Editor’s Note:
The Saudi Gazette reported December 11, 2009 that Sheikh Ahmed Al-Ghamdi, head of the Hai’a, in Makkah – the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice in the Kingdom – spoke in support of the “mixing of the sexes.” His comments came in the wake of the highly publicized firing of a senior cleric who challenged the coeducational policy at the Kingdom’s newly opened, showcase postgraduate campus, the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology at Thuwal. The KAUST campus’ coeducational studies policy is a concept not previously permitted in public institutions in the Kingdom. Today we provide for your consideration a report on the controversy.
Coed Saudi Campus is Focus of Reform Controversy
By Patrick Ryan
Published December 12, 2009
Two years ago King Abdullah broke ground on a world-class postgraduate research university along the Red Sea Coast north of Jeddah that would bear his name and spelled out his vision for what he considered to be the modern House of Wisdom, or Bayt Al-Hekma, an intellectual landmark of the “Golden Age of Islam.” He called for the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, or KAUST, to become a bridge between cultures and nations, adding, “We hope that the university carries out its noble humanitarian message in a pure and clean atmosphere, taking the help of God and then that of enlightened intellectuals all over the world, without any bias or discrimination.”
This September King Abdullah presided over the inauguration of KAUST and of more breaking ground — the introduction of a coeducational campus in the conservative Kingdom. Men and women at KAUST working together on the high-tech campus without restrictions are contrary to the interests of traditional elements in the religious establishment. “Coeducation is a sedition and an absolute evil,” said Sheikh Sulaiman Al-Douish in a communiqué following KAUST’s opening. His condemnation was echoed by fellow cleric Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Toraifi, according to Habib Trabelsi, writing in SaudiWave.com. Al-Toraifi called gender mixing at the campus “an evil act.” Trabelsi said the reaction was cast by some as a war between the “guardians of virtue” and the “agents of America,” the religious establishment hardliners versus the “liberal current.”
The war of words grew increasingly vicious within days with positions being staked out on web sites, columns and television interviews. One such appearance by Sheikh Saad Al-Shithri, a recent appointee of King Abdullah to the influential Council of Senior Scholars stoked the controversy. Al-Shithri called for the separation of the sexes at KAUST in an appearance on an “Islamic” channel called “Al Majd,” according to Faisal Abbas on Huffington Post, saying mixing “is not allowed as it could lead to greater sins and vice.” Abbas noted the senior cleric said sexual harassment, rape and blackmailing were examples of the evils that could occur in a mixed environment.
The cleric’s criticisms of the King’s university drew a sharp response from the editor of the Saudi daily Al Watan, Jamal Khashoggi according to Abbas. Khashoggi accused Al-Shithri of attempting to interrupt “the progress of the nation,” and, Abbas reported, providing ammunition for those who reside in the “caves of Afghanistan” who have labeled the country’s leadership as “infidels.” Khashoggi said of Al-Shithri and the hardliners, “This is a strategy for the conservatives to control the university or at least to have a major say in it. This is the old trick for them to have the upper hand to sabotage reforms.” Other articles in the Saudi press criticized Al-Shithri’s views, some pointing out that mixing was not inconsistent with the teachings of Islam.
On October 4th the Saudi Press Agency reported that Al-Shithri was out, sacked from the Council of Senior Scholars by King Abdullah. The abrupt and very public disposition of the cleric was a move calculated to send a message, according to Thomas Lippman, author and adjunct scholar at the Council on Foreign Relations. He told SUSRIS the King wanted to make sure the religious scholars, the Ulema, understand they “are employees of the state and therefore had better toe the line.”
This week Sheikh Ahmed Al-Ghamdi, head of the Hai’a, in Makkah – the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice in the Kingdom – spoke in support of the “mixing of the sexes” during an Okaz interview cited by the Saudi Gazette. “Mixing was part of normal life for the Ummah and its societies.. ..The word in its contemporary meaning has entered customary jurisprudential terminology from outside.” Al-Ghamdi said, “Those who prohibit the mixing of the genders actually live it in their real lives, which is an objectionable contradiction, as every fair-minded Muslim should follow Shariah judgments without excess or negligence. In many Muslim houses – even those of Muslims who say mixing is haram – you can find female servants working around unrelated males.” Al-Ghamdi went on to praise KAUST as an “extraordinary move and huge accomplishment to be added to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s record and the history of the Islamic Ummah. It is a great step which the Ummah can look up to in recapturing its role in civilization and its scientific honor.”
Talking about the surprising position taken by a leading Hai’a figure, historian Robert Lacey, author of “Inside the Kingdom: Kings, Clerics, Modernists, Terrorists and the Struggle for Saudi Arabia,” told SUSRIS: “The cynics will say, of course, that after decades of enforcing excessive segregation, this is a fine time for the religious police to discover that the social mixing of the sexes is okay, after all. But it is better late than never, in my opinion. And this is how the Kingdom works: the King takes the lead and the elite follow. The larger question is whether the message will be accepted at the grass roots. The logic of what Sheikh Al-Ghamdi is saying is that all Saudi campuses should now allow social mixing, but I am not sure that will happen any time soon. A lot of the traditionalist websites have come out very strongly against Al-Ghamdi’s statement and he is being denounced as a traitor – or that ultimate insult ‘a government sheikh’.”
The message transmitted by Al-Shithri’s sacking appears to have been received, at least in some quarters but certainly not universally among the clerics. “Despite his position, the Sheikh is not, in fact, a heavyweight religious figure,” said author Lacey. “He is no Salman Al-Awdah. He is following a trend not setting it. But I think his change of direction is significant. Sometime ago he and his men were involved in quite a notorious ‘sting’ operation to send out a message that the religious police were intent on enforcing segregation. Now he seems to be giving out a contrary message, so it shows the way that a certain wind is blowing – and it clearly heralds a bitter division in the conservative religious ranks that is likely to grow.” Lacey said the arguments by the Sheikh and the other religious scholars who have spoken out in support of KAUST, were more significant in that they shadowed the tactics the King used to outflank the conservatives.
According to Lacey, King Abdullah is not saying, “‘Mixing of sexes on campus is the modern way.’ He is saying, ‘This is the traditional way, derived from the best precedents in the Islamic past.’ He is playing the fundamentalists at their own game – as he has done with his entire KAUST campaign, arguing that he is not so much building a 21st century university as going back to the great old days of the Bayt al-Hekma, the House of Wisdom, and the finest traditions of Islamic learning.”
The launch of KAUST may have provided the venue for the current skirmish but as Lippman told SUSRIS, “The issue with KAUST is not really about the university, it’s about who is going to set the agenda for the country – the royals or the Ulema. We now have the answer, which has been the same answer since the battle of Sibila,” referring to the decisive defeat of religious rebels by Saudi Arabia’s founder, King Abd al-Aziz, in 1929.
The pace and breadth of reform will likely continue to prove controversial and as Lacey noted, “It is a very profound battle for the allegiance of Saudi Arabia, and we shall have to see whose interpretation of history prevails.”
{ 3 trackbacks }