Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → News and Events → UK news and issues → Islamic Reform Conference

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
April 23, 2024, 02:50 AM
Do humans have needed kno...
April 20, 2024, 08:02 AM
Lights on the way
by akay
April 19, 2024, 12:40 PM
اضواء على الطريق ....... ...
by akay
April 19, 2024, 08:50 AM
Do humans have needed kno...
April 19, 2024, 12:17 AM
What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
April 18, 2024, 02:39 PM
New Britain
April 18, 2024, 01:41 PM
Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 05:56 PM
عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:01 PM
Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 08:06 AM
Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 05:44 AM
Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 08:53 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Islamic Reform Conference

 (Read 30064 times)
  • 12 3 4 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Islamic Reform Conference
     OP - May 08, 2010, 09:48 AM
    In case anyone's interested, there's a conference for Islamic reform at Oxford University in June. Wish I could go. Cry

    https://www.signup4.net/Public/ap.aspx?EID=ISLA10E
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #1 - May 08, 2010, 09:52 AM
    At 90USD a ticket it looks like they're trying to price the fundies out of the dialogue.  Tongue
    Each of us a failed state in stark relief against the backdrop of the perfect worlds we seek.
    Propagandhi - Failed States
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #2 - May 08, 2010, 09:55 AM
    Fuck. I really want to go, but I have classes. I'm gonna try my best.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #3 - May 08, 2010, 11:04 AM
    thanks for posting that abood - i had no idea things like this existed. i live in Cambridge so it would only be a short trip for me - will definitley think about attending - in fact i think i probably most definitely will  Smiley
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #4 - May 08, 2010, 11:23 AM
    Nice one. I'll see about attending, looks interesting.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #5 - May 08, 2010, 01:35 PM
    Interesting.  Afro
    I watched some of the "Secular Islam Summit" videos on YouTube a few months ago.
    This summit took place in Florida in 2007.

    On a side note, apparently Ibn Warraq doesn't like the word 'reform' with regards to Islam; he prefers the word 'enlighten', because reforming Islam sounds like the true Islam is good, but it is clear most people that a lot of the evil dogma lies at the heart of Islam.
    "Many people would sooner die than think; In fact, they do so." -- Bertrand Russell

    Baloney Detection Kit
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #6 - May 08, 2010, 01:49 PM
    you lot should pm each other & meet up there - keep us posted  Afro
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #7 - May 09, 2010, 04:49 AM
    I wonder if Al-Mouhajiroun will try and crash the party.  Roll Eyes
    Pakistan Zindabad? ya Pakistan sey Zinda bhaag?

    Long Live Pakistan? Or run with your lives from Pakistan?
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #8 - May 09, 2010, 09:55 AM
    Abood gets a wonderful news
    Quote from: Abood on May 08, 2010, 09:48 AM
    In case anyone's interested, there's a conference for Islamic reform at Oxford University in June. Wish I could go. Cry

    https://www.signup4.net/Public/ap.aspx?EID=ISLA10E

    I am so glad to know about that conference dear Abood.,  So what should we do to help the folks in that conference  and to make the conference successful ?  

    I think My good old friend Edip Yuksel and his group is the force behind this .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edip_Yuksel
    http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6362&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

    So we should send some information to him on what People are thinking about reforming Islam.

    For me to start,  It  is banning CHILDREN dressing up like this..



    I am going to propose that to him..

    with best wishes
    yeezevee
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #9 - May 09, 2010, 09:58 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on May 09, 2010, 09:55 AM

    For me to start,  It  is banning CHILDREN dressing up like this..


    The thing is some sickos might have a penchant for sweet innocent girls in hijab, they often prey on these types because they are less likely to kick up a fuss, so defeats the purpose even further I think..
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #10 - May 09, 2010, 10:03 AM
    Quote
    The thing is some sickos might have a penchant for sweet innocent girls in hijab, they often prey on these types because they are less likely to kick up a fuss, so defeats the purpose even further I think..

    i didn't get you there dear IsLame., You mean to say if I write to these guys about  "telling them that is silly and stupid to dress up children and brain wash them with Islam"  defeats the purpose??

    I was hoping that they will understand why i am saying that...

    Any way let us see., here is the list of guys that will be there..

