Book review of "Voice of an Exile" by Nasr Abu Zaid with Esther R. Nelson

Is the Qur’an the literal Word of God revealed to Muhammad through the angel Gabriel? Islamists in power, and many Muslims of the current age, feel that this is so—it is the present orthodoxy within Islam. However, one notable exception is Nasr Abu Zaid. In his book co-authored with Esther R. Nelson Voice of an Exile: Reflections on Islam, Zaid feels that certain “… people resist looking at God’s Word as a document expressed in human language, thinking that understanding in such a way goes against belief or faith”(97). Nasr feels that “Language does not emerge from a vacuum. Language has a cultural, social, and political context. Human beings populate these contexts. Human beings, living throughout the world in specific places at specific times, leave their mark on language” (96). Islamic fundamentalism has always insisted that the Qur’an is God’s eternal, uncreated speech. Because it always existed it was never created and fundamentalists feel, thusly, that the text should be read literally and applied uniformly across time and place (Zaid and Nelson 3-4, italics mine). However, just as Bishop John Shelby Spong argues similarly for the interpretation of the New Testament Scriptures, Zaid feels that modernity should approach the Qur’an using the seventh-century context in which it was created in order to extrapolate meaning for the modern age. Zaid feels that the divine text became a human text at the moment it was revealed to Muhammad. How else could human beings understand it? Once it is in human form, a text becomes a book like any other. Religious texts are essentially linguistic texts. They belong to a specific culture and are produced within that historical setting. The Qur’an is a historical discourse—it has no fixed, intrinsic meaning (Zaid and Nelson 97). Yet, Zaid is not trying to debunk or make the Qur’an, Islam, or Muslims illegitimate. He states early in his book that “… I identify myself as a Muslim. I was born a Muslim, I was raised a Muslim, and I live as a Muslim. God willing, I will die a Muslim” (11). A major stance that Zaid takes issue with comes from state power that does not separate from religion. Zaid comments, “When the state identifies itself with a certain religion, folks who belong to another religious tradition inevitably are discriminated against. In addition, those folks who belong to the religion officially sanctioned by the state, but don’t hold orthodox views…become subject to persecution on the grounds of apostasy and heresy” (183).

It is on the grounds of apostasy and heresy that Zaid was forced into exile away from his beloved home of Egypt based on his ideas of how the Qur’an should be read and interpreted. Even though Zaid offered new insights and encouraged only debate, not allegiance, toward his ideas, the powerful in the current Islamic orthodoxy forced him to live in exile from his homeland. Zaid feels one should pursue religious texts through historical context and hermeneutics. By placing yourself within the specific time of any religious document you enable yourself to discover new insights that a literal, or “face value”, interpretation will not uncover. The foundation of any sacred writing is constructed, molded, and whose intentions reflect, around the society in which it was born. I feel that fundamentalists in Islam, and in any other religion, have a right to think, discuss, and preach how they feel. However, when Islamic fundamentalist powers censor anyone amongst “the ranks” by any and all means necessary they undermine the central theme of their Prophet, their Qur’an; the central theme of Nasr Abu Zaid—justice.