Fatima is Fatima - Dr. Ali Shariati

Ali Shariati (November 23, 1933 in Kahak - 1975 in Southampton, England) was an Iranian revolutionary ^[1] and sociologist, who focused on the sociology of religion. He is held as one of the most influential Iranian intellectuals of the 20th century ^[2] and has been called the 'ideologue of the Iranian Revolution'.

I was introduced to him through the writings of Basit Bilal Koshul. Koshul’s work titled ‘Recounting the Milestones: An appraisal of Islam’s Encounter with Modernity” also outlines the life and ideas of Ali Shariati.  (Read it here, page 66). According to Koshul, Shariati was attempting to articulate a vision of Islam that made Islam a living historical phenomenon, at the same time that it exposed the vulgarity, hollowness and inanity of the attempts by the political and cultural elite of Iran to uncritically import secular, Western culture into their society.

I came across Ali Shariati’s lecture titled “Fatima is Fatima” (Read it here) which he delivered at Husseineh Ershad, an educational institutional established by Shariati in Tehran. The essence of the lecture is very interesting and worth reading especially in today’s world where women are divided between tradition and modernity. I have pasted some highlights from the lecture below but before I end this post I would like to share with you a paragraph from the above mentioned work of Koshul.

“Shariati notes that everything that has been said about “man” in the Qurab also applies to “woman” because, from the Quranic point of view, both are created from exactly the same nature and each is equally liable to be held accountable on the Day of Judgement for his or her deeds. Commenting on the popular misconception that the woman in created “..from the rib of the man,” Shariati notes that in Hebrew and Arabic one word means both “rib” and “nature”. During the process of translation, the word “rib” has been used more often with reference to the relationship of the creation of the women in relation to man. But the following ayah of the Quran makes it clear that the woman is created from the same nature as man:

And Allah made for you mates, of your own nature. (Al-Nahl 16:72)”

Highlights

A new class is created. It is characterized by foreignness and modernization. It adores the West. It is not religious. If it had a memory of or inclination towards religion, it has long since been stamped out. Luxury, transience, pretentiousness and foreignness prevail among this class. And their Islam, in the words of Sayyid Qutb, is an American Islam. 

Woman, in their (traditional clergy) view, must also remain as she is today because, simply enough, her form existed in the past and has become part of social traditions. It may be 19th century, 17th century or even pre-Islamic, but it is considered to be religious and Islamic.

The idealistic schools of thought embrace the highest values, the absolute and most desirable ideologies. Each and every fact is categorically rejected if it does not suit them. They have no patience. They deny unpleasant realities and dig out the roots of anger. Anger, violence, pleasure seeking and greed are realities which do exist…

The opposite of idealism is realism. Its followers see everything, no matter how ugly or unpleasant, simply because it has an external existence. They accept a thing, attach their hearts to it and find faith. They oppose and reject, however, all beauty, truth and correctness simply because these do not record with existing realities. Through this rejection, they become unbelievers…

We (Muslims) only have the right to know fashion models and beauty queens. We have only the right to know movie sex goddesses in cheap exploitation films, the Queen of Monaco and all of the seven female guards around James Bond. Such women are the sacrifices made to European production of Europe. They are the toys and wind-up dolls of the wealthy. They are the slaves of the houses of the new merchants. We Muslims only have the right to know these examples of the women of European civilization. I have never seen photographs from Cambridge, the Sorbonne or Harvard University telling about female university students who go to the library to work on 14th and 15th century manuscripts and to research artifacts from 2500-3000 years ago in China. I have not seen pictures of those who bend over Quranic manuscripts based upon Latin. I have not seen pictures of those studying Greek, Cuneiform and Sanskrit texts without moving and without allowing their eyes to rove. They don't take their heads out of their books until the librarian takes their books away or asks them to leave. 

We separate her from humanity. We thought that if she had beautiful handwriting, she would write to her lover. With this type of thinking, it would have been better if we had blinded her so she would never see a 'forbidden' person. In this way, Mr. Jealous, who feels the weaknesses of his own personality, would not have to worry about the disloyalty of his wife. He would be safe to the end of his life.

It was the Prophet who said, "Education is necessary for Muslims, both men and women." But it is always men who have had the right to be educated... 

They said, a Woman will be freed-not by books or knowledge or the formation of a culture or clear-sighted vision or by raising the standard of living, or by common sense or by a new level of vision of the world, but rather with a pair of scissors. Yes. Putting scissors to the modest dress!" This is how they think that women will all at once become enlightened! 

An Arab poet tells us, "If a father has a daughter and thinks of her future, he should think about three different sons-in-law: one, the house which will hide her; two, the husband who will keep her; and, three, the grave which will cover her! And the last one, the grave, is the best."
This is why the Koran, in the strongest terms, warns of the dangers of this frightening 'highest honor' when it says: He hides himself from the people. Should he keep her with disgrace or bury her alive in the dust? Behold, evil is what they decide" [16.59].

References 

1. 30th Anniversary of the Foundation of the Islamic Republic, A Revolution Misunderstood. Charlotte Wiedemann
2. Gheissari, Ali. 1998. Iranian Intellectuals in the Twentieth Century. Austin: University of Texas Press.
3. Abrahamian, Ervand. 1993. ‘Ali Shariati: ideologue of the Iranian revolution’. In Edmund Burke and Ira Lapidus (eds.), Islam, politics, and social movements. Los Angeles: University of California Press. First published in MERIP Reports (January 1982): 25-28