    Quote
    CONFIRMED

        * Adis Duderija (Phd. Islamic Hermeneutics, Bosnia)
        * Aisha Musa (Prof of Islamic Studies, Florida International University)
        * Ali Behzadnia (M.D. Former member of first cabinet of Islamic Republic of Iran, USA)
        * Aliagha Mammadov (Cinealliance, Film Producer, Azarbaijan)
        * Amina Wadud, (Prof. Gender Studies, University Melbourne, Australia)
        * Arnold Yasin Mol (Author and member of NMP, Netherlands)
        * Asghar Ali Engineer (Ph.D, Chairman, Centre for Study of Society and Secularism, India)
        * Aslbek Mussin (Founder, Izgi Amal, Almaty, Kazakhstan)
        * Caner Taslaman (Prof. of Philosophy at Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey)
        * Chris and Linda Moore (Retired Entrepreneurs, UK and Turkey)
        * Edip Yuksel (J.D., Author, Founder of Islamic Reform, USA)
        * Erdem Çetinkaya (Miva Film, Director/producer, Turkey)
        * Farouk A. Peru (PhD candidate, activist, UK)
        * Fereydoun Taslimi (Businessman, USA)
        * Gershom Kibrisli (Karamite leader, Israel, Netherlands)
        * Hasan Mahmoud (Author, Canada)
        * Hussain Najafi (Businessman, USA)
        * Kelly Wentwordth (Programmer, Director - American Islamic Fellowship, USA)
        * Layth Saleh al-Shaiban (Author, Activist, Saudi Arabia)
        * Matthew Capiello (PR MPJP, USA)
        * Melissa Robinson (Director - American Islamic Fellowship, USA)
        * Mike Ghouse (Activist, World Muslim Congress)
        * Milan Sulc (CEO, Software Company, Switzerland)
        * Misbah Deen (Professor, Department of Computer Science, University of Keele, UK)
        * Muhammad Shahrur (Prof, Syria)
        * Mustafa Akyol (Author, Turkey)
        * Nafeez Mossadeq Ahmed (Prof. Sussex University)
        * Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd (Prof of. Islamic Studies at Univ of Leiden & Utrecht, the Netherlands)
        * Raymond and Sophia Catton (Founders of Quran Society, Canada)
        * Ridwaan Davids (Activist, South Africa)
        * Ruby Amatulla (President MPJP, Author, USA)
        * T.O. Shanvas (M.D., USA)
        * Taj Hargey (Professor of History, Oxford University, UK)

    WILL SUBMIT A PAPER

        * Abdur Rab (PhD. Author, Economist, USA)
        * Asma Ishak (J.D., Toronto Law School)
        * El-Mehdi Haddou (Vetenerian, Canada)
        * Gatut Adisoma (PhD, Activist, Indonesia)
        * Gershom Kibrisli (Karamite leader, Israel, Netherlands)
        * Ghayasuddin Siddiqui (PhD, Muslim Congress, UK)
        * Hasan Bin Izhaar (PhD, Pakistan)
        * Kassim Ahmad (Author, Political leader, Malaysia)
        * Khaled Abou El-Fadl (Prof. Of Law, UCLA, USA)

    INVITED

        * Akbar Ahmed (Prof American University, DC, USA)
        * Andreas Christmann (Prof. Middle Eastern Studies, University of Manchester, UK)
        * Baroness Warsi (Politician, UK)
        * Daniel Martin Varisco (Prof. of Anthropology at Hofstra University)
        * Fatima Marnissi (Prof. Tunusia)
        * Jeffrey Lang (PhD., Mathematician/Author, University of Kansas, USA)
        * Mahyad Tousi (CEO BoomGen Studios, California)
        * Martha Schulte (Prof. Arabic University of Texas, USA)
        * Mohamed Hedjaj (PhD., Engineer)
        * Mohammad Mova Al Afghani (Founder and Lawyer at Center for Law Information, Pakistan)
        * Nader Hashemi (PhD, Denver University)
        * Reza Aslan (PhD, Media consultant, USA)
        * Richard Voss (Prof. Business Management at Troy University, USA)
        * Shabbir Ahmed (M.D. Author, USA)
        * Tariq Ramadan (Prof. Oxford, UK)
        * Yusuf Desai (Forward Thinking, London)
        * Ziyauddin Sardar (PhD, Author, UK)
        * A member of European Foundation for Democracy
        * A member of Netherlands's Muslim Party

    with best wishes
    yeezevee
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #11 - May 09, 2010, 10:24 AM
    Quote from: yeezevee on May 09, 2010, 09:55 AM
    Abood gets a wonderful news I am so glad to know about that conference dear Abood.,  So what should we do to help the folks in that conference  and to make the conference successful ?  

