Menu
Connexion Yabiladies Ramadan Radio Forum News
The amalgam
e
7 août 2005 01:15
The amalgam:


Author of the article: Dr. Anisa Abd el Fattah

I received this article from someone who also feels that the writer's perspective is right Scroll down for complete version of the Sardar article.) I don't. Every religious and political theory has an idea about war and violence. Islam's take on self defense, as opposed to unjust violence is no more easily exploited and distorted than the teachings or beliefs of any other way of thinking about human survival, conflict war, etc. It is unfortunate to me that many Muslims feel that because it is particularly the teachings of Islam that have come under scrutiny, that this means Islam has a unique or special concept or idea about violence that lends itself more easily to extremists. Or that Muslim "scholars" are creating extremists versions of Islam to be exploited. That is ridiculous. No one can be a "scholar" of Islam and lie about Islam. Islamic scholarship is not based upon owning information. Knowing things about Islam, doesn't make one a "scholar" in Islam. This lets us know immediately that the people creating this hoax know little about Islam, or they assume that we know very little about it.

Media attention and pressure to create a "guilty" Islam is the problem, and anyone can do it with any choice of words, and a certain perspective. Anyone could do the same with the Bible, the Talmud, Socialism, Republicanism, Communism, etc. Even pacifism can be treated in this way, and made to appear condoning of violence in its refusal to address violence as a real phenomenon that cannot always be addressed successfully with pacifism. Unfortunately for Muslims who have been robbed of our intellectualism, we are being bombarded with people such as this writer, and it seems that we have few who are interested in engaging such ridiculous notions as his, since perhaps they fear being categorized as "extremists." Now anyone who disagrees with the likes of this person are "Kharjites," when in reality, he may be the Kharijite, only the intellectual brand.

I think that more likely these people, like Osama Bin Laden, who has dual loyalties perhaps due to his parentage, one parent being from among the Talmudist of Yemen, the tribe in fact of the young man who killed Rabin, and another parent from the Muslims of Syria, is less likely to be a religious extremist than simply an insane person who has crafted for himself a version of Islam that is very similar to Talmudic teachings, even more than it is to Islam. No one wants to address this issue. Instead they assist Bin Laden by giving his hybrid creation status and recognition, and using it to make their case that something is wrong with Islam that must be changed, or Islam must be eliminated, or banned.

I wonder if it has dawned on anyone, that Bin Laden gets more press than anyone, even the President of the US. His press conferences and videos and the like get complete coverage, along with explanations and commentary by leading scholars, but never Islamic scholars. Has anyone ever considered that even though it is clear that what these people are teaching is not supported by a single verse of the Quran, yet in fact subscribes to many Talmudic themes, that not one person has ever suggested that a hoax is being perpetrated by someone who wants to make it appear that Bin Laden is an "Islamic extremist" when in reality he is not. He is indeed an "extremist" but not a Muslim extremist. Is itb possible that he is a communist? Or an atheist? or a deobandist? Why do they call him an Islamist when he has never called himself an Islamist and in fact they know that he does not practice Islam?

We need to differentiate between Islamic teachings about self defense, and war, and the rights of groups, individuals and others to self defense, and unjust violence. The Quran makes such distinctions clear. Every religion and political theory has a doctrine that provides for such rights. When these doctrines are adopted and distorted by anyone, whose fault is it? If somone were to say that secularist beliefs have fed the greatest violent scourges upon humanity, would we be surprised? Yet, in this new dialogue on political violence, we only want to talk about Islamic violence and extremism? Did such violence spring up in an isolated environment by request of the black hearts of murderers and extremists?

