Monthly Archives: April 2013

‘Biblical Blame Shift’ Is Monotheism Root Cause Of Religious Wars?

Posted on by
Reply

An interesting take by Jan Assmann, who argues that the multiple competing deities kept cultural and political balance and equilibrium,and prevented wars. Monotheism disrupted this stability and that lead to religious wars. It started with Old Testament.( F. Sheikh)

Is the Egyptologist Jan Assmann Fueling Anti-Semitism?

By Richard Wolin

Jan Assmann has been described as the world’s leading Egyptologist—a characterization that few these days would dare to dispute. A 74-year-old emeritus professor at the University of Heidelberg and honorary professor at the University of Konstanz, Assmann has held guest professorships at Yale, the University of Chicago, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, in Paris.

Assmann argues that biblical monotheism, as codified by the Pentateuch, disrupted the political and cultural stability of the ancient world by introducing the concept of “religious exclusivity”: that is, by claiming, as no belief system had previously, thatits God was the one true God, and that, correspondingly, all other gods were false. By introducing the idea of the “one true God,” Assmann suggests that monotheism upended one of the basic precepts of ancient polytheism: the principle of “divine translatability.” This notion meant that, in ancient Mesopotamia, the various competing deities and idols possessed a fundamental equivalence. This equivalence provided the basis for a constructive modus vivendi among the major empires and polities that predominated in the ancient world.

Assmann readily admits that the ancient Middle East was hardly an unending expanse of peaceable kingdoms. However, he suggests that before monotheism’s emergence, the rivalries and conflicts at issue were predominantly political rather than religious in nature. For this reason, they could be more readily contained. Monotheism raised the stakes of these skirmishes to fever pitch. According to Assmann, with monotheism’s advent, it became next to impossible to separate narrowly political disagreements from religious disputes about “ultimate ends” (Max Weber) or “comprehensive doctrines” (John Rawls). According to the new logic of “religious exclusivity,” political opponents to be conquered were turned into theological “foes” to be decimated.

By introducing the “Mosaic distinction,” Assmann argues, the Old Testament established the foundations of religious intolerance, as epitomized by the theological watchwords: “No other gods!” “No god but God!” Thereafter, the pre-monotheistic deities were denigrated as “idols.” As Assmann explains: Ancient Judaism “sharply distinguishes itself from the religions of its environment by demanding that its One God be worshiped to the exclusion of all others, by banning the production of images, and by making divine favor depend less on sacrificial offerings and rites than on the righteous conduct of the individual and the observance of god-given, scripturally fixed laws.”

In his more recent work, Assmann has taken the corrosive spirit of early modern Bible criticism a step further. In The Price of Monotheism (Stanford University Press, 2010) and related studies, Assmann ignited an international controversy by claiming that the Old Testament, by discriminating between true and false religion, was responsible for ushering in unprecedented levels of historical violence. Provocatively, he has designated this fateful cultural caesura—whose origins lie in the sacred texts of ancient Judaism and which Assmann describes as a world-historical transition from “cult to book”—as the “Mosaic distinction.”

Ckick link below for full Article;

http://chronicle.com/article/Biblical-Blame-Shift/138457/

 

Pulitzer Prize For Drama ‘ Disgraced’ & Review on Movie ‘ The Reluctant Fundamentalist’

Posted on by
Reply

Ayad Akhtar wins 2013 Pulitzer Prize for Drama 

Ayad Akhtar, a son of Pakistani immigrants, wins 2013 Pulitzer Prize for Drama.  Last year, his play “ “Disgraced’’ has a successful run at Lincoln Center in New York. The New York Times Review praised it “a continuously engaging, vitally engaged play about thorny questions of identity and religion in the contemporary world”

“ Mr. Akhtar, a novelist and screenwriter, puts contemporary attitudes toward religion under a microscope, revealing how tenuous self-image can be for people born into one way of being who have embraced another.”

“Disgraced” also drew on a dinner party Mr. Akhtar and his former wife once gave, in which a discussion of Islam created tensions in the room, even among his close friends. “Their perception of me, in some subtle and not-so-subtle ways, shifted over the course of just an evening,” he said.

“The players are a quartet of accomplished New Yorkers of differing races, creeds and, yes, colors, although they have all arrived at the same high plateau of worldly achievement and can agree on the important things, like the tastiness of the fennel and anchovy salad and the banana pudding from Magnolia Bakery. What they cannot agree on — and what will ultimately tear apart at least one of the relationships in the play — is who they really are and what they stand for, once the veneer of civilized achievement has been scraped away to reveal more atavistic urges.”

“( Akhtar) makes no bones about the challenges facing Muslims in America: “My hope is that it’s all balanced in the play but I think there’s a sense of Muslims in the West being besieged by a truculent atmosphere that makes it difficult for them to feel at home. With Disgraced, I’m trying to put a clash on stage that reflects the clash that’s happening within the social body.”

New York Times Review  10/23/2012

http://theater.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/theater/reviews/disgraced-by-ayad-akhtar-with-aasif-mandvi.html?_r=1&

Interview with The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/theatre/theatre-features/9997972/Interview-with-Ayad-Akhtar-winner-of-the-2013-Pulitzer-Prize-for-Drama.html

 

Mira Nair’s New Movie “The Reluctant Fundamentalist”

Adapted from Hamid Mohsin’s novel opened in theaters last Friday. Below are excerpts from review by Financial Times.

“The money that brought the film to life came from Saudi Arabia, with later support from Qatar. Hani Farsi, chief executive of his London-based family investment group, the Corniche Group, and the owner of the Bulgari Hotel in Knightsbridge, signed the cheque..”

“Nair had longed to make a film about Pakistan. There were sentimental reasons. Her father, a civil servant in the elite Indian Administrative Service, grew up in Lahore, when Pakistan’s second-largest city was part of northern India before partition in 1947. During her childhood in the southern Indian state of Orissa, she relished her own Punjabi identity, learnt Urdu and adored ghazals, the heart-rending ballads of the north. She long considered Lahore, with its painting, poetry and courtly manners, as a Venice of the east – only now “two guys with guns come along and throw you into the back of a Pajero”.

“I wanted to make a film about contemporary Pakistan and not one riddled by partition and the weight of all that because [as Indians] that is all we see. We don’t see anything that is now.”

More broadly, she wanted to tell a tale of a global conflict from the other side, and took The Battle of Algiers, Gillo Pontecorvo’s 1966 film about the Algerian revolution, as inspiration.”

“From Vietnam’s Deer Hunter to Iraq, films are never about the person who has had his house destroyed. I want to tell the other side … It’s really about this duel, this dance.

“At its heart it is a thriller. The colour is all very well but it’s what is going to happen. Is he or isn’t he [a fundamentalist]? That’s an amazing razor to walk on,” she says. “The elegance of the story is that you don’t know what side our hero is on.”

Unlike Hamid’s book, Nair’s softer, homespun optimism wins out. The protagonist’s lover in New York does not fade away with anorexia, depression and suicide. The climax of the book is left darkly to the reader’s imagination; less so in the film, where the hero steps back from violence. Monsoon Terrorist is what Hamid, who worked on the adaptation, dubs the film”

Click to read full review;

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/cd119fda-a699-11e2-95b1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2RHhCeM5a

 

 

 

 

 

“Crawl in, Or Reach Out” By F. Sheikh

Posted on by
Reply

After Boston Marathon Bombing, one Muslim woman remarked on her Facebook page ” I feel like crawling in the closet and not come out”. I am sure many of us has similar feelings or thoughts.

But despite this difficult to come out moment, Islamic Center of Rockland ( ICR ) continued its outreach efforts and invited a group of fellow Americans from Orangeburg library to visit the Mosque and observe last Friday’s Prayer.After listening to Sermons(Khutba-posted on our website) and observing prayer, there was a question answer session. Mr. Azeem Farooki is spearheading this program on behalf of Islamic Center, and  received following heartening comments in two e-mails;

From:<rcls.org>
Date: April 22, 2013, 10:42:49 AM EDT
To: <farookiazeem
Subject: Thank you!

‘Hi Azeem!

The card I sent should arrive at the mosque in a few days, but I want to thank you and all the others that helped with Friday’s program.  I’ve gotten numerous emails from the patrons who attended, saying what a wonderful program it was, how they enjoyed meeting everyone, and how much they learned.”

Second E-Mail

“On Apr 22, 2013, at 8:16 PM,

 Dear Mr. Farooki,
 
 I was a member of the group from the Orangeburg Library that attended your mosque on Friday. I wanted to thank you and the other members of the Islamic Center for your kindness and hospitality in hosting our group. It was just a wonderful experience to observe the prayer service, and the sermon was absolutely terrific. Then, you and your colleagues were so kind and patient in answering the many questions of the group. The gift of the books about the Qur’an was so very special.
 
Thank you again for a most rewarding afternoon,”

On April 25th, 2013, Rockland Community College & Islamic Center of Rockland are holding a program  ” Promoting Muslim Understanding”, and below is its e-mail invitation;

Please join us

Thursday, April 25, 11 a.m.

Film: Persepolis

Technology Center, Room 8180 (Ellipse)

Admission: Free and open to the public

The film is a “poignant coming-of-age story of a precocious and outspoken young Iranian girl that begins during the Islamic Revolution.” The viewing will be followed by an open dialogue with Azeem Farooki of the Islamic Center of Rockland. Refreshments will be served.

Please join us!

— 
Sarah N. Levy
Interim Library Director
Rockland Community College Library
145 College Road
Suffern NY 10901

(845) 574-4472; 574-4097

Islamic Center of Rockland not only holds interfaith meetings but also regularly invites a group of students from local schools to visit the Mosque and ask questions.  ICR joins local church and Synagogue for distribution of Thanksgiving meals. This year it has started its own Soup Kitchen for poor on major holidays.

Although tragedies like Boston Bombing sets back years of efforts, but recoiling or crawling in is not the option.The purpose of this writing is that if all Islamic Centers and Mosques have similar programs, it will go a long way to counter onslaught of stereotyping and demonizing propaganda. Apart from cleaning our own house, energetic involvement in the sociopolitical activities is more important than ever to safeguard the future generations from this stereotyping and demonetization.

Two related Articles;

Link to “Today’s Friday Payer’s Sermons- Courageous & Right on Target”

http://www.thinkersforumusablog.org/archives/5568

Are We Failing Our Young Muslim Generation?

http://www.thinkersforumusablog.org/archives/5587

 

 

“Reflection On 3 Questions Raised by Mr. Noor Salik” By Mirza Ashraf

Posted on by
2

The three questions were raised by Noor Salik in his comments on ” Today’s Friday Prayers’ Sermons( Khutba )-Courageous And Right on Target.

Question # 1: If the objective is ideological, can the terrorist actions be justified?

The term “terrorism” is derived from the Latin word terrere which means to make tremble or to frighten. It came to be recognized as “terrorism” via French word terrorisme associated with the regime de la terreur or the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution from 1793 to 1794. In Europe the concept of terrorism developed in the French Revolution which JUSTIFIED terrorism as an INDISPENSABLE TOOL TO ESTABLISH A DEMOCRATIC ORDER, and thus the word “terror” entered the political lexicon. The French thinker, Maximilien Robespierre, supporting the view that only terrorism would produce true democratic disposition, said, “Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible; it is therefore an emanation of virtue; it is not so much a special principle as it is a consequence of the general principle of democracy applied to our country’s most urgent needs.” Sergius Stepniak, a Russian-born fighter for democracy, argued in his manual on guerrilla warfare that “the terrorist … is noble, terrible, irresistibly fascinating, for he combines in himself the two sublimities of human grandeur: the martyr and the hero.” Within these contexts, revolutionary Europeans justified terrorism as a struggle for the restoration of liberties and elevated it to heroism and martyrdom.

Definition of Terrorism: Though there is disagreement on the definitions of terrorism, but according to the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373 and domestic jurisprudence of almost all countries in the world, terrorism refers to a phenomenon including the actual acts, its perpetrators and their motives, as criminal acts. Today throughout the world there is a consensus, that all acts of terrorism are unacceptable under any circumstances. The United Nations has not yet been able to define a “consensus definition” of terrorism, but the one written by the Dutch terrorism expert Alex P. Schmid is applied for general interpretation by the political and social scientists: “Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby—in contrast to assassination—the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generations. Threat-and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperiled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought,“ (Wikipedia).