    I think My good old friend Edip Yuksel and his group is the force behind this .
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edip_Yuksel
    http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6362&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

    So we should send some information to him on what People are thinking about reforming Islam.

    For me to start,  It  is banning CHILDREN dressing up like this..

    (Clicky for piccy!)

    I am going to propose that to him..

    with best wishes
    yeezevee


    yeah i think Edip Yuskel is one of the major organisers behind the event. his general stance already is to ditch all hadith and tafsir (hijab etc. of course only come form hadith) and to go back to Islam solely from the Quran. He beleives that if Quran is interpreted in the correct and progressive way, Islam could be reformed to what it was always supposed to be - a religion of peace, tolerance, justice. here is a summary from his manifesto to Muslims:

        *

          Let's reject all other religious teachings besides the Quran, and let's dedicate the system to God alone.
        *

          Let's stand against marginal elements among us, oppressive puppet regimes, brutal wars, occupations, and clandestine operations.
        *

          Let's topple the oppressive monarchs, and elect our own leaders so that we can have peace, liberty and justice on our own volition.
        *

          Let's fight not with bullets or bombs, but with intelligence and wisdom.
        *

          Let's give up superstitions and medieval culture, and start engaging in scientific enterprise.
        *

          Let's stop subjugating our mothers, sisters, daughters and wives; let's give them back their dignity, equal rights, liberty, and identity.
        *

          Let's unite our voices and prayers with genuine Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Agnostics, anyone who seeks justice and peace, rather than injustice and war.
        *

          Let's organize local and international conferences to discuss this issue. We may invite religious scholars of every sect or cult, but we should not let them run them, since our experience shows that they have not done a good job in leading.
        *

          Let's acknowledge the truth so that the truth will set us free.



    in general i think it's great there are a growing number of Muslims like him who are willing to look at the Quran in a non-orthodox way and use it to reform Islam. i don't think reformists will always agree on all points - but it's great there are conferences like this to find some common ground so that progress can be made. i just hope that reformists are able to make a major impact on how the majority of Muslims veiw Islam. It's going to be an uphill task - hopefully the number of reformist Muslims will grow.
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #12 - May 09, 2010, 10:26 AM
    islame, see - Shabbir Ahmed is invited  Wink
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #13 - May 09, 2010, 10:32 AM
    Quote from: abuyunus2 on May 09, 2010, 10:24 AM
         Let's reject all other religious teachings besides the Quran, and let's dedicate the system to God alone.
        *

          Let's stand against marginal elements among us, oppressive puppet regimes, brutal wars, occupations, and clandestine operations.
        *

          Let's topple the oppressive monarchs, and elect our own leaders so that we can have peace, liberty and justice on our own volition.
        *

          Let's fight not with bullets or bombs, but with intelligence and wisdom.
        *

          Let's give up superstitions and medieval culture, and start engaging in scientific enterprise.
        *

          Let's stop subjugating our mothers, sisters, daughters and wives; let's give them back their dignity, equal rights, liberty, and identity.
        *

          Let's unite our voices and prayers with genuine Christians, Buddhists, Jews, Agnostics, anyone who seeks justice and peace, rather than injustice and war.
        *

          Let's organize local and international conferences to discuss this issue. We may invite religious scholars of every sect or cult, but we should not let them run them, since our experience shows that they have not done a good job in leading.
        *

          Let's acknowledge the truth so that the truth will set us free.

    in general i think it's great there are a growing number of Muslims like him who are willing to look at the Quran in a non-orthodox way and use it to reform Islam. i don't think reformists will always agree on all points - but it's great there are conferences like this to find some common ground so that progress can be made. i just hope that reformists are able to make a major impact on how the majority of Muslims veiw Islam.

    +1 and that where we stand together on the same ground.  I also believe Islam can be reformed to  some extent and make it less poisonous than what it is atm.  Its time reformists got together as one to counteract the wahabists & and am pleased to see at least you are making the effort to attend  Afro
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #14 - May 09, 2010, 10:40 AM
     
    Quote from: IsLame on May 09, 2010, 10:32 AM
    Its time reformists got together as one to counteract the wahabists & and am pleased to see at least you are making the effort to attend  Afro

    I am all for that dear IsLame., I fully support reformists  attacking wahabists., And I support others attacking reformists.  

