Pat Condell on Feminism and Islam

[icehorse]

Try your local library. Chances are there'll be a few books introducing you to the basics of Islaam . If you want a somewhat different take on Islaam, try some introductions to Sufi Islaam.

I know how to use google. I want to know what definition you're using. Is your definition codified somewhere. Otherwise it's like you're arguing with your own private language.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I know how to use google. I want to know what definition you're using. Is your definition codified somewhere. Otherwise it's like you're arguing with your own private language.

My point is only that Islaam doesn't take only one form. It has many different sects, not to mention ordinary Muslims' own personal takes on this or that issue. So, particularly in relation to the latter, it's not going to make a whole lot of sense to talk about codification/documentation. As with pretty much any other religion. I have my take on Islaam, which will be different from the next person. If you want to know my take on Islaam, what exactly is it about my Islaam you want to know?

 

[icehorse]

My point is only that Islaam doesn't take only one form. It has many different sects, not to mention ordinary Muslims' own personal takes on this or that issue. So, particularly in relation to the latter, it's not going to make a whole lot of sense to talk about codification/documentation. As with pretty much any other religion. I have my take on Islaam, which will be different from the next person. If you want to know my take on Islaam, what exactly is it about my Islaam you want to know?

I find this "hide the ball" defense to be really fundamentally dishonest. One can never criticize Islam because it's a moving target. It turns out that one CAN insult a billion Muslims, but you just can't pin anything on them. That sort of hypocrisy doesn't lead to good relations.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I find this "hide the ball" defense to be really fundamentally dishonest. One can never criticize Islam because it's a moving target. It turns out that one CAN insult a billion Muslims, but you just can't pin anything on them. That sort of hypocrisy doesn't lead to good relations.

So it's okay for other religious traditions to have diversity, but not Islaam?

 

[icehorse]

So it's okay for other religious traditions to have diversity, but not Islaam?

I'm not saying that. And also, it's not only Muslims who are guilty of the shell game. Christians play the game as well.

What's off putting is when religious folk ascribe good things to their religion, but refuse to consider criticisms. Now if you don't claim that your religion does any good in the world, then I have no beef with you. But for the most part, folks who place their religion as a significant factor in who they are, also claim that their religion is a positive force.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

What's off putting is when religious folk ascribe good things to their religion, but refuse to consider criticisms.

Oh, I hear you alright. If we take 'Islaam' to include every sect going, and every individual's interpretation of it (from the mystical and peaceful Sufis to the literalists to the espousers of violent Jihaad against civilians in the West, not to mention the Qur'aanists, and so on), then there's much to be critical of. But my personal interpretation/version of Islaam is not the same thing as this broader notion of what constitutes Islaam, so I am not going to accept a criticism of what e.g. the so-called Jihaadists do as a criticism of my Islaam. Do you get what I am trying to say here? The problem may well be in my articulation of the issue!

 

[icehorse]

Oh, I hear you alright. If we take 'Islaam' to include every sect going, and every individual's interpretation of it (from the mystical and peaceful Sufis to the literalists to the espousers of violent Jihaad against civilians in the West, not to mention the Qur'aanists, and so on), then there's much to be critical of. But my personal interpretation/version of Islaam is not the same thing as this broader notion of what constitutes Islaam, so I am not going to accept a criticism of what e.g. the so-called Jihaadists do as a criticism of my Islaam. Do you get what I am trying to say here? The problem may well be in my articulation of the issue!

So way back when - in the early posts of this thread - you described Islaam as a sort of useful framework through which you can view the world. Did I get that right? If so, can you share any elements of that useful framework? I've asked this question of many Muslims and I've never understood how any of the "good" aspects of Islam are unique or even much more than common sense. For example I hear "Islam teaches charity". Well I'm all for charity, but it wasn't invented by by Islam nor is it at all unique to Islam. So what's the draw?

thanks

 

[Notanumber]

Do moderate Muslims have to attend the mosque on a regular basis to listen to what the imam tells them or can they be good Muslims by ploughing their own furrows?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

So way back when - in the early posts of this thread - you described Islaam as a sort of useful framework through which you can view the world. Did I get that right? If so, can you share any elements of that useful framework? I've asked this question of many Muslims and I've never understood how any of the "good" aspects of Islam are unique or even much more than common sense. For example I hear "Islam teaches charity". Well I'm all for charity, but it wasn't invented by by Islam nor is it at all unique to Islam. So what's the draw?

