Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Welcome to the forum → The Lounge → Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?

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

Lights on the way
by akay
November 22, 2024, 02:51 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
November 22, 2024, 06:45 AM
What music are you listen...
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 08:08 PM
Gaza assault
November 21, 2024, 07:56 PM
Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
November 21, 2024, 05:07 PM
New Britain
November 20, 2024, 05:41 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
November 20, 2024, 09:02 AM
Marcion and the introduct...
by zeca
November 19, 2024, 11:36 PM
Dutch elections
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 10:11 PM
Random Islamic History Po...
by zeca
November 15, 2024, 08:46 PM
AMRIKAAA Land of Free .....
November 07, 2024, 09:56 AM
The origins of Judaism
by zeca
November 02, 2024, 12:56 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?

 (Read 23522 times)
  • 12 3 ... 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     OP - March 11, 2016, 03:47 PM
    Quote
    It’s become increasingly difficult for leftists and feminists to critique certain ideas and groups, even when those groups put forth misogynist ideas, such as far-right Islamic groups. At the same time, we’re dealing with figures like Donald Trump and his followers who are promoting ignorant, dangerous, and racist arguments against Muslims as a whole, homogenizing Muslim people in a misinformed and damaging way.

    Maryam Namazie is an atheist, a leftist, a feminist, a critic of Islamic extremism, and co-founder of the British Council of Ex-Muslims, yet she is routinely attacked and no-platformed — not only by Islamic groups, but by feminists and leftists, who call her Islamophobic.

    In this episode, I speak with Namazie about her critiques, as well as the Paris attacks, the New Years Eve assaults in Cologne, Charlie Hebdo, and the trend of no-platforming controversial figures.

    Listen to the podcast: http://www.feministcurrent.com/2016/02/16/podcast-maryam-namazie/
    Which side are you on?
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #1 - March 11, 2016, 03:53 PM
    Quote from: zeca on March 11, 2016, 03:47 PM
    Listen to the podcast: http://www.feministcurrent.com/2016/02/16/podcast-maryam-namazie/

    Maryam Namazie is an atheist, a leftist, a feminist, a critic of Islamic extremism, and co-founder of the British Council of Ex-Muslims, yet she is routinely attacked and no-platformed — not only by Islamic groups, but by feminists and leftists, who call her Islamophobic.

    all that is OK but I don't know the meaning of what is left and what is  right and what is middle., I think those tags are irrelevant  now a days.

    well let me hear this first
     
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #2 - March 12, 2016, 07:43 AM
    Hi zeca,

    I apologise for cutting across the profound dialogue that yeezevee has initiated with you. I know it would take me a long time to properly research and formulate a response that would do justice to the depth and eloquence of "I don't know the meaning of what is left and what is right and what is middle," and no doubt you are spending sleepless nights over it, which I think is only fair.

    My interjection, I'm afraid, is much more trivial than that: I've listened to the podcast as you suggested (thank you for the link) and find a strong similarity between the behaviour of the section of the Left that Maryam refers to (some call them the regressive Left), and the behaviour of what came to be called the Stalinist Left. It did not matter how many millions Stalin (or any other purportedly communist tyrant) killed, the Soviet Union was not to be criticised ("Have you forgotten how many imperialist armies invaded in 1921?!" etc.).

    One offshoot of that apologetics was the feminist initial enthusiasm for Margaret Thatcher, "because she is a woman." Why did we first actually have to experience Thatcherism ourselves, before such feminists came around? Is it going to take actual Shari'a in the West before feminists acknowledge that women are victims under that system? (Am I justified in thinking they're still interested in the plight of women?) How many more times must we hear that ISIS has "hijacked" Islam? Seriously? The fact that the Qur'an contains verses that contradict some of the practises of Shari'a is not the point. The point is that it contains the verses that support it. And besides, there's that little inconvenient innovation that we don't talk about: abrogation. Yes, sir! Those cuddly moderate verses mean sod all. They've been trumped by later bullballs verses.