    That freedom of Expression to attack should be kept open...
    Do not let silence become your legacy.. Question everything   
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim     
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #15 - May 09, 2010, 10:42 AM
    Abdullahi an-Na'im is attending  Afro

    Before I left Islam I was an advocate of what he was suggesting after reading his book, "Towards an Islamic Reformation".

    Basically he argues that abrogation was created by the scholars - and give precedence to verses that were largely a response to the needs of the time. This resulted in abrogating the peaceful verses in favour of the belligerent. He says the needs of today have now changed dramatically and argues the process of abrogation must be reversed, with the earlier, peaceful, and conciliatory verses to replace the belligerent - arguing that they represent the true eternal message of the Qur'an as opposed to the verses that were aimed at the specific circumstances at that time.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #16 - May 09, 2010, 10:43 AM
    thanks islame. you may not agree, but i think islam can be reformed into something which is not 'poisonous' at all. and I definitley am going - i will register this week.
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #17 - May 09, 2010, 10:57 AM
    This is part of an article I wrote about reforming Islam - about a year or two before I finally left Islam:

    ...However the world and the social conditions that the Qur’an was revealed in has changed dramatically. Particularly during the last 150 years as enormous advances in science and technology have been a catalyst for social and intellectual change that have altered the way we interact with the world and each other, challenging old ideas and beliefs. We have seen the rise of Democracy, Liberalism and Pluralism along with freedoms, equalities and liberties that the populations of the past could never have dreamt of. Societies have developed and evolved and the relationships within them - particularly between men and women - have changed radically. There is a greater consensus regarding basic ideals of Human Rights and how people and Nations should interact with each other and conduct international relations.

    The dilemma for Muslims is how do we react to all of these changes and still remain faithful to the ideal of Islam as a perfect and unchanging ‘Divine Code’ of life? Do these changes undermine Islamic values? Can we selectively incorporate what may be regarded as good innovations or are all innovations evil? Can we apply human reasoning to find new interpretations? Or have all the various permutations been comprehensively detailed by the great Scholars of the past. Making any fundamental changes impossible? Should we cling resolutely to the classical model of Islamic Law and the Islamic State? Throw into this mix the anger and sense of injustice Muslims feel about issues such as Palestine and their political and economic weakness in the face of Western dominance. Then sprinkle in copious amounts of poverty and ignorance and the result is a deepening crisis and sense of confusion amongst Muslims.

    Many ordinary Muslims are not even aware of the extent of this conflict. Or if they are they try to soften or explain them away using modern apologetic arguments that avoid confronting and thus having to deal with the reality. But anyone who has studied Islam and in particular the Shari’ah – the ‘Divine Code of Life’ – will know that for example, Islam allows Slavery, Offensive Jihad (Attacking non-Muslim countries to Spread the Rule of Islam), Death sentence for any Muslim wishing to leave Islam, Stoning of adulterers, Amputating the hand of a theif, Corporal punishment for a rebellious wife and restrictions and inequalities as regards women and non-Muslims in an Islamic State – all of which are in direct conflict with modern notions of Equality, Freedom and basic Human Rights.

    Of course when faced with such a conflict between a perfect ‘Divine Code’ and the modern world Muslims have no choice but to conclude that it is the modern world, dominated by non-Muslim philosophies and values that is the source of the problem. Islam by its very nature compels Muslims to look back to the past for the perfect model for society and to be suspicious of anything new. No matter what group, party or sect you ask, whether extremist, moderate or esoteric, they are all bound by this definition. So though almost every Muslim today feels this conflict, they are unable to resolve it because to admit that things need to change appears to be tantamount to saying Islam is wrong or that God made a mistake!

    So the apologetics go on trying to defend or put a modernistic gloss on problematic issues. While claiming that the ‘perfect’ and ‘ideal’ Islamic State would resolve all the ills of the world. Of course when one points to concrete examples of Shari’ah which have or still are being implemented in Saudia Arabia, Sudan, Pakistan and Afghansitan, almost every Muslim you meet will say “Oh they are not doing it properly!” or “That country is not really Islamic” and then adding, but if we were to return to the ‘TRUE’ Islam everything would be fine. It is of course a very convenient way of avoiding the true implications of applying the Shari’ah in our day and age. No-one dares to challenge or confront these difficult issues head on. No-one dares to admit that the Shari’ah in it’s present form is inadequate for our present circumstances. And even though there are some scholars who are beginning to challenge many of the traditional aspects of Shari’ah, no-one dares speak the word “Reform” – fearing they will be accused of trying to change Islam. The very idea of reform is regarded in some circles as a rejection of Islam itself. It is the thought that dare not speak its name. Even the modernists are constrained to work within this paradigm, leaving their arguments, that Islam is perfectly compatible with modern notions of equality, pluralism and human rights, at best ambiguous and at worst intellectually dishonest. It is no wonder that one often hears the plea from non-Muslims “Will the TRUE Islam please stand up?”

    It is this situation that the extremists, like Bin Laden, have been able exploit to gain support for their violent tactics. They represent arguably the most honest and simplistic response to this crisis. Back to basics! Cut away all the accumulated debris of 1400 years of innovations and return to the ‘pure’ Islam, precisely as it was practised at the time of the prophet. The main vehicle for achieving this is of course Jihad (Struggle) against the Kuffar (Unbelievers) and the setting up of the Khilafah (Islamic State). They see the failure and weakness of the Muslims is because they have strayed away from the ‘pure’ Islam of the prophet and abandoned the essential duty of Jihad.

    It is a response that has found a ready and willing audience. Particularly amongst the young and disaffected who see their leaders, politicians and even family members only paying ‘lip service’ to the Islamic ideals they claim to follow. They compare the glory and supremacy that the Islamic State had during it’s ‘Golden Age’ and the abject weakness, ignorance and poverty of the Muslim people today and conclude that it is because Muslims are not following the ‘true’ Islamic teachings. So they join the Jihad to re-establish the ‘true’ teachings.

    Having accepted this approach they see every failure as a result of not following Islam ‘properly.’ They are drawn ever deeper into extremism, applying every minute detail ever more rigorously and harshly, to the extent that Islam loses it’s moral and spiritual dimension entirely and becomes merely a mechanical exercise of applying a bewildering and often complicated array of rules, where human reasoning plays no part. It is simply a matter of following the ‘evidence’ (daleel) from the Qur’an and Sunna ‘literally’ and without any ethical considerations. As a result they have no moral dilemma that this glorious Jihad seems to boil down to indiscriminate slaughter of innocent civilians. Or that this perfect ‘Islamic State’ amounts to little more than a brutal system of punishments.

    Of course the vast majority of Muslims are strongly opposed the violent actions of suicide bombers and those who take the lives of innocents. But as yet there is no alternative response to speak of, no strong opposition to the extremists. There may be the odd apologist who speaks out on the media to explain that ‘Islam is a religion of Peace’ and ‘Islam is against terrorism.’ But such slogans carry no authority at all with the both the extremists and more importantly with the reality of the Classical Shari’ah.

    The only effective response that will finally allow Muslims to show their opposition to the extremists is one that confronts the traditional model of Islam. One that challenges the notions that give rise to such extremism. Because the uncomfortable truth is that although there are many verses of Qur’an and Hadith that preach tolerance, peace and the sanctity of human life there are also many that preach a more intolerant and violent approach. The moderates will always be unable to completely silence the extremists, in the final analysis, simply because they are unable to provide irrefutable scriptural evidence to completely invalidate the methods of the extremists. Whatever proofs are produced against the use of violence, there exists others that support it. Leaving the door always open for one group or another of extremists to use it to justify their methods and seduce angry young men hungry for a cause to fight for. The only way to allow Muslims to finally confront extremism is to confront Islam itself and look honestly and critically at those areas that conflict with our present situation and search for ways to reform them.

    Of course many will claim that the evidence that Islam is a peaceful and tolerant religion is irrefutable and that the verses that appear to provide support for violence are simply being misinterpreted or taken out of context. But such a claim becomes absurdly irrelevant when the reality of the situation is that there persists to be a very sizeable and militant minority who stubbornly refuse to see it that way – and have plenty of textual evidence on their side! So we are left with the same problem. Namely that the Qur’an and Sunnah provides religious justification – however erroneously interpreted – to support the violent actions of a very militant minority.

    If one Islamic Scholar produces evidence that killing innocents is prohibited, another will produce evidence that in certain circumstances it is permissible. If one scholar produces evidence that suicide bombing is Haram another will produce evidence that it is the highest form of Martyrdom. The result is that the majority of Muslims are confused and caught within a dilemma of conscience. Either they concede that the extremists have sound evidence and end up trying to defend acts which their heart is, at the very least, uncomfortable with or they do their best to quote the peaceful parts of the Qur’an and Hadith and end up with a slightly inconclusive rebuttal.

    But how could such a confusion and dilemma exist when the Qur’an is the divine word of God, a ‘clear’ book wherein there is ‘no doubt’ for all time and all places? The reason lies in our very understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah as being for ‘all time and all places’ and the confusion between what was actually specific to the Prophet and to the situation at the time. For example some of the guidelines regarding the delivery of the Message of Islam was specific to the Prophet himself as the reciever of the Divine message. For example Sheikh Moiz Amjad on the web site www.understanding-islam.com points out that only the Prophets of God had what is known at Itmaam al-Hujjah meaning only they had the special authority for certain acts and that later generations did not have that same authority.

    This is not to say that prophet Muhammad message was not eternal and universal, but simply that there is a great deal that needs to be understood in it’s context. He was first and foremost a prophet sent to his people, to the harsh and barbaric society that existed in 7th century Arabia with responses and solutions specific to the needs of the time. The Qur’an itself testifies to this, stating that it was revealed;

    “So that you can warn the Mother of Cities (Makkah) and it’s surrounds.” (6:92)

    Prophet Muhammad was sent with the Qur’an as a messenger to his people - the people of Makkah and the surrounding Arab tribes - first and foremost. It spoke to the people in their tongue and in terms they could understand and respond to. Its purpose was to transform this brutal and severe nomadic desert society by providing specific solutions and responses to the particular circumstances of the time.

    This doesn’t contradict the fact that Muhammad was also sent to all mankind with a universal and eternal message. There is no contradiction in this dual nature of prophet-hood. On the contrary, it is a fundamental part of the Islamic belief in the progression of prophets, that every prophet was sent with the same basic and universal message, but was also sent with a specific set of instructions and laws appropriate for the time. The Islamic Scholars are all agreed that the reason for this is because the needs of people change according to the time and place. So the laws, regulations and form the message takes differs to suit the changing needs of mankind. As Yusuf Ali in his well known commentary on the Qur’an says;

    “God’s message from age to age is always the same, but its form may differ according to the needs and exigencies of the time.”

    The Qur’an clearly states that Muhammad was sent according to the same ‘Way/Method” (Sunnah) as all the prophets of the past;

    “Such was our method in the case of those whom We sent before you and you will not find any change in Our method” (17:77)

    It has always been “Sunnatu-llaah” “The Method/Way of God” to send prophets with both a ‘universal’ message and a ‘specific’ set of laws and responses to the needs of the people of that particular place and time and Allah said this Method/Way “never changes.”
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #18 - May 09, 2010, 10:57 AM

    Our mistake has been to assume that Muhammad’s message was different and that the whole of it was meant to apply literally at all times in all places until the end of time. It is this misunderstanding that has created this anomaly within Islam. So, for example, Muslims are quite happy to accept that in the 600 years between Jesus and Muhammad, peoples needs changed so that a new response was required. Yet during the 1400 years since Muhammad’s message there have been no changes that require a different response? Despite the fact that more changes have taken place on every level of human society during the last 100 years than any changes that took place between 1st Century Palestine and 7th Century Arabia!

    Such a misunderstanding has come about for many reasons. One is the confusion regarding the verse in the Qur’an declaring Muhammad to be the “Seal of the Prophets!” It is assumed this means the whole of his message applies for all times and all places. But there is no justification for this assumption since being the ‘Seal of the Prophets’ does not contradict the fact that Muhammad’s message contained both universal and specific aspects. It simply means that man had now reached a stage in his development where it was no-longer necessary to send any more prophets or divine books. Man now has enough resources at his disposal to find his own way in the world. The Qur’an testifies to the fundamental importance of Human Reason (‘Aql) and Human Nature (Fitrah) and their role in seeking and understanding the divine truths. Revelation was never meant to put an end to the use of these, only aid them.

    Another reason often quoted to argue that the whole of Muhammad’s message is for all