The Muslim Reformation: Time for Wittenberg

It's a great achievement for Islamic leaders and scholars as well as Newsweek and the Washington post to present this imperative opportunity for inter cultural and global philosophical dialogue. What's important is that by exchanging our ideas and comments regarding inter religious relations and world events that affect our views of each other as fellow human beings. Since the advent of humanity, We strove to make sense of the world we live in and the lives we've experienced. Worldwide curiosities to learn the true nature of life and our universe is an exceptionally rare virtue upon life on Earth. In other words, we're the only known species on the planet who've pursued to unravel these great mysteries and developed written philosophies based upon our understanding of the world around us.
One such philosophy that lasted throughout the ages of humanity is commonly known as religion and spirituality. Ever since our early belief in the Sky God and the God Mother from ancient Pagan times, we vigorously pursued to unravel the truth about our most profound questions. As any educated person would know that religion and their core beliefs or faith have evolved over time. Paganism, Monotheism and Polytheism have been influenced by humanity as these great philosophies have influenced our perceptions and decisions in life over the ages. Over time humanity has embraced diverse religious faiths and spiritual convictions that continue to influence our behavior in our times and most likely beyond.
What's vital for humanity's progress and even survival is to know the true nature of faith itself. To understand the true origins of faith. But most of all, is to accept the truth for whatever it may be. Each one of us will learn the absolute truth once we die. But until that time comes for anyone of us to depart this world, we really don't know the answer to God's existence nor do we have the absolute truth in regards to the true nature of God. Besides if we did possess the truth, there would've been only one religion on Earth with no diversification of any way, shape of form. There would only be one holy scripture written throughout human history.
Considering one's religious faith to be absolute, while considering others to be false would be ethnocentric at best. While collectively searching to unravel the mysteries on nature, life and the universe through sincere reasoning and serious research would be enlightening at its worst. Most importantly, we must accept the fact is that none of us have conclusive evidence to confirm our core beliefs and there's always an immanent change that our most cherished beliefs could be wrong. Our greatest challenge would be to tolerate the truth no matter what it may ultimately be. With such an open mind, we would be able to overcome any future discovery that would contradict our faith regarding the true nature of life, spirituality and divinity.
Humanity does have the ability to achieve such a social achievement. However, it's solely up to humanity and not any other entity or groups of entities to decide our destinies. Each one of us has a choice to make; either hopelessly engaging into meaningless inter cultural conflicts or combine our scientific and cultural gifts to thrive into an enlightened global civilization that could ultimately expand beyond our solar system. The choice is yours, and the time to make it is now!

$'TH WATCH, CONCERNED THE CHRISTIAN NOW LIBERATED,
JILILAH,

With all the WAPO ON FAITH Panelists' Comments, posters fora, the money-making books selling religion or bashing it, the serious studies about 'evolutionary religion', ad inifinitum, have we still not understood that the question of morality, whether spiritually/religiously inspired, rationality-driven, or implemented by the 'real-politic' state-military complex, the non-state combatant fog, the resistance-fighter imponderable, the suicide-bomber penumbra, the terrorist-darkness power-base, is, in the final analysis a survial strategy analysable, for pragmatic purposes, only in the context of Game Theory?

Type the name Peter Turchin in the Wikipedia search engine icon, and you will see a lsit of all the studies in Game Theory-inspired analyses of 'evolutionary religion' and the role of cooperative strategies in the development of moral codes based on the survival imperative. Go to the Metanexus website or the Templeton website , and you will see a stupendously well-thought-out research project detailing the research-study topics on the competitive evolution of spiritual codes and religions.

