Tel Aviv University

Tariq Ramadan and Western Islam: a critical analysis

By Federico Gaon (Student ID: 341046043)

Lecturer: Dr. Uriya Shavit
Islam and the West
Spring Semester 2017
Long Paper (8600 words)
 Gaon 1

Introduction

Tariq Ramadan (b. 1962) is possibly one of the most influential voices of Europe, particularly amid
increasing discussions concerning the place and spiritual life of Muslims in the West. Born in
Switzerland, a grandson of Hassan al-Banna (the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood), Ramadans
name has been imprinted in lists of contemporary luminaries by publications such as Time and
Foreign Policy.1 Self-described as an activist professor, Ramadans career spans three decades, in
which time he has published several works concerning Islamic ethics and the identity of Muslims in
the West.2 Additionally, he presently holds tenure at Oxford as well as positions in some universities
in Europe and Asia.
Despite his reputation, or rather still, because of it, Ramadan stands a controversial figure. To
some he is a needed reformer, a man with a vision, a Muslim Martin Luther who struggles to
bridge the gap between the secular lifestyle of the West and the traditional values of Islam. 3 He is
known to be a charismatic orator, particularly with Muslim youth audiences, and so his lectures often
witness large audiences. Esteemed by many as a voice of moderation, he publishes columns in The
Guardian and Al Jazeera, and continues to be interviewed, referenced or cited during debates about
globalization, Westernization, and Islamic ethics. On the other hand, Ramadan has a plethora of
detractors, who accuse him of doublespeak.4 Critics argue that Ramadan advocates for the
Islamization of Europe and that he consistently refuses to condemn acts of terrorism. They point out
that while he tells Muslims one thing, he tells non-Muslims what they want to hear. In line with these
allegations, following suspicions of ties with the Palestinian Hamas through a Swiss-based charity
association, in 2004 US authorities banned Ramadan from entering the United States. The prohibition
was lifted in 2010 once Barack Obama became President.5 For better or worse, Ramadan is seemingly
shrouded in contradiction. Possibly reflecting this impression, the philosopher described himself as a
Salafi reformist, an individual who seeks to protect Muslim identity and religious practice, while

1 Ramadan was named in 2004 by Time magazine as one of the most influential people in the world. Moreover, he was listen
at least six times in the Top 100 Global Thinkers list compiled annually by the Foreign Policy magazine. See
http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1970858,00.html, and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP_Top_100_Global_Thinkers.
2Ian Buruma, Tariq Ramadan has an Identity Issue, The New York Times Magazine, February 4, 2007. Accessible at
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/magazine/04ramadan.t.html.
3Ramadan was called a man with a vision in an article published at the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website in
2014, and a Muslim Martin Luther by Paul Donnelly, in an article published by The Washington Post on August 28, 2004.
See https://archive.is/SKT1F (accessed on July 12, 2017), and http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40222-
2004Aug27.html.
4See for example Caroline Fourest, Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, (New York: Encounter Books,
2008); Paul Berman, Whos Afraid of Tariq Ramadan?, New Republic, June 4, 2007 (accessible at
https://newrepublic.com/article/60961/whos-afraid-tariq-ramadan); and Gilles Kepel, The War for Muslim Minds: Islam
and the West, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004), 279-280.
5See Sheldon Chad, Ramadans visa ban lifted, The Guardian, January 23, 2010. Accessible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jan/23/tariq-ramadan-clinton-visa.
 Gaon 2

acknowledging Western constitutional structure, and professing true loyalty to the country of
residence. 6
The purpose of this paper is to analyze Ramadans ideas regarding Muslim identity against
the backdrop of Western secularism. Given space limitations, this paper will focus on three of
Ramadans books published in English: To be a European Muslim (1999), Western Muslims and the
Future of Islam (2004) and What I Believe (2009). While covering the period between 1999 and 2009,
these books reveal that, for the most part, Ramadans thought remained the same throughout the
decade. Further still, this paper will use a small number of his columns, as well as more recent
lectures available on YouTube, as to verify ideological continuity in respect to the abovementioned
books. Concretely, multimedia sources indicate that Ramadan has maintained his premises up to the
present day. The selected published works cover the same issues in different length, yet they
demonstrate that the authors core ideas have not been revised. It could be argued that To be a
European Muslim serves as an introduction to Ramadans thought, and he makes a case for a cross-
cultural understanding between non-Muslims and believers alike. However, in all, he writes under the
assumption that Westerners are in need of such sensibilization. He suggests that Muslims living in
Europe are daily put on scrutiny, either to measure their loyalty to society or to press these
communities to integrate fully. Instead of having to justify themselves continually, Ramadan makes
a case for a change of consciousness. In essence, observing that justification leads to stigmatization,
the intellectual suggests Muslims should reassert their identity by taking a decisive role to improve
society as a whole. This is done by bearing witness to the Islamic Revelation, sharing and promoting
universal ethical values, of top need in times where globalization leads to purported spiritual
emptiness and meaningful existential questions. Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, which was
published by Oxford University Press, is perhaps indicative of Ramadans growing influence by the
early and mid-2000s. In it, Ramadan further develops his principles and delivers a section entirely
focused on the practical application of his ideas surrounding the personality of the European Muslim.
In turn, What I Believe constitutes but a treatise meant to synthesize and distribute his overall thoughts
over a general array of issues, including Muslims living in the West, Islamic feminism, controversies
surrounding the headscarf, among others.
Ramadan has since published more works centering on the life of Muhammad and Islamic
ethics, books which are not considered in this analysis. Likewise, non-English material will not be
taken into account. Critics often point out that Ramadans doublespeak is best illustrated when
observing his supposedly ambiguous message.7 While allegedly passing a robust anti-Western

6See Ian Buruma, Tariq Ramadan has an Identity Issue, and Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2003), 26-27.
7Caroline Fourest notes laconically that Ramadans message is so ambiguous that one can make anything one wants of it.
Fourest, Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, 168. Ramadans purported ambivalent message came to the
spotlight following an iconic appearance on French television, on November 20, 2003. In a debate with then Interior
Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, Ramadan refused to condemn his older brother Hani, who supposedly advocated for the stoning of
 Gaon 3

message to Muslim audiences through audio recordings and lectures in Morocco, he supposedly
appeals to anti-globalization leftists and liberals alike. Notwithstanding these allegations, given that
this material is beyond the scope of this study, Ramadans ideas will be analyzed on the basis of the
works named earlier. However, in doing so, this paper will demonstrate that criticism of Ramadans
pieces is indeed warranted. It will be discussed here that Ramadan is not able to solve seeming
contradictions obscuring some of his proposals for a better understanding between Muslims and their
non-believing/er fellows. Moreover, given that his ideas have not shifted in the time lapse when the
selected books were published the analysis here presented does not adopt a chronological approach.
Instead, for the purpose of clarity, this study is divided into two sections. The first one deals with
Ramadans conception of Islam as a value-system inherently compatible with reason. More
specifically, it covers the notion of ijtihad, the employment of reason to bring about judicial rulings
reflective of different and changing aspects of reality; all the while remaining true to the spirit of
Revelation. Noteworthily, Ramadans reputation as a progressive thinker lies in part due to his
rejection of taqlid meaning blind imitation which is held as the juridical anathema of ijtihad. His is
an outlook reminiscent of conventional modernist-apologetic literature, insofar as he laments the
influence of scholastic traditionalism throughout the centuries: a force that arguably stripped Islam of
its progressive and rational nature.8 Islam is basically shown as a universal, all-encompassing source
of inspiration that allows believers to contemplate every situation through spirituality, reason, and
balanced contemplation. Therefore, the first part will explore how Ramadan justifies using ijtihad as
the tool par excellence to adapt religious teachings to the overall context of Muslims living in
Western countries.
The second and more substantial part of this paper explores the difficulties surrounding
Muslims sense of belonging in Western societies. With this in mind, Ramadan elaborates identity
markers which define a Muslim from a theological standpoint. He uses these to reinforce the idea that
Muslims face no hindrances or religious mandates preventing them from inhabiting Western, non-
Islamic lands. Subsequently, he makes the argument for a deculturalized Islam purged of outdated,

adulterous women under sharia the Islamic law. Asked if he agreed with this monstrosity, Ramadan replied that he
disagreed, that such punishment was not applicable. However, he also stated that he believed Muslims in countries where
stoning was practiced should enact a moratorium to allow for a debate on the issue. Drawing on this anecdote, Paul Berman
suggests that Ramadans position illustrates how a seventh century ideology lies beneath his modern rhetoric about feminism
and rights. See Berman, The Flight of the Intellectuals, (Brooklyn NY, Melville House Publishing, 2010), 213-116. While an
English transcript of the abovementione debate can be found in Bermans (2010) book, the debate can be found on YouTube.
See for instance https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGdimAneQ2Y (accessed on August 31, 2017).
8 Ramadan identifies with the legacy of well-known intellectuals and reformists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth
centuries, including Jamal al-din al-Afghani (1838/39-1897), Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905) and Rashid Rida (1865-
1935), insofar as these thinkers held a very dynamic relation to the scriptural sources and a constant desire to use reason in
the treatment of the Texts in order to deal with the new challenges of their age and the social, economic, and political
evolution of societies. See Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 26. That said, Ramadan further depicts in
this fashion controversial, if not highly debatable figures such as Hassan al-Banna (1906-1949), Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966)
and Abu Ala Mawdudi (1903-1979), often considered radical proponents of contemporary political Islam. For prompt
further reference see Bwering, Crone and Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 62-64 (for
Banna); 488-489 (for Qutb); and 332-334 (Mawdudi).
 Gaon 4

localized or temporal influences which are not reflective of the Quran and the Sunna, or whose rulings
are not applicable to the European context. Later, and perhaps more significantly, this paper will
illustrate Ramadans objections to assimilation of Muslims, who he claims are pressured to forsake
their religious duties for the sake of conformity to public norms. As opposed to having a passive,
reclusive role, the intellectual in question affirms that Muslims living in the West ought to bring about
a positive change in/to society by being faithful to the universal teachings of Islam. Doing so enables
them to remain both Western and Muslims, albeit with ample terminological discussions surrounding
identity issues.
Despite these points, it will finally be argued that the question of identity is not satisfactorily
or entirely answered. As it will be seen, Ramadan does not attempt to bring the best of both worlds
the West and Islam to the equation. Instead, and despite his attempts to bridge positive (Western)
law with the legal structure of Islam, at all times he subordinates the former to his understanding of
the latter. To be a Western Muslim is thus to remain true to ones religious identity, doing the utmost
to engage with the environment, spreading the values of Islam, though minimizing conflict with the
secular framework, the concept of nationality and citizenship.

Concerning the exercise of ijtihad and the role of reason in Islam

The use of reason in religion to address changing realities occupies a central position in Ramadan's
works. Ramadan defines ijtihad as the rational elaboration of laws either on the basis of the sources
or formulated in light of them.9 In broad terms, ijtihad is dealt as a necessary if not a fundamental
tool for alleviating Western Muslims from both doubts and pressure arising from the secular
environment. On the other hand, ijtihad is also presented as a means through which the literalist
character of the Salafi approach can be challenged.10 In analyzing the virtues of human interpretation,
Ramadan discusses three essential elements which define his understanding of ijtihad, acting as a
framework for subsequent discussions concerning Muslims vis--vis the West. First and foremost, the
author warns against the trivialization of religious practices by disassociating reason from the Islamic
sources. In other words, Ramadan emphasizes that the exercise of ijtihad is tied to a set of parameters
and conditions. Thus, in the second place, Ramadan argues that the practitioner of ijtihad is required
to meet specific qualifications. It is in this individual, singularly referred to as a mujtahid (and plurally
as mujtahidun) that lies an enormous responsibility for bridging perceivable gaps between religious
sources and reality, as a product of time and place. For this reason, the third element witnessed in his
arguments concerning ijtihad is a sense of conceptual kinship between the mujtahid and a civic

9 Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 45.

10In What I Believe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) Ramadan writes: For reformists, faithfulness as to practice,
prescriptions, and prohibitions is essential, but there is no faithfulness without evolution, 47.
 Gaon 5

community leader. The term, composed of the root taqlid, refers to the authoritative scholar who can
interpret divine sources and elucidate their meaning in the form of rulings (fatawa) which in turn will
be expectedly respected by society at large.11
To begin, Ramadan criticizes Muslims who adopt a somewhat flexible understanding of
ijtihad to justify whatever conduct or purpose suits them best. Analogously, he warns against the
misuse of maslaha, the concept of public interest applied in Islamic jurisprudence and seemingly
related to the notion of reason. Maslaha is the juridical instrument of ijtihad, and according to
Ramadan, it has been used for justifying every new (false) ruling. To preserve legal instruments
within the scope of religion, unrestricted maslaha (mursala) must be cast aside.12 Rulings adopted
for the sake of the common, general (kulliyya) utilitarian good must necessarily refer to the primary
sources of jurisprudence, the Quran, and the Sunna.13 In this sense, far from representing the freedom
to stipulate rational rulings when the sources do not give clear and adapted answers, ijtihad must be
applied in reference to rules, knowledge or science, and not by the desire to please modern and
progressive compatriots.14 Accordingly, he states that these limitations act as ethical directive
principles, leading humanity to an horizon of values whose respect will shape our humanity and
dignity.15 By the same token, the publics interest cannot be safeguarded without following such
values; so there cannot be maslaha without being superseded to the divine law, and the
comprehensive message of Islam.16
The immediate reflection attached to this argument is that not everything can be justified in
the name of religious moderation. In his eyes, limits built on Islamic sources and judicial rulings
safeguard human righteousness; and to say that Islam allows adaptation is not the same as admitting
reformation. The former implies that Islam intrinsically allows the faithful a certain degree of leeway

11For prompt reference on the religious concepts of taqlid and ijtihad, and their application in historical perspective, see
Bwering, Crone, Mirza, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 244-246. See also Wael B. Hallaq, Was
the Gate of Ijtihad Closed? International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol 16, No. 1 (1984): 3-41.
12Ramadan adopts a traditional consensus insofar as he states that whenever a verse in the Quran is self-evident, its meaning
being clear, it cannot be subject to speculation or interpretation (qati). Thus such verse cannot be employed for purposes
connected with ijtihad. See Ramadan, To be a European Muslim: A Study of Islamic Sources in the European Context
(Leicester: The Islamic Foundation, 1999), 83, and Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 43-44. For further
reference on the conventional understanding of sharia in regards to ijtihad see for instance Mohammad Hashim Kamali,
Shariah Law: An Introduction (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2008), 39-42.
13 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 77-80; and Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 48-49.
14 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 56.
15 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 64.
16Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 78-79. Interestingly, in Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, Ramadan states
that to reject sharia (the laws and judgements) provided by the Islamic sources leads to the negation of Islam (kufr) (See
page 44). On the other hand, in What I Believe, rather than alluding to the concept of maslaha, Ramadan employs the notion
of ethics of citizenship to refer to the same thing. Instead of using maslaha or public interest, he emphasises a corpus of
ethics that requires consistency and relies on reconciliation between the universality of values and the sense of belonging
(and critical loyalty) on the national and local level. (See page 116.)
 Gaon 6

to consider changing realities in time and place. In contrast, the latter suggests that at least one core
tenet in religious practice or doctrine needs to be altered to purify the faith. In this respect Ramadan
seems to opine that Western Muslims often mistake the one for the other. He implicitly assumes that
the Oneness of God the pillar known as tawhid makes Islam a truly universal religion, removing
the necessity to question its essence or the veracity of its sources. This is to say that Western Muslims
cannot be expected to reform a religion which is already perfect and to forsake their religious
identity to conform with a majority pattern (i.e., the secular society).17 Bluntly speaking, one may
indeed put under scrutiny certain interpretations, but not the divine source per se. As stated by the
author, drawing on tawhid, faith demands of reason that it should unite, marry, pacify in full
faithfulness: as a testimony to consciousness of the covenant.18 The Believer must [therefore]
understand the importance of sticking firmly to what God has revealed and not to go beyond allowed
rights, either in the sense of limitless liberality or inordinate excess in prohibiting things or
activities.19 Ramadan consequently fixes sharia as the path that leads to the spring, as an
immutable path towards ethics, and it is thus necessary to become acquainted with it for guidance and
inspiration.20
In regards to the second element, given the universality of Islamic ethics and the necessity to
keep the divine law to preserve human dignity, interpreting religion becomes a restricted business,
afforded mostly to the few. At a basic level, a formed opinion on religious affairs is only valid when it
is reached after following the abovementioned standards.21 For this reason, the exercise of
extrapolating Islamic principles onto the modern era through reason and constant awareness of the
changing realities is easier said than done. Lest to allow religion to lose meaning or devolve into
intellectual shallowness, ijtihad is not left to the common individual to apply. Ramadan makes it clear
that ijtihad, being the third source of jurisprudence, is fard al-kifayah a collective obligation
meaning that every member of the community needs to strive to maintain it. Basing his opinion on
that of Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, he writes that this is too heavy a burden for one person and
contemporary ijtihad cannot be effective without the constitution of councils or forums of ulama and
secular scholars or specialists in different disciplines.22 However, only through the rulings from the

17 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 64-65. To some degree, Ramadan seems to have altered his discourse and attitude
toward the word reform. He uses it in Western Muslims and the Future of Islam to state (in page 109) that a reformist
Islam is possible. Moreover, in What I Believe he adopts the word due to backlash he received from conservatives who
seemingly discredited his thinking. The book must be recalled is meant for non-believers, and he uses the word reform
to portray himself in a progressive light. (See pages 41-42, 48). Yet he also suggests that he means an intellectual reform
(or revolution), and not necessarily a religious one. (See page 58.)
18 Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 61.
19 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 73.
20 Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 31.
21 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 74-76.
22 Ibid., 97.
 Gaon 7

learned and righteous scholars can the community discern between what is permissible under ijtihad
and what is not. Ramadan is explicit in listing the competencies a mujtahid needs to possess in order
to perform his role correctly.
As he puts it, to be a mujtahid is to have: knowledge of the Arabic language; knowledge of
Quran and hadith sciences; deep knowledge of the objectives (maqasid) of the sharia; knowledge of
the questions on which there has been a scholarly consensus; knowledge of the principle of analogical
reasoning (qiyas) and its methodology; knowledge of the historical, social, and political context the
situation of the people living around him (ahwal an-nas); and the recognition or affirmation of these
competences by others, who must be willing to testify to his honesty, reliability and uprightness.23
Arguably, these skills represent the kind of Islamic expertise beyond the capability of the
average believer. Indeed, Ramadan notes that some jurists consider that these conditions and
qualifications are so high and demanding that it has not been possible to reach such a level after the
era of the great ulama, roughly during the 9th century.24 At any rate, these requirements refer to the
broader concept of fiqh (knowledge), defined by Ramadan as the state of juridical reflection reached
by Muslim scholars at a certain time and in a certain context in light of their study of the sharia.25
Intangible as it may be, fiqh is an indispensable item in the jurists portfolio, and it represents his
source of legitimacy. Since the Western mujtahid is expected to pass judicial rulings, he is in turn
supposed to have a profound and perhaps complex understanding of Islamic law and the various
elucidations given by scholars throughout history. Given that he will take part in the consolidation of
French or German Islamic customary law, leading to a cemented Western Islamic identity, his role
consists in adapting judicial doctrine to the essential identity markers in the territory in which he
operates. Hence, his ability to approach religion dynamically is directly tied to his ability to remain
within the boundaries posed by both oral and written tradition. The jurists mental faculty to find a
solution to a legal question (i.e., to exercise ijtihad) is therefore restrained to fiqh. Appraised in this
light, the mujtahid is responsible for revisiting the corpus of historical Islamic rulings and determine
which opinions remain current and which must be superseded by more relevant ones.
The third element of Ramadan's perspective on ijtihad potentially reflects his more
progressive aspect as an intellectual. In his writings the Swiss-born thinker assigns an enlightened role
to the mujtahid, picturing the jurist as an agent openly involved in social affairs (muamalat).26 For

23Ibid., 87-88; Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 47, 256. See also https://tariqramadan.com/english/the-conditions-
shurut-of-ijtihad/
24 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 88.
.
25 Ibid., 60.
26 Ibid., 75; Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 85.
 Gaon 8

instance, he seems to imply that female mujtahidun would be permissible.27 He envisions the mujtahid
as serving the community at large, beyond his role as legislator, regardless whether he is employed by
the state or not (as a mufti). He sees the jurist as possessing an enormous potential to form and shape
an Islamic consciousness, particularly against the backdrop of Western ascendancy.28 As a result of
the considerable amount of effort that is required to process divine instilled regulations, Ramadan
concedes that only the mujtahidun can set an example into the bargain, re-assessing the Islamic
discourse in view of their local realities. With the Quran at hand, and the Sunna at heart, the mujtahid
clarifies between obligatory acts (fard), that which is forbidden (haram), that which is
recommendable or preferable (mustahab, mandub), reprehensible (makruh) and permissible (mubah),
yet he is also aware of the environment in which he (or she) operates.29 Patent in his works, this
emphasis on context reflects a direct concern for social affairs like unemployment, violence and
marginalization among others, which he disassociates from religious practice and cultural markers.30
In essence, Ramadan is of the strong opinion that ijtihad has a strong role to play in
addressing a variety of social, economic, political and scientific problems directly involving Muslims,
and particularly Muslim minorities in non-Islamic countries. However, notwithstanding Ramadans
emphasis in the intrinsic rational nature of Islam (conceived as pathway to solving such difficulties), it
could be argued that his thesis presents noteworthy contradictions. In the first instance, he is not able
to reconcile the status of the Islamic sources as perennial all-compassing life guidelines with the fact
that such as they are they do not provide answers to every situation. When the Quran and the
Sunna are silent writes Ramadan jurists have to formulate rulings which must protect peoples
interests without betraying the [Islamic] references.31 But as he comes to recognise, the pursuit of
maslaha is inherently controversial, not least because of the lack of a clarity with respect to its

27 Despite parsimony in his writings in regards to recognizing women, in Western Muslims and the Future of Islam Ramadan
affords a couple of pages to discuss Islamic Feminism. The author acknowledges that Muslim women in the West are not
necessarily bound by the customary instructions of the ulama from Muslim majority-countries. In essence, he briefly makes
the case for womens involvement in civic affairs and in the study of Islamic sources. (See pages 139-143.) In What I Believe
Ramadan states that Islam has no problem with women, but Muslims do clearly appear to have serious problems with
them. The author refers to his belief that thinkers do not contextualize and separate between what is religious and what is
cultural from times of the past. (See pages 62-66.) Notwithstanding this position, it could be argued that Ramadans
emphasis in contextualizing the situation of women does not necessarily reflect a liberal outlook. In view of the
abovementioned debate between himself and Nicolas Sarkozy in 2003, Ramadans position towards women falls into moral
relativism, to the extent that each society must discuss and apply the Islamic teachings according to their circumstance. As
Caroline Fourest (2008) suggests, it is in this sense that contextualizing is not the same as actualizing. (See page 123.)
28 Ramadan, What I Believe, 33-34, 71-72.
29 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 68-69.
30For some of Ramadans remarks on sensitive social affairs, particularly directed towards non-Islamic audiences, see for
instance Ramadan, Europes Islam Question, The Guardian, December 4, 2008. Accesible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2008/dec/04/religion-islam-europe. Also, A Conversation with Tariq
Ramadan, April 27, Pew Research Forum. Accesible at http://www.pewforum.org/2010/04/27/a-conversation-with-tariq-
ramadan/.
31 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 81.
 Gaon 9

definition and the strict and demanding conditions of its application.32 To elucidate on matters not
contemplated in the sources can lead to different outcomes because interpretations could easily
diverge, either for better or worse (in terms of religious integrity or radicalism). Ramadan does not
pretend to have a solution to this challenge. Rather, he implies that jurists must exert themselves to the
best of their abilities to overcome silence in the sources through a deep, difficult and detailed
study.33 In this vein, Allah kept quiet on some issues not out of forgetfulness, but out of mercy [...]
His silence is the starting point of our critical thinking.34 In this, there is no mention of the worldly
sources of law, creating the impression that maslaha cannot be afforded utilitarian value based on
discussions of a secular kind. Simply put, there cannot be common interest beyond the scope of
religious doctrine.35
Subsequently related to this problem is the fact that there is no clear institutionalized process
to discriminate between the correct and fallacious understandings of ijtihad and maslaha. As seen
above, although Ramadan is adamant in tying rulings to Islamic sources, and despite presenting a set
of recommendations to doing so, he cannot reconcile the prospect of contradictory fatawa rulings.36
At the same time, the lack of a universally-accepted method or institution to accurately determine
the validity of religious decisions puts in question the legitimacy of the religious practitioner and
interpreter. Here Ramadan also concedes to the impossibility of reconciling everything, at least
promptly or confidently.37 Assuming that two different opinions over the same matter cannot be true
at the same time, he indicates that every Muslim has to follow the opinion whose evidence and
strength appear, after reflection and analysis, the more obvious and convincing in his/her eyes.38
Despite being subtle, perhaps in order to minimize argumentative troubles, such statement could in
principle be aptly used to justify any kind of interpretation, including purported literalist and

32 Ibid., 82.
33 Ibid., 82. See also Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 51, 58.
34As recorded in a lecture on the subject of critical thinking in Islam, delivered by Ramadan at Sakarya University, Turkey,
on April 10, 2015. The video can be accessed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pdP8UNmU1Q.
35 In What I Believe, Ramadan is somewhat more favorable towards the secular environment, indicating that nothing in
secularism opposed a free and autonomous practice of Islam, provided leaders do not profess a type of secularist
dogmatism or a militant atheism pretending to eradicate religious expressions. (See page 98.) Noteworthily, a similar
discussion can be applied to the sciences, and whether they are dependent on Revelation. In Western Muslims and the Future
of Islam, Ramadan presents a graphic (Figure 2.2, page 59) in which he places Revelation (tawhid) at the core of sciences
and ethics, followed by concentric circles representing other sciences such as economics, sociology, computing, physics,
philosophy and mathematics.
36Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 76-78. Furthermore, the author presents (and endorses) tips introduced by Yusuf al-
Qardawi for the application of adequate ijtihad. Most noticeably, Qaradawi attempts to overcome this problem by asserting
that ijtihad is too heavy a burden for one person, requiring instead the constitution of councils or forums of ulama. That said,
there is no clear answer as to how to institutionalize a process to determine between correct and incorrect rulings based on
the exercise of ijtihad. (See pages 94-98.)
37 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 91-92.
38 Ibid., 92.
 Gaon 10

unreasonable ones, which deny ijtihad in the first place.39 Ramadan goes as far as stating that truth
does not necessarily lie in the majoritys interpretation, for it is liable to be influenced by the broader
culture, historical context, or the circumstances of each one of the interpreters.40 Throughout his
works and interventions, the reader or listener can sense that Ramadan is critical of political
literalists (he tends to avoid terms such as Islamist or Wahhabist), who distort religion by
denying ijtihad its rightful place in Islam.41 Yet if one is to judge literal regressive interpretations
using Ramadan's standards, the reader is forced to vest legitimacy on the Muslim who follows the
most convincing fatwa in his or her own right. The intellectual in question dedicates numerous pages
to discuss how it is that through reason Western Muslims can potentially find answers to common day
situations. Nevertheless, given the contradictions recently mentioned, he can only suggest that his
interpretation of ijtihad and maslaha is as valid as everyone elses. As he puts it laconically, a fatwa
is Islamic from the moment it respects the Quran and the Sunna. No more, no less.42 Quoting Imman
al-Shafii, Ramadan indicates that jurists need to acknowledge with humility that their opinions might
be wrong, and those of their opponents right.43 It is in this fashion that Ramadan often suggests that
while Islam needs no reformation, Muslims need to reform their minds and embrace rational
interpretations of their religious sources.44
A third contradiction has to with the role assigned to ijtihad as fard al-kifayah, as a collective
obligation. As previously mentioned, Ramadan believes that conducting ijtihad against the backdrop
of modern times is too heavy a burden for one person, to the extent that multidisciplinary councils
must be created to address precisely the contradictions arising from the plausibility of different self-

39Ramadan argues that the gates of ijtihad have never been closed, for no individual jurist had the the right to take such a
decision in the name of Islam. However, while inadvertently recognising a problem linked with a lack of a religious
institution capable of taking paramount decisions (precisely in the name of Islam), his argument could presumably be turned
upside down, so as to justify the negation of ijtihad. (See To be a European Muslim, 88). According to Hallaq (1984), taqlid,
or blind imitation was traditionally justified on the grounds that it was extremely difficult and complex to undertake ijtihad
(page 33). For a contemporary study on the differences in doctrine surrounding ijtihad and religious innovation (bida),
particularly amongst Islamic apologetics, see Uriya Shavit, Sharia and Muslim Minorities: The wasati and salafi
approaches to fiqh al-aqalliyyat al-Muslima (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). Shavit contends that the salafi
approach, which Ramadan opposes, is wary of employing ijtihad, due to the human propensity for error, and the enormous
requirements a mujtahid needs to perform it. (Pages 39, 67.)
40 Ramadans lecture at Sakarya University, Turkey, on April 10, 2015.
41 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 241-242; Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 27, 164; What I Believe, 59.
Although the author avoids terms like wahhabist and islamist, he employs salafi, presenting a distinction between two
tendencies: salafi traditionalism, and salafi reformism. While the former emphasizes a literalist approach to religion, the
latter (with which Ramadan identifies) is concerned with rediscovering the pristine energy of an unmediated reading of the
Quran and Sunna. (Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 241.)
42 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 71.
43 Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 50.
44See David Shariatmadari, Muslims need to reform their minds, The Guardian, February 28, 2017. Accesible at
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/tariq-ramadan-muslims-need-to-reform-their-minds. Ramadan also
describes the process of embracing dynamism and innovative perspectives in religion as being a silent revolution. See for
instance Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 4, 104.
 Gaon 11

superseding rulings. That said, Ramadan also suggests that to engage in ijtihad is an expensive
proposition, in as the amount of time and resources a potential mujtahid needs to invest in fulfilling a
series of requirements are rather elevated. Furthermore, as a spiritual figure, the author esteems
everlasting ethical traditions, placing them ahead of the supposedly neutral rule of law or by
impartial values formed in a free market.45 Expectedly, Ramadan does not hide his preference for
ius naturale (natural law) over ius positum (positive laws). In contrast with the Islamic conception of
jurisprudence, statist-based legal positivism acknowledges man, not the heavens, as primary source of
laws and rights. While this highlights Ramadans attachment to Islamic jurisprudence, it put into
question the practicality of the proposed multidisciplinary councils. In truth, when Ramadan
emphasizes ijtihad and rational thinking within Islam, he is not defending a democratizing effort or
doctrine, and certainly not a call for universal priesthood (in the Christian Protestant sense of the
expression). In theory, only the learned scholars who met the aforementioned requirements are
entitled to an opinion, lest to allow the individual to instill more confusion than wisdom on a given
community. Coupled with the rejection towards the rule of positivist law, these requirements virtually
result in ijtihad being an individual effort, not a collective one, carried by individuals (possibly
charismatic) within constituencies.
In short, Ramadan presents the case for Islamic ethics, arguing that reason is an integral and
paramount piece. Nonetheless, the lack of clear institutionalization of fatawa, demarcating what is
permissible and what is not, adds weights to the ruling of individual jurists, who may choose to style
themselves in a moderate or literalist fashion. All the more so in the context of Western societies
lacking Islamic custom law.
Having established that Islam is not averse towards reason nor democracy, Ramadan argues
that rather than debating integration of Muslims to the West, these should assert their religious
identity and contribute to the development of that civilization. As it shall be discussed below, this is
the central tenet of Ramadan's socio-political thought. It is the fundamental belief that Muslims have
to take an active role in shaping a new European identity, less dependent on temporal circumstances
such as language or boundaries, and fundamentally more attentive to universal ethical values that
emanate from Islamic principles and wisdom.

Concerning the identity of Muslims in Western societies

Ramadan is outspoken when it comes to denouncing Western perceptions of otherness, namely

towards Muslims and Islam. As discussed earlier, he challenges the notion that his religion is not
compatible with value-laden terms such as progress, democracy, and modernity. Assuming that these

45See Ramadan, Islams role in an ethical society, The Guardian, February 23, 2010. Accesible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/feb/23/ethics-citizenship-islam.
 Gaon 12

concepts are purportedly well represented in the Islamic essence, Ramadan suggests that the tendency
towards demanding the integration of Western Muslims to their host societies is an invalid
proposition. The Western notion of integration mandates submitting religion to secular parameters and
changing identity settings, which become superfluous or mundane in light of Islams global
projection. In this vein, Ramadan believes that a Muslim without his or her religion is an oxymoron.
Thereof, if that person is poised to live in a Western (or in fact any society), integration cannot run
though minimizing if not abandoning faith and religious practice.46 In other words, Muslims cannot be
asked to adopt full heartedly the secular customs of the Western reality, for doing so would violate the
rights and dignity of the Islamic collective. Eloquently put, to be a Muslim Westerner is to
experience the spiritual tension between a faith that calls for liberation of the inner self and a daily life
that seems to contradict and imprison it.47
As it was the case with the principles of ijtihad, Ramadans position on the subject of identity
can be organized by distinguishing between three distinctive elements. Firstly as suggested above
he conceives Islam as an identity marker and attempts to build a definition of such. He describes the
aspects constituting the overall picture of the Islamic selfhood and personality.48 By presenting
these characteristics, he is able to develop a conception of a pure and deculturalized Islam, removed
from the cultural elements originating in different lands and circumstances. This realization represents
the second component in Ramadans elaboration of Muslims in the West and yet another practical
application of his understanding of contextual awareness. Considering that ijtihad is necessary to
provide the faithful with sound answers arising from specific circumstantial problems, Muslims must
recognise that judicial interpretations are prone to change with time and place. They must, therefore,
disregard antiquated judicial notions or opinions that no longer apply to their realities, provided they
do not contravene the Quran and the Sunna. Analogously, for the same end, Muslims must
differentiate between the mandates originating in the sources, and those which represent conventions
established by scholars over time but do not necessarily emanate directly from the same. Perhaps
more importantly, the third element determines that it is Muslims collective obligation (fard al-
kifayah) to bear witness to the Mohammedan Revelation wherever they live. A corollary of the
previous points, it establishes that as long as Muslims are allowed to live as such in a given place,
they may become members of that country, embracing their host societies as their own. However,
while living and enjoying the same rights and freedoms as non-Muslim citizens, believers must

46
Ramadan considers the concept of integration as obsolete: The all but obsessive discourse about the integration of
new citizens is an objective impediment to the positive development of a feeling of belonging. In this sense, at some stage
integration policies result in the exact opposite of what they set out to achieve: they highlight differences, define caricatured
entities, and maintain the idea that after several generations certain citizens remain guest, who are too different, who
perpetually need to adapt. (What I Believe, page 68.)

47
Ramadan, What I Believe, 34. See also Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 126-130.

48
Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 135.
 Gaon 13

engage with their surroundings on an equal footing with the non-Islamic majority, and perform their
duties openly, testifying their faith on a daily basis through prayer and moral behavior. In all, this
constitutes Ramadan's formula to come to terms with a European Islamic identity.
In regards to the first element in defining an identity based on Islam Ramadan introduces
various markers expressed as rights or competences. He mentions faith and spirituality; unhindered
practice of religious mandates; education and transmission of values; freedom of worship; freedom of
speech; and participation in social affairs.49 The writer notes that despite limited incidents or
controversies (for instance surrounding the use of the veil in public) European Muslims are allowed to
fulfill these religious requirements without facing significant obstacles from the non-Muslim majority.
Taking this realization further, he states that Muslims in the West not only have the right to practice
their religion, but to organize socially and politically, to pursue knowledge, and to benefit from the
protections afforded by the law.50 Taking into account that these rights are not universally held in
Muslim majority countries, Ramadan indicates that there is no handicap undermining Islam in the
West. In the absence of a contradiction making it impossible for Muslims to inhabit European
societies, believers may coexist with non-believers and respect local laws. Despite the secular
backdrop, positive law is a contract Muslims willingly sign so long as it does not contravene their
religion. National European constitutions are binding because they represent a (social) pact in which
the Muslim tacitly or explicitly consented to. More important still, Islamic law and jurisprudence
command believers to submit to such a framework, for Muslims are bound to respect their
commitments. Illustrated by the author, implementing the sharia, for a Muslim citizen or resident in
Europe, is explicitly to respect the constitutional and legal framework of the country in which he is a
citizen.51 It is therefore acceptable to frame Muslim identity within a European context, for Muslims
are allowed to remain as such. Despite living among a non-believer majority, European Muslims are
not excluded from the umma (the global community of the faithful) because they may recite the
shahada testifying that there is one God and that Muhammad is his last Messenger. 52
The second point is very much related to Ramadans understanding of what constitutes true
Islam, assuming that is the authors intention. In view of his understanding of Islam as a rational and
encompassing system, and that only the Quran and the Sunna are perennial sources, European
believes must deconstruct, deculturalize religion from markers no longer relevant to their reality. It
means that religion is often embedded with cultural elements pertaining to a specific circumstance and

49
Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 132-137; Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 89-92.

50
In What I Believe Ramadan states: It is now clear that so long as the two basic rights (freedom of conscience and
freedom of worship) are recognized and protected, as they are in all Western societies, Muslims have to respect the law,
which is binding on them as it is on all other citizens and residents. (Page 52.)

51
Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 172. See also Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 94-96; What I Believe, 56-58.

52
Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 153-154; Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 74-75, 89.
 Gaon 14

that believers must separate between the spiritual and the customary. In other words, to understand
their faith, believers need to question the authority of the local sheik, to gauge if his decisions are
purely based on his private faculties or opinions, or if they actually represent the divine message
imparted by the prime sources.53 For a European Islam to gain sway, believers must not blindly
imitate foreign sheiks whose practice does not correspond to their reality as Western Muslims.
Despite being one Islam, rulings codify different attitudes or behaviors in Algeria, Morocco,
Pakistan or Tunisia; and it is up to Western religious leaders to jointly establish new interpretations
based on the sources and the particular needs coming from the European context. In this sense, the
formulation of both an Islamic legal frame and a Muslim European identity should be a dialectical
process between the community and the mujtahid in order for the latter to formulate appropriate legal
answers to the questions addressed to them in light of their new environment.54 This is to say that for
maslaha to be kept, Muslims in the West must assert themselves in a more nuanced fashion,
approaching the sources, the Quran and the Sunna, directly, without resorting to the localized
traditions of their migrant fathers and grandfathers.
As part of this analysis, Ramadan makes particular focus on deconstructing the conventional
spatial dichotomy between dar al-Islam (the abode of Islam) and dar al-Harb (the abode of war).
While the former refers to the lands governed by Muslim rulers, where the faithful are in principle
free to bear witness to the Revelation, the latter is ascribed to those territories ruled by the kuffar (the
infidels, the non-believers).55 Ramadan rejects this polarization on the grounds that it is no longer
appropriate to divide the world conceptually. At a time when Earth is but a global village, with a
very complex geopolitical configuration, these concepts become historically dated and irrelevant.56
The concepts allude to the first three centuries of Islam, when it became necessary to mark a
distinction regarding legal and political issues, so as to guide the behavior of the faithful. Moreover,
considering that these concepts cannot be found in either the Quran or in the Sunna, they are rendered
anachronistic.57 For that same reason, the notion of dar al-ahd (the abode of treaty) which refers to
non-Islamic countries who have signed peace or collaboration treaties with Islamic counterparts is
likewise no longer valid. Such distinctions cannot be imparted because globalization has undermined

53 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 115-116; Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 78-79; What I Believe, 41-45. The
issue of deculturalization of religion is also addressed in Ramadans lecture at Sakarya University, Turkey, on April 10,
2015.
54 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 116.
55 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 125-131; Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 65-76; What I Believe, 51-55.
56 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 123. See also Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 67-68.
57 The author of To be a European Muslim states: In a world which has become a village, where populations are in constant
flux and within which we are witnessing a process of increased complexity regarding financial and political power as well as
a diversification in strategic alliances and spheres of influence, it is impossible to stick to an old, simple and binary vision of
reality (page 127.).
 Gaon 15

borders, allowing Muslims to travel and settle lands irrespective of their governments or religious
affiliation.58 It is because the world has grown a complex, diverse place, that Ramadan presents the
idea of reforming the minds of Muslims. Once again, the thinker in question does not indicate that
Islam per se needs a reformation given the changing circumstances of the planet, but that it is
Muslims who need to return to the sources and find consistent, balanced answers for the troubles of
our time. In an unbalanced and rapidly-changing world, Islam, far from becoming an obstacle to
progress, supplies solutions and spiritual reassurance.59
This reflection constitutes the third and quite likely the most important element in this
mans thought concerning Muslims in the West. It is the central idea that integration does not stand
for assimilation and that believers must take an active role in bearing witness to their faith amid the
general collective. Rather than renouncing religiosity in the sphere of public life, Muslims can use the
teachings of Islam (alamiyyat al-Islam) to influence or bring about a positive change in society.60
Ramadan believes that the perceivable revival of spirituality among the Muslims youths is an integral
part of this process. Contrary to widely held beliefs states the author this phenomenon is not
exclusively an expression of opposition to the West, but it happens that this re-discovery is a positive
affirmation of self-confidence among young Muslims.61 At its most basic level, this position
translates to a calling for Muslims to collectively use the potential of Islamic ethics and values to
fulfill the divine duties emanating from the Revelation. Conversely, it is suggested that to conform
with the majority by turning away from ones religious message, is an even more dangerous form of
alienation since, in the process of resisting, ones critical capacity, concern for consistency, and
creative energy are lost.62 For this reason, Muslims in Europe uphold great responsibility for they
provide their host societies with faith, a sense of limits, moral direction, and permanent commitment
to human and social issues. All of this amounts to the pursuit of the common interest, and Muslims
are in a unique position, indeed a common duty (fard al-kifayah) to spearhead a common effort.
Europe is thereof the space of testimony (dar ash-shahada), a term introduced by Ramadan to both

58In light of this thesis, in What I Believe, Ramadan advances the notion that Islam has become a Western religion; that
Western Islam is a reality, just like African, Arab, or Asian Islam (insofar as there are a variety of interpretations and a
plurality of cultures). (Page 5.)
59In To be a European Muslim Ramadan states: A radical change in our state of mind is needed if we want to face, as we
must, the world around us. To be a consistent and balanced Muslim today is difficult because the world around us and the
parameters, in the Islamic or in the Western space, are no longer coherent. This means that we are asked to return to the
sources of Islamic teachings if we are to know a framework, a guidance or a direction which allows us to face this
contemporary situation. (Page 130.)
60 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 129-130.
61 Ibid., 114.
62 Ramadan, What I Believe, 65.
 Gaon 16

highlight and legitimize the presence of Muslims in the West, attaching a divine sense of purpose to
their livelihoods there. 63
Summing this section, Muslims may stay in non-Muslim environments because these three
elements duly represent three fulfilled conditions: the faithful are free to pronounce the shahada and
practice their religion without major obstacles; free to study their religious sources in the pursuit of
knowledge and maslaha (to be useful to Muslims and society as a whole); and free to remind people
of God and spirituality, being involved in social activities to greater justice and dignity. 64 That said,
it can again be argued that his arguments present noticeable contradictions if not troublesome
propositions. Consider the fact that in no circumstance does Ramadan recognize intrinsic value in
Western culture or philosophy. Through his writings, the thinker praises Islam for its intellectual
(rational) endowments, and assumes that his religion has a great deal to offer Westerners.
Nonetheless, quite conversely, he fails to mention possible contributions of Western culture or
thought to the aggrandizement of either Muslims or Islam.65 On the contrary, he conceives the
industrialized and modern society as being superfluous, individualist, irreligious and chaotic in terms
of the worrying phenomenon of religious illiteracy.66 This becomes a fundamental problem while
defining the identity of European Muslims. Although Ramadan makes it clear that Muslims may live
in Western societies where they constitute a minority, he does not take issue in terminological
discussions over either citizenship or identity. It is, for instance, the question of which construction
outweighs the other, Muslim or French, German or British. Is a Muslim living in France a
French Muslim or a Muslim Frenchman? Ramadan is of the opinion that this terminological debate
is pointless, and thus he does not concern himself with framing or justifying nationality.67 In the texts,
it is suggested that a humanist or universalist would not expect geographical attachment to come
first or to solve the question of being.68 National identity is pictured as a temporal construction that

63Ramadan considers Europe to be an area for responsibility for Muslims, or an area to testify belief in the Islamic creed, in
the oneness of God (tawhid), and the acceptance of Muhammad as Gods prophet. The author calls this area dar al-shahada
or alam al-shahada. See To be a European Muslim, 149-150; Western Muslims and Future of Islam, 76-77; What I Believe,
51-52.
64 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 66.
65 Even though Ramadan describes himself as a mediator belonging to both Islamic and Western scenes, he is not outspoken
in recognising intrinsic value behind Western culture, norms, or philosophy, which could provide Muslims with positive
inputs, as to influence their way of life. In What I Believe, he states that while Muslims suspect he is a bit too Western, he
remains a bit too Muslim for some Westerners. (Page 14.)
66 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 183-184, 215-216.

67 In To be a European Muslim, Ramadan writes that the discourse identifying the notion of Muslim identity is very
theoretical and imprecise and does not rely on an analysis of the concrete situation of the Muslims in Europe. (Page 179.) In
Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, Ramadan indicates that nationality is a response to the question how? given
that it contains instructions concerning how to live in a given space, within a given constitution, and how to relate with the
fellow man. In turn, Muslim identity pertains to the question why? given that it provides an answer to the philosophical
question of being. (Page 93.) Moreover, in
68 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 168. See also Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 93.
 Gaon 17

regulates behavior among members of society, yet it is one that does not address the very essence of
life, the very purpose of mankind. Sovereignty lies in God, not in man, and thus attachment to the
divine supersedes all other bounds.
To be clear, Ramadan identifies this problem and asks whether a Muslim is allowed to
become a genuine Muslim-European individual, but he avoids providing his readership with a
straight answer, other than that the two can coexist with one another.69 For this reason, Ramadan
emphasizes the exercising of choice. It is suggested that when in doubt or crisis about one's identity,
the Muslim-European should actively select the elements within the Western context that do not
contravene his or her Islamic values (described above in the first element) while discarding those that
do indeed pose a contradiction.The author further stresses that collectively, these choices represent an
unavoidable and necessary challenge. In this respect, when Ramadan presents the case for a
deculturization of religion (in order to adapt rulings to the requirements of our time), he is not
advocating for a liberal, Westernized strand of religion.70 His purpose lies solely in making it easier
for Muslims to conciliate between their responsibility as citizens of a given European country and
their duties as believers. This process is meant to alleviate the possible identity crisis affecting
Muslims in the West. If faith and citizenry do not undermine one another, then there is no external
manifestation of a conflict of loyalties. It is for this purpose that the mujtahidun must provide
European Muslims with the appropriate teachings and rulings to enable to protect and fulfill their
identity, not as Arabs, Pakistanis or Indians, but henceforth as Europeans.71 Their identity is neither
totally diluted within the European environment nor in reaction against it, but rather based on its own
foundations according to its Islamic sources.72 In essence, the case remains that a Muslim is first and
foremost a Muslim, insofar as he has duties and obligations to fulfill in the society where he lives. To
be a Muslim in Europe means to interact with the whole of society at different levels (from local up
to national and even continental involvement).73
Ramadan suggests that in the European context, Muslims assert their identity through their
actions, and that is to bring about spirituality to the presumed spiritual emptiness of the West. In no

69
This ambivalence is seemingly underscored by Ramadans rejection of the concept of (social) integration (to a host-
society), and his relativization of national identity. (See footnote 46 above.) In What I Believe, the author suggests that
policies should be developed to underscore contributions of migrants rather than to stress or urge their integration to the
receiving society. (Pages 68-69.) To make his case, he states that he is Swiss by nationality, Egyptian by memory,
Muslim by religion, European by culture, universalistic by principle, Moroccan and Mauritanian by adoption. (Page 38.)

70
Ramadan indicates that there is no room for theology in Islam, because its three fundamental principles are never never
put into question: the absolute oneness of the Creator (God), the impossibility of there being a representation of Him, and the
truth of His word revealed in the Quran. (Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 12.)

71
Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 196.

72
Ibid.

73
Ibid., 214.
 Gaon 18

uncertain terms, to be a Muslim is to bear witness to the Revelation. Yet this realization raises another
apparent contradiction in Ramadans claims, prompting questions surrounding the relationship
between identity and proselytism. Although this issue is worthy of a separate study, suffice it to say
that in his writings Ramadan appears deliberately disingenuous about the subject. Through his texts,
the intellectual stipulates that the process of modernization, in the industrial sense of the expression,
necessarily entails a process of Westernization, that ought to be countered with ethical values
emanating from religion.74 Hence, he relates the identity of believers to the concept of dawa. The
notion refers to the holy call, invitation or mission to achieve greater piety amid society, and occupies
a central theme in contemporary Islamic movements. According to Ramadan, transmitting the
Message of Islam through dawa must not be confused with either proselytism or efforts to convert:
the duty of the Muslim is to spread the Message and to make it known, no more no less.75 The
Muslim must bear witness to the faith before all humankind by defending and spreading justice,
solidarity, and the values connected with honesty, generosity, brotherhood, and love.76 However,
referencing Al-Malawi, Ramadan makes an analogy between the Meccan period and the
contemporary circumstance of Muslims in the West. At the foundational moment of Islam,
Muhammad's followers were a minority in Mecca, belonging to a society that rejected them. But just
as those Muslims considered themselves responsible for bearing witness to their faith before their
people and their tribe, in the present new world order, which seems to have forgotten the Creator
and to depend on a logic that is almost exclusively economic, Muslims face the same responsibilities,
particularly in industrialized societies.77 Notwithstanding the claim that bearing witness to
Revelation and engaging in proselytism is different, such distinction is not successfully drawn, nor the
subject further discussed.

Conclusion: Tariq Ramadan, a reformist or an Islamic apologetic?

At the heart of the discussions presented in this study lies a gap between the secular and the religious
domain. It is one which Ramadan attempts to bridge by emphasizing the role of reason in Islam, as
well as the duty of Muslims to actively engage in social issues to bring about a positive outcome. At
first, in line with traditional modernist apologetic literature, Ramadan defends his religion as a
perennial source of positive inspiration, kindred to justice and reason. Despite the passing of time,
Islam remains evermore relevant, providing mankind with a set of universal values and ethical

Ramadan equals globalization with westernization. See for instance To be a European Muslim, 147-148;
74

Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 75-76; What I Believe, 26-27.
75 Ramadan, To be a European Muslim, 133-134.
76 Ramadan, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam, 90.
77 Ibid., 73.
 Gaon 19

regulations, which inherently recognize the importance of context, and the changing situation of
Muslims in time and place. Ramadans outlook is subsequently more innovative when he discusses
the identity of Muslims in the West. He stresses that believers reaffirm their identity by interacting
with the environment, behaving ethically, and by bearing witness to the Revelation amid non-
believers. In doing so, they are fulfilling a divine mission, a sense of purpose larger than life. By
actively collaborating as citizens of a given non-Islamic country, Muslims are in the process of
cementing a distinct cultural identity, in anticipation of a customary Western Islamic tradition,
comparable with customs already established in other parts of the world inhabited by Muslims. For an
individual, to reaffirm such identity is to be both Western and Muslim without any kind of emotional
hindrance, without necessarily subduing one identity marker to the other. Since both markers regulate
different domains, the spiritual and the secular, both can coexist without undermining the other.
Muslims in the West are therefore instructed to think of themselves as active members of society, to
forsake the mentality of the sojourner or the misplaced, and consciously behave as law-abiding
citizens. Since the (positivist, secular) rule of law that prevails in Western countries does not
contravene Islamic rights, nor is systematically unjust towards Muslims, these have an obligation to
respect the legal framework of the societies in which they live. In all, at times when the West faces
increasing security challenges coming from the so-called Islamic fundamentalists, Ramadans position
and influence could certainly cast a positive impression. In a way, this is precisely why Ramadan has
gained notoriety, commanding respect in academic and political circles alike. His voice strikes a
chord of much-needed moderation and reform, to persuade Western Muslims that they have
significant roles to play in European societies.
However, in the absence of a clear and unambiguous sense of Western Islamic identity, and a
broad mistrust between the Western and the Islamic components, the only useful marker provided
by Ramadan to bridge these two is the ability to deculturalize religion. Believers are asked to
distinguish between the core teachings of their religion and the cultural influences that have imprinted
religious practice throughout time. Ramadan poses that in making such distinction, Muslims will be
able to avoid outdated rulings which, although relevant to a certain context (in time and place), are no
longer applicable or practical to their daily reality as Western citizens. Following Ramadans
instructions, this process of deconstruction is poised to represent the first step in the process towards
building a native Western Islamic customary framework. Yet Ramadan is unable to move beyond a
fundamental structural challenge, if not problem, in the community of jurists. Given the lack of a clear
institutionalized process to reconcile between contradictory rulings, the author concedes that every
Muslim must make up his/her mind as to which ruling or interpretation is more soundly backed by
evidence, reflection and analysis. In practice, this demonstrates that, in principle, any kind of
interpretation could be justified, for every sheikh would presumably justify his decision on a careful
contemplation of the sources, as Ramadan proposes. In this sense, as Uriya Shavit notes in his study
of the wasatiyyah (the balanced, middle or centered way Ramadan identifies with) and
 Gaon 20

salafiyyah (literalist) trends in apologetic discourse, In their quest to convince others that their
approach to fiqh is the only legitimate one, wasatis and salafis ironically demonstrate that a coherent,
essentialist, and universal truth cannot be derived from the revelations.78
Essentially, to use imprecise yet commonly-used terminology, this means that both
fundamentalists and moderates claim to represent the true manifestations of Islam by reflecting
on the same heavenly sources. As discussed in this study, taking into account that Ramadan is unable
to define the publics interest (maslaha) beyond an attachment to divine law, he is incapable of
forsaking religious practice. In consequence, he cannot successfully resolve the paramount question of
religious legitimacy. Notwithstanding his support for a careful ijtihad, restricted to the hands of a
capable few, he cannot deauthorize conservative Muslims who challenge his ideas. As Ramadan
recalls in introductory remarks, this debate has become a source of personal friction and even
animosity between himself and fellow Muslims.79 In turn, this might have to do with Ramadans
discourse on the subject of reformation, a highly contentious one, particularly amid conservatives, the
kind who do not subscribe to the outlooks presented by the author. Given such opposition, Ramadan
speaks of a reformation in the mind of Muslims: a statement rather different than saying that it is
Islam which warrants reformation. However, this is more of an ontological question. If Muslims
reform their minds, such process would collectively bring about a different understanding of
religious doctrine. For this reason, whether Ramadan is candid or not while addressing the issue of
reform whether he speaks his mind or adapt his words to minimize quarrels with critics his
statements concerning Muslims interaction with the Western environment are bound to be
ambivalent, and thus a source of controversy. While some could praise Ramadans attitude towards
rational thinking, and his call to a positive, collaborative effort between Muslims and non-Muslims
alike, others could point out that he is either unable or unwilling to break with the psychological
barrier posed by dogma.
Notwithstanding his efforts to explain how Islam and nationality can coexist with one another
in harmony, in all he does not recognize positive contributions the West has given, or could
potentially offer Islam. Ramadan urges his readers to move past the discourses of pride and
victimhood to reach a new understanding shaped by positive perceptions, yet at the same time, he is

78Uriya Shavit, Sharia and Muslim Minorities: The wasati and salafi approaches to fiqh al-aqalliyyat al-Muslima, 16. In
Holy Ignorance: When Religion and Culture Part Ways (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), Olivier Roy makes a
comparable argument by employing the market analogy to describe the multiplicity of religious discourses available to eager
consumers. Roy poises that in the globalized, hyperconnected world of today, Islamic formulations are dissociated from the
culture that produced them whether Saudi, Magrebi, or Turkish Meaning that each individual can adapt the belief kit
on the market to suit his or her needs. (Page 160.)

79
See for example Ramadan speaking in 2009 about a prospected moratorium on capital punishment. Published by Quran
Speaks, available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPvph4INf9I. As the video suggests, rather than advocating for the
abrogation of capital punishment, including the stoning of women (which Ramadan refused to condemn outright during his
2003 debate with Nicolas Sarkozy), the Islamic thinker proposes instead a moratorium to allow Islamic scholars to debate
the issue in light of the religious sources and the present context.
 Gaon 21

seemingly unable to attach epistemic value to Western constructs. Albeit pluralism is recognized,
Ramadan sees it essentially as a universal value grounded in Islamic teachings. Furthermore, although
Ramadan underscores the potential of the democratic system to carry out his vision of a truly plural
society, he portrays the republican, liberal framework (in the traditional philosophical concept) as a
means to an end; and not necessarily as an end in (of) itself. Judging by the texts and samples
analyzed here, whether Ramadan believes in the legitimacy and utility of democratic rule over other
systems is unclear. It is my impression, as this study has suggested, that Ramadan cannot reconcile
himself with the notion of real, legitimate sovereignty outside the scope of Islam, the Quran, and the
Sunna. That is to say that Ramadan behind his progressive face sees the Western democratic
political system as a set of institutions capable of empowering Muslims, of improving their quality of
life, and of protecting their religious freedom and rights. Not for nothing, the author justifies
attachment to local laws (and to the Western concept of the social contract) by appealing to the idea of
contracts, and Muslims heavenly-ordained commandment to respect them as binding, whether at the
collective or individual levels. Nonetheless, interestingly enough, he does not allot sufficient space (if
any) to discuss the virtues of a system based on legal positivism, on man-made laws, as opposed to
divine law. It would seem as if secular legislation was only valuable to the extent that it has a practical
function in protecting Muslims, by codifying norms already available in the Quran and the Sunna.
Ramadan argues that unless Western societies follow the program he has laid in his writings
unless they adopt a philosophy of pluralism80 Europes soul will be forsaken, risking the reduction
of the West to a civilization of superfluous, selfish and irreligious individuals with no sense of
purpose beyond themselves. To a secular reader, this could very well represent the most sensitive
point in Ramadans writings. As shown in this study, the Swiss-born thinkers ambiguity can indeed
raise concerns regarding his vision of dawa. Ramadan pictures Europe as the space of testimony
(dar ash-shahada), where Muslims must bear witness to their faith, in a scenario akin to that of the
first Muslim converts during Muhammad's era. In presenting this analogy, Ramadan is conspicuously
silent in drawing a distinction between proselytism and engaging in a mission to achieve greater piety
in society. If Islam provides balanced answers for the troubles of our time, supplying spiritual
reassurance and ethical values, then there is arguably a connection between Ramadans program and
religious proselytism, which can indeed take place in the framework of religious pluralism and
dialogue that the author calls to reinforce. In short, and to the credit of critics who accuse Ramadan of
being deliberately ambiguous about his real intentions, his writings remain inconclusive, and his
motives subject to scrutiny. In the end, it is certain that in Ramadans eyes, to be a European Muslim

80In What I Believe, Ramadan writes: This is a categorical necessity: without a purposeful policy aimed at managing
cultural and religious diversity within democratic societies, the very principles of democracy will be endangered, along with
the fundamental assets of political pluralism in which the West justly takes pride. The issue at hand is clearly to save
Europes soul or simply to provide it with one. (Pages 90-91.).
 Gaon 22

implies a sense of duty or mission to spread Islamic values to counter the appeal of secularization and
other ills associated with industrialization.

Works cited

A Conversation with Tariq Ramadan, transcript of an event organized in Washington by the Pew Research
Center, April 27, 2010. Accessible at http://www.pewforum.org/2010/04/27/a-conversation-with-tariq-ramadan/
(accessed July 29, 2017).

Berman, Paul, The Flight of the Intellectuals, (Brooklyn NY, Melville House Publishing, 2010).

Berman, Paul, Whos Afraid of Tariq Ramadan?, New Republic, June 4, 2007. Accessible at
https://newrepublic.com/article/60961/whos-afraid-tariq-ramadan (accessed July 15, 2017).

Bwering, Gerhard, Crone, Patricia, and Mirza, Mahan, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political
Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013).

Buruma, Ian, Tariq Ramadan has an Identity Issue, The New York Times Magazine, February 4, 2007.
Accessible at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/magazine/04ramadan.t.html (accessed July 25, 2017).

Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, A Man with a Vision, Intercultures Magazine, September 10, 2014.
Accessible at https://archive.is/SKT1F (accessed July 12, 2017).

Chad, Sheldon, Ramadans visa ban lifted, The Guardian, January 23, 2010. Accessible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jan/23/tariq-ramadan-clinton-visa (accessed August 3,
2017).

Dr. Tariq Ramadan: The Importance of Critical Thinking for Muslim Societies both in the West and East,
YouTube video, from a lecture at Sakarya University, Turkey, April 10, 2015, posted by CILE Center:
Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics, May 24, 2015. Available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pdP8UNmU1Q (accessed July 11, 2017).

Donnelly, Paul, The Ban on a Muslim Scholar, The Washington Post, August 28, 2004. Accessible at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40222-2004Aug27.html (accessed July 13, 2017).

Foreign Policy (FP) Top 100 Global Thinkers, Wikipedia entry. Available at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP_Top_100_Global_Thinkers (accessed July 20, 2017).

Fourest, Caroline, Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, (New York: Encounter Books, 2008).

Hallaq, Wael B., Was the Gate of Ijtihad Closed? International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 16, No. 1
(1984): 3-41.

Kamali, Mohammad Hashim, Shariah Law: An Introduction (Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2008).

Kepel, Gilles, The War for Muslim Minds: Islam and the West, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
2004).
 Gaon 23

Moratorium on Capital Punishment, YouTube video, from a Tariq Ramadan interview, aired on March 14,
2009, posted by Quran Speaks, March 29, 2009. Available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPvph4INf9I (accessed September 9, 2017).

Nicolas Sarkozy vs. Tariq Ramadan, YouTube video, from a debate on French television, on November 20,
2003, posted by Tariq Ramadan Best, November 23, 2016. Available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGdimAneQ2Y (accessed August 31, 2017).
Ramadan, Tariq, Europes Islam Question, The Guardian, December 4, 2008. Accessible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2008/dec/04/religion-islam-europe (accessed August 10, 2017).

Ramadan, Tariq, Islams role in an ethical society, The Guardian, February 23, 2010. Accessible at
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/feb/23/ethics-citizenship-islam (accessed August 14,
2017).

Ramadan, Tariq, The Conditions (Shurut) of Ijtihad, February 11, 2016. Accessible at
https://tariqramadan.com/english/the-conditions-shurut-of-ijtihad/ (accessed August 12, 2017).

Ramadan, Tariq, To be a European Muslim: A Study of Islamic Sources in the European Context (Leicester: The
Islamic Foundation, 1999).

Ramadan, Tariq, Western Muslims and the Future of Islam (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

Ramadan, Tariq, What I Believe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009).

Roy, Olivier, Holy Ignorance: When Religion and Culture Part Ways (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).

Shariatmadari, David, Muslims need to reform their minds, The Guardian, February 28, 2017. Accessible at
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/28/tariq-ramadan-muslims-need-to-reform-their-minds (Accessed
September 2, 2017).

Shavit, Uriya, Sharia, and Muslim Minorities: The wasati and salafi approaches to fiqh al-aqalliyyat al-
Muslima (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).

The 2004 Time 100, Time. Available at

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1970858,00.html (accessed July 20, 2017).