Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts


Qur'anic studies today
Today at 06:50 AM

Do humans have needed kno...
April 20, 2024, 12:02 PM

Lights on the way
by akay
April 19, 2024, 04:40 PM

اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
April 19, 2024, 12:50 PM

Do humans have needed kno...
April 19, 2024, 04:17 AM

What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
April 18, 2024, 06:39 PM

New Britain
April 18, 2024, 05:41 PM

Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM

عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM

Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM

Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM

Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Agnostic Muslim Rambling

 (Read 20755 times)
  • 12 3 ... 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     OP - July 28, 2015, 04:00 PM

    Just sharing a Facebook post you guys might find interesting Smiley

    When will we Muslims realise why we have consistently failed to confront and defeat the extremist, harsh and brutal versions of Islam. They have only gone from strength to strength. Why? Because we keep playing their game by their rules. But traditional views of Islam will never be able to defeat them. It only makes us look dishonest. We are left scraping the barrel for verses and hadith about peace. We are left with making tenuous and frankly dishonest interpretations to counter them. All the while we convince no one and only make the extremists look good in the eyes of some youngsters. I remember growing up in the 70s and seeing the first influences of Wahabi Islam take hold on young people. At the same time the Islamic revolution in Iran helped inspire a new brand of political Islam and there was a rise of groups such as Hizb u Tahrir (& then their much more crazy off shoot Al-Muhajiroun with their many aliases.) At first they just talked in meetings. Then some went to fight the Russians in Afghanistan or to stir things up elsewhere. They grew and whole families went to join the 'mujahedeen' in Afghanistan. Different extremist groups sprang up like Al-Takfir wal-Higra in Egypt amongst others. Then we had bin Laden and Al-Qaidah. All the while the majority of Muslims kept repeating the empty mantra "this has nothing to do with Islam." Now we have ISIS - more insane than them all. Far from defeating them we are helping them grow. The reason is simple and I keep saying it. You can't defeat them from within the traditional Islamic paradigm. Nor can they be defeated by bombs. When one group is bombed out of existence, another even worse group rises from its ashes. As I have said many times, bad ideas can only be defeated by better ideas. As yet Muslims have not come up with a convincing counter narrative. I personally believe the answer lies in recognising the Qur'an's human and not divine origin and contrary to what some may think, this doesn't mean we have to abandon our faith in Islam. In fact it was only when I realised that the Qur'an was fallible and not infallible that I saved my own faith.
  • Soap box rambling
     Reply #1 - July 28, 2015, 04:04 PM

    A Muslim friend asked me this:

    I really enjoy reading your thoughts Hassan.  How do you reconcile your faith in Islam with your statement that the Quran is a fallible human product?  If Muslims accepted that then it would open the door to reform.  My understanding is that the Quran is considered to be the unchanging word of God revealed to Muhammad, although I understand that the Quran we have today is Uthman's version.  Please could you elaborate on your point?  Thank you and best wishes.
  • Soap box rambling
     Reply #2 - July 28, 2015, 04:04 PM

    My reply was this:

    I believe that to a greater or lesser extent everything we do is inspired by God. For me God is not the human God we constructed. But that "something", that indefinable, a force of nature, the power behind the cosmos that inspires all things. In this sense I believe the Qur'an was inspired. However while I believe Muhammad was inspired by God to utter its words, I believe this inspiration came through the mind and person of Muhammad and that it was he who interpreted this inspiration according to his time, culture and personality. He composed the words and phrased the sentences. As a result I believe that while the Qur'an contains a great deal of wisdom, it is inextricably tied to it's context and environment and most important of all it is fallible not infallible! This means I can take the Qur'an as a source of inspiration and wisdom at the same time I subject it to human reason and not the other way round.

