CENTER CONTEMPORARYARAB STUDIES GEORGETOWNUNIVERSITY GEORGETOWNUNIVERSITY
OccasionalPapers eries
InEn AnrHRoPoLoGY TalalAsad Talal Asad
=rtllr LhAl drlsbiil -.bsl:-,"J*L3"V
Isr.q,.vl
Series OccasionalPapers Series
THp Iona
AxrHRoPoLocY TalalAsad Talal Asad March 1986
CENTER FO CONTEMPORARY ARAB STUDIES GeorgetownUniversity Washington .C. 20057
IsLAM
Gpxnn^ql INTnoDUCTIoN
Center or Contemporary Arab Studies Georgetown University wa established in 1975 to enlarge and enrich academic studies an scholarly entire research on the Arab world. The Center's geographicalpurview is Arab world from Morocco to Kuwait and Syria to the Sudan. Functionally, literature, theology, ecoit includes the disciplines of Arabic language nomics, history, political science, nternational elations, philosophy, sociology, businessadministration,development, aw, and fine arts. The Center administers Master's degree program in Arab studies and certificate programs in Arab studies at the undergraduatean graduate annual distinguished lecture in Arab annual symposium and sponsors hosts lecture and film programs throughout the academic studies, as well year. publicationsprogram the Center consistsof books, special eports, papers by Georgetown faculty and other scholars n wide variety of research areas. Occasional papers consist of studies particular merit which by reason of length and specializedsubjectmatter may not find a conventional scholarly publications outlet. With coverage a diversity of topics, they are designed to fill important gaps n the existing literature on the Arab world. The Center seeks to facilitate the responsible expression f variety of doing so, ideas analyses of the Arab world and its development. only position taken by the Center is that improved knowledge, understanding, informed discussion of this region is beneficial o all concerned. Opinions expressed are solely those of the authors. The director of the Center fo Contemporary Arab Studies is Professor Michael Hudson. Ms. Zeina Azzam Seikaly is the Center's publications manager. J. Coleman Kitchen, Jr. edited this paper.
recent years here has been ncreasingnterest something alled he anthropologyof Islam. Publications y Westernanthropologistsontaining the word "Islam" or "Muslim" the title multiply at a remarkabl ate. he political easonsor this great ndustry reperhapsoo evident o deserve muchcomment.However hat maybe here want o focuson theconceptual basisof this literature.Let us beginwith a very generalquestion.What, exactly, is the anthropologyof Islam?What is ts object of investigation? The answerma seemobvious:whatthe anthropology f Islam nvestigates s, surely, slam. But to conceptualiz slamas he objectof anthropological study s not as simple matter somewriterswould have suppose. There appear o be at least hreecommonanswers o the questionposed above: 1) that in the final analysis here such theoreticalobject as Islam; (2 hat Islam s the anthropologist'sabel or a heterogeneousollection of items, eachof which as beendesignatedslamicby informants; 3) that Islam a distinctivehistorical otality which organizes ariousaspects of social ife. We will look briefly at thefirst two answers, nd henexamine at length he third, which is in principle he most nteresting, ve hough is not acceptable. Eight years ago, the anthropologistAbdul Hamid El-Zein struggledwith
Talal Asad is a Reader in Social Anthropology at Hull University. He received a D. Phil. from Oxford University in 1968and has conducted extensive anthropological research on su ch topics as Bedouin tribes, Arab nationalism, religion, an political systems. Dr. Asad's numerous publications include The Kababish Arabs: Power, Authority nd Consent in a Nomadic Tribe (1970), Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter (editor and contributor, 1973),Th Sociology of Developing Societies: The Middle East (co-editor with Roger Owen, 1983), Ideology, Class andtheOriginof thelslamicState" (inEconomyandSociety,lgs0),and"TheIdeaof anonWestern Anthropology" (i Current Anthropology, 1980). Professor Asad presented this paper at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies as the 1984-85 Annual Distinguished Lecture in Arab Studies.
this question a survey entitled "Beyond Ideology nd Theology:Th Search th Anthropologyof Islam. This was a brave effort, bu finally Th conteniiotr ut there rediverse ormsof Islam,eachequally unhelpful. ^each worth describing, wa linked in rather puzzlingwa to th real, underlyingunconassertion ha they ar ll ultimatelyexpressions scious ogic. This curious slippage ro an anthropological ontextualism inalsentence is article: into Levi-Straussianniversalism hi .,.Islam'as other words, analytical ategory issolves well." an analyiicalcategory, herecannot,strictly speaking, e such Islam thing an anthropology Islam. second oint th first kind. On adherent an unr*.t So much Michael Gilsenan,who, ke El-Zein, emphasizes his recent view Islam ma be excluded om he form book Recognizing slam2 ha ot th true Islam' Hi anthropologist'snterest on th grounds hat .ugg"riion that he different hings ha Muslims hemselvesegardas slamic if nddevelopment their societies indeed should situatedwithin sensible ociologicalule, ut t doesno help dentify slamas analytical adopts om other anthropologists-that slam object study. Th id"u ot o, if only because is simply what Muslims everywhere ay is-will there ar everywhereMuslims wh sa that what other people ake to Islam no really Islam all. This paradoxcannot resolvedsimply ctaimas what Islamwill be admitted th anthropologist saying ha informant's ownbeliefsan practices,because onty where applies practices terms an solated it is generallympossible definebeliefs practices f others re is beliefs subject. Muslim's beliefsabout re sustained hi ow beliefs.An like al suchbeliefs, ey animate social elationswith others. th mostambitious Le us turn thento an answerof he third type. On question Ernest Gellner'sMuslim Society,3 attempts address which an anthropologicalmodel presented th characteristicways which social structure, eligiousbelief, an politicalbehavior nteractwith Islamic otality. what follows, shalldeal some eachother with this text. My purpose,however, no to assess is particularwork, mustbe examined anyone exirait theoretical roblems se wh wishes write an anthropology Islam.As happens,manyelements found also in other th overall picture presented Gellner ar ournalwritings-by anthropoiogists, rientalists, olitical scientists unique ists. looking thii text ne therefore so ooking more ha less nterest ha th wa account.Bu th picture t presents s nd he concepts t deploys' been ut together-the assumptions draws il
Gellner's There in fact more than on attempt conceptualizeslam Christianity text. Th first these nvolves explicitcomparison etween nd Islam, each broadly conceived differinghistoricalconfigurations
power and belief, oneessentiallyocated n Europe, he other n the Middle East. Such conceptualization central o Orientalism, ut it is also o be found implicitly in the writings of manycontemporaryanthropologists. On sign of this is the fact that anthropologicale xtbooks the Middle "ReliEast-such as Gulick'soor Eickelmsn'ss-devote heir chapter gion" entirely to Islam. AlthoughChristianityand Judaismare also ndigenous o the region, t is only Muslimbelief nd practice hat Westernanthropologistsappear o be interestedn. In effect, or most Westernanthropologists, Sephardic Judaism an Eastern Christianity are conceptually marginalized nd represente d s minor branches n the Middle East history that developselsewhere-in Europe, and at the roots of Western civilization. My disquietabout his notion o Europeas the true locus of Christianity comeprimarily ro and he MiddleEast as he true ocus Islamdoes the old objection o religionbeing epresenteds he essence f a historyan a civrTrzationan objectionwhich even someOrientalistsike Becker advanced long ago).uMy concernas an anthropologists over the way this particular contrastaffects he conceptualization Islam. Consider, or instance, he openingparagraphs f Gellner'sbook. Here he contrastbetween slam and Christianity drawn n bold, familiar ines: Islam heblueprint fa social rder.t holds
