|
 An issue of Conversion: The Case of Abdul-Rahman the Afghan
By Dr. Abidullah A. Ghazi
The
Milli Gazette Online
7 April 2006
The issues emanating from
the turbulence instigated by the insensitive Danish cartoons have yet to
be settled, and we now find ourselves staring into the face of another,
even more complicated ordeal: the apostasy case of an Afghan named
Abdul-Rahman. While this case may seem to have global ramifications, the
personal side to the matter of Mr. Abdul-Rahman deals with the safety as
well as insistence of this individual to stand up for the faith of his
choosing. While such matters are significant on a small scale, there is a
far-reaching and more formidable issue hovering over the conversion of an
individual from one faith to another, mainly its legality and propriety in
today's world. An equally important matter is the position of the Shari'ah
on the topic of radd, a term which denotes a Muslim's abandoning
Islam and converting to another faith. To have a clearer analysis of Mr.
Abdul-Rahman's plight we must look to all the three of these dimensions.
It appears from several
news reports that Mr. Abdul-Rahman may not have altogether been a mentally
stable individual. There are reports of that prior to and after his
conversion to Christianity he maintained an abusive relationship with
parents. He also he failed to support, both financially and emotionally,
his children, they very same children which he had now, after 16 years,
sought custody over. In 1990 Mr. Abdul-Rahman left his wife and children
in Afghanistan and began working for an international Christian aid group
in neighboring Pakistan. There are contradictory reports regarding the
location of his conversion, although at this point such information seems
to be immaterial detail. Mr. Abdul-Rahman could have stayed in Pakistan,
where laws against conversion from Islam exist on the books but are rarely
(if ever) implemented, he chose to move to Germany, where he remained for
nearly ten years having little contact with his family. The aforementioned
Christian social workers might have saw fit to train Mr. Abdul-Rahman
while he resided in Europe for a suitable profession in order to
eventually unite him with his family but this did not happen. In 2002 Mr.
Abdul-Rahman decided to return home following the collapse of the Taliban
regime. From all accounts, embracing the Christian faith did not seem to
have made him a better person. His return only aggravated all the family
problems that were their before. He began to insist on gaining custody of
the children he left sixteen years earlier, and at one point even
physically attacked the children's grandfather when the family refused to
hand them over. Mr. Abdul-Rahman gave the impression that he took pleasure
in using his conversion as a weapon to further aggravate the already
strained relationship as the family was obviously distressed at the man's
conversion. Yet Mr. Abdul-Rahman reportedly took great relished in rubbing
the fact in their faces. The family, though disappointed with his change
of faith, nevertheless dismissed his claim as prank designed to exact
revenge and they urged Mr. Abdul-Rahman not to make a public issue out of
it. However when the family refused to hand over the children Mr.
Abdul-Rahman saw fit to go public with his conversion, conceivably to
humiliate his familial adversaries. He went to the local police and forced
the issue of his conversion, ostensibly in hope of provoking
confrontation. It has been reported that those police officers at the
neighborhood station who were present during Mr. Abdul-Rahman's
announcement of apostasy endeavored to persuade Mr. Abdul-Rahman to go
home and not bring trouble on his head by making it a public issue, but
the man was unrelenting and he managed in the end to bring worldwide
attention to himself.
The law in Afghanistan,
as well as in several other conservative Muslim countries, stipulates the
death penalty for any Muslim who converts out of Islam. In spite of this
seemingly zealous and archaic law we also find that Afghanistan has been,
and continues to be, on many levels a hospitable society that accepts a
remarkable degree of religious diversity. There is a large Shi'ite
population in the central part of the country, and into modern times
sizeable Sikh and Hindu communities have resided in Jalalabad, Kabul and
other major cities and have done so for centuries. Most of these Hindus
and Sikhs are Afghan nationals and have freedom to practice their
religion. They also have their own places of worship.
However conversion of a
Muslim to other religion (especially if it is publicized) is not really
part of the story about the tolerance of religious minorities. Whether or
not Mr. Abdul-Rahman's public announcement of conversion to Christianity
was done out of a sincere desire to witness for his faith or out of sheer
spite is irrelevant when we look at the wider issues. Yet within any
traditional society a change of faith (or lifestyle) is more than just an
issue of finding a more satisfying theology; it is toying with societal
norms of reputation and loyalty, virtues that are even more perceptible in
Afghanistan's heavily tribalized society. In much of Afghan society honor
killing and retribution are accepted norms, irrespective of their clear
prohibitions in Islam. Even as the justices pondered their verdict, Mr.
Abdul-Rahman's family certainly would have preferred his execution if for
no other reason than to save them from public humiliation and shame.