    It has been 1400 years since Muhammad was inspired to compose the Qur'an and the world has changed. Circumstances have changed. Relationships between men and women have changed. Man himself has changed. I believe there is still much we can take from the Qur'an and Islam as a spiritual tradition. A spiritual tradition I am familiar with and feel comfortable within, yet at the same time I recognise it's "human" origin and that it can be wrong sometimes. I don't feel the need to make tenuous or dishonest interpretations of verses that trouble me such a 4:34 which says a man can hit his wife. I can say quite honestly that is what it says. But it is wrong. It is wrong because these are the words of a fallible 7th century man and not the literal speech of a wise God. That doesn't mean I have to reject the whole book. It would be foolish not to say arrogant to dismiss everything Muhammad said - nor all the words of all great thinkers of the past simply because they were fallible. We can take the good and leave the rest. That is the nature of accumulated human knowledge and experience, which as I say, I believe is all inspired by this cosmic force of nature that drives us.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #3 - July 28, 2015, 04:18 PM

    Hassan - I think you're starting to put some good arguments together.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #4 - July 28, 2015, 04:25 PM

    Thanks, Zeca.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #5 - July 28, 2015, 04:37 PM

    If I can ask an off-topic question, Hassan, how do Islamic exegetes usually explain the portions of the Qur'an where the speaker is swearing in the first person, as in "I swear by ...."  ... example being Q 81:15.  Is God supposed to be swearing here?  That seems very strange to me, the natural reading would be that the messenger is swearing to his audience, trying to get them to understand the veracity and importance of what he is saying.  How is this understood?  In general, how is the occasional Qur'anic switch from "I" speech to "we" speech explained?

    Your post, with its emphasis on Muhammad and his inspiration, reminded me of this subject.  My suspicion is that the earliest Qur'anic texts were phrased in this "I" form (the Arab messenger's statements) and later shifted to "we," so that no longer is the messenger speaking, now the divinity is speaking the message.  A transition from human inspiration, to an unquestionable divine proclamation.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #6 - July 28, 2015, 05:59 PM

    Hassan
    Whats the ratio between muslims agreeing with your ideas and those opposing? What about the numbers agreeing?
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #7 - July 28, 2015, 06:17 PM

    If I can ask an off-topic question, Hassan, how do Islamic exegetes usually explain the portions of the Qur'an where the speaker is swearing in the first person, as in "I swear by ...."  ... example being Q 81:15.  Is God supposed to be swearing here?  That seems very strange to me, the natural reading would be that the messenger is swearing to his audience, trying to get them to understand the veracity and importance of what he is saying.  How is this understood?  In general, how is the occasional Qur'anic switch from "I" speech to "we" speech explained?

    Your post, with its emphasis on Muhammad and his inspiration, reminded me of this subject.  My suspicion is that the earliest Qur'anic texts were phrased in this "I" form (the Arab messenger's statements) and later shifted to "we," so that no longer is the messenger speaking, now the divinity is speaking the message.  A transition from human inspiration, to an unquestionable divine proclamation.


    All changes of pronoun from first sing to first plural to third person are usually explained as the magnificent eloquence of the Qur'an and like the emperor's new clothes no one. The mufassireen are bs masters and will find a reason for everything.

    Honesty I always thought it sounded contrived, but then what do it know compared to the great mufassirin.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #8 - July 28, 2015, 06:21 PM

    Zaotar this is from the Islam q and a site:

    http://islamqa.info/en/209022

    **********************
    Islam Question and Answer
    General Supervisor: Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid
    Tue 12 Shw 1436 - 28 July 2015
       
     - The Quraan and its Sciences » Quraanic Exegesis.
     - Basic Tenets of Faith » Tawheed (Divine Unity) » Names and Attributes of Allaah.
    ares
    209022: The variation of pronouns in the Qur’an is a sign of its eloquence and miraculous nature
    A non muslim wants to know the reason why the quran was also revealed in reported speeches. An example is where Allah says in Al Inshiqaq vs 24.And Allah knows best what they gather( of good and bad deeds). That is Allah mentioning his name in terms of 2nd person.
    Praise be to Allah.
    The Qur’an was revealed in a plain Arabic tongue; one aspect of the literary style of the Arabs is that the speaker may refer to himself sometimes in the first person, sometimes in the third person, sometimes in the singular and sometimes in the plural. This variation is part of eloquence and good style. No one can understand this except those who know Arabic and have a sufficient grasp of its different ways of expression.

    The Qur’an was not revealed in only one style, as the questioner thinks; rather it uses a variety of different styles; this is part of its miraculous nature and eloquence.

    Dr ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-Mutayri says in his book Da‘aawa al-Taa‘ineena fi’l-Qur’an al-Kareem (p. 304): One of the literary styles of the Arabs is for the speaker to refer to himself in the first person and in the third person. For example, a speaker may say, “I did such and such; I went; I instruct you, O So and so, to do such and such.” And sometimes he may also say of himself that “So and so – meaning himself – instructs you to do such and such, and forbids you to do such and such; or he likes you to do such and such.” This is like when an ameer (ruler) or king says to his people: “The Ameer asks you to do such and such.” What he is trying to emphasise is that his instructions are based on the fact that he is a ruler or king; this is more eloquent than saying to them, “I am the king and I am telling you to do such and such.” Saying “The king instructs you…” is more eloquent than saying “I am the king and I am instructing you…”

    This kind of style also appears in the Qur’an. The one who does not know Arabic may think that Allah cannot speak of Himself in the third person, and that He must say “I have sent down to you, O Muhammad, the Book with truth, confirming what came before it” and the like. But this reflects ignorance of the literary style in Arabic and how it is part of Arabic eloquence. Undoubtedly for Allah to speak of Himself in the third person is more eloquent than saying “Alif-Laam-Meem, I am Allah, there is no god but I, the the Ever Living, the One Who sustains and protects all that exists. I sent down to you the Book with truth, confirming what came before it…” (cf. Aal ‘Imraan 3:1-3).

    End quote.

    It is known from Arab literary custom that they do not persist in one style in their speech; rather they move from one style to another, even in a single passage, let alone when there are two different passages (on two different occasions). This is part of Arabic literary style that serves to keep the listener’s or reader’s attention.

    Az-Zarkashi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

    Moving from one style to another serves to make speech flow more smoothly, helps the listener to focus, renews his interest and avoids the boredom that may result from always adhering to one style.

    Haazim said in Minhaaj al-Bulagha’: They become bored when the style persists in using the first person or the second person, so they move from second person to third person. By the same token, a speaker may change the pronoun and play with the words, sometimes using the first person to speak of himself, and sometimes using the second person or third person. Hence speech that persists in using a particular pronoun, whether it is the first or second person, is not regarded as good; rather it is more appropriate to move from one to the other.

    Then az-Zarkashi (may Allah have mercy on him) gives different examples of such usage and their effectiveness in conveying the message.

    See: al-Burhaan fi ‘Uloom al-Qur’an by Badr ad-Deen az-Zarkashi, 3/314-330

    For more information, please see the answer to question no. 606

    And Allah knows best.

    Islam Q&A
    Related fatwa
    The meaning of the pronoun “We” as used in the Qur’an
    Create Comments
     WhatsApp

    Categories

    Articles & Books

    Introduction to Islam

    NewFatwas

    Send A Question

    contact us

    All Rights Reserved for IslamQA©  1997-2015  0.073
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #9 - July 28, 2015, 06:27 PM

    Hassan
    Whats the ratio between muslims agreeing with your ideas and those opposing? What about the numbers agreeing?


    Don't know the ratio but I have had a surprising amount of support.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #10 - July 28, 2015, 06:28 PM

    Zaotar this is from the Islam q and a site:



    ^happymurtad thinks this is bullshit and we do not believe it. He’s still skeptical.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #11 - July 28, 2015, 06:40 PM

    Of course it's bs.

    I was being sarcastic when I said: "what do it know compared to the great mufassirin."
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #12 - July 28, 2015, 06:47 PM

    Oh, we know. Happymurtad was making a joke. He thought it was funny.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #13 - July 28, 2015, 07:06 PM

    Lol... Gosh I missed the magnificent eloquent change of pronouns hehe... Sorry I'm watching Battlestar Galactica while typing on my mobile lol

  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #14 - July 28, 2015, 09:09 PM

    Interesting, thanks.  It's long been a mantra of mine that any typos I may make, and any grammatical errors, should be understood as part of the exquisite eloquence of high English writing style.  Even better is just banging randomly on one's keyboard ....fd.makln n vfnoiwer, witness the elegance.

    In all seriousness, I think there's very interesting analysis to be done on these shifts of perspective, as I suspect older text was written in first person singular and third person, and then in order to 'divinize' the text, the first person singular was partially (but not entirely) converted and expanded with first person plural narrative framework.  Thus something akin to "I swear by the falling star, that Allah should be praised" became "We swear by the falling star, that Allah should be praised."
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #15 - July 28, 2015, 09:31 PM

    Nor is it just the pronouns for God that are confusing but in general things can get pretty confused. Verse 22 of Sura Yunus is one example:

    هُوَ الَّذِي يُسَيِّرُكُمْ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ ۖ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا كُنْتُمْ فِي الْفُلْكِ وَجَرَيْنَ بِهِمْ بِرِيحٍ طَيِّبَةٍ وَفَرِحُوا بِهَا

    "He it is Who enables you to travel through land and sea, till when you are in the ships and they sail with them with a favourable wind, and they are glad therein"
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #16 - July 28, 2015, 10:16 PM

    I enjoy your ramblings Hassan.

    Skywalker asked how many muslims are interested in your views. If I have leant anything reading this forum it is that outwards appearances of conforming to a strict version of Islam can sometimes mask inward dissent or at least discomfort/dissonance. I hope that your writings give these quiet dissenters and thinkers food for thought and a possible path forward.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #17 - July 28, 2015, 11:31 PM

    Thanks SCM. It is also my experience too that many harbour very unorthodox views than they let on and are just waiting for someone else to make the first public move and that is indeed what I'm trying to do.

    Get the ball rolling.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #18 - July 28, 2015, 11:50 PM

    Could you elaborate on what you mean when you say traditional views of Islam will never be able to defeat them and You can't defeat them from within the traditional Islamic paradigm?

    Why can't you beat them?
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #19 - July 29, 2015, 12:09 AM

    Simple really:

    Because one cannot get around the harsh and violent verses and hadith if one still buys into the belief they are divine, infallible and cannot be wrong.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #20 - July 29, 2015, 12:16 AM

    If you read the above you will see I gave the example of 4:34.

    Traditional or orthodox Islam has to accept God allowed a husband to hit his wife (as a 3rd step). Any attempt to get around that (within the traditional paradigm) has to maintain the view the Qur'an is divine, infallible and never wrong. So any explanation that tries to say it doesn't allow a husband to hit his wife is dishonest and laughable and will always lose out to the more honest straightforward and obvious meaning.

    But if one takes my view then one can embrace the idea that it is human and fallible and can be wrong. No need for tenuous and dishonest interpretations that fool no one. One can simply admit; yes the Qur'an does indeed say a husband can hit his wife but it is wrong! Plain and simple.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #21 - July 29, 2015, 12:37 AM

    Simple really:

    Because one cannot get around the harsh and violent verses and hadith if one still buys into the belief they are divine, infallible and cannot be wrong.


