Just read Kevin Reinhart's "Lived Islam" (Cambridge UP, 2020). It makes elegant use of concepts from linguistics in order to make sense of the unity and diversity of Islam. Thought I'd share some of my notes here. 1/
Like a linguist documenting living language varieties, Reinhart is concerned with "Lived Islam": not an essentialist, prescriptive definition of what Islam is supposed to be, but a description of "colloquial Islam", "Islam as it [actually] exists in the world". 2/
People all over the world speak English in many different varieties, yet nevertheless tend to agree that they all speak the same language. This offers Reinhart his theoretical framework, describing "dialect" features of Islam as well as the "koiné" register & "standard" Islam. 3/
He critiques two paradigmatic approaches to Islam. The essentialist approach—"the assertion that Islam is always and everywhere the same"—is untenable and cannot account for the vast historical and present diversity of Muslim spiritual practices. 4/
But the anti-essentialist "islams" approach—the idea that there are as many islams as places (or even as Muslims)—misses what Muslims actually hold in common and how they recognize each other as Muslim. 5/
R aims for something in the middle: Lived Islam as actually observable practiced Islam, "the Islam of ordinary Muslims & of the ʿulamāʾ when they're at home." If "Islam" is like prescriptive English taught in textbooks, "Lived Islam"=the colloquial English spoken in real life. 6/
There is a sense of a prescriptive standard that aids mutual intelligibility and keeps everyone in the same community—but just as no one speaks English without an accent, no one lives Islam without some degree of particularity. 7/
Different English dialects have features that are distinct (US elevator/UK lift) or even mutually unintelligible (ppl outside of New England might not know the word "jimmies" meaning chocolate sprinkles). R calls Islamic practices that are local and particular "Dialect Islam" 8/
Dialect Islam includes things like local shrines, regional beliefs about the evil eye, particular rituals, etc. Muslims from a different part of the world might not recognize these practices or even consider them part of Islam. An example I thought of is "786" in South Asia. 9/
The abjad numerological value of the basmala is 786, & this number is significant for South Asian Muslims who see it as a symbol of Islam. But to Muslims from elsewhere it's just a random number w/o religious significance. 786 is part of subcontinental "dialect Islam." 10/
Again, just like with language, everyone has a dialect; no one speaks in a way that is completely unmarked, and no one practices an Islam that is completely divorced of place and particularity. 11/
Despite these differences communication happens across dialects. R argues for a "koiné Islam" generally common to all Muslims. A koiné is a language variety, sometimes simplified, which enables communication across dialects. 12/
R kind of mixes his metaphors, referring to both "koiné Islam" and "cognate" practices and symbols. While maybe not perfectly accurate in linguistic terms, they're nevertheless very useful metaphors for the features generally held common to Muslims. 13/
Those "cognate" features which make up "koiné Islam" include the Qur'an, the sunnah/hadith and the Prophet, the so-called "5 pillars", the notion of shari'ah, & indeed the notion of Islam. They allow for a shared Muslim identity despite the varied ways each one is understood. 14/
Then there is "standard", prescriptive Islam, the Islam of the scholars (ʿulamāʾ). They "reprove and reform, instruct and improve, they bring the Local into line with the Ideal", preventing the Islamic "dialects" from breaking off into separate "languages". 15/
"Standard" and "Dialect" Islam are constantly in dialogue. The standard form may not correspond exactly to lived reality but it has prestige and is the form that is taught in Muslim institutions and to new Muslims. 16/
"Standard" ideas impact the dialects, bringing them in line with the Islam of scholars and texts, but "dialect" ideas also impact the scholars: ex. the mawlid trickling up from the masses to be justified by (some) scholars despite the objections of "hardcore Scripturalists" 17/
I found Reinhart's use of sociolinguistic terms to be a very useful approach to the unity and diversity of Islamic practice. It's better suited to undergraduate teaching than Shahab Ahmed's _What Is Islam?_, to which it's been compared. 18/
Ahmed and Reinhart had similar aims, I think, but Reinhart's book is much more succinct (a slim 167 pages) and accessibly written. I have more thoughts and notes to share but I'll save those for another time. 19/end
Loading suggestions...