I find those who argue, without questioning their rebellion against religion, that atheism is the only rational outlook intolerably lazy, intellectually. Of course, I myself have questioned religion; I have wondered about the nature of the deity; I have taken the philosphersnet test not only on 'make your own deity' but also on 'taboo'; since I was a child of eight years, I have wondered what happened when I sleep and what is the nature of 'nothing'; even before that time, I had wondered what the world would look like to an ant and, more puzzlingly, to the nearly flat (i.e. one-dimensional) carpet mites. I have, in front of me, Roger Penrose's book titled "The Road to Reality", which investigates in the profoundest sense possible the questions of what is consciousness, how do we know what we know, what does 'understanding' mean.
But, even when all these questions would have been answered, if ever they get answered, the fundamental question of survival will remain. Jilali is as right in referring to J.H. Denison's book "Emotion as the Basis of Civilization", as the author of the vastly enlightening book "Descartes' Error" is in refuting the thesis that rationality explains all, thereby corroborating Penrose's argument that emotional knowledge or knowledge by acquaintance (or gradaul hard-wiring in the brain) is equally important in the discovery of Truth.
And, wonder of wonders, both views are coherent with George Bush's obsession that the geo-strategic issues facing policy makers like him at this juncture in history are 'existential'. Where George Bush, and with him, the 'jihadists', the militarism-obsessed warmongers, the destructionist and self-destructionist suicide bombers are wrong , is in their assumption that the Game of Survival is zero-sum. It is us or them.
Just before Bush gave the orders to invade Iraq, Freeman Dyson advised, in his Templeton Awrd lecture, that the expenditures that were about to be earmarked for military adventurism would be far more productively spent in scientific research that, already then, bore the promise of plenty to relieve world povery, fight global warming, cure energy-resource shortages, and, to satisfy the most exquisite aspirations of us all, make the world a better place for all of us to line in.
But, the pessimism/'real politik' of those who wield power prevailed over the dreams of those who push forward the frontiers of scientific discovery and invention and those hard-working peoples of our planet whose spirituality in the end conquer the cynicism of our tyrants.

For Jililah only,

Nice try but recognizing the flaws in the foundations of Islam, Judaism and Christianity by the "kneelers" and "pew peasants" will quickly converge these religions into some simple rules of life. No clerics, imams, rabbis and priests needed or desired. It will be called the great "Pink Slipping" of religious leaders.

For those who post merely to cast Islam as evil, irrational and false, please let me point out that at various times in history, Islam was a progressive force that assisted the rise of culture in the West. One of Judaism's greatest sages is Maimonides. In Maimonides famous work, "Guide for the Perplexed," the harmony of past ages was noted in the forward of this book. (The paperback edition with bright red cover - do not have it in front of me now to provide better detail, but you can find it on Amazon and THIS is the kind of reading we all need to do for consciousness raising to occur) Anyway, in the forward, a letter that Maimonides wrote is spoken of and he refers to Muslim philosopher Ibn Rush'd (Averroes) who advocated rationalism, as "My Master Abd Allah Ibn Rush'd." Maimonides works were written after the death of Ibn Rush'd, so he used 'My Master' not in the context of a living mentor, but as an expression of respect for a philosophical body of writing that inspired his own. I believe that Thomas Aquinas was then similarly inspired by Maimonides. If you value the contributions of Aristotle, Plato, Socrates and the Neoplatonists like Plotinus, Porphory and Iamblichus, it is good to realize that this body of work had become lost to Western culture and it was revived by Jewish and Arab scribes who translated the texts into Arabic and Hebrew, which were then translated to Latin and Greek leading to the 'Renaissance.'

OK - I hear you! You are asking, "What have Muslims done for us lately?" In truth, not much!
Islam is now in a period of intellectual stagnancy as Europe was during 'The Dark Ages."

But the haters of Islam need to face some facts. As obviously Islam will not be wiped from the face of the earth, as you wish, what would you next hope to see happen to current day Islamic culture? Hopefully you would answer that you would like to see a great consciousness raising in the Muslim world. The FACT that verses exist in the Qur'an which advocate a society establish around given human rights mandates, that have NOT been abrogated as often thought, gives Muslim a legitimate base for this REFOCUSING on the humanitarian model of Islam.

As a hater of Islam, if you cannot wipe Islam from the face of the earth - is not what the Muslim moderates are attempting to accomplish the next best thing for ALL OF HUMANITY?

Truly, the emotional hate posts here only express psychological immaturity. If you oppose violence, then help us find a viable solution based upon ISLAM'S OWN DICTATES rather then asking Muslims to forfeit their culture and become Western clones.

You can choose to help society reach a more humanitarian age or just boo and hiss from the sidelines. Can we not engage together in a vision that will uplift all concerned? Any reality is preceded by a vision. We may not be where you wish us to be but we are trying with everything we have to bring about a refocusing on the innate humanitarian aspects of Islam.

