Chapter Ten
The Problem of “the Other” as a Term
Some Muslims object to using the term of “the other,” in contexts where it refers to non-Muslims. They accuse those who use this term with such a reference of audacity in moving the truthful discourse out of its proper context and of defiance of the command of God, who calls them “unbelievers.” To use the term “the other” instead of “the unbeliever,” according to that argument, is a kind of appendage to God’s words and to the Qur'an and the Prophet’s Sunna. Islam rejects such an appendage, and this appendage to the Qur'an terminology is used in the discourse of some Muslims to flatter unbelievers under some political pressures that are no longer a secret. These pressures are exercised by countries of unbelievers which, as the advocates of this argument put it, dominate most countries of the world today, particularly Muslim countries. This flattery, they say, is a kind of acquiescence to the unjust, and a Muslim should not fall into the pitfall of the hazards of such acquiescence in Islamic Law. The severe consequences are indicated in the warning: “… lest Hellfire touch you” (Hood XI: 113).
To begin with, I confirm that using the term “the other” as a substitute intended to cancel the term “unbeliever,” “unbelievers,” and other terms used in the Glorious Qur'an is a serious violation of Islamic Law. A person who uses the term with that intention, that is substitution and cancellation of the terminology of the Glorious Qur'an, undoubtedly commits that violation and I declare before God my disavowal of him and his action and warn against this deviation from the True Faith. However, I think better of my fellow Muslims and believe it is unlikely that any of them would have such an orientation. I consider any Muslim with just an iota of belief in his heart or some degree of knowledge of God’s religion, albeit a small one, to be high above falling into such a deviation. Only complete ignorance regarding the sacredness of the Glorious Qur'an and of every letter, word, and verse God has put in it would lead to such a deviation. As every Muslim well knows, the Qur'an – in its totality and its details, including its letters, words, verses, method of writing, and order – is absolutely verified, and no Muslim is allowed to change or replace any letter of the Glorious Qur'an as it is circulated among Muslims today among Muslims, or add to it or delete from it even one letter. It has been and is the verified, accepted, and sacred Qur'an for Muslims all through the ages. Thus, if a person using the term “the other” with the determined intention to change and replace this person should be exposed, his deviation and violation should be put to an end, and disavowal of him and his action should be declared.
On the other hand, “the other” is used at times in a general sense to refer to all non-Muslims, covering all their variations, their characteristics, and their religious, cultural, political, racial, national, and gender groupings, for they, as it is well known, are not all the same. I do not see in such a usage anything wrong either legally or linguistically. In such a context, “the other” is a term employed for an encyclopedic reference that cannot be covered by any other term, since other terms mostly have a categorizing nature, a more definite meaning, and a more specific legal reference. The term “unbelievers” for example, refers to a group of God’s creatures who have, in Islam, a situation and are covered by rulings different from the situation and rulings relevant to those referred to in the Qur'an as “polytheists.” The same is true about the terms “hypocrites,” “People of the Book,” “magi,” “apostates,” “atheists,” “people covered by covenants,” “combatants,” “security seekers,” and other classification terms of the Qur'an that are well known. This is the religious aspect of the matter.
As for the cultural and political aspect, “the other” is a term that covers many intellectual, philosophical, ideological, social, environmental, behavioral, and professional groupings of the West and East, and many others as well, which cannot be covered collectively by any term derived from any of the fields to which they belong. Each field has its own classification terminology that cannot easily accommodate the references and implications of other fields. “The other,” therefore, is a term that provides a convenient way to address or refer to all without any exception and without making any blunder. It is truly an encyclopedic term with a clear encyclopedic denotation. It is, moreover, a summing-up term, and Arabs appreciate brevity. Thus, it is a rhetorical expression that spares the user going into the details of descriptive or classifying terms, which, on many occasions and in many situations, are not really needed.
For all these classifications, Islam has a general attitude and has, at the same time, specific attitudes and rulings that apply to each category alone, in as much as the specific Islamic term used by God, the Most Sublime, applies to it. This means “the other” cannot express the legal reference when dealing with a specific classification the same way as expressed by the particular term for it specified by God and used in the Qur'an. Such specific terms are precise and clear-cut in their reference to the intended classification and the rulings that apply to it in the Islamic system.
It might be asked, “But why not us the term ‘people’? It is, on the one hand, a Qur'an term and, on the other hand, it has an encyclopedic reference and meaning.” In principle, this is a reasonable question. There is no doubt that the term ‘people’ is a nice, noble, and graceful term, and it is sufficient to its credit that it is one of the terms used by God in the Qur'an. “The other” is also a Qur'an term, used in the Qur'an in more than one place and in various forms. The following are examples from the Glorious Qur'an:
It was accepted from one and not accepted from the other (Al-Maidah V: 27).
The other said: “And I saw myself carrying bread on my head and birds were eating of it” (Yusuf XXII: 36).
And he was assisted at it by other people (Al-Furqaan XXV: 4).
If one of them wrongs the other … (Al-Hujuraat XLIX: 9).
Then after them, We raised another generation (Al-Dominion XXIII: 31).
… And raised after them other nations (Al-Anbiya XXI: 11).
We also made other people inherit it (Al-Dukhaan XLIV: 28).
The word ‘people,” however, does not express the meaning intended in the contexts where “the other” is needed. “The other” is most often used to express difference from or similarity to the people of other religions, cultures, civilizations, and political views. All these are people, and the expression people, is a collective noun. We share this term with others without any distinction, for we are people, and so are all other human beings. Every human being is similar to others in his form and a brother to them in humanity. But within this human framework, people differ and have various religions, cultures, nationalities, races, genders, customs, and conventions. Thus, if someone says, for example, “People and we,” it is as if he says, “People and people. The word “we” here refers to the human species and, therefore, does not imply difference, which is most often meant when the phrase “The other and we” is used.
There is no doubt that both we and the other share being people, but we differ in our characteristics and personal things. For him, I am another, and for me, he is “another” within the framework of our being human. Our Lord and the Lord of people is one and the same, but people are different in their beliefs and concepts concerning their Lord. They are also different in their cultures, their customs and traditions, their approach and behavior, and their interests. It is this difference that we express when we use the term “the other.” It means the other in religion, culture, civilization, nationality, policy, interest, approach homeland, environment, nation, or people, and so on along the list of variations and private human concerns. Moreover, the term “people’ would also be suspect, according to the logic and the attitude adopted in objecting to the usage of “the other.” “People,” for critics of the term, would also soften Qur'an terminology and be an appendage to the Will of God, Who used for things specific names that must be used, without turning to other general terms that would confuse believers with unbelievers or with others, according to that logic. This means that the term “people” would not solve the problem for those who are quick to accuse.
On the other hand, someone might say:
I am all for this variation, and it is certainly something real and evident in the lives of people and communities. God, Himself, tells us this, when He says, “People, We have created you from a male and a female and made you into nations and tribes in order to know each other. The noblest among you in God’s consideration are those who fear Him the most” [Al-Hujuraat XLIX: 13]. But using the term “the other” might suggest that we and this other are equal, while we are not. We are a distinguished nation in its belief and faith, in its approach and values, and in its traits and characteristics, which belong to it alone, and not to any other nation. We are – through the command of God, the Most Sublime – the best of nations: “You are the best nation that has been known by Mankind” [Aal 'Imraan III: 110]. And through the honor bestowed upon us by God, the Most Glorious and Sublime, we are the middle nation among all others: “We have made you a middle nation” [Al-Baqarah II: 143]. We are also honored and commissioned by God to be a nation of witnesses for Mankind “… so that you will be witness for Mankind” [Ibid.]. The term “the other” puts us on equal footing with other nations, and perhaps, with time, these divine characteristics with which God have honored us alone out of all nations will be obliterated in the culture of new Muslim generations, while they are traits we should hold to and constantly reinforce in the education and culture of our rising generations.
There is no doubt that God have favored the Islamic Nation with grand qualities and honored it with sublime traits. These qualities should be understood as qualities of tasks rather than qualities of racial or national superiority. We are the best nation due to three traits, and we continue to be so as long as we hold on to them. We
1. enjoin justice,
2. censure evil, and
3. Believe in God.
On the other hand, we are the middle nation among all others, because:
§ We are a moderate nation in our faith and belief. We do not take our religion to an extreme, nor do we neglect its values.
