Labels

Abortion Allah America ancient anti-feminism Apostle Arab Arabia Aristotle Augustine autobiography bank banking beliefs Bhudda Bible biblical bigot bigotry biography Buddha Day Buddhism canon catholic Catholicism character charisma children christian christianity Christmas church Cinema civilization clutter commentary compromise conflict controversy conversion convert courtship creed crisis Crito culture custody dating debate deed democracy dhamma dharma dialogue differences diversity divorce dukkha Eastern Orthodoxy economics elections elephant esoteric essay ethics ethnicity Evangelical Evangelism extremism extremist fable faith family fatwa feminism fiction Folk four noble truths friends fringe Fun Gandha Baba gender generosity Giri Bala; Babaji global studies gnostic God golden rule good goodness Gorgias Gospel greed hadith hate Hebrew Bible heretic Hinduism hoarding Holiday home I AM ibn Baz idiom idols individuality initiative insurance interest interfaith interpretation interracial Iranaeus Iraq islam Israel Israeli jannah Jesus Jesus freak Jesus movement Jew jihad Judaism jurisprudence kids Kindness knowledge Kriya Yoga language law liberal liberals life Life of Pi love manners Mark marriage meaning Mecca meditation mess Middle East miracle Mission moderation Mohammed monastery money monk movie Muratorian muslim myth mythology Native American New Years opinion opportunity Padre Pio pagan Palestine pastor path Paul Paula Fredriksen pay it forward peace perception perennialist personality philosophy Pink Floyd Plato polite politeness politics pro-choice pro-life progressive proof Protestant proto-orthodox proverbs psychology Qaradawi Qur'an reincarnation relationship religion repentance respect responsibility retrospection revert review Rick Santorum rights rules Saint sala salvation science scripture secrets semantics sermon shari'a sharia shrine shura sin Socrates Soroush spirituality St. Theresa of Avila Strangers stuff Subculture Symposium tact Tanakh Tariq Ramadan temple terrorism terrorist Thanksgiving theology Theravada Therese Neumann tradition translation turkey understanding universalism USA values Vesak Visakha Puja wisdom women Xenophon Yogananda Yogi zealot
Showing posts with label extremist. Show all posts
Showing posts with label extremist. Show all posts

Saturday, November 24, 2012

Religious vs. Political Islam

Having read Tariq Ramadan’s article, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim from the New Statesman website published on February 12, 2010, I find myself agreeing with his premises. He is correct when he points out that the term “terrorist” is subjective, and it is the “winners” or the majority that get to decide the labels; in this case, the West. I would argue, however, that “terrorist” is not a completely subjective term. The threat of and/or killing of innocents to promote fear in hopes of obtaining power will always be “terrorism” in my book, regardless of who is committing the acts. If we (America) are committing terrorism in the Middle East with our actions, I would hope that those of us with sound minds would condemn the acts just as if they were committed against our own people. The double standard that seems to play out these days leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

I also agree with Ramadan’s stance that religious and political extremism or moderation do not necessarily go hand in hand. Where I disagree is the idea that you can completely disentangle socio-economic politics from religion. Our beliefs, often our religion, typically dictate our desires and actions. Our personal alignment in politics is based on those fundamental beliefs about life and how it should be lived. Tell me then, how you can have one (politics) apart from the other (religion).

I find myself frustrated because I agree with so much of what Ramadan wrote in this article, but instead of helping find a solution on how to move forward, I think he muddies the water by suggesting we only deal with political Islam. Perhaps I am simply not convinced that we will find a moderate religious Muslim as an extremist, although I do think it may be possible to find an extremist religious Muslim who does not act in an extreme political way. Maybe it is a rectangle-square relationship. Not all rectangles are squares, but all squares are rectangles. Maybe all political extremists are also religious extremists, but not all religious extremists are political extremists. It would be interesting to find out via some study.

Until I can find the studies I am looking for, I personally intend to help the voice of moderate Islam rise. We are not invisible and we do condemn the actions of the fringe elements that inflict pain and injury upon the innocent.

This is a response paper that was originally written in reference to Tariq Ramadan’s article, Good Muslim, Bad Muslim from the New Statesman website published on February 12, 2010 for REL 432: Modern Muslim Thought at Michigan State University in September 2012

Monday, October 15, 2012

Bickering Brothers



The following is is a response paper originally written for the Modern Muslim Thought class that I took as part of my religious studies program at the university I attend.  I apologize that I am not able to supply the document that I am referring to in the paper, as I cannot find a corresponding link online already and I do not have permission to publicly distribute the pdf I obtained in my class. However, the topic is certainly research ready: it was an account of a fatwa debate about the Arab-Israeli Peace Initiative that took place between Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Shaikh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz. The paper follows.
Oh, al-Quds / Jerusalem, what a quandary you are. I thought of the title to this response paper by linking what I understood to be the main issue at hand. I am also reminded of a song, but think that words should be replaced… “This land is my land, no this land is my land”… The undying war has reared its ugly head. I’m going to be upfront and admit my bias. I think they (the ever fighting siblings, the Palestinians and the Israelis – or if you prefer, the Muslims and the Jews), aka Ishmael and Isaac)) are all being idiots. I do want to highlight my use of the word “fighting” as I am only shunning the ones hell bent on destroying each other. I know that there are many on both sides praying for peace, and I also know that not all Palestinians are Muslim. Another cliché comes to mind: “Can’t we all just get along?”
Ok, so now for my take on these fatwas. 
Shaikh 'Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz
I think the basic fault line between the two Shaikh is their Definition of what a Jew is. I think that Shaikh ‘Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz thinks of a Jew as a person. A person who, because of religious and power differences throughout history, may or may not, be an enemy to Muslims. I think that he would rather see the end of this conflict, even if it means, to some extent, “giving up”. Sometimes we have to realize and cut our losses in life. I think he sees what many of us throughout the world see: continuing bloodshed and senseless death over a conflict that may never be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction, especially when satisfaction for either party means complete annihilation of the other (here I refer to the fundamentalists or further, the extremists, on both sides). I am afraid I have to put Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi in the fundie box.
Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi
Shaikh Yusuf virtually spits hatred at Jews. Not just any particular Jew who has done him wrong, but ALL Jews. To me, he sees a Jew not as a person, but only as the enemy. I think that he might accept a situation that does not call for annihilation of all Jews, only if it meant that they surrendered Israel to Islam. I imagine by his arguments that he would see them leave as well (at least). Yusuf argues that ibn Baz’s fatwa cannot hold its own because it doesn’t apply to the reality at hand. He doesn’t see the analogy of the Quarysh tribe as making sense now. Because, that would only apply to regular enemies, not the JEW! At least that is how it read to me. The problem I find with his rebuttal to Ibn Baz is that reality is a matter that is subjective by nature. I think Yusuf sees surrender as not only weakness, but an affront to God, because how dare the Muslim give up when God is on his side? My answer? Perhaps he doesn’t understand God’s plan. What if God’s plan is to teach these disrespectful, bickering children to get along, once and for all.
What saddens me is what it usually takes to get estranged siblings to come back together…

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Extremism in Islam is not of Islam

           Extremism is essentially anything found far outside the norm. The Islamic extremists involved in causing the tragedies of 9/11 definitely fit this description. Unfortunately, too many people saw these terrorists not just as extremist, but as the norm. They called them extremist, but also believed that all Muslims have the same extreme positions as those terrorists. They wrongly equated the minority with their view of the majority. Unfortunately again, many people in America and around the world still hold this skewed view of Islam. Islam is not a religion of extremes, however.
            Yusuf Al-Qaradawi wrote an essay about Extremism in Islam in 1981. In his essay, Al-Qaradawi explains how Islam calls for moderation, which is the exact opposite of extremism. He quotes Sura 2, Verse 143 as an example of how moderation is a fundamental landmark of Islam: “Thus have we made of you a community justly balanced…” He further demonstrates that Islam calls for moderation and rejects and opposes extremism such as ghuluw [excessiveness], tanattu’ [transgressing, meticulous religiosity], and tashid [strictness, austerity]. Al-Qaradawi refers to hadith and the Qur’an to make his points, especially about the people before the Muslims who perished because of excessiveness or went astray, taking others with them. The Qur’an warns Muslims not to follow in the way of the people before (typically referring to Christians and Jews).
            Religious zeal was also warned against in hadith, as the Prophet PBUH used to say, “Ruined were those who indulged in tanattu’” (Muslim) and “Do not overburden yourselves, lest you perish. People [before you] overburdened themselves and perished. Their remains are found in hermitages and monasteries.” (Abu Ya’la)
            Al-Qaradawi finds that there are three defects with religious extremism. 1. Excessiveness is too disagreeable for ordinary human nature to endure or tolerate and 2. it imposes on other rights and obligations, 3. thus it is often short-lived. I know from experience as a convert and from readings of books about converts, that often they dive right in and try to take on everything about Islam all at once, and find it to be too overwhelming, and after trying to give it a fair shot, they give up. Personally, I have been warned by many to “take it slow” as Islam is so big that it needs to be taken on step at a time.

            The author does not stop at why extremism doesn’t belong with Islam, but goes on to describe how to notice if it is manifesting in the community. Al-Qaradawi lists bigotry and intolerance as a first indicator. I think this applies for any religion, not just Islam. I have faced it as a Christian and more so as a Muslim. I have experienced more problems from “born” Muslims and other converts than I have from people of other faiths, which surprised me greatly. I have been told, more than once, that I was not “Muslim” enough, because I am not strict in practice. At the same time, knowing the people it came from, they weren't perfect either.  The problem with this bigotry and intolerance, he says, is that “such a person doesn’t allow any opportunity for dialogue with others so that he can compare his opinion with theirs”. This is only too true. Bigots have their minds set and are unwilling to hear anything that contradicts or is different from what they have learned. Change and different is just too scary for some people to be open. Bigots are not open to agreement or compromise, as those require a meeting in the middle, or in other words, moderation.
            Another manifestation of extremism is the perpetual commitment to excessiveness and attempts to force others to follow suit, this then follows with the overburdening of others without regard to time and place. Extremists in Islam also have a forceful, harsh approach in calling others to Islam, which is likely a manifestation of wanting to force others to think the same as there is power in numbers. These people are not soft, not accepting, and can end up turning people off to Islam and giving them the wrong ideas about what Islam is. Al-Qaradawi shows that this is in contradiction with the Qur’an, which says, “Invite [all] to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious.” (Sura 16, Verse 125) and “It is part of the Mercy of God that you deal justly with them. If you were severe and hard-hearted they would have broken away from you.” (Sura 3, Verse 159).
            Finally, suspicion and distrust are also manifestations of extremism. This is noted in how some Muslims will accuse others of not being devout enough, or not being true Muslims, as I have experienced before. This is the worst accusation a Muslim can utter, as the Prophet PBUH said, “When a Muslim calls another Muslim an unbeliever, then surely one of them is such.” (al-Bukhari). The Qur’an established brotherly love, and turning against each other is opposite of that. Only Allah can look into the heart of a person and know what they believe. 

            If you think about a peaceful, serene moment that you have experienced, was it ever extreme? Moderation is key, after all.

Written for my Modern Muslim Thought class in February 2012