a set rules xist, ternal,
divinely ordained, and independent of he will of men, which defines he proper ordering of society. . . Judaism and Christianity are also blueprints of a social order, but rather less so than Islam. Christianity, from its inception, contained an open recommendation to give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. A faith which begins, and or some time remains, without political power, cannot but accommodate tself to political order which is not, or is not yet, under its control Christianity, which initially flourished among he politically disinherited, did not then presume to be Caesar. A kind of potential or political modesty has stayed with it ever since those humble beginnings. . . . But the initial successof Islam wa so rapid that it had no need to give anything unto Caesar. on
reads carefully
what is being said here, on
must be assailed by a
variety of doubts. Consider he long history since Constantine,n which Christianemperorsand kings, ay princesand ecclesiasticaldministrators, Church eformers nd colonialmissionaries, veal soughtby usingpower in varyingways o create maintain he socialc onditionsn which menan womenmight iv Christianives-has this entirehistory nothing o do with Christianity?As a non-Christian would not presume o assert hat LiberationTheologynor the Moral Majority belong o the essence f Christianity. As an anthropologist, owever, find it impossible o accept hat Christianpractice nddiscoursehroughout istoryhavebeen ess ntimately concernedwith the uses political power for religiouspurposes han the practice nd discourse f Muslims. want to make clear hat havenothing principleagainst omparisons betweenChristianand Muslim histories. ndeed, ne of the mos valuable
features he recentbook Fischeron IranT th nclusion descriptive account he madrasa material om Jewishan christian histories very fe anthropologicaltudies f contemporar system.This consetstam ha employ mplicit comparisons it Europeanhistory' an quentlyenrichou understanding. attempt ut ne should beyonddrawingparallels, Fischerdoes, this reason'my wn research systematicexplJration differences. beenconcernedwith detailedanthropological past hiee years ou.. he medieval analysestofmonastlc itual, he sacrament confession, Inquisition twelfth-centuryWesternEurope, which stand n contrast very differentconnections etweenpower and religion th medieval he fact that Christians nd Jews have Middle East. Of particularnote ot wa that usually ormed anintegralpartof Middle Eastern ociety amiliar true of non-christianpopulations Europe.My claimhere at Muslim rulershave general ee more olerant nonan valid on christian rulers have of non-christiansubjects,bu Muslim subjects Muslim authorities "religious" and simply that medieval Christian ,.poliiical") must have ha devisevery differentstrategiesor developing oo largea subject regulating ubjectp opulations. moral subjects wa worth touching expounded ere,even n outline, to illustration. clasModern historianshave often observed ha Muslim scholars an sicalan post-classical eriodsdisplayed curiosityaboutChristianity' this heirattitudewa strikinglydifferent ro he ively nterest hown only of beliefs nd practices their christian contemporaries this intellectual he reason other cultures oo.e What Islam bu ch as indifferenceoward Others?Th explanation ivenby Orientalists an attitude BernardLewis is that he early military successes Islam bred complacency oward ChristianEurope' "Masked contempt peoples f Islamcontinhe OttomanEmpire, imposingmilitary miglit West modern ge cherish-as many East dawn ed until uperiority still do today-the conviction he mmeasurable mmutable medievalM uslim ro Andalusia others. or of their civilization unbePersia, hristian Europewa still outer darkness barbarism ss o learn'"r0 sunlitworld of Islam ad ittle fear lief, om which question bestapproached turning around Perhaps at wa so wh Roman nd asking no wh Islam wa uncuriousabout Europe ut practices Others'The answer Christianswere nterested th beliefs intrinsic with cultural motives allegedlyproduced ha less he collectiveexperience military encounworldview or qualities or different ters, ndmorewith structures disciplinary racticesha called iving among kinds systematic nowledge. fter all, Christian ommunities about Muslims th Middle Eastwereno noted or their scholarly uriosity about African Europe either, an Muslim travelersoften visited an wrote terms an Asian societies. doesno make good sense think disembodiedindifcontrasting ttitudes Islam ndChristianity,
ference" faces a disembodied "desire to learn about Other." On ought instead to be looking for the institutional conditions for th production various social knowledges. What was regarded as worth recording about "other" beliefs customs? By whom wa it recorded? which social project were the records used? Thus, it is no mere coincidence that he most impressive catalogues pagan belief practice in early medieval Christendom those contained in the Penitentials (handbooks fo administering sacramental confession to recently-converted Christians) or that successive manuals or inquisitors in the later European Middle Ages describe with increasing precision comprehensiveness he doctrines and rites of heretics. There is nothing in Muslim societies to parallel these compilations systematicknowledge about "internal" unbelieverssimply because disciplines that required sustainedsuch information re no to be found Islam. other words, forms of interest in the production of knowledge intrinsic to various structures of power, and they differ not according to the essential character of Islam Christianity, according to historically changingsystems Thus, beyond my misgivings about plausibility of historical contrasts in terms cultural motives-such as "potential political modesty" "theocratic potential" on the other-lies another concern, th one hand, namely that there may well be important differenceswhich anthropologist studying other societies ought to explore, and which too easily obscured by the search for superficial or spurious differences. problem with kind of contrasts Islam with Christianity drawn Gellner is that the relations between religion political power are the same in the two. Rather, the very terms employed are misleading, and we need to find concepts that are more appropriate for describing differences.
NI So far we have looked very briefly one aspect of the attempt produce anthropology Islam: the virtual equationof Islam with Middle East, definition of Muslim history "mirror image" (Gellner) Christian history, in which connection between religion power simply reversed. This view open criticism both because t disregards detailed workings of disciplinary power Christian history because it is theoretically most inadequate. argument here is not against he attempt to generalize about Islam, but against manner in which that generalization is undertaken. Anyone working on the anthropology of Islam will be aware that there is considerable diversity in the beliefs nd practices of Muslims. he first problem is therefore one of organizing this diversity terms of an adequate concept. familiar representation of essential slam as the fusion of religion with power of these. neither nominalist view that different instances what re called Islam essentially unique generis.