§ We are a moderate nation in our spiritual and everyday worship. We do not prefer one over the other.
§ We are a moderate nation in our approach. We do not sever all relations with the other, and we do not exhibit unrestrained inclinations.
§ We are a moderate nation when we enter into a quarrel, and we are a moderate nation when we enter into a friendship.
§ We are a moderate nation in dealing with the other; justice gets us closer and injustice drive us apart.
We are a nation of witnesses for mankind, because we witness that
§ God is the One and Only the Eternal, who begets none, nor is He begotten, and he has no partner;
§ religion in God’s consideration is Islam;
§ anybody who seeks a religion other than Islam will not have it accepted from him,
§ Islam is a religion of mercy for all mankind;
§ justice in Islam is for all people, without any distinction;
§ God, the Most Sublime, gives a high value to human life and dignity;
§ God respects human freedom and gives a high value to human reason;
§ God, the Most Sublime, gives mankind the freedom of belief, for He says, “There is no coercion in religion”;
§ the earth is the dwelling place of all creatures, and its safety should be maintained;
§ the resources of the universe should be available to all people without any oppression or monopoly; and
§ Security and peace characterize the normal relationship between people.
Yes, through all of this, we are the best nation. Through this, and by observing it and the actual system of our life, we prove to be the middle nation among all others. Through this, and with our serious and refined pursuit of its objectives, we qualify ourselves to have the honor of the task of being witnesses for mankind. Yes, it is a distinction of tasks, performance, and assignment, rather than of national, racial, or gender supremacy. The Islamic Nation must understand that it is open for all mankind to join, regardless of their ethnic groups, races, colors, and genders. It is composed of Arabs and non-Arabs, with all the range of their nationalities; of white, black, and yellow. It is not a nation of a particular group of people, race, or gender. Nor are its members of a particular color, excluding other colors. It is the nation of all ethnic groups, races, genders, and colors, because all are honored servants and respectable creatures of God.
Undoubtedly, we are a nation with qualities and characteristics of its own, but we call for mutual acquaintance and coexistence with the other, without condescension or attitude of superiority, and without treating him with contempt or depriving him of any of his rights or belongings. On the other hand, we do not submit or yield, nor do we give up our identity, pride, or any of the qualities and tasks assigned to us by God. For us, the other is a brother in humanity, a partner in the mission of vicegerency on earth, a neighbor and partner in regional citizenship, as he is a neighbor and partner in universal citizenship. He is also a road companion in the fields of life, a partner in security and interests. Yes, the common ground we share with the other is extensive, and it falls within the framework of our religious and cultural variation and has the basis of confirming the religious and cultural aspects peculiar to each side.
Therefore, using the term “the other” does not seek, as some assume or fear, to confuse things, cancel variations, and obliterate special qualities. Nor does it seek to give up one’s identity and replace it with a common identity or religion. Each nation, each group, and each civilization has its own characteristics and traits, which it holds to and is proud of. We are ordered in our religion not to deprive people of any of their rights, and, in return, we refuse to be deprived by anyone of our right to what we believe in or of our distinctive qualities of religion, culture, and civilization.
On this basis, “the other” is not a term meant to cancel one party to the advantage of another, nor to obliterate differences and peculiarities between people. It is used only because it is an inclusive term, used to refer to human beings other than us, with all their variety and titles. Ultimately, each of us is “the other” for other people.
In summary, I hold that I find no justification for some Muslims to be apprehensive about using the term “the other,” or reject it. We all know that we should be liberal in our terminology. Once intentions are pure and suspicion is absent, the devil’s effort to divide people will fail, hard feelings will be removed from hearts, and the ranks will draw close in the niches of obedience and pure servitude to God, the One, the Beneficent, the Merciful, the Kind One, the Forgiver, the Giver, and the Guide to the Straight Path.
From His Book (Partners ... not Guardians) Part Four / Chapter Ten
|
To the Nation’s leaders - To the Nation’s scholars and intellectuals - To leaders of the world |
All Rights Reserved For The Author Prof. Dr. Hamid Al-Rifaie