The Good Life and its Representation: #Religion, #Ethics and what you can see?

I had intended to write a series of blogs on religion and ethics soon after the 7th Wasatiyyah Conference in Cape Town on the 20th of May. But this was not to be as I began teaching a module on Jihad and violence at the University of Cape Town. I will report on this as well. For now, I continue my chosen blog journey on ethics, values and religions.

Shaheed's defense and graduation took place on the 10th of May, 2017. The thesis was based on field work in Mumbai on the good life as articulated around food, sacrifice, consumption and production. The cover on his thesis was a row of animal carcasses in the background, and a man sitting in the front. Shaheed was asked for a photograph by the University, which he supplied.

But Utrecht University chose a different photograph to announce the event (picture on the side). It was a photograph of a woman holding a cat on a lap, wearing a green dress and face cover.

The choice of this photograph rather than the one given by Shaheed revealed and obscured the moral life of Muslims. Firstly, the rejection of Shaheed's photograph says a lot of what is considered ethical with regard to animal rights and non-rights. Supermarkets are filled with meat, but the reality of the slaughter should be kept in the background.

On the other hand, the choice of this photo rather than the original one was perhaps an act kindness by the administration. Muslims already have a bad reputation! And the administration perhaps chose something more familiar and less jarring. This was surely more ethical. Holding a cat with tenderness was better than sitting in front of a row of animal carcasses. But then one has to ask, how moral is it to do something for another person? This choice was good for the image of Muslim society, but not so good in relation to the choice made by Shaheed? We have a contrast between ethics as freedom (Shaheed's choice), and a sense of the good (for the benefit of the Muslim image).

But I reflected on what this picture shows in relation to the history of public ethics and gender in the West since the advent of modernity. I read recently from Graeber that a major transformation took place on how ethics were removed from display under the impact of the Protestant Reformation. Men, in particular, had previously displayed their identity and values on their bodies, by the clothes and accessories that they wore. Then, under the impact of a pietistic tradition, this display was displaced with a dour exterior and an inner sense of rectitude and self-righteousness.

In contrast, women were expected to continue showing off their values, valuables and identities on their bodies.

So what does this picture show about Muslim ethics? On the one hand, it is revealing and concealing at the same time. It shows the values that Muslims hold dear. At the same time, it hides those values. A full cover from head to toe does not show anything, and everything. Unless, of course, the very act of concealing is a value. A women in niqab is a concealment by fact.

When one brings in the fact that this photo was chosen in Utrecht, Netherlands, then it seems that this says nothing about Muslim values. It displays a modern European tradition that frames women who show values or no values.

So, ethics and display are deeply connected. As ethics are personal and individual acts of kindness, generosity, etc, they can be entangled with public display and hypocrisy. This conundrum does not seem to have been addressed in the anthropology of ethics, but there is extensive discussion thereof in religious literature. 

Journeys on and in the Ethical - Religion, #Ethics and Violence

Castle in Cape Town

The International Peace College South Africa in Cape Town, in cooperation with AMEC (Afro-Middle East Centre) based in Johannesburg, hosted its 7th Annual Wasatiyyah Symposium in the Castle of Good Hope on Saturday 20 May 2017. The meeting turned around the challenge of ISIS to South Africa in general, and the South African Muslim community in particular.

Presenters wrestled with why about 100 recruits in South Africa turned their backs to the Muslim community. Moreover, they wrestled with why these recruits chose violence rather than the middle path (#wasatiyyah)- a path of commitment and moderation, a path exemplified by the history of Muslims in South Africa.

A few days earlier, I had the privilege of attending the 5th Annual Conference on Law and Religion (ACLARS) in Rabat, Morocco. The theme of the conference was Law, Religion and Security. Over two and a half days, academics presented papers on how law and religion mediated values, violence and power. As in the Wasatiyyah Symposium in Cape Town, delegates wrestled with how the best side of religion in African countries may contribute to security and peace. ISIS was the elephant in the room.

A few days before that, I attended a symposium entitled “Islam as an Ethical and Material Practice” that preceded my son’s (Shaheed Tayob) graduation at Utrecht University in the Netherlands. It focussed on the implications and questions that emerged from this thesis (Islam as a Lived Tradition: Ethical Constellations of Muslim Food Practice in Mumbai). This was a very different meeting, mixing personal pride and reflection. But the conference, now located in Europe, reflected on the representation of Islam in the public sphere, and the practices that shaped and directed Muslims in Mumbai. There seemed to be a big gap between the ethical and the representational.

A week before that, Prof. Elena Stepanova from Ekaterinburg (Ural Federal University) invited me to an International Interdisciplinary Conference (Religion in the Public Sphere: Paradoxical Presence). I used the opportunity to reflect on the paradoxes in the National Policy on Religion and Education promulgated in 2003. The policy was designed to change the nature of religious education in South African schools. Here too, I was drawn to the ethical between deliberation and representational. The former was devoted to examine and explore the history of religions, while the latter was devoted to putting up religion for display (a display often marked by power and privilege).

These are privileges that I have often taken for granted. The meetings of sharing and learning find their way into writing, teaching and public life. This time, I was painfully aware of my carbon footprint as my Abdul-Aleem Somers has often reminded me. But as I looked back at these experiences, I also became aware of the interconnectedness of these meetings. In the next few weeks, I would like to revisit these meetings through the sights, sounds and emotions that they evoked for me.

I will be reflecting on them through the weekly meetings that we have organized at the University of Cape Town on religion and ethics. Our research group, Religion Education and Islam, African Publics and Religious Values, comes together for an hour to discuss articles and books that we read together. For 2017, we first read James Laidlaw’s The Subject of Virtue: An Anthropology of Ethics and Freedom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), and we are now following up with Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided By Religion and Politics (Pantheon Books, 2012). From different vantage points, they are challenging us to think about ethics in religions, and in the study of religions. But as you will see, we challenge their conception of ethics through the religious that we know.