A***@somewhere.com
2004-01-09 04:43:56 UTC
Can Islam be reformed?
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina31119.htm
By: Ali Sina
When the US Secretary of State Colin Powel said Islam is not incompatible
with democracy, the spokesman of the Islamic Republic of Iran Hamid Reza
Asefi mocked him and said "US officials' comments on Islam clearly prove
they do know nothing about Islam and Muslims.
If Asefi has said only one word of truth in his entire life, this is it.
Today the question that everyone asks is whether Islam can be reformed and
whether it can accommodate the democracy.
A friend of mine wrote: "Pentateuch is very similar to the Quran: same
intolerance, same draconian laws, etc. yet the great part of the Jews
finally rejected the literal interpretation of their holy scriptures and
proved they could evolve."
Also Christianity has allowed for change, The Church of the 16th century was
as repressive as the Talibans and the Wahhabis. Yet Reformation took place,
nonetheless. And even the Catholic Church is finally opening up.
Can't then we extrapolate that the same could happen to Islam?
The idea that since Christianity and Judaism reformed then Islam can also be
reformed is untenable. Islam is not comparable to Christianity, Judaism or
any other religion.
Christianity is essentially a religion of the heart. It were statements such
as "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" and "My kingdom is not of this
world" that allowed the Christians to keep their faith while permitting
secular governments to evolve independent of the Church. A Christian does
not feel any contradiction or dichotomy by living with secular laws and
practicing his religious beliefs. One can be a Christian in his heart and
secular in politics. Therefore reform in Christianity did not mean
renouncing faith.
There are very few Jews who believe that the Pentateuch is actually the word
of God. In all the five books attributed to Moses, he is referred to in
third person. Then the Deuteronomy ends by giving an obituary about Moses
and how his tomb has been lost. This allows the Jews to be open about the
interpretation of the Bible as it is clear, at least to the thinking
majority of them, that the Bible is not the textual word of God but written
by humans, who were allegedly inspired, yet fallible nonetheless.
Also living in Diaspora for 2000 years with no temporal authority has forced
the Jews to learn how to adapt their Jewish laws (Halakhah) to the
exigencies of the non-Jewish world, which allows them now to create a
secular state in a country built through religious imperatives.
However, reforming Islam is not something that a Muslim would consider.
Those who ask such question are always the non-Muslims. For a Muslim this
question is pointless. The thought of reform would not even pass the mind of
a Muslim. He would tell you that the problem with Islamic world is in the
inadequate interpretation of the Sharia and not in the Sharia itself.
Quran is considered to be the verbatim words of God. The verse "This day I
have perfected your religion for you, completed my favor upon you, and have
chosen for you Islam as your religion" 5:3 reverberates in the ears of every
Muslim. It leaves no room for interpretations and reformations. How can
anyone improve or change something that is perfect?
History shows that all attempts to reform Islam have failed. The Sufis tried
to interpret the Quran esoterically and mystically. The Mu'tazelis went as
far as to suggest that if there is a contradiction between the revelation
and reason the latter should prevail. Some modern day Islamists such as Ali
Shariati and Sorush have tried to use Islam as a political tool to bring
Islamic world out of the dark ages and into the modern world. However all
these attempts have failed and Islam is now in it darkest phase of its
existence. As a matter of fact every time Islam is taken into equation, even
nominally, for a social change the result is catastrophic because the
gravitational pull of the Quran towards fundamentalism quashes every other
consideration. Quran cannot be interpreted and reformed. The will of God
cannot be surpassed by the will of people because of convenience and
expediency. Any minor deviation from the Quran is considered to be a direct
challenge to its authority and it invalidates the entire faith.
Islam is considered to be a "complete way of life"
This concept is eloquently explained in the Islamic site Islamonline.net
"Islam is not a religion in the common, distorted meaning of the word,
confining its scope only to the private life of man. By saying that it is a
complete way of life, we mean that it caters for all the fields of human
existence. In fact, Islam provides guidance for all walks of life -
individual and social, material and moral, economic and political, legal and
cultural, national and international.
The Qur'an enjoins Man to enter the fold of Islam without any reservation
and to follow God's guidance in all fields of life."
In Islam politics and faith are intertwined. The separation of the two would
mean the end of faith. In criticism of Christianity the above site
continues: .
"Religion asks us to separate things of God from those of Caesar. Such a
judicial separation between the two means the degrading of both the secular
and the sacred. That religion is worth little, if the conscience of its
followers is not disturbed when war clouds are hanging over us all and
industrial conflicts are threatening social peace. Religion has weakened Man
's social conscience and moral sensitivity, by separating the things of God
from those of Caesar."
As for Islam, it totally denounces this concept of religion and clearly
states that its objectives are purification of the soul and the reform and
reconstruction of the society. "
The Qur'an says in Surah 57, verse 25:
We verily sent Our messengers with clear proofs and revealed with them the
scripture and the balance [i.e. the authority to establish justice], that
mankind may observe justice and the right measure.
Then in Surah 12, verse 40:
The command is for none but Allah; He has commanded that you obey none but
Him; that is the right path.
Also, in Surah 22, verse 41:
[Muslims are] those who if We give them power in the land, establish [the
system of] salat (prayers and worship) and zakat (poor due) and enjoin
virtue and forbid vice and evil."
"Thus, even a cursory study of the teachings of Islam shows that it is an
all-embracing way of life and does not leave out any field of human
existence to become a playground for satanic forces."
That is true. A Muslim is supposed to get religious instructions about
everything. Even with which foot he ought to enter the toilet, which
direction to face, which foot to put his weight on during defecation and how
many rocks to use for cleaning purposes are topics that the foqaha, "the
doctors of the law" study for years to master and then guide the ummah who
in turn would not lift a finger without consulting such doctors.
Addressing the problem of Sharia for a Muslim is considered heresy. The
so-called moderate Muslims do not propose to scrap or change the Sharia. So,
what a moderate Muslim would say about the law of stoning? He would deny
that this is an Islamic law and he would challenge you to find such a thing
in the Quran. He is right! Stoning does not exist in the Quran. But it
exists in the Sunnah and the Sunnah (Muhammad's own examples) is the major
source of the Sharia law.
In Islam if there is no specific reference to a law, the Judaic law should
apply. Stoning the adulterers is a law prescribed in Deuteronomy 22:23, and
the prophet practiced stoning of adulterers as per various hadiths. (1, 2,
3)
As the Imam of IslamOnline.net rightly states, Islam is not a religion at
all. Islam is politics. Islam's only objective is to reclaim the Earth for
Allah and establish the rule of Sharia. You take away that objective and
Islam as a whole becomes meaningless. It simply loses its raison d'être.
While Christ wanted to conquer the hearts of the people, Muhammad could care
less about people's hearts. He was interested in conquering cities and
establishing the dominion of Islam in the name of God.
The very word Islam means submission. The first duty of a Muslim is to
strive (make Jihad) and render the world submissive to Allah and his
messenger.
Ironically, the word peace in Islam, also derive from the same root SLM,
does not mean mutual and harmonious coexistence of two equal and sovereign
people. It means suppressing the non-Muslims and making them submissive to
the rule and dominance of Islam. Islam does not recognize the legitimacy of
any non-Islamic government especially over the Muslims.
"Yea, to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth; 24.42 and,
"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never
will it be accepted of him" 3:85. Muslims are pressed to "fight them [the
infidels] on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail
justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere" 8:39,.
It must be noted that tumult and oppression means resisting the advance of
Islam. Justice and peace can only prevail when Islam becomes dominant and
other religions are subdued and their followers are reduced to tributaries
to the coffers of the Islamic state. They must "pay the Jizya with willing
submission, and feel themselves subdued".9:29.
I strongly disagree with those who compare Islam of today with the
Christianity of the Middle Ages and claim that since Christianity eventually
was reformed, Islam can also reform.
The proponents of reform have a very weak position to defend. Daniel Pipes
is one such scholar who believes, at least ostensibly, that Islam can be
reformed. The weakness of his position is picked up by his opponents who
rightly say, "Dr. Pipes seems to contradict himself. First he says that
there is nothing in Islam that contradicts democracy and then insists that
Sharia is antidemocratic."
