Sherman Jackson's provocative and fascinating book offers a historical and critical engagement with Blackamerican Islam, to use his preferred term. As a reader who is neither black nor Muslim, I can say that I learned a great deal, and in many ways I found this to be an extremely valuable model for the study of the expression of religious ideas in new cultural idioms. In that sense, at least, it should be of deep interest to the comparativist.
He begins by tracing the rise of Islam among blacks in urban North America in the formative days of the Nation of Islam in the early 20th century. In that context, the exotic concept of Islam was essentially used by Blackamericans as a structure for clearing space to conceive and express unique religious needs and beliefs. Because there were nearly no actual Muslims in the US, Islam was a free zone for the imagination, where anything could be said without fear of contradiction. Many of the early views of Nation of Islam were concurrently bizarre, and, to my sensibility, archaic, such as the belief that white people were essentially created by an evil scientist.
This set the stage for an interesting confrontation years later, when millions of Muslim immigrants arrived, many of whom were shocked to learn how Islam was being interpreted by Black Muslims. Some of the new arrivals set about "rectifying" the views that had by now been in place for several decades. At this poin, the attention of Blackamericans began to shift to the study of Arabic, the traditional study and interpretation of the Qu'ran, and the indigenous laws and texts of the traditional heartland of Muslim belief. Today, the majority of Blackamerican Muslims are Sunni.
This process of assimilation and accommodation led to an interesting conflict, because, on the one hand, the Nation of Islam did indeed generate a number of religious ideas that were distinctly un-Islamic, at least as viewed from its traditional formulation. On the other hand, these novel religious structures were in many ways unique expressions of the spiritual needs of Blackamericans, and they belonged to a larger phenomenon that Jackson refers to as "Black Religion" in the United States, which he describes as a general religious paradigm that is opposed on all levels to white supremacy and its destructive effects.
The solution that Jackson advocates in this rather partisan book is that the fundamental tools and beliefs of traditional Islam should be "appropriated" to serve the spiritual and social needs and Blackamericans, without uncritically accepting all that it has to offer. For traditional Islam is often represented by its immigrant advocates as dialectically opposed to the culture of Europe and America, which may be conceived by conservative scholars such as Sayid Qutb as a form of "Jahiliyyah," a polemical term describing the state of depraved ignorance that characterized pagan Arabia in pre-Muslim times.
Blackamericans cannot accept this critique of their own culture for a number of reasons, not least of which because it entails a rejection of the unique cultural heritage and legacy that they have built at great cost, and to great reward, over the long centuries. Nor is traditional Islam necessarily well-suited to address the social and psychological need for emancipation from white supremacy - not because it is incompatible with this imperative (indeed, Jackson argues that a proper understanding of Islam demands confronting white supremacy), but because the problem of white supremacy has simply not been formative for Middle Eastern, Asian, and African forms of Islam in the same way.
Jackson persuasively rejects what he terms the "false universals" of immigrant Islam - the belief that contemporary forms of religious life that are affirmed, say, in Saudi Arabia, are correct, and should be viewed as valid and binding for all Muslims in all times and in all places.
I fully agree that the tendency to project one's own conclusions and sympathies as if they had no history is an extremely pernicious and destructive belief. Jackson takes contemporary Islam to task for its tendency to espouse a false universalism that is tied to a mythologized sense of history and self-serving political ideology, and argues at length that Islam has always expressed its fundamentals in terms of the specific circumstances of each historical time and place.
Although I agree with this argument, I do not think Jackson is particularly consistent on this point. One of my chief criticisms of this book is that his critique of universals is underdeveloped, and its application is selective and incoherent. For this book, as I mentioned, is a strongly partisan work, arguing for a particular vision of history and Islam, and where Jackson uses his critique of universals to assail the positions of others, his own conclusions are frequently presented as normative and binding, without any qualification.
One must be self-critical to at least the degree one is critical of other beliefs and views, and here I think Jackson is at his weakest. He has a tendency toward what I experience as a kind of covert authoritarianism.
In my opinion, Jackson is also a somewhat stronger social critic than philosopher or theologian, and a bit at sea when he engages in philosophical critique.
The final pages of the book are dedicated to his vision of Islam, founded on a conception of Allah as completely transcendent, in the sense that God is in no way defined by any external fact or relationship, but is entirely self-constitutive. Man, on the other hand, is a creature of contingency, and our religious duty is to discover and obey the law of God.
I don't find that strong dualistic stance persuasive or useful, and I don't think he really gets nondualism. His response to the self-abandonment taught by Sufism, practices that William Chittick strikingly rendered as "naughting the self," is to argue, in essence, that because the ego of Blackamericans have been so battered by social abuse, they need to strengthen the self, not weaken it. This argument rests on a deep misunderstanding of what self-abnegation means in most apophatic traditions, including Sufism. Surrender of the self doesn't mean you break the ladder before you climb, it means you let go of it at the top.
In the final pages of the book, on the one hand we're warned against the tendency by humans to impute their own provisional desires to the will of the creator, and to turn religion into a self-serving farce. Perhaps two pages later, he writes that Blackamerican Muslims must "not be afraid to ignore what they deem to be irrelevant or harmful and add what they deem to be useful or necessary." How one is to do this without succumbing to what he refers to as the "false heteronomy" of the "new anthropomorphism" is not obvious.
Finally, I found Jackson's gender politics off-putting. It is my belief that the function of social criticism, such as Jackson engages in here, is to serve the self-emancipation of communities by thought. Apparently in Jackson's conception, it is to serve the self-emancipation of men. Women occupy precisely zero of his attention, other than a baffling and somewhat off-puting statement in the introduction that amounts, as far as I can follow it, as a statement that treating the "gendered" aspect of Islam is tantamount to acceding to the "soft" and "feminized" destabilization of traditional gender binaries that have "weakened" Black Christianity.
This view gives me significant pause. If the form by which white supremacy is expressed is to render blacks as "other," "lesser," and "not fully human," the form by which male supremacy is expressed is to keep silent with respect to women, and to affirm the unspoken premise that when we're talking about history, we're talking about male history. With his obvious courage, intellect, and experience, Jackson should know better than to play into it.
Nevertheless, I learned a great deal of value from this book, and would certainly recommend it to anyone interested in either Blackamerican history, or Muslim history, or both, with the aforementioned caveats kept in mind. In particular, his analysis of how old traditions find new expressions when expressed within new historical horizons is cogent and thought-provoking, and deserves careful consideration.