    But traditional Islam does not interpret these verses and hadith to mean you can commit terrorist acts right? That's what we hear all the time from Muslims, so according to traditional Islam you can get around them.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #22 - July 29, 2015, 12:44 AM

    Like I've said before there are many Islams and yes most Muslims will not interpret them in the way terrorists do. But the uncomfortable truth is it is just a matter of interpretation and when one accepts that revelation must take presence over reason then violent interpretations can never be convincingly defeated. The door is always open for another group to convince others this is what God says.

    My view places human reason over revelation.

    Smiley
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #23 - July 29, 2015, 12:52 AM

    Like I've said before there are many Islams and yes most Muslims will not interpret them in the way terrorists do. But the uncomfortable truth is it is just a matter of interpretation and when one accepts that revelation must take presence over reason then violent interpretations can never be convincingly defeated. The door is always open for another group to convince others this is what God says.

    My view places human reason over revelation.

    Smiley


    How strong or valid is the violent extreme interpretation within Islamic scripture? The sort where people believe it's acceptable to walk on to a London tube train and blow everyone up for example.

    I am constantly told by Muslims that their interpretations are ridiculous and they know nothing about Islam but of course, they would say that wouldn't they.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #24 - July 29, 2015, 01:10 AM

    Well this is the old "What is True Islam" question that I've touched on many times saying there is no true Islam, just lots of interpretations.

    As I say the vast majority would not interpret Islam the way groups like ISIS do, but the problem is they can't conclusively invalidate such violent interpretations as long as they have to work according to the rule that revelation trumps human reason.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #25 - July 29, 2015, 01:20 AM

    Well this is the old "What is True Islam" question that I've touched on many times saying there is no true Islam, just lots of interpretations.

    As I say the vast majority would not interpret Islam the way groups like ISIS do, but the problem is they can't conclusively invalidate such violent interpretations as long as they have to work according to the rule that revelation trumps human reason.


    Yes i get what you are saying when you say Islam is just interpretation however surely some interpretations must have more evidence for it than others.

    For example, if i asked you if the Quran supports polytheistic beliefs or monotheistic beliefs you wouldn't tell me 'well there's many interpretations' would you? The Quran quite clearly supports monotheism.

    Is there actually a solid argument that can be taken from scripture for these extreme violent interpretations or are they just invented by uneducated nut-jobs.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #26 - July 29, 2015, 01:25 AM

    How strong or valid is the violent extreme interpretation within Islamic scripture? The sort where people believe it's acceptable to walk on to a London tube train and blow everyone up for example.

    I am constantly told by Muslims that their interpretations are ridiculous and they know nothing about Islam but of course, they would say that wouldn't they.


    To be fair, many of the translations and tafsir in English or other languages present Islam in a different light than the Quranic Arabic "original" does.
    It is awfully hard to win converts with tidbits about hell, just as it is equally hard to win converts with a language they do not understand. I am sure this a problem since the "time of the prophet".

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #27 - July 29, 2015, 01:47 AM

    Yes i get what you are saying when you say Islam is just interpretation however surely some interpretations must have more evidence for it than others.

    For example, if i asked you if the Quran supports polytheistic beliefs or monotheistic beliefs you wouldn't tell me 'well there's many interpretations' would you? The Quran quite clearly supports monotheism.

    Is there actually a solid argument that can be taken from scripture for these extreme violent interpretations or are they just invented by uneducated nut-jobs.


    Oh without a doubt solid arguments can be taken from scripture for these extreme violent interpretations. Well most of them, anyway.

    I thought I had made that clear.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #28 - July 29, 2015, 02:42 AM

    Lol... Gosh I missed the magnificent eloquent change of pronouns hehe... Sorry I'm watching Battlestar Galactica while typing on my mobile lol




    I seriously do not understand how you can do anything else while watching Battlestar Galactica. It held me captive.

    Don't let Hitler have the street.
  • Agnostic Muslim Rambling
     Reply #29 - July 29, 2015, 05:56 AM

     Afro

    Such an awesome series. I'm actually watching it again lol

    Gaius Baltar is me haha  grin12
  • 12 3 ... 5 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »