Muslims’ contribution to Sri Lanka and the world: Some little known facts
by Ifham Nizam
The Island spoke to Asiff Hussein, Vice-President, Outreach of the Centre for Islamic Studies (CIS) about cultural contribution of Muslims and misconceptions about the Islamic faith.
Q:
You have lectured extensively on Muslim Cultural Contribution. So, how would you describe such contribution both locally and internationally?
A:
Islam has throughout history been a very dynamic force, extensively borrowing from cultures and contributing to them. In the early years of Islam, the influence of the Byzantine Empire, also known as the Rome of the East was considerable. Thence came the domes of our mosques and the crescent symbol which was originally the symbol of Constantinople, the capital of Byzantium. When the Ottoman Turks took it in 1453, it became the symbol of Islam. The Muslims in turn improved on the architecture and so we have the onion domes of the Kremlin and the pointed towers of Castle Neuschwanstein in Bavaria resembling Islamic minarets as you see in the great mosque in Medina and the Blue Mosque in Istanbul.
In medicine, the early Muslims borrowed from Greece and the medical tradition known as Unani (literally Greek) was born. The Muslims in turn improved on it and passed it on to Europe, so much so that Ibn Sina’s (Avicenna’s) Qanoon Fit Tibb or Canon of Medicine was a standard textbook in European universities until as recently as the eighteenth century.
Even in Sri Lanka, we find Muslims have made a very meaningful contribution in terms of food, dress and pastimes. Sinhala sweetmeats such as aluva, dodol and bibikkan, accharu pickles, savoury sambols, articles of dress like sarong and karabu and pastimes such as the rabana and kite flying all owe their origins to the country’s Moor and Malay communities. Nose ornaments widely worn by Tamil women were also introduced by the Muslims. Arab and Muslim women widely wore such ornaments in the good old days.
Q:
Has Islamic fundamentalism taken hold of the local Muslim community and if so what can be done about it?
A:
Fundamentalism might be the wrong word to use in this context since a Fundamentalist is literally one who sticks to the fundamentals of the faith. The proper word to use might be extremist rather than fundamentalist. There have been some extremist interpretations of Islam by Saudi-inspired Salafi scholars locally, especially where matters such as niqab (face covering) are concerned. However even in Saudi Arabia, these extremist attitudes are no longer being tolerated and that’s a good thing. In Islam what is required is to dress modestly and cover all except the face and hands. To say that the faith requires covering more than that is going beyond Islamic teachings and no doubt an expression of extremism. Nevertheless I still believe it should be a choice for the woman herself if she opts for niqab. Individual freedoms are also important, so long as it is not forced or coerced using religion among other things.
However, this extremist thinking has not made much headway in Sri Lankan society and is rejected by the vast majority of Muslims. In fact, the Easter Sunday bombings of churches and hotels shook and shocked the community as we never imagined even in our worst nightmares that such a thing could ever happen. As things are turning out now, there were other sinister interests behind these terrorist attacks. What these terrorists did went against every teaching of Islam including striking religious places of worship and killing innocents among other things.
Q:
You focus a lot on the Past as an Inspiration for Co-existence between Muslims and people of other faiths. Why do you do that?
A:
Muslims have co-existed with the other communities of this island for well over a thousand years. They never arrived here as invaders but as peaceful merchants who made an immense contribution to our country by way of supplying essentials to isolated communities such as the Veddas and the landlocked Kandyan kingdom for centuries at a time when it was surrounded and at times blockaded by the colonial powers. They also intermarried with both Sinhalese and to a lesser extent Tamils. This is probably why you find Kandyan Muslims still bearing Sinhala ge-names. It has also been established by genetic studies that Sri Lankan Muslims are the least exclusive of all of the island’s races.
This means they have been the most inclusive and have DNA that closely resembles the Sinhalese. This is mostly true of maternal lineages which proves that the early Moors settled here intermarried with local women. However there are Sinhalese paternal linages of Moors as well which shows how close these two communities were in the past. So how do we create awareness of this fact? Simple, by publicizing it in every possible way, that we are one with the rest of the communities that have made this beautiful island our home.
Q.
There is a misconception that in Islam women are not treated as equals. How far is this true?
A:
This is a common misconception, mainly because of the way Islam is interpreted in certain countries like Saudi Arabia. In Islam, women are free to own and manage property and transact business in their own right; they are free to marry partners whom they choose and may do so even sans the consent of male guardians such as father or brother. Unfortunately many of these rights given in both the Qur’an and in the ahadith or traditions of our Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) are trampled in countries like Saudi Arabia which are more concerned about maintaining their tribal traditions than the true laws of Islam.
In some cases, the West deliberately complicates the picture, especially when it comes to matters like Female Genital Mutilation. True, Islam has nothing to do with FGM, but we do have something called female circumcision, which like male circumcision involves the removal of a little bit of skin, the prepuce covering the clitoris and ensures a lifetime of genital hygiene and enhanced sexual pleasure. But the West perpetuates this myth equating it to FGM as happens in certain African countries. Fortunately Islamic organisations and publications have now begun addressing these topics. A case in point is the leading international Islamic magazine Al Jumuah carrying its cover story on Islamic Female Circumcision, making a very good case why it ought to be obligatory and outlining its many health and sexual benefits. Thus, it is not only the manner in which Islam is interpreted in certain societies that is the problem, but also how the West portrays it to be.
Q:
Sharia Law is commonly thought to be a very harsh set of laws and unsuited for the modern world. What is your take on this?
A:
Shariah Law is not at all what it is commonly understood to be. You wouldn’t believe me if I were to tell you that it was until recently, one of the most, perhaps the most lenient of legal systems the world had known. But that’s the fact. Take amputation of the hand for theft. Do you know that to cut off a thief’s hand that at least thirteen conditions should be met and that if any one of these conditions are not met, the penalty cannot be applied. In fact, in Ottoman Turkey where the Shariah was applied for well over three centuries, there were only a handful of cases where thieves had their hands cut off.
Why, because the legal conditions that required the penalty to be carried out were so difficult to establish. The stolen item should have had a certain value, something like forty dollars or more in the present context, it should have been kept in a place of safekeeping like a safe, it should have not been in a public place or in the sight of the public, etc., and when all these conditions have expired, it is still possible to save the thief from the penalty if the victim comes forward to gift it to him or her. In contrast until as recently as the early 1800s thieves in Britain could be sent to the gallows without any of the attenuating conditions that Islamdom imposed.
Then take adultery. True, stoning to death may well be the punishment, but the fact remains that to prove adultery as many as four witnesses are necessary, and these four should have seen penetration taking place by the offending couple. The purpose of Shariah is not to humiliate or mutilate, but to impress on potential offenders the seriousness of their offence and to prevent the evil from being broadcast in public so that it becomes the order of the day.
