From face veils in France to wannabe terrorists in Times Square, the question of how to "fix Islam" has become a normal but urgent question these days. The same question reigns in Muslim majority countries, where cultural forces clash between the hyper secular and the religiously retrograde. Today, Oxford University weighs in on the issue with its headline event, Rethinking Islamic Reform. The event hosts a conversation between the infamous Tariq Ramadan and the less controversial but equally influential Shaykh Hamza Yusuf Hanson. What distinguishes both the event and the speakers is not the topic of conversation, but its quality, content, and soberness in an age of hyperbole.
The fact is that on the question of Islam, the media thunderdome has been dominated by two extremes. In one corner, self-styled Muslim critics demand that the Islamic tradition secularize along the same course as western society. In the other corner, are the radically marginal pathologists like Revolution Muslim and Anwar al-Awlaki. In the vast middle lays the conservative silent majority of Muslims, devoted to their religion, distraught with global affairs, and perplexed on how to proceed.
But this polarization and misplaced energy is not just a media problem. The intellectual debate is caught in the same trap. For example, it has become a common choir on the American academic scene to host conversations between renegade clerics and ivory tower philosophers on the question of Islamic reform. They typically unfold with panelists praising the reemergence of Islam's "rationalist" theological school (Mu'tazilism), deriding the medieval implementation of Shariah law, and triumphantly calling for a philosophical overhaul in Muslim societies that will most certainly overcome the day's crisis.
Ironically, the problem here isn't just idealism or naïveté, but more that the conversation isn't exactly a new one. Since at least the mid 19th century, Muslim modernist reformers such as Sir Seyyed Ahmad Khan in India (d. 1898) and activist pan-Islamists like Jamal al-Din al-Afghani (d. 1898) have promoted free thinking and reason in the development of a viable Islam for the modern age.
The reasons why the exhausted attempts at Islamic reform have not altered the cultural logic of Muslim society writ large isn't because the religion is inherently incompatible with the modern era or that its religious elites are hiding their heads in the sand. It is because the route of reform in Islam has until now has been incorrectly targeted, ill-conceived, and often tainted with imperialist pretensions. Thankfully, Oxford's conversation between Tariq Ramadan and Hamza Yusuf's is one of the first major steps taken by a western institution to move beyond the stagnant dichotomies that have dominated the perennial "clash of civilizations" issue.
What both scholars possess that so many others wish they did is an aura of authenticity in Muslim circles. The grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, Tariq Ramadan is not only widely respected, but expertly versed of the limits and possibilities of the Islamic legal and theological traditions. Acutely aware of the political sensitivities of Muslims both in western societies and Muslim majority countries, he is uncompromising in his moral certitude and commitment to pragmatism. In the age of Nidal Hassans and Faisal Shahzads, Ramadan represents a viable non-violent outlet for the politically disenfranchised and disillusioned Muslim masses.
Shaykh Hamza Yusuf Hanson likewise enjoys the popular support of Muslim youth around the world, and especially so in the west. Trained in the centuries old tradition of Muslim scholarship in West Africa and the Middle East, Hanson is an expert in Islamic jurisprudence and the mystical sciences. His speeches never allow an empty seat and his education programs out of the Zaytuna Institute have offered American Muslims an alternative to the Wahhabi petro-dollar paradigm. He is the organic intellectual par excellence to the mainstream Muslim world.
Rethinking Islamic Reform also marks a growing realization that genuine and viable change in Muslim society will not emerge from goodhearted liberals or renegade clerics who would like to revive the spirit of dead poets and sages of centuries of Muslim past to save the day. Instead, it will grow out of a natural conversation between the traditionally trained scholars of Islam (ulama) and the activist minded modern intellectuals (mufakkirun) that places Muslim pragmatism and Islamic viability at the center. There are cadres of scholars and institutions already undertaking this work, the question remains as to whether or not the powers that be will let it unfold naturally.
Today's event is a step in the right direction, but the fact that it is taking place at the Oxford Divinity School instead of al-Azhar in Cairo or the Qom seminary in Iran, may be a bad omen. Remember, the Muslim audiences that need to be reached are viscerally averse to foreign meddling in their religion. They are also deeply, deeply conservative. They make the Vatican look like--well--the Huffington Post. So as long as we set aside our fantasies of a Muslim Martin Luther (and King Jr.) rising from the ashes to rescue us, we might just be on the right track.
since 1977-2004 NONE of the governments in the Muslim World were ruled by Islam, but by oil-based thoroughly secular and "modern" dictators. Whether we are talking about Egypt, Syria, Tunisia, or Iraq. We are talking about a leftist, "progressive", secular, and areligious elite who were serving and securing the interests of their former colonial powers rather than their own people.
As a secularist rather than point the finger at religion, you may want to look in the mirror and ask why your brethren ruling by your bankrupted set of ideas (indoctrinated from YOUR same institutions) have such a pathetic record whilst being in power and securing your way of life.
Critical thinking skills are something that does not come naturally to people in general -- you have to make a conscious effort to develop them. Humanity in general suffers from this defect, not just religious nutbags of any type.
I hope that practicioners of all religions, not just Islam, develop these vital skills and put them to use so that the fate of all humanity takes a turn for the better. There is much that is good about religion, provided we discard that which is evil.
After long talks with family members still living in Iran, friends of the family, and several professors with knowledge of Islam, I finally came to the conclusion that the general Muslim populace will have to be like me -- able to understand that while there are a lot of good things about the Qu'ran and it provides very useful guidelines to try and live up to [as do the Talmud, Book of Mormon and Bible], it is not 100% accurate. It can't be, because the state of knowledge at the time it was written was much less complete than it is now. Like the Bible, some of the rules are antiquated and pertain less to today's society than the one present at the time. In short, Muslims have to develop critical thinking skills and keep the useful and good parts of the Qu'ran [to cite just one, there's an admonition to treat orphaned children, especially girls, with fairness and respect and not to try and cheat them -- there are hundreds, if not thousands, of similar statements in the Qu'ran that apply just as well to the modern world] while being able to reject the parts that no longer apply.
If you look at the "Western World", the reasons for its' rapid economic, humanist and social development don't lie in a reform of Christianity, but in the fact that the Western World has distanced itself from Christianity.
While the "West" still remains Christian on paper, you'll have a very hard time finding an educated person that actually believes in a talking snake, the garden of eden, a 950 year old man called Noah that managed to gather 200.000 animals and built a gigantic boat for them, a 930 year old man called Adam who was created from dust, or any of the other hocus pocus.
And those few Christians that really DO believe in all the Biblical tales and really DO follow the Bible word for word are seen as crazy, homophobic, unprogressive social outcasts à la 'Westboro Baptist Church'.
When judging and commenting on the lack of humanist progression in the "Muslim World", we need to understand that our liberal, cherry-picked form of Christianity is entirely different to present day Islam.
Even your average, moderate Muslim considers every word of the Qu'ran and the Hadiths to be historically true, scientifically accurate and morally superior: Including Adam, Noah, global flooding, medieval forms of punishment and winged horses. Good luck adapting that to the 21st century!
It's a privilege to be your first fan. Considering the breadth of your insight and your skill at expressing it, I look forward to seeing your posts on other topics. Welcome to Huffpost!
islam does not have centralised authorities (like the Church of England etc)... "Islamic" societies consist of different cultures/societies and ethnicities.. such cultures influence how "Islam" is adopted... separation of mosque and state? well that is a start... but that has to be left to those countries to decide (a lot of these countries have not developed yet [which does not necessarily mean because of "Islam"])..
it is not as easy as saying its an "Islam" thing.. after all... what did God do to the Sodomites? But gays are not "persecuted" in the "West" (for example) not because of some reform to Christianity (despite Churches accepting homosexuals etc)... rather by the laws that those countries adopt give rise to these "progressive" ideas... true.. Islam is a part of the societies.. there is no denying that... just like Hinduism is in India (although there are quite a few Hindus that would beat/kill the woman for sex out of wedlock.. just like Christian Lebanese) or Christianity was in Europe.. progressive change will happen by those countries moving forward through education and creating the barrier of mosque and state...
to just blame it on the "religion" though again... is just a simple and lazy way of looking at it..
I completely would agree that Islam is generally different because of the non-centralized nature. As big as Islam is the religion is still based on really tiny groups. That hurts more than it helps. Catholicism, for example, is big and centrally controlled so it is able to standardize ideology. Other christian sects are not centrally controlled and subject to the whim and fancy of the local leader. Islam is like the latter. There are people with no education on the religion who claim to be knowledgeable and have a following.
But it is not all the culture that is to blame. Going back to those other smaller christian denominations for a moment we can find example where the religion is holding the culture back. Small groups have no reason to take on the knowledge of the culture. All those christian sects that reject science hold back the advancement of their followers. Not that central power would solve everything. Catholicism still pushes out lots of regressive ideas that cause societal harm.
But Islam may be part of the problem. Historically Islam has been largely political and that political power has been able to be sustained through times when other religions have lost theirs.
Changing the future will be about education. For that to happen some Muslims will have to be willing to consider what is being said instead of seeing it as an attempt to destroy the religion.
There are many differences of course, but they actually share a lot in common, especially by way of history and origin. In fact, Joesph Smith was actually a great admirer of Muhammed.
I would be interested to see more comparative religion articles between the two, as it seems you can learn a lot about one from the other.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_Islam
A Latter-day Saint Perspective on Muhammad:
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=bbaba1615ac0c010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
"Islam is the one and only truly belief in the oneness of God!"
This is also untrue...there are several religions just as monotheistic, and even then...I really dont care.
The rest of what you said, I wholeheartedly agree with - fanned :)
'How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.
Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome. '
“It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer...striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace...to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.â€
Churchill was a barbarian with a flair for words.
We welcome you to follow many of the Priests and Pastors to understand and love the Almighty Creator
Quran, Surah 5:Ayat: 82-83 "And thou wilt find the nearest of them in affection to those who believe (to be) those who say: Lo! We are Christians. That is because there are among them priests and monks, and because they are not proud. When they listen to that which hath been revealed unto the messenger, thou seest their eyes overflow with tears because of their recognition of the Truth. They say: Our Lord, we believe. Inscribe us as among the witnesses"
A Christian Minister's Conversion to Islam
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKXKKyyXG4g&feature=related
How the Bible Led Me to Islam:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYMKQKSV0bY&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=7D7717C794608157
http://www.usislam.org/converts/converts.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j-kMfA2x8w&feature=PlayList&p=A6F1B1A59147F69D&index=6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5-FzP5QPO8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnsIeh_s05g&feature=PlayList&p=47B2E6598D683780&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=83
May Almighty God the Creator please with all of you, for what you have done helping mankind and will Allah give you peace and happiness in this world and Jannah in the hereafter.
AMEEN
You ALL need to get over yourselves.
ORGANIZED (read that male ) religion is the bane of civilization.
"You'll put your eye out with that" ~ mom
The depth of the religion in the lives of the adherents (in "Muslim countries") is so great that changing viewpoints without appearing to attack Islam is very hard. Attempts to democratize (as in freedoms, not government) are viewed as western attacks on Islam and Muslims. That makes it hard to have a discussion about advancing Islam from its current state (and people are not so hot on Islam being adapted to society and prefer to have society adapt to islam).
Plus there is the problem of Islam being whatever one's local Imam says Islam is. Those who are authorities are accepted without question. This all may be due to the lack of debate about the religion within the religion.
I am not trying to say that outside criticism should mold the future of Islam, only that outside criticism should not be met with outrage. Maybe those people outside of the religion have something with their criticism. Maybe not. But responding as though every criticism is an attack will not get anyone anyplace.
Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed in the neck by an Islamist in 1994, leaving him incapable of using his hand to write.
Dr. Ahmed Sohby Mansour was dismissed from Al-Azhar University and imprisoned for six months.
Cairo Appeals Court declared null and void the marriage of Abu Zayd and Ibtihal Younes in 1995 for apostasy (for denunciation by Abu Zayd of the permissibility of the ownership of slave girls in Quran).
After the verdict, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad organization (which assassinated Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981) said the professor should be killed because he had abandoned his Muslim faith.
Hirsi Ali is under 24hours armed protection. Dutch government expelled her from Nederland due to the threats from Domestic Jihadists. Her and Theo Van Gogh made 10 minutes movie criticizing treatment of women in Islam. For that Theo Van Gogh has been shot multiple times, then stabbed.
Atif al-Iraqi, Ragaa al-Naqash, Mahmoud al-Tohami, Youssef Chahine and many, many others are real reformists, who put their lives in danger to advance reform and progress in this world.