Humanitarian Qur'anic verses (ayah)?
Please see excerpt from Dr. Mansoor Alam's article below:

So what should be done now? Should we simply close our eyes to the Qur’an and allow these latter-day rulers and Imams to regurgitate the same old sectarian-based Shariah that was developed under dictatorial rule and which tramples on the most basic values of the Qur’an dealing with universal human rights, that among these are: sacrosanct right of the sanctity of human life (5:32); inalienable right of the freedom of choice (2:256, 18:29); right of tolerance for other faiths (22:40) and absolutely no compulsion in faith (2:256); right to conduct state affairs by mutual consultation (3:159, 42:38); universal right of human dignity (17:70); sacrosanct right of equal justice for all (4:58, 4:135, 5:42, 16:90) including enemies (5:8) and no bending of justice for anyone (if the Prophet was not above the law (6:15) then how can anyone else be?); right to hold positions based solely on merit (46:19); right of personal responsibility and accountability (53:38); right of ownership of the fruits of one’s labor and no free ride for anyone (53:39). Are these Qur’an-guaranteed human rights (to all men and women) to be found in our current practice of Islam anywhere not to say of the holiest place in Islam, the birth place of our Prophet (PBUH)?

Who else could be more responsible then for damaging the sacred heart of Islam in the name of Islam, in the name of the Qur’an, in the name of the Prophet (PBUH) than the twin forces of Muslim dictatorship and Muslim priesthood?

The situation has degenerated to such an extent that if one were to mention that above human rights are some of the most sacred in Islam; that our Prophet (PBUH) lived and implemented these rights in society; that an Islamic society is supposed to be constituted on the basis of these core rights at its heart; then surely it will raise many eyebrows and may even invite sarcasm from certain quarters with comments such as: “Have these human rights anything to do with Muslims and Islam?” These reactions are not out of place considering how Muslim countries have been mistreating and even killing their own people in the name of Islam.

The world is judging Islam by our practice of Islam, by observing the so-called practicing Muslims. No wonder we seem to be fulfilling the prophecy of the Qur’an by showing to the world by our own actions that Islam is a failure, that Islam is false (107:1-7)! Our failure to live up to true Islam is being seen as failure of Islam. We may think we are good practicing Muslims and that we will ultimately have the mercy and the blessings of Allah. All this is fine but what about the Qur’an and its emphasis on universal human rights? Is the Qur’an only for reciting to achieve mercy and forgiveness, mostly for the dead? Or, should its human rights also need to be implemented in human society?

As a matter fact these values are under siege in every Muslim country. Can we expect to get anywhere when Muslim societies trample on these rights while putting extraordinary emphasis on rituals? What would be more important to Islam in the eyes of Allah: performing its rituals or implementing its basic human rights?

The Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said that Muslim Ummah is like a body. When any part of the body is in pain the whole body feels it. That body seems to be in critical condition today. The only way to revive it is to go back to the basic Qur’anic values guaranteeing universal human rights and make them the foundation of Muslim society the way our Prophet (PBUH) did more than 1400 years ago when the rest of the world was living in barbarism and chaos as noted by many historians (e.g., J.H. Denison, Emotion as the Basis of Civilization). This is the real miracle of the Qur’an. This is the true Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) to practice (7:157).

As moderate Muslims speak out, the belief question sets in. It’s not the matter of do I believe them, on the contrary, the real issue is do they believe themselves. Do they possess a genuine faith in their moderate belief or is it something less? For me this is the subject of concern. Moderate Muslims must engage the extremists.
If their faith is authentic they will be compelled to move in such a way for that is what faith does in a human. The external actions we live out are simply the side affects of the faith within.
Considering the state Islam is in moderate Muslims are obliged to answer as to whether there will be an Islamic reformation.
This is a hard question because another more piercing request follows it.
That is who will be the Muslim reformers whose faith forces them to confront those Imams who lead people in hostile prayers. Not a confrontation over a distance via words on paper but challenging the Imams face to face, belief to belief, inside these radicals own Mosques. Yes there is danger in calling such ignorance into question but ignorance must be forced to explain and to justify itself publicly in order to be disgraced. Only in such exchanges can Islam or any religion overcome with violent emotions hope to reform itself. Those who reason reformation useless now are destined to take their place alongside the earlier pre-reformation pessimists.

Will there be Muslim counterparts to the likes of reformers Martin Luther, Marie Dentiere, Justin Martyr? That answer is within every moderate Muslim.

The Enlightenment was all about
curbing the power of the Church.
It was also about questioning the nonsense of gods and the supernatural.
It was when mankind was putting superstition aside,
and using reality and common sense to live by.
It was when mankind began to realize that
there is no God.An idea that Muslims are still unable to deal with.
Think twice before you martyr yourselves.
All that happens to martyrs is they become as dust.

The Enlightenment was all about
curbing the power of the Church.
It was also about questioning the nonsense of gods and the supernatural.
It was when mankind was putting superstition aside,
and using reality and common sense to live by.
It was when mankind was began to realize that
there is no God.An idea that Muslims are still unable to deal with.
Think twice before you martyr yourselves.
All that happens to martyrs is they become as dust.

Anonymous:

When admitting that the Enlightenment was made possible by the intercourse between Western and Muslims scholars during the Middle Ages (which is certainly true), please do not forget to admit a few facts.

1. The Western scholars in questions were Catholic through-and-through, and sought to integrate their faith with reason, without compromising either one, because they were convinced that there is only one universe, one real-world, and that if two things are true, then they must fit together somehow.

2. The Catholic Church lauded and praised many of those scholars. Some of them were declared saints or blesseds, even - Anselm, Albertus Magnus, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Bernard of Clairvaux, Raymond of Penyafort, Cajetan, Duns Scotus; many others, while not canonized due to character defects, are still taught in Catholic universities - Abelard, Hugh of St. Victor, Peter Fiore, Hildegard of Bingen.

3. The Enlightenment was made possible because of the patronage system and the university system established by the Scholastics, which made the possible professions revolving around the intellectual life.

4. The Enlightenment vigorously rejected the Scholastics as obscurantists, casuits, superstitious, and hair-splitters; instead they favored a rigorous division of reality into the sacred and secular, and insisted that the two had nothing to do with each other. They were especially eager to see morals separated from science - one suspects that they only wanted to do whatever they wanted.

The Enlightenment may or may not have been a good thing; but that it was a trade up from the Middle Ages is doubtful. We have traded Holy Wars for Holocausts. That's great. We have beaten back the Black Plague by getting filth out of the streets; in the process we have unleashed an STD Plague by putting the filth on billboards, music videos, movies, television, comedy routines, and even children's classrooms. That's great, too. What a trade for the better.

The Muslim world may have previously hated the West because it was Christian; now, whether they believe us Christian or no, they almost certainly hate us because we are not Christian. Why should they possibly want an Enlightenment after our style?

Reverend Rodriguez,

I hope that you are reading the comments on your piece and that you will, As Taiq Ramadan and others before you have done, write a 'post-discussion' epilogue setting out your own reactions to the comments. I shall be looking forward to that, because I take you in good faith that you would welcome a robust Islamic Reformation, in line with was started several decades ago by Hassan Al Banna and Abul Ala Maudoodi, not a Western-inspired pseudo-Reformation.

We Muslims are proud that we have successfully managed to prevent the Counter-Reformationists
(at least the non-Muslim Counter-Reformationists -- we are still tackilng the home-grown Counter-Reformationists otherwise known as 'terrorists', to be distinguished fromresistance fighters), unlike the 'liberation theology' Reformers who seem to have been, at least for the time being, forced into retreat. But, we Muslims and humanists wish you well.

One final word -- as proof of the villainy and duplicity of the 'true axis of evil' in sabotaging a home-grown Islamic Reformation, consider the fact that the US administration has twice refused a visa to Tariq Ramadan to take up an academic position offered by Notre Dame University. The well-informed (and certainly not 'terrorism-sponsoring' professional journal Foreign Policy of Carnegie Mellon University has run cover stories titled "Who Is Afraid of Tarq Ramadan".

Do really honest people need greater proof of the villainy and duplicty of the neocons and the neo-imperialists?

Thank you, Sir, and Again, I wait to read your epilogue on this debate.

anonymous: "We have to admit that western Enlightenment is made possible by the intercourse of western and Moslem scholars in the Middle Ages."

Yes, the atmosphere created by Mohammed's command: "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57) is quite conducive to free intellectual inquiry.

Perhaps you're thinking of dhimmi non-Muslims under Islamic rule.

Those who wish for a Reformation within Islam are already getting it.

