Modern Things on Trial

Halevi, Leor

doi:10.7312/hale18866

Cited by 25 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…108 In Modern Things on Trial, I use instead the term "laissez-faire Salafism" to define "the ethos," which Riḍ a's journal embodied and channeled, "of the economically liberal movement of Islamic reform that arose under the aegis of the Empire of Free Trade." 109 Like other religious reformers in this period, Riḍ a emphasized the virtue of ijtih ad, independent legal reasoning with the goal of reinventing Islamic law, and despised the practice of taqlīd, dogmatic adherence to a school of law. 110 His 1922 fatwa may in many ways seem a classic Salafist fatwa.…”

Section: I V E R G E N T J U D G M E N T S a N D N At I O N A L I Smentioning

confidence: 98%

“…As a religious and legal authority, this meant a profound commitment to interpreting Islamic law so as to facilitate all sorts of things, from projects of constitutional reform in the Ottoman Empire to plans by Muslims to profit from forbidden goods in China. 127 The ultimate goal, which motivated his vigorous defense, was for both Arab and non-Arab Muslims to flourish with the power of alcohol and eventually build powerful states.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nationalist Spirits of Islamic Law after World War I: An Arab-Indian Battle of Fatwas over Alcohol, Purity, and Power

Halevi

2020

Comp Stud Soc Hist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 1922, one of the most famous Muslim scholars of modern times, the Syrian-Egyptian reformer Rashīd Riḍā, published in his journal a detailed fatwa in defense of alcohol. He did so in reaction to an obscure Indian jurist's fatwa that had warned Muslims not to use alcoholic products. On the surface, the authors of the fatwas appeared to be principally concerned with the right way to interpret sacred laws of purity and pollution. However, this article reveals that their disagreement had much to do with differing approaches to the politics of independence. Their divergence is intriguing because the cities where they lived, Cairo and Bombay, had just experienced the convulsions of anti-British consumer boycotts. And it emerged at a time when anti-imperial Muslim activists from the Middle East and South Asia were rallying together for a pan-Islamic cause—to prevent the final collapse of the caliphate. These movements swayed both Riḍā and his rival, who may well be described as Muslim nationalists. Yet they embraced radically different strategies for independence. One aimed for national purity, the other for national power. This discrepancy led to the battle of fatwas—a forgotten battle that is worth remembering because it suggests some of the difficulties that Muslim jurists of Arab or Indian ancestry faced during the interwar period when they tried to turn Islamic law into an effective nationalist discourse.

show abstract

Section: I V E R G E N T J U D G M E N T S a N D N At I O N A L I Smentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%