Muslims are supposed to give their highest allegiance to Islam, not to their
country and not even to their family. The scope is not as much to convert
the world into Islam but to dominate the world and to establish the law of
Sharia.
As a matter of fact when a Muslim army invaded a country, they did not
accept the conversion of the conquered right away. This would have deprived
them of the booty and to excise the Jizyah tax, which was the main incentive
of the Muslims to attack in the first place. The conquered people were left
to practice their religion for centuries providing the wealth for the
Islamic empire and finance the Islamic army to continue with their
conquests. As the following hadith shows the Muslims would provide
"protection" for the people of other religions, i.e. would not kill them,
under the condition that they pay the jizyah which as Umar said was fixed by
Allah as stipends for Muslims.
Sunnan Abu Dawud Book 19, Number 2955:
"According to the saying of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him): Allah has
placed truth upon Umar's tongue and heart. He fixed stipends for Muslims,
and provided protection for the people of other religions by levying jizyah
(poll-tax) on them, deducting no fifth from it, nor taking it as booty.
Therefore when Muslims say that Islam is a tolerant religion, which allows
the non-Muslims to keep their faith and practice their religion, in a sense
they are telling the truth. However, that freedom has a catch and that is to
accept the status of dhimitude, become subservient to Muslims and "pay the
Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"
According to Muslim scholars, the verse 9:23 of the Quran that instructs the
Muslims not to take the infidels as their awlia (protectors, custodians,
rulers) implies that Muslims should not accept the rule and the governance
of non-Muslims. Hence they are required to overthrow the non-Islamic
governments, whenever they are able to and wherever they reside to establish
Islamic governments. Until then that country is considered to be Dar al Harb
(House of war). When the governance of the country is turned over to the
Muslims, that country becomes Dar al Islam (House of Islam) and Sharia
becomes the law of the land. This does not mean that everyone will be forced
to convert to Islam. It means that everyone becomes subject to Sharia and
those who are not believers will be classified as dhimmis, will have to pay
Jizyah and support the Ummah financially.
--
JimB
http://www.geocities.com/UAM01
Union Against Multi-Culty
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina31119.htm
By: Ali Sina
When the US Secretary of State Colin Powel said Islam is not incompatible
with democracy, the spokesman of the Islamic Republic of Iran Hamid Reza
Asefi mocked him and said "US officials' comments on Islam clearly prove
they do know nothing about Islam and Muslims.
If Asefi has said only one word of truth in his entire life, this is it.
Today the question that everyone asks is whether Islam can be reformed and
whether it can accommodate the democracy.
A friend of mine wrote: "Pentateuch is very similar to the Quran: same
intolerance, same draconian laws, etc. yet the great part of the Jews
finally rejected the literal interpretation of their holy scriptures and
proved they could evolve."
Also Christianity has allowed for change, The Church of the 16th century was
as repressive as the Talibans and the Wahhabis. Yet Reformation took place,
nonetheless. And even the Catholic Church is finally opening up.
Can't then we extrapolate that the same could happen to Islam?
The idea that since Christianity and Judaism reformed then Islam can also be
reformed is untenable. Islam is not comparable to Christianity, Judaism or
any other religion.
Christianity is essentially a religion of the heart. It were statements such
as "Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" and "My kingdom is not of this
world" that allowed the Christians to keep their faith while permitting
secular governments to evolve independent of the Church. A Christian does
not feel any contradiction or dichotomy by living with secular laws and
practicing his religious beliefs. One can be a Christian in his heart and
secular in politics. Therefore reform in Christianity did not mean
renouncing faith.
There are very few Jews who believe that the Pentateuch is actually the word
of God. In all the five books attributed to Moses, he is referred to in
third person. Then the Deuteronomy ends by giving an obituary about Moses
and how his tomb has been lost. This allows the Jews to be open about the
interpretation of the Bible as it is clear, at least to the thinking
majority of them, that the Bible is not the textual word of God but written
by humans, who were allegedly inspired, yet fallible nonetheless.
Also living in Diaspora for 2000 years with no temporal authority has forced
the Jews to learn how to adapt their Jewish laws (Halakhah) to the
exigencies of the non-Jewish world, which allows them now to create a
secular state in a country built through religious imperatives.
