Translated material
Complementarity experience
Various and sometimes rather difficult accusations against Islam as religions today have become a common place and almost a stereotype of mass consciousness. The belief that Islam is a religion of aggressive, reactionary, totalitarian, intolerant, backward, wild, terrorist, etc., not only the inhabitants, but also some outstanding cultural figures. Fresh in the memory of the tough statements of the fashionable French writer Michel Welbek - he even had to explain to this in court, which, however, did not see crime in them.
It is necessary to admit that such ideas are not nodel. Neither typical phenomena of xenophobia, nor a “conspiracy against Islam” and a focused policy of pro -American mass media would not be enough to explain such a common negative attitude. Decades of terrorism under the flag of Islam, numerous conflicts on the boundaries of the Muslim world and inside it, finally, the acute problems arising in the mass household communication of Muslims and non -Muslims living next to each other cannot but reproduce the unattractive image of this religion again and again.
But even if you agree that the prevailing image is true to some extent, what to do next? This would mean that the spiritual wealth of one and a half thousandth traditions are sent to a landfill of history and are more inaccessible to humanity, which considers itself progressive. This would mean that the spiritual wealth of Western civilization is finally buried for Muslims. Finally, the conflict between modern civilization and peoples who want to remain faithful to Islam is insoluble. Or permitted, but only by eliminating one of the parties.
Obviously, the way out of this impasse cannot be found within the framework of the philistine approach. No matter how we are prone to a simple view of things and simple decisions, we will have to turn to science for help, with its desire to draw subtle differences between close phenomena and categories. In this case, we are talking about distinguishing the message of religion, its Kerigm, and how this message is refracted in the minds of people, always due to factors of place and time.
Kerigma (from the Greek “news”, “posting”, “sermon”) is a term returned to modern thought by the Protestant theologian Rudolf Boltman. This term denotes the meaningful core of a particular religion, the message that its founders addressed to people. What is the news of Islam? Islam primarily teaches compliance with such moral responsibilities that are enduring nature and are valid for all people, wherever they live, no matter what goals, no matter what goals are pursued and no matter how they relate to each other. It can be argued that other religions carry such news, but this is not entirely true. In other religions, the norms of behavior, no matter how moral they are, are subordinated to some goals that are heteronas in relation to morality as such-love, as in Christianity [1] , inner freedom, as in Buddhism, and so on. It is good that everything that corresponds to these ideals, and everything that does not correspond to them can be neglected. Only in Islam are moral responsibilities based on the eternal and omnipotent will of the Creator, self -shaped and absolutely indisputable - they are all performed for the sake of submission to the will of God (such, in fact, the meaning of the word “Islam”), and this submission is self -suffering. If we allow at least the slightest opportunity that there is more than one legislator of morality, that the Supreme Judge is not absolutely transcendental to the world of the defendants, that he is at least somewhat similar to us, that his will is subject to fluctuations or his power can be called into question-the moral law loses its firmness. In this case, we inevitably fall into moral relativism, we admit that every nation and even every person have the right to have a special idea of moral duty. But then a wanderer, who finds himself in foreign lands or just entering a foreign house, will not be able to feel safe, because he will not know that another people or another person considers it permitted in relation to him.
Essentially, Kerigma of Islam embodies the ideal that was still called the “civil religion” thinkers. “It is very important for the state,” writes Rousseau in his treatise “On the Public Treaty,” “every citizen has a religion, teaching him to love his duties; But the dogmas of this religion are interested in the state and its members only insofar as they are related to morality and duties that prescribe these dogmas in relation to another person to those who profess them ... After all, there is a purely civil doctrine, the rules of which should be established by sovereign; This in a special sense will not be the dogmas of religion, but the feelings of the public, without which it is impossible to be a good citizen or a faithful subject. And without forcing anyone to believe in this catechism, sovereign can expel from the state of anyone who does not believe in it. He can expel him not as a wicked, but as an antisocial person who is unable to sincerely love the laws of justice and, if necessary, give his life to the victim of duty. The dogmas of the civil religion should be simple, few, announced in accurate expressions, without clarification and comments. The existence of a powerful, rational, beneficial deity, which has foresight and providence, life of the future century, the bliss of the righteous and the punishment of the evil, the holiness of the social contract, here are all positive dogmas ” [2] . Is it not true, all this, and especially in the last phrases, is very reminiscent of Islam?
It should be noted that the idea of civil religion, according to a number of researchers, is also realized in the United States, who are aware of themselves primarily by a Christian country [3] . Despite the last circumstance, the foundations of this religion are fundamentally different from Christianity, since Christianity is a religion of love, and love cannot be imposed into the duty, especially social (only in Nazi Germany, love for the Fuhrer was declared a legal concept) [4] .
Kerigma is expressed primarily in the arches of creed formulas. However, this formalization does not take place in all religions, in addition, the most formalized text always leaves a fairly wide field for a variety of readings and interpretations, directly dependent on the characteristics of the religious consciousness of the reader. It is on their basis that the transient forms of a particular religion are born. Even Erich Fromm in the work “Psychoanalysis and Religion” spoke of two types of religious consciousness, in the light of which the same faith looks completely different-authoritarian and humanistic.
It is believed that in Islam the mentioned field is very small, because the Qur'an is something more than just a goddessed book (like the Bible of Christians), this is a direct speech of God, extremely monolithic and unambiguous. However, the righteous person who is honored by Muslims as the fourth caliph Ali (cousin and son -in -law of the Prophet Muhammad), claimed that the Koran himself did not say anything, people say for the Qur'an. And people really speak differently, sometimes diametrically opposite, demonstrating a wide range of all kinds of readings of the Kerigma of Islam and, accordingly, the cultural forms of this religion. Why is this happening?
Firstly, in Islam there is no church as a single and mystically meaningful corporation of the clergy, and thereby there is no single consecrated opinion that would enjoy indisputable authority. Moreover, in Islam there can not be clergy in general, since in it all believers are absolutely equal before God, including the freedom of interpretation of the Qur'an. According to purely rationalistic - and not in mystical - reasons are distinguished only by people who are distinguished by their scholarship in the field of Muslim scripture and legend (Koran and Hadis).
Secondly, in Islam there are various methods of interpretation of the Qur'an, divided into two groups: Tafsir and Tavil-letter-alphabetic and symbolic-allegorical. The second approach is especially characteristic of Shiites and Sufis. Its use often leads to conclusions directly opposite to the literal reading. The most striking and significant example of such a contradiction is the interpretation of Sura 71 “NUH” the greatest Sufi teacher Ibn Arabi [5] . The breadth of Sufi interpretations directly affects not only abstract, but also purely practical things. So, one of the most terrible sins in Islam is to give the “companion” to the Creator (Shirk, polytheism)-the Sufis interpret not as a formal worship of any other deities (which they could relate very condescendingly), but as any psychological obstacle to “learning themselves to God”. It is remarkable that At-Tlimsani (student of Ibn Arabi) equated the Koran himself to the shirk.
Thirdly, the Qur'an, like the Bible, did not fall to the ground, according to a well-aimed expression of Chesterton, in the form of a neat volume. During the life of Muhammad, the text of the Muslim revelation was transmitted mainly in oral form, there were only separate records, and made not by the prophet himself, but by other people. The composition and order of these records varied. And only 20 years after the death of Muhammad, a special commission was appointed Caliph Osman, which chose one of many versions and formed a canonical text on its basis.
Fourth, the well-known problematicity laid down in the fate of the Koranic text, gave rise to a special section of Muslim theology, Namh (this word literally means “abolition”, “elimination”, “change”, “transformation”). Namh is engaged in the abolition of some divine commandments (Nass) in favor of others. Since the source of Sharia requirements is not only the Qur'an, but also the Sunnah (legend consisting of hadiths), not only one ayah of the Qur'an can be replaced by another and not only an indication of the hadith can be replaced by an indication of the ayat, but the ayat can be replaced by hadis (not to mention the replacement of hadith guediz - between Muslim scientists, including within Sunnism, they exist Significant discrepancies about which hadiths are considered false and which are reliable).
The question of which order should be abolished, and which, instead of abolished, is decided, of course, people decide - albeit diligently studying the religious sciences, but not devoid of human weaknesses and not free from circumstances, which apply an imprint on their way of thinking. And since the Quinnic text was also ordered by people, they have to determine the criterion of preferences. Traditionally, later Medinsky verses are preferred to earlier Meccan. However, not all theologians agree with this. For example, the modern theologian Mahmud Mohamed Tah proposed to consider the texts of Muslim law the texts of not the Medinsky, but the Meccan period. Meccan requirements are much more liberal in relation to women, foreigners, etc. During this period, the verses of the Koran are addressed to all people, therefore their imperatives are universal, while the Medine poems are addressed primarily to the Arabs of the VII century, who lived in an unfavorable environment. If those norms that were previously used in Sharia will be canceled, and other Muslim law will be based on other, also recorded in the Qur'an and Sunnah, but previously canceled norms, Muslim society can radically transform and will hardly contradict modern ideas about freedom and equality.
So, Kerigma Islam leaves a rather wide scope for various readings, and there is actually nothing in it, which would certainly prevent the formation of a humanistic, and not an authoritarian version of Islamic religiosity. But for some reason, it is the authoritarian reading of Islam, which causes modern conflicts. Islam clearly does not correspond to the latest trends in modern religious consciousness, including theistic. The religiosity of the postmodern era implies the shift of accents from the myth to Kerigme and from the ritual to ethics, a more meaningful, rational approach to the basics of the doctrine, less attachment to outdated philosophical and scientific concepts, a more balanced and positive attitude towards earthly pleasures, including sexuality, some liberalization of confessional institutions, finally, a large tolerance for the Gentiles and readiness for dialogue with other faiths.
All this we almost do not observe in the world of Islam. What is the reason? Apparently, not in the Muslim religion as such, but in the culture of peoples, traditionally professing this religion. This conclusion is confirmed by two circumstances. Firstly, the crisis of culture, the loss of creative initiative began almost simultaneously (in the XV-XVI centuries) in various countries of the East, including non-Muslim (India, China, Southeast Asia). Secondly, this crisis was preceded by a period of cultural leadership, which is characterized, in particular, the much greater flexibility of Muslim religious consciousness. Only in the 20th century did Muslims appear who decided to blow up the Buddhist statues in Bamian - during the previous one and a half thousand years, no one thought about it.
Once Islam was not “backward” and “reactionary”, but the most “advanced” and “progressive” religion (if these epithets are generally attached to religion). Just at a time when the Muslim peoples shared the achievements of their culture with Europeans, Islam, which was widespread from Senegal to Indonesia and from African horn to Siberia, demonstrated his ability to organically integrate into a wide variety of life styles. Almost nowhere in this vast space, Muslim law did not become the only regulator of public life and everywhere was supplemented by norms based on local customs. In each region, a special form of religious consciousness arose, the most corresponding to the integration of Islam into the lifestyle of the peoples who accepted it.
In Iran, these were Shiism and Sufism. The Shiites, especially the so -called “extreme”, very freely interpreted the Muslim picture of the world, creating their own versions of a rather colorful metaphysics, which, combined with the corresponding religious and social practice, has formed what is now called “Gnostic Islam” (the term itself is very eloquent). Sufis, representing the mystical direction in Islam, saw in Sharia the only first step of the mystical path, which can be neglected if the highest goal - unity with God requires this. Therefore, in Sufi literature, and especially in mystical poetry, we can find examples of a more free attitude towards alcohol, sexuality, unacavement, etc.
In India, this trend has reached the maximum degree. If the Persian and Central Asian Sufis only allowed women and Gentiles to their gifts, the Indian Sufis accepted the Gentiles in their brotherhoods and urgently recommended that women participate in Sufi rites. If the Sufis of the Middle East could neglect certain Sharia requirements and expressed thoughts about the mystical equality of all religions, then the Indians included local rites (primarily Hindu) in their religious practice. The Mogol ruler of India Jella ad-Din Akbar in the 16th century even tried to introduce a syncretic religion-“Din-i Ilahi” (“Divine Vera”)-which combined the provisions of Islam, Zoroastrianism, Hinduism and Jainism [6] .
In tropical Africa and Southeast Asia, a complementary, that is, ensuring the complementarity of Islam and a local lifestyle, the form of religiosity has become the so-called adatal Islam (from the word “adat”-a pre-Islamic custom). As already mentioned, everywhere the norms of Muslim law act simultaneously with adat, but in the case of advent of Islam, local traditions even penetrate into the creed and cult. Thus, we are already talking about a kind of syncretic Islam.
In China, the assimilation of Islam took completely unique forms, characteristic only for this civilization. The fact is that by the time of the arrival of Islam, a system of complementarity of the three exercises (San Jiao) was already developed here, according to which each of the religions (Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism) performs its own functions, acts in its plane and therefore cannot intersect from the other and contradict it. The process of integration of Islam into this system began around the 16th century-it is associated with the name of the famous Muslim-Confucian High Ruya. In the XVII-XVIII centuries, a complex of texts was created, called Islamic-Confucian. Finally, at the turn of the 19th - 20th centuries, such a wonderful figure appeared as Ma Yuanzhan (1853-1920). Being an imam and Sufi, the leader of the “Muslim Renaissance” in China, at the same time he remained a genuine bearer of Chinese culture, consciously following Confucianism, vividly interested in Buddhism and Taoism and supporting the most warm relations with representatives of these confessions.
In the north and west, complementary Islam was represented by the Hanifite Mazhab. В отличие от других религиозно-правовых школ, этот мазхаб позволяет считать местные обычаи столь же значимым источником права, как Коран и Сунну, что упрощает деловые отношения, облегчает деловые и бытовые контакты с иноверцами, значительно ослабляет традиционный ригоризм бытовых правил. Благодаря своей широкой терпимости ханифитский мазхаб стал начиная с XI века быстро распространяться, охватив Анатолию, Балканы, Северный Кавказ, Причерноморье, Поволжье, Среднюю Азию, Афганистан, Индию и обширную степную зону до Китая. Ханифитами были ханы Золотой Орды, Великие Моголы и султаны Османской империи. Этому мазхабу следует большинство мусульман бывшего СССР.
