Jump to content
Baghdadee بغدادي

Why Muslims are not free to interpret Koran?


Recommended Posts

What annoys me about the stupid political justification by well-spoken Muslims is that it has been suggested that most young Muslims are frustrated by the foreign policies of the West. But the question is that one can deal with unacceptable western foreign policies through the available democratic channels and not necessarily through violent channels such as killing. Killing people to demonstrate one’s protest on western foreign policies is simply a way to reflect one’s perception on how to influence the world and issues that one disagrees with.

 

 

 

Now, if I were in a desperate and depressed state of mind and spirit then I would do the closest thing that may be of worthwhile. The worthwhile thing that I may do is the one that makes me focus on how I can be in peace with myself. And in Islam I may make my Muslim community feel proud explicitly but guilty implicitly. Since killing myself would, on the surface, demonstrate my commitment to my community religious creed but deeply I will leave an eternal sense of guilt. By doing so I am in peace with myself and make my community lives the contradiction of feeling guilty and been proud of me. It is a very complex message that can be used by young Muslims to have an everlasting peace by dying but punish my community by such inner conflict of pride and guilt. In simplest terms I can declare my double bind message of “ I love you and I want to hurt you for not letting me do what I believe is right for me”. By the way, this sort of dynamic can happen in non-religious community as well.

 

 

 

The above analysis is about the chronic identity crisis young Muslims live like many other young people in this world. But the difference between a committed Muslim and an ordinary person is that the ordinary person is doing the same but will hurt his or her only family and not to kill as many as s/he can by suicide bombing. We mustn’t forget that there are stories of a severely depressed person who chooses not to kill him or herself only but to blow few more around him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 148
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Muthana

During the police debriefing after the bombing in London, one journalist asked

the London Chief police if he think this act was done by Muslim's terrorist, and

his answer was" it is wrong to combine the two words, Muslims and terrorist,

Islam is a religion of peace, may be they are terrorist use the name of Islam to

justify their action, but they aren't Muslims". No body can say it better !!

 

I believe few people terrorizing Islam , more than terrorizing the people. Islam

was the fastest growing religion in the united states before 911, and what Bin

Laden did, or what Zaraqwai is doing, or what the extremists did in Algeria

destroys the faith, and the name of Islam , and we like it or not every one of

us who has Middle eastern name is impacted by the action of few criminals.

 

I know people in US, and I believe every one else, use religion to their

benefitsآ , either by collecting money, or participating in business, and some

hungry for power and money, and since they can't win by democracy, they chose

the radical approach, by recruiting some young people, and convincing them that

they go to heaven and get seven virgins!! (they can get them hereآ without

killing themselves or others), I don't know if this really in Koran , but at

least that what they claims.

 

 

Even though, I don't practice Islam as I should be, but I believe those few

criminals are taking Islam as hostage, and make some of us to be ashamed of

tying our name to Islam because of their actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest tahir

When I set out to criticise that verse I know there are hundreds of other verses in

Koran which will very easily be construed as justification for radical actions

As there are many others in other religious books Tora or bible and others.

 

that is not the point, let me try again to focus our attention to a practical reality

to avoid getting into a philosophical debate a bout who's philosophy is better,

or right or wrong.

 

Most muslims who live in the west they did so either escapping prosecution or looking

for better opportunities to live or worship , they got it in the west.

 

there are as ala pointed out lots of people who are desperate , lost their sense of

fulfilment in any way , financial,social, or spiritual; one way or another they do not feel

fulfilled or accomplished enough. these people span all the spectrum of society and

are volurenable to being swayed especialy if they are convinced that their radical

actions are actualy justified by the heavens.

Unfortunately combined with these individuals there is no shortage of perswaders

from extreme muslimes. there are no shortage of sympathizers and Indifferent muslimes

who are willing to accept that these radical criminal actions are justified.

 

there is no real courageous Islamic practical leadership which thinks in practical terms

to stand up to condemning these actions,educate their own community and the public

and be truthful when conveying islamic verses by hiding the truth.

say it as it is and if as a comunity you believe it does not apply today and it should not be

followed then explain it away and advise your community and followers to that fact.

 

this not happening and all we hear from Islamic leaders is Sanitized versions of how Islam is

the religion of peace. The problem is that there are great many fluent arbic speaking scolars who spent gobles of time and studied Koran and know it as well as we do.

You can not continue to evade the western public by telling them half truths and give

emunition to extreme factions to recruit.

 

leadership reponsibility is to lead their people and do the right thing to protect them

if they realy care about their community.

 

the west relies on facts , the fact is that all or the great majority of the bombing are executed

by muslimes. muslimes are suspects. muslim leadership is responsible to protect what they have by stepping up to the plate and do what is right to separate themselves from the radical

criminals.

that is the only way in my opinion. It might be too late to completely remove suspecion

but it is not too late to act .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This morning I read an article by an academic which suggests that economic factors may have contributed to the phenomena of suicide bombing. In his article the writer has touched the surface of a very important concept in the Quranic teaching and that is "al shahada" martyrdom. I would like to dig a little deeper since it may lead to better understanding of killing the self.

 

At the core Quranic and Prophet Mohammad teaching the concept of Shahada is the tremendous way to fight your enemy if you are a devout Muslim; also it is a way to cleans yourself and be in heaven. Therefore, if one fights an enemy of Islam then s/he would be a mart yer and is forgiven from all sins that s/he had committed in the past. Now....this lethal combination of fighting the enemy through shahada and cleansing the self and going to heaven is the most destructive combination humanity may ever see again. This lethal combination is quite evident in Quranic teaching.

 

Enemy can be anyone who may disagree or promote ideas of anti-Quranic teaching or even fight Islam and its core principles. So the west can be an enemy since its interest and values can contradict all Quranic values and principles therefore a good Muslim may choose to fight this enemy and go to heaven. Muslim preachers promote the concept of shahada, and of course a depressed Muslim or a young Muslim with some identity crisis would take that as an eternal solution to his or her worldly troubles and misery.

 

Unless Islam and its preachers stop all attempts to win their feeble arguments by assuming their superior moral status then it will be defeated by the powerful West and any other civilisations that may disagree with Islam (e.g. Hindu, Sikh, Baha'i...etc). Devout Muslims must learn how to lose to a more rational and solid arguments and start learning how to survive pragmatically and develop a rigorous intellectual capacity to deal with disagreements. Furthermore Muslims must stop fantasising about their future domination of the world in moral senses, the reality is proving them wrong everyday. They may become larger in numbers, but unless they develop ways to allow people to be critical of the Quran and its teachings, they may stay idle and in the rut of been victims of the west and others....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest moron99

I do not deny being an outsider, but even then I am entitled to form an opinion. It seems to me that the essence of the problem is not Islam but the extent to which it has been corrupted for politcal reasons. Specifically,

 

1). The dictators of the region have defined the west as an enemy that collaborates against mideast culture in order to explain their own failures and deflect frustration away from them. The state appointed and sponsored Imams elaborate and expound upon this theme and offer interpretations based upon the assumption that the west is, in fact, an enemy of Islam.

 

2). It would also seem to need that the qoran should be chronologically interpreted. Such that if there are two contradictory passages, then the later one takes precendent over the earlier one since Mohammed would possess all earlier knowledge plus additional learnings.

 

 

In fact, I think that Islam's greatest enemy is the despot within. I think this has been true since the assasination of Imam Hussein. Through the centuries the despots have applied relentless pressure upon Islam to and interpret it in such a way that it helps to maintain, reinforce, and legitimize their grip upon power. The despots promote social taboos and supress questioning ... but wasn't Islam suppossed to be the religion of knowledge, fact, and reasoning? These despots provide sanctuary and money for Imams based not upon piety but upon politics. Like a river washing through limestone, Islam has been redirected so slowly that no one ever noticed.

 

When I read the prophets summary speeches and final words, I see direct contradiction to what Islam and Muslim have become. Freedom is a thing. Justice is a thing. The right to think differently is a thing. The right to speak amoung fellow people is a thing. How is it possible for the muslim to accept having these things taken from him when it is expressly forbidden in the final speech?

 

These things I do not understand. Can anyone here explain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the last week, I prefered to listen than sharing ideas.. A lesson I took from 9/11 criminal acts, it is better to be passive until people cool down abit.. Our goal should always go to reasonably analyse and then find out .

 

I think the legitamate question of why Muslims are not very clear in condemning the London terror attacks, is lacking reasonable thinking.

Firstly because the most important religous leaderships in Muslim world had clearly condemned these acts.

Secondly, Muslims are not alone in not showing serious condemning of the terrorist acts. India and Chiana did the same. That is not to the attacks on the west only but also for the attacks on their Muslim fellows in Iraq and Afghanistan . You only see the condemnation when it goes to their land, as what had happened in Egypt lately.After the killing of the Egyptian emmbassidor, I started to hear the egyptian media referring to Qaeda as terror group!

The same thing for western civilised nations, Over last thirty years , Saddam was terrorising his people, and we still have allot of westren scholars and intellectuals considering him as a non terror related.. They based their judgment on a funny finding that Saddam was not proven in any operational relation to the Qaeda terror networks. As if they are saying that as far as terror is not hitting us "the west" then we should not consider it as terror. I would ask all those who are pointing to Muslims nations as not showing enough condenm to these barbaric acts, why you didn't do same when all those toletarians regims terrorised their nations. The answer is clear, that becuase you thought that it was not hurting you..

I was listening to CNN, the US version, on the news covering London's attacks under the terror slogan, immediately it went to cover the killing of tens of Iraqi kids last wensday, but to change the slogan to "insurgence".. Though Alqaeda was behid the two.. But in Londaon it is terror and in Baghdad it is insurgence..!

 

 

 

The above simple demostration might bring us to another issue. Is it true that the silence of the westrn nations and the terrorist acts by some of it's governemnts can be considered as a blew up to all claims by the westren civilzation and calls for freedom?

Of course not.. It is always true that politics is diffrent . What is happening by what is called Moslim terrorists is an act of politics, though it might dress some islamic cover and though it might be based on some Islamic intepretations..

 

That is not to hide those bitfalls that current Islamic theology and teaching might be victim of..

I think one of the most serious problems that current version of Islamic teachings is facing is the inherritance of all those teachings developed through the power and controll era, after the death of the prophet.. There are allot of contradictions between current known Islam and what Quaran is saying..Let me give some simple examples of known prophet and qoran sayings

 

- "Those who can't phisically correct the non accepted doing might do it by condenming, if not then by keeping their self away"

-"A kiiling of an innocent person , is equal to the kill of whole humanity"

- "If a parent slap their kid, to the extent of redish skin, they should pay equivelant to 50gm of gold to charity"

- "Every one has fullright in his religion, there should be no enforcement on people"

 

Don't put me wrong as an Islamic defending , just have a look around , you might find that same teaching had created Sofisim with all it's human sensative believes..

A teaching that goes so deep in human right care, would be very unlikely going to it's violatation.. So where is the problem..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Moron99
What is happening by what is called Moslim terrorists is an act of politics ...

 

Salim, glad you posted. You opinion carries great weight for me. I think all rational people realize that the terrorist is political ambition hiding behind the qoran and seeking protection in its ambiguities. The radicals amoung us may shout loudly about the evil of Islam and they may draw the anger of many muslims. But they are only a few amoung us and our social institutions do not allow them power without majority. Forgive their transgressions as you would have them forgive those of your countrymen.

 

But the question of importance is not condemnation. The question of importance is why the muslim masses (outside of Iraq) take no action. The unspoken fear is that the muslim masses will never reject the radicals from their mosques and one day a red line will be crossed. <i>(in reality, that's why the US is in Iraq ... to save us all from crossing the red lines by offerring the ideology of democracy as a political alternative. I think the terrorist realize this and think that your democracy must fail at all costs.)</i>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moron99,

 

question of importance is why the muslim masses (outside of Iraq) take no action.

 

Why they didn't on Iraqi people every day sloughtering by Alqaeda?

Why the western masses take no action as they did demonstrating their anti Iraq liberation?

 

It is simply lack of understanding..

It is sad that people don't realize the real danger as far as it is not hurting them.. It is same for Moslims and others.. even Iraqis themselfs.. Let me tell you this story.. Before the liberation, most Iraqis that knew, were not condemning the suicid acts in Isreal.. They thought them as a way of legal defence, they never realised the criminality side of such brutal actions until they got hurt and pay the real price of these acts.. Americans that I know, would never realized the huge mistake by former US adminstrations narturing and supporting the Jihadists until they got hurts severly by them.. Same for Egyptians, Suadies.. Arabs and moslims.. It is a world wide human phenomina

 

Terror is terror ,any where, in Isreal, Iraq, US England, Egypt.. we should act together to stop it..

 

When President Bush stood off to tell the world about this fact, allot of people accused him of aggressiveness .. Today the whole world need to know, not only Moslims, that this is another human being threat, we should all stand up.. No more double standard is accepted. The world fought the Nazies together, they should do same..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

maybe if I ask the question differently, with background.

 

It really isn't about the terrorists themselves or their motivations. It is about why they are allowed to use the mosque as their recruiting centers, storage depots, and meeting halls.

 

There is no church or synagogue where a person is allowed to say that God wishes for one person to kill another. If such a person were to stand upon the pulpit and endorse hatred or killing, then the people of the church would drive him out and tell him that it is wrong to preach such things in a house of god. They would rise to defend the sanctity and purity of their church. They would tell him that no father would wish to have his children killed and that he is not allowed to use the church to spread such a nessage.

 

For example, we have a form of terrorism in America where people bomb abortion clinics. They say that they do it for religous reasons but they are rejected by the churches and find no pulpit from which to preach. The reason is not the morality of abortion or even the morality of killing. The reason is the morality of using God to justify killing and protecting the religion.

 

We in the west are incapable of understanding how someone preaching hatred or killing is allowed to speak in a mosque. We can not understand why people who believe in God would allow it. To us, it is beyond understanding. If these people are not Islamic, then why does Islam give them sanctuary? Even more baffling is the storage of weapons in mosques. Why are the tools of death allowed to be hidden within a house of God? If such a thing happened here, the people would march upon the church and demand that the weapons be removed. We do not understand. It makes all the condemnations appear to be little more than decietful double-talk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest,

That is a very legitimate concern.. Iraqis used to ask same question on Aliraqia Tv every day finding so many such moques transformed to cells of terror.However, I would like to ask you mentioning to me even one mosque that do such wrong doing among hunderds of thousands of Moslim mosques around the world that is not financed by a suadi related Wahabee/salafee sect.? Do you know that the Salfees don't represent more than 5% of Muslim poulation as best estimation?

 

You might say that that there are allot in the west that have such preachings..and you might be right..Do you know why? that is because the west were narturing them during the cold war for political reasons ,so they become a real financial and political power..You might need to know that the Sunni mosques and Imams are not like the Shia, they are usually sponsered by organizations and governments not by folowers as the case with Shia. Have such huge financial power was a desastrous implications on controlling such Mosques and impact on Islamic faith looking in the west, the worst was the impact of supporting Saddam in demolishing the moderate Shia Najaf school to the favour of the rdical Qum, the worst was to support Sadat allowing Wahabisim and radical Islamic brotherhood figures taking over The sunni most important Moderate Alzhar school in Egypt.The worsest was the CIA role in Zia Alhaq's of Pakistan in supporting the Suadee money to control the Sunni moderate school in Pakistan in the senventees.. . The Salafee Suadee teaching becomes the dominant in these mosques.

 

The question is how can the Salafees -jihadists legitimize their criminal calls based on Islamic teachings and why masses of ordinary Moslims don't stop them from taking over?

 

That is the real question and I should try to share some answers later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

I agree with you in so many ways on so many things Salim. But maybe not on this one.

 

As a christian, I can not really expect the average Muslim to know the difference between baptist and presbyterian. You are of such great knowledge that I wouldn't be surprised if you did, but it wouldn't be fair to expect it. Nor can you expect an average Christian to know the difference between shia and sunni.

 

Specifically, you can't expect non-muslims to understand the differences between one mosque and another. In their eyes, 5 out of every 100 muslims supports terrorists. They do not know which 5 and you can't expect that they ever will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't,but I was trying to hightlight some points when it comes to the question of Islam and terror.

 

I think there is a definite need to expose such differneces between main stream Sunni/Shia teachings and the minor outspoken radical Jihadists one.

 

We need to set a road map, and it should be in the first place to repair the damage that CIA and British intellegence had committed in allowing the Salafee Money in taking control of Sunni schools.. As for Shia , President Bush had already stepped the right historical one in creating the environments for Najaf most moderate Islamic school to be free.. We need to push for the next most important one ever, the liberation of Alazher!

 

 

I don't how, but I think President Mubarak's rule is critical. Yesterday I read in Elaph arabic website a horific story.. One of the most moderate Egyptian Islamic scholars sent the web site a letter announcing publicly that he is taking back what had written and thought of. he added that this was due to demands by Jihasists who threatend him and his family..

 

Wenstren media had their agendas which might not be in favour of such calls to clarify the facts about main stream Islamic teachings , but I think the Christian churches have their responsipilities too.. Do you know that till now ,no westrn church officials or scholars had ever tried to visit the oldest Islamic school of Najaf after the liberation to meet scholars there, at least to know in direct intellectual dialoges more about an Islamic face that might be different! At least to set some infrastructure for video confrence sessions, if they can't afford paying the peasant looking simple rented house of Ayatoulah Systani or Hakim or Yaqoubee!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Guest

The Iraqi Shia have gained enormous respect and honor throughout the world. There are too many things to list. It started with not seeking bloody revenge against the saddamists. It continued through the patience and tolerance when Sadr invaded your holy city. It was emphatically confirmed with risking death to vote. The purple finger of an Iraqi has become a worldwide symbol for courage.

 

But even then, your message is diluted by Sadrists. We still do not know if Sadrists are an aberration or a branch.

 

Personally, I have come to the conclusion that what is inside the heart of an Iraqi Shia (not counting Sadrists) is very nearly the same thing that is inside the heart of a western christian. If there are any people capable of rebuilding mesopotamia into a great world leader of the 21st century, it is the moderate Shia of Iraq.

 

My opinion is that the Islamic faith has grown so large and widespread that it now needs a central committee whose purpose is to maintain the core messages of Islam. Without such a committee there are too many people in too many different locations who will interpret Islam to suit their needs. But I think this raises a problem that Muslims are not ready to deal with. Separation of religion and government. If the central committee members hold political office then their ability to focus upon Islam is compromised and the temptations of power will constantly pull at them. If there was to be an "Islamic summit" how many Imams would be required?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I have come to the conclusion that what is inside the heart of an Iraqi Shia (not counting Sadrists) is very nearly the same thing that is inside the heart of a western christian

 

Moron99,

I would asure you that it would be same for inside the heart of any Sunni Moslim too. We need to step forward to help Sunni shool of though liberated from the hijacking by Salafism, a step that is equivalent to the prave President Push taken to liberate Najaf from a 14 hundred years of jail sentence! As for Alsder refrence, I might have time to comment later..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...