The implication of being an Arab has long been pondered upon for centuries. Whether or not religion, culture and language are specific criteria that are essential to address has long been deliberated. But are there always certain guidelines that define who we truly are as individuals or as people? Perhaps the languages spoken and the religions followed by people living in America should be considered when defining an American as well. Maxime Rodinson suggests that this ideology holds true, particularly with the Arab people. He states that in order to understand the ethnos of a certain cultural group, there needs to be “defining criteria” of the entity in order to keep the uncertainty as marginal as possible (Rodinson 44). In this sense, defining individuals based on their backgrounds comes off as a form of profiling, which cannot hold any substantial connotations. For instance, an individual’s citizenship or residential status has no direct correlation to what background or culture they identify with. This makes this method of profiling merely a tool for the outside world to use as a way to easily identify others of a different cultural background. Inherently, personal entities cannot be categorized by a certain culture, or race, because there are no quantifiable guidelines to abide by that can truly define who someone is. An individual’s identity is what he or she would fundamentally identify him or herself as. Rodinson does not take into account as to how Arab individuals would define themselves. He simply takes into account his own perspective of what he considers an Arab: one who speaks the Arabic language, upholds historical, cultural and religious traits of the Arabs, and personally claims the Arab identity. Rodinson is signifying that these three criterion are what sets apart who is Arab and who is not, however, the Arab identity certainly cannot be limited to specific criterion, but rather represents a sense of identity as a whole.
The first criterion for identifying as an Arab according to Rodinson, include regarding the Arabic language, or a form of the language, as their mother tongue (Rodinson 45). Nonetheless, Rodinson himself discussed the formation and usage of the Arabic language throughout the history and the civilizations of the Arab diaspora, even in the pre-Islamic era when forms of Arabic were on the rise. Certainly, the Arab ancestors cannot be any less Arabic than the Arab of today. The language has evolved and has indeed become part of the Arab identity, but is not necessarily all inclusive. The Arab world has become so vast and diverse, not only has the Arabic language spread over nations, but different forms and dialects of the language have augmented. There are people from different countries in the Arab world such as Christians in Iraq who speak a different form of Arabic known as Chaldean. There are also Christians in Lebanon as well as individuals in Egypt who may speak Arabic, but do not affiliate themselves with the Arab identity (Rodinson 7). Additionally, there are Jews who speak Arabic but would not consider themselves Arab either. This suggests that language is certainly not a defining factor as to who can identify as an Arab. Just as an English speaker in an Arab country would not necessarily identify as an Englishman. Language is simply a means of communication, and does not elucidate the cultural background of an individual.
The institution of Islam was also an essential part of Arab history for the Arab ethnos. Rodinson explains its close ties when explaining that the Prophet of Islam was an Arab and that the Quran is written in Arabic. This, however, does not equate to Islam becoming a defining aspect of the Arab ethnos. During the time of the Caliphs, Arab Jews and Arab Christians were allowed to reside in the conquered land and practice their religion as long as they paid a special tax to the Islamic nation (Rodinson 18). During this time period, those with different religious backgrounds coexisted with Muslims, while still preserving their cultural and religious beliefs. Throughout the course of history, even before the rise of Islam, there were many Arabs that were Christians, Jews, and, pagans in the Arab world. Simply put, not all Arabs are Muslim and not all Muslims are Arab. Subsequently, with the expansion of Islam in other regions, peoples of diverse backgrounds have embraced the religion and the language its holy book, the Quran, was written in. Muslims of different cultural and ethnic upbringing recite prayers and Surah’s from the Quran solely in Arabic, despite whatever their mother tongue may be. In early Islamic history for example, Bilal al-Habashi was a freed African slave who was first to give the Adhan, the call to prayer, which is recited in the Arabic language. Even if an individual does not associate himself with the Arabic language entirely, the religious aspect exists in the hearts of Muslims, and this may lead them to identifying with the Arab culture in a religious sense. Likewise, practicing the Islamic faith is not a set cultural trait for an individual to be considered an Arab.
Rodinson also brings up the point that Arabs are those who simply identify themselves as Arab people. This would propose that the Arabs are those who consider themselves to be of Arab descent, and who identify and understand the culture to its fullest. Although, this is a very bold statement that takes in the sense of self-identity, it is evident that the Arab world is a diverse region that consists of people of various identities. There are people of different cultural and religious background who are residing in nations across Arabia. To this day, there are many similarities as well as differences in customs and culture between Pre-Islamic Arabia and the Arabia of today. In earlier times, Arabs linked their identity to the tribes they belonged to since the tribe brought protection and support to the individuals (Rodinson 19). Today, Arabs link their identity to the Arabic nation in which they belong to, so to identify an Arab as an entire population would be challenging, as there are several populated nations that make up Arabia as a whole. Rodinson has also mentioned how different cultures have spread throughout the regions. For instance, Lebanese Christians looked at France as a cultural model and have adopted the language and culture different from their own (Rodinson 29). This portrays how an Arab identity extended beyond its cultural horizons, and is turning into somewhat of a melting pot. Coexistence has always been an important practice through the dawn of time. Each culture, race and religion is like a puzzle piece that is part of the bigger picture that is the world. In this case, each piece has come together to create what is Arabia today.
Defining what it means to be an Arab is a difficult practice; just as Rodinson stated, “any definition of this kind involves a certain amount of arbitrariness” (Rodinson 45). This implies that there are exceptions to the rules that he has put in place, and that there are in fact several Arabs who may not consider themselves Arabs and vice versa. In due course, is there any significance to categorizing Arabs as exhibiting certain criteria? There is in fact no well-defined set of guidelines that are capable of distinguishing who an Arab truly is. Who constitutes as an Arab is solely up to the individual who considers him or herself an Arab, because of the vastly spread out culture. Arab culture has impacted many regions in terms of customs, religion, and language that these three criterions are not enough to exemplify an Arab person. It is rather important to take note of the diversity and culture of the Arabs and non-Arabs alike in the Middle East as a whole, rather than work to define characteristics that detach them.

Works Cited

Rodinson, Maxime. The Arabs. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1981. 1-47.
Print.