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 hadith. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hadith. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 20, 2012

Pluralism and Salvation

In today’s global society, the need for inter-religious dialogue is becoming very important in the efforts for creating peace. It is for this reason that I returned to school to pursue a BA in Religious Studies and a career in interfaith relations. I intend to work closely with Muslim – Christian relations, and as such, knowing the contemporary arguments for religious ecumenism is as important as knowing the history for and against pluralism and salvation of the “other” in Islam.

In Mohammad Hassan Khalil’s “Salvation and the ‘Other’ in Islamic Thought: The Contemporary Pluralism Debate (in English)”, the fact that not all pluralists are created equal is made known. Pluralism in Islam (and likely elsewhere) has divisions - a main reason for the diversity in arguments for pluralistic salvation. Categorizing the arguments starts by categorizing the types of pluralists. It is of some importance to note that most of these pluralists write in English and reside in predominantly non-Muslim countries.

The esoteric perennialist school of thought began with Rene Guenon. Its core belief is that each of the major religions has truth and lead to God. Later, John Hick argued a congruous form of pluralism akin to the story of the elephant and the blind men – the seeming differences in religion are actually only because of perspective and frame of reference. Building on the perennialist thought and distancing from Hick’s view, Reza Shah-Kazemi uses the term universalism and suggests that in order for a religion to be a valid path to salvation, it need to be divinely inspired, not a human construct.

A critical issue with all of these arguments is that they frequently refer to the Qur’an almost exclusively, whereas the majority of Muslims view hadith to be authoritative. In order for many of these Muslims to be open to the pluralist arguments, there may need to be some reconciliation with their views based on hadith. Simply writing hadith off as fabricated or corrupt does a disservice to the debate, as it is akin to telling someone that what they believe in is lies.

The best way to move forward in the debate is to determine how best to help create a paradigmatic revolution. These paradigm shifts are possible, as history has shown us – in both the USA with the civil rights movement and in recent times, in the Middle East with the Arab Spring.

This is a response paper that was originally written in reference to Salvation and the ‘Other’ in Islamic Thought: The Contemporary Pluralism Debate (in English) by Mohammad Hassan Khalil for REL 432: Modern Muslim Thought at Michigan State University in September 2012

Saturday, October 13, 2012

Pluralism and Salvation



In today’s global society, the need for interreligious dialogue is becoming very important amongst efforts for creating peace. It is for this reason that I returned to school to pursue a BA in Religious Studies and a career in interfaith relations. I intend to work closely with Muslim – Christian relations, and as such, knowing the contemporary arguments for religious ecumenism is as important as knowing the history for and against pluralism and salvation of the “other” in Islam.

In Mohammad Hassan Khalil’s “Salvationand the ‘Other’ in Islamic Thought: The Contemporary Pluralism Debate (inEnglish)”, the fact that not all pluralists are created equal is made known. Pluralism in Islam (and likely elsewhere) has divisions which is a main reason for the diversity in arguments for pluralistic salvation. Categorizing the arguments starts by categorizing the types of pluralists. It is of some importance to note that most of these pluralists write in English and reside in predominantly non-Muslim countries.

The esoteric perennialist school of thought began with Rene Guenon. Its core belief is that each of the major religions has truth and lead to God. Later, John Hick argued a congruous form of pluralism akin to the story of the elephant and the blind men – the seeming differences in religion are actually only because of perspective and frame of reference. Building on the perennialist thought and distancing from Hick’s view, Reza Shah-Kazemi uses the term universalism and suggests that in order for a religion to be a valid path to salvation, it need to be divinely inspired, not a human construct.

A critical issue with all of these arguments is that they frequently refer to the Qur’an almost exclusively, whereas the majority of Muslims view hadith to be authoritive. In order for many of these Muslims to be open to the pluralist arguments, there may need to be some reconciliation with their views based on hadith. Simply writing hadith off as fabricated or corrupt does a disservice to the debate, as it is akin to telling someone that what they believe in is lies.

The best way to move forward in the debate, which is one important to interfaith relations locally and globally, is to determine how best to help create a paradigmatic revolution. These paradigm shifts are possible, as history has shown us – in both the USA with the civil rights movement and in recent times, in the Middle East with the Arab Spring.

Monday, October 8, 2012

Gender Equality and Islam


“Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” (Qur’an 4:11). The question is: what does this quote form the Qur’an mean when it comes to women and their standing in society as compared to men? Too many mullas (religious scholars), it means that women are worth only half of what man is worth. It seems to make sense, right? Why else would men get twice as much as women? It seems logical until you consider the context. What is the context? The way in which society operated at the time this surah was received by Mohammed, PBUH.

 As Benazir Bhutto shares, in sixth century Arabia, men were the providers, women were the provided. Women did not have to work, and what their husband’s earned was theirs. The husbands were in charge of taking care of their wives and children. Thus, when considering inheritance, men needed twice as much, so that he could provide for his wife, and women needed less, since her husband (and his inheritance) was going to provide for her. When considering the quote mentioned above in this context, you can see how it has nothing to do at all with equality, except to makes sure that men and women were equally provided for, considering their social obligations.  

 Today’s gender inequality found in some Islamic areas are not just from the interpretation of mullas, but also from hadith that have been considered “authentic” but may not be, even by the standards that were originally set by the leaders of three of the prominent schools of thought: Malik, Shafi’i, and Hanifa. Several examples that are less than favorable toward women come from hadith reported by Abu Bakra, recorded by Al-Bukhari, whose work “has been the most highly respected references for twelve centuries” (Fatima Mernissi).

Unfortunately, some of these hadith are written without the context, and as mentioned earlier, context is important. Also, Abu Bakra’s hadith are suspect, as he was not honest, having been flogged for slander, and Aisha, the Prophet’s wife counters many of his hadith and even chastised him for collecting hadith he never heard.

Gender inequality in Islam does not come from scripture; rather it comes from a string of male oriented, patriarchal mulla interpretation and the coupling of suspect hadith being considered authentic. I feel one must always consult the Qur’an, pray for guidance, and find harmony between heart, Qur’an, and interpretation – for oneself.

Written for my Modern Muslim Thought class in March 2012

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