    There is something about the way Western politics intersects with identity and ego that gives us the bizarre phenomenon of feminists supporting Islam, a creed whose scripture and doctrinal tradition are riddled through with the most rabid, violent misogynism. But no, it gets worse: feminists who don't want to know about rape if the perpetrators are Muslim, because "it ignores that there's rape elsewhere as well!" Convicted rapists should call their solicitors right now. They've been unfairly convicted because there were other rapes taking place on the other side of the world at the time.

    I don't think we need to worry too much about objections from Muslim apologists for Islam. They will never persuade because their purpose is not to persuade, but to stop progressives from persuading. Of course we know better than to let ourselves be intimidated, as Maryam well demonstrates. At worst they're an infantile annoyance.

    That so many Muslims are sensitive to Islam and the Qur'an being criticised is not our fault; it is theirs. They are the ones who refuse to be honest about their scripture. I'm afraid we cannot wait around until they one day wake up to call a spade a spade. We have our rights and freedoms to protect against a relentless mediaeval onslaught, aided and abetted by the Left that Maryam talks about.

    Sorry about the distraction, zeca. Without further ado, I hand you back to the venerable yeezevee.
    New general blog, Autonomous Individual, under construction at Freethought Blogs to be launched soon with posts on Pedagogy, Religion, Cities and Marriage Equality. http://freethoughtblogs.com/anjuli
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #3 - March 12, 2016, 12:00 PM
    BuraqRental.

    You. are. such a good writer!  Afro

    Also, finally a feminist platform that supports Namazie Smiley
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #4 - March 12, 2016, 01:00 PM
    Quote
    I've listened to the podcast as you suggested (thank you for the link) and find a strong similarity between the behaviour of the section of the Left that Maryam refers to (some call them the regressive Left), and the behaviour of what came to be called the Stalinist Left. It did not matter how many millions Stalin (or any other purportedly communist tyrant) killed, the Soviet Union was not to be criticised ("Have you forgotten how many imperialist armies invaded in 1921?!" etc.).

    I think there's a line of development between the two via uncritical support from parts of the left for national liberation movements and 'anti-imperialist' third world regimes.
    Which side are you on?
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #5 - March 12, 2016, 02:02 PM
    The problem with Maryam Namazie is that she doesn't seem to be aware of her subjectivity. She talks about growing up in an Islamist country, yet she doesn't recognize that different people have different experiences of Islam. So when she makes sweeping generalizations like that Islam is misogynistic, it betrays a lack of nuance.

    I can see why leftists oppose her. And as a leftist myself, I'd support the work she does if she stops homogenizing Islam. It's very easy to be critical of rightist xenophobes who homogenize Muslims, but many people not on the right talk about Islam as if it's a monolithic entity and somehow seek to justify it by trying to disconnect Islam from Muslims.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #6 - March 12, 2016, 07:43 PM
    Islam is not misogynistic at all. If by misogyny you mean a 'hatred' of women - rather Islam is at best antiquated and to some extent outdated when it comes to 'women issues', legal principles and relations between the sexes.  Classical Islam, as in the Hadith and Qur'an certainly do contain verses that  discriminate and degrade women if the stipulations, expectations and values were to be applied today. That there are Muslims that have reinterpreted the verses (Fatima Mernissi) or outright completely ignore rather uncomfortable elements of classical Islam (Quran, Hadith, tafsirs of the early scholars) is another matter all together.

    I agree nuance is required but when speaking of Islam we need to be clear that the modernist interpretation glosses over a lot of what the Quran truly means as Muhammad and his band of merry men that authored the Quran were of their time.
    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #7 - March 12, 2016, 10:15 PM
    I think you'd find that a lot of leftists would disagree with you about the relevance of what Muhammad "truly" intended. I certainly do. Many leftists are influenced by post-structuralism and have moved past this concept of objective truth and towards inter-subjective truths. From this standpoint, Namazie's view seems outdated. Certainly we can be critical of traditionalists who wish to impose a 7th century vision of Islam, but to make a statement that that somehow equates to the "true" Islam is a point of view that holds little basis in contemporary leftist frames of thought.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #8 - March 12, 2016, 10:47 PM
    Then how can leftists ever relate to any historical document ever? Historians and anthropologists construct/infer the intended meaning of a text via the language used at the time of when the text was written (or as close as) and combine that with evidence of cultural practices at the time which is where a wider reading of other texts, archaeology and ethno-centric studies come in.

    How can you move past good, decent academia? I don't get it. objective truth has nothing to do with it but when the Quran instructs people to discipline their wives or that such and such crime deserves punishment we apply historical analytical or social science techniques that provide a more accurate picture of the meaning or application of words and behaviours.

    Post-structuralism appears to be a fancy schmancy way of saying 'I'm gonna make shit up because my world view can't confirm to reality.' If you follow that line of thought then Islam means anything and everything.

    When I teach political ideology and use texts you can only understand it by analysing the meaning of words, associating them with actions (if applicable) and locating them within the context the words were revealed. To deny this and construct meaning of a belief or ideology based upon a contemporary understanding then state this is what the author intended or most likely meant is disingenuous and a delusion.
    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #9 - March 12, 2016, 11:02 PM
    Quote from: Jedi on March 12, 2016, 10:47 PM
    Then how can leftists ever relate to any historical document ever? Historians and anthropologists construct/infer the intended meaning of a text via the language used at the time of when the text was written (or as close as) and combine that with evidence of cultural practices at the time which is where a wider reading of other texts, archaeology and ethno-centric studies come in.

    Intersubjectivity means I look at a historical document from the subjectivity (i.e. perspective) of its writers. I can study the subjectivities of 7th century Muslims without imposing them onto 21st century Islam, because 21st century Muslims have different subjectivities.

    Quote
    Post-structuralism appears to be a fancy schmancy way of saying 'I'm gonna make shit up because my world view can't confirm to reality.' If you follow that line of thought then Islam means anything and everything.

    Post-structuralism has nothing to do with my worldview. If anything, it's the exact opposite of that: it's about moving beyond objectivizing our own worldviews and recognizing that our views are shaped by our subjective experiences, and other people have other worldviews that might be very different from ours. Post-structuralism is about recognizing those small "t" truths.

    Quote
    To deny this and construct meaning of a belief or ideology based upon a contemporary understanding then state this is what the author intended or most likely meant is disingenuous and a delusion.

    I explicitly said that what the author intended is irrelevant to Islam today. It's only relevant if we're studying the Quran as a historical document. If we're studying it as a living document, we need to understand it from the perspective of its living adherents.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #10 - March 12, 2016, 11:32 PM
    I agree with the first two points.

    My concern is that recognition of subjectivity is not new as historians double check their findings to eliminate bias and peer review allows for criticism to occur. There is such a thing as a 'true' meaning whereby true means as close to the intended meaning at the time we can get. It's this understanding that allows historians to critically re-evaluate key texts and understand their meanings.

    There are no small t truths. Your truth about whether the Battle of Hastings occurred in 1066, of what ethnicity Genthis Khan was or what the word 'wicked' meant in Victorian England must conform to the best available evidence as opposed to how you want things to be. Thus, other people can be wrong. Or am I misunderstanding the argument?

    It is true that 21st c Muslims have different subjectivities. But we can not superimpose their mindset and interpretation on to a 7th C text. We must, using the best historical and linguistic techniques available to us, allow the Quran and Hadith to speak for themselves. This will allow for an honest and coherent dialogue otherwise it's a free for all. 21st C liberal minded Muslims or non-Muslims who wish to gloss over the more uncomfortable aspects of Islam which is rooted in 7th C - 12th C (or even later) must accept this otherwise conversations will be fruitless.

    Reminds me of the science wars of the mid 90s.

    I like these discussions.
    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #11 - March 13, 2016, 05:18 AM
    Quote from: Absurdist on March 12, 2016, 11:02 PM
    studying the Quran ...as a living document.


    I don't know where you're based, but, boy, are you in trouble. Something that even the "subjective" Namazie would've been able to point out to you.
    New general blog, Autonomous Individual, under construction at Freethought Blogs to be launched soon with posts on Pedagogy, Religion, Cities and Marriage Equality. http://freethoughtblogs.com/anjuli
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #12 - March 13, 2016, 05:37 AM
    Quote from: Jedi on March 12, 2016, 11:32 PM
    It is true that 21st c Muslims have different subjectivities. But we can not superimpose their mindset and interpretation on to a 7th C text. We must, using the next historical and linguistic techniques available to us, allow the Quran and Hadith to speak for themselves. This will allow for an honest and coherent dialogue otherwise it's a free for all. 21st C liberal minded Muslims or non-Muslims who wish to gloss over the more uncomfortable aspects of Islam which is rooted in 7th C - 12th C (or even later) must accept this otherwise conversations will be fruitless.


    I agree with this, except perhaps to point out that a quick trawl of dialogues or debates involving Islamic apologists suggests that "pandemonium" or "riot" would be more accurate than "free for all". Other than that, I'm still working hard to understand 7th-C subjectivity. My progress so far can be read here https://wordpress.com/post/anjulipandavar.wordpress.com/274. I've already had further thoughts on some of the points made in this piece, which I'm simply releasing as blog posts as and when, such as this one https://wordpress.com/post/anjulipandavar.wordpress.com/308, posted today.
    New general blog, Autonomous Individual, under construction at Freethought Blogs to be launched soon with posts on Pedagogy, Religion, Cities and Marriage Equality. http://freethoughtblogs.com/anjuli
  • Re: Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #13 - March 13, 2016, 09:20 AM
    Quote from: Helaine on March 12, 2016, 12:00 PM
    BuraqRental.

    You. are. such a good writer!  Afro

    Also, finally a feminist platform that supports Namazie Smiley


    Thank you for your kind words, Helaine. I only joined this forum a few weeks ago and am still finding my feet (thankfully, not because they've been amputated!). I want to generally stick to one persona on the forum, but my venting and heavier writing is on my blog https://anjulipandavar.wordpress.com/ where I've just started a new satirical page "No Jokes, No Humour, No Fun". I might cross-post from that page to here, but am still thinking about it. I'm now working on a satirical piece about ISIS's Fatwa #64.

    I've generally been on the feminist outer fringes, even back in the day, for pretty much the same reasons that Namazie is now. Joining her is like finding a home. Germaine Greer's silence on the plight of women in Islam in general, and under full-blown Shari'a in particular, gives a whole new meaning to "The Female Eunuch"!

    I look forward to reading your posts.
    New general blog, Autonomous Individual, under construction at Freethought Blogs to be launched soon with posts on Pedagogy, Religion, Cities and Marriage Equality. http://freethoughtblogs.com/anjuli
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #14 - March 13, 2016, 11:39 AM
    Quote
    Quote from: Helaine on March 12, 2016, 12:00 PM
    BuraqRental.

    You. are. such a good writer!  Afro

    Also, finally a feminist platform that supports Namazie Smiley

    Quote from: BuraqRentalsInc on March 13, 2016, 09:20 AM
    https://anjulipandavar.wordpress.com/ .................
    I look forward to reading your posts.


    Hmm   Helaine I  am glad you are probing BuraqRentalsInc and I must read that anju_blog to get more insight in to BuraqRentalsInc.,  

    Ladies,gentlemen and the readers., I think you guys have to be careful about BuraqRentalsInc., They actually rent burqa to cover your brain and advertise all sorts of freebies to lure and dope the customers . But don't judge BuraqRentalsInc what she writes at CEMB., one must take away burkha that is hiding our brains then only we can uncover BuraqRentalsInc ulterior motives..

    Quote
    "No Jokes, No Humour, No Fun" in Islam.... specially in this 21st century Islam..   BuraqRentalsInc.

    let me remember that and use it on humorless folks .  well I added the word"Islam" to BRI(BuraqRentalsInc.) words
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #15 - March 13, 2016, 04:33 PM
    Quote from: Absurdist on March 12, 2016, 11:02 PM

    I explicitly said that what the author intended is irrelevant to Islam today. It's only relevant if we're studying the Quran as a historical document. If we're studying it as a living document, we need to understand it from the perspective of its living adherents.


    Many of its modern adherents still base their views on interpretation (their own, scholars, etc) of what the author intended. So the methods you discard can still be applied.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #16 - March 13, 2016, 06:47 PM
    It is mind boggling.

    Black is white, down is up, 100 is 3 and man is woman.
    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #17 - March 13, 2016, 11:37 PM
    Does that mean Quranists should be taken as seriously as the "real" muslim scholars like Qadhi?

    I feel like Quranists should get more recognition, I think if more muslims adopt Quranism reformation would come much faster....

    As dishonest as it may sound, it's better if they follow Christianity's "old testament doesn't matter" route. Just scrap all hadiths and make new interpretation of Quran.
  • Re: Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #18 - March 14, 2016, 02:48 AM
    I always find Namazie to be the left guarantor of ruling class opinion, (and here I include the ruling class and capitalist left.) Not because she isn't sincere but because half her battles are conducted at the level of the political elite that none of us care for in the struggle for a better world.

    So what. You've made the Trotskyist (and other factions of the capitalist left) agree with you. What is this doing for muslims in doubt who need support or apostates? You can't really say you're campaigning to better the lives of ex-muslims, muslims from atheist backgrounds, etc. In a hilarious irony, when the crappy bourgeois left criticises her being motivated by a political agenda they actually complete this ideological matrix that feeds into this Stalinist (for that is their ex tradition in iran) idea that all capital and property must be managed from the top up rather than said relations being destroyed.

    If Namazie was a true anti-Stalinist communist, she would realise that the left and right are both different wings of the capitalist class. She would also realise that the left is absolutely misguided about the masses as the right, not because of any mental deficiency, but because what the working-class will do to overcome the self-perpetuating cycle of capital is inimical to their class interests.

    Simple declamatory pronouncements designed to cultivate an elevated level of consciousness (without theory being informed by action) are useless at best and actively reactionary at worst. Action being the will to act, and when action is genuine action (I.E: the new novel will to act) there will always be risk taking and uncertainty, otherwise it is not meaningful political or moral action in any sense. It is a mantra of rigidly mechanised routines, like the body on amphetamines, although this is a much more disorientating level of speed, resulting in a consciousness that is stuck in a deranged loop of excitement and despair. It doesn't liberate you but entrap you further.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #19 - March 14, 2016, 06:00 AM
    Hmm.

    Separating Namazie's feminism and anti-Islamic views from her political/economic views is probably better.

    I think her target is still to make everything better for ex-muslims. Whether her political views would produce the best result for this or not... People can be contradictory and idealistic. It's hard to compare everything they say and see if they all match up. I think Namazie's intentions are still good, but we don't all have to agree with her political views. Most of her supporters probably don't like communism anyway, just supporting her because her views on Islam are valid and important. She fights hard against Islamism.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #20 - March 14, 2016, 10:44 AM
    Quote from: schizo on March 14, 2016, 02:48 AM
    I always find Namazie to be the left guarantor of ruling class opinion, (and here I include the ruling class and capitalist left.) Not because she isn't sincere but because half her battles are conducted at the level of the political elite that none of us care for in the struggle for a better world.

    So what. You've made the Trotskyist (and other factions of the capitalist left) agree with you. What is this doing for muslims in doubt who need support or apostates? You can't really say you're campaigning to better the lives of ex-muslims, muslims from atheist backgrounds, etc. In a hilarious irony, when the crappy bourgeois left criticises her being motivated by a political agenda they actually complete this ideological matrix that feeds into this Stalinist (for that is their ex tradition in iran) idea that all capital and property must be managed from the top up rather than said relations being destroyed.

    If Namazie was a true anti-Stalinist communist, she would realise that the left and right are both different wings of the capitalist class. She would also realise that the left is absolutely misguided about the masses as the right, not because of any mental deficiency, but because what the working-class will do to overcome the self-perpetuating cycle of capital is inimical to their class interests.


    Hi schizo, good to see you back.

    As I understand it there was a split in the Worker Communists over Maryam Namazie's approach. I'm wondering if you'd say your critique goes for the Worker Communists in general or just Namazie's side in the argument. I'm not that sure what to make of the Worker Communists in any case. Their whole tradition does come out of a break with the official CP some time after the revolution in Iran but they seem to have moved on from their origins.
    Which side are you on?
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #21 - March 14, 2016, 12:08 PM
    Quote from: Absurdist on March 12, 2016, 10:15 PM
    I think you'd find that a lot of leftists would disagree with you about the relevance of what Muhammad "truly" intended. I certainly do. Many leftists are influenced by post-structuralism and have moved past this concept of objective truth and towards inter-subjective truths.

     

    I don't understand this. The entire purpose of the religion is attaining salvation and entering heaven by performing the right deeds and avoiding sinful deeds. The entire religion is based upon the belief that Muhammad's claims to being a prophet of god were true.


    If you accept that Muhammad's claims were false then there is no purpose in prayer,, no purpose in hajj, no purpose in fasting, no purpose in avoiding "sinful" deeds if there is nothing immoral about them.

    Not to mention the concept of tawhid and the shahada itself become meaningless.

    In my opinion a life without curiosity is not a life worth living
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #22 - March 14, 2016, 12:49 PM
    TDR throws some raw gems here & there in to the forum.,
     
    Quote from: TheDarkRebel on March 14, 2016, 12:08 PM
    I don't understand this. The entire purpose of the religion is attaining salvation and entering heaven by performing the right deeds and avoiding sinful deeds. The entire religion is based upon the belief that Muhammad's claims to being a prophet of god were true.

    If you accept that Muhammad's claims were false then there is no purpose in prayer,, no purpose in hajj, no purpose in fasting, no purpose in avoiding "sinful" deeds if there is nothing immoral about them.

    Not to mention the concept of tawhid and the shahada itself become meaningless.


    Let me collect that and   polish a bit  to write two statements out of that one.  One for Islam and other one for all faiths/faith heads . Cheesy

    Quote
     ... The entire purpose of  Islam as religion  is attaining salvation and entering heaven by performing the right deeds and avoiding sinful deeds. This whole faith is based upon the belief that Muhammad's claim  being the perfect last prophet of god and Quran is perfect  last word of god  are  true.

    If you accept that Muhammad's claims were false then there is no purpose in Islamic prayer,, no purpose in hajj, no purpose in fasting and no purpose in avoiding "sinful" deeds if there is nothing immoral about them. On top of all that the basic concept of Islam "tawhid and the shahada"  become just meaningless words at best and self deception and deceiving other at worst........    .TheDarkRebel

    That is for Islam and this is for All Religions/All Faiths and to All Faith heads...lol..

     
    Quote
    The entire purpose   a religion or a faith in this super god supreme deity is  based upon the design to focus the attention and energy of human beings on a single, unknown,  unchanging, uncompromising,  invisible supreme being described ancient/medieval cave dwellers written in some silly books as god/human/prophet chi chats. This  super god supreme deity allegedly created an inferior human race just for some extra companionship and love for himself and then supposedly foisted a set of oppressive and in some cases arbitrary rules on them, which if broken would be met with unimaginable punishment in this life and after this life.

    Any faith or any religion which does  not agree with the above statement should not be considered as religion  but a religious hypothesis that is open to debate, to question and  to modify as we go along in life..  

    And my good wishes to you dear TDR
    yeezevee
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #23 - March 14, 2016, 03:13 PM
    Quote from: TheDarkRebel on March 14, 2016, 12:08 PM


    I don't understand this. The entire purpose of the religion is attaining salvation and entering heaven by performing the right deeds and avoiding sinful deeds. The entire religion is based upon the belief that Muhammad's claims to being a prophet of god were true.


    If you accept that Muhammad's claims were false then there is no purpose in prayer,, no purpose in hajj, no purpose in fasting, no purpose in avoiding "sinful" deeds if there is nothing immoral about them.

    Not to mention the concept of tawhid and the shahada itself become meaningless.




    On the surface of it, maybe. But dig deeper and religion is about the use of stories, symbolism and abstract concepts that then become codified in order to influence or control behavior. Figuring out how the spell works doesn’t necessarily free one from it.

    I'm beginning to become of the opinion that reinterpreting the symbols might be more effective than casting them away all together.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #24 - March 14, 2016, 07:09 PM
    Then you are being dishonest. You will be re appropriating a 'symbol' to present it as something that is far removed to what was originally intended.

    The underlying principle of super naturalism should be abolished all together. Otherwise you are not freeing yourself from the chains, you're only slightly loosening them.
    No free mixing of the sexes is permitted on these forums or via PM or the various chat groups that are operating.

    Women must write modestly and all men must lower their case.

    http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?425649-Have-some-Hayaa-%28modesty-shame%29-people!
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #25 - March 14, 2016, 07:20 PM
    Quote from: happymurtad on March 14, 2016, 03:13 PM
    On the surface of it, maybe. But dig deeper and religion is about the use of stories, symbolism and abstract concepts that then become codified in order to influence or control behavior.


    Aesop's fables are the same way. So is any good work of fiction or parable.

    I don't understand why people must do everything they can to put a positive spin on religion and render scripture no different from any other type of literature.
    "I moreover believe that any religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system."
    -Thomas Paine
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #26 - March 14, 2016, 07:34 PM
    Quote
    Quote from: happymurtad on March 14, 2016, 03:13 PM
    On the surface of it, maybe. But dig deeper and religion is about the use of stories, symbolism and abstract concepts that then become codified in order to influence or control behavior. Figuring out how the spell works doesn’t necessarily free one from it.

    I'm beginning to become of the opinion that reinterpreting the symbols might be more effective than casting them away all together.

    Quote from: Jedi on March 14, 2016, 07:09 PM
    Then you are being dishonest. You will be re appropriating a 'symbol' to present it as something that is far removed to what was originally intended.

    The underlying principle of super naturalism should be abolished all together. Otherwise you are not freeing yourself from the chains, you're only slightly loosening them.


    well JD .. you are looking for facts and truth where as Happy M is trying approach to solve  the present problems that is created by these  so called  religions/gods/preachers/faith heads  and the sociopolitical structures that comes of these religions..
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #27 - March 14, 2016, 07:35 PM
    I never implied a positive spin. I’m just stating the facts. Belief, by its very nature, is dealing with the world of ideas. Symbols represent those ideas. It’s how human beings work. If you can have those symbols represent different ideas, it’s probably easier than starting off from scratch. History is full of examples of this.

    I’m not saying you have to retain any “supernatural” elements related to the symbol to help it develop a new meaning.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #28 - March 14, 2016, 07:39 PM
    Quote from: happymurtad on March 14, 2016, 03:13 PM
    On the surface of it, maybe. But dig deeper and religion is about the use of stories, symbolism and abstract concepts that then become codified in order to influence or control behavior. Figuring out how the spell works doesn’t necessarily free one from it.

    I'm beginning to become of the opinion that reinterpreting the symbols might be more effective than casting them away all together.

    I wanna get high with you and talk about this.
  • Why must Maryam Namazie take on the left in her critiques of Islamic extremism?
     Reply #29 - March 14, 2016, 07:44 PM
    Quote from: happymurtad on March 14, 2016, 07:35 PM
    I never implied a positive spin. I’m just stating the facts. Belief, by its very nature, is dealing with the world of ideas. Symbols represent those ideas. It’s how human beings work. If you can have those symbols represent different ideas, it’s probably easier than starting off from scratch. History is full of examples of this.

    I’m not saying you have to retain any “supernatural” elements related to the symbol to help it develop a new meaning.

    well then what you said before is no use.,    if it doesn't have “supernatural” element/s.,then it is not a  belief  and you can not call it as religion.  It is as good as any scientific hypothesis  that every day folks hypothesize on a given problem they are working., And your previous post  is useless for faith heads...

    YOU GOT TO HAVE SOME SUPERNATURAL STUFF TO THESE GUYS.,   let me put this basic wiki link on Concepts of god  in different faiths here .. and all that is nothing to do with OP
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • 12 3 ... 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »