Islam in Crisis - Part 3

# 26

Jihadis killed and mutilated more Kashmiri civilians yesterday.

To support the brutal cutting the throat of a person and expressing delight in the slaughtering of Hindus you should have very good cause.

To what extent do you trust http://www.ummah.org.uk/ to give you full facts about Kashmir?

In response to Urstruly’s post #23, I would like to say that the exchange of ideas even on subjects where you hold different views, is a healthy exercise. I don’t believe anybody has spoken the last word on the origins of the universe or how it will end, if it ever does. The explosion or collapse of our puny planet, the Earth, wouldn’t be the end of the universe although it would certainly end the human life. What science has provided us are the means to test the veracity or truthfulness of a logical statement. For instance, there was a common belief in the past that Earth was flat. Scientific investigations showed otherwise. Unless a scientific statement is supported by actual data, it is not credible. So should all the other statements be. Divine component of all the religions is beyond such a test. It is left then to the individuals to do whatever they want to do with it. Trouble begins and multiplies when a group of people insists that others should believe in such questionable theses as they do. For instance, Imam Ahmad Hanbal believed that God literally does sit on a throne and those who do not believe like him are deviants. Others thought that this was simply an allegorical description. It cannot be reasonably proved or disproved one way or the other. There was a lot of trouble and strife on this issue.

I personally believe that there shouldn’t be any heated debate on such an apocryphal issue. We have no means of knowing with our finite minds what God, the Infinite Being, is? Why should then we argue if He is or isn’t material and does (or doesn’t) sit on a throne?

However, science cannot flourish under the threat of Blasphemy Laws. Science deals with verifiable facts; it doesn’t say any thing about the unverifiable things. But it certainly has shaken the foundation of religion.

Urstruly has also mentioned the limits of human knowledge. True, human knowledge is limited but these limits are movable. We now know a great deal more than our forefathers knew. Will man ever be able to determine the essence of God? It is very unlikely because the definition of God has also changed and keeps on changing with the passage of time. There was a time when God was quite accessible and was there like a good neighbor. He was there whenever man in distress needed him. It can be verified by reading the old scriptures, which also describe a number of epiphanies. Gradually, man has pushed Him yonder and yonder because he wanted his God to remain a mystery and a conundrum. Now God is completely transcendental, beyond our space and time. He is out and beyond our universe and hence our comprehension.

I have written in one of my essays that much of philosophy is rational speculation. Speculation indeed it is.

Talib Saheb:
Thanks for a really enlightening article. Articles like these serve dual purpose - they encourage muslims to think out-of-the-box and they help non-muslims get a better understanding of how islam got to where it is.
p.s. Are you the father of one of the most-liked persons on Chowk?

re: #21 by arjun_m

Despite the gory details narrated by this particular Jihadi, lets not forget that General Haman was a combatant, not a civilian. He chose to participate in India`s suppression of Kashmiris, raping of women, custodial killings and various human rights abuses that continue to this day. You can visit the following link to see a glimpse of how the Hindu occupation force has treated Kashmiri civilians:

http://www.ummah.org.uk/kashmir/atroc/

The rules of armed conflict in Islam are very clear on this. Killing of enemy combatants is legitimate; killing of civilians is not.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

rigtht now Islam is NOT in crisis -- it`s Christian Morality respresent by two WAR CRIMINALS -- BUSH & BLAIR -- that is in Crisis.

sawaale digger... jawabe digger

Folks -- the two MONSTER CRIMINALS are destroying the ancient cpital of Islamic Sciene and Antiquity -- Baghdad -- with MOABS and Daisy Cutters -- and we pathetic Muslims are discussiing Islam --

shame on us

right now we should be discussing -- LETHAL BORN-AGAIN Christianity and its MURDEROUS COLONIALISM -- (I hought we had buried the goddam thing half a century ago)

Today -- it is the British and American CHRISTIANITY that is in CRISIS --

NOT Iraqi ISLAM.

freethinker #22

Good rebuttal. But puting the lives of ancient Islamic scholars or even the article of Mr. Qureshi aside; we may come to a conclusion just by our mere observation that the skeptical world view of science by the religious orthodoxy has come and passed just as it came to the christianity and passed. And since there was never a ``doctrine of infalibility`` in Muslim orthodoxy and never it was organized as that of Christian orthodoxy, it did not have to face the embarassment and later downright anymosity as the christianity faced. The post Darwinism era came and went away probably along with Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. Today the attitudes towards science and technology have changed drastically. Today even those parents who never saw even a primary school want to have first priority for their kids in the field of science and technology. And if the child cannot make it in some field of science and technology, it feels like if an elder has died in the household. Times have changed. It is time that skeptics must change too.

