Reforming Islam: Thoughts on its future – Economist Review

2015/04/18 Leave a comment

More on Hirsi Ali’s latest book from The Economist (earlier NYTimes Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s ‘Heretic’):

Unfortunately, very few Muslims will accept Ms Hirsi Ali’s full-blown argument, which insists that Islam must change in at least five important ways. A moderate Muslim might be open to discussion of four of her suggestions if the question were framed sensitively. Muslims, she says, must stop prioritising the afterlife over this life; they must “shackle sharia” and respect secular law; they must abandon the idea of telling others, including non-Muslims, how to behave, dress or drink; and they must abandon holy war. However, her biggest proposal is a show-stopper: she wants her old co-religionists to “ensure that Muhammad and the Koran are open to interpretation and criticism”.

Hearing this last argument, a well-educated Muslim would probably give an answer like this: “If ‘criticism’ means denying that Muhammad was God’s final messenger, who delivered the Koran under divine inspiration, then it would be more honest to propose leaving Islam entirely—because without those beliefs, we would have nothing left.”

To put the point another way, if there is to be any chance that Muslims can be persuaded to set aside premodern ideas about law, war and punishment, the persuader will not be a sophisticated secularist; it is more likely to be somebody who fervently believes in the divine origins of the Koran, but is able to look at it again and extract from its words a completely fresh set of conclusions.

Reforming Islam: Thoughts on its future | The Economist.

Filed under Religion Tagged with ,

Reza Aslan explains why it’s fine to blame ISIS on Islam — and why Islamophobes still have it wrong

2015/04/09 Leave a comment

Reasonable words and reminders:

“But that’s not very helpful,” he added, “and it’s also not true. A Muslim is whoever says he’s a Muslim. A Christian is whoever says he’s a Christian. A Jew is anyone who says he’s a Jew. If you are saying that this is your identity, and you are acting according to your identity, then we should probably take your word for it. Because it’s not helpful to say ‘no, that has nothing to do with religion,’ because like it or not, these actions are being done in the name of a specific religion.”

“How do we confront that?” Aslan asked. “The knee-jerk response is just to blame religion. If ISIS is killing in the name of Islam, then it’s Islam’s fault. But that’s just a very simple and unsophisticated way of thinking.”

“Listen,” he continued. “I am totally fine with you blaming Islam for ISIS. If you want to place the responsibility for ISIS on Islam, that’s fine with me — as long as you also credit Islam for the people who are fighting ISIS. For while it is true that ISIS are Muslims, it’s also true that so are the tens of thousands who are battling them, and the tens of thousands of victims of ISIS. They’re all Muslim too.”

“So if ISIS is Muslim, and the people they are killing are Muslim, and the people who are fighting ISIS are Muslim — what does that say about Islam?”

“Not much, actually,” he said, answering his own question. “Nothing much, nothing you can make some grand generalization about. If you want to blame religion for all of the bad things that religion does, fine. As long as you are willing to credit religion for all the good things religion does.”

“Of course, that’s usually not the case.”

Reza Aslan explains why it’s fine to blame ISIS on Islam — and why Islamophobes still have it wrong.

Filed under Religion Tagged with ,

Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s ‘Heretic’ – NYTimes.com

2015/04/06 1 Comment

Good review of Hirsi Ali’s latest book, “Heritic:”

In “Heretic,” Hirsi Ali forgoes autobiography for the most part in favor of an extended argument. But she has trouble making anyone else’s religious history — even that of Muhammad himself, whose life story she recounts — as dramatic as she has made her own. And she loses the reader’s trust with overblown rhetoric. Many Muslim immigrants in the West grapple with conflicted identities, she writes, leaving them longing for one extreme or another in the pursuit of certainty. She wonders: “Must all who question Islam end up leaving the faith, as I did, or embracing violent jihad?” (Probably not.) She tries to warn Americans about their naïveté in the face of encroaching Islamic influences, maintaining that officials and journalists, out of cultural sensitivity, sometimes play down the honor killings that occur in the West. But it is safe to say there is no shortage of horrified fascination in the topic; she even cites a 3,000-word Time magazine article that, in fact, spelled out every tragic detail of one of her examples.