problem which anthropologists ve attempted resolve wa adapt ttre orientalist distinctionbetweenorthodox diversiiy hu Little Traditions, categories Great nonorthodox sram se up th seeminglymoreacceptable istinction etween he scripturalist, saint-worshipping,itualistic eligion puritanical aith of th towns, nd a claim bf n. countryside.Fo anthropologists,either rm of Islam are' ormed being egarded more real" thanlheother'They rewhat of th countryin different ways in different conditions. fact, th religion abstract, ontrastive ense. recisely single or only side taken defiiition particularistic,ooted variable ocal conditions because oral culan personalities, authorizedby he uncheckablememories unlettered ountryfolk highlyvariable' Orthodoxy" slam tures, (albeit nvariable)or is therefore, such anthropologists, erely he nicetiesof preoccupation Islam amongmany, distinguistreo sacred it authority om sacred exts rather doctrine nd w, "tui111ing persons. anthroThis dichotomyha beenpopularized wo well-knownWestern nd pologistsof Moioccan Islam, Clifford Geertz nd Ernest Gellner' argument .ol1l. their pupils. ut what made interestingwa he further apparent orrelation this dual Islam with wo types that there wa colonial distinctive social structure, something irst proposed wa claimed' scholarship th Maghrib. ClassicalMaghribi society, th consisted th on handof he centralized, ierarchical rganization he egalitarian's egmental rganizationof th he other cities, nd rulers wh continually surrounding ribes. Th cities were governed tribesmen dissident,self-governingribes; attempted subdue united turn resistedwith varyingdegrees success, sometimes, evenmanaged supplant incumbent an outstanding eligious Islam nicely to he tw kinds social ruler. Th wo .ut.goii.s he ribes; politicalstructure ihari,alaw th cities,variable ustomamong latter. Both structuresare seenas lrla*a he former, saintsamong whom parts of singlesystembecause he define he opponents etween precisely' unceasing trulgle or politicaldominance akesplace' More very at because ot urbanan ribal populations re Muslim, ll owing iacred exts (andso perhaps so mplicitly least nominalallegiance merges' to their iterateguuidiunr), particularstyle of politicalstruggle tribes nd is possible or urbanrulers claim authorityover he tribes, n the name support country-basedeaderwh aims supplant he ruler Islam. French sociproduct nitially thisbroadschema, hich added, successiveublications, number ology lslam," Gellner classical ociologies religion, reading detailsdrawn writings Khaldun's Muqaddi*oh, nd (3 British anthropological cover virtually th as extended segmentaryineage heory. An entire span Middle East, nd almost whole North Africa nd drawn beenused him, resulting icture Muslim history.
by others, o elaboratehe old contrastbetween slam and Christianity n seriesof inversions-as in the followingcrisp accountby Bryan Turner: There is a sense n which we ca say that in religion "the southern, Muslim shore of the Mediterranean is kind of mirror-image of the northern shore, of Europe. On the northern shore, th central religious tradition is hierarchical, ritualistic, with a strong rural appeal. One corner-stone of th official religion is saintship. The deviant reformist tradition is egalitarian, puritan, urban and excludes priestly mediation. the southern shore, Islam reverses this pattern: it is the tribal, rural tradition which is deviant, hierarchical and ritualistic. Sim ilarly, saint and shaikh are mirror-image roles. Whereas in Christianity the saints are orthodox, individualistic, dead, canonized by central authorities, in Islam the shaikhs are heterodox, tribal or associational, iv ing and recognized by local consent.rr
Even applies to the Maghrib, this picture has been subjected to damaging criticism by scholars with access o indigenous historical sources in Arabic (e.g., Hammoudi, Cornell).12 his kind of criticism important, but it will not be pursued here. While it is worth asking whether this anthropological account Islam is valid for the entire Muslim world or even for the Maghrib) given the historical information available, let us instead focus a different issue: What are the discursive styles employedhere to represent the historical variations in Islamic political structure, and the different questions forms Islamic religion linked to the latter? What kinds these styles deflect us from considering? What concepts do we need to develop as anthropologists in order to pursue those very different kinds questions n viable manner? In approaching this issue, let us consider the following interconnected points: Narratives about culturally distinctive actors must try to translate represent he historically-situated iscourses f such actors as responses to the discourse of others, instead of schematizing and de-historicizing their actions. Anthropological analysesof social structure should focus no typical actors but th changing patterns of institutional relations nd conditions (especially hose we call political economies). analysis Middle Eastern political economies and the representationof Islamic "dramas" are essentially different kinds of discursive exercise which cannot be substituted fo each other, although they can be significantly embedded in the same narrative, precisely because hey are discourses. It is wrong represent types Islam as being correlated with types of social structure, on the implicit analogy with (ideological)superstructure (social) base. 5) Islam as the object anthropologicalunderstandingshould be approached as a discursive tradition that connects variously with formation moral populations resistance o it), and th producselves, the manipulation tion appropriate knowledges.
reads an anthropological text such as Gellner's carefully, one may notice that the social and political structuresof classicalMuslim society
very distinctiveway. What ne inds effect re protagorepresented nistsengaged dramaticstruggle.S egmentaryribesconfrontcentralized city," nd unarmedmerchants states.Armed nomads lust after also between nomads.Saintsmediatebetween onflicting ribal groups, th lliteratenomadan remote,capriciousGod. Literateclericsserve heir ry to maintain sacredaw he puritanical ourgeoisie powerful uler Lmploys religion iegitimize privilegedstatus.Th city's poor seek religion eicitement.Religious eformers nite pastoralw arriorsagainst deciiningdynasty.Demoralized ulers re destroyed he disenchantment their urban subjects onvergingwith th religious nd military power their tribal enemies. s castentirely n terms dramatic representation socialstructure roles ends excludeotherconceptions, which we shall rn n moment. discourses ut even narrativeabout ypicalactors equires account representedor which that behaviorca that orient their behavior n thestrict sense, misrepresented) actors o eachother. a dramatic ines he actorsspeak. account thesediscourses re contained indigenous iscourses however, otallymissing n Gellner's arrative' behave' think, speak, Gellnei's slamicactors "normal" and "revolutionary" ye without adequate vidence,m otives major protagbehavior re continuallybeingattributed he actions onists n classicalM uslim society.There are, o b sure, eferences ..partnerswho speak clear at samemoral anguage," text to suchexpiessions merelydeadmetaphors, ecause ellner's onception power isolated om ca emollient language re that description he circulation elites withincontextof pro"".r. "Islam provided coman-immobile-structure," example, writes which, certainkind smoothness mo language nd brutalistic orm, ad been akingplaceanyway." In other more mute words, on removes common anguage Islam, nothing an signifmore an facilitating nstrument language icancechanges. domination at s already place. language very nadequate-inadequate This purely nstrumental ie narrative at tries describeMuslim society preciseiy or th kind i.rn1, of what motivatesculturallyrecognizable ctors. is only when th anthropologistakeshistorically efined iscourseseriously, especially conaskedabout questions they constitute vents, subjectsmighthave esponded ariously ditions which Muslim ulers authority. physicalorce, persuasion, simply habit. usually egarded he fact that Geerlz,wh interesting reflect reochaving primary nterest n culturalm eanings againstG ellner's Islam cupationwiih socialcausation, resents narrative Islam Geertz's slam different. not, this respect, Observed ndeed,beingmore conscious his own highlyalso dramaturgical made explicit se metaphors political wrought iterary style, "classical" politics Islam "classical" Morocco theater.
Indonesiaare very differentlyportrayed,but each, n its own way, portrayedas essentiallyheatrical.Yet for Geertz,as for Gellner, schematizationof Islam as a dramaof religiosityexpressing ower obtainedby omitting indigenousdiscourses, nd by turning all Islamic behavior readable esture.
