I disagree with the role of the secular Western university being the site of training imams. I am aware that all the Ivy League schools in the United States were originally founded by the British crown as theological schools to train colonial clergymen. I know that the modern secular university owes its roots and origins to the Christian monastery and cathedral schools of medieval, feudal Western Europe. I acknowledge that graduation robes are derived from clerical vestments, however, should the secular university be the site of Muslim de facto seminaries? Or should the Muslim community create separate private institutions which train American imams?
Islamic studies and any serious social science pursuit in Western academia is to maintain a detached objectivity from the subject being studied. Islamic studies should be the scientific study of the phenomenon of Islam as a religion, spiritual tradition, legal system, cultural realm, architecture, performing arts/music/dance, cultural artifact, etc. It should not be a "madrassah" where those robbed of the opportunity to live in a Muslim-majority society can memorize the Qur'an and engage in other traditional Islamic sciences without having an open-minded skeptic frame of reference when studying Islam scientifically. Science is an uncertain art, science is based on theories which always are subject to scrutiny. Theories are only presumed truths, therefore the knowledge produced in science is relative, not absolute.
Islam is concerned with absolute truth and the premise that there is a divine presence. However, science is NOT designed for the purpose of proving or disproving the existence of God. If Islamic studies is only a mere collection of naturalistic observations and field research anthologies about the norms of Muslim majority societies both past and present, the rehashing of classical jurisprudence using modern social science jargon to sound credible to Western academics, and only involved in the ethnocentric study of Islam through a Middle Eastern gaze, then Islamic studies as a new discipline has a long way to go.
I have noticed an increasing number of imams who often "brag" of their university credentials in Islamic studies in the United States. Is such autobiographical information meant to impress Muslims and thereby maintain a level of legitimacy as an imam in the local masjid?
Though priests/pastors and rabbis have secular Western degrees, their religious training takes place in seminaries or rabbinical colleges. They may have a degree in divinity or religious studies from a Western secular university, however, the place where their religious training takes shape and is molded is not found in the Western secular university.
Perhaps I am the product of the Enlightenment, perhaps I adhere to a form of "Western" Islam where there is a division between the sacred and profane. Though such a dichotomy is generally rejected by the Muslim Ummah, I believe in the United States and other Western countries, Muslims should adhere to this division.
The secular Western university belongs to the realm of the profane now, though at one time it belonged to the realm of the sacred.
However different Islamic studies departments in Western universities are from traditional madrasahs, they do have one common goal; to give their students a good understanding of classical Islamic texts and practices. So it seems natural that Muslim communities in the west would treat university departments as a valuable resource in terms of training imams, etc.
Institutions like Harvard Divinity School have a few professors who are also practicing ministers. So I don't see why the same couldn't happen with Muslims students and professors.
The lack of religious training sites is an issue that Muslims must eventually address. There are few institutions that offer imam training, but Islamic studies should be interdisciplinary.
It should not merely be a place to study Islamic texts, but one should also ask questions about the current state of Islam and Muslims today.
For example, what role does satellite televsion have in modern Arab political discourse?
How has American occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan either aided or diminish the influence of democrats?
Does Palestinian school curriculum really teach anti-Jewish hatred and propaganda as alleged by Zionists?
What are the roots of contemporary anti-Semiticism in Muslim circles today? Why are the Protocols of Zion so popular among Muslim reading audiences?
What role has the hijab played in terms of contemporary gender relations and issues of female modesty/female liberation from the male gaze as object of sexual desire?
Therefore, Islamic studies should overlap in fields like history, political science, sociology, psychology, child development, ethnic studies, etc.
Often times Muslims say, "The ills in Islam today are rooted in culture." But is this merely a correlation or cause in Islam? How can we prove this statement to be true using the scientific method?
Question: if you believe that Islamic studies should be interdisciplinary, that it should ask questions about the state of Islam and Muslims today, then wouldn't a secular Western University be an ideal place for it? It seems to me that a department of Islamic studies in an existing secular university would lend itself to the interdisciplinary approach more so than an institution dedicated to Islamic studies. Such an approach would allow for a cross-pollination of both students and faculty, fostering the kind of discourse I think you're looking for, Gustavo.
Further, from a logistical standpoint, doesn't it make more sense to take advantage of the existing institutions to build up an Islamic curriculum? Such a curriculum would be subject to the same type of scrutiny and review that other curricula within that university are (though admittedly, some
of those curricula could use some more scrutiny and review), and the physical infrastructure and administrative frameworks would already be in place to support this approach.
Post new comment