Religion plays different remarkable roles in society, at individual and collective levels. The powerful influence of religion manifests in various aspects of human endeavor to the extent that it is applied. Given the inclination of people toward religion, it is sometimes easy for people to use it as a tool for influencing certain desired behavior in others. One example is in the area of politics, which certain actors have used, and continue to use religion to exploit people, often to their selfish interests. This is one of Saba Mahmood’s contention in her book, Politics of Piety[1], which is about the Islamist political movement in Egypt. Mahmood cites the example of the military dictatorship of Zia ul-Haq in Pakistan (1977–1988) who used “…Islam to buttress his brutal hold on power”[2]. Mahmood argues that Zia ul-Haq’s regime promulgated many policies that were against women’s freedom. This oppressive regime, she writes, was part of her motivation for feminist activism. In this sense then, it is evident that religion can be employed to achieve both negative and positive ends: while the political class employ religion for negative, exploitative means, minority, oppressed, and marginalized groups on the other hand employ it toward liberatory efforts. The use of religion as a tool for political liberation forms the basis for this commentary on Saba Mahmood’s examination of the women’s mosque movement as part of the Islamic Revival in Egypt.
In the first chapter, “The Subject of Freedom,” Mahmood begins by presenting the puzzle of women supporting a movement which does not favor them; that excludes them and disregards their rights. One explanation for such exclusionary functioning of religion could be the influence of patriarchy and male dominance, which tend to view women as secondary or even subject to men. In certain contexts, women must accept male domination without objection, whether it is in their interests or not. The role of women within political, religious, professional, and other contexts in society, has often been overlooked. Mahmood’s focus is on Muslim women (in Egypt); however, the functioning of patriarchy and male dominance can be seen in other religious contexts. In Christianity for example, the patriarchal [mis]interpretation of biblical texts adversely impacts the status and role of women. Another example is Hinduism, which is the dominant religion in India and forms its nationalist movement, Hindutva, what Sikata Banerjee (2012; quoted in Kinnvall, 2019) refers to as “muscular nationalism,” with the narrative that “a more aggressive and disciplined Hindu male” is the one who can “firmly make…India a true Hindu nation”[3] These comparative references emphasize the fact the exclusion and domination of women functions similarly across various religious contexts.
On the other side of the coin, however, religion has also been instrumental in advancing political liberation movements, such as the women’s mosque movement in Egypt which Mahmood discusses. In this context, the same religion that for a long time presented women as subjects, subordinates, and secondary, became the driving force behind women’s political movements. The same religious ideals that men have employed in their subordination, on the contrary, also inspire the beliefs and activities of the women. This shows the extent to which passive participation can be subordinating. In religious contexts where women are passive participants along with men’s leadership without challenging male domination, women remain subordinates. When however, women become conscious of their role, they are motivated to challenge domination and liberate themselves from it.
My concluding thoughts are that although religion has been used to exercise control politically and otherwise, it can also serve as a powerful tool of liberation.
[1] Mahmood, Saba. Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject. Princeton University Press, 2011. Project MUSE. muse.jhu.edu/book/64877.
[2] Mahmood, 2011. p. xxi.
[3] Kinnvall, Catarina. “Populism, Ontological Insecurity and Hindutva: Modi and the Masculinization of Indian Politics.” Cambridge Review of International Affairs, vol. 32, no. 3, 2019, p. 294, https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2019.1588851.