When Hirsi Ali writes, almost wistfully, that “it is unrealistic to expect a mass exodus from Islam,” even secular readers may begin to wonder if she is their best guide to understanding the religion. (A suitable subtitle for “Heretic” might be: “How to Be a Muslim, if You Must.”)

Unquestionably, Hirsi Ali poses challenging questions about whether American liberals should be fighting harder for the rights of Muslim women in countries where they are oppressed, and she is fearless in using shock tactics to jump-start a conversation. Blasphemy is an essential part of any religious reform, she argues, and defends her right to speak bluntly. “I have taken an enormous risk by answering the call for self-reflection,” Hirsi Ali has said, in response to critics who find her tone abrasive. “I have been convinced more than ever that I must say it in my way only and have my criticism.” There is no denying that her words are brave. Whether they are persuasive is another matter.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s ‘Heretic’ – NYTimes.com.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , ,

Muslim Women Are Fighting To Redefine Islam as a Religion of Equality | TIME

2015/03/30 Leave a comment

More on some of those pushing for reform within Islam and a more modern and egalitarian interpretation of the texts:

[Zainah] Anwar [director of the global Muslim women’s organization Musawah—Arabic for ‘equality’] was addressing a packed auditorium at the University of London’s School of Oriental and Asiatic Studies for the release of a powerful new weapon for Islamic gender warriors: a book examining how a single verse in the Quran became the basis for laws across the Islamic world asserting Muslim men’s authority—and even superiority—over women. In Men in Charge?, scholars tackle what Musawah has dubbed “the DNA of patriarchy” in Islamic law and custom: the thirty-fourth verse in the fourth chapter of the Quran, among the most hotly debated in the Islamic scripture. The English translations of the verse vary, but one popular one conveys the mainstream takeaway: “Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend their property [for the support of women.]”

For centuries, male jurists have cited 4:34 as the reason men have control over their wives and the female members of their family. When a wife doesn’t want to have sex, but feels she should submit to her husband, this sense of duty derives from the concept of qiwamah—male authority—derived from Verse 4:34. When a Nigerian wife reluctantly has to agree to her husband taking a second or third wife, this is qiwamah in action, notes the book. The concept of qiwamah “is one of the most flagrant misconceptions to have shaped the Muslim mind over the centuries,” Moroccan Islamic scholar Asma Lamrabet writes. “It assumes that the Quran has definitively decreed the absolute authority of the husband over his wife, and for some, the authority of men over all women.”

While the overall message of the Quran is unchanging, say Muslim reformers, new generations must find their own readings of the sacred texts. As it stands, Islamic fiqh, or jurisprudence, was largely forged during the medieval period, when women’s roles and the concept of marriage and male authority were very different. Why, they ask, should the way that 10th-century Baghdadi men read the Quran dictate the rights of a 21st-century woman? To the reactionaries who charge that these reformers are deviating from Islam, Islamic feminists point out that there is a difference between Islamic jurisprudence—a man-made legal scaffolding developed for the specific conditions of medieval Muslim life—and the divine law itself, which is eternal, unchanging and calls for justice. It’s not the Quran they question, but how particular interpretations of it have hardened into truth. “The problem has never been with the text, but with the context,” legal anthropologist Ziba Mir-Hosseini told the Musawah seminar.

Muslim Women Are Fighting To Redefine Islam as a Religion of Equality | TIME.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , ,

Opinion: Manifesto for a modern Islam

2015/02/25 Leave a comment

Debate within the Muslim communities on reformation and modernity:

In a clearly formulated manifesto last week, four well-known Muslim intellectuals appealed to all Muslim political and religious leaders to stand up and support a democratic Islam. In their letter, they also laid out some concrete steps, among them a conference in France early next year that would “define the contours of a progressive interpretation of Islam firmly grounded in the 21st century.”