With all due respect, the only substantive true statement in Mr. Rodriguez's essay is that change within Islam can occur only as Muslims themselves make it happen.

The most grievous error in this essay is assuming that a Muslim reformation would be similar to the Christian one.

The Christian Reformation was a movement not toward pluralism or tolerance (or any other multiculturalist Newspeak); it was a movement away from man-made doctrines and toward the Word of Christ, the Bible.

At least in the case of Luther (others had their own agendas), God's Word was the only rule for life and doctrine.

There is a similar "reformation" occurring with Islam. After a century of ignorance, Infidel domination and occupation, and a paucity of resources, there is a return to the commands of Allah and the example of Mohammed.

Aided by Western self-loathing, historical illiteracy, political correctness, and the greatest transfer of wealth in human history (with the discovery of oil under Muslim lands), Islam is reasserting itself as the devout return to the rule of Allah as revealed in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira.

What does a return to Islam's "sacred" texts mean for non-Muslims?

Only more of this:

"the Messenger of Allah . . . would say: 'Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war. . . . When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. . . . Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them . . .'" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4294).

"fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) . . . " (Qur’an 9:5).

"Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers . . . " (Qur'an 9:14).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued" (Qur'an 9:29).

"Allah's Apostle said: 'I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle . . . '" (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 2, Number 24).

"Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do" (Qur'an 8:38, 39).

"O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him" (Qur'an 9:123).

"Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom ye may not know, but whom Allah doth know. Whatever ye shall spend in the cause of Allah, shall be repaid unto you, and ye shall not be treated unjustly" (Qur'an 8:60).

“Muhammad said, ‘A single endeavor of fighting in Allah’s Cause is better than the world and whatever is in it’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 50).

"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home) . . . But those who strive and fight hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward . . . " (Qur'an 4:95).

“A man came to Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad in reward.’ He replied, ‘I do not find such a deed’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44).

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Qur'an: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah?" (Qur'an 9:111).

"O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place . . . " (Qur'an 9:38, 39).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

“Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been made victorious with terror. The treasures of the world were brought to me and put in my hand’” (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 220).

"The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256).

"In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things" (Qur'an 5:17).

"They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them" (Qur'an 5:73).

"The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth" (Qur'an 9:30)!

"It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son" (Qur'an 19:35).

"Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures" (Qur'an 98:6).

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them'" (Qur'an 8:12).

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter . . . " (Qur'an 5:33).

"It is not for any prophet to have captives until he hath made slaughter in the land. Ye desire the lure of this world and Allah desireth (for you) the Hereafter, and Allah is Mighty, Wise" (Qur'an 8:67).

"Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57).

"War is deceit" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268).

"Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah" (Qur'an 3:28).

"Ye have indeed in the Messenger of Allah a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is in Allah and the Final Day, and who engages much in the Praise of Allah" (Qur'an 33:21).

"Allah's Apostle said, 'The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him"'" (Bukhari Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177).

". . . We were (sitting) in the mosque when the Messenger of Allah . . . came to us and said: (Let us) go to the Jews. We went out with him until we came to them. The Messenger of Allah . . . stood up and called out to them (saying): O ye assembly of Jews, accept Islam (and) you will be safe.

. . . .

"he killed their men, and distributed their women, children and properties among the Muslims, except that some of them had joined the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who granted them security. They embraced Islam. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) turned out all the Jews of Medlina. Banu Qainuqa' (the tribe of 'Abdullah b. Salim) and the Jews of Banu Haritha and every other Jew who was in Medina.

. . . .

"It has been narrated by 'Umar b. al-Khattib that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim" (Muslim Book 019, Number 4363-4366).

"Abu Burda reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: No Muslim would die but Allah would admit in his stead a Jew or a Christian in Hell-Fire. 'Umar b. Abd al-'Aziz took an oath: By One besides Whom there is no god but He, thrice that his father had narrated that to him from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him)" (Muslim Book 037, Number 6666).

"Malik said, 'The blood-monies of the Jew, Christian, and Magian in their injuries, is according to the injury of the muslims in their blood-moneys. The head wound is a twentieth of his full blood-money. The wound that opens the head is a third of his blood-money. The belly-wound is a third of his blood-money. All their injuries are according to this calculation' (Muwatta Book 43, Number 43.15.8b).

"O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust" (Qur'an 5:51).

Be careful of that for which you wish.

concerned...

Thanks for your comment...yep..my own.

Yoyo,

Impressive "poetry" and reasoning!!! Your own???

Daniel,

As for when Islam embark upon its own journey to Enlightenment, do you mean Enlightenment as in Buddhism or as in Western thought?

We have to admit that western Enlightenment is made possible by the intercourse of western and Moslem scholars in the Middle Ages.

Yes,the battle is amongst the crazies.
My God against your God and anyone else's God.
Atheists look on and become collateral damage.
The war should be between truth and nonsense;
between reality and unreality;
between the supernatural and the natural;
between the real and the imagined.
If we can't agree on which God is the one true God,
maybe it's because there is no God.
The supernatural world,after all,exists only
in the imagination.

Every Christian has his/her own interpretation of the Word of God. Four different books, at least five auxiliary books/epistles, competing theologians/sects/protests, and competing stories just in the original set followed by translations and embellishments followed by countless interpretations, hidden codes and raptures. IMHO, God needs to have another visit to a mountaintop to get the mess cleaned up.

Of course, there are the other religions (e.g. Islam to stay on topic) that have the same God but different authentic Words. Very strange that our God could create such confusion don't you think? The whole cacophony smells of politics and economics.

I will stick with Mark's Gospel, the seven authentic epistles of Paul and the nine (the two great ones leaving out the God "vanities)Commandments along with the evaluation of these by modern biblical scholars to get some semblance of what God is trying to communicate realizing that good people of other faiths or no faiths are also God's chosen ones.

Murderous terrorists exist across all faiths, as well as the faithless. Look at the IRA. I've never believed that because someone is a terrorist AND they hold a particular religious faith, it means they are a terrorist BECAUSE of that faith. They are going to kill people who don't see things their way, and they will latch on to the nearest convenient widely-accepted "cause" in order to justify and garner sympathy for their barbarism.

Look at Serbia, Kosovo, Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan, Ireland. It's about land, resources (oil/water/whatever), preferred form of governmental oversight, and other things - NOT about religion. In countries where these things (resources, governmental form, etc.) are plentiful and agreed upon, you will almost ALWAYS find various religious faiths peacefully and lovingly existing alongside each other.

Murderers as well as peaceful lovers of their fellow man exist in all countries, among all languages and faiths. It's too bad that everyone gets so caught up in trying to intertwine the murderous tendencies with certain faiths instead of acknowledging the real causes and forces at work.

And then, please do not forget, that after the Reformation, Europe then had the Enlightenment, in which the simple mythical Christian religion morphed into a much more subtle and complex characterization, along with a multutude of modern philosophical outlooks of the world, not the least of which was science. When will Islam embark upon its own journey to Enlightenment?

Reverend Rodriguez,

Thank you, Sir, for the thought.

Yes, you are right. The Reformation started several decades ago, precisely with Hassan Al Banna, Abul Ala Maudoodi, and so many others.

What did this Reformation entail? There were elements of the Martin Luther-style reformation. While Islam did not have a Church that sold ‘salvation’, the (post-Kemal Ataturk)would-be secular leaders still used the 'shura' (council of nominated religious experts) to align the Umma (believers) behind their policies, which were often dictated by the former colonialist oppressors or by CEOs of mega-corporations. The believers were deceived into supporting the greed and power-grabbing policies of the compradores and their masters, often to the detriment of the Umma. Just as Luther roused the Catholic believers against the exploitation that the priests selling ‘divine favours’ were making to enrich themselves and their Church, the Islamic Reformists roused the Muslims to recoup the former glory of Islamic civilization by (1) reviving their pride in their inheritance; (2) reinforcing their common brotherhood with the rest of the Umma that had been so savagely divided by the imperialists ( as M. J. Akbar reminded WAPO readers in a recent forum comment, Churchill had even encouraged Ibn Saud to establish a ‘southern Caliphate to counter the ‘northern Ottoman Caliphate – imperialist duplicity and villainy did not start with Bush and Cheney!); (3) giving a decisive new impetus to their achievements in science and technology.

The other important difference from Christianity, apart from a Church and ‘salvation’, was that Islam had never cultivated the slightest strain of duplicity in its dedication to the cause of the oppressed – the institutions of zakaat (divinely-mandated alms-giving), of the extended family, of “the best among you is the one who is most pious among you” . It is a superbly egalitarian religion – the wealth of a Muslim is the wealth of the Umma left in trust with him (thus we have the Waqf, etc) As such, Islam never had to confront the communism-versus-capitalism phenomenon. Unfortunately, this great force, left in the hands of unsuspecting but also sometimes complicit Muslim rulers, made the community of believers vulnerable to instrumentalisation of their faith by both sides in the communism/capitalism struggle of the last century. That was how the ‘mujahideen’ ended up becoming human flesh cannon balls hurled at the communist war machinery in Afghanistan, fighting a westen-inspired war against ‘Godless communism’. In addition there were the resource-grabbing wars (for oil, for control of the former Islamic ‘silk road’, for geo-strategic dominance, especially in the vast Eurasian landmass).

The Islamic Reformation has had its resounding successes – Malaysia, Turkey, Iran (despite the very vicious subversions and disinformation), but also Tunisia, Indonesia (despite the instrumentalisation of Suharto by the US anti-communist machinery), etc. In other parts, the subversives and the counter-revolutionaries, both domestic and foreign, have prevailed – for the time being. In Saudi Arabia, for example, even as Reformation forces persevere. Aramco-led counter-reformation forces have prevailed so far. Countries like Brunei still have to have a Reformation movement to be initiated, although it stability seems to preclude its coming about very soon. Other countries like Algeria, Pakistan, partly Morocco and Egypt are paying the price of foreign-supported counter-reformation forces and/or instrumentalisation for vicarious imperialist motives.

Reverend, Sir! In view of Islam’s egalitarian nature, you can rest assured that NO FORCE IN THIS WORLD will stop Islamic Reformation, Turkish-style, the way obscurantist forces have managed to stop the ‘liberation theology’ reformation n Latin America

Ryan Haber-

"so that science is not closed to the transcendent and religion is not hostile to reason and thought"

A beautiful goal, sir. So Mote It Be.

Mr. Chase has some excellent points. I would like to expand upon his thinking a bit.

One of Martin Luther's fundamental gripes against the Catholic Church was its use of Greek philosophy to structure its understanding of the Christian Gospel. That is at the heart of his idea of "Sola Scriptura" demand: don't try to 'figure out' all this stuff - just read the Bible and do what it says, he insisted. The corollary was that religion did not "fit in" with the rest of reality as an integrated whole, but rather was a separate thing, a separate reality. Thus Luther's interpretation of the command to render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's. The secular sphere and the religious had, in Luther's thinking, no real interaction (let alone integration). This disconnection is why Protestantism and secularism get along so nicely - each is content to let the other do its own thing without trying to connect between the two.

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, has always insisted that there is just one reality, one universe, and that its different facets have ordered relationships with each other. The most important facets of reality are those that pertain to eternal destiny, it argues, which are the same facets about which the Church speaks. Thus the Church takes for itself a sort of overarching supervisory position: not in charge of anything in particular, except religious life, but with a certain oversight of everything in general, even things like politics and scientific research. Naturally, politicians and scientists chafe at this ordering, and prefer a separation. A secularization, made possible by the Protestant Reformation, is what they looked for.

The problem with a Muslim Reformation is that it has already happened, and failed. In the 11th and 12th centuries AD, Islam saw its philosophical hayday. Ibn Sina (Avicenna), Ibn Rushd (Averroes), and Ibn Farabi among a host of others labored to integrate their Koranic religious convictions with systematic thought in a way that could give a "big picture" of the whole world, sustain scientific discoveries, and help address questions not obviously answered in the Koran. They were in pursuit of the same project that the Catholic Scholastic philosophers (Thomas Aquinas, et al.) undertook about a century later (and mostly in light of the progress made by the Muslim philosophers first!). It was the same project that Martin Luther rejected in Catholic Europe. In Muslim Persia the project was torn down by Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali, a theologian and cleric, like Luther, who was convinced that thinking about religion and faith somehow undid them. He wrote oodles of volumes, but his most significant is also one of his latest. It is most significant because it is a reversal of the earlier. "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" is a proposal of epistemological skepticism that would make Descartes or Hume blush. It denies any real ability to know anything outside of one's own mind, cutting off the subjective from the objective, the religious from the material universe.

So if this division of religious from secular has occured in both the Western world (in the 16-17th centuries) and in the Muslim world (in the 12th-13th centuries), why they both look so different from each other?

Simply put, the West has tended toward interest in the material and thus become more secular, while the Muslim world has tended toward interest in the religious and thus become more 'fundamentalist'. It was the same basic philosophical thrust to separate religion and the secular from each other that has allowed each to become unbalanced. If we separate the two so completely, we are left to chose between (on the one hand) a secularized scientism with no room for human values and transcendence, without wonder and awe; and (on the other hand) a detached religiosity with no room for inquiry or reasonability, nothing to prevent it from becoming unhinged in its own little mental universe, nothing to prevent it from becoming fanatical.

The two worlds we have thus face face each other in gaping incomprehension, each thinking of the other, "How can you be so obtuse?"

What is needed in both the Western world and in the Muslim world is a philosophical understanding in which there is one reality, and each thing has its proper place and can be understood analytically (in its parts and in itself) and comprehensively (as part of the bigger picture) - so that science is not closed to the transcendent and religion is not hostile to reason and thought. What is emphatically NOT needed in either the Western world or the Muslim world is a new Reformation, a new division of this-world from that-world. We've had quite enough of that already.

There are 1 billion plus Muslims in the world because of "sword-forced" conversion and forced procreation. Considering the contemporary Islamic truth/death squads and "koranic" rules, things have not changed. Give freedom to the Muslim masses trapped under Islamic tyranny and watch what happens.

Any idea how many Muslims have access to this discussion??

And if I lived in Iran or other Islamic states and noted that Mohammed was an illiterate, hallucinating Arab who had contemporary or future scribal henchmen writing their own "koranic" militant agendas for plundering/looting the lands of non-believers, I would be beheaded. And you call that a "peaceful" religion??????

You go Jihadist!

Yeah, CW Chase, I think you have a point.

Ahhh, The Jihadist is still making the rounds but still not addressing the root problem with Islam, i.e. its flawed foundations. But we must also consider The Jihadist's predicament being in a country about to convert to an Islamic state. I am sure her comments are already being monitored by the Islamic koranics in Malaysia. And almost a billion Muslims living in fear just like The Jihadist!!! How disturbing!!!!

Mr. Rodriguez said:

"Simply stated, the Muslim community may very well benefit from a Reformation, a Wittenberg moment of sorts in order to subjugate the impetus of the current transnational movement of militant Muslim totalitarianism. September 11th, 2001, provided a an opportunity for the Martin Luthers within the Muslim community to rise up and post the grievances on the doors."

Christopher Responds:

There are several severe problems with Mr. Rodriguez's position, as there are for anyone (and there are quite a few) calling for something similar to a "Reformation" in worldwide Islam.

First, since Sunni Islam does not have the same kind of rigid hierarchies that Roman Catholicism as an institution had, there can't be a Reformation against one. Yes, the religious authorites at Al-Azhar University are regarded as generally authoritative for Sunni Muslims, but they hardly have the power to excommunicate anyone, as the Roman Catholic hierarchy does. Sunni Islam is already quite "Protestant," and like Protestants, when Sunni Muslims disagree with each other, someone goes a few miles down the road and builds another mosque, just as American Protestants do in their tradition.

The other great difficulty is that the loosely Muslim counterpart of the Protestant Reformers (complete with "Sola Scriptura") are the fundamentalist Salafis--the very people who are being seen as ideologically very troublesome and often supportive of violence. Just as it would be if we were discussing fundamentalist Protestantism is in the United States, it would make little sense to call for a Reformation against those who are widely already regarded as having taking up the mantle of that very challenge.

Anyone care to comment on Rev. Rodriguez' point? Correct me here, but I don't get the impression that Islam is sufficiently well-organized to have any universal religious hierarchy. On the other side, we do seem to be seeing the political equivalent of the counter-Reformation.

Hello Concerned the Christian Now Liberated. I'm waiting for Ross, Frank Collins et al to be here! Waiting for you all gentlemen:).

Ummm.... Salman Rushdie is a novelist. A fiction writer. I am waiting for him to write a satire on the two councils that lead to the Nicene Creed. After all, he believes all religions are nonsense.

Without Salman Rushdie and Dutch MP Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the Muslim panel, the panel was a "stacked pro-Islamic deck".