Devising narratives about the expressions the expressive intentions of dramatic players is not the only option available to anthropologists. Social life can also be written or talked about by using analytic concepts. Not using such concepts simply means ailing to ask particular questions,and misconstruing historical structures. an example, consider he notion of tribe. This idea s central o the kind of anthropology Islam of which Gellner's ext is such prominent example. It is often used by many writers on the Middle East to refer to social entities with very different structures and modes of livelihood. Ordinarily, where theoretical issues are not involved, this does not matter very much. where one is concerned,as at present,with conceptualproblems, is important to consider the implications analysis of an indiscriminate usage the term "tribe. " It is the case not only that so-called "tribes" vary enormously their formal constitution, but more particularly that pastoral nomads do not have an ideal-typical economy. Their variable socioeconomic arrangementshave very different implications for their possible involvement politics, trade, an war. Several Marxists, such as Perry Anderson, have argued or th concept of "pastoral mode production," and following im Bryan Turner as suggested hat this concept should form part of a theoreticall informed account of Muslim social structuresbecause to the extent that Middle Eastern countries have pastoral nomads iving in them.r3 pastoral nomads n the Muslim Middle East have assumption typical political and economic structure s misleading.'o he reasons this are too involved and tangential considerhere, a brief look at the issue will remind of concepts of social structure different from those still being deployed by many anthropologists historiansof Islam. An study of the military capabilities pastoral nomads in relation to townsmen must begin not from the simple act that they are pastoralnomads, political-economicconditions, some systematic,some but from variety contingent. Types animals reared, patterns seasonalmigration, forms of herding arrangements, ights of access pastures and watering points, distribution of animal wealth, degreeof dependence returns hrough sales, direct subsistence ultivation, gifts and tribute from political superiors inferiors-these other considerationsare relevant an understanding even the basic question many spare can be mustered or war, readily, and for how long. Among pastoral nomadic population studied n the desertsof northern Sudan many years ago, for example,
altered drastifighting mobilizing large numbers possibilities of th twentieth catly from th middle of th nineteenth century to th middle shift to more small livestock, large increase primarily because complex herding alrangements, greater nvolvement in animal intensive that this different pattern of property rights' he point is sales, Indeed, there Middle tribal grouping is somehow typical inclined able argument is simply that what nomads typicai tribes. various historical product settled populations relation tb^Oo expression some conditions that define their pbtiti.ut economy, slamic drama. essentialmotive that belongs tribal protagonists n a classic "disCurregarded agents more other wOrds, "tribes" historical structures terms "societies" are. They sive structures" possibilities people's lives ar realized. This does which th individuals ho comprise them, less real than mean that "tribes" belong, motives, behavior, an utterances does ut th vocabulary "tribe," strictly speaking, in analytic accounts whose principal object embedded in narratives about agency' It is althoughiuch aicounts an place that differently structured in time precisely because "tribes" utterances will differ import forms of behavior, an motives, too. th lines Representations of Muslim society that ar constructed along place for peasants' Peasants' ke un u.iion play have, no surprisingly, doing anything. In accounts like Gellner's they ot depicted women, distinctive religious expression-in contrast, dramatic role nd have soon that s, to nomadic tribes an city-dwellers. Bu of course rather ca tell production an exchange' he concepts turns female' produce crops (ust as pastordifferent story. Cultivators, male rent yield up both sexes raise animals) which they sell alists something that is taxes. Peasants,even in th historical Middle East, do that doing that region, crucial in relation to he social formations dramatic terms. political-economic to be conceptualized far-reachmedieval agiicultural sector underwent important changes money development of urban populations, ing consequences transcontinental trade.15This is true also fo th regional .*non1y, changes later pre-modern period, even though economic histories talk economic have be decline rather than growth. One does in terms acknowledge that such changes have profound implications determinist autonomy. fo questions domination This approach to writing about Middle Eastern society, which pays special sensitive impersonal constraints, will attention th long-term working social economy varying connections between indissoluble that historical Middle Eastern social power. It will also continually remind societies were never self-contained, never isolated from external relations, never entirely unchanging, even before their incorporation into th an with a fixed modern world system. Unlike those narrators wh present Islamic dramatis personae, enacting predetermined story, we can cast
look for connections, changes, differences, beyond the fixed stageof an Islamic theater. We shall then write about an essential Islamic social structure, but about historical formations in the Middle East whose elements are never fully integrated, never bounded by the geographtcal limits "the Middle East."16 It is too often forgotten that "the world of Islam" is concept for organizinghistorical narratives, the name for self-contained collective agent. This is not sa that historical narratives have social effect-on th contrary. But the integrity world of Islam is essentially ideological, discursive representation. Thus, Geertz has written that is perhaps as true fo civilizations as t is for men that, however much they may later change, the fundamental dimensions their character, the structure possibilities within which they will some sensealways move, set n plastic period when they were first forming."rT Bu the fatality of character that anthropologists like Geertz invoke is the object f a professional writing, not the unconscious of a subject that writes itself as Islam for Western scholar to read.
VI anthropology of Islam being criticized here depicts a classic social structure consisting essentiallyof tribesmen an city-dwellers, the natural carriers of two major forms of religion-the normal tribal religion centered saints shrines, and the dominant urban religion based on the "Holy Book." argument is that if the anthropologist seeks to understand religion placing it conceptually in its social context, then the way in which that social context is described must affect the understanding religion. ne rejects schema of an unchangingdualistic structure Islam promoted some anthropologists, one decides write about the social structuresof Muslim societies n terms of overlappng spacesand times, so that the Middle East becomesa focus of convergences thereforeof many possiblehistories), then the dual typology of Islam will surely seem ess plausible. It is true that in addition to the two major types religion proposed the kind of anthropology of Islam we are talking about, minor forms sometimes specified.This so in Gellner's account, and in many others. Thus there is the "revolutionary" opposed o the "normal" Islam of the tribes, which periodically mergeswith and revivifies puritan ideology cities. And there s the ecstatic,mysticalreligion of the urban poor which, 'the opium of the masses, excludes hem from effectivepolitical actionuntil, that is, the impact of modernity when it is the religion of the urban masseswhich becomes "revolutionary." a curious w&y, these wo minor forms Islam serve, n Gellner's ext, markers, positive, negative, of the two great epochsof Islam-the classical otation-within-an-immobile structure, and the turbulent developments mass movements contemporary world. So this apparentconcession the idea that there more than tw types of Islam is at the same time a literary device define "traditional" "modern" Muslim society. the notions
1t
Now, the anthropologist's presentation of Islam will depend not only on th way in which social structures are conceptualized, but on the way in which religion itself is defined. Anyone familiar with what is called the sociology of religion will know of th difflculties involved in producing conception of religion that is adequate or cross-cultural purposes. This is important point becauseone's conception of religion determines he kinds questions thinks are askable and worth asking. But far too few wouldbe anthropologists of Islam this matter serious attention. Instead, they ideas rom the writings of the great sociologists often draw indiscriminately (e.9., Marx, Weber, Durkheim) in order to describe forms Islam, th result is not always consistent. Gellner's text is illustrative in this regard. The types of Islam that ar presented as being characteristic of ''traditional Muslim society" Gellner's picture ar constructed according to three very different concepts of religion. Thus, Ihe normal tribal religton, "that of the dervish or marabout," is explicitly Durkheimian. is . concerned," are told, "with social punctime and space, with season-making and group-boundary-marking festivals. The sacredmakes thesejoyful, visible, conspicuousand authoritative" (p 52). So the concept of religion here involves a reference o collective rituals to be read as an enactment of th sacred, which is also, for Durkheim, the symbolic representation of social and cosmological structures.rs concept that is deployed in the description of the religion of the urban poor quite different, and it is obviously derived from the early writings Marx on religion as false consciousness. city has its poor," Gellner writes, "they are uprooted, insecure, alienated. . . . What they require from religion is consolation or escape; their taste is for ecstasy, excitement, absorption in a religious condition which is also a forgetting . . ." 48).tn looks at this kind of construction carefully, finds that what called psychological response o an emotional experience.What religion here is as indicated in the account of tribal Islam was an emotional effect, but here it is an emotional cause.In the one case he reader told about collective rituals and their meaning, about ritual specialistsand their roles; in other attention is directed instead private distressand unfulfilled desire. When one turns to the religion of the bourgeoisie, one is confronted other organizing ideas. "The well-heeled urban bourgeoisie," remarks Gellner, "far from having a taste for public festivals, prefers the sober satisfactions of learned piety, a taste more consonant with its dignity and commercial calling. Its fastidiousnessunderscores ts standing,distinguishing both from rustics nd the urban plebs. brief, urban life provides a sound base for scripturalist unitarian puritanism. Islam expresses such state of mind better perhaps than other religions' 42) 'oThe echoes rom Weber's Protestant Ethic this passageare not accidental, or its authority is invoked "bourgeois Muslim" is accorded a more than once. In this account, moral-or, better, an esthetic-style. Hi distinguishing eature the literacy that gives hi direct access o the founding scriptures and the Law. In this latter respect on is urged to see him immersed in a moralistic, literate