The four men behind this letter are Tariq Ramadan, professor of contemporary Islamic studies at the University of Oxford; Anwar Ibrahim, the head of Malaysia’s national opposition and chairman of the World Forum for Muslim Democrats; Ghaleb Bencheikh, the president of the World Conference for Religions for Peace; and Felix Marquardt, founder of the Abd al-Raḥman al-Kawakibi Foundation. They’re hard on their fellow Muslims and ask tough questions. In their letter, they call for a clear-eyed diagnosis of Islam’s current plight and want to develop a fundamental critique of Islamic culture and religion.

The authors rightly ask, for example: Why have the regular calls for “an Islamic Renaissance” largely gone unanswered? Why did the “uncompromising critical analysis of the Quran and the prophetic traditions,” launched at the beginning of the 20th century, not lead to a lasting Islamic path to modernity? Why are innovative reformers who are looking for a connection between modernity and Islamic norms and values often forced to stand on the edge of society, fighting a losing battle?

Opinion: Manifesto for a modern Islam | Europe | DW.DE | 22.02.2015.

And from the Manifesto:

We must take ISIS’s and Boko Haram’s claims to be practicing a rigorous Islam seriously: suggesting simply that terrorist acts committed in the name of Islam have nothing to do with Islam is not serious. The accusations brought against the ‘silent majority’ of Muslims as a result of the actions of these terrorist groups may be unjust, but they must be addressed. Once and for all, we must let the barbarous murderers who justify their crimes in the name of Islam know: when they attack anyone, they are attacking us Muslims, our faith and values, first and foremost.

Muslim opinion leaders must be aware of their crucial responsibility in this area. If we do not want Islam to be permanently hijacked, it is our duty to constantly advocate moderation and a reformist approach to issues of religious education, governance, the rule of law, freedom of expression and the protection of fundamental liberties while taking a clear stand on the interpretation of scriptural sources (ijtihâd).

Those who want to divide humanity use uneducated shortcuts to associate Islam and barbarism and imply that there is an intrinsic violence in our religion, a natural solidarity between Muslims and terrorists. They imply that Islam is intrinsically incompatible with democracy.

In reality the vast majority of Muslims reject violence. And when freedom and democracy suffer, they suffer too, just as Buddhists, Sikhs, Christians or Jews do. The enemy is not our neighbour who goes to the synagogue, the church, or the temple. The real peril lies elsewhere: it is in the withdrawal, the ignorance, and the stigmatisation of the other; it is in the prejudices that drive us apart when we should be joining together as humans.

The time has come to turn the tables on the hijackers and set a new course for Islam in the 21st century. Our future, as peace-loving Muslim democrats, is at stake.

Muslim Democrats of the World, Unite!

Filed under Religion Tagged with , , ,

How Obama thinks about Islam and terrorism: Why he chooses his words so carefully.

2015/02/23 Leave a comment

William Saletan’s analysis of the careful and nuanced thoughts behind Obama’s recent speeches on Islam and terrorism – his take on the 10 points of Obama’s strategy:

  1. Today’s terrorism is overwhelmingly Muslim, and its roots pervade the Muslim world.
  2. Our enemies want us to associate them with Islam.
  3. We must choose our language to thwart the enemy’s strategy.
  4. The links between Islam and terrorism are partial, manufactured, and severable.
  5. The president should bend over backward not to call out Muslims for terrorism.
  6. The enemy isn’t Islam or religion. The enemy is religious violence.
  7. We should talk about Muslim victims of terrorism.
  8. We should talk about Muslims who fight terrorism.
  9. Muslims have a greater responsibility to fight terrorism, because they have a greater stake in it.
  10. The rest of us need the help of Western Muslims.

Worth reading and sharp contrast to the Canadian government approach of playing politics (where the only public point of agreement appears to be the first one).

How Obama thinks about Islam and terrorism: Why he chooses his words so carefully..

Filed under Radicalization, Religion Tagged with , ,

Fear Inc.: Behind the $57 Million Network Fueling Islamophobia in the U.S.

2015/02/16 Leave a comment

Interesting short video on some of the forces behind anti-Islam and anti-Muslim messaging (under 2 minutes):

 

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , ,

Islamic poets wrote their own crude irreverent satire, centuries before Charlie Hebdo

2015/02/07 Leave a comment

Always good to know history:

Intolerance of satire is not intrinsic to Islamic civilization. In fact, Islamic history bears its own tradition of irreverent writing on religious imagery. One of the most influential and lauded (though not uncontroversial) Arabic poets of all time, Abu Nuwas, regularly employed sexually graphic and borderline blasphemous imagery in his own brand of “Islamic satire” that resonates to this day.

Writing from Baghdad during the zenith of the Abbassid period — the Islamic empire that lasted from roughly the mid-8th to mid-13th centuries — Abu Nuwas drew on profane and offensive imagery as a way to subvert the authority of the caliph and mock the excesses of the court. Despite his critique of those in power, he himself was a court poet, providing him with an elite audience.

Often, his words directly targeted the institutions of Islam. In one colorful verse, for example, he calls sodomy the “true jihad.” Playing on the meaning of the word “Islam” as submission (to God), he draws on the word’s sexual connotations to suggest that Muslims should get non-Muslims to “submit” through sex.

In another of his verses, two young boys fall in love, and in lieu of praying five times, they fornicate five times a day when the Muslim call to prayer. Such a perversion of the religious pillars makes Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons tame by comparison.

A few centuries later, an Andalusian poet and disciple of Abu Nuwas, Ibn Sahl, composed a poem describing his conversion from Judaism to Islam as the choice to take a new lover. Seeming to violate the sanctity surrounding profane depictions of the Prophet, he writes, “I abandoned the love of Moses, to adore Muhammad.”

Is this depiction of prophet as lover less offensive than a cartoon promising readers “100 lashes if they don’t die of laughter”? Or a drawing of a woman running nude with a Burqa protruding from her rear? Both juxtapose religious imagery with the irreverent and profane in order to comment on the status quo.

Islamic poets wrote their own crude irreverent satire, centuries before Charlie Hebdo – The Washington Post.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , , ,

The Women’s Mosque evolves North American Islam – Sheema Khan

2015/02/06 Leave a comment

North American innovation:

Sana Muttalib and M. Hasna Maznavi, co-founders of the Women’s Mosque of America, should be lauded for taking the bold and pragmatic step of providing a vehicle for Muslim women’s empowerment. The goal is to complement existing institutions and provide women with the necessary tools to make a difference in their communities. They have decided to stay within orthodoxy, by having a female imam lead only women in prayer – a practice that goes back to the time of the Prophet Mohammed. Women will be welcomed as they are – with or without a hijab. The mosque will provide public lectures for men and women by female scholars.

More importantly, it will be a centre where women can study the scriptures and traditions for themselves, within a cultural context where gender equality is non-negotiable. Or, as author Asma Barlas puts it, “unreading patriarchal interpretations of the Koran.” They will have the opportunity to discover how women helped to build Muslim societies from the seventh century onward – female warriors, Islamic scholars, judges, philanthropists, poets and rulers.

Most importantly, they will contribute to the evolution of an indigenous form of Islam that’s reflective of North American culture.

The Women’s Mosque evolves North American Islam – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with , ,

Meet the honor brigade, an organized campaign to silence debate on Islam

2015/01/21 Leave a comment

More on the progressive voices within the Muslim communities, this time by Asra Nomani, who has been advocating that women should be able to pray in the main halls of mosques, rather than segregated spaces, and a fairly extensive list of how this and similar discussions has been subject of efforts to be shut down:

Beyond these statements, though, we need a new interpretation of Islamic law in order to change the culture. This would require rejecting the eight schools of religious thought that dominate the Sunni and Shiite Muslim world. I propose naming a new one after ijtihad, the concept of critical thinking, and elevating self-examination over toxic shame-based discourse, laws and rules. Such a project could take the power out of the hands of the status quo clerics, politicians and experts and replace it with a progressive interpretation of faith motivated not by defending honor but acting honorably.

Meet the honor brigade, an organized campaign to silence debate on Islam – The Washington Post.

Filed under Religion Tagged with , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →