There is no god but GOD, and Mohammed is His Prophet.
Allahu Ackbar. (GOD is the greatest)
Asa Lama Lakem. (GOD’s Peace be upon you)
Inshallah. (GOD willing)
First word that comes to mind: Uh-oh. (Or is that two words?)
As in, “Uh-oh, something unpleasant is going to crop up where Islam is the topic, whether it be an accurate criticism, an unfortunate misunderstanding, or a viscious lie.”
Liberal American female follower of a non-Abrahamic religion, if you’re interested in demographics.
Interesting thread, Aldebaran.
Upon hearign Islam the first things that come to mind are God, Allah and faith. But at the same time, I cannot help but think ‘politics’ as well, due to its intertwining with religion on many recent matters.
Mehitabel,
You will seldom see a link between the terrorist actions of the people you mention and their religion.
Nationality is not a religion.
And I don’t refer only to the US media.
But I’m more then once a year in the USA and I have American friends overthere, so I do get direct acces.
Besides that: I have acces everywhere to media channels everywhere. It isn’t that difficult to follow written and oral media releases worldwide, no?
Islam in a link with terrorist sells. It is a fact nobody can deny.
Yet there isn’t something as “Islamic terrorist” at all since terrorism is in clear opposition with the teachings of Islam.
As I guess it is in oppositoin with every form of religion or non religion. It could be an interesting thing to reflect and debate on how and why this link is so much in fashion but that is something for an other topic.
Salaam. A.
I’m rather often in the USA and have friends there.
Accurate criticism - for as far as criticism can be seen as possibly accurate, which is an other question - isn’t something unpleasent, it is interesting.
Misunderstandings are also interesting when those who have them are open for being more informed.
Lies are interesting to hear because you can expose them for what they are and thus add to clear them up.
Which religion do you follow or don’t you have any?
Salaam. A
green-bladder,
Islam is intertwined with politics from its very first beginning.
Muhammed became the leader of a state from the moment he moved out of Mecca to Medina. (hidjra)
As result of that the way of organising and defending the Umma became part of the Muslim’s lives.
You can find several referations to that in Al Qur’an and of course the hadieth are crowded with them.
Salaam. A.
What do I think of when I hear the word “Islam”?
Me personally?
Hmmm… much the same thing I think when I hear the word “Christianity” used in exclusion, or for that matter, Judaism.
These are words which mean a shitload of different things to different people, but I’m a cyncial son of abitch these days. As I’ve reached my middle years, I’ve reached a certain philosophy on life which I try not to force down anyone else’s throat, and indeed I never mention it - unless specifically invited in a thread such as this…
Essentially, I’ve reached the conclusion that human beings, deep down in their DNA at a lowest common denominator level, are just out and out tribalism addicts. You name it… if there’s a way of allowing the inbuilt need in all of us to feel as though we’re part of a tribe - any tribe - there’s a lifestyle or a philosophy out there waiting to suit our needs.
And it works on so many levels… what team do you follow? What state are you from? What country are you from? What race are you? What’s your genetic ancestory? What religion are you?
All of the above allow a form of tribalism to manifest itself. And tribalism exploits the need which exists in almost all of us to feel as though we belong to a “larger group” of some sort, because, in a “larger group” there is safety - safety in numbers.
As I said, this is my own personal philosophy and I usually keep it to myself - nonetheless - as I’ve gotten older, I’ve started to take greater and greater pleasure in simply walking to the beat of my own drum - and in particular, avoiding the inherent “mob drifting” which tends to manifest itself in that most intangible forms of tribalism - namely - religion.
Now, with your permission, I’m going to sprout off a bit regarding Indonesia - the world’s most populated Muslim country. As you know, a lot of Islamic Extremism is coming out of Indonesia presently. I’m sure, given a generation and an overall rise in living standards that it will drop off - but for now it’s a problem. My issue is this… geographically, Indonesia is far, far away from Saudi Arabia. And yet, I hear a veritible shitload of Arabic rhetoric emanating from various Islamic hotheads coming out of Indonesia at the moment.
My observation is this… I’m not going to pass judgement on whether the Indonesian Islamic Extremists are a good or bad thing - but I will argue thus - if it weren’t for the innate sense of tribalism which is attached to religion - I honestly doubt that under normal circumstances that Indonesia’s poorer classes would give even the slightest shit about what some Arab 10,000 miles away is saying, or thinking, or doing. But the nature of tribalism is such that it allows us to think that we’re part of some greater group, and what the group does, is good for all of us. And I don’t accept that. It’s a flaw in our genetic makeup in my opinion.
And Islam is not alone in the tibalism area obviously. A list as long as the Nile River can be written about the dreadful, stupid, shitty things which the various tentacles of Christian tribalism have inspired.
But the world’s best example of rampant, utterly implacable, infinitely entrenched tribalism? The Isreali/Palestinian conflict. Man, that one is so way, way, WAY out there. And of course, everybody can tell me reason upon reason upon reason as to how it has come to pass, but the ultimate reason that it’s unfolded the way it has is simple hateful tribalism - that is - this land is MY tribe’s land - not your tribes! Time to kill!
And so it goes, and so it goes.
So that’s what ISLAM means to me. As does Christianity and Judaism, and Hinduism etc etc. It means tribalism, and I have zero respect for tribalism other than at the nation/state level.
Aldebaran,
Hello friend.
It has been far too long since we last chewed the fat, as it were.
One of the first things I think of when I hear the word Islam is the unsmiling visage of the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
It was he, in fact, who first inspired me to read several translations of the Koran. I also read translations of his written commentaries on political principles, and social and religious philosophy from books published in 1979, translated from Persian to French and published by Editions Libres-Hallier in 1979. I read the English translations, of course, not being too fluent in Farsi (or as an Iranian acquaintance of mine yelled at me one day “Just say Persian, you damfool.”)
I am curious to know the extent to which the thoughts of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, as expressed in his writings, is representative of Islamic thought in general. I’m assuming that you are familiar with the Ayatollah’s thoughts on matters Islamic, of course.
I am aware of the differences between Shia and Sunni attitudes generally, what I am asking about is are the differences so pronounced that for example you, Aldebaran, might have serious problems with the Ayatollah’s particular slant and interpretation of things Islamic? ( this is asssuming you are not a Shi’ite yourself).
And there never was a “money-lending Jew”, because Old Testament forbids usury?
And there never was a “Christian crusader”, because it is in opposition to all Christ’s teachings?
And there were no upper and lower “classes in Communist countries”, because Communism society is classless by definition?
Will you get real, please?
I read your posts with great interest, but why are you constantly making such evasive and naive statements?
It’s not what the theory is, it’s the practical application of it that makes all the difference.
Association of Islam with terrorism is a direct result of the terrorists justifying their actions in the name of Islam. Palestinian and Chechen terrorists can be called resistance fighters against Israel and Russia, respectively. But al Qaida acts in the name of the whole of Islam. When Egyptian terrorists slaughter dozens of European tourists, they real purpose may be to get to the Egyptian government, but what they say to the world is that they somehow defend Islam. That’s how logical Western mind works: we are “obsessed” with causes and effects. If Osama would restrict his activities to fighting Saudi regime, and those Egyptians to fighting Mubarac’s, they would be called “nationalists”.
BTW, Christian fundamentalists get a lot of bad publicity in the West simply because that they are suspect of a potential to commit violence in the name of religion. The same goes for “zionist” Israel. And it was a very long time since anybody was killed in the name of Christian or Jewish god, anywhere. So don’t complain that Muslims get treated unfairly.
My first thoughts on hearing the word Islam is rigid. That’s the first thing I think about when I think of any religion (I was raised Roman Catholic, but I cannot get over my logical objections to accepting things on faith alone, so I don’t practice). I find religiions to be too rigid in defintion, to unaccomadating in belief to be practical. Most of the major world conflicts outside of the two World Wars boil down to religion, and there’s a reason: because there is no room for compromise.
And to be fair, I understand that in Islam it is preached that the People of the Book should be respected, but the overiding belief is that Allah is the only god and Islam is the one true faith. No compromise, yet where does that leave me, in the eyes of a good muslim, since I will never convert to Islam (or any faith)?
Also, to Boo Boo Foo, great summation. I feel very similar. You may want to read a book called Holy War: the Crusades and Their Impact on Today’s World, by Karen Armstrong. It is an excellent summation of the historical divide between the three religions of Abraham right up to the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“Terrorist”, if you must know.
The next thing I think of is “Oz”, which is an American Television show that features lots of muslim characters and plotlines.
I am. It’s not because people give them a name which they think suits them that these labels are correct.
Islamic terrorists can’t exist since nothing what any terrorist can ever do can be called Islamic.
These are the facts. All the rest is fantasy.
Thank you for reading and contributing to the discussion.
Where am I evasive? And stating an obvious truth has nothing to do with naivity but with giving realistic facts.
There is no practical implication possible of “Islamic terrorism” since terrorism doesn’t exist as a possible concept in Islam.
Ah… Now we come finally to the truth: which is that this is nothing else then the fact that they use the name Islam. That doesn’t make what they do “Islamic”.
If I say I post on this website in the name of Islam, does that make that claim of mine a fact? No. It makes only that I claim to act in the name of Islam.
Wrong. What is called Al Quaeda acts in what they want to name it. It is not because some of those people say they act “in the name of Islam” (and by the way: where did you ever hear or read that they claim to act in the name of “whole Islam”?) that what they say is a fact. It is only what they choose to call it.
You are free to believe them of course. But everyone familiar with Islam shall tell you that you are wrong.
Now we come finally to the fact that you admit that this is only what “they say”. (leaving out of the discussion the “amount” of victims)
So where do you get the idea that what “they say” is an undeniable fact?
If I say I own this website, I own it? Is that a fact now to you?
Don’t think so.
Well, my logical European/Arab-mixed-mind separates rumours, claims, ideas, stories, fantasies and whatever else that floats around from clear facts. In this case: from the fact that there isn’t such a thing as terrorism as a possible concept in Islam. Which results in the fact that there can’t exist such a thing as “Islamic terrorism”.
There only can be terrorism committed by people who claim to be followers of the religion Islam. Which by the way they contradict themselves by their actions.
They would be called opposition or traitors or whatever name their governments would choose to call them.
Do you see me complain? Stating that Islam is in fashion among sensationalists and other media is merely saying what is an obvious fact.
BTW: There isn’t such a thing like “Christian” or “Jewish” or “Muslim” God. There is only one God, no matter how you name Him and no matter how you worship Him or don’t worship Him.
And to add a bit of current info on bad publicity, since the idea is brought up here: The present US president and government are in the eyes of many people worldwide a far greater danger to the world then the whole lot of terrorist organisations worldwide.
But that is food for an other topic.
Salaam. A.
Yes there was and is.
Allah is the Arabic name for God. There is only one God. People all over the world name Him in their own language. Where do you get the idea that Allah is “an other God”?
As for Islam being the “only true faith” : In Al Qur’an is among others clearly stated that God created many ways. Meaning: different paths leading towards Him.
So that leaves you where you are: If you believe in God and worship Him sincerely and act according the principles and commands of your belief, then in my view it is what God provided for you. Maybe in time and you will learn about an other way or maybe God doesn’t want you to do so.
As a Muslim I can only say that only God can judge because only God knows what is in people’s heart.
Salaam. A.
The writings of a person express the thoughts of that person. Such a person can have people who follow his ideas, or he can talk to the desert. In the case you refer to: many followed and still follow his ideas.
Yet “many” doesn’t mean every Muslim, and especially in this case it only means those people who think like Khomeiny and see him as their leader. As to why this is/was possible would lead us off topic.
Yes I would see a very serious problem in becoming part of that “many” I refer to above, to the extend that it is in fact impossible.
Salaam. A.
Are you also aware that the Ususi currently in power in Iran are not the only option under the Shi’a category? There are Shi’ite communities in Yemen with little or no alliegence to Iran, Alevi in the Balkans, and groups in Africa. The Usuli shout louder, are probably more numerous, and get more headlines. Not all followers of Ahlul-Bayt follow that particular line of teachers.
I, for one, don’t follow Khomeni or any other alim that I am told I should. I am a firm believer in Ijtihad
Martin
Allah on a pongo stick! He’s turning Great Debates into Great Dogma. I guess next he’ll claim the earth is flat since the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia, Sheik Abdel-Aziz Ibn Baaz (peace be on him or whatever), says so. Oh, and I’m sorry Aldebaran to bug into your thread despite the fact that I’m not even a distinguish Arabist.
http://www.world-of-dawkins.com/Dawkins/Work/Reviews/1996-febsaganreview.htm
On the topic of the right honourable Mr. Ayatollah Khomeini (pbohow), the first thing that pops into my mind is the fatwa against Salman Rushdie (peace be on him!) – next something I had read Khomeini saying about where a girls first menstruation should take place; namely in the husbands house. While I googled for that I found these other titbits of wisdom from this great Moslem thinker.
“A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate; sodomising the child is OK. If the man penetrates and damages the child then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl’s sister.”
So it’s ok to sodomise a child, a bummer about the sister though, eh.
“It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband’s house rather than her father’s home. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.”
Yeah that’s it, seeing it again nearly brings tears of joy to my face. Such glorious wisdom! I have two daughters, the oldest already six! – I’ll have to hurry now to reserve my place in heaven!
- “A man can have sex with animals such as sheeps, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine”*
Fuck a camel? Sure why not, just don’t sell it to me afterwards. That guy other there sell it to him! That would be the moral thing to do.
“Eleven things are impure: urine, excrement, sperm…non-Moslem men and women…and the sweat of an excrement-eating camel.”
Gee so you think I’m impure. But, you know Khomeni my dude, I’m not so hot on you either.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/islamquotes.htm
And I can see why you really wouldn’t want to claim this guy as your religious inspiration martin_ibn_martin. Perhaps, you know, even a vehement denunciation would be in place?
For the record I know there’s another face of Islam. It’s just that when one hears such ridiculous and disgusting things being said and done in the name of Islam – it tends to stick. Human nature I guess. (I have heard, dunno if it’s true, that there was a branch of Afghan Moslem that swore on peace and pacifism, and went to India to back Gandhi. Now if you could tell that story, next time you mention Islam – perhaps another thing will come to mind)
Now, this would be about the place where you usually start calling me a Nazi MC Master of Silly Ceremonies. You just go right ahead lad if it makes you happy, I won’t mind.
Rune (peace be on me)
The first terms?
Intolerance.
A rigid and inflexible belief in doctrine.
A raging xenophobia and religious bigotry that would shame an Alabama Klansman.
Having said that, I must admit that I’m talking about Saudi. I can go to Bahrain, Egypt, or the Emirates and Islam suddenly becomes much more reasonable. I understand that many of the more hellish aspects of Saudi are more cultural than religious but the Saudis themselves claim that their culture is based on strict Islamic principles.
So, who is correct? Many Islamic scholars reject the Wahabbi doctrines but there are plenty of others here that ably defend them.
Frankly I’m not too enthralled with the Islamic justice and mercy routine at the moment. I’ve just returned from the Phillipines where I had to take an employee. He had AIDS and yes, he was gay as well and was imprudent enough to admit that to the (Moslem) doctors here. Their response was to tell him to leave the hospital immediately and that his present suffering and impending death were divine retribution for his sinful lifestyle. The Islamic compassion went out the window immediately. Incoherent and unable to speak above a whisper, unable to walk or drive, and they threw him out of the hospital. I had to take him home to die.
While I was away in the PI, another hosptal in Jeddah did exactly that, dumped a dying AIDS patient into the street. I don’t know if he died or not. Check the Arab News if you want the details.
Best Regards
Testy
Winston Smith,
I think you are bordering on being very unkind to Aldebaran.
He is already on record in this thread as not being into the thoughts and beliefs of the late, and not very lamented Ayatollah Khomeini, and his take on things, so I don’t think it is completely right that you should focus too strongly on the Ayatollah motif.
Incidentally, I regard Aldebaran as a great guy and he knows me well enough to know that I have never indulged in playing mind games, with him or with anyone else.
He has made it fairly clear in this thread that whatever a particular Imam might have stated in the past, it does not necessarily mean that the pronouncement automatically becomes a law that applies to all Muslims, Shi’ite, Sunni or Sufi or whatever.
Incidentally, the Ayatollah Khomeini did not actually approve of human to animal fornication. To quote from one of his tracts:
I believe that there is a certain amount of judgementalism there.
Everyone here thinks the same damn thing, except they are too civilized and politically correct to admit it.
Nonsense. I don’t know who you think you’re kidding with this happy horseshit, but I’ve seen it before and it’s ALL lies.
allah is the name of just ONE of the old meccan deities that were in fashion when mohammed invaded. Perhaps you’ve heard of the satanic verses? They were in fact speaking of the daughters of ‘allah’ the moon god. Old mo included these lines to hoodwink the local Meccans into thinking his religion jived with the old style stuff.
Of course, he promptly changed that once in power. Just like he screwed the Jews and anyone else that wouldn’t submit to HIM