enterprise. Neither collective rituals or unquenched desire, neither social solidarity alienation, religion here solemn maintenance public authority which rational partly because is in writing, partly because it is linked socially useful activities: service to state, commitment commerce. These different ways of talking religion-the tribal an th urbanare not merely different aspects of the same thing. They are different textual constructions which seek to represent different things, nd which make different assumptions about th nature of social reality, about origins needs, about he rationale cultural meanings. or this reason, they are not merely different representations, are ncompatible constructions. In referring to them one is comparing like with like. Bu main difficulty with such constructions is not that they inconsistent. is that this kind of anthropology of Islam (and I want to stresshere that Gellner's eclecticism typical of very many sociological writers Islam) rests on false conceptual oppositions nd equivalences, which often lead writers into making ill-founded assertionsabout motives, meanings, an effects relating "religion." More important, makes difficult formuquestions that lation once less endentious more interesting than those which many observers contemporary Islam (both "conservative" "radical" Islam) seek to answer. An instructive example hoary old argument about totalitarian character of orthodox Islam. Like Bernard Lewis many others, Gellner proposes that scriptural Islam an elective affinity Marxism,2r partly "the inbuilt vocation towards because implementation of sharply defined divine order on earth" (p.47), partly because "The totalism of both ideologies which] precludes nstitutionalisedpolitics" 4g). empirical question of how widespread Marxist moveQuite apart from ments have been among twentieth-century Muslim populations,22 must said that the notion f totalitarian Islam rests on a mistaken view of the social effectivity of ideologies. moment's reflection will show that it is ot he literal scope shari'a which matters here th degree o which informs and regulates social practices, nd is clear that there never been ny Muslim society in which th religious aw of Islam governed more than of social life. If contrasts this fact with the highly regulated character social life in modern states, one may immediatelysee reason why. administrative and legal regulations such secular states more pervasive effective controlling details of people's lives than anything to be found in Islamic history. he difference, course, lies textual specificationsof what is vaguely called social blueprint, he reach of institutional powers that constitute, divide p, govern large stretches social life according systematic in modern industrial societies,whether capitalist or communist.23 In 1972,Nikki Keddie wrote: "Fortunately, Western scholarship seems have emerged from period when many were writing . . that Islam Marxism were so similar many ways that one might lead to th other."2a
13
Western scholarly innocence is not entirely behind Perhaps that period point this example will be lost if it is seen as merely another s. Bu attempt to defend Islam against the claim that it has affinities with a totalipast, and even tarian system. Such a claim as been challenged in matter claim from being reproduced, rational criticism cannot prevent emphasize is in itself of little theoretical interest. Instead, is important must carefully examine establishedsocial practices, "religious" that conditions that define "nonreligious," in order to understand well "conservative" or "radical" political activity in the contemporary Islamic will now turn. it is to this idea that world. Vil far has been that no coherent anthropology Islam general argument the idea ca be founded on th notion of determinate social blueprint, religious deology which social structure of an integrated social totality mean that no coherent object for an anthropology interact. This does that it is adequate o say that anything Muslims believe Islam possible, part Islam. Most anthroregarded by the anthropologist do can widely, both those appealing pologies Islam have defined their scope an essentialistprinciple and those employing nominalist one. If one wants from Muslims should begin, Islam write an anthropology discursive tradition that includes nd relates tself to the founding concept neither a distinctive social the Hadith. Islam texts of th Qur'an beliefs, artifacts, customs, a heterogeneous collection structure morals. It is tradition. Islam in Local Contexts," Eickelman In a useful article, "The Study there is a major theoretical need for taking up he has recently suggested village or tribal Islam nd that of "middle ground" between the study the most urgent theoretical need well be universal Islam.25 right scale much of finding Islam is a matter or an anthropology such a discursive radition" right concepts. formulating concept. What is a tradition?26 tradition consists essentially discourses purpose f form seek to instruct practitioners regarding given practice that, precisely because is established,has a history. These practice was instituted, discourses elate conceptually o past (when an from which he knowledge of ts point nd proper performance has been best be secured transmitted) and a future (how he point of that practice should modified abandoned), hrough in the short or long term, present (how is linked to otherpractices, institutions,and social condiMuslim disIslamic discursive tradition is simply tradition tions). future, Islamic past course that addresses tself to conceptions particular Islamic practice in the present. Clearly, ot with reference Islamic discursive tradition. and do belongs o everything Muslims what was this sense necessarily mitative is an Islamic tradition
done in he past. even where traditional practices appear to the anthropologist to be imitative what gone before, it will be the practitioners' conceptions what is performance, nd of how past related present practices, that will crucial for tradition, apparent repetition of an old form. point is not, some Western anthropologists nd Westernized Muslim intellectuals have argued, that "tradition" is today often fiction present, a reaction the forces of modernity-that in contemporary conditions crisis, tradition Muslim world weapon, ruse, defense, designed confront threatening world,27 it is cloak aspirations borrowed styles of behavior.2s claim that contemporary ideas social arrangementsare really ancient when they are not is in itself more significant than pretense that ones have been introduced when actually they have not. Lying oneseH, as well as to others, about the relationship of th present to the past is as banal in modern societies as it is in societies that anthropologists typically study. The important point simply that all instituted practices oriented to a conception of the past. the anthropologist of Islam, proper theoretical beginning therefore an instituted practice (set particular context, having particular history) into which Muslims nducted as Muslims. analytical purposes there s essentialdifferenceon this point between "classical" "modern" Islam. discourses n which teaching done, n which correct performance of the practice is defined and learned, are intrinsic to all Islamic is therefore somewhat misleading suggest, some sociologists have done,2e at it is orthopraxy ot orthodoxy, ritual doctrine, that matters Islam. is misleading because such contention ignores centrality of the notion of "the correct model" to which instituted practice-including ritual-ought to conform, a model conveyed in authoritative formulas in Islamic traditions in others. I refer here primarily programmatic discourses "modernist" an "fundamentalist" Islamic movements, to the establishe prctctices Muslims. practice Islamic because authorized discursive traditions of Islam, and is taught to Muslims3o-whether an,alim, khatib, a Sufi shaykh, or an untutored parent. It worth recalling here that etymologically "doctrine" means teaching, that orthodox doctrine therefore denotes correct process of teaching, as well as the correct statementof what be learned.3') Orthodoxy crucial all Islamic traditions. sense n which I use this term must distinguished sensegiven to it by most Orientalists anthropologists. Anthropologists like El-Zein, wish to deny special significance orthodoxy, those like Gellner, wh see it as specific heart of Islam," both are missing something vital: that orthodoxy is not a mere body of opinion bu a distinctive relationship-a relationship power. WhereverMuslims have power to regulate, uphold, require, or adjust coryectpractices,and o condemn,exclude,undermine, or replace ncorrecl ones, there is the domain of orthodoxy.
15
these powers are exercised, the conditions that make them possible (social, encounter (from Muslims the resistances political, economic, etc.), Islam, anthropology an non-Muslims) are equally the concern research is in the city or in the direct object whether regardless in the past. Argument and conflict over countryside, in the present form and significance of practices ar therefore natural part of any Islamic tradition. "Islamic tradition," Orientalists and anthropolIn their representation reasoningsurroundplace argument ogists have often marginalized ing traditional practices. Argument is generally representedas a symptom "the tradition crisis," on the assumption that "normal" tradition (what "tradistinguishes structure" Abdallah Laroui calls "tradition ideolo gy"t') excludes reasoning st as it requires unthinking condition work of formity. Bu these contrasts and equations re themselves historical motivation, manifest in Edmund Burke's ideological opposition "reason,"33 an opposition which was elaborated between "tradition" conservative theorists who followed him, and introduced into sociology Weber. necessarily nvolved in traditional practice whenargument Reason proper performance of that ever people have to be taught about th point lack practice, whenever th teaching meets with doubt, indifference, of understanding. It is largely because we think of argument in terms of place in assume t has formal debate, confrontation, nd polemic that wi someone over for lhe process trying traditional practice.3aYe willing performance of traditional practice, as distinct from trying to demolIslamic discurish an opponent's ntellectualposition, s a necessarypart tradisive traditions as of others. If reasons an arguments are intrinsic tradition in crisis," it should be the not merely tional practice, analyzethe kinds of reasoning, anthropologist's first task to describe reasons for arguing, that underlie Islamic traditional practices. is here discover a central modality of power, and of th resisthat the analyst process arguing, of using th force of reason, tances encounters-for responds to the fact of resistance. Power, and at once presupposes tradiresistance, are thus intrinsic to the development nd exercise of tional practice. theoretical consequenceof this is that traditions should not be regarded as essentially homogeneous, at heterogeneity n traditional practices variety Islamic tradition. the absence necessarily populations traditional Islamic practices in different times, places, historical different Islamic reasonings hat different social indicates conditions an or cannot sustain. The idea that traditions are essentially homogeneoushas a powerful intellectual appeal,35 it is mistaken. Indeed, of the development widespreadhomogeneity s function not of tradition, modern industrial and control of communication techniques that ar part societies.36 ot homogeneous, they aspire to coherAlthough Islamic traditions
ence' he wa that al discursive raditions That they no always attain is du asmuch th constraints political an economicconditions in which traditions re placed to thiir inherent imitations.Thus, ou ow time th attemptby Islamic raditions organizememoryan desire coherentmanner increasinglyemade he social orces industrial capitalism, which create conditions avorable very different patterns of desirean forgetfulness.3T anthropology Islam will therefore seek understand he historicalconditions enable production maintenanceof specfficdiscursive raditions,or their transformation-and the efforts of practitioners achieve oherence.3s
vnr have beenarguing ha anthropologistsnterested Islam need rethink their object study, an that th conceptof traditionwill help this task. I now want to concludewith a final briefpoint. To write about tradition to be in certain narrative relation to it relation that will vary according to whether on supports opposes he tradition, regards morally neutral.Th coherence eachparty finds,or fails find, that tradition will depend their particular historicalposition. In other words, there clearly not, no ca there such thing a universallyacceptable accountof a living tradition. ny representation tradition contestable. What shape contestationakes, occurs,will determined ot only he powersan knowledges ac sidedeploys,bu th collective fe they aspire o-or whose survival ai quite ndiiferent.Moral neutrality, here always, no guarantee political nnocence.
NorBs
Theology: The Search or the 1. A. H. El-Zein, "Beyond ldeology A n t h r o p o l o g y o f I s l a m , " inAnnual Review A n t h r o p o l o g y , V l ( 1 9 7 7 ) ' M. Gilsenan,Recognizing slam (London: Croom Helm, 1982). E. Gellner, Muslim Society (Cambridge,England: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1 9 8 1 ) . 4. J. Gulick, The Middle East: An Anthropological Perspective (Pacific Palisades,California: Goodyear PublishingCompany Inc., 1976). Middle East: An Anthropological Approach 5. D. F. E,ickelman, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:P r e n t i c e - H a l l n c . , 1 9 8 1 ) . Emergence Kul' See J. van Ess, "From Wellhausen o Becker: its Probturgeschichte n Islamic Studies, Islamic Studies:A Tradition lems, ed. M. H. Kerr (Malibu, California: Undena Publications, 1980). Fischer, Iran: From Religious Dispute to Revolution (Cambridge, Massachusetts:H arvard University Press, 1980). "Anthropological Conceptions Religion: Reflections on Geerlz," M a n , XVIII, n o . 2 ( 1 9 8 3 ) ; N o t e s o n B o d y Pain and T r u t h i n M e d i e v a l Christian R i t u a l , " E c o n o m y and Society, X I l , n o . 3 , ( 1 9 8 3 ) ; " M e d i e v a l no. 2, (1986). Anthropological View," Social History, Heresy: von Grunebaum, Modern Islam (Berkeley For example, Angeles:California University Press 1962), Europe," Islam in History, ed. B. Lewis, "The Muslim Discovery 100. Lewis (New Y o r k : T h e L i b r a r y Press,l9l3), Kegan Paul, Islam (London: Routledge 11. B. Turner, Weber 197 ), 12. Abdallah Hammoudi, "segmentarity, socialstratification, oliticalpower Gellner's heses," Economy and Society,IX s a i n t h o o d : eflections h e R o l e o f the Sufi Shaykh ( 1 9 8 0 ) ; V . J . Cornell, " T h e L o g i c o f A n a l o g y
in Post-Marinid Morocco," International Journal of Middle East Studies,
(1983).
