Religious Tradition

Religious Tradition

When considering more closely the concept of tradition, in particular that of religious tradition, we may start by making a descriptive distinctionbetween various kinds of tradition: great versus little traditions, religiousversus non-religious traditions, traditions bound to local or regional areas versus more abstract traditions beyond immediate communication, raditions bound to specific ethnic, professional, or other groups versus traditions that stress individual experience or personalization. Tradition has an inherent character of process since it consists of a transmission, conscious or unconscious, of social and cultural elements that are part of a particular way of life or a specific organization of it.In this process of transmission, those who are at the receiving end are not simply passive receptacles. In fact, the vitality and very survival of a tradition depends on people assimilating elements of it because of the orientation and style or “taste” they give to life and the appeal of the community that partakes in the tradition. Tradition as transmission is an operation that implies an appeal; certain elements of it have a symbolic value and the tradition itself may even acquire a mythical value. Indeed, the social symbolism in a tradition refers to certain values that are pertinent to the cohesion and survival of the community and which the tradition upholds. This helps to explain why a tradition in a process of rationalization tends to develop into ideology, which, depending on circumstances, may develop beyond the tradition from which it originated. Traditions have their own history, and whereas some may experience an outburst of energy, others may come to a dead end. When circumstances change, a tradition can adopt new expressions, redefine itself, and take a new direction. In trying circumstances it can contribute to strengthen the community by providing shared meanings. It may even go underground, which implies that some elements are concealed. Needless to stress, a tradition precedes the individual born into it, who appropriates values through it, and who arrives at his own way of life precisely with reference to it. Individuals and groups always stand within traditions, but usually they have a certain freedom of choice to the extent that a tradition allows for variations. In more pluriform societies, it is possible to step over from one to another tradition. There is always an extreme possibility of stepping out of a given tradition without entering into another one. Paradoxically enough, the very originality of religious people, revolutionaries, and artists has sometimes given rise to new kinds of traditions.

SOCIAL REALITY IN ISLAM

SOCIAL REALITY IN ISLAM

The role religion plays and can play in development processes has attracted

attention both from those who, on the basis of a particular analysis or

worldview, judge religion a priori to be an obstacle to the development of

society and from those who, of the opposite persuasion, assign religion a

positive role in whatever circumstances, be it a particular religion, be it

religion in general. One of the weaknesses of both positions is that they

investigate different social circumstances with different religions at different

times and places by means of one specific value concept of religion. I do

not want to give here any general evaluation of religion a priori but merely

to concentrate on one specific religious tradition, that of Islam.

In fact, a fruitful approach to the problem of the role of religion in

development processes is to start with the fact of tradition. Reformulated,

the problem is then the role a particular religion plays, and can play, in

the tension that exists between tradition-bound societies and their need

to develop for their sheer survival. We are here concerned with the social

and cultural forms of such societies: the presence of social and cultural

traditions on the one hand, and the need for new social and cultural

forms and expressions on the other hand. It is precisely through given

social and cultural forms that religion plays an important role, and it is

largely through changes in these forms that we can assess what kinds of

development take place in a society.

I assume here that the combination of a social tradition that is “established”,

in the sense that it determines all human relations, and cultural

forms that are “fixed”, in the sense that they hardly change, constitute a

closed sphere, and are not able to express new contents, constitutes a

major obstacle to development. In that case, changing reality cannot very

well be assimilated and elaborated in new terms, intellectually or otherwise.

A religion may, but need not necessarily, I think, be instrumental in

creating such a stagnant social and cultural situation. In fact, there are at

least three alternatives for the role a given religion can play in regard to

a given social and cultural tradition:

1) A religion may legitimate a particular tradition and make it “religious”.

In this case, tradition and religion are closely linked and may even

be identified with each other. This is the case in most tribal religions and

to a large extent the Hindu and Jewish religious traditions. In Islam this

is the position of “orthodox” (Sunnî) Islam inasmuch as it recognizes

local traditions (³ÇdÇt) besides the Sunna with a capital S (authoritative

tradition of the Prophet) to have religious value.

2) A religion also may reinterpret a given tradition at a given moment

and select certain vital and essential elements from it while leaving others

aside. This implies a split in the tradition and a reinterpretation of the

elements and principles judged to be relevant and worthy of retention.

This is the case, for instance, in Reform Judaism, in the Protestant

Reformation, and in reform movements in general that want to go back

to the pure origins or message of the religion under consideration. In

Islam, this has been the position of the various “reform (islÇh) movements”,

in particular during the last hundred years.

3) A religion may make a resolute break with an existing tradition,

setting against it new norms as a result of which a kind of religious revolt

takes place. This happened, for instance, with the separation of the

Buddhist community from the Vedic religion, that of the Christian community

from Judaism, and that of the Bahâ’î community from Islam,

where the break went so far that not only sects but new religions arose.

Such religious revolts can take place on the basis of an immediate revelation

or insight or other profound experiences touching something “absolute”

in people that transforms and mobilizes them. Within Islam, the

Khârijî movement some decades after Muhammad’s(SAW) death or more recently

the Wahhâbî movement in Arabia come to mind. Islam itself also

represents a religious protest: a separation from polytheism, existing

monotheisms, and unbelief.

These three alternative relationships between a given religion and a

particular social and cultural tradition imply that we should take religion

as an active principle that can act in at least three different ways in

relation to tradition. One may also speak of three “ideal types” of

religion that are relevant for our theme:

1) Religion as legitimation, leading to the formation of an autonomous

religious tradition that grows in the course of time;

2) Religion as reinterpretation, leading to a religious discernment

within a given tradition (social, cultural, and then also religious);

3) Religion as protest, leading to a religious judgment of and a crisis

within a given tradition.