Reinterpretation of Islam in Turkey

#241 Posted by hamidm2,

Haha .. yeah I remember .... but then it appears he smelled your bacon from afar ...

#240 Posted by tahmed32 o

...while it is considered virtuous to make the propet a de facto and infallible god

Who said so? Muslims certainly don't. I know the sufis say so, which is why I consider them no more than hindus.

zeemax,

..... i am warning you - don't mess with this tehsin character unless you want socrates, plato, the us constitution, the bill of rights, french revolution and the kitchen sink thrown at you ........ the man is an imbecile but he knows the difference between freedom and liberty .....

#235 zeemax: that does not logically follow. I am merely saying what the Quran says - that the prophet is not a god, nor is his business. And while it is considered virtuous to make the propet a de facto and infallible god - this is quite contradictory to what the Quran says, and quite consistent with the way the message of other religions has been corrupted by priests (Jesus never said he was the Savior of Mankind from the original sin, mullah Augistine did that centuries later, nor did Jesus ever claim to be the son of God - all he said was that religion is about love for fellow humans).

#237 Posted by TehsinA

In Islam there is no concept of liberty ...

This is such an ignorant remark that it is quite amazing. Is it intentionally so for some reason?

Zeemax:

No my friend, this is one of the usual suspects. I guess, I should blame it on Chowk’s incompetence, for whatever reason whenever I go to sign in, my ID of Tehsinabbasi is coming as unrecognizable. I emailed their help desk but got tired of waiting for their response which hasn’t come as yet. So I figured I’d set up a new ID. I could’ve pretended to be Bluemax or Zaro, but you know me I hate pretenses.

TAhmad:

I am glad that you have defined Islam for yourself, but that is an individual interpretation not shared by the billion plus throng. So unless you plan an evangelizing mission (a reformation movement) it will be restricted to yourself. The question becomes, could any such mission how ever carefully crafted succeed?

I have observed one such heroic attempt by Mr. Ghamdi, who has put an “enlightened moderation” hue to this dilemma. But as he continues to dig deeper to find answers to never ending questions, he ends up looking like the rest of the so called ulemas who selectively quote the Quran for their particular point of view.

The real trouble why I say that the reformation window is closed is the fact that humanity has moved on. The values that inspire the world today are those of liberty and justice. Every where you go this is the battle cry of the “unwashed masses”. In Islam there is no concept of liberty, there is a concept of freedom which is also defined in a very limited sense, meaning an absence of slavery. As far as justice goes, the only couple of times that the Quran mentions justice it is in terms of the Judgement Day when God will administer justice. Selectively broadening these areas interferes both with truth and justice.

#234 Posted by tahmed32

"my" definition of Islam is not dependent on how some other individual (even the sahaba or even the prophet himself ... he was honest in conveying the message as he understood it ... I see the Quran placing severe limits on the prophet himself on matters of religion ...

Hmm ... it appears hamidm2 is right after all. You ARE vying for some sort of prophet hood indeed!

further to #234 also note that there was a "communication link" between what the prophet said and what the scribes wrote years after his death. Thus, while no doubt the closest source we have of the religious experience the prophet had, one would have to be intellectually dishonest to claim that what is written in the Quran is the precise words that were narrated to the prophet. As for the sunnah and hadith not to mention the gazillions of other traditions built up over the years - the less said the better. Why would I want to follow traditions set in primitive societies driven by kingships (the acronym for dictatorshop) and individual struggles for power in the name of religion?

So, when reading the Quran, I take into account all these factors. I look for what the Quran consistently emphasizes, I keep in mind that it was directed towards people living in the 7th century - and so look at the direction the Quran points towards keeping this in mind.

And thus, the Quran points towards individual responsibility, rationality, scientific interest (the essential contribution of the Quran in fact, per John Huston in "The Worlds Religions"_ and good cheer to fellow humans.

And that makes me very comfortable with being a muslim. Because I am no longer a slave to tradition or to any man - only to my own sense of responsibility.

Hope this helps. :-) now to do some work..

#232 ok, that helps and thanks for the explanation.

So, as I understand it, you accept my right to define Islam "as it means to me". That is all I am saying.

As I said to dost mittar below - I dont really care if I am the only person on earth who thinks that Islam is about "individual responsibility before God to distinguish between right and wrong and to do the right thing."

If someone wishes to define Islam as being a pact with the devil or a bunch of superstitions - that is fine too. one man's green is indeed another man's red, just as one man's meat is indeed another man's poison.

Note though that "my" definition of Islam is not dependant on how some other individual (even the sahaba or even the prophet himself) interpreted it - and thus I dont need to cherry pick muslim history for examples. All I need to do is go to read the Quran and try to understand it to the best of my abilities.

Having done that, I am very comfortable in my belief that the prophet had some kind of a religious experience in the cave, and that he was honest in conveying the message as he understood it (and the letter I am comfortable with because I see the Quran placing severe limits on the prophet himself on matters of religion - if the prophet wanted to use religion for political power, he would never add such a thing.

Re: # 229

I don't think there is any special need here to celebrate the loss of human life...

Re: # 231

In your previous interacts, you are the one who defined Islam, "as it means to you, i.e., tahmed". Clear so far...
I accept that and fully agree with you...NOT your definition of Islam BUT what it means to YOU...
Here is the point: what "something" means to you, doesn't necessarily mean the same to someone else... or does it?
What I am trying to say is, you can make a broad enough and inclusive enough "definition" of practically anything in life, that doesn't make it universally acceptable as THAT VERY THING to someone else...more confused?

to put it more simply, what you perceive as green, maybe someone elses's red..

As far as me agreeing with your definitions, no I don't. Islam is how it is defined by the teachings of the "Quran and Sunnah", and the subsequent collective historical experience derived from various attempts at implementing those teachings; very few true success stories there...if you can cherry pick a few to suit your needs or pride, they are the result of "the human" inside and not exclusive to anything Islamic...

#230 i am confused now in what you are saying, so help me please: first, do you agree or disagree with my definition of islam?

Re: # 224

By the way, I am NOT defining anything here, let alone Islam. I am only using YOUR definitions as in the interacts mentioned...

#226 Posted by akcheema on March 4, 2008 4:43:53 am


I wonder how that would be re-interpreted through the eyes of history


people will write poems about it...


roses are red
violets are blue
the jihadis you created
are now killing you

Re: # 224

I thought I had....what did you think after reading my contributions?