13. B. Turner, Marx and the End of Orientalism (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1978),, 14. T. Asad, The Kababish Arabs: Power, Authority and Consent in Nomadic Tribe (London: Hurst & Co. 1970);T. Asad, "The Beduin s a Military Force," The Desert and the Sown, ed. C. Nelson (Berkeley: University CaliforniaPress, 1973);T.Asad, "Equality in Nomadic Systems?," Pastoral Production and Society, ed. Equipe Ecologie et Anthropologi Soci6t6s Pastorales (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979). 15. A. M. Watson, Agricultural Innovation in the Early Islamic World (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1983). 16. The changing networks intercontinental trade which linked Dar ulIslam to Europe, Africa, and Asia differentially affected and were affected patterns production consumption within it (see Lombard, premiire grandeur: VIIIe-XIe siicle [Paris: Flammarion, L'Islam dans l97ll). Even the spread of contagious disease with its drastic social and economic consequencesconnected Middle Eastern political units with other parts of the world (see W. Dols, The Black Death in the Middle East 36-37). It would [Princeton: Princeton University Press,1977],especially not be necessary to refer so baldly to well-known historical evidence if "Islam" as a mechanwere not still common for eminent scholars o write ically balanced social structure, reflecting its own dynamic of cause and effect, and own isolated destiny. Geertz,Islam Observed Haven: Yale University Press,1968), quite 18. Gellner's resort to the Durkheimian viewpoint religion s place we read that "the faith Thus, in consistentas it ought the tribesman needs to be mediated by specialand distinct holy personnel,, rather than to be egalitarian; needs to be joyous festival-worthy, no puritanical and scholarly; rt requires hierarchy and incarnation persons, not in scripts" (p.41',emphasisadded).But a dozenpages ater, when Gellner "revolutionary" tribal religion, these needs wants introduce idea have to be made to disappear: is a curious but crucial fact about the social psychology Muslim tribesmen," he writes, "that their normal religion is for them at one level mere aller, and is tinged with irony, and with ambivalent recognition that the real norms lie elsewhere" emphasis in original). 19 Such phrases might be more plausible (but no therefore entirely validsee,e.g., Abu-Lughod, "Varieties of tlrban Experience," Middle Eastern Cities, ed. I. Lapidus [Berkeley and Los Angeles: California University Press, 19691)f applied to the condition of poor rural migrants a modern rnetropolis,To describe he lower strata medievalMuslim cities, with their organization nto quarters, guilds, Sufi brotherhoods, etc., as being "uprooted, insecure, alienated" is surely a little fanciful, unless, of course, one takes the mere occurrence of bread riots in periods of economic hardship as a sign
mental disturbance mong he poor. Yet, oddly enough,when Gellner does refer to the urban masses n twentieth -century ities, a totally ew motivation s imputed o the uprootedmigrants: tribal styleof religion loses hen much its function,whilst the urban ne gains authorityan prestige om the eagerness f migrant-rusticso acquire espectability" emphasisadded).Now the religion th urban poor is attributed longer o a desire or forgetting,b ut to a desire or respectability 20. Most Muslims or most their history, as Gellnerhimselfacknowledges, annotbe described scripturalist uritans, et "Islam," he claims, expresses scripturalist tateof mind better han other religions.There s surelysome uzziness ere. t is clear hat Gellner s identifying he essential tendency Islam with what he regards s the ife-styleof the "well-heeled urban bourgeoisie."This equationmay be appealing someMuslims,bu the attentive eaderwill wish o ask n whatsense is social roup s naturally "puritan," and indeed n what sense ey re "better" puritans han, say, seventeenth-centuryuritans n Englandand America.A natural "distaste fo public estivals"?Anyonewh has ived n a Muslimcommunity,or read relevanthistoricalaccounts e.g.,EdwardLane'sMannersan Customs the Modern Egyptians London:Dent (Everymanedition),19081,r Snouck Hurgronje'sMekka in Latter Part of the l9th Century Leiden: Brill, 19311), ill know the rit es of passage re more elaborate mong he "wellheeled rbanbourgeoisie" hanamong he ower urbansocialstrata. Scripturalism" basedon literacy?But the iteracy merchants very different thing rom the iteracyof professionalme of religion" (seeB. V. Street's excellentbook, Literacy Theoryand Practice lCambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress,19841).esides,he raditions Qur'anicexegesis evelopedby Muslim "men of religion" are ar richerand more diverse h anth blanket erm "scripturalist" suggests. 21. In reproducing view that there s an "elective affinity" between Islam Marxism,Gellnerappearso havemissedhe act hat bn Khaldun, the only classicalMuslim heoristwh deals detailwith connectionsetween politicalpower and he economy,warnsexplicitlyagainst government's trying o control radeorproduction-see TheMuqaddimah, bridged dition (London: Routledge nd KeganPaul, 1967), p.232-234.Since he idea government ontrol of the economyha neverbeenpart classicalM uslim theory, but is central o classicalM arxism, here s here crucialopposition between he two. 22. Apart rom the mportant ommunist arties n Iraq ndSudan neither of which commanded massive ollowing) Marxism has had no real roots amongcontemporaryMuslim populations.S tates ike the People'sDemocraticRepublicof Yemenareexceptions at prove he rule. (SeealsoA. A. Bennigsen nd S. E. Wimbush,M uslim lr{ational ommunismn theSoviet Union Chicago:C hicagoUniversityPress,1979)or anaccount protracted resistances gainstR ussianmperialp ower.)Marxist deology asbeenassociated with someWesternizedntellectuals nd some authoritarian tates, bt;1neverwith the'ulama the well-heeled rbanbourseoisie.
