Chivalry: The Ethical Standard for Masculinity
This is the first installment of the chivalry series taken from the men’s only "Rijaal" discussion group I lead at Qahwa in ADAMS Center. Its skeleton is taken from the “Futuwwa” section of Imam Al-Qushayri’s Risalah.1
A foundational part of American lore is the self-evident truth “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Although the Founding Fathers wrote the Declaration of Independence for political purposes, these values are also considered true socially, permeating our identities—regardless of whether we, as a nation, uphold this ideal. Like our politics, Anyone or anything threatening our independence (i.e., our unalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) should be defended against.
The lines are clearly defined—bad guys threaten independence, whereas good guys uphold it—and social capital is afforded accordingly. Throughout America's history, our social movements have always sought to correct injustices by hegemonic forces: the emancipation movement, the labor movement, the women’s movement, etc. The problem is that no objective ethical standard defines this course correction—and, therefore, lacks protection from overcorrection—instead, it is defined by secular liberalism. Born out of Western modernity, liberalism’s two main characteristics are individuality, as opposed to the collective (tribe or tradition), and adversariality—that institutional competition generates dynamic social order.2 So, besides being devoid of an objective ethical standard, what arbitrates these social positions is determined by the zeitgeist’s whims. Contrarily, with scripture, God’s ethical standard becomes a timeless unifying force applicable to all. The challenge for us, particularly as American Muslims, is that we are both Western and religious people who believe in scripture and tradition. But with this challenge, we also have an opportunity; regardless of whatever extreme society may sway, our robust tradition provides an ethical compass and can be America’s lighthouse through any social dismay.
One of today's most significant topics is masculinity, but to properly discuss it (often called the “Manosphere”), you must first examine what brought it about in our current context. The Manosphere’s progenitor, the Men’s Liberation Movement, was an explicit reaction to feminism.3 Although there have long been what might now be considered feminist writings and writers, it was not until the 19th century that it coalesced into a self-identifiable movement. Marry Harrington writes, “The story of feminism is one of the economic transitions—and particularly of the Industrial Revolution.”4 In summary, feminism was birthed out of a response to the establishment of factories during the Industrial Revolution. In practice, this “reduced women’s economic agency … and the resulting split between ‘home’ and ‘work’ drove “women increasingly into a domestic-only role.”5 Hithtero, generally speaking, feminism is the institution that fights against the unjust treatment of women and “the patriarchy” is its villainous proponents.
The significant socioeconomic changes of the last century—the American ideal of a self-made man (that now seems like an impossible dream) coupled with women entering the workplace6—have left the postmodern man untethered. He wanders through the abyss of a culture devoid of healthy masculine mythos, searching for identity. Chivalry is not dead, but the drivers of its virtue are frequently overshadowed by narcissism and fear of committing a cancelable offense. So now, in our morally bankrupt culture, reality TV stars and online content creators (caricaturing an exaggerated form of hyper-masculinity7 in pursuit of heroic masculinity) have started to fill the vacuum.
Honestly, I have no interest in supporting either of these institutions. I believe our fixation on “certain unalienable rights,” found in both feminism and the manosphere, is a weak position because of its Liberal foundation—placing the ownness of upholding said rights extrinsically. Its motivator to change is in upholding, and at best conforming to, the social status quo and not necessarily genuine change. So, yes, of course, I want women to be respected and honored, but I want men to do so genuinely and based on objective measures, not simply because that is what the new social hegemony obligates. Likewise, I want to ensure that men feel confident and honored in this process. As bell hooks said, “Only a revolution of values in our nation will end male violence, and that revolution will necessarily be based on an ethic of love. To create loving males, we must love males.”8 There is no better source for this than Islam.
Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah frequently mentions that service and love are the essence of the spiritual path.9 The Islamic paradigm focuses on individual rectification and purification. Rooted in theocentric ethicality, societal change (both political and social) is never at the expense of the individual but instead to its benefit. Society is a large macrocosm built of many individuals and, as the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said, "You see the believers … resembling one body, so that, if any part of the body is not well, then the whole body shares the sleeplessness (insomnia) and fever."10 Therefore, to find a healthy equilibrium for love, respect, and honor, we need the ethic bell hooks talks about, where men and women take on a personal responsibility to grow and change for God’s sake and, thus, uplift society as a whole. Furthermore, we need to orient our ethical compass where any injustice against anyone is something we cannot sleep with.
Because the terms “masculinity” and “femininity” are not a part of the traditional Islamic lexicon, perhaps a more authentic alternative could be “jamál” and “jalál” (beauty and majesty). These two names of Allah, always associated with the article “al” (the), indicate Allah’s absolute possession of their attributes without comparison.11 When associated with anything other than Allah, they inevitably have deficiencies and are imperfect. Also, neither term is restricted to gender, but are qualities found in both males and females. Examples of that can be seen in the Sahaba (companions) who were immediately around the Prophet ﷺ—His wife Sayyida Aisha was known for her jalal as was Sayyidna Umar (radiAllahu ‘anhuma, Allah be pleased with them both). In contrast, Sayyida Umm Salama and Sayyidna Uthman were known for their jamál. If we have deeper consideration, we will recognize that each of the examples mentioned above does not have jalál or jamál at the expense of the other. Every person may have a dominant trait, but ideally, we struggle against ourselves to be balanced. Those who engage in a tazkiya al-nafs (self-purification) process—ridding themselves of unhealthy characteristics, adorning themselves of healthy characteristics, and struggling to balance the two—Allah describes in the Quran as successful.12 Additionally, He ﷻ made us, the Ummah (nation) of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, a just and balanced community so we may be witnesses over humanity.13
The traditional ethical code in Islam is known as futuwwa (chivalry). Despite it not being restricted to either gender, my focus for this article is men. Neither men nor women exist in a siloed vacuum; we have always been interdependent, and whenever there’s an imbalance in a binary system, both sides are impacted. The economic factors Marry Harington mentions negatively impacted women’s economic, and therefore social, agency also impacted men. While much of the conversation on this addresses power and social agency, my focus is ethics. Through a healthy ethical framework rooted in objectivity, I believe we will shift away from behaviors imposed by external forces to an intrinsic desire to purify ourselves (tazkiya al-nafs). That is when real change happens as “Allah does not change a people's condition unless they change their inner selves.”14 And when this self-purification is coupled with an intention to please God, we will be successful.15
Imam Abu Al-Qasim Al-Qushairi (d. 465/1074)—one of the earliest scholars to complie a complete manual on tazkiya, Al-Risala Al-Qushayriyya Fi ‘Ilm Al-Tasawwuf—dedicated a complete section on the subject of futuwwa. It is evident from the text that, for Imam Al-Qushayri, futuwwa is entirely centered around service. This section centers on service animated by (and seeking a more profound) belief in Allah. He starts the section with,
God Most High said: “They were [chivalrious] young men (fitya) who believed in their Lord, and We increased them in guidance.”16
The master [al-Qushayri] said: “The foundation of chivalry is that the servant of God always exerts himself in the service of others.” The Prophet – may God bless and greet him – said: “God Most High attends consistently to the needs of His servant as long as His servant attends to the needs of his fellow Muslims.”17
We must first start with why. Without understanding it (i.e., our intention), we can easily delude ourselves away from the purpose of pleasing Allah to pleasing our egos despite appearing altruistic. Starting with why is not easy and requires constantly engaging in muhasaba (self-reckoning), but, as the Prophet ﷺ said, “The clever person is the one who subjugates his soul and works for what is after death. And the incapable is the one who follows his desires and merely hopes in Allah.”18 From this internal struggle, like the “Men of the Cave” in Surah Al-Kahf, we are blessed with Allah's increase. Furthermore, we draw a sense of duty and responsibility that sets the tone for our ethical disposition regardless of the circumstances we find ourselves in.
This ethic of sincere service is not glamorous. Sometimes, we must forgo our comfort to ensure the needs of those we are responsible for (or accountable to) are taken care of. Nevertheless, it is not servitude—wherein we lack choice. By intending to earn Allah’s pleasure, we retain our autonomy and are motivated by our sense of duty. We take this responsibility as a source of honor, even feel a sense of gratitude to Allah for the opportunity, and our feelings become a conduit to worship Allah. This is important because the opposite, when service is really servitude, often leads to expectations (of reciprocity) and resentment and can escalate to abuse.19
As an Imam and father, the future of our community, particularly the men, is of great importance and concern to me. Too often, I see men of all ages lost, failing to launch, and sometimes taking their frustrations out on others. We need God-fearing, humble, and confident men who will serve their families, community, and Ummah. We need men who are not looking to be served but feel a sense of dutiful honor to serve others. We need men who lead by ethics to be righteous and courageous despite what social pressures may be at large. We. Need. Men.
And, ultimately, with Allah is all success!
Al-Qushayri, Abu ‘Al-Qasim. Al-Qushayri's Epistle on Sufism: Al-Risala Al Qushayriyya Fi 'ilm Al-Tasawwuf. Trans. Alexander D. Kynsh. Suhail Academy Lahore, Pakistan: Kazi Publications, 2011.
Dagger, Richard, Minogue, Kenneth, Ball, Terence and Girvetz, Harry K.. "liberalism." Encyclopedia Britannica, September 14, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/topic/liberalism.
The Men’s Liberation Movement disappeared by the late 70s. “The conservative and moderate wings … became an anti-feminist men's rights movement, facilitated by the language of sex roles” and “the progressive wing of men's liberation abandoned sex role language and formed a profeminist movement premised on a language of gender relations and power” See Messner, Michael A. “The Limits of ‘The Male Sex Role’: An Analysis of the Men’s Liberation and Men’s Rights Movements’ Discourse.” Gender & Society 12, no. 3 (1998): 255–276.
Harrington, Mary. Feminism Against Progress. Washington, D.C: Regnery Publishing, 2023. 28–29.
Ibid., 36.
Holt, Douglas B., and Craig J. Thompson. “Man‐of‐Action Heroes: The Pursuit of Heroic Masculinity in Everyday Consumption.” The Journal of Consumer Research 31, no. 2 (2004): 425–440.
Harrington, Mary. “How Andrew Tate smashed the patriarchy”. Reactionary Feminist. January 6, 2023. https://reactionaryfeminist.substack.com/p/how-andrew-tate-smashed-the-patriarchy.
The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity, and Love. New York, NY: Washington Square Press, 2004. 11.
“Muslim Unity Through the Prophetic Path of Service and Love”. Qadiryya.org. January 25, 2014. https://qadriyya.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Muslim-Unity-through-the-Prophetic-Path-of-Service-and-Love.pdf.
Quran 42:11.
Quran 87:14.
Quran 2:143.
Quran 13:11.
Quran 91:9.
Quran 18:12–13. This refers to “the Men of the Cave” in Surah Al-Kahf.
Al-Qushayri, 237.
Sunnah Al-Timidhi 2459.
Finkel, Eli J. “Impelling and Inhibiting Forces in the Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence.” Review of general psychology 11, no. 2 (2007): 193–207.