to the world. It showed the people how to look at themselves and the universe around them anew.
Suddenly the people realised that they were not alone in the world, and they inhabited it along with a host of germs, microbes, forces and energies that were previously invisible to the naked eye.
With Science, they thought they could understand and explain everything. The world became theirs to conquer and they no longer feared the darkness of the night or the darkness in their hearts.
But in time the doctors of Science grew more and more confident in themselves and their achievements. They basked in the glory of the adoration of others, and soon realised that the people believed in them wholeheartedly.
Rites and rituals
This blind faith in Science and the doctors of Science led to a growing feeling of superiority among the doctors themselves. They argued among themselves about the ways to improve their Science, and how Science could be used to service the needs of the masses - though the masses themselves were rarely consulted.
They spoke of saving the souls of the people - though they never bothered to ask if the people wanted to be saved. They claimed that they had so much to offer to the masses - but failed to ask if the masses wanted what they had to give at all.
The doctors of Science were respected and admired for the knowledge they possessed, but this knowledge would also have a corrupting role to play. The doctors of Science grew more and more conceited and self-satisfied.
They claimed that they alone knew and understood the secrets of Science and the wonders it could produce. They became introverted and suspicious of those who tried to understand their arts, and in time the knowledge they possessed became more and more exclusive.
The doctors began to grow closer together. They spoke only with each other, for each other and to each other, among themselves. They formed closed circles with all manner of rites and rituals of association and entry. They created tests and curricula, so that fewer and fewer could join them in their charmed circle.
They kept out the mob with their criteria of knowledge and they began to speak a language of their own that nobody else understood. They dressed in a particular way, spoke in a particular manner and adopted mannerisms that were particular to them alone - all in an effort to draw a distinction between themselves and the others.
Soon their mode of dress, behaviour and speech became as important as the science they claimed as their own. One only had to look at one of them to conclude: There goes a doctor of Science.
Orthodoxy threatened
But among the doctors were quite a few charlatans and hypocrites too, who had learnt how to dupe the masses with their manners and dress, and who in fact knew precious little about Science itself. (Except a few quotes in some esoteric script that nobody else could read or speak.)
When the ordinary people began to question the doctors about their Science, they were told by the doctors that ordinary folk had no right to ask such questions. "We are the inheritors of a tradition of knowledge that goes back many generations. We have passed this knowledge among ourselves, from one generation to the next.
How dare you, a mere layperson, ask such questions? How dare you speak about our Science which your simple untutored mind cannot understand?" they thundered.
Those who tried to read about Science and discuss it on their own were deemed 'misguided' and 'untutored' by the scientists. Those who tried to criticise the doctors were dubbed 'unbelievers' and 'sceptics', who were threatening the orthodoxy itself.
And those who tried to get around the doctors and practice Science on their own were attacked on the grounds that they had 'insulted Science', and accused of being mere amateurs with no knowledge and know-how.
Thus, as fate would have it, what began as a universal belief and value system ended up being the exclusive purview of a select few. The doctors of Science tried to monopolise the discourse of Science to themselves. They issued decrees and warning to all who tried to challenge them and their dominant position.
Those who questioned them, criticised their methods or doubted their intentions were cast beyond the pale of society and judged 'irrational', 'unscientific' and 'backward'. They were regarded as a danger to society and to Science.
Because no one had the courage or will to question the scientists, Science was allowed to develop on its own, beyond the control of society and heedless to the needs of humanity. It was a supreme irony that Science, which began as a gift and boon common to all, became a closed discourse for a select few only.
In time, it developed into a dogma that had binding force on all who came under its sway. The doctors of Science lorded it over the masses, and the hypocrites and charlatans among them were given the opportunity to lead the masses astray with their theories of racial supremacy, eugenics, social Darwinism, nuclear deterrence, atomic weapons and modern methods of genocide.
All of humankind was made to pay the ultimate price thanks to the conceit of a minority who felt that they and they alone understood the meaning and benefits of Science.
Open to scrutiny
If this story is to have any relevance to us at all, it ought to remind us that no system of belief - sacred or profane - has ever been immune to the frailties of human beings. We are, every single one of us, mortal beings with mortal flaws. Our egos, fears and prejudices will see to it that even the noblest of intentions will be sullied in time.
For that reason, it is imperative that our beliefs and convictions ought to be checked time and again. Proud beings that we are and blinded by our faith in ourselves, it pays to have our convictions questioned and our authority challenged once in a while.
This is true for scientists and doctors, politicians and peasants alike. It is also true of religious leaders, be they priests or Ulama, who - like any one of us - are just as likely to make mistakes or be swayed by their all-too-human weaknesses.
It is for this reason that no discourse should ever be kept closed and exclusive only to a select few. Religion, like any other belief system or way of life, has to be kept open to the scrutiny and enquiry of everyone - from the educated to the most ignorant.
For in the questions and critiques that are levelled at us, we may gain an insight into the flaws and mistakes of ourselves and our interpretations. For religious elites to claim that they and they alone have the right to speak and teach our religion is an offence and an insult both to our intellect and to the religion itself.
Islam will survive the questions we put to it, even if some flawed and mistaken Ulama won't. Islam is too important to be left to a handful of clerics and scholars alone. Let the doors of ijtihad (interpretation) open; let Islam breathe again.