supposed y Gellner o be the historicalcarriers scripturalist, nitarian, puritan slam. It is his mistakenattempt o connect his latterkind Islam with "Marxism," "socialism," "socialradicalism" termsused ndiscriminately) that leads him to make the implausibleargument ha "scripturalist rigorism or fundamentalism" s admirably suited o bringingabout modernization n the Muslim world. 23. As a succinctevocation f th powersof a modernstate, he ollowing memorable assagerom RobertMusil's greatnovel has scarcelybeenbettered: "The fact is, living permanentlyn well-orderedStatehas an outand-outspectralaspect:one cannotstep nto the streetor drink a glass water or ge into tram without touching he perfectly balanced eversof gigantic apparatusof laws and relations, setting he in motion or letting them maintainon in the peacean quiet of one's existence.On hardly knows any of these evers,which extenddeep nto the inner workingsan network he entire constitution which as on the other side are ost never beendisentangled y any living being. Hence onedenies heir existence, st as the commonma denies he existence the air, insisting hat it is mere emptiness. ." The Man Without Qualities,Vol. (London: Secker Warburg, 1954), 182. Los Angeles: 24. N. Keddie, Scholars,S aints,and Sufis Berkeley CaliforniaUniversityPress,1972), 25. D. F. Eickelman, "The Study of Islam n Local Contexts," Contri(1984). butions o Asian Studies, 26. In outlining he conceptof tradition, am indebted o the insightful writings of Alisdair Maclntyre, in particular his brilliant book After Virtue (London:Duckworth,198 ). togethern all mannerof 7. Thus Gilsenan: Tradition, therefore, differentways in contemporaryconditionsof crisis; t is a term that is in fact se shifting n content. changes,hough ll wh highly variable so to mark out truths nd principlesas essentially nchanging.n the name tradition many traditionsare born and come nto oppositionwith others. It becomes language, weaponagainstnternaland externalenemies, refuge,an evasion, part of the entitlement o dominationand authority over others." (Recogntzingslam, 15.) Or as AbdallahLaroui puts it in The Crisisof heArab Intellectual (Berkeley Los Angeles:CaliforniaUniversityPress,1976), 35 "one might say that tradition existsonly when nnovation s accepted nder he cloak of fidelity o the past." Eickelman,Th Middle East, Chapter In a short paperwritten a decade go,"Politics an Religion n IslamicReform" (Review of Middle East Studies,No. 2, Lond on: Ithaca Press,1976) emphasized that orthodoxy s always he product a network power. 30. Incidentally, t is time that anthropologists Islam ealized hat there "political sociology," hat his deployment is more to Ibn Khaldun han the Arabic malaka) of the Aristotelianconcept virtue (i th form especially elevant o an understanding what I have called slamic radi-
recent essay, "Knowledge, Virtue, an Action: Th Classical tions. Muslim Conception Adab an he Natureof Retigious ulflllment Islam," Khaldun'sconcept usefulaccountof I. Lapidushas ncludeda brief Place Authority: D. Metcalf ed.],Moral Conduct milaka Adab in SouthAsian Islam lBerkeley nd os Angeles:CaliforniaUniversity Press,19841PP 52-56). (New York: "Doctrine" in New CatholicEncyclopedia, McGraw-Hill, 1967). cit., P.33. Laroui, nd Maclntyre, "EpistemologicalC rises,Dramatic Se Gutting Revolutions, Philosophy Science,"Paradigms (Notre Dame:Notre DameUniversityPress,1980), 64-65' Teaching English: L. Stratta, Argument nd Se J. Dixon A. Wilkinson (Milton Keynes: A Critical Analysis," Writers Writing, OpenUniversity Publications, 986). 35 Thus, in an essayentitled "Late Antiquity nd Islam: Parallelsan (i B. D. Metcalf, op cit.), th eminenthistorianPeterBrown quoteswith approval ro Henri Marrou: "For in the last resort classical humanismwa basedon tradition,somethingmparted one's eachers mindsof onegeneration, al handed unquestioningly . . it meant fundamental omogeneity nd indeed of whole historical period, which madecommunication nd genuine ommunioneasier" (p 24). It is amiliarconcept,whichBrownemploys discuss he Islamic precisely iradition," that anthropologistshouldabandon favor another. 6. Fo an ntroductorydiscussion some roblems elating the control effectsof a typically modern rm of communication, eeR. Williams, CulturalForm (London:Fontana,1974). Television: echnology described Jacques result amongMuslim ntellectuals monde actuel parmi trop d'intellectuels de Berque thus: "Dans militants,on se partageentreadeptesd'une authenticit6sansavenir et adeptes d'une modernisme an acines. frangais raduit mal, I'espdce, qu aEilwa anEAr l-aEil en arabevient beaucoupmieux:anEdr l-maEir Presses I'UsciencesParis: magir." (L'Islam: philosophie t nesco, 9811, 6 8 . ) problem ndicatedhere not the same 8. It should stressed ha reated n themanymonographsha purport describe he recent as he "erosion the old unity valuesbased Divine Revelation"which as he "stable, ndeedstatic, socialworld" accompaniedhe disruption traditionalM uslim society cf M. Gilsenan, aint nd sufi Modern Egypt addresses [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), p. 196, 192).Arecent example that questions I have in mind is S. Zubaida's "The ideological some Society, governmenl," Economy Khomeini's doctrine conditions XI (1982),which attempts to show that Khomeini's novel doctrine wilayatmodes reasoning, traditional shi'i premises i-faqih, although based "nation-state." Zubai"nation" prrirpposes the modern concepts traditional stability assumption require da's argument does homogeneity. 22
Selectionof Publications from the Center fo Contemporary Arab Studies Contemporary North Africa: Issues of Development and Integration Edited by Halim Barakat, 1985 papers delivered at a symposium on North Africa This is a collection sponsored by the Center. Contributors include such prominent scholars Fatima Mernissi, Carl Brown, Halim Barakat, John Ruedy, Elbaki Hermessi, Dale Eickelman, I. WilliamZartman and John Damis, among others. authors discuss he Maghrib's position between he West and the Mashriq, intra-regional conflicts and cooperation, structural changes society, cultural dynamics, and the problemsof development.261pages,$15.95.
Tensions n Islamic Civilization By Constantine K. Zurayk, 1978 reprinted 1984) Dr. Zurayk describesand analyzes he major formative periods in lslamic civilization, the tensions t has experienced,and the ways it has reacted them. Presentday tensions esulting rom the forces of tradition, modernity, nationalism are discussed. pages,$3.75.
Arab Resources: The Transformation of a Society Edited by Ibrahim Ibrahim,1982 Arab This study considers he range factors affecting development in world an examines the broad sectoral resources, the infrastructure resource development, and the problems shaping he political economy of Arab development. Contributing authors include Nazli Choucri, George Abed, Hisham Nazer, Roger Owen, Yusif Sayigh,JanetAbu-Lughod, Philip Khoury, p a g e s ,$ 1 5 . 9 5 . D a n k w a r t R u s t o w , a n d C h a r l e s ssawi. All books are paperbound. Pleasesend a check or money order payable CCAS with each book order. Prices include postage and handling for orders within the United States. Prepaid orders only. A complete list of CCAS publications availableupon request.
Center Contemporary rab Studies Georgetown niversity Washington,D .C 20057 Q| 625-3128
CBxrrn ron CoNTEMpoRAnvAn.ql Sruurps GnoncBrowN Uxrvrnsrrv Executive Committee
Prof. JohnD. Ruedy Prof. Mich ael C. Hudson,Director Prof. Hisham Sharabi Prof. Halim Barakat Prof. BarbaraStowasser Prof. Wallace Erwin Prof. JudithTucker Prof. Ibrahim Ibrahim DeanPeterF. Krogh, ex-fficio Prof. IbrahimM. Oweiss AdvisoryCouncil Ali Ghandour,Chairman Alia-The Royal JordanianAirline
J. William Fulbright Hogan & Hartson
AbbasAbdulla Kuwait Universitv Office Embassyof the Stateof Kuwai+ Munir H' Atalla
SaeedGhobash Arab MonetarvFund
GeorgeN. Atiyeh Library Congress Anis Bahraoui Maroc Ddv6loppemen F. M. Al-Bassam ArabianAmerican Oi Company Lucius D. Battle U.S. Ambassador Retired) MarmadukeG. Bayne U.S. Navy (Retired) C. RobertBlack TexacoMiddle East/FarEast RobertF. Conley LockheedInternationalCompany EdgarM. Cortright E. M. Cortright an Associates RaymondD'Argenio United Technologies orporation Ahmad MuhammadAl-Dhubaib King SaudUniversity SaudiArabia HassanA. Al-Ebraheem Minister of Education Stateof Kuwait Elizabeth Fernea The Universitv Texasat Austin
ParkerT. Hart u.s. Ambassador Retired) MostafaKamal Helmi Arab Republicof Egypt Albert Hourani Antony'sCollege University of Oxford Raymond . Howar Howar Properties Charles ssawi PrincetonUniversitv A. M. Kattan IssaAl Kawari Minister of Information Stateof Qatar WalterE. Ma Donald Mobil Oil Corporation MohammedNaki Archibald Roosevelt. r. ChaseManhattanBank,N.A. DonaldL. Snook EssoMiddleEast QaisAl Zawawi DeputyPrimeMinister fo Financialand EconomicAffairs Sultanateof Oman
