Shared by Zafar Khizer
http://dawn.com/2013/05/30/rape-cases-cii-says-dna-data-not-acceptable-as-primary-evidence/
Submitted by Mirza Iqbal Ashraf
(1) WHAT IS ISLAM?— (2) WHAT IS MODERNITY?— (3) WHO ARE MUSLIMS?
First of all: WHAT IS RELIGION? Oliver Leaman in his work the Islamic Philosophy, (page 126) explains what religion is: “Etymologists tell us that the word “religion” may come from the Latin root religare, meaning to adhere or bind. It’s a wonderful derivation. In both its secular and religious manifestations, faith is alluring and seductive precisely because it’s driven by propositions that bind or adhere the believer to a compelling set of ideas that satisfy rationally or spiritually, but always obligate. History is a crucial concept for religion, since the rationale for a particular religion may well be historical. For example, it is often argued by a religion that the truth of its doctrines lies in the facts of the past, and, were it not for those historical facts, that the religion would be unworthy of acceptance.” According to an American philosopher C. S. Lewis: “As a biological phenomenon, religion is the product of cognitive processes that have deep roots in our evolutionary past.” What is ironical with the Darwinian theorists, that regarding religion they argue that it is a myth of the past, but regarding human being they link him to the very past man the animal. If man can evolve from an animal to a present day human being, it is quite natural that his mythical convictions evolved as a religion in his present cognition. We cannot ignore that the quest of myths, religions, philosophy, and science is same; the quest for knowledge to reach the “ultimate truth” of creation of man and the cosmos.
Secondly ORIGIN OF RELIGION: Origin and source of religion can never be known with certainty. Different researches are based on speculations. The anthropologists hold that religion originated from people’s interaction with nature; the psychologists view frustration, fear, stress, and emotional need; the sociologists believe religion as the first social system; and the rational philosophers agree not to agree on the subject of religion. For those who believe in God, Divine revelation is still an agreeable and acceptable origin of the religion.
Thirdly WHY PEOPLE BELIEVE IN RELIGION: “Mankind is continually and universally threatened with failure, frustration, and injustice. Religion becomes the attempt of people in groups to “relativize” such threats to their wholeness by placing them within a context of a larger system or plan and by “explaining” much that happens in terms of supernatural intervention into and control over and control over earthly events. At the same time, threats similar to those experienced by individuals also affect social relationships–and, in fact, society itself. Religion arises as an attempt by society to cushion such threats (both itself and to its members) by bringing people into a ritual fellowship of common belief. Religion is thus a response to both individual and group needs.” (Ronald L. Johnston: Religion in Society, page 35).
1. WHAT IS ISLAM? As a matter of fact, religion is not a fixed collection of beliefs, myths or rituals. Properly understood, Religion–when both science and philosophy fails to give a definite answer to man–is a living technology for experiencing the Creator or to be more explicit, God. Religion, somewhat began in fear, whereas philosophy began in wonder about various issues related to fear and wonder of natural phenomena that human beings found mysterious and surprising. In Islam, we have both, fear and wonder combined together. Many great Islamic thinkers and philosophers from al-Kindi to Allama Iqbal agreeably created a meta-theory–a theory about theory–called “theory of double truth” meaning that the truths of religion and philosophy are so distinct that there is no way that they can contradict each other. In Islam reason and religion do not come into conflict, they are rather about the same truth, only expressed in different ways, (for detail read Ibn Rushd, al-Ghazali, and Iqbal). Allama Iqbal’s whole philosophy is based on characteristics of Hz. Khizer, Sikander, and Rumi. Unfortunately no one understands Iqbal today. Please see Iqbal’s great Persian verses, (translated by me and posted on TF web) and understand Sikander the non-believer challenging the Qur’anic figure Hz. Khizer (It is viewed that that Hz. Idris is Hz. Khizer). Islam, according to many great Islamic philosophers, is a social phenomenon and, as such, is in a continual reciprocal, interactive relationship with other social phenomena–Divine and earthly.
2. WHAT IS MODERNITY? Modernity has many interpretations. Generally the idea of modernity common to sociology, economics, and historiography, both in their professional and popular or fold form, is an attempt to grasp the peculiarity of the present by contrasting it with the preceding age. Philosophically, modernity means various moments of abundant epistemological optimism. Since no other religion after Islam has successfully appeared or has been accepted as religion, Islam is accredited as the latest or a modern religion. Within this context, Islam as a religion does not need to be changed or even modified since it has the capability to be compatible with every age and to assimilate all modern thoughts and traditions in its discipline, except those which are un-natural. Islamic jurisprudence based on Shari’ah, socially or politically, has never been a static set of rules throughout the 13 centuries of Islamic dominance in the world. Although I can quote hundreds of references from European and American historians and thinkers, here I am quoting few lines by the agnostic, humanist thinker, and a protagonist of mathematical-philosophy, Bertrand Russell. He writes in his great book, A History of Western Philosophy, in the chapter Mohammedan Culture and Philosophy, page 419-28: “The religion of the Prophet (Mohammed) was a simple monotheism, uncomplicated by the elaborate theology of the Trinity and the Incarnation. . . . Arab Empire was an absolute monarchy, under the caliph, who was the successor of the Prophet, and inherited much of his holiness. The caliphate was nominally elective, but soon became hereditary. The first dynasty, that of Ummayyads, which lasted till 750, was founded by men whose acceptance of Mahomet was purely political, and it remained always opposed to the more fanatical among the faithful. . . The Abbasids were, politically, more in favor of the fanatics than the Ummayyads had been.” He further writes, “Mohammedan civilization in its great days was admirable in the arts and in many technical ways, but it showed no capacity for independent speculation in theoretical matters.” Here, I would dare to disagree with Russell [since he had not read Qur’an] as the Qur’an clearly mentions, “Call [the mankind] unto the way of thy Lord with wisdom and fair exhortation, and reason [argue] with them in the better way,” (Q. 16:125). According to the Prophet of Islam, “God has not created anything more beautiful, better, or more perfect than reason–so much so that to ponder for an hour, is better than Divine service for a year,” (Sahih Bukhari).
3. WHO ARE MUSLIMS? This is a big question? Whereas all other civilizations in the world have gradually evolved, Islam is a civilization founded by its Prophet. Muslims are citizens of a great ummah, a civilization under the banner of universal Islam, where they believe in One God, the five pillars of Islam. Islam presents an all-embracing system of life comprising a distinct and self-contained culture. Their diversity in different factions and different approaches is the result of Islam’s capacity to assimilate other cultures into this system, including Central Asian, Persian, Egyptian, European, Indian, Mongolian, and Far Eastern peoples, a culture which is originally Arabian, is based on Islam’s appeal to humanitarian theism. Today what is feared and is being challenged–and is being treacherously presented under the garb of pristine Islam–is in fact the essence of Islam’s doctrine of immanent universality [a universality that has the capability to assimilate all other cultures and traditions which do not confront natural tenets of mankind and are not repugnant to Qur’anic injunctions], against which the non-Islamic world is poised. This natural religion of Islam, a driving force in Muslim civilization, has been and is still politically misunderstood, misinterpreted, and exploited both within and beyond Islam.
Mirza Iqbal Ashraf: May 18, 2013
Afiya Sheherbano, in her article ” Ignorant Goodwill”, responds to an article by Jemima Khan, ex-wife of Imran Khan, on polygamy in Muslim Community in the West. The article by Jemima Khan is posted on TFUSA website(http://www.thinkersforumusablog.org/archives/5811)
In the post-9/11 period, conservatives in the west view Muslim women’s freedom exclusively through the act of unveiling, while ‘anti-imperialists’ fetishise it as a tool of passive revolution against racism, imperialism and Islamophobia. Neither wishes to discuss discrimination or material rights beyond wardrobe politics.
Then, there are some adventurous souls who overstretch their benevolent sympathy for the Muslim woman’s cause with a recklessness that only the very privileged can afford. Jemima Khan, enamoured by all that she has learnt about Muslim women’s exceptional rights during her time as Imran Khan’s wife, has recently ‘investigated’ British Muslim women’s partiality towards polygamous marriages as a socio-cultural refuge.
Mrs Khan herself renounced the traditional right of Muslim women to keep their maiden names after marriage but interestingly, chooses to retain her ex-husband’s identity even post-divorce. Social-celebrity affectation or not, that’s her personal choice. However, when she masquerades as a social scientist, then Mrs Khan may be well advised to read some of the prolific international scholarship by (Muslim) women on the historical intersections of polygamy with culture, religion and class and their assessment of its doubtful ‘benefits’.
Not to privilege science too much, even an anecdotal survey of some working class communities of Lahore, where Mrs Khan lived for several years, would have confirmed her thesis – albeit not with the same optimistic conclusions. Often, polygamous marriages have indeed provided some women a sanctuary…but not from poverty or abandonment, instead, from domestic violence. Once displaced, primary wives of polygamous arrangements sometimes (though not always) become lesser targets of spousal and in-law violence/discrimination. Technically, this could qualify polygamous arrangements as safer havens, I suppose. Read full article Click link below:
http://www.sacw.net/article4414.html
( Posted by F. Sheikh)
William James, the American pioneer of the scholarly study of religion, would call Wieland’s behavior not religious violence, but “fanaticism.” In his 1902 book The Varieties of Religious Experience, James argued that, for the fanatic, “piety is the mask, the inner force is tribal instinct.” Where Nietzsche had observed and analyzed Christianity’s supposed preoccupation with the vengeance of the powerless against the powerful, James used this specific form of hostility, calledressentiment, to account for the violent inclinations we see from isolated pretenders to “saintliness” — people whose real faith is in the invulnerability of their self-made system of beliefs more than in any traditionally and communally observed God.
Fanaticism is not religion pushed too far. It is tribalism without a tribe. And it can be a particular risk with the geographical and cultural dislocation attending the American experience of immigration, whether for the Wielands of Saxony or the Tsarnaevs of Dagestan. Read Full article by clicking on .http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/05/the-boston-bombing-made-in-the-usa/275510/
Posted by F. Sheikh