The conversion of
Abdur-Rahman has now grown from being a personal choice of faith to an
international predicament. Many Muslims and non-Muslims view this as an
embodiment of the confrontation between modern values of freedom of
conscience and the code of Islamic Shari'ah. Despite its long
history of religious intolerance, issues of faith in Western societies are
now primarily a personal matter. The constitutions of secular societies
around the world guarantee freedom of conscience and freedom of religion
as inalienable human rights. Secular constitutions provide equal
guarantees and opportunities to all religions within the state's borders
to practice, teach, publish, convert and establish institutions. Muslims
living in Europe, North America and even India have been great
beneficiaries of such freedoms.
The phenomenal growth of
the Muslim community in North America, both through immigration and
conversion, as well as the establishment of Muslim institutions, speaks
volumes to the tolerance and acceptance of religious diversity in the
midst of a primarily Christian society. In company with the
constitutionally authorized equality of all faiths is the great level of
tolerance Americans possess for religious diversity. Mainstream Christian
and Jewish organizations have opened avenues of dialogue and cooperation
with Muslim groups in the country. Here in America the mental ghettoes of
religious separatism are disintegrating and we can see ourselves entering
an age of discourse and mutual respect. The instances of mutual respect
and cooperation afforded those Muslims living in North America are too
numerous, while incidents of impudence and intolerance, seemingly inspired
by the Shari'ah code, have displayed the exact opposite in several
Muslim-majority lands.
It must also be
understood by the reader that the socio-political situation in each
Muslim-majority land varies from place to place. Despite the seemingly
intolerant atmosphere in several, many positive inter-faith and
cross-cultural exchanges are becoming increasingly visible in others.
Muslim countries are mosaic of social and cultural diversity. There has
also existed historically a long tradition of acceptance diversity of
culture and faith in Islamic civilization, a fact that has to be
remembered by those wishing to jettison this value in favor of insularity
and narrow-mindedness.
The question nowadays for
the Muslim community in the West is how we want this very same culture of
freedom and choice that we enjoy as minorities reflected in
Muslim-majority societies. In the globalized reality of today, Western
Muslims have a special duty to promote similar attitudes of respect for
human rights, tolerance and mutuality in Muslim-majority societies. I
firmly believe that this can be done within the strictures of our Islamic
obligations and within the bounds of the Shari'ah.
The final, and most
problematical, issue is the one that needs to be addressed and redressed
above all else: the traditional understanding of radd. While much
has been made of the official radd penalty in the Western media these
days, the fact is that historically this penalty has been rarely enforced,
and usually when it was, it was due to some unmitigated political upheaval
caused by the said apostasy. While some may assert that Mr. Abdur-Rahman
brought all of this public uproar upon himself, in doing so he has forced
an important issue. It is time that we Muslims (both as minorities and
majorities) reflect on the following points:
1. What is the basis of
the radd law? Was it laid down for a specific situation and
specific time or is it an immutable law based upon the Qur'an and the
Sunnah, the tradition of the Prophet?
2. Should such a law now
be appraised from the perspective of the Qur'an and Sunnah in order
to bring it into harmony with new realities of global interaction?
3. What would be the
power of such a law in societies where Muslims live as minorities?
4. Has the Muslim world
(or any single Muslim country or a group of zealots for that mater) the
religiously sanctioned authority to carry out a judgment or issue a fatwa
for the execution of an apostate?
5. Should this issue be
resolved on the basis of reciprocity? If Muslims have the freedom to
convert others to their faith, shouldn't Muslims also have similar
freedoms to be converted to other faiths?
6. If Muslims living in
non-Muslim societies enjoy religious freedoms as well as the independence
to establish their own Islamic intuitions, should non-Muslims also be
given similar rights in Muslim countries?
These points are
important for all Muslims to ponder, but they have special significance
for those of us living in free and secular societies where we enjoy the
protection of state laws. Having presented these questions I respectfully
urge the Fiqh Council in North America as well as other Islamic scholars
and theologians nationwide to respond to the subject of radd and the issue
of religious freedom and to urgently provide a well thought-out statement
of for an Islamic position on both matters. At the same time I urge
various authorized Dar ul-Ifta (houses of religious decrees)
worldwide to address this issue on a priority basis and review the
Shari'ah in the light of the ever-shrinking world we live in.
As a believing and
practicing Muslim who is deeply involved in interreligious dialogue and
understanding, I call on all Muslim judicial systems and legislatures
worldwide (where the radd law exists) to contemplate the decorum for this
modern age in which we live and bring our age-old and well-tested values
in line with universal values. It is high time that Muslims learn to
respond to all such challenges intellectually and academically, not
through passionate or repellent reaction. The world has reached a level of
maturity where the majority of its people are prepared to hear whatever
opinions we may voice and many would even argue our case, provided we also
show a willingness to hear and respect theirs.
The author is Executive Director, IQRA International Educational Foundation, and may be contacted at draghazi@aim.com
|
