-
A kind of experimentI have been reading a fair few articles by and interviews with Ibn Warraq and I want to test out one of his hypotheses. Warraq believes that, in large part because of the legacy of Edward Said, Western academics, journalists and commentators more generally find it difficult to criticise Islam and that “charges of "Islamophobia" are hurled at those who dare to criticize that most criticizable of all religions.” To see if this really is the case I have been putting up posters that could be seen as critical of Islam around my neighbourhood with my email attached, to see what kind of responses I might get. Here is a selection of the posters - I would be fascinated to hear your responses to them:Voted for by Alexander Hine.
"Words of Wisdom from the Religion of Peace:
Sura iv: 34 - Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, & because they spend of their property (for the support of women).
So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that
which Allah hath guarded.
As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them & banish them to beds apart; and beat them.
Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted, Great.
1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong!
…
Words of Wisdom from the Religion of Peace:
Sura v: 51 - Believers! take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends. They are friends with one another.
Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number. Allah does not guide the wrongdoers.
Sura iv: 101 - The unbelievers are your sworn enemies.
Sura lx:4 - We renounce you (i.e. the idolaters): enmity and hate shall reign between us until you believe in Allah
only…
1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong!
…
Words of Wisdom from the Religion of Peace:
Sura ix: 5-6 - "Kill those who join other gods with God wherever you may find them."
Sura viii: 12 - "I will instill terror into the hearts of the Infidels, strike off their heads then, and strike off from them every fingertip."
Sura viii: 39-42 - "Say to the Infidels: If they desist from their unbelief, what is now past shall be forgiven them; but if they return to it, they have already before them the doom of the ancients!
Fight then against them till strife be at an end, and the religion be all of it God's."
1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong!
…
Words of Wisdom from the Religion of Peace:
Prime Minister Mahathir, to the 10th Islamic Summit Conference, 2003:
The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million. But today the Jews rule this world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them…
They invented and successfully promoted Socialism, Communism, human rights and democracy so that persecuting them would appear to be wrong; so they may enjoy equal rights with others…
Of late because of their power and their apparent success they have become arrogant. And arrogant people, like angry people will make mistakes, will forget to think.
They are already beginning to make mistakes…There may be windows of opportunity for us now and in the future.
We must seize these opportunities.
1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong!
…
Words of Wisdom from the Religion of Peace:
Sura ix: 29 - Fight against such of those to whom the Scriptures were given as believe neither in God nor the Last Day, who do not forbid what God and His apostle have forbidden , and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued.
…
Muhammad to his followers:
“Kill any Jew that falls into your power.”
(from the biography of the prophet by Ibn Ishaq.)
1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong!"
…
So, what do you think of these. Are you offended? and if so, are you offended by what I’ve done or the way I’ve presented these quotes, or by the quotes themselves?
I would be interested to know, I want to believe that Ibn Warraq is wrong about people in the west, I want to believe that we do have the balls to defend our own culture and criticise others’ when they encourage violence, misogyny and hatred. Now, before you get any big ideas – I am not attacking Muslims. You might have noticed that in the posters, I make no comments on the texts, I simply present them to the audience. This is so that I can see what it is that offends people – if it is the text itself, then their problem is with the Qur’an and other Islamic sources, if it is with me or the way I have presented the texts – then they’ll have to explain what exactly I have written that is offensive. Now, the “1.3 billion Muslims can’t be wrong” line might be taken as offensive, but it is just a comic touch and, in fact, is either true (if one believes in the Qur’an, then Muslims aren’t wrong) or it is ironic (coming, as it does, after an offensive piece of text and obviously implying its own opposite).
Well, let’s see what people be saying, thinking, drinking. Give me your answers and your dancers. Throw at me opinions and womens….was that a stretch? Oh yes! No Rhyme!
A. Hine
Adding your reply:
Registration is required because of issues with spam. It is fast and free! This author would LOVE to get a comment from you, please join!
Crazyhead
July 24
religion is dirty mate.... it lacks the ability to evolve with society and it creates a sort of social atrophy... and in many cases moral atrophy... american christians said many of the same things in the 50's.... some still do...
July 24
no,
You are wrong. You could not do the same with the bible in general. You could (perhaps and very carefully) do the same with the old testament, not with the new testament; And there is an enormous difference between the two. And even then it would not be the same, the muslims believe that the koran is the literal word of God. Neither Jews nor Christians believe that.So the difference is that, as you said, Islam lacks the ability to evolve with society, while christianity and Judaism do not. You can see this very clearly, by the way
As for "Insert any other large religious text," have you even ever read Budhist or Hindu scriptures? Differences between the religions are huge at certain points.
cosmosis
July 24
Don't forget that Islam once had a golden age where hundreds of schools of thought flourished and debate over the true meaning of the Qu'ran was the norm. It was because of this fluidity that the Muslim world was able to produce many scientific advancements during this time (approx the same time of the middle ages in Europe). This ideology of debate, critical thinking, and interpretation was known as "ijtihad" and is actually promoted by the Qu'ran. However over time a more conservative stronghold took over and it became the norm to abandon ijtihad.
I would also like to say that even though all these verses are indeed true, there are also verses in the Qu'ran that "counteract" these in a way. Yes the Qu'ran is very misogynistic but it also has some very hopeful passages towards women such as the fact that they are allowed to keep their own hard-earned cash, create a prenuptial agreement, and not get married if they choose not to, among other things. The same can be said of many other issues. Is the Qu'ran really against homosexuality? Or is it merely against the act of anal sex (the two are not synonymous) or even further is it only against the act of anal sex as a form of rape?
There is hope for Islam. It is not Islam that is bad but the Muslims who have corrupted it. All that is "wrong" with Islam can be said of Judaism and Christianity (the Torah/Bible instructs us to kill witches, etc) the difference is that Christians and Jews have come up with (legitimate) interpretations of their holy scriptures to bring their respective religions into the 21st century. Islam has the capability of doing the same thing, but first the Muslim community itself needs to change.
The Qu'ran itself states in Chapter 13, verse 11 that "God does not change the condition of a people, until they change what is in themselves."
Look up Irshad Manji. She is a godsend to the religion of Islam whose main goal is to get Muslims to once again embrace Ijtihad and to do away with the rampant dogma that has taken over the Islamic world and replace it with true faith and understanding.
July 25
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Islam did indeed have a “golden age” and the fruits of this time helped the west greatly, giving back to us much of our Greek heritage that was lost. Again, a renaissance of this more reflective Islam is urgent today.
It is interesting that you point out the issue of misogyny, I read a good book that argued that comparative to pre-Islamic Arabian society, women were well-treated under Islamic rule (though there is much to suggest this is propaganda). This would be a good sign if it could be taken as a starting point for further emancipation – again, the problem comes from the fact that the Qur’an is seen by Muslims as the final word of God and Muhammad as the ideal embodiment of what a man should be. This means that, far from being a starting point, the minor improvements made by Muhammad (if such they were) must be seen as the best women can ever hope for. A life of obedience, inequality, injustice and divinely sanctioned violence.
You are right, there is hope for Islam – a start would be the abolishment of Sharia law, the separation of church and state in Islamic thought, the renouncing of imperialist ambition, recognising Israel, emancipating women, and rejecting or radically reinterpreting all violent and misogynistic passages of the Qur’an, Hadith and commentaries….it’s a big job, early to rise early to bed.
I will indeed look up Irshad Manji, I would be interested to read her thought and ideas on these matters
Thanks for the tip
A. H.
Alexander Hine
August 1
A. H.
cosmosis
August 1
I'm trying to get a hold of her PBS documentary "Faith Without Fear", it's supposed to be really interesting as well.
Alexander Hine
August 4
Edit | Reply
Crazyhead
July 24
actually.... i could do the same with the bible.... and i have....
"And even then it would not be the same, the muslims believe that the koran is the literal word of God. Neither Jews nor Christians believe that."
what christians and jews are you hanging out with?
99% of christians are under the impression that the bible is still the word of god.... and is to be taken psudo-literally... (by psudo i mean that many say it should be literal, but are lazy and pick and choose what to take)....
"Hasn't Christianity been going uphill since the middle ages? The same goes for Judaism. Islam is a different matter..."
so because a religion changes to fit the times it is somehow better? change in religion means corruption.... islam has remained reletively free of corruption for a good while... unlike christianity....
"As for "Insert any other large religious text," have you even ever read Budhist or Hindu scriptures? Differences between the religions are huge at certain points"
what?
i WAS a budhist, first of all...
second of all.... if we are going to include religions with SMALL scriptures in my comment about LARGE scriptures.... then i simply cannot rebuttle that.....
i said "large scripture" budhism, taoism, shinto.... these have large collections of small scriptures but they all lack a single large unifying scripture..... that large unifying scripture being the fulcrum of the arguement....
July 25
Edit | Reply
I did not say that it isn't the word of God, merely not the "Literal" word of God. I agree with you that many pick what should be taken literally. But is there any harm in that?
"so because a religion changes to fit the times it is somehow better?"
Do you really mean to say, that it has NOT gone uphill since middle ages? I find it very difficult to accept that there is more corruption now (though of course there's still corruption) than five hundred years ago.
"i WAS a budhist, first of all..."
My apologies if I offended you, that was not my intention.
"i said "large scripture" budhism, taoism, shinto.... these have large collections of small scriptures but they all lack a single large unifying scripture....."
It seems I misunderstood what you meant, sorry. What would you then, beside the Torah, Bible, Qu'ran, find a large scripture?
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
As for your point about small and large scriptures, this is mere semantics – it is also irrelevant and incorrect. The Torah is a collection of texts written by many different authors, and edited and re-arranged over time, the New Testament is exactly the same (recall the council of Nicea?), there is even evidence that the Qur’an is a roughly cobbled together collection of esoteric texts. That aside, what possible difference could it make whether we are speaking about small or large scriptures…wouldn’t the important point be that teachings within the texts not the size of them? Until you explain the relevance of that point I shall declare it nonsense and sneeze at it!
A. H.
Weydon
July 25
Curiously you say the Old Testament could be used to show a barbaric society, but then also say Judaism is "going uphill". Judaism IS the Old Testament more or less. The only reason you think Islam CAN'T move is because you're bias by media exposure, and not exposed to enough actual Muslims. The Torah, the Bible, and the Koran are ALL self-insisting on being the literal truth, and they were all written by men many years ago. Perhaps there was a divine spark in some of it, perhaps some of it was based on true events, but they are ALL subject the corruption of men. It doesn't mean there's nothing worth taking from them today, and that they can't exist today without being womanizing barbarians.
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Now do the same experiment with the Qur’an and your examples of Muslims.
As I’ve heard it said – ‘don’t judge the Muslims you know by Islam, and don’t judge Islam by the Muslims you know.’
Judaism is the Old Testament? That’s quite novel…I suppose we can forget about Rashi, Maimonides and all the rabbis and teachers then? And Jesus too I suppose, that tragic Jew of Palestine.
Judaism is NOT the Old Testament, just as Islam is NOT the Qur’an; Judaism and Islam are societies/civilisations/religions that have their basis in these texts. As such, the Old Testament should be seen through the religion based on it and through Jewish in terpretations of it; likewise with Islam. Islam, sadly, must be seen at least partially through the lens of terrorism and imperialist violence – which are perfectly legitimate outgrowths of traditional interpretations of Islam.
Of course, Islam can change, but we should not pretend that this is just a matter of superficial adjustments – rather it is a matter of radical reformation, a reformation that I believe is beginning even now.
A. H.
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
As for who takes their Holy books ‘literally’ (this term is tricky) and who doesn’t, it’s a mixed bag – there are members of all faiths who do so, and those who do not. However, as I note below, Christianity and Judaism have long and continuing traditions of reinterpreting and critiquing their texts (Christian fundamentalism is a fairly aberrant, modern development), Islam has such a tradition, but it is very much on the fringes and has been so historically.
Islam doesn’t lack the ability to evolve with society as a matter of necessity but rather of contingency. There was once a strong rationalist tradition in Islam, a drive towards reinterpretation of the Qur’an in light of rationality and changing social circumstances, but it was quelled fairly early on. But of course, there are vestiges of this tradition in the Islamic world which, insh’Allah, shall be nurtured and grow in the future (one of the reasons I am critiquing Islam myself).
Christianity and Judaism have indeed been improving since the middle ages (though there are pockets of regression in Christianity, particularly in the US) – both have long and eminent traditions of scrutinizing their religious texts in the harsh light of reason, culminating in the higher Biblical criticism of the 18th Century, and the eminently ‘modern’ works of Spinoza in the 17th. And, yes, Islam has generally been going downhill for a long time – but it is darkest before the dawn, as they say.
You are also spot on about the Buddhist and Hindu counterexamples (I would also include Bah’ai), crazyhead’s critique of your point is misguided – as I’ll try to show below.
A. H.
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
Alexander Hine
July 27
Edit | Reply
A.H.
Weydon
July 27
Christianity has a long history of misogyny and discrimination, even into the modern days. What do I think makes someone a Christian? Loving your neighbor and all that, yes. But that's not what the Nazi's, KKK, and the Catholic church covering up for pedophiles have been done.