В XIX–XX веках на основе ханифитского мазхаба стали складываться различные формы либерального ислама (аналогичным образом крайней формой ханбалитского мазхаба стал ваххабизм). Среди мусульман России, в Поволжье и Средней Азии, возник джадидизм (от «усул-и-джадид» — новый метод). В наши дни он переживает возрождение, причем его сторонники отождествляют себя с более поздним явлением, получившим название «евроислам». Это понятие в середине 1990 годов ввел в научный оборот профессор политологии Гёттингенского университета Бассам Тиби, обозначивший так ислам, который вполне может уживаться с демократическим государственным устройством и укладом жизни современных стран Запада. В качестве примера профессор Тиби приводит комплементарный вариант ислама, развившийся в Боснии до войны на Балканах. Как западный уклад жизни влияет на мусульманское право [7] , так и мусульманское право влияет на западное правосудие, о чем свидетельствует, например, прошедший в 1998 году в Германии международный коллоквиум «Исламское право и его рецепция судами на Западе».
Таким образом, в арсенале ислама есть не только возможности, но и опыт реальной интеграции в образ жизни самых разных народов. С течением времени в некоторых регионах мусульманского мира этот опыт был забыт, но в наши дни он вновь актуален. И прежде всего для самих мусульман — ведь многие из них драматически переживают вызов западной цивилизации, которая предлагает им многочисленные соблазны, но вместе с тем ассоциируется с изменой вере отцов.
Ислам всегда был чужд аскетизму, и мусульманину нелегко противостоять этим соблазнам. Но так же нелегко ему отвернуться от своей религии. Выражением этого острого внутреннего конфликта и стал тот наблюдаемый нами сейчас конфликт внешний, который часто приводит к многочисленным жертвам. В этой связи опыт комплементарного ислама актуален и для немусульман, решающих проблему сосуществования с мусульманами.
Будущее ислама и мусульманского сообщества сегодня в руках тех мыслителей и школ, которые могут и хотят применить этот богатейший опыт к современной ситуации. Задача тех, кто желает безболезненной интеграции мусульман в немусульманское общество и усвоения культурных ценностей ислама европейской цивилизацией, состоит в том, чтобы способствовать усилению комплементарных веяний в исламе. Только таким образом может быть разрешено одно из самых опасных противоречий современности.
[1] Любовь («агапэ») далеко не всегда предполагает следование нравственному закону: «Плод же духа: любовь, радость, мир, долготерпение, благость, милосердие, вера, кротость, воздержание. На таковых нет закона» (Галат. 5:22–23); «Закон положен не для праведника, но для беззаконных и непокорных, нечестивых и грешников (1 Тим. 1:9). Недаром Августин писал: «Люби — и делай что хочешь» (Рассуждения на Послание Иоанна к парфянам 7, 8). Ислам, напротив, требует исполнять долг перед ближним независимо от отношения к нему: «И может быть, вы ненавидите что-нибудь, а оно для вас благо, и может быть, вы любите что-нибудь, а оно для вас зло, — поистине, Аллах знает, а вы не знаете!» (Коран, 2:213 (216)).
[2] Руссо Ж.-Ж. Об общественном договоре, или Принципы политического права. Глава VIII «О гражданской религии». Перевод М. А. Рейснера.
[3] См.: Religion, Morality, and the Law: Nomos XXX / Ed. by JR Pennak and JW Chapman, (NY; L., 1988).
[4] Характеризуя людей, которые не считали себя христианами, но самой своей жизнью осуществляли христианский идеал, современные богословы называют их «анонимными христианами». Последователей гражданской религии смело можно назвать «анонимными мусульманами».
[5] История пророка Нуха — библейского Ноя — трактовалась суфиями как сложная аллегория. В частности, потоп отождествлялся ими с бурным житейским океаном, в котором спасается лишь тот, кто плывет на ковчеге следования Божьим заповедям.
[6] Характерно, что именно суфизм привлек к исламу некоторых представителей интеллектуальной элиты Запада — мыслителей (Р. Генон, Р. Гароди, Ф. Шюон) и востоковедов (М. Лингз, Т. Буркхардт, Ж. Мишон, М. Шодкевич и др.).
[7] См.: Horowitz DL The Qur'an and the Common Law: Islamic law reform and the theory of legal change // American journal of comparative law. Berkeley, 1994. Vol. 42. № 3. P. 543–580.