Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Gaza assault
Yesterday at 09:25 AM

New Britain
February 25, 2025, 08:11 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
February 25, 2025, 03:50 AM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
February 23, 2025, 09:40 AM

What music are you listen...
by zeca
February 22, 2025, 09:50 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
February 22, 2025, 02:56 PM

German nationalist party ...
February 21, 2025, 10:31 AM

Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
February 14, 2025, 08:00 AM

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
February 13, 2025, 10:07 PM

Muslim grooming gangs sti...
February 13, 2025, 08:20 PM

Russia invades Ukraine
February 13, 2025, 11:01 AM

Islam and Science Fiction
February 11, 2025, 11:57 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Traditional Islamism

 (Read 4402 times)
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Traditional Islamism
     OP - April 18, 2009, 05:52 PM

    When I left Islam, I was still optimistic that it might reform itself some day. I knew of the Mu'tazilites, the rationalist school that did not see the Quran as infallible, and I thought perhaps there could be a rationalist revival.

    However, after seeing the revivalist Traditional Islam movement, which is represented by websites like Masud Ahmed Khan's site (link given below), I am seriously pessimistic about any reform in the Islamic tradition. I see very little self-critique in the Islamic tradition, only defensiveness in the face of perceived Western imperialism.
    http://masud.co.uk/

    The Traditional Islam movement employs, imho, obscurantist sophistry that covers up facts about Islam with its eloquence. It is orthodox to the core, and though it bills itself as being the panacea to political Islam, I don't see that much difference between Islamists and traditional Muslims in theory. It's just that the traditional Sunnis are nonviolent and speak in softer voices but otherwise the ideology is not too different. Traditional scholars like Abdal Hakim-Murad all believe that there will some day be a return to a global Caliphate, for instance. When Muslim luminaries and intellectuals believe these things, is it surprising that Muslim radicals are so politically charged?

    A long time back I had a fairly useless argument with the guy who runs this blog:
    http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/

    I was trying to convince him that Islam had to change to adapt to the modern world. But I could not get through to him at all. Please read his blog. Actually he tried to convince me that there is no such thing as "Islamism", and that the only difference between Traditional Islam and Islamism is that Islamists are violent whereas traditional Muslims, while espousing the exact same ideology and beliefs, want to bring about change through peaceful means.

    On his blog he criticizes Majid Nawaz, the Quillam Foundation, etc., i.e. all those who try to present Islam with a more modernized face, and with a totally straight face endorses all sorts of barbaric practices as intellectually respectable.

    Did you guys catch the episode of The Big Questions with the topic "Is Islam an Intolerant Religion?" It featured Majid Nawaz, Maryam Namazie and also that complete joke, Anjum Choudhury.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAKRvBe_-EA

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zdymMsSgIk

    When moderate Muslims like Majid Nawaz and the other Sufi gentleman in the audience deny certain actions attributed to Muhammad (like the way he stoned adulterers to death, contrary to Jesus' actions, let it be noted), they only look foolish. You can see the discussion on Traditional Islamism's blog on this episode -- they're all basically just laughing at Majid Nawaz for denying the stoning punishment:
    http://traditionalislamism.wordpress.com/2009/02/22/the-idea-of-a-practising-muslim-is-an-innovation/

    There is no dispute whatsoever on the stoning punishment as far as the Islamic orthodoxy is concerned:
    http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=7&ID=1856&CATE=1

    The basic questions I'm asking are:

    Is Traditional Islam all that different from Islamism in terms of ideological content (even if it is different in terms of practical tactics)?

    Does Traditional Islam not give legitimacy to Islamism by not criticizing barbaric aspects of the Islamic religion?

    Is the Traditional Islam movement itself quasi-political?
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #1 - April 18, 2009, 06:17 PM


    Is Traditional Islam all that different from Islamism in terms of ideological content (even if it is different in terms of practical tactics)?

    Does Traditional Islam not give legitimacy to Islamism by not criticizing barbaric aspects of the Islamic religion?

    Is the Traditional Islam movement itself quasi-political?


    I have to agree with you and this is quite difficult for me as I personally know quite a few involved with the "Traditional" Islam movement and I know they are decent people.

    Some here may be a little confused by the name "Traditional" Islam when the movement is believed by many to be moderate and even Sufi inclined - but that is the point of what they are trying to do. To - as it were - reclaim 'traditional' Islam from the extremists.

    I am not sure I would say they give legitimacy to Islamists, but I certainly agree that it is just the same old Islam dressed up in 'obscurantist sophistry'.

    I think many of those involved sincerely desire a more moderate peaceful and spiritual Islam, and so I certainly wouldn't accuse them of trying to mislead anyone. But it is simply that they are in a straight-jacket called Islam and no matter how hard one strains and wriggles - you really are not going to be able to change things much. I suspect some will eventually see that it's not working and they are still left with the same problems. Others will be happy with the illusion of a more moderate, peaceful and spiritual religion, and still others will not have a clue but smile and nod joyfully when the main movers behind it give another dazzling and eloquent speech.

    I was at a talk by Maryam and the issue of whether Islam can reform came up. I said I believed it could like Christianity has. Maryam said Christianity hasn't really been reformed but it has been  marginalized and made irrelevant and that was what she hoped would happen to Islam. I am beginning to think she is right.

    btw - yes I saw that program when it was aired a few Snday's ago - I wish Maryam had been given more time to talk - she's a great public speaker!
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #2 - April 18, 2009, 06:36 PM


    I was at a talk by Maryam and the issue of whether Islam can reform came up. I said I believed it could like Christianity has. Maryam said Christianity hasn't really been reformed but it has been  marginalized and made irrelevant and that was what she hoped would happen to Islam. I am beginning to think she is right.

    btw - yes I saw that program when it was aired a few Snday's ago - I wish Maryam had been given more time to talk - she's a great public speaker!



    Well, even if a religion has to reform & stay, it needs something to hold onto, otherwise it is reformed out of all existence!

    In Christianity's case, what needed to be reformed, ridiculed & marginalized was the Church & bigots, what Jesus taught & did wasn't particularly abhorrent by themselves, in Muhammad's case, not only do we need to reform, ridicule & marginalize the followers, a possible task but we need to also find ways to do the impossible-reform Muhammad's actions.
    .

    As for Christianity, even where it hasn't been marginalized, or even amongst people who still take it seriously, they have found a wriggle room by simply avoiding the OT God, & focusing on Jesus(despite the fact that the OT God is Jesus Daddy & also Jesus Roll Eyes)

    Thus people like Sparky can easily explain the flaws of Christianity away by claiming that he's under Jesus, & the OT Commands were for another place & time-which seems absurd to an unbeliever, but its possible for people to see things that way as believers.

    Indeed, the OT is like an old piece of Constitution of any country, to give an analogy, its like the American Constitution of the 18th century, when they still had slavery, while Jesus' teachings are like the present American Constitution of the 21st century.Christianity isn't significantly OT religion, they don't circumcise their boys' or eat kosher food, its possible for a believer to explain those stuff away as important only till Jesus arrived to put matters straight(although it won't convince skeptics)& still imagine that their Lord & founder of their faith, Jesus was a good person,worth emulating for all time.

    There's nothing particularly appalling in Jesus' words, & certainly nothing appalling in his conduct.

    In Judaism, while YHWH is certainly unpleasant, Jews have practically never imposed their faith on others, & they have a legacy of surviving in the face of tremendous persecution, while Islam has very often imposed itself on populations the world over.

    A Christian can well look at their past atrocities, & convince themselves that their actions were contrary to Jesus' teachings, whereas when Muslims look at their history, they'll have to face up to the unpleasant fact that they were acting exactly as Muhammad had.

    Nor can Muslims continue to overlook all that is sordid in Muhammad's character, some try to do that by becoming Quran only Muslims, but even if we're left with only the Quran, there are passages advocating peace, others advocating violence & the violence gets the upper hand via the doctrine of abrogation in the Quran itself. To explain the violence in the Quran, we need to turn to hadiths, & then we get all the unpleasant stuff in the hadiths.

    What aspect of the faith can Muslims hold onto after reform, if they're forced to take a long, hard look at their faith, as Christians(& most others) have been?

    Christians can still have a meek, mild, loving Jesus who's their Lord & religion's founder,Jews can revel in the fact that they've survived such intense persecution & still survived, Buddhists have the Buddha & his essentially benign teachings, etc-Muslims have an unpleasant Allah, who unlike YHWH demands world conquest, & a founder Muhammad, who did most unpleasant stuff a person could do.

    Its difficult to avoid looking at either Allah's or Muhammad's flaws, & still remain believers, possible but requires loads of mental gymnastics, & if Muslims are forced like Christians to be very critically analyzed, that might be just too much for Islam to bear .

    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #3 - April 18, 2009, 06:49 PM

    I was at a talk by Maryam and the issue of whether Islam can reform came up. I said I believed it could like Christianity has. Maryam said Christianity hasn't really been reformed but it has been  marginalized and made irrelevant and that was what she hoped would happen to Islam. I am beginning to think she is right.

    Its a good point, and exposing Islam will certainly speed this process up..

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #4 - April 18, 2009, 06:54 PM

    I was at a talk by Maryam and the issue of whether Islam can reform came up. I said I believed it could like Christianity has. Maryam said Christianity hasn't really been reformed but it has been  marginalized and made irrelevant and that was what she hoped would happen to Islam. I am beginning to think she is right.

    Yep, I think that's what will happen to Islam. It doesn't seem to have the tools to reform itself from within, but I think with the passage of time and the pressure of the circumstances it will simply have to retreat from the public sphere.

    I am actually hoping that secular progressives in Iran manage to displace the current regime there at some point, as that would really deal a huge death-knell to political Islam.
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #5 - April 18, 2009, 07:12 PM

    Its difficult to avoid looking at either Allah's or Muhammad's flaws, & still remain believers, possible but requires loads of mental gymnastics, & if Muslims are forced like Christians to be very critically analyzed, that might be just too much for Islam to bear.

    Some good points, Rashna.

    Let me add a bit about Hinduism also: in the 19th century, the Bengali renaissance in India, part of the overall anticolonial movement toward independence, led to a massive reform of Hinduism on the grounds that the core texts of Hinduism are philosophical rather than prescriptive, and on the grounds that lived, spiritual experience superceded all intellectual dogmas. Unlike Muslims, who simply see all criticism of their rules and laws as Western imperialism, the Hindu reformers didn't have even the slightest problem throwing out the old shastras and smritis without a second thought. Nobel prize winners like Rabindranath Tagore came out of this movement.

    Imagine if by some miracle Muslim reformers did the same -- just threw out barbaric Shariah laws without flinching or getting defensive! Lord, I would celebrate!

    With Islam, the problem really boils down to how one can reconcile oneself with Muhammad's later behavior in Medina. I've seen Muslims like Leila Ahmed and Kecia Ali very courageously admit that Muhammad did many things that can't be seen as acceptable in today's context, but for some reason they manage to maintain their faith in Islam ... it's not clear to me how. Perhaps they find themselves drawn to some of the beautiful things that have come out of Islam -- the art, the poetry, the mystical traditions.
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #6 - April 18, 2009, 07:18 PM

    With Islam, the problem really boils down to how one can reconcile oneself with Muhammad's later behavior in Medina. I've seen Muslims like Leila Ahmed and Kecia Ali very courageously admit that Muhammad did many things that can't be seen as acceptable in today's context, but for some reason they manage to maintain their faith in Islam ... it's not clear to me how. Perhaps they find themselves drawn to some of the beautiful things that have come out of Islam -- the art, the poetry, the mystical traditions.


    Hi ned!

    I'm not a Hindu, I'm a daughter of a Muslim mother & a Zoroastrian father & I'm unsure about God's existence, but I do know about Hinduism from where I stay. Hinduism, like Judiam doesn't have a single founder, not even a single god-it is thus rather different from Islam.

    Islam, as a proselytizing faith with a single founder, can be rather closely compared with the other biggie-Christianity, founded by Jesus Christ, or with the Eastern tradition of Buddhism.

    Both Jesus & Buddha are regarded by all their founders as the ultimate ideal against which they must measure their lives, their actions & teachings are the basis for the faiths-infact the faiths derive their names from these two!

    In case of Islam, although it derives its name from "submission" every Muslim is required to say that they believe in Allah & Muhammad in their shahada.

    Muhammad is parallel to Jesus & Buddha, & diametrically different from both.

    World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #7 - April 18, 2009, 07:23 PM

    I'm not a Hindu, I'm a daughter of a Muslim mother & a Zoroastrian father & I'm unsure about God's existence, but I do know about Hinduism from where I stay. Hinduism, like Judiam doesn't have a single founder, not even a single god-it is thus rather different from Islam.

    Yep, you're right. In fact the word "Hinduism" itself is contested and seen as a modern construct. Prior to the advent of Islam in South Asia, what really existed in India were a number of philosophies and cults that engaged in creative discourse with one another. That's why India was quite pluralistic and non-proselytizing before Islam came into the picture. That entire amalgam is dubbed "Hinduism" today.

    Islam, as a proselytizing faith with a single founder, can be rather closely compared with the other biggie-Christianity, founded by Jesus Christ, or with the Eastern tradition of Buddhism.

    Both Jesus & Buddha are regarded by all their founders as the ultimate ideal against which they must measure their lives, their actions & teachings are the basis for the faiths-infact the faiths derive their names from these two!

    In case of Islam, although it derives its name from "submission" every Muslim is required to say that they believe in Allah & Muhammad in their shahada.

    Muhammad is parallel to Jesus & Buddha, & diametrically different from both.

    Yeah, this is the core problem.
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #8 - April 18, 2009, 07:25 PM

    Perhaps they find themselves drawn to some of the beautiful things that have come out of Islam -- the art, the poetry, the mystical traditions.

    That does not make you a Muslim, just somebody with an interest in classical history and art.  

    They probably are cultural Muslims, and just not willing to admit in public that they are agnostic and thus no different from some members of this forum.

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #9 - April 18, 2009, 07:28 PM

    Perhaps they find themselves drawn to some of the beautiful things that have come out of Islam -- the art, the poetry, the mystical traditions.

    That does not make you a Muslim, just somebody with an interest in classical history and art.  

    They probably are cultural Muslims, and just not willing to admit in public that they are agnostic and thus no different from some members of this forum.

    I have heard people saying that Leila Ahmed and Kecia Ali are not really Muslims per se, as they are quite honest in their criticisms of Islam in its classical formulation ... so I think you're right, they're probably cultural Muslims who have a bone to pick with neoconservatives who integrate their dislike of Islam with an imperialist agenda.
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #10 - April 18, 2009, 08:43 PM

    Sam Harris puts is nicely, if you are a moderate in a religious belief then you pretty much doubt it. One cannot be a moderate in a religious belief, it one believes in that conviction firmly. Such as one cannot be a moderate in the belief that the earth is geospherical. Recently I have been looking into what Musharaf pre-posed and that is enlightened moderation, it is just a fancy word to say maybe you doubt the divinity of Islam. Such thoughts within Islam could work, if the masses were not illiterate, I see in the near future Indian and Pakistani Muslims will not rely on Islam too fundamentally, and that will be the deathblow to it, once the Muslim masses learn to think critically Islam will almost become non-existent in the political sphere. Turkey and Malaysia are perfect examples of this. Educate the masses in critical thinking and Islam starts to collapse. 
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #11 - April 18, 2009, 09:14 PM

    Muslims claim Islam to be the fastest-growing religion in the world, but I'm curious about how many people that call themselves Muslim actually believe in Islam.

    Personally, I have met some Muslims that don't even know how to pray but still proudly call themselves Muslim. My dad was working in a particular area of Russia recently where everybody is Muslim by name, but he did not see a single hijabi and found that everyone drinks and eats pork.

    "when you've got thousands of hadith/sunnah and a book like the Qur'an where abrogation is propagated by some; anyone with a grudge and some time on their hands can find something to confirm what ever they wish"- Kaiwai
  • Re: Traditional Islamism
     Reply #12 - April 18, 2009, 09:22 PM

    Muslims claim to be the fastest-growing religion in the world, but I'm curious about how many people that call themselves Muslim actually believe in Islam.

    Personally, I have met some Muslims that don't even know how to pray but still proudly call themselves Muslim. My dad was working in a particular area of Russia recently where everybody is Muslim by name, but he did not see a single hijabi and found that everyone drinks and eats pork.

    Thats certainly true.  However I question the claim in any case.  From what I hear the numbers of Muslims in Africa is dramatically reversing and I would love to see some real impartial statistics.  Anyone got some?

    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • 1« Previous thread | Next thread »