by Marina Schneider
On Friday, October 25, Dr. Mehrdad Alipour (University of Utrecht) gave a talk on his book, Negotiating Homosexuality in Islam: A Legal-Hermeneutical Examination of Modern Shi’i Discourse.
Dr. Alipour started his talk with an explanation of his method. He decided not to approach his study through a social lens, because he argues that Shi’i discourses don’t address homosexuality as we understand it now. Instead, he chose to structure his analysis around the Islamic legal method of ijtihād: ijtihād being a way in which Muslim jurists can definitively attain or justifiably derive legal rulings from reliable sources. By considering Islamic legal sources through the lens of a jurist, he hoped to find spaces in Shi’i discourses to advance scholarly conversation, to find texts that speak to modern concerns, and to consider how these sources can be analyzed through the method of ijtihad.
The primary sources Dr. Alipour addressed in his talk were hadiths, and hadith collections such as al-Burūjirdī’s collection compiled in the 20th century (the most comprehensive collection of hadiths). From this collection he identified one hundred and thirty-five hadiths on sexual behaviors. Within these one hundred and thirty-five hadiths, Dr. Alipour identified seven different groups of what he calls pre-modern homosexual categories. From these categories, Dr. Alipour was able to elaborate on what behaviors or social practices are mentioned in hadiths. He also used his categories to distinguish between modern and pre-modern conceptions of homosexuality. In particular, Dr. Alipour noted the difference in power relations between sexual partners as central to distinguishing between the modern and premodern. He argued that a key feature of modern homosexuality is the consensual and equal status of partners, while pre-modern categories were primarily concerned with differences in age, class, social, and economic status. This contrast is significant from a legal perspective because many of the premodern homosexual practices mentioned in texts are illegal in the modern world due to one partner’s inability to give consent due to age or status as an enslaved person or servant.
From categorization, Dr. Alipour moved into addressing a few examples of hadiths. Hadiths were gathered through chains of oral transmission and the individuals who transmitted the account are recorded at the beginning of each hadith. This list of names is a called an isnād. Dr. Alipour examined the isnāds of some of the hadiths used to proclaim contemporary stances on homosexuality in Shi’i legal traditions. He argued that there are weaknesses in the isnāds of these hadiths, such as one person in the isnād being known as an unreliable hadith transmitter which, according to Islamic legal traditions, makes these hadiths weak sources for legal rulings.
Through his study, Dr. Alipour explained that he critiques the authoritative stance some Imams have taken on homosexuality, pointing out that according to the guidelines of the Islamic legal tradition, there are gaps in the reliability of the hadiths they are using as authoritative sources. He argues that these weaknesses need to be considered and readdressed. Through his work, he hopes to open new spaces for discussion between scholarly discourse and traditional Islamic legal thought.
Marina Schneider is a PhD student in the Department of Religious Studies at UT. Her research focuses on religion and the material culture of Medieval Spain.