As for Qura`n being created or eternal is more of a question of logic rather than that of philosophy or religiosity. It is exactly as one of the questions that you posed in your last article, which was, ``If God is absolute in all respects, then can He create a stone which even He cannot lift``. The question is no more an enigma. Those who know the science of logic know that this sort of questions fall into logical fallacies called ``circular logic``, where the first part of sentence puts forth a statement and the last part of the sentence is so chosen that it rejects the contention in the first part. Such statements are not a shortcoming or weakness of Divinity, but rather it presents to us the limitations that the science of Logic and Reason has. Which means that the reason and logic can take us only so far and in order to tread into the realm of beleif, you need a total paradigm shift. In other words you cannot do electricians work with the toolset of a plumber or vice versa. Similarly, the question of Qura`n being created or eternal falls into the realm of same catagory of logical fallacies. According to a Hadith, Holy Prophet forbade us to engage in discussions based on logical fallacies. And wouldn`t you agree with me when I said that I fail to see how a debate on Qura`n being created or eternal can uplift the conditions of Muslims, as the author of this article contends?

This is in reference to Urstruly’s post #17 in which he has reproduced a piece by Nadeem Qureshi. Mr. Qureshi raised a couple of interesting questions in his piece. For instance, he asks, “So the Muslims of old drew their inspiration from exactly the same texts that is (are) read today. Why is it then, that working from the same material, they were able to create a civilization that dominated the world, while the Muslims of today remain mired in obscurity and ignorance?”

The Islamic Scientists who advanced the front of the scientific knowledge in medieval times were born factually in the Muslim households but they were not orthodox in their beliefs at all. I had tried to explain this point in my “Skeptical and Counter-Skeptical Trends in Medieval Islam” which was posted on Chowk on November 28, 2002. One of the greatest names among the Muslim medical scientists was Ibn Sina who was declared apostate half a century after his death by Imam al-Ghazali, for his philosophical theories and beliefs. Ibn Sina had preceded al-Razi who was the greatest medical scientist in the world of his time. He regarded the knowledge of Geometry more important than that of the Holy Book. He believed that the Prophets were impostors. Ibn Rushd who was a great Philosopher and whose work is still cherished in the western world had constructed a doctrine of ‘double truth’ to protect himself from the wrath of the orthodox Muslims but could not succeed in doing so. He died in exile. So if one wants to really comprehend what role, if any, religion played in the creative work of the Muslim scientists, one should probe and research into their life stories. I do not mean to suggest that one has to be necessarily an agnostic or atheist in order to do meaningful work. All that I am saying is that many of the scientists, Muslim and non-Muslim, are liberal in their outlook and beliefs and they are not hindered by their religious beliefs, whatever they are.

For instance, if a Muslim scientist wants to contribute meaningfully in Quantum Mechanics, he would most assuredly read and understand the latest work published in the research journals and not go to the Holy Book for new theories and ideas for development pertaining to Quantum Mechanics. Many of us however do believe that the Holy Book is the source of all knowledge. If a Muslim scientist entertains this belief, his definition of ‘knowledge’ will certainly be different from the conventional.

Professor Abdus Salam had a staunch faith in Islam (his brand) and he was a top of the line Quantum Physicist. He drew his inspiration from the spirit of Islam and the Holy Book but for his scientific work, he went back to research journals.

There is some confusion in comprehending the true essence and origin of the Holy Quran also. If it (Quran) is eternal and ‘uncreated’, then it cannot be the word of God because if it is, then it is the creation of God. The only uncreated being in the whole universe is God, as majority of the monotheists believes. It is only God who was not created by any other being and is the creator of every thing. Is Quran included in every thing? If the Holy Quran is eternal and uncreated, then it has to be another God. Is It? Think over it.

