Is a reformation within Islam finally under way?
A few weeks ago, Fareed Zakaria wrote a thought-provoking Op-Ed piece in Newsweek titled, “The Road to Reformation” (Feb 5 ’07)
In that he wrote,
“For those in the west asking when Islam will have its Reformation, I have good news and bad news. The good news is that the process appears to have begun. The bad news is it’s been marked by calumny, hatred and bloody violence. In this way it mirrors the Reformation itself, which we now remember in a highly sanitized way.
During that era, Christians of differing sects massacred each other as they fought to own the true interpretation of their religion. No analogy is exact, but something similar seems to be happening within Islam.
Here the divide is between the Sunnis, who make up 85 percent of the Muslim world, and the Shiites, who represent most of the other 15 percent.…Islam’s quiet cleavage has come out into the open. At a recent demonstration in the Palestinian territories, opponents of Hamas taunted the Sunni Islamists as “Shiites” because of their links to Iranian-backed Hizbullah.
…think, for a moment, about what the trend means for Al Qaeda.
Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, both Sunnis, created Al Qaeda to be a Pan-Islamic organization, uniting all Muslims as it battled the West, Israel and Western-allied regimes like Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
Neither Zawahiri nor bin Laden was animated by hatred of Shiites. In its original fatwas and other statements, Al Qaeda makes no mention of them, condemning only the “Crusaders” and “Jews.” But all ideologies change as they encounter reality. When bin Laden moved to Peshawar in the 1980s to fight the Russians in Afghanistan, he allied with radical Sunnis who had a long history of oppressing Afghanistan’s Shiite minority, the Hazaras. (The novel “The Kite Runner” is about a young Hazara boy.) Even then, bin Laden didn’t sanction anti-Shiite violence, nor did he add anti-Shiite accusations to his messages. But after the Sunni Taliban took power, Arab fighters under his command did support his hosts’ anti-Shiite pogroms.
Iraq was the real turning point. The self-appointed leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi, had a poisonous attitude toward Shiites. In a letter to bin Laden, written in February 2004, he described Iraq’s Shiite majority as “the insurmountable obstacle, the lurking snake, the crafty and malicious scorpion, the spying enemy … The danger from the Shia … is greater … than the Americans … I come back and again say that the only solution is for us to strike the religious, military, and other cadres among the Shia with blow after blow until they bend to the Sunnis.” Zarqawi was drawing on Wahhabi Islam-and its offshoot Deobandism* in South Asia-in which there is a deep and oppressive strain of anti-Shiite ideology.”
* The Deobandi school of thought promotes a particularly violent and narrow interpretation of Islamic ideology on which I had commented in a past essay, see “Random Musings on 7/7”
Fareed Zakaria further writes:
“Bin Laden and Zawahiri were clearly uncomfortable with this new line…but by the end of 2004, both had decided that Al Qaeda in Iraq was too strong to rebuke. And, rousing anti-Shiite feelings seemed the only way to mobilize Iraq’s Sunni minority. It also, crucially, made them see Al Qaeda as an ally. The trouble for Al Qaeda is that as a practical matter, loathing Shiites works in only a few places: principally Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and some parts of the gulf. Most of the rest of the world’s 1.3 billion Muslims are turned off by attacks on their co-religionists.
…These emerging divisions weaken Al Qaeda, but they will help most Muslims only if this story ends as the Reformation did. What is currently a war of sects must become a war of ideas.
First, Islam must make space for differing views about what makes a good Muslim. Then it will be able to take the next step and accept the diversity among religions, each true in its own way.
…We should encourage the diversity within Islam, which has the potential to divide our enemies. But more important, we should encourage the emerging debate within it. In the end it was not murder but Martin Luther that made the Reformation matter”
***
Just a week later, eminent British historian Paul Johnson made a similar point in his essay for Forbes titled, “The Middle East Situation Is Not Hopeless“, (12th Feb ’07)
He wrote,
“Next to courage, patience is the most valuable of political virtues, and, like courage, it’s often in short supply….
…The Western occupation of Iraq has had two consequences–one intentional, the other less so. It transferred the location of Muslim extremist violence from Western cities such as New York and London to the Muslim heartland of the Arab world. But the violence in Iraq has had the unforeseen consequence of resurrecting, in acute form, the smoldering violence between the two chief branches of Islam, the Sunni and the Shia.
The civil- religious war between these two sects is now the dominant factor in the insurgency in Iraq…Few people outside Islam–and not all that many within–understand why Sunnis and Shiites hate one another so much. The quarrel goes back an entire millennium, originally arising from a dispute over the right of the Prophet Muhammed’s descendants to rule. Over time the two branches acquired distinctive, all-pervading and radically different views of their religion.”
Paul then provides a brief explanation of “How Sunnis and Shia Differ”…Interestingly his views on which of the two is a more radical strain is different from what I had understood in the past – and also at odds with Fareed Zakaria’s thoughts above (Fareed�and I both believe that Sunnis are the more radical between the two sects – but maybe both of us are wrong and such a simplistic explanation does not exist)
“The Sunnis–who traditionally have constituted the majority of Muslims, especially in the Arab world–place great emphasis on the value of consensus: the need for general agreement over questions regarding their faith; the rule of the majority. The Shia, in contrast, are the dissenters.”
….Shiite(s)…are more active in proselytizing than are the Sunnis–and their numbers are said to be growing.
By nature of their faith, Shiites are more militant, more inclined to violence. They are, therefore, more easily recruited to extremist sects and tend to take them over. They dominate Hezbollah, for instance. Shiite extremism also colors the aggressive international politics of Iran–its threats to “wipe out” Israel, as well as its determination to manufacture and use nuclear weapons.
…Nearly all the killing in Iraq is now carried out by rival Arab sectarian gangs for purposes that make sense only in terms of Islamic dogmas.
Some Western commentators, recognizing that the crisis in the Middle East is now assuming the nature of an internal religious war (like the conflict between Catholicism and Protestantism in Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries), are sounding dolorous notes of alarm and prophesying endless slaughter and woe, with fighting spreading throughout the region and the West inevitably being dragged in.
This reaction is needlessly pessimistic, even in the short term. In the long term I see a Muslim revulsion for religious and sectarian violence of all kinds, especially if the Shia leadership in Iran begins to threaten its Sunni enemies with its soon-to-be-acquired nuclear weapons.
…Moderate Muslims have long bewailed the fact that Islam has largely missed the opportunities to grow rich and powerful that were so eagerly seized upon by the West. The chance for the long-delayed Muslim revolution of reason and tolerance, which will finally bring the billion followers of Muhammed into the modern world, is at hand.
The situation in the� Middle East may at present look confused and threatening, but forces are at work that promise hope and long-term stability. What we need now is patience.”
Then I came across the recent TIME magazine cover story: “Behind the Sunni-Shi’ite Divide” (5th Mar ’07)…unfortunately it is largely silent on the broader ramifications of the current conflict and avoids the question of whether there might truly be an Islamic reformation under way.
Finally, have a look at this blog.�It talks about a recent “Secular Islam Summit”.
From the post:
“…the Secular Islam Summit offers a ray of hope. Just a handful of reformers gathered in Florida made CAIR squirm. Imagine if hundreds of moderate Muslim voices rose up and challenged the Saudi-backed Wahhabi lobby.”
Cannot agree more…
Related Posts:
Shabana Azmi is right about one thing… (also see comments)
Image courtesy: Wikipedia
nice post shantanu
Forget about islamic reforms, where are our Hindu reforms?
Arya samaj is too slow, o it has lost its shine.
VHP and RSS companies are too narrow minded.
Others are scatered everywhere or are not there.
Tell me, who will reform Hindus?
Shiite extremism also colors the aggressive international politics of Iran–its threats to “wipe out” Israel, as well as its determination to manufacture and use nuclear weapons.
Iran’s threat was to wipe out the “Zionist Regime” of Israel (similar to wiping out the Saddam Regime) and not the people of Israel. It was a reference to wipe out the administrative system which is consistent in perpetrating Human Rights violations against Palestine, Lebanon with US help by violating UN regulations (if that means anything anymore).
Read this for instance
http://news.independent.co.uk/appeals/indy_appeal/article2097790.ece
http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/2006/07/insane-brutality-of-state-of-israel.html
The comment was made in Persian and CNN conveniently distorted it and reported it as they always do. George Bush amplified the translation. And that “eminent british historian” wasn’t eminent enough to differ.
clap!clap!clap!
Anyway,
Interesting post, Shantanu
Mahesh and Mohammed: Thank you for your comments.
I will respond to them on my return.
Mahesh: I hope you have read this post:
https://satyameva-jayate.org/2007/07/02/is-this-too-much-to-ask/
Dear Shri Mahesh,
Let me assure there is too much of reform that is taking place in the Hindu Religion but no reform can take place in Sanatana Dharma.
Let me explain further. if you are look at the narrow western thought of “HINDUISM” then I think reformation is taking place. Have a look at the great Gurujis like “Sri Sri Ravishankar”, Swami Sathya Sai Baba” Swami Chinmayananda” Swami Suddhananda”. I almost forgot, “MATA AMIRTANANADA MAYEE” a poor fisherwoman!They are making a change. “A very Great change”
They are making the real truths of “Sanatana Dharma” apparent and that has made youth resurgent. Pranayama, Yoga, Sanskrit, Ayurveda all these very “Bharataya Items” are now making great strides in the world.
Let me make it apparent here that both the RSS and VHP are required as otherwise the “Secularists”, hope you are not one of them, will have destroyed what was left of apparent “Western Hinduism” and we would not have anything to discuss on this blog today.
As a conclusion please note that today there are schools in Kerala which are training Tribals and so called BC’s in priesthood to serve in temples!
Let us us continue to strengthen true Sanatana Dharma and get rid of this “Western Cliche- Hinduism”.
Regards,
V.C.Krishnan
@ Mohammed: You write that “Iran’s threat was to wipe out the “Zionist Regime” of Israel (similar to wiping out the Saddam Regime) and not the people of Israel.”
Pl. note that unlike the Saddam regime, Israel’s government is democratically elected – so to ask for it to be dismantled is, in effect, de-legitimising the right of Israelis to govern themeselves and exist as a sovereign state.
Also can you please provide a reference (or translation) which suggests that the remark was directed at “the administrative system” rather than the State of Israel?
Thanks.
Mahesh says forget Islamic reforms but asks who will reform Hinduism. What is the problem with Hindus? Are they waging a war to make the whole world Hindus? Are they disregarding other countries’ laws and imposing Hindu Laws? Are they infiltrating neighboring countries and causing terror? Have they gone out to attack churches and mosques all over the world? Have they declared a single country Hindu? In fact even Nepal has ceased to be Hindu. Now you know why Islam’s reformation is needed. Of course, that is not to say that practice of Hinduism should not be brought on the lines of teachings of Swamis Vivekananda, Chinmayananda and Dayanand Saraswati (the list can go on).
It is time, Muslims of India/Pakistan/Bangladesh and Sri Lanka come together to undertake this historic task.
These nations have the largest number of Muslims who can provide leadership to Islam. Arabs have only brought ignominy to both faith and faithfuls. Muslims from sub continent should wake up.
Mahendra Mathur is absolutely right in his point that we cannot keep harping on Hindu reform every time the topic of Islamic reform is raised.
Hinduism may need some reform in some social practices, many of which have been outlawed by the Indian government. These include the caste system, dowry system, and the practice of female foeticide etc. These are social evils and the abolishing of such practices don’t really affect Hindu beliefs or theology.
However, to reform Islam, major shift in the theology will have to be undertaken. How can you reform a religion which claims to be the only true one in the world and that all other non-believers should either be converted or put to death? To change this religion to a more tolerant one that is accepting and respectful of other religions, it will take major reworking of their primary scripture, the Koran.
Interview with Wafa Sultan on Al Jazeera (2006):
http://www.spike.com/video/wafa-sultan-clashes/2703896
Also at http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ai=214&ar=1050wmv&ak=
Excerpts from Professor Hired for Outreach to Muslims Delivers a Jolt
…Muhammad Sven Kalisch, a Muslim convert and Germany’s first professor of Islamic theology, fasts during the Muslim holy month, doesn’t like to shake hands with Muslim women and has spent years studying Islamic scripture. Islam, he says, guides his life.
So it came as something of a surprise when Prof. Kalisch announced the fruit of his theological research. His conclusion: The Prophet Muhammad probably never existed.
…Muslims, not surprisingly, are outraged. Even Danish cartoonists who triggered global protests a couple of years ago didn’t portray the Prophet as fictional. German police, worried about a violent backlash, told the professor to move his religious-studies center to more-secure premises.
“We had no idea he would have ideas like this,” says Thomas Bauer, a fellow academic at Münster University who sat on a committee that appointed Prof. Kalisch. “I’m a more orthodox Muslim than he is, and I’m not a Muslim.”
When Prof. Kalisch took up his theology chair four years ago, he was seen as proof that modern Western scholarship and Islamic ways can mingle — and counter the influence of radical preachers in Germany. He was put in charge of a new program at Münster, one of Germany’s oldest and most respected universities, to train teachers in state schools to teach Muslim pupils about their faith.
Muslim leaders cheered and joined an advisory board at his Center for Religious Studies. Politicians hailed the appointment as a sign of Germany’s readiness to absorb some three million Muslims into mainstream society. But, says Andreas Pinkwart, a minister responsible for higher education in this north German region, “the results are disappointing.”
Prof. Kalisch, who insists he’s still a Muslim, says he knew he would get in trouble but wanted to subject Islam to the same scrutiny as Christianity and Judaism. German scholars of the 19th century, he notes, were among the first to raise questions about the historical accuracy of the Bible.
Many scholars of Islam question the accuracy of ancient sources on Muhammad’s life…But only a few scholars have doubted Muhammad’s existence. Most say his life is better documented than that of Jesus.
…A convert to Islam at age 15, Prof. Kalisch says he was drawn to the faith because it seemed more rational than others. He embraced a branch of Shiite Islam noted for its skeptical bent. After working briefly as a lawyer, he began work in 2001 on a postdoctoral thesis in Islamic law in Hamburg, to go through the elaborate process required to become a professor in Germany.
…He had no doubts at first, but slowly they emerged. He was struck, he says, by the fact that the first coins bearing Muhammad’s name did not appear until the late 7th century — six decades after the religion did.