As for Muslim responsibility, I see none. What I see is that there is an effort to make it appear as though Islam is uniquely disposed to exploitation by extremists and that is not true. Why Bin laden and others chose Islam rather than the communist manifesto, or the rhetoric of the American revolution, of the suicidal Jewish Masada, or the Crusades is anyone's guess. Perhaps he, like so many others knew that Islam would be the easiest target. After centuries of Muslim governments destroying Islamic intellectualism, and then creating their own Muslim bogeymen, most especially any group, or person who opposed the status quo, it would make perfect sense to wrap a rag around ones head and say that one is acting in the name of Islam. There are so many real questions to be asked, but we can't get around the rhetoric of the propaganda campaign to get to the truth. Also keep in mind that the truth is not the aim of people who want to point the finger at Islam and say, "it is your religion, and your fault, and where is your sense of guilt and shame?" The truth doesn't serve such obvious subterfuge. The truth would say perhaps, that we have, together, created a world that rewards violence with land grabs and occupations where people can be slaughtered killed, and dehumanized, and where we say nothing because we like the killers, and hate the ones being killed because they are not like us, and they are brown. That we allow people to ignore and trample on the law, and create new paradigms in thinking about justice that suits their religious view, and we allow them to impose it upon an entire world even though it is wrong. Or maybe the truth would say, " we, together have created a world where one group of people can decide who is good and bad and who should be rewarded and punished and strangely it is always only people who they see as a threat, and they see everyone tat disagrees with them or who is not subject to their control as a threat because they are guilty." Should we follow them? For the Muslim, as I see it, the Quran is sufficient. It teaches that every one is responsible for their own sins. It teaches that as a social, political and religious obligation, we must root out the causes of violence and crime in our societies. The Quranic approach to sin and vice considers cause and effect, not simply effect. An example is the Islamic approach to adultery. The Quran says it is a sin, and crime, yet it also says "lower your gazes, speak justly and not seductively, cover your bosoms, wear lose fitting clothing, hide your nakedness, dress modestly, etc." It doesn't simply teach us what is sin, it teaches us how to avoid sin, and how to root sin out of our hearts and societies. That is why Islam can only be a target in this campaign to defame Islam and vilify Muslims. It can never be allowed to speak, or be examined honestly because once it is, answers will follow that will change the world, change peoples hearts, and cause them to accept Islam. People do not want to end political violence and war, they want to teach the Muslim that our violence and war is wrong, and that theirs is right, and that there is no equivalence, even violence kills both them and us equally.

We should be suspect of such campaigns presently being carried out to make it appear as though Islam is uniquely predisposed to violence and extremism. It is not. When the world wants to get serious about understanding political violence, we will take up an examination of issues related to the rights of people to self defense, as opposed to unjust violence, since this is the approach that Quran has taken, as do all other ideals concerned with human survival, justice and progress. We should be especially suspect when governments and their lackeys are paying big money to push their ideas, and create cleavages between Muslims on such topics.

The Quran says that every human being is responsible for their own deeds, and no one can bear the burden of another, no matter how much one might desire to do so, or attempt to make it so. I am sure that with each act of violence carried out in the name of Islam, the heart of every sincere Muslim crys, yet, such hearts would cry whether or not these acts were perpetuated by men named Bin Laden. It's too bad that the rest of the world only gets angry, or takes action when violence is carried out by the Bin Laden's and not when it is carried out by abortion center bombers, or Goldsteins. Will a dialogue be prompted on Jewish terrorism by the Goldstein massacre in the Hebron mosque and this lastest attack? No it wont. And the reason that it wont is because the issue is not religious prompted violence and extremism, the issue is Islam. So long as we accept the idea that it should only be Islam, and that some skewed sense of collective shame and guilt obliges us to feed into the hysteria being created by propagandists at the behest of God knows who, we will never get the answers we need to improve the world. I am sorry for Muslims who are so guilt struck, that they feel compelled to ignore opportunities to change the world, and rush instead to change a fake "Islam" that exists only in the minds of its creators, and those who know very little, or who have very little regard for either truth, or Islam. To change that problem, we don't need to demonize Islam, we need to allow the truth to be told. Since that will not happen soon, Muslims must gird their loins and brace themselves for more of the same pseudo intellectual onslaughts by paid propagandists that incites hatred and fear of Islam and Muslims, and that creates fear, and shame and guilt in the hearts of innocent Muslims. In the Quran there is a section that talks about Musa in the confrontation with Pharaoh. It says that only some of the children of his people believed in Musa. The older people feared to believe because they were afraid of being persecuted and executed. They, the older people said, "we have only had trouble since you came here, leave us alone." Musa answered, "if you believe in God, put your trust in Him and pray for His assistance. Perhaps it is God's plan to destroy your enemies, and to make a people deemed of no value, inheritors."