Question # 2: In modern times what is the definition of Muslim identity? (i.e. in term of terrorism).

The Muslims following the Qur’anic injunction: “And fight them until persecution is no more,” sought their own justification that to be a martyr is to be killed fighting in the way of God. “How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth from out this town of which the people are oppressors! Oh, give us from Thy presence some protecting friend! Oh, give us from Thy presence some defender!” (Q. 4:75). The only term in Islam close to terrorism or acts of violence against a society or a state are termed as “fitna” meaning sedition, revolt, mutiny, tumult and mischief, and “fasad” meaning disturbance, discord, violence and fighting. In the Qur’an people who perpetrate fitna are mentioned as “those [who] cause mischief in the earth: theirs is the curse and theirs is the ill abode.” (Q. 13:25). Islam considers a revolt or fight as fitna and disruption of peace. It does not support an armed conflict or revolt against a lawful ruler; however, if the ruler is unjust it prescribes a peaceful disobedience. The Prophet of Islam said that, “there is no obedience in transgression. Verily obedience is in good deeds.”Clarifying this precept Maulana Fazlul Karim, the translator of Mishkat ul Masabih opines, “this rule applies not only to rulers but also to their officers in the state. In case of A STATE INJUNCTION PROHIBITING THE DUTIES OF ISLAM, it is not lawful to raise a common revolt against the ruling power, but it is lawful to disobey the unlawful order.” All this does not mean that there were no terrorism like acts in the History of Islam. The Kharijites were the first terrorists type fighters. The Assassins created terror for at least a century until they were crushed by Hulegu Khan. The Algerians following the French concept of terrorism as a way to freedom used terrorism as a war to seek freedom.

Bernard Lewis, the famous historian of Middle East and Islamic societies, in the early 2nd half of the 20th  century divided the world in four civilizations, the Chinese, Indian, Western, and Islamic. Samuel Huntington following Bernard’s lead, presented his book “The Clash of Civilizations” in the end of 20th century. However, today the Chinese and Indian civilizations are rapidly adopting Western culture and tradition. Western philosophy is rapidly taking over Chinese and Indian philosophies in their academic curriculums. Today the whole struggle in the world is between the Western and the Islamic civilizations. Since, economically and militarily Muslims are weak and technologically behind, they are fighting to protect their religious, traditional, and cultural identities with the help of terrorist tactics. Islam does not follow “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.” On the other hand, it rigorously holds that it is as evil to suffer evil not protesting as to commit evil and it is the slavish sufferers who create tyrants. The DEFINITION of ISLAMIC IDENTITY according to Rumi is: “EVERTHING, INCLUDING DIVINITY, IS AN EXERCISE IN AWARENESS.”

Questions # 3: Muslims in western societies (North America and Western Europe) are very successful in professional achievements but we tend to live in isolated cultural clusters. What about cultural integration of Muslims in western culture?

Cultural integration is an on-going evolutionary process and no one has control over it. Parental nurturing or community instructions is a self satisfying complex to pass on their identities to the next generation, which in itself is a natural and on-going process. Only first generation entering into a cluster of different cultures succeeds to preserve its cultural legacy and that also within its community circle. The second generation lives in between the stream of widening, deepening and speeding up of cultural inter-connectedness in all aspects of its contemporary environments and social life. The third generation completely assimilates into the mother culture of the region where it is living. Since the Muslims are not conquerors here, they as a subject of the ruling social order, are under the pressure of the ruling culture. Today, globalization which is not merely on account of a technological advancement, but is also a result of trans-cultural and trans-civilizational relations which is about modern man’s sense of his self in a world being perceived as a single space. Though seemingly the world is changing, but as a matter of fact it is an individual’s idea of the self that is expanding. Since human being’s self is impregnated with multiple deep prints of identity—religion, nationality, ethnicity, class, gender, and so on—if one of these starts to give way (say, nationality as is seen in the case of Muslim immigrants adopting USA nationality), it is quite natural that CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE ADOPTED NATIONALITY WOULD EVENTUALLY COME TO FILL THE VACUUM.

Mirza Ashraf