Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam Book

I've come across so many disillusioned individuals in the Muslim world that adamantly claim that reform is a naive utopia. That fossilised clergy has such a strong hold on interpretation and on the majority of believers that thinking outside the box has become impossible, even dangerous. Yet that is exactly what Amina Wadud does, making her a controversial figure both home and abroad. "The implication is that for any who wish to be accepted as truly Muslim, their struggles cannot go beyond established patriarchy or male authorities, otherwise they face the potential consequence of being labelled outsiders to Islam"

But Wadud is not naive, she has been on the discriminated end of every context possible, as an African American in USA, as a single parent of 5 in a society without sufficient child care, and as a woman in Islam, in the West, not to mention academia. Yet she has nurtured a deep faith for more than four decades, and excelled as an Islamic scholar. I was struck by how logical her arguments are, rooted in that if Qur'an is for all times and all people, it must therefore be interpreted through the context of all those times and people. The essence of Qur'an is justice, and we must all strive towards it in the context we experience. Circumstances have changed immensely since the time of revelation, and new interpretations must emanate from the world as it is today, with awareness of human rights and a global economy that requires women to carry as much of a financial burden as men. For those that deny this possibility and staunchly claim that there only can be one interpretation of the scripture they ignore that "as they analyse the same sources, their diverse conclusions indicate that what is basic to "Islam" results from only the human interaction with those texts - an interpretive process. Ultimately textual meaning is neither fixed nor static . Hermeneutics, as core to the act of interpretation, must be emphasised, since a single source can and has lead to diverse conclusions."

There is quite a bit of semantics that may get tedious for those that aren't interested in too much of a deep dive, but I understand why she stresses on the importance of definitions, such as using "engaged surrender" rather than "submission", or on the right to claim who is and is not a Muslim: "It is just as easy for liberal Muslims to dismiss Muslim terrorists by saying they are not "true" to Islam. When I engaged in such oversimplification and reductionist claims, I inadvertently implied I actually had the power to express and possess the "true" Islam. The arrogance of this claim allowed me to remove myself from the responsibility of standing against certain evils performed in the name of Islam". "Despite numerous definitions, historical and current, whether explained or not, knowingly or unknowingly, each user assumes some authority that justifies him or her to determine when others would be considered adherents to their understandings, practice, and limitations of "Islam" ". How many that seem to forget that judgment is in the hands of God, and not their own.

Wadud believes there are egalitarian qualities in Islam, that we in its practice must have full moral agency to be able to actively surrender ourselves to Allah. Patriarchal control of women's lives limits that agency, and "according to shari'ah women are not full, autonomous, and independent agents in the family. They are only a facility to its wholeness and wellbeing. They are taught to sacrifice or develop personal interests to the higher goal of family wellbeing. Meanwhile men and sons are encouraged to develop ideas of manhood as unlimited empowerment". I so recognise her description of "double-talk", men that start a sentence with that "men and women are equal in Islam", and continue with BUT "men have a degree above women", basically that "if she is truly Muslim, she must remain satisfied with her rightful status - even if actually second-class", I don't know how many times I've seen this comment in social media.

She is not aiming for secularism, since her "analysis differs from secular articulations of social justice in that the total well-being of the human creature is not limited to the physical or material", and she (conscious of what the label would bring on?), nor does she call herself a Muslim feminist, but "pro-faith" and "pro-feminism". And even tho she stresses on that women's liberation in the Muslim world must be different from that of the Western, she freely admits to borrowing much of its rhetoric, such that "the personal is political", meaning that the free labour that women have performed throughout time must be recognised by bringing it into public policy.

I really enjoyed Waduds's vision, and she does not shy away from discussing problematic passages in scripture that can't be rationalised away (such as 4:34), tho I will go on to read her previous publication where textual interpretation is in focus. But sadly her aim at change from the inside is far from on the verge of taking root in any majority Muslim communities (or other), since "theories were always based on the presumptions of the male Muslim as the normative human being", and that foundation will not easily budge. But "the master's tools will not dismantle the master's house", and progress cannot be achieved within old interpretation. It is time that women "appropriate Islamic primary sources, especially the Qur'an" rather than to remain on the pedestal prison where they have been put by male scholars.