Dr. Anisa Abd el Fattah

J
JD
7 août 2005 14:41
bonjour embryon_sur_terre


ce texte est intéressant mais il joue une fois de plus sur le thème des "gentils musulmans victimes d'un méchant complot judeo chrétien".

je crois qu'il faut distinguer le niveau individuel et le niveau collectif:
au niveau individuel, il est évident qu'on ne peut pas reprocher à tous les musulmans les actes de ben laden et des autres terroristes islamistes. ( de même qu'on ne peut pas reprocher à tous les juifs les actes de l'armée israelienne en territoires occupés )
mais au niveau collectif, il me semble que l'islam ne peut pas être complètement innocenté.

je veux bien croire que le terrorisme est contraire à l'islam authentique mais pourtant :
- la condamnation de Ben Laden par des autorités religieuses a été bien timide et tardive. combien de fatwas ont t elle été émises en ce sens ?
- Ben Laden avait le soutien officiel des talibans, "étudiants" sortis des écoles coraniques donc à priori musulmans et "savants"
- Le Coran contient des justifications de la violence :
"We need to differentiate between Islamic teachings about self defense, and war, and the rights of groups, individuals and others to self defense, and unjust violence. The Quran makes such distinctions clear"

Le fait de légitimer la violence dans certaines conditions ouvre la porte aux dérapages et aux interprétations fanatiques.
d'autres religions comme le christianisme ( celui de Jesus ) et le boudhisme rejettent toute forme de violence. je trouve celà préférable, mais ce n'est que mon avis.



cordialement

I
7 août 2005 16:51
Combien de personnes sont mortes par des mains "musulmanes"?

Combien de personnes sont mortes par des mains "judéo-chrétiennes"?

(au xxeme siécle et en ce début de siécle)

le calcul est vite fait mon cher jd,le déompte de la référence en la matiére

(11/09/01)préte méme à sourire.





Tu dit:

"Le fait de légitimer la violence dans certaines conditions ouvre la porte aux dérapages et aux interprétations fanatiques"


Que fait tu des lois sur la légitime défense,qui n ont rien d islamique,ne sont

elles pas une bréche pour certains abus?
I
7 août 2005 16:57
"ce texte est intéressant mais il joue une fois de plus sur le thème des "gentils musulmans victimes d'un méchant complot judeo chrétien".





et pourtant c est l actualité!


>>>>>>>>>Palestine spoliée

>>>>>>>>>afghanistan devasté

>>>>>>>>>irak ruinéé et défoncéé

>>>>>>>>>syrie mis en garde

>>>>>>>>>iran ms en garde




Mais quels sont donc les interets servisconfused smiley

I
7 août 2005 16:57
J
JD
7 août 2005 17:44
salut Iron-man

tu dis :
>>>>>>>>>>>>Combien de personnes sont mortes par des mains "musulmanes"?
Combien de personnes sont mortes par des mains "judéo-chrétiennes"?

je ne sais pas s'il faut faire un concours de ce genre...
un seul mort à cause de la religion c'est déjà un de trop mais les conflits du XXme siècle ne sont plus basés sur la religion.

le texte, si j'ai bien compris, dit en gros que l'Islam est victime d'une campagne de dénigrement pour le faire passer pour une religion violente alors que l'auteur prétend que c une religion tout ce qu'il y a de plus pacifique.

moi je dis que s'il y a bien campagne de dénigrement, elle n'est pas totalement artificielle et sans raison ( j'ai expliqué pourquoi dans ma première réponse )



>>>>>> Que fait tu des lois sur la légitime défense,qui n'ont rien d islamique, ne sont elles pas une bréche pour certains abus?
>
tu as raison mais ces lois ne sont pas d'inspiration "divine" mais simplement et bassement humaines.

cordialement


e
9 août 2005 11:52
Bonjour JD,
Je te renvoie une fois encore à l'article.
Sache qu'un extrémisme en appelle un autre, que lorsque on découvre que dans la maison il y a un voleur, on le chasse avec ce qu'on a sous la main, qu'un agresseur, on l'agresse de la même façon qu'il nous agresse. Mais il nous est interdit - si vraiment tu as lu le Coran pour le savoir- d'être les agresseurs! Mais la défense est légitime. Et c'est Allah qui nous le commande:

"...Le talion s' applique à toutes choses sacrées -. Donc, quiconque transgresse contre vous, transgressez contre lui, à transgression égale. Et craignez Allah. Et sachez qu' Allah est avec les pieux." (Al Baqarah, 194)

"Combattez dans le sentier d'Allah ceux qui vous combattent, et ne transgressez pas. Certes, Allah n'aime pas les transgresseurs!" (Al-Baqarah, 190)

"Ô les croyants: ne déclarez pas illicites les bonnes choses qu' Allah vous a rendues licites. Et ne transgressez pas. Allah, (en vérité,) n'aime pas les transgresseurs." (Al-Ma'ida, 87)

"Invoquez votre Seigneur en toute humilité et recueillement et avec discrétion. Certes, Il n'aime pas les transgresseurs." (Al-A3raf, 55)

"Dis: "Venez, je vais réciter ce que votre Seigneur vous a interdit: ne Lui associez rien; et soyez bienfaisants envers vos père et mère. Ne tuez pas vos enfants pour cause de pauvreté. Nous vous nourrissons tout comme eux. N' approchez pas des turpitudes ouvertement, ou en cachette. Ne tuez qu' en toute justice la vie qu' Allah a fait sacrée. Voilà ce qu' (Allah) vous a recommandé de faire; peut-être comprendrez- vous." (Al-An3am, 151)

"Et, sauf en droit, ne tuez point la vie qu'Allah a rendu sacrée. Quiconque est tué injustement, alors Nous avons donné pouvoir à son proche (parent). Que celui-ci ne commette pas d'excès dans le meurtre, car il est déjà assisté (par la loi)." (Al-Isra' 33)

"Qui n'invoquent pas d'autre dieu avec Allah et ne tuent pas la vie qu' Allah a rendue sacrée, sauf à bon droit; qui ne commettent pas de fornication - car quiconque fait cela encourra une punition" (Al Furqaan, 68)


Il y a tant de commandement d'Allah (swt) qui interdisent au Muslim de faire du mal gratuitement, ni même d'en avoir une simple intention!

Je sais que tu ne liras pas les références coraniques que je viens de donner... Tu craindrais peut-être de porter atteinte à ta propre vision des choses en les lisant et en y méditant??
Ce que tu as bien voulu dire ci-dessus révêle bien l'AMALGAME dont parle l'article de Mme Abdel Fattah. Il est temps de prospecter plutôt les voie qui permettrient un réel rapprochement et mettre fin aux obscurantismes, au lieu de jeter de l'huile sur le feu. Qu'Allah te guide vers ce qui est bien.

Cordialement
J
JD
9 août 2005 22:18
embryon_sur_terre a écrit:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Je sais que tu ne liras pas les références
> coraniques que je viens de donner... Tu craindrais
> peut-être de porter atteinte à ta propre vision
> des choses en les lisant et en y méditant??
> Ce que tu as bien voulu dire ci-dessus révêle bien
> l'AMALGAME dont parle l'article de Mme Abdel
> Fattah. Il est temps de prospecter plutôt les voie
> qui permettrient un réel rapprochement et mettre
> fin aux obscurantismes, au lieu de jeter de
> l'huile sur le feu. Qu'Allah te guide vers ce qui
> est bien.
> -------------------------------------------------------

bonjour embryon_sur_terre

je n'ai certes pas lu le Coran en entier mais le peu que j'en connais montre qu'on y trouve ce qu'on y cherche.
celui qui y cherche la paix et le Bien les trouve mais celui qui y cherche la violence et l'intolérance le trouve aussi. Ce n'est qu'une question de choix des versets et d'interprétation.

Là où je suis d'accord qu'il y a amalgame, c'est quand on juge l'islam uniquement à travers le comportement extrémiste de certains musulmans.
Malheureusement il se trouve que les musulmans plus "visibles" sont justement les intégristes et les terroristes...

cordialement



e
9 août 2005 22:40
Bonjour JD
>>>....celui qui y cherche la violence et l'intolérance le trouve aussi. Ce n'est qu'une question de choix des versets et d'interprétation.>>>>

>>>>il se trouve que les musulmans plus "visibles" sont justement les intégristes et les terroristes...>>>>

Il faudrait que tu chages de lunettes mon ami!

Cordialement.



Modifié 1 fois. Dernière modification le 09/08/05 22:47 par embryon_sur_terre.
a
10 août 2005 00:29
Ben si on doit commencer à faire un décompte des morts et souffrances provoquées par chaque religion depuis leur naissance on en a pour des pages et des pages.
 
Emission spécial MRE
2m Radio + Yabiladi.com
Facebook