joshim

Much of the moral arguments found in the Quran assume we have the ability to recognise faḥshā when we see or experience it. al-aʿrāf:33 even says that God only restricts us in al-fawāḥisha. So if same-sex relationships are forbidden, it must be because they are immoral, and this should be evident. If not immediately, then at least after examination and reflection. It’s from this angle that I think the classical shariah position on homosexuality can be questioned, because it doesn’t persuasively make the case that homosexual relationships are immoral.

For example, the argument that homosexual sex is a perversion and abuse of bodily organs and orifices isn’t based on the Quran, which never speaks of the telos of specific body organs or orifices. Other justifications, such as the argument that legitimising homosexual relationships will destabilise traditional marriage, or that it could lead to other social ills, are not compelling. If homosexual relationships cannot be shown to be immoral, why then would they be forbidden? Potentially, the shariah could allow for them. Consider al-rūm:21,

๏ And from His signs is that He created partners for you from yourselves. That you may find tranquillity in them, and He placed between you love and mercy. Indeed, in that are surely signs for people who reflect. ๏

The verse doesn’t say our partners must be of the opposite sex – healthy relationships are built on mutual feelings of tranquillity, love and mercy. “Your tongues and colours,” says the next verse, are from God’s signs. Echoed again in the imagery of fāṭir:27–28, the vastness of human diversity is likened to the colours and textures of mountains, fruits and living creatures. This should give pause for thought before a blanket exclusion of diversity in sexuality is pursued, given how integral sexuality is to the human condition.

A Quranic basis for homosexual relationships can be built from these verses, provided those which are typically used to oppose them are accounted for. Such as the story of Prophet Lut and his people, which is traditionally read as a strong condemnation of male homosexuality. I won’t reproduce an alternative interpretation here in full, but just to give an example of how one can begin to form, consider al-anʿām:139. This verse is not directly related to the story of Prophet Lut, but its language is instructive:

๏ And they say, “Whatever is within these pleasant things is only for our males [dhukūr] and forbidden for our azwāj! […]” ๏

The people granted privileges and pleasures to their males and wilfully neglected their complementary azwāj. This isn’t an example of homosexuality or sexual deviancy, but a blatant display of sexism. This can be linked to al-shuʿarā:165–166 where Prophet Lut admonishes his community:

๏ Do you bring forth the males [al-dhuk’rān] from the worlds, and forsake what your Lord created for you of your azwāj? Rather, you are a transgressing community! ๏

There is an obvious similarity. Lut’s people could be described as male supremacists – they favoured and sought to elevate the males while they neglected and oppressed women. The other verses of the story can also be interpreted in this light, which shifts the message away from homosexuality entirely.

◆◆

Tagged: #homosexuality #tradition #shariah