But why rake up these old issues? Lot of water has already flowed under the bridge.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Remember,
Ethics and rules listed in the Koran are not a goal in themselves. They are the path to the goal, which is the salvation. This abolishes the concept of absolute ethics, and allows 1.3 billion different interpretations of Islam, all being 1.3 billion different paths to God.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#4: Thank you, `Freethinker`` Mohammad Gill, for your corrrection. You are right while summarizing the Mutazilites` view on the Quran in a very early para of my piece, I erred. I did mean to write that a `created` Quran meant for them a `non-eternal` Quran, and an `uncreated` Quran an `eternal` Quran. My principal point, however, whichTI believe must have come through in my piece, warts and all, was that the Mutazilites believed that the Quran was `created` scripture, therefore `non-eternal`, as against the Asharite view that the Quran was `uncreated` meaning an eternal scripture, in fact one that was co-eternal with God. There are many flaws in thislatter argument which I hope to spell out one day. For the moment, let me say that I have apologised to the editors of Chowk for my egregious error. May I add here that I very much look forward to reading your erudite essays on Chowk from which I derive a great deal of benefit. Rasheed Talib

MU`TAZLEEN, NIETSZCE & MODERN MUSLIMS

The following article pretty much sums up, all that there is regarding the place of Mu`tazleen thought in the modern (Islamic) world. The last paragraph is worth reading. I can attest to that. The thought process is in motion, whether it is Dr. Israr Ahmad`s lecture or a mosque in North America.

-----------



Educating people about religion

By Nadeem Qureshi


Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy in a recent article has referred to Islamic history to argue that a sect called the Mutazilites (Mu`tazila, in Arabic) were responsible for spectacular developments that took place in learning and science from the 8th to the 13th centuries, and that this process came to an end when the Imam Al-Ghazali `spearheaded` the reawakening of `Muslim Orthodoxy.`

However a closer look at Islamic history does not support the conclusions he has reached.

The Mu`tazila were a fringe sect whose origins go back to the Umayyad period when a student of the `Aalim Al-Hassan of Basra separated from him over a question concerning the status of a Muslim who has committed a major sin. And hence the name Mu`tazila comes from the verb `itazila - to separate from, dissociate from etc.

The central plank of the Mu`tazila doctrine hinged on the arcane question of whether the Quran was `created` or `uncreated`. The Mu`tazila held that it was `created` whereas orthodox Islamic doctrine to this day holds that it is `uncreated`.

And so the Mu`tazila remained an obscure fringe sect for more than a century after their founding until caliph Ma`mun succeeded his brother Amin in 813 A.D. Ma`mun strongly embraced the Mu`tazila and made their doctrine a matter of state policy to the extent that an inquisition was set up and people could be flogged, or worse, if they failed to display their allegiance to it. After Ma`mun`s death in 833 A.D. the Mu`tazila lost favour and were declared heretical a few years later by the Caliph Mutawakkil (847 A.D - 861 A.D).

Be that as it may Ma`mum was a man dedicated to learning and science. A story in Ibn Al-Nadeem`s `Fihirist`` relates how he had a dream in which he saw Aristotle sitting on a throne. Following this vision he had an emissary dispatched to the then Roman Emperor to collect as many books on science as he could so that they could be translated. Clearly it was Ma`mun`s personal love of knowledge rather than the views of the Mu`tazila that caused him to strongly sponsor learning.

While it is true that Ma`mun`s reign was a particularly fertile period for science and learning, the same can be said, in general, of the whole Abbasid period which extends from the defeat of the Umayyads, in 750 A.D. to the sack of Baghdad by the Mongols in 1258 AD - a period of 500 years. The proof of this is that some of the greatest scientists of the Abbasid period the likes of Ibn Sina, Al-Razi, Ibn-Al Rushd, Ibn Hayyan, Al-Biruni, and countless more did their work decades or centuries after Ma`mum and the Mu`tazila were distant history.

Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali was born in 1058 A.D., more than two centuries after Ma`moun`s death. He was a man of extraordinary brilliance and had an intense thirst for knowledge. He studied the natural sciences, philosophy and religion and wrote extensively on his research. He had an open mind and was committed to the search for truth. In the end his search led him in 1095 A.D. to embrace Sufism - a tradition that has never been regarded to be part of Islamic orthodoxy. He died in 1111 A.D. The Abbasids continued to rule for another century and a half and learning continued to flourish.

Islamic orthodoxy remained essentially unchanged throughout the Umayyad and Abbasid periods, and indeed remains much the same today. So if we have to seek an explanation for why the Muslims fell behind in learning and science after the 13th century we have to look elsewhere.

One does not have to look further than the Quran and the Hadeeth to see the emphasis that Islam places on learning. The fact that this did not happen earlier - in the Umayyad period for example - is because the Muslims were preoccupied with spreading Islam to the edges of the known world and building an Islamic state. Their work done, the Umayyads left the stage and the Abbasids then focused their attention on learning for half a millennium.

As Muslims seek to find their way in the modern world it is useful for them to bear in mind that the only time in history that they had held a place of influence and power on the world stage was during the Islamic rule of the `Khilafat` - the Umayyads from 661 A.D to 750 A.D. and then the abbasids from 750 A.D. to 1258 A.D.

It is easy for us to blame our backwardness on our adherence to an ancient religion and to ascribe the success of the West to embracing secularism. Yet in the post-colonial period secular governments have ruled most Muslim countries and they have not succeeded in lifting their people out of poverty and backwardness.

Islam has been favoured amongst all the other divine religions by having in its possession a scripture - the Quran - acknowledged to be unchanged from the time it was revealed. And while they cannot match the absolute authority of the Quran, it is generally accepted that the sayings of the Prophet (the Hadeeth) as reported in the two Sahihs - Bukhari and Muslim are authentic.

So the Muslims of old drew their inspiration from exactly the same texts that is read today. Why is it then, that working from the same material, they were able to create a civilization that dominated the world, while the Muslims of today, remain mired in obscurity and ignorance?

This question admits of no simple answers. It is clear however, that there is no going back to the past. Those who believe that a `khilafat` can be re-established - and there are such people - are actually having dreams. But it is also clear at the same time, as we have seen from a cursory glance at our history, that we cannot blame our religion. The fault then rests squarely with us, with our ignorance of what our religion is, of who we are and of where we have to go.

We in Pakistan suffer especially from this ignorance. The sectarian violence of the recent past is ample evidence. People in the Arab world shake their heads in disbelief when they learn of shootings in Pakistani mosques. They just cannot believe that Muslims would kill other Muslims, let alone do it in a place of worship. Gai Eaton refers to the malaise that afflicts us in the introduction to his excellent book `Islam and the Destiny of Man` in which he says: ``Where human beings are concerned, good men and good women are by no means thick on the ground, but vice always pays its tribute to virtue by masquerading behind the mask of religion - or more recently - of some political ideology, and both wickedness and stupidity walk the streets more confidently when decently clothed.``

``It would be foolish``, he continues, ``and, to say the least, counter productive to seek arguments to excuse divisions within the Ummah, wars between Muslim states, the brutality and hypocrisy of certain nationalist leaders, the corrupt practices of the rich or the hysteria of zealots who have forgotten the fundamental (Islamic) law of mercy and the binding obligation (in Islam) to make use of the gift of intelligence.``

Mr Eaton is an Englishman who has become a Muslim. He has written his book to explain Islam to westerners. But it is also written for those Muslims whose minds have been shaped by a western system of education. Those of us who are exposed to this education, either in Pakistan or abroad, develop, without perhaps realizing it, a certain scepticism of all things religious. The system focuses on guaranteeing success in this world. It is not concerned with what may happen in the next.

The most vexing problem we face in Pakistan is unequivocally this: How do we educate our people, the majority of whom are illiterate, about their religion? Literacy is of course of paramount importance and it must be addressed with extreme urgency. But this is a separate issue. Our concern here is with religious knowledge. And the majority of Pakistan`s people get their information about Islam from the Imams of their local mosques. Here we have a problem. Many of these Imams do not have the necessary training or knowledge to inform the people about the truth of Islam. The sectarian upheaval that we now see is a direct consequence of this unfortunate situation.

I attend jum`a prayer at my neighbourhood mosque in a suburb of the city of Dammam. The Imam there is a manager in corporate planning at the Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). He is well versed with the Quran and the Hadeeth. In a typical khutba it is not unusual for him to refer to people such as Freud, Nietzsche, Sartre, to name just a few. It is rare that I emerge from one of his khutbas without having learned something new. Indeed it is an event that I look forward to and ensure that I arrive early to get a good place. How many people in Pakistan would be able to make a similar assertion?

Thanks for taking the time to write about this subject Rasheed Talib.

There is a little bit more to it than this but with the taking over of

``Islamic`` activism by fascists in the past few decades, thanks in part

to the assistance provided to them by the West, Islam has become

a profession instead of a religion.

It is time we go back to religion again.


Ras

#9
Sameer

you had to say something, even if its the most superficial thing to say. I was expecting something more educated from you. FYI, most of these philosophical debates raged at a time when the intellectual center of islam had already moved to `Ajam. The Abbasids, though headquartered in Baghdad, were originally an Ajami phenomena. Add egyptians and Andulusis to the mix and you have a potpourri of philosophies, many of which endured, some as `deviant` as the ex-fatimids Druzes`, and some as puritanical as latter day wahabis..

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts