RSS feed for Shi'a Pundit

Shi'a Pundit

Devoted to the viewpoint of Islam of Muhammad SAW and Amir ul-Mumineen, Ali ibn Abi Talib SA, in the Shi'a Fatimi Ismaili Dawoodi Bohra tradition.

October 29, 2002

Falsafat I: Ideofact on Qutb.

Bill Allison's Ideofact blog is one of those rare blogs that serves as a reference site for others, rather than a mere collection of opinions. Bill has blogged on topics ranging from the middle ages to Bosnia, covering literature and history and supported by a formidable library. One of the most important series of posts that Bill has worked on is his ongoing analysis of "Sayyid" [1] Qutb's book, Social Justice in Islam[2]. This book's influence on the radical segment of Islam has been profound, to the extent that Qutb has been called "the brains behind Osama bin Laden" (here are a pair of articles that discuss this influence in detail by Dinesh D'Souza).

What is important about Bill's thorough analysis is that it demonstrates just how far from mainstream Islam that Qutb's ideas and interpretations are - to the extent that even an outsider to the faith can see them (not to impugn Bill - he has deep and personal knowledge of Islam, though he is not muslim himself). I agree completely with him when he says:


I've never been convinced that it is Islam in and of itself with which we are at war, but rather with a bunch of lunatics who believe that Islam justifies flying a few airplanes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Beyond that, I tend to think the main problem of the Middle East is tyranny.
...
Islam shares the concept of the equality of souls before God. It has not found expression in anything like our Declaration, it is not the organizing principle of any predominantly Muslim society, but the concept is there, and is something which perhaps can be built upon.


Following the vein of my previous post, where I discuss how far off base OBL is from Islam, this post is an attempt to catalouge all of the Ideofact entries on Qutb. Thus we can demonstrate that not only is OBL's ideology flawed, but also the lineage of his ideology as well. Taken together, this could be considered the beginnings of a systematic refutation of the OBL version of Islam. I am regrettably not qualified to "deconstruct" Qutb with Qur'anic references but I know this to be possible, and Bill does an admirable job even without turning to the ultimate authority.

Ideofact Qutb Series
1
2:1, 2:2, 2:3
3:1, 3:2, 3:3
4
5
6
7:1, 7:2, 7:3, 7:4, 7:5, 7:6

Bill hasnt yet finished the series, so I will update this post as he adds new entries.

So, then, what is the alternative to Qutb? The answer is Ali ibn Talib AS, the chosen sucessor to the Prophet (and the defining figure of Shi'a theology). I will review Ali's AS work, "Peak of Eloquence" (Nahjul Balagha), in the next post in this series.


[1] As far as I can determine, the title of Sayyid was bestowed upon Qutb by himself.
[2] For the masochistic, you can buy this book from Amazon. Not recommended unless you have the patience of a sage (like Bill).

permalink | posted by Shi'a Pundit

October 26, 2002

wretched are those who call for Harabah.

Osama bin Laden's "fatwa" against Americans - calling upon Muslims to murder and plunder them - is well known and was widely reported by the media. OBL labeled this as a jihad and a religious duty. However, it was actually neither a fatwa nor a call to jihad, let alone a religious duty of any kind. It is critical for muslims and non-muslims alike to understand exactly how OBL has misapproriated these terms and how his call to action goes against the fundamental tenets of Islam in the Qur'an itself.

A fatwa is a religious pronouncement, a call to religious duty. By its very definition, therefore, it can only be invoked by a religious authority. OBL has no such authority, and in fact usually fatwas are issued by councils of clerics (in the Sunni tradition) or by religious imam (in the Shi'a). OBL's family may have built many mosques, but it is certainly doubtful he ever led prayers in one, or ever acted in a religious advisory capacity. If anything, OBL is a pretender to religious authority. The notion that his pronouncements can be labeled fatwas is intrinsically ludicrous. Even the ruling Saudi family dares not lay claim to the authority to issue fatwas (though in their case, they just let their Wahabi symbiotes do it).

OBL's ignorance about Islam and the laughability of his claim to religious authority is well-illustrated by his own words:


The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." . . .


The very first statement asserts that "killing Americans and their allies" is an "individual duty". The Qur'an does in fact support violence if in defense against attack, but here OBL explicitly describes the targets as "civilians and military." Note that if you make the argument that there is no such thing as a civilian, then that qualification is unneccessary. Presumably then OBL does make such a distinction, and thus he is knowingly calling for the murder of innocents.

Contrast this with the words of the Qur'an itself:


We ordained for the Children of Israel that if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land. Those who wage war against Allah and His prophet, kill the believers and plunder their property shall be disgraced in this world, and for them is a dreadful doom in the hereafter. (5:32-33)


(note - translations of the Qur'an are inherently flawed.)

The contrast is crystal clear. What OBL is calling for violates Qur'anic precepts. His assertion that this is the "duty" of all Muslims is thus ignorant and self-refuting. His gross ignorance of the Qur'an demonstrates that he is an impostor of religious authority.

On a minor theological note, the "holy mosque" (ie, the Kabba) never needs to be liberated. It is Allah's - and thus will always be safe. To say that the Saudis are pagans and that the Kabba needs to be liberated is in one sense an insult to God. Would Allah allow the Kabba to fall into the hands of pagans? The Saudis - despite all their faults - have made it possible for Muslims worldwide to perform the Hajj[1]. As for Masjid al-Aqsa, it still is owned by the Waqf and muslims do have access, for the most part. Any muslim who has actually gone there can attest to this. I wonder if OBL has ever bothered?

Finally, the ayats that OBL invokes are taken grossly out of context. Again with a translation (sigh) :


Surely the number of months with Allah is twelve months in Allah's ordinance since the day when He created the heavens and the earth, of these four being sacred; that is the right reckoning; therefore be not unjust to yourselves regarding them, and fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). (9:36)


This is directed at two targets. First, the pagans here are specifically the pagans of Saudi Arabia before Islam, who used to observe a year of 13 months after two years to combine the solar and lunar years, due to which they had to transfer the observance of Muharram to the succeeding month, Safar. This verse condemns their interference with the lunar calendar. Second, taken in a broader context, says to fight them together as they fight you all together. Since Islam is not under attack by America or her allies (in fact, Muslims reside there as well, and none of the established schools of jurisprudence consider American muslims to be inferior or non-muslim), this ayat does not apply.

The other ayat that OBL invokes is also very out of context:


Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression. (2:190-193)


These ayats are often used by fanatics for precisely oppsite to their intent. The main points here are that fighting is only permitted in self-defense. If fighting starts, then kill them wherever they are found, unless they ask for mercy (this is also the Jacksonian model as well). Most importantly, show mercy when one has the upper hand.

The Qur'an is also explicit about the fate of those who misuse the words of Allah themselves for their own gain. I'll let OBL, and any fan of his, look that up themselves. For all the good it shall do them.

OBL continues,


We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.


I have previously blogged about jihad. What OBL calls for here is not jihad, since he has already explicitly targeted non-combatants, but note that he goes further here and calls for plunder as well. This is actually a call to harabah, or "war of intimidation." Note that harabah is strongly condemned in the Qur'an, for example the explicit reference in 5:33 to those whose intent is "mischief through the land".

For more discussion on harabah, see this excellent entry on alt.muslim, and this essay on an Islamic definition of terrorism. Alt muslim also makes this telling point, which is similar to what I was saying earlier:


Because the word jihad roughly means "religious effort," the West can come off as attacking the daily life of ordinary Muslims, while terrorists get away with wrapping their crimes in religious phraseology. Muslim scholars are meeting in Washington with US officials to change this. "When people carelessly dump on jihad, it has an immediate polarizing effect," said Khaled Abou el Fadl, a professor of Islamic law at UCLA who will attend the meeting. "It may not change much, but it allows Muslims and non-Muslims to say something about terrorists without appearing to malign Islamic theology."


Speaking in God's NameKhaled Abou el Fadl (professor of Islamic law at UCLA) is also an accomplished writer on these topics. His book, Speaking in God's Name, is a very thorough look at how religious terminology is abused by the extremists. It is vitally important that these differences in terminology are understood - more than merely semantics, it is the framework for understanding the problem of radical fascist Islam and the underlying problem of tribalism. I urge other bloggers to make a point of calling terrorism harabah and not jihad, and to avoid labeling every frothing opinion of extremists a fatwa.

Islam is actually the solution to the problem. It is in our collective best interest, to understand the classical interpretations of Islam (of which mine is but a single example of many), because that understanding can shape policy. Consider the hypothetical post-war Iraq. If we simply set up a barbie dolls and rock and roll culture, then there will be a fundamentalist backlash. The last thing we want to do is turn secular but tyrannical Iraq into a defeated but fundamentalist nation. The former can be bombed and deterred and exiled and killed, but the latter is a huge incubator just like Afghanistan was.

If we are to be successful we have to remove the incubators, the conditions under which they are created, as well. Doing that means that an understanding of classical Islam is essential. Thats the propaganda war we need to fight against OBL.


[1] I drive an SUV. Whether I'm killing the Earth or helping muslims do hajj depends on your point of view, I guess.

permalink | posted by Shi'a Pundit

October 23, 2002

Modern Islam.


This post is unlike most of mine, in that it really is a colection of links rather than an analysis of an issue. But there are a range of resources Iwhose existence I want to document here.

Previously, I blogged about Ismail Royer (whose essay on Victimhood is absolutely brilliant) - though I've become somewhat disenchanted with him subsequently, since his personal interpretation of Islam compels him to make acid comments about the validity of others' marriages, and make a curious denial of the existence of Wahabism. Read the comments section on this post for details. I've also recently noted the alt.muslim site, which is so good that I'm going to add an XML feed to Shia Pundit from it. The editor, Shahed, has graciously invited me to submt content for alt.muslim, so I willdo my best not to disappoint him.

But apart from luck, it is quite hard to find other Islamic sites, especially ones that link to me. I rely heavily on the statistics pages at Ecosystem websites like Myelin and Organica to find new refers. That's how I came across Bin Gregory, a Muslim blogger who immediately captured my attention with his post on the beauty of Qasida, which are elegies of faith, haunting and powerful, taking the elegance of the written Arabic to an entirely different level.

Also, Bin Gregory reminded me of the following link, to the Zaytuna Institute, which was founded by Shaikh Hamza Yusuf, a staunch proponent of Modern Islam and its role in the world as a beacon of reason. Yusuf is a true intellectual and has an extensive portfolio of speeches and essays that are mandatory reading if you want to understand the true Islam of the ages as opposed to the pseudo-Islam of the media and the tribal idiots. Some of these speeches are Islam's Progressive Tradition, and America's Tragedy (an essay about 9-11). The Zaytuna Institute also runs an Academy, which is an Islamic school run according to modern and rational philosophies in stark contrast to the ignorance of the madrassahs in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Their explanation of their mission rejeuvenates the original spirit of the word madrassah, in my opinion:


Zaytuna Institute and Academy is a non-profit, educational institute and school founded and run by people committed to reviving time-tested methods of educating and transforming human beings. It is our belief that Islam offers a cohesive understanding of the world and a praxis for it that is able to cut through the illusion of contemporary nihilism and materialism.

We recognize ignorance as the greatest weapon of the dark forces working in the world and believe that the light of true knowledge is the only weapon to dispel that darkness. This is our struggle, and our efforts are directed at spreading the light and wisdom of prophetic truths everywhere and to all peoples. Our aim is to teach the tools individuals need in order to live lives of guidance and adherence to sacred order and to restore broad-based pluralistic and true scholarship to its proper place as a first priority of Muslims.

We believe the problems facing this generation are those very problems mentioned in our Prophet's final sermon, upon him be prayers and peace: economic injustice, racism, the oppression of women, and the manipulation of natural order. We believe these human illnesses can only be treated through healing the hearts of humanity with spiritual truths of the impermanence of the world and the need to understand our purpose while we are here and act accordingly. This can only be done with sound and true knowledge. It is our goal to acquire and disseminate that knowledge.


There are two other great modern Islamic writers I want to mention as well. First is Irshaad Hussain, a relative unknown, but whose discussion of The Place of Intellect in Islam remains one of my favorite essays of all time. Second, is Seyyed Hossein Nasr, whose essay Science and Civilization is a powerful refutation of Huntington's flawed Clash of Civilizations thesis. Links to these many other essays on the nature of Science and Islam can be found at my friend Murtaza Gulamali's website, The Interface.

permalink | posted by Shi'a Pundit

October 12, 2002

no assets to freeze.

Want to see an example of a thriving embrace of Islam and the Internet? Take a look at the alt.muslim website, especially their Islamic Thought section. It has an ecellent collection of analyses and interesting stories, including this short account of Badshah Khan, a leading advicate of non-violence and contemporary of Ghandi:


Working alongside Gandhi to liberate South Asia from British colonial rule, Badshah Khan (affectionately known as the "Frontier Gandhi") spent his 98-year life proving that the highest religious values of Islam are deeply compatible with nonviolent conflict resolution, even against heavy odds. From the tribal Pushtuns, Khan assembled the world's first and largest non-violent army in the 1930s, the 100,000-strong Khudai Hidmatgars ("servants of God"). "That such men, who would have killed a human being with no more thought than they would kill a sheep," recounted Gandhi, "should at the bidding of one man have laid down their arms and accepted nonviolence as the superior weapon sounds almost like a fairy tale." "I cited chapter and verse from the Koran to show the great emphasis that Islam had laid on peace," said Khan of his discussion with a skeptical Muslim. "I also showed to him how the greatest figures in Islamic history were known more for their forbearance and self-restraint than for their fierceness. The reply rendered him speechless."


There is a great collection of articles and intellectual opinion on the Islamic Thought page. And, the site is humorous and witty - including randomly-changing bylines like 'Your mysterious neighbors', 'No compulsion in opinion', 'Detained indefinitely', and my personal favorite, 'no assets to freeze" :)

permalink | posted by Shi'a Pundit

October 8, 2002

the tools of political control.

Xavier (whose bilingual blog I came across via Bill Allison) has found translations of certain sermons by radical Islamics that are - as he puts it - "sludge." I quite agree (and I haven't even bothered to click the link to know I agree with him). I also emphatically second his comment about the difference of hijab between Canada and Saudi - the Canadian freedom to choose hijab is the essence of Islam. I must state that I feel America to be even more superior as an Islamic country, because of the freedom hardwired more directly into the very law of the land. America and Islam are more than merely compatible, they are in fact siblings of ideology.

However, Xavier subsequently writes to wonder if I (or other bloggers writing about Islam) will be able to explain how these sermons fit into Islam. He assumes I will have a "hell of a time explaining the vehemence of those sermons and the vitrolic hatred". As I have written on numerous occassions before, the answer is simple. These sermons have nothing to do with Islam. They are manifestations of a tribal impulse to exert political control over a population.

I refer you to these previous pieces where I explore how Islam is irrrelevant to the abuses of these radical hatemongers.

The politicization of Shari'a
The Burka and the Bikini

Xavier also writes,


Worse from my perspective, is the near silence of Moslems towards those vile sermons. I'm becoming resentful because Canada and the U.S. have been quite exemplary in their treatment towards their Moslem citizens and visitors. I'm implicitly demanding reciprocity: I want my fellow Moselm citizens to set the record straight. Of course Canada isn't perfect or doesn't have its defects but the country is hospitable place for immigrants to live their lives in relative freedom and practice their religions. Which is a far cry with Saudi Arabia and some other Moslem countries.


To which I can only say, that that particular tree has fallen in the forest many times, but were you there to hear it? I am reminded of an essay by Kamila Shamsie in the Guardian (which I have also posted to UNMEDIA list), entitled "My home is not the place you see on TV":


Just as Pakistan looks like an extremist monolith if
you watch news reports in the US, so the US looks like an arrogant nation
baying for blood and willing to bypass due process if you watch news reports
here. The interesting point is this: the same news channels which broadcast
images of Pakistan to the US also broadcast images of the US to Pakistan.
That is, we watch CNN and we think it's showing us a complete picture of
America.


I must ask Xavier, how exactly do you set the record straight? What exactly is "the record" ? Pewrusing Xavier's blog I see other calls upon Muslims (presumably, many read his blog) to express themselves publicly, loudly, often. He points out that Saudi Arabia dominates the popular preconseption of Islam and says it is MY responsibility to combat that well-funded campaign.

Well, I have a blog. But I have a life too. I'm sorry, Xavier. I do what I can but most muslims can do much less. Muslims want to live in peace, pray, work, earn, send kids to college, watch TV, volunteer, raise their children, retire, much teh same as you do. We are not a religion of PR activists. We do not have billions of dollars propping us up as tyrants over our people. And I reject your claim that it falls upon me to redefine the public perception of Islam to YOUR satisfaction.

I respect that Xavier has a bilingual blog. Might I inquire if he reads Persian? or Arabic? Or Urdu? There is an entire universe of political debate occurring outside the relatively new boundaries of the internet, or the transient boundaries of the English language. But as long as the west supports dictators like Musharraf, or Mubarak, or Saddam, then the debate must continue in stilted terms, and the process of political freedom is dragged out. It will take longer, but it will happen. But it must happen on the terms of the people, not the bystanders.

True Islam - even if mis-practiced by a billion Wahabi fanatics, is eternal. It cannot be suppressed. As long as a single Muslim like myself practices it in accordance with the original teachings of the Prophet, it cannot be extinguished from this world. As a Muslim, it's not my place to worry about how Islam is perceived by you. It's to worry about how Islam is practiced by me.

UPDATE: Bill comments, noting that the misuse of ideology to further political control is not limited to Islam. He points out that NAzi Germany and Communist Russia (which had much worse victim bodycounts than radical Islam, I might add) employed similar methods.

permalink | posted by Shi'a Pundit

Archives

Nahj-ul Balagha

About Shi'a Pundit

Shi'a Pundit was launched in 2002 during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. The blog focuses on issues pertaining to Shi'a Islam in the west and in the Islamic world. The author is a member of the Dawoodi Bohra Muslim community. Bohras adhere to the Shi'a Fatimi tradition of Islam, headed by the 52nd Dai al-Mutlaq, Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin (TUS).

traffic stats -

html hit counter