However, reforming Islam is not something that a Muslim would consider.
Those who ask such question are always the non-Muslims. For a Muslim this
question is pointless. The thought of reform would not even pass the mind of
a Muslim. He would tell you that the problem with Islamic world is in the
inadequate interpretation of the Sharia and not in the Sharia itself.
Quran is considered to be the verbatim words of God. The verse "This day I
have perfected your religion for you, completed my favor upon you, and have
chosen for you Islam as your religion" 5:3 reverberates in the ears of every
Muslim. It leaves no room for interpretations and reformations. How can
anyone improve or change something that is perfect?
History shows that all attempts to reform Islam have failed. The Sufis tried
to interpret the Quran esoterically and mystically. The Mu'tazelis went as
far as to suggest that if there is a contradiction between the revelation
and reason the latter should prevail. Some modern day Islamists such as Ali
Shariati and Sorush have tried to use Islam as a political tool to bring
Islamic world out of the dark ages and into the modern world. However all
these attempts have failed and Islam is now in it darkest phase of its
existence. As a matter of fact every time Islam is taken into equation, even
nominally, for a social change the result is catastrophic because the
gravitational pull of the Quran towards fundamentalism quashes every other
consideration. Quran cannot be interpreted and reformed. The will of God
cannot be surpassed by the will of people because of convenience and
expediency. Any minor deviation from the Quran is considered to be a direct
challenge to its authority and it invalidates the entire faith.
Islam is considered to be a "complete way of life"
This concept is eloquently explained in the Islamic site Islamonline.net
"Islam is not a religion in the common, distorted meaning of the word,
confining its scope only to the private life of man. By saying that it is a
complete way of life, we mean that it caters for all the fields of human
existence. In fact, Islam provides guidance for all walks of life -
individual and social, material and moral, economic and political, legal and
cultural, national and international.
The Qur'an enjoins Man to enter the fold of Islam without any reservation
and to follow God's guidance in all fields of life."
In Islam politics and faith are intertwined. The separation of the two would
mean the end of faith. In criticism of Christianity the above site
continues: .
"Religion asks us to separate things of God from those of Caesar. Such a
judicial separation between the two means the degrading of both the secular
and the sacred. That religion is worth little, if the conscience of its
followers is not disturbed when war clouds are hanging over us all and
industrial conflicts are threatening social peace. Religion has weakened Man
's social conscience and moral sensitivity, by separating the things of God
from those of Caesar."
As for Islam, it totally denounces this concept of religion and clearly
states that its objectives are purification of the soul and the reform and
reconstruction of the society. "
The Qur'an says in Surah 57, verse 25:
We verily sent Our messengers with clear proofs and revealed with them the
scripture and the balance [i.e. the authority to establish justice], that
mankind may observe justice and the right measure.
Then in Surah 12, verse 40:
The command is for none but Allah; He has commanded that you obey none but
Him; that is the right path.
Also, in Surah 22, verse 41:
[Muslims are] those who if We give them power in the land, establish [the
system of] salat (prayers and worship) and zakat (poor due) and enjoin
virtue and forbid vice and evil."
"Thus, even a cursory study of the teachings of Islam shows that it is an
all-embracing way of life and does not leave out any field of human
existence to become a playground for satanic forces."
That is true. A Muslim is supposed to get religious instructions about
everything. Even with which foot he ought to enter the toilet, which
direction to face, which foot to put his weight on during defecation and how
many rocks to use for cleaning purposes are topics that the foqaha, "the
doctors of the law" study for years to master and then guide the ummah who
in turn would not lift a finger without consulting such doctors.
Addressing the problem of Sharia for a Muslim is considered heresy. The
so-called moderate Muslims do not propose to scrap or change the Sharia. So,
what a moderate Muslim would say about the law of stoning? He would deny
that this is an Islamic law and he would challenge you to find such a thing
in the Quran. He is right! Stoning does not exist in the Quran. But it
exists in the Sunnah and the Sunnah (Muhammad's own examples) is the major
source of the Sharia law.
In Islam if there is no specific reference to a law, the Judaic law should
apply. Stoning the adulterers is a law prescribed in Deuteronomy 22:23, and
the prophet practiced stoning of adulterers as per various hadiths. (1, 2,
3)
As the Imam of IslamOnline.net rightly states, Islam is not a religion at
all. Islam is politics. Islam's only objective is to reclaim the Earth for
Allah and establish the rule of Sharia. You take away that objective and
Islam as a whole becomes meaningless. It simply loses its raison d'être.
While Christ wanted to conquer the hearts of the people, Muhammad could care
less about people's hearts. He was interested in conquering cities and
establishing the dominion of Islam in the name of God.
The very word Islam means submission. The first duty of a Muslim is to
strive (make Jihad) and render the world submissive to Allah and his
messenger.
Ironically, the word peace in Islam, also derive from the same root SLM,
does not mean mutual and harmonious coexistence of two equal and sovereign
people. It means suppressing the non-Muslims and making them submissive to
the rule and dominance of Islam. Islam does not recognize the legitimacy of
any non-Islamic government especially over the Muslims.
"Yea, to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth; 24.42 and,
"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never
will it be accepted of him" 3:85. Muslims are pressed to "fight them [the
infidels] on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail
justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere" 8:39,.
It must be noted that tumult and oppression means resisting the advance of
Islam. Justice and peace can only prevail when Islam becomes dominant and
other religions are subdued and their followers are reduced to tributaries
to the coffers of the Islamic state. They must "pay the Jizya with willing
submission, and feel themselves subdued".9:29.
I strongly disagree with those who compare Islam of today with the
Christianity of the Middle Ages and claim that since Christianity eventually
was reformed, Islam can also reform.
The proponents of reform have a very weak position to defend. Daniel Pipes
is one such scholar who believes, at least ostensibly, that Islam can be
reformed. The weakness of his position is picked up by his opponents who
rightly say, "Dr. Pipes seems to contradict himself. First he says that
there is nothing in Islam that contradicts democracy and then insists that
Sharia is antidemocratic."
Muslims are supposed to give their highest allegiance to Islam, not to their
country and not even to their family. The scope is not as much to convert
the world into Islam but to dominate the world and to establish the law of
Sharia.
As a matter of fact when a Muslim army invaded a country, they did not
accept the conversion of the conquered right away. This would have deprived
them of the booty and to excise the Jizyah tax, which was the main incentive
of the Muslims to attack in the first place. The conquered people were left
to practice their religion for centuries providing the wealth for the
Islamic empire and finance the Islamic army to continue with their
conquests. As the following hadith shows the Muslims would provide
"protection" for the people of other religions, i.e. would not kill them,
under the condition that they pay the jizyah which as Umar said was fixed by
Allah as stipends for Muslims.
Sunnan Abu Dawud Book 19, Number 2955:
"According to the saying of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him): Allah has
placed truth upon Umar's tongue and heart. He fixed stipends for Muslims,
and provided protection for the people of other religions by levying jizyah
(poll-tax) on them, deducting no fifth from it, nor taking it as booty.
Therefore when Muslims say that Islam is a tolerant religion, which allows
the non-Muslims to keep their faith and practice their religion, in a sense
they are telling the truth. However, that freedom has a catch and that is to
accept the status of dhimitude, become subservient to Muslims and "pay the
Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued"
According to Muslim scholars, the verse 9:23 of the Quran that instructs the
Muslims not to take the infidels as their awlia (protectors, custodians,
rulers) implies that Muslims should not accept the rule and the governance
of non-Muslims. Hence they are required to overthrow the non-Islamic
governments, whenever they are able to and wherever they reside to establish
Islamic governments. Until then that country is considered to be Dar al Harb
(House of war). When the governance of the country is turned over to the
Muslims, that country becomes Dar al Islam (House of Islam) and Sharia
becomes the law of the land. This does not mean that everyone will be forced
to convert to Islam. It means that everyone becomes subject to Sharia and
those who are not believers will be classified as dhimmis, will have to pay
Jizyah and support the Ummah financially.
--
JimB
http://www.geocities.com/UAM01
Union Against Multi-Culty