The Old Testament is Judaism as the Koran is Islam and the Bible is Christianity. Of course they all have other things going on in their faith and history, but that's the books they follow. There's some translation differences here and there, but it's the faith they follow. Jesus was a Jew but has nothing to do with the Jewish faith.
Alexander Hine
August 4
Edit | Reply
Likewise Islam is not the Qur'an only, but also the commentaries by Muslim thinkers, an example of which I gave in my original post (Al Ghazali (one of the most revered Muslim thinkers) on women). Unfortunately, the majority of Muslim exegesis has puched the violent, misogynistic aspects of the religion and done little to nothing to ameliorate them.
….So, no I am not contradicting myself.
Christianity does indeed have such a history. All of which appears aberrant in light of Christianity's own teachings. Terrorism, on the other hand, does not seem out of kilter with what we read in the Qur'an and other texts about killing for the sake of Allah's empire etc. (think of Muhammad massacring 600 men from the Quraysh tribe of Jews by beheading because they would not submit to his rule.
"The Old Testament is Judaism as the Koran is Islam and the Bible is Christianity. Of course they all have other things going on in their faith and history, but that's the books they follow."
You got to the key point at the end – those are the books they follow. What you should really say is those are the books from which their culture flows, modern Christianity, for example, owes more to Thomas Aquinas than to whoever sat down and wrote the gospels, but there would be no Aquinas without the gospels.
"Jesus was a Jew but has nothing to do with the Jewish faith."
Not quite. He was a very devout Jew and there has of late been something of a flowering amongst many Jewish thinkers in appreciation for Jesus' significance to Jewish history (so tied up with Jewish faith).
Okay. I think we're actually in agreement. We both want Islam to reform, maybe you just don't want to admit how dire the need for reform really is. I dunno.
A. Hine.
cosmosis
July 27
So, both the Sharia and the Hadith are the brain children of fallible men who based them on their interpretations of the Qu'ran. So when the Sharia says that the penalty for stealing or something is 100 lashes/death,etc, remember that these are not God's words but the words of interpretors.
It is a fact that violent verses exist in the Qu'ran, just as they do in the Torah and the Bible (the new testament isn't just the Gospels after all). They are not the problem. The problem lies with moderate muslims who deny that the terrorists are pulling out these violent passages from the Qu'ran to justify their wrong-doings. So many moderates will be quick to say "Islam has nothing to do with it! These terrorists are completely un-Islamic." However, what they should be doing is recognizing that these terrorists are using Islam for their own doings and throw counter verses back at them. They need to fight them with scripture.
For example, the Qu'ran says "the ink of the scholar is more valuable than the blood of a martyr" which would be perfect for knocking some sense into these suicide bombers. But as long as moderates don't stand up for their religion, terrorists will be pulling out the verses that say that martyrs will get 72 virgins without any one saying anything to the contrary.
So it's not about reforming Islam, it's about getting people to once again reflect on their religion. As I mentioned earlier, Itjihad is an Islamic practice of using critical thinking to interpret the Qu'ran and resulted in numerous schools of thought. Islam has become over the years very rigid due to dogma. This is why there is such an uproar whenever someone criticizes Islam. It's because dogma is fragile and will collapse under scrutiny. Only when muslims begin interpreting their religion for themselves and not waiting for dogma instilling clerics to do it for them will Islam be able to once again grow and flourish and criticism won't be as threatening as it is now.
Alexander Hine
August 4
Edit | Reply
I basically agree with you, except that you (perplexingly) deny that Islam is in need of reform and then go on to describe how such a reform might take place. Are you sure you understand what you're saying?
"nly when muslims begin interpreting their religion for themselves and not waiting for dogma instilling clerics to do it for them will Islam be able to once again grow and flourish and criticism won't be as threatening as it is now."
Sounds like a case study in religious reformation to me…but then, I am Australian and the sun sometimes gets to me J
One more point: The problem with simply throwing peaceful verses back at terrorists is that verses of violence tend to outweigh them – this is why I think radical schools of thought are needed in the Islamic world, which are willingly to simply reject portions of the Qur'an as tied to another historical period, and no longer relevant. There is simply no way to make some of the verses I quoted above mean anything peaceful without outright falsification.
Weydon
July 29
Bravo
Those were excellent points cosmosis!cosmosis
August 1
Edit | Reply
Please register or login to comment! It's totally free