thanks

Yes, that's exactly right. Okay, so it's not in the individual elements - for as you say, you'll be hard pushed to find anything particularly unique about Islaamic teachings - but rather the combination, and the simplicity of that combination:
1) The strong monotheism, not brooking any association between God and anyone or anything - there is no deity but God, and Muhammad (pbuh) is no more than God's servant and Messenger (i.e. nothing more than a man with a man's weaknesses, and certainly not one to be elevated to the status of anything more than that).
2) Regular prayers.
3) Fasting.
4) The annual welfare payment.
5) The pilgrimage to Makkah (Mecca) for those who can afford it, and for everyone not performing it, the so-called feast of sacrifice (which for me, isn't about sacrifice at all).
And that's it. Everything else comes down to how you apply these five pillars and a large amount of culture (which can be dispensed with).

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Do moderate Muslims have to attend the mosque on a regular basis to listen to what the imam tells them or can they be good Muslims by ploughing their own furrows?

So, attending the mosque every Friday around lunchtime (unless you have a good reason not to) is obligatory for every sane adult male Muslim (it's encouraged for ladies too, but not obligatory). And yes, listening to the imaam's weekly sermon is part and parcel of that. But only listening. That doesn't have to stop you ploughing your own furrow! I (try to) go to my local mosque every Friday (whether I'm at work or home) and I'll listen to the imaam and reflect on his words, but at the end of the day, I don't have to answer to the imam, but rather to Allaah! The imaam is not my lord! So it's always got to be about my relationship with Allaah, and how I understand that relationship.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

I'm a libertarian, so anything which contravenes liberty - and there's a lot of that going about in many Muslim countries and communities - is going to be a massive problem for me. Misogyny whatever its manifestation is one of my biggest bugbears.

Good for you. I wish more Muslims would openly acknowledge that fundamentalist Islam is responsible for these things, although I know that there are many who do.

 

[icehorse]

Yes, that's exactly right. Okay, so it's not in the individual elements - for as you say, you'll be hard pushed to find anything particularly unique about Islaamic teachings - but rather the combination, and the simplicity of that combination:
1) The strong monotheism, not brooking any association between God and anyone or anything - there is no deity but God, and Muhammad (pbuh) is no more than God's servant and Messenger (i.e. nothing more than a man with a man's weaknesses, and certainly not one to be elevated to the status of anything more than that).
2) Regular prayers.
3) Fasting.
4) The annual welfare payment.
5) The pilgrimage to Makkah (Mecca) for those who can afford it, and for everyone not performing it, the so-called feast of sacrifice (which for me, isn't about sacrifice at all).
And that's it. Everything else comes down to how you apply these five pillars and a large amount of culture (which can be dispensed with).

I read the Quran (well, you know, a translation). And I spot checked the translation I read with two other translations. I found the three translations mostly agreed with each other. I also read a very apologetic biography of Muhammad, and then several other accounts of his life. (I have honestly only dipped into the Hadith a tiny bit.)

These books really trouble me. It seems to me that the most natural reading of the Quran is that it's a war manual for Muslims against the rest of humanity. I'm not the first to notice that ISIS's interpretation of Islamic scripture is very natural and extremely defensible.

So it's always struck me that a moderate, peace loving Muslim has to do substantial mental gymnastics to square a peaceful world view with the scripture. I don't doubt that some Muslims can and do pull off this non-trivial exercise, but it doesn't surprise me at all that we see all of the problems we see in the Muslim world, and that polls tell us that so many of the world's Muslims are anti-secular. It really seems as though the scripture is a huge negative influence on humanity. I'm inclined to take you at your word, and my only conclusion is that you have the world view you have in spite of the scripture, not because of it.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I also read a very apologetic biography of Muhammad, and then several other accounts of his life

The trouble with these accounts is that they postdate Muhammad (pbuh) by quite a few years..

These books really trouble me.

Some of the things they contain really trouble me too.

It seems to me that the most natural reading of the Quran is that it's a war manual for Muslims against the rest of humanity.

If you read all of the Qur'aan the whole way through, and take all of it together, and understand the context both of individual verses and of the Qur'aan as a whole, you may learn to see it in a different light. The Qur'aan was revealed at a time when society in that part of the world was violent and misogynistic and generally not a nice society to be living in. Against that backdrop, the Qur'aan was a vast improvement, a practical way to reform that society. But I don't believe it is a blueprint for all time. If you see it in this light, as a text which combines some universal teachings with quite a few teachings, and a way of framing reality, applicable to the needs of that time and place, which it would be plainly inappropriate (to say the least!) to apply in most parts of the world today, then you might start to get a different measure for the Qur'aan and what it is (and what it is not). So many Muslims do see it as a blueprint for all eternity. Doesn't mean they're right. In his last sermon to the people before he died, Muhammad (pbuh) beseeched Allaah, saying that he hoped that the last to hear his message would understand it better than those gathered before him that day.

But I do believe that there is a war going on, not between Muslims and non-Muslims mind you, but between the forces of the light and the forces of darkness. And there are people who call themselves Muslims on both sides (as there are people who call themselves the adherents of other traditions), which makes it all a bit messy and complicated. But this belief of mine, which is as much a Gnostic one as anything, doesn't mean that I use the Qur'aan as a war manual. I have my own war manual (that I put together myself) for this spiritual war.

I'm not the first to notice that ISIS's interpretation of Islamic scripture is very natural and extremely defensible.

Not so. Their interpretation is an abusive and far more intolerant and violent one more in keeping with the society that the Qur'aan was aimed at reforming.

It really seems as though the scripture is a huge negative influence on humanity

Of course, we don't know how much better or worse humanity might have been without it.

I'm inclined to take you at your word, and my only conclusion is that you have the world view you have in spite of the scripture, not because of it.

Well, the path I tread and the beliefs I hold started way before I converted to Islaam, and they have continued to evolve since within that framework I outlined to you earlier. Moreover, you seem to place too much stock on the scripture, which is important to be sure, but just one part of a Muslim's spiritual and religious life. Or at least this Muslim's spiritual and religious life.

 

[icehorse]

@The_Fisher_King

I really appreciate the openness with which you discuss this!

 

[The_Fisher_King]

@The_Fisher_King

I really appreciate the openness with which you discuss this!

Many thanks!

 

[icehorse]

If you read all of the Qur'aan the whole way through, and take all of it together, and understand the context both of individual verses and of the Qur'aan as a whole, you may learn to see it in a different light. The Qur'aan was revealed at a time when society in that part of the world was violent and misogynistic and generally not a nice society to be living in. Against that backdrop, the Qur'aan was a vast improvement, a practical way to reform that society. But I don't believe it is a blueprint for all time. If you see it in this light, as a text which combines some universal teachings with quite a few teachings, and a way of framing reality, applicable to the needs of that time and place, which it would be plainly inappropriate (to say the least!) to apply in most parts of the world today, then you might start to get a different measure for the Qur'aan and what it is (and what it is not). So many Muslims do see it as a blueprint for all eternity.

It seems to me that the thoughtful and explicitly non-dogmatic approach you take to understanding the scripture is relatively rare. And given how crowded and dangerous our planet has become, that makes the scripture mostly dangerous. People like you can navigate it thoughtfully, but far too many cannot.

 

[idav]

It seems to me that the thoughtful and explicitly non-dogmatic approach you take to understanding the scripture is relatively rare. And given how crowded and dangerous our planet has become, that makes the scripture mostly dangerous. People like you can navigate it thoughtfully, but far too many cannot.

Hey but you believe in free speech right? What writing are not potentially dangerous? Ones without hate or violence perhaps?

 

[icehorse]

Hey but you believe in free speech right? What writing are not potentially dangerous? Ones without hate or violence perhaps?

I do believe in free speech. I never called for anything like burning scripture. But when free speech REALLY COUNTS is when it's used to criticize popular, powerful ideas. Islam is a set of popular, powerful and IMO really bad ideas. The Quran promotes hate and violence, and it's protected speech (in the US at least), AND we need to have the right to criticize and ridicule such speech.

 

[idav]

I do believe in free speech. I never called for anything like burning scripture. But when free speech REALLY COUNTS is when it's used to criticize popular, powerful ideas. Islam is a set of popular, powerful and IMO really bad ideas. The Quran promotes hate and violence, and it's protected speech (in the US at least), AND we need to have the right to criticize and ridicule such speech.

All speech in the US would fall under the first amendment, religious or otherwise. Practicing religion is protected but within the confines of its secular law.

 

[icehorse]

All speech in the US would fall under the first amendment, religious or otherwise. Practicing religion is protected but within the confines of its secular law.

Agreed. But recently religious folks of several stripes have been advocating for blasphemy laws which would restrict some criticism.