He traded ideas with some scholars in Saarbrücken who in recent years have been pushing the idea of Muhammad’s nonexistence. They claim that “Muhammad” wasn’t the name of a person but a title, and that Islam began as a Christian heresy.
…Prof. Kalisch says he “never told students ‘just believe what Kalisch thinks’ ” but seeks to teach them to think independently. Religions, he says, are “crutches” that help believers get to “the spiritual truth behind them.” To him, what matters isn’t whether Muhammad actually lived but the philosophy presented in his name.
…The professor says he’s more determined than ever to keep probing his faith. He is finishing a book to explain his thoughts. It’s in English instead of German because he wants to make a bigger impact. “I’m convinced that what I’m doing is necessary. There must be a free discussion of Islam,” he says.
—Almut Schoenfeld in Berlin contributed to this article.
Dear Shantanu,
Nothing is nearer to your objective. The ideas of Christianity and that of what as Prof: Kalisch has said go together to form one significant truth.
“They are all talking of nothing but “Sanatana Dharma”!
Religions he says are “crutches” that help believers get to the “Spiritual truth behind them.” To him, what matters isn’t whether Muhammed “ACTUALLY LIVED” but the “PHILOOPHY PRESENTED IN HIS NAME”.
This is the closest one has got thru to being “Sanatana Dharma.”
A few more years it will be “Satyameva-Jayate”.
Regards,
vck
vck and shantanu , u must remember that muhammed made sure that he was worshipped in no form or shape ,as his teachings claimed that only allah was worthy of worship and not any human being .after muhammed died a few attempts were made to sketch muhammed’s pictures but the idea was shut down by omar who made a historical speech to the people ”those of u who worshipped muhammed ,let me remind u he was just a human being . he is dead and gone .only allah is worthy of worship and it should remain so for all of us .”there is a lot of misunderstanding among non muslims and even a section of muslims about the wahhabi sect .i m not a follower of it , but i must say i find nothing wrong in it .the koran is the holy book of the muslims and the hadeeth is a book which documents the lives and laws practiced by muhammed and his companions .the koran is a dialogue between man and his creator ,between good and evil ,with the almighty showing how good deeds triump over all evil deeds . the hadeeth is the documented life of muhammed and his companions and the steps they tooks in various stages of their life in a given situation .the hadeeth was never made into a ‘law’ by any of the 4 caliphs of islam to be practiced worlwide by muslims , because its influence was mostly confined to the behavioural aspects of desert tribes . the koran was more universal in its theme of a dialogue between a man and his creator over the matter of good and evil .the wahhabis of saudi arabia follow both ,the quran and the hadeeth,and quite fairly so ,because the hadeeth appeals to their regional sentiments .so why r these wahhabis so misunderstood in other parts of the world ?? i will explain the reason why ?? for example,a muslim from india has migrated to saudi arabia and worked there for say 30 years .he becomes used to the saudi religious way of life through the hadeeth acceptance . when he returns back to india ,he wants to impose the hadeeth on other muslim followers ,without understanding the impact of its limited appeal .his lack of knowledge fails to see that a desert practice will not hold water in an agricultural country . that is the reason why the ahle hadeeth sect inspired from saudi wahhabism has failed to make inroads among common indian muslims and even in indonesia or malaysia .in india , far less than 2 percent are ahle hadeeth or wahhabis and they are disliked for their rigid stance on religion . that , however does not mean that wahabbism is evil or promotes hatred or killings . it is nothing like that .saudi has strict laws and human life is safe in saudi arabia ,with clamping down on elements who try to sow the seeds of hatred in saudi arabia .
islam did not begin as a christian heresey ,infact islam is more close to jew religious preachings and practices .even prophet mohammed belonged to a sect that practiced a religion on judaism lines .
Dear Tarique,
That is precisely the point. True Vedic religion does not have a picture of the Gods and Godesses. The Vedas were revealed to the sages. The sages had no picture of themselves. It was spread by word of mouth and NOT EVEN WRITTEN!
The codification of thoughts came through later thru Manusmriti and others. The WAY OF LIFE as SANATANA DHARMA is known is simple.
It appears to be closer to your thoughts.
I think we are moving closer and closer to bridge the Gap and arrive at the TRUTH. The WAY OF LIFE;
Call it what you want. All thoughts are revealed. One calls it ALLAH, the other THE BRAHMAN and another the SUPREME RULER.
A rose by any other name smells as sweet.
Regards,
vck
Radical Islam’s war with India
The time has arrived for the unspoken to be spoken: Radical Islam is at war with India.
The objectives of the war are to destroy India as a nation with a composite culture and multi-ethnic society, and replace it with a phenomenon which began as an enclave in Saudi Arabia in the 7th century and has already enveloped a good part of the globe.
read here.
http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=14801161
bharat , why r u making india look so weak by saying that it will replaced by a saudi arabian culture .believe in urself and if u cannot do that ,atleast talk something good and things which are positive and make sense .what will u achieve by comparing a country with a total population of 17 million with a large agricultural country like india with a population of 1200 million .u get my point ,u r making a mountain out of a mole hill.
Womens Right in Islam
“Men are overseers over women, by reason of that wherewith Allah hath made one of them excel over another, and by reason of that which they expend of their substance. Wherefore righteous women are obedient, and are watchers in husbands absence by the aid and protection of Allah. And those wives whose refractoriness ye fear, exhort them, and avoid them in beds, and BEAT them; but if they obey you, seek not a way against them; verily Allah is ever Lofty, Grand.” (Quran 4:34
Very interesting site for understanding Islam
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles.htm#women
How Islam Failed Muslims
By: Ohmyrus
Why is it that the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) and some idolater nations have overtaken the Muslim world?
President Perves Musharaf of Pakistan recently said that Muslims are the most illiterate, unhealthy, poorest of peoples in the world today. He is right and I might add, very few Muslim countries are democracies including his own.
Muslims at one time were the most powerful, richest and advanced people of the world. From them arose four great empires – the Ummayad Empire, the Abassid Empire the Mogul Empire and the Ottoman Turkish Empire.
Their decline can be traced to about 1700 when the west caught up with the Ottoman Empire, the last great Muslim empire.
A number of reasons were advanced for this decline and more recent failures by the Muslims themselves, including the invasion of the Mongols, the crusades, western imperialism and Israel, the perpetual whipping boy. An idea gaining ground in the Muslim world is that their low estate is due to Muslims turning away from God. The remedy is therefore to become more Islamic.
In my opinion, the most important reason for Muslim failure is Islam itself.
Islam is a complete way of life as Muslims are fond of saying. Islam tells you how to punish criminals, how many wives you can have and even which hand is assigned for toilet duty. No other religion is so detailed as to what you can or cannot do.
But the rules governing this complete way of life were developed for a 7th century medieval desert society. Some of these rules are no longer applicable for the 21st century.
Let me give you four reasons why Islam impedes progress. But first, let me say that I am not interested in making a value judgement on what is right or wrong. I believe that religious ideas can have an impact on economic growth and am only concerned in assessing the impact of Islam on the economy and society.
Imbedded in the Koran is the shariah law. This makes it difficult to separate mosque from state. A good Muslim desires to follow Mohammed’s teachings to the full and this means that he must desire to live in an Islamic state where the shariah law is enforced.
Thus in every Muslim country, there exists a group of people who desires to live in an Islamic state. Pakistan tried it when Zia Ul Haq was president. The economy was ruined in the attempt.
So far, there have been four other attempts at an Islamic state – Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan and lately Afghanistan under the Taliban. None of them successfully led their people to sustainable industrialization though oil money in Saudi Arabia and Iran hid their failures.
To make matters worse, out of the Muslims who desire an Islamic state, a minority is prepared to use violence to achieve it. Their reasoning goes something like this.
God’s law is higher than man’s law. Sounds reasonable, right? Democracy is man made. Therefore an Islamic state, which is ruled in accordance to God’s law, is superior to democracy. In fact, democracy is a form of idolatry where you put man above Allah.
This rejection of democracy not only hinders its establishment in many (fortunately not all) Muslim countries but some Muslims feel perfectly justified in using violence to create an Islamic state. They don’t see the need to let the ballot box decide since God is above any man made democracy.
This is due to the nature of Islam itself where its founder, Prophet Mohammed was also a military commander. Thus to a militant Muslim, Al-Qaeda’s attempt to violently create an Islamic state in SE Asia is only doing exactly what Prophet Mohammed did in his lifetime. His words of violence, perhaps uttered in the heat of war, are now forever recorded in the Koran and Hadiths as Holy Scripture. Let me give you a few examples.
Surah 8:39 (or thereabouts) says, “Make war on them until idolatry shall cease and God’s religion shall reign supreme.â€
Surah 8:12 says, “God revealed his will to the angels, saying: “I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!â€
Surah 9:39 (or thereabouts) says, “If you do not go to war, He will punish you sternly, and will replace you by other men.â€
If I am not mistaken, Osama bin Laden said this or something very similar in that famous training video that CNN and BBC kept playing many times after September 11.
While most Muslims are peaceful people who interpret the Koran in a non-violent manner, such verses create the potential for a minority to justify the use of violence for the establishment of an Islamic state. For centuries, Muslims have declared jihad (holy war) against the enemies of Islam.
If they die in a jihad, the reward is paradise filled with fruit trees and the loving company of numerous houris (heavenly virgins) with their “high bosomsâ€. It is somewhat similar to the ancient Viking belief in Valhalla where the brave warriors go to when they die in battle. None of the other major religions in practice today have this concept.
Even if such people are a small minority, their presence destabilizes countries and frightens away western or Japanese investors. Between India and Pakistan, which country do you think is more attractive to an American investor? I think there is no comparison. Why go to Pakistan where there are people wanting to kill you? Some of these militants think that the killing of an infidel American or Jew will win them passage to paradise.
The presence of violent men not only deters foreign investors but also make it impossible to have a functioning democracy.
The second way Islam failed Muslims is by suppressing its women. Women are considered inferior to man and in a hadith are described as mentally deficient. That is why one male witness is equal to two female witnesses in an Islamic court. Take a look at Surah 4:34 from the Holy Koran which approves of wife beating:
“Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, forsake them in beds apart and beat them.â€
What is the economic implication of this attitude towards women? Since they are thought of as inferior, there is discrimination in the workplace. Since there is discrimination against women in the work place, parents give a lower priority for their daughter’s education.
If you go the Middle East, you will find that men dominate the work place. Women are expected to be homemakers.
Averroes (1126 – 1198) believed that much of the poverty and distress of his time was due to the fact that women were “kept like domestic animals or house plants for purposes of gratification, instead of being allowed to take part in the production of material and intellectual wealth, and in the preservation of the same.â€
Women who stay at home tend to have more children. They tend to see their children as their security in old age. That is why there is a high birth rate in most of the Islamic world. A high birth rate means poverty perpetuating itself, as there are fewer resources to educate everybody. That is why poor third world countries are advised to promote family planning.
Saudi Arabia’s per capita GDP has declined compared to 20 years ago mainly because its population has grown and its oil revenue has not. It has not succeeded in developing manufacturing export industries like the East Asians have.
As a result, Saudi Arabia is actually getting poorer-though still rich. Thus, suppressing women not only deprive a nation of half its work force but also increase its birth rate and hence make them poor.
On the other hand, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, emancipated Turkish women. He banned polygamy, the veil and insisted that women be as well educated as the men. He gave them the vote and allowed them to be elected into parliament. Today, the most advanced Muslims are the Turks as a result of Ataturk’s reforms of which women’s emancipation was one.
The third teaching of Islam that impeded progress was the prohibition of usury – the lending of money for interest. This helped the west to overtake the Ottoman Turks because the west (initially also prohibited from lending for interest) developed banks earlier.
Banks encourages savings which are then pooled together to lend to businessmen. Savings can later be tapped to invest in joint stock companies and business ventures. Companies can be larger and more efficient with greater economies of scale. Savings and investments together with a debt market promote economic growth. London, Geneva, Amsterdam, Milan, Venice were great financial centers from the days of the Renaissance.
I believe the Muslims were late to develop the banking/finance industry because of the prohibitions against usury. Fortunately, today most Muslims ignore these ancient prohibitions. They borrow money from and deposit money into banks and use credit cards. For the pious, there are the Islamic banks. So this is no longer a problem. But the west had a head start in economic development.
Islamic banks are not supposed to charge interest, which is forbidden. But they are allowed to make profits. I am told that for the most part, there is nothing essentially different between Islamic banking and the conventional banking.
Very often, the “profits†they make is fixed and guaranteed. This means that profits are really “interestâ€. Theoretically, Islamic banks are supposed to share in the profits of the projects they lend to. If it is truly profits, they should earn more in good times and lose money in bad times.
This is difficult to arrange. If the project is promising, the customer does not want to share in the profits. They prefer to pay a fixed sum for the money advanced to them by the bank. If the project looks dicey, the bank wants to be safe and would ask for a fixed guaranteed return for its money.
All this goes to show that it is difficult to operate in the modern business world without usury. Islamic banking is thus an exercise in self-delusion.
The fourth reason is that Islam stifles Science. For Science to flourish, there must great tolerance for new ideas, which is sorely lacking in the Islamic world. Ideas (both scientific and philosophical) need to be freely debated so that good ideas are adopted and bad ones discarded. Islam is not the only religion to stifle Science. Just look at what happened to Galileo when he said that the earth revolves around the sun. But eventually rationality prevailed in Christendom.
This could happen in the west because there is a clear separation between Church and State. The separation was due to these famous words from Christ:
“Render unto Cesar the things that are Cesar’s. Render unto God the things that are God’s.â€
The separation was not always perfect. But the principle ran like a golden thread since medieval times till the present. What it meant in practice is that the neither the medieval popes not the kings were as powerful as the Caliphs who possessed both temporal and spiritual power. For the Caliph any challenge to a religious doctrine also meant a challenge of the Caliph’s right to rule. Any challenge to the Caliph’s right to rule is also a challenge to God since the Caliph was by definition Prophet Mohammed’s successor.
To be sure, the Muslim world did produce many noted poets, philosophers and scientists – Al-Farabi, Al-Razi (a famous physician), Avicenna, Averroes etc. After the 7th century conquests of major part of the Byzantine empire and the Persian empire, the Arabs came into contact with more advanced civilizations – Christian, Zoroastrian and Hindu. They were eager to learn and acquire knowledge.
Books were translated into Arabic and the Caliphs were happy to employ non-Muslims, especially Peoples of the Book, to serve them. Greek science and philosophy were taught in schools and there was a fusion of Islamic ideas and Greek rationality. This inevitably led to a clash with the conservative religious scholars.
These scholars believed that all knowledge came from God’s revelation and philosophical and scientific inquiry will ultimately lead to unbelief. Those scientists and philosophers, while not rejecting (at least publicly) Islam believed that truth could also be derived from human reason. Human reason can be reconciled with God’s revelations.
The Mu’tazilites belonged to this rational school that had confidence in human reasoning. They initially enjoyed the protection of the caliphs and persecuted those who disagreed with them. But later they fell out of favour. A theologian, Al Ashari, who subordinated reason to revelation, dealt the rationalist Mu’tazilites a mortal wound.
About two centuries later, Al-Ghazali drove in the final nail thus ending the influence of Greek rationality in Islamic thinking. He wrote, “The source of their infidelity was their hearing terrible names such as Socrates and Hippocrates, Plato and Aristotle.â€
He opposed the spirit of free inquiry saying that certain of the natural sciences were opposed to religion. He led Muslims back to an unquestioning literal interpretation of the Koran. The traditionalists had finally won. Science lost.
It should be noted that most of the scientists, poets and philosophers in Islam’s golden age (the time of the Abassid Caliphate) were Jews, Christians or Muslims who were suspected of apostasy or blasphemy. Many suffered harassment and even death. Thus if science did flourish during this golden age, it was in spite of Islam and not because of it.
In the Christian world, science managed to eventually triumph because the Pope was not as powerful as the Caliph thanks to the separation of Church and State. In Islam, where there is no separation of Mosque and State, the progressive forces of Greek rationality could not prevail and were ultimately stifled.
These are the many ways in which Islam impeded the progress of Muslims. However, there appears to be an idea sweeping the Muslim world that the path to greatness lies in greater Islamisation. By becoming more pious, they hope to win the favour of God and be restored to their former glories.
It is like a doctor prescribing smoking to cure lung cancer. To sum up, Islam stifles science, women and to a lesser degree in present times the banking industry. All these have a negative impact on economic growth. In addition, its doctrine of jihad and its propensity for violence makes it stony ground for democracy to flower. Let me leave you with a quote from Ataturk:
“The evils which had sapped the nation’s strength,†he declared, “had all been wrought in the name of religion.â€
Tarique,
It only takes a small virus to kill a gigantic elephant.
Similarly, the Islamic virus has already destroyed the lives of 50% of the original Hindu population of the world.
Are you trying the lull the remaining 50% of the Hindu population in complacency?
During Bakr-Id, I have seen the Qurbani goats being lulled into complacency by distracting it with fresh green grass, while the executioner (typically, the head of the Muslim family) sharpens his knife discreetly.
But I don’t think the Hindus will fall for your “Trojan Horse” this time.
Ibn Warraq
Happy to see you here. I am assuming you are the same Ibn Warraq, I have read about on Internet and other sites.
@ Vedikgyan:
Thanks for your great post.
ibn warraq ,do not insult the 85 percent hindus into believing that they were bullied by 15 percent muslims .u r trying to run down a 6000 year old civilisation by insulting it ,just to prove ur point . comparing the hindus to slaughter goats by muslims u forget ,the leaf feeders were brahmins who formed the chunk of policy makers in the early congress and communist political set ups .so if i get convicted by 50 whips on my arse ,the brahmins must share atleast 25 of them.ur muslim bias fails to notice that hindus are the ones who sell their animals to muslims for sacrifice.most of the breeders for bakri idd goats are hindu villagers from rajasthan ,maharashtra ,and madhya pradesh .ibn , kindly do one more research for some startling truths about animal slaughter houses in india . find out the top 20 meat export houses in india and their owners . u will find hardly 10 percent muslims in it .
al kabeer , the most successful meat export house in india is not owned by a muslim.infact it is a hindu.this goes the same for many other meat export houses.
vedikgyan ,i agree with most of ur comments yet i must say u have got a few things about islam and koran totally wrong . a lot of things and practices were performed by muslims using islam as an excuse or twisting the meanings of koran to suit their power equations. it does not mean that islam and koran did not promote rationalism and it was totally blind to modern development . from 700 a.d to 1700 a.d it was muslim rule in most part of the world .the ‘reanissance ‘ in europe was inspired by the muslim success in world affairs . the ‘french revolution ‘ finally overcame the muslim military powers all over the world .that the french revolution came with a overwhelming desire to beat the muslim rule and overcome the inferiority complex existing in europe for the last 1000 years.they say ”success has many fathers ,success hides many failures”.the success of the french revolution made western europe modern and advanced and cynosure of all eyes . but what about the failures in the landlocked eastern europe ? the poverty of tribal christians existing even today in central africa ? the neglect of christians in south america and south east asia ? the rebellion of christians in cuba ?the state of christians in asia ? today after the muslims have lost it all ,put all the blame on them. praise the christians for success in western europe and overlook their dirty linen in other parts of the world .as they say ”a rich man’s fart is never smelly”.
*** COMMENT EDITED ***
Looks like you did NOT get the analogy of the Qurbani goats. Perhaps you never will.
*** NOTE by MODERATOR ***
Ibn: I have edited your comment since it crossed the line I have set for this blog. I let most comments stay intact in the interest of freedom of speech…However, I cannot let commentators make sweeping generalisations without offering any evidence or facts.
By all means have a debate here but please stick to evidence, references and verifiable observations…
Thanks.
And Tarique can make sweeping generalizations, I presume?
Fareed Zakaria should try preaching to his own flock first. The same goes for Tarique.
The Kafirs don’t need your sermons, dear. Save it for the Momins.
“Reformation” in Islam has always meant removing any traces of non-Islamic beliefs that may have crept into the “One and Only True Religion” during the Islamic invasion of the world.
This includes removal (from Islamic practices) of any Kufr Hindu concepts of Divinity, Peace and Yoga (as recently ordered by Islamic Theologians.)
“Reformation” in Islam has always meant returning to the Pure, undiluted Islam specified by Mohammed (PBUH) through his words and deeds i.e. Qu’ran, Hadith, Sunnah.
Each Islamic Reformer tries to outbeat the competition into proving that he is more Islamic than the others. The result: Those who are considered less Islamic are killed mercilessly.
ibn warraq , this is an old story bro .this blog has moved ahead to more rational lines .u still need to read better posts to catch up with the level of discussions that goes on here .
ibn warraq ,join a ‘rabble rousing ‘ brigade .discussions are meant only for the sane .
Tarique,
Lets look at your sense of fair-play.
When you kept commenting almost every day on this same topic for the past one week, it was perfectly fine and acceptable.
But when I called your bluff about Islam in my comments today, then this topic suddenly becomes an old story and is off-limits to me.
Tsk..Tsk..If you wish to pass for a rational and sane guy, atleast try to sound like one.
*** COMMENT EDITED ***
If you insist, I can try to be a mere rabble rouser…
…I stick to facts – which you obviously can’t refute without ad hominem attacks.
This story may be from 2007. But Islam is still stuck in the 7th century; and wishes to drag the rest of the world back to the 7th century. That’s the crux of the problem, dear.
Kaleem Kawaja has written a post on IndianMuslims titled,
“Iqbal, Jinnah And The Lost Glory Of The Muslims Of India“.
It is a good, thought-provoking post in which this sentence caught my eye:
I have requested Kaleem to elaborate…
***
Tarique: any views?
@Tarique:
“saudi has strict laws and human life is safe in saudi arabia ,with clamping down on elements who try to sow the seeds of hatred in saudi arabia .”
Do you really believe this? If yes, can I have whatever you are smoking?
patriot ,why don’t u visit saudi arabia and find out.a hindu friend of mine visited it for business .he did not like the strict laws prevalent there ,yet he praised the security standards and rules and regulations imposed on everyone . u can walk the streets of jeddah or riyadh carrying any amount of money without the fear of being looted . they have their strict laws which everyone may not find convenient ,yet i have spoken to hindus and sikhs,and they said it was a safe place to work.
shantanu ,kaleem has used ‘islam’ instead of ‘muslims’ .the problem is not islam but muslims.it is a fact that after the 1857 mutiny ,where the last mughal emperor was defeated ,the muslims had lost their way over any rational thoughts (ESPECIALLY THE NORTH INDIAN MUSLIMS ).they say when ur times are bad ,nothing goes right for u .it is during these frustrating times ,the british began to encourage groupism among hindus and muslims.three decades later the divide turned into personal hatred in the formation of ‘muslim league’ and ‘hindu mahasabha’.later,self styled leaders like jinnah and savarkar emerged epousing religious pride and suspicion of the other community.savarkar and jinnah were brilliant at ‘social engineering’,but unfortunately they did it only on religious lines.the fact that jinnah never went to a mosque to pray,ate pork ,drank wine,and lived a englishman’s lifestyle.savarkar on the other hand was a confirmed athiest ,yet ‘hinduism’ suited his personal ambitions . this was the tragedy of india…….islam and hinduism was dragged in a struggle to suit a few politically minded hindus and muslims.
islam as a religion does does not clash with marxism,socialism ,pacifism . but yes,muslims as an political entity do have clashes with these modern ideologies . i feel it has a lot to do with ignorance and failure to keep pace with the changing times .two things i feel as an indian muslims damaged us .one the creation of pakistan on religious lines ,secondly the unnecessory importance given to urdu language after it had lost most of its utility with the coming of the french revolution .muslims have themselves to blame as they failed to cope with failure and accept ground realities after having to relinquish power after 1000 years.the leadership during this period and the next 200 years failed the muslims.instead of embracing modernity with changing times ,the muslims were drawn in a shell,from which they have still to emerge.even today i feel sad when an ignorant muslim says ‘marxism means rejecting the theory of god’.i fail to convince them that marxism opposed religion on grounds that it divided society and took their minds away from real issues facing a nation.they were not opposed to god ,but to the ‘politicisation of god’.the muslims have failed islam on socialism and pacifism.’jihad’ which was a tool of ‘inner struggle ‘ for rationalism and search for peace ,has been made a tool for destroying human lives of other religions and also people of their own faith. islam makes only 1 percent provision for ‘violent jihad’ and only under extreme circumstances after all efforts for peace have failed. 99 percent ‘jihad’ is inner struggle within the soul searching for truth.if islam was opposed to socialism i don’t think so it would have survived as a religion or even as a nation for 1400 years and have had a population of 1.5 billion worldwide today.in the end it was the muslims alone who gave a bad name to islam ,by associating it with things that it opposed the most.all this for the sake of greed,power,and domination.but true islam will never fail .if the muslims abandon it ,a good research scholar from another faith will stand up and revive it. i feel proud when western historians inform me that the ‘renaissance’ in europe was inspired by the success of muslim way of life in the 13th century and 14th century.the desire to achieve the levels of muslim military tactics and world domination led them to the ‘french revolution’.
tarique,
I disagree with you that “The problem is not Islam but Muslims”. That is every Islamic apologist’s eternal excuse.
Pakistanis, Arabs, Iranians, Afghans, Bangladeshis, Iraqis etc are human beings just like you and me. They are made of the same flesh and blood as you and me.
I shed tears of sadness everyday when I see these Pakistanis, Arabs, Iranians, Afghans, Bangladeshis, Iraqis kill each other and others all over the world by car-bombs, suicide bombs and beheadings.
It is not these people’s fault that they have been brainwashed by their religion from a very early age.
Take away the Qu’ran from their hands and they are no different than you and me. That is the solution to world peace.
Dr.Ali Sina, Ibn Warraq, M.A.Khan and other stalwarts have proved in their books/articles that the real problem is not Muslims, but Islam.
Muslims are the biggest victims of Islam, along with Hindus, Christians, Jews and others.
Reena
I absolutely agree with you. Few days back I was disturbed by their beheading punishment. It’s so cruel and unhuman. There should be strict punishment but atleast not of this kind.
Dear Tarique bhai,
There is no prohibition in Hinduism for Hindus to be Atheists or Agnostics. There is freedom and multiplicity of ideas about God in the various philosophies that define Hindu thought. In Hindu thought, you can believe in one God or many Gods or many Gods who are manifestations of one God. In Hindu thought, you can believe that there is no God (Atheist) or you can believe that there may or may not be God, but you don’t care to find out either way (Agnostic).
One of the famous Hindu Rishis was Rishi Charvaka – who espoused Atheism. Veer Savarkar was the Agnostic Hindu Yug-Purush who defined the word ‘Hindutva’ and the rest is history.
There is no death sentence in Hinduism for denying God or not believing in God. Some people in my family are Atheists; and they are proud Hindus at the same time.
On the other hand, the punishment specified in the Quran/Hadith/Sunnah for Muslims who deny Allah or even believe in a different God (than Allah) is the Death Sentence. The fate of a non-Muslim is worse.
Hinduism minds its own business and does not want to rule the world. Islam has given the clear mandate from Allah to conquer the whole world and convert everyone to Islam.
So, I request you humbly – please do not equate Hinduism and Islam. Please do not equate Islam’s genocide and extermination of all cultures and religions and faiths with Hinduism.
I don’t know about the other readers on this blog, but I, for one, will not allow you to insinuate it unchallenged.
Excerpts from Muftis may ban music, dance at nikahs, say it is un-Islamic
reena behenji , let me make it very clear that the charges u r making aginst islam is not sound .it is more a propoganda. did u know that the caliphs of islam provided maintainence expenses for churches and synagogues in jerusalem .that the armies of other faiths fought alongside muslims in various conquests .i m not here to compare islam with hinduism .i like ,love and respect both these religions .nothing will change my opinion even if the entire islamic world beheads or hangs me for it. u get the point now behenji ? a lot of radical clerics avoid a discusson with me ,and nobody has issued a fatwa till date on me. i have questioned their preaching methods ,their practices that is defaming islam on their face .they failed to provide me any satisfactory answers yet they never threatened me yet.reena behenji ,today i m making an effort to educate young muslims on matters of ‘love for country’ ‘respecting hindus and their way of life ‘ ‘acceptance of humanity as one brotherhood’ . i know i may not be successful by one and all ,but so far the result has been positive . even if i fail i know atleast my kids will inherit my values ,which i hold very close to my heart.the muslims have a big problem ,yet i know it can be adressed and repaired if people like u are willing to help the moderate muslims change a lot of misconceptions that have crept inside islam today . reena behenji , if u just sit and fight with me u r not going to achieve anything . infact ,u will be doing a huge damage to our nation.
reena behenji ,kindly do not try to mix various incidents of history just to prove ur point . if u cite an instance of history it must be told in a full content . ur problem is that u just pick up a muslim incident that suits ur agenga and start roaring ‘islam is villian’. u should have cared to listen to k.sudershan the RSS chief who said ‘there is no hindu terrorism or muslim terrorism ‘. k.k.ravishanker and baba ramdev echoed the same thing . the entire deoband came out against the ‘terrorists’.help all of us understand the positive message preached in every religion .a negative attitude will leave all of us ‘uneducated’ in life despite our learnings.
Dear Shantanu,
Poor AAmir khan, Saif Ali Khan, Sharukh Khan, will be out of work and I will miss them.
It is sad that we are coming across fatwas which are demeaning to the human psyche.
We would not have a Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, A Bismillah Khan, A Mohammed Rafi, A BEgum Akhtar, A Parveen Sultana, A Zakir, A Salim – Javed, A Waheeda Rehman, An Abdul Kalam;
Oh where are we heading to.
Does it mean that one should not stand up to these Fatwas!
Regards,
vck
vck , do u know that ‘fatwas’ across the globe are accepted by only of a few islamic institutions . in india ,the government consults the deoband on muslim matters and no other single institution .in world matters western countries and US consult only the al azhar islamic university in cairo . likewise ,worldwide there are only 5 or 6 institutions who issue fatwas which are respected by one and all . if u remember a month ago in israel a similiar thing took place . a few jew rabbis with a few hundred men went out on the street breaking up CD and musical instruments and video libraries,beating up women who wore sleeveless shirts,asking youths tio grow long beards,etc.etc. does it mean that all these things were done on behalf of the entire jew community ? in northern ireland ,catholics and protestants burn churches of each other for months.a catholic protestant riot ends up with loss of lives and burning down of hundreds of churches .the peace loving jain priests ordered their followers that ‘no marriages or parties and loud music to be conducted after sunset’.and vck ,ask the mullah who issued this fatwa ,whether the muslim lane where he resides, are people following his edict .
Mr. Tariq,
I agree with Abul Kasem (an ex-Muslim of Bengali origin) in his article below. He is a prolific writer and you will enjoy reading his articles.
I quote some excerpts from his article. Please note that these are Abul Kasem’s words, not mine:
– The Indian commando, once again, proved beyond a shadow of doubt who reigns supreme when the Allahs soldiers face the might of the professional military. These Islamist jihadists excel in only one art—the killing of hapless, unarmed, weak, innocent civilians.
– The only language Islamist soldiers heed is the language of force and compulsion. Islam only respects a strong force
– Islam has no respect for human rights or human lives.
– Terrorism is a tactic used to spread and subjugate the world to Islam
– Infidels are truly dumb when it comes to analysing Islamist terrorism. It appears the Koran is correct when it says that the infidels are deaf, dumb and blind
– A handful of Jihadists can, and will kill hundreds and thousands of innocent people. All that these intrepid jihadists need is a firm brainwash with the Koranic verses and the motivations from Muhammad’s life.
“Lessons from Mumbai Massacreâ€: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2175
Also, when you click on this link, please scroll down below the article and read the comments from readers. One pious reader called “ChampionOfIslam†justifies the murder of innocents in Mumbai and praises the Jihadi killers. If you really care, you can try to reply to him and convince him why he is wrong.
Interestingly, “ChampionOfIslam†uses the same sentiment that you showed to Reena: “Islam still bears Hegemony over 57 countriesâ€
Extracts from
The virulent Wahabi virus by Murad Ali Baig, writing in HT (Apr 10 ’09)
Mumbai. Afghanistan. Pakistan. The ‘Islamist’ terror attacks in South Asia all had the hallmarks of Wahabi ideology. Its followers are blinded by faith to believe that they have the mandate of Allah to rid the world of ‘infidels’ and ‘heretics’. Combating terrorism may thus be impossible until this Wahabi cult is thoroughly discredited.
Mohammed Abd Al Wahab, (1703-1794), redefined Islam in a narrow and intolerant way and injected into it such a virulent cult of hatred that, though repeatedly put down, it has risen to become the single greatest threat to world peace today.
…The Islam of the Quran suffered in the hands of many revisionists who changed its direction over time. The holy book was supplemented with the Hadith written 200 years later with further interpretations. In the Quran, Muhammad had defined jihad after the battle of Badr … “We are now finished with the lesser jihad (struggle against oppression) and are beginning the greater jihad (struggle against our own weaknesses),†but jihad is mentioned 199 times in the Hadith in stronger terms. Wahab seems to have understood the tremendous power of hatred to unite and inflame its followers in an intense ‘holy war’. He urged followers to mercilessly exterminate ‘infidels’, ‘blasphemers’, ‘idol worshippers’, Christians and even ‘Muslim apostates’ like the Shias and Sufis.
…Wahab’s vision enshrined in his book ‘Kitab al-Tawhid’ (book of unity) encountered strong opposition when it was first preached around 1744. Religious teachers including his father and uncle were horrified but he was fortunate to find a patron in Muhammad Al-Saud who used this vitriolic new creed as a powerful weapon to propel his tribe forward. Al-Saud went on to win his descendents the kingdom of Arabia that they rule to this day. Then the discovery of oil in 1938 gave them the power to finance the spread of their creed.
With Indian Muslims making pilgrimages to Makkah, Wahabism spread to India by the 19th century. Wahabi, also called Salafi, centres were established in our country.
The ‘chhota (small) godown’ at Patna supplied funds, manpower weapons and materials to the ‘barra (big) godown’ at Sittana near Swat where the turbulent border tribes were drawn to this violent creed. The ‘Hindustani fanatics’ were rooted out several times by the British.
These fanatics had great influence in the Indian madrasas where most Muslim children were educated. In 1866, two mullahs set up a madrasa at Deoband, north of Delhi, that was initially known as the Arab Madrasa, to preserve Islam from British oppression. Though Wahabism never had mass support, as it was too violent and intolerant, few Muslims dared to speak up against them though some mainstream mullahs declared ‘fatwas’ against this heresy.
…In Pakistan however, the fanaticism was kept aflame on the issue of Muslims being oppressed in Kashmir. They were greatly encouraged when the USSR occupied Afghanistan in 1979 and the CIA collaborated with Pakistan to fund and train the Taliban to fight them. Madrasas preaching Wahabism then infected the children of some three million Afghan refugees.
…Muslims need to make the fanatics understand that Wahabis are not heroes but heretics against the words of Muhammad. Indian Muslims were too intimidated by Wahabism to speak out fearlessly against this creed. It is time they did.
@Santanu: “Muslims need to make the fanatics understand that Wahabis are not heroes but heretics against the words of Mohammed.”
Words of Muhammed.
Sura 5:51 O believers take not Jews and Christians as friends…..
Sura 8:37 Allah may separate the pure from impure……
Sura 5:33 (Those who fight Allah)….shall be slain or crucified…
Sura 8:12-13 Cast terror into the hearts of infidels. Strike off their heads….
Sura 8:67 …make wide slaughter in the land
Sura 9:73 Make war on unbelievers (of Islam)…
Wide slaughter in the land of infidels–that is India. Maybe the Wahabis are getting the message of Muhammed clearly and we are the ones in denial.
http://www.masada2000.org/Islam-Rules.html
This is applicable to every country. Look around. Is it not true ?
@Shantanu: May I post a short quote from Sam Harris in “End of Faith”, which questions the concept of ‘religious moderate’…
It is secularism and science which will open the doors to dilute religious fundamentalism. The question is – Can Islam or Christianity ever be moderate? In other words can a Muslim keep one foot in the 21st Century and another in 7th Century beliefs that clash virulently and not be dishonest to either? This applies equally to any other blind belief which has immoral consequences..
Putting all our energies in encouraging religious moderation, defined as an attempt to “hold on to what is still serviceable in orthodox religion”, closes the door to more sophisticated approaches to spirituality, ethics, and the building of strong communities.
It best this can be a transitional approach with political correctness being observed before its dropped for the real work. But do we have the luxury of time, given Taliban is closer now to nuclear warheads?
Hrishi, there’s a famous saying in India (probably reflective of Permit Raj) that if one wants to buy a gun, one has to apply for a permit for a cannon.
Sam Harris and others’ approach seems to be based on that thinking – of going to a certain extreme in their criticism, and hoping that the views will shift somewhat towards them. Of course, it’s all predicated on those who need to read those books are not only reading them, but changing course after reading; and it’s not just preaching to the choir. 🙂
http://www.hindujagruti.org/news/6759.html
Congress Govt. objects scene of ‘Afzal Khan Killing’ in film.
If this is correct, it is terrible. Are we living in democratic India or some Islamic nation. What is wrong in showing the facts.
Whither secularism ?
I usually dont post in Blogs but your blog forced me to, amazing work.. beautiful
And, then I read this:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/History.htm
And, I wonder if this page is even 50% accurate, how can anyone expect reformation of Islam?
No wonder muslims would like us to read the Quran in Arabic – the lesser the number of people know about what their prophet was upto, the better for the “believers”!
Cheers
@Patriot, it’s easy to tell whether someone is honest or not: if they say Islam means “peace” instead of “submission” (that’s something very basic), it is a pretty good indicator that they’re going to be an apologist and indulge in a whitewash, or haven’t done their research. 🙂
Kaffir, dude …. you have not read the link, have you?
It is anything BUT an apologist website for Islam! In fact, as I say, if they are even 50% right about the history of Mohammed, then we can forget about any dialogue with Islam, EVER!
Cheers
@Kaffir:
The name of the website is ironic. Their home page has a running tally, month-wise(!), of how many muslims have been killed by other muslims, in terror attacks.
Cheers
BTW, I also posted the above link on the IndianMuslims blog site, whom I have considered enlightened, moderate muslims in the past – however, this comment of mine is still stuck in the “moderation queue” for the past 8 hours!
Hmmmmmmmm ……
@Patriot, I did read the link. It is a website that’s meant to expose Islam’s “peace”ful behavior, so I got it that they are using the URL (thereligionofpeace) in an ironic way.
My comment was for discussions in general, and in reference to those people who state that Islam is a religion of peace either with full sincerity or to whitewash, when the meaning of Islam is submission.
@Kaffir: Is it submission or subjugation ?
KSV, the literal meaning of ‘Islam’ is “submission”, from what I’ve read. If you’re talking about not theory, but practice, then subjugation may work in many instances.
Why on earth in the 21st century do we still have people who believe in an angry, vengeful god who is always looking over our shoulders. If a human behaved the way these monotheistic gods do, he would be charged with insanity.
I think the myth of the ONE True God has led to monocultures of the mind, where any other idea about god or reality causes so much discomfort that it leads to anger and madness. We see this every time groups act violently by destroying not only public property, but also human lives. For example the Danish cartoon incident where 50 people died. If this isn’t collective insanity, what is it.
And why on earth does God, the jagatkaraka (creator of the universe) need me to submit. He doesn’t need my constant praises or prayers. In fact He/She should not be bothered by the belief or non-belief of individuals.
@Harapriya:
“And why on earth does God, the jagatkaraka (creator of the universe) need me to submit. He doesn’t need my constant praises or prayers. In fact He/She should not be bothered by the belief or non-belief of individuals.”
Exactly right! My sentiments to a T.
Cheers
Excerpts from Moderate, Meek Or Muted? (emphasis mine):
It has been an interesting exercise to watch the reaction of moderate Muslims in Karnataka to the violent incidents following the publication of a Taslima Nasreen piece in a Kannada newspaper a fortnight ago. Most of the reactions that I will report and comment upon below are, I emphasise, of moderates whose writing I have had a chance to follow for over a decade now. These writers are not self-assigned moderates or publicly-proclaimed ones, but have come to represent a mature Muslim voice in the state by consistently following a liberal trajectory in their writing.
…However, the reaction of these moderates to the Taslima incident has confounded me. One can understand their hesitation about turning polemicists on this subject, but one did not expect their disapproval of inflammatory politics and fundamentalist tendencies within the community to be so spiritless.
One did not expect their distress and anger to hide behind the flourish of literary prose. During the crisis, they came across as people walking the tightrope or as trapeze artists swinging and pouring into the opinion of two contradictory worlds — the world they believe in and the world they oppose. Even while they kept their freedom to disagree with the ‘shallow barbs’ of Taslima on the burqa, they could have perhaps been a little more direct and taken a larger view of the reaction-pattern within the community.
…There is one dominant strain in most of these reactions and that is Taslima indulges in a grand disfigurement of the Quran. ‘The Quran actually does not say so’ is the refrain. Let’s assume that Taslima distorts, even that she distorts deliberately, but the question is how does a moderate voice defend a genuine misreading of the Quran? What place does the irreverence of a non-believer have in a moderate’s mind? To what extent would such a mind confront the seclusion and immobility of meaning?
…Here again is another wonderment: Given the freedom and relative anonymity that the Internet as a medium offers, one wonders why the moderate Muslim dithers even here to speak his rational mind. What is this unnatural restraint all about?
…Consider now the response of Fakir Mohammed Katpadi, a well-known fiction writer in Kannada who belongs to the Byary community from the coastal district of Dakshina Kannada. He is not as vague as Rashid is, but his struggle to offend none is obvious. The opening sentences set the tone of the entire piece:
“Knowing pretty well that our people become enraged if their religious beliefs are questioned, I do not understand why our writers behave in this fashion.
.
..At the end there is a piece of cautious advise to his fellow Muslims:
“Instead of giving a fitting reply to criticism, getting on the streets and protesting violently will only give a bad name to the community. We should remember that it will in no way help save the religion.”
What these fitting replies are is not spelled out by Katpadi.
…What is most apparent from this unfortunate incident is that the moderate Muslim intellectual seems to have conceded the role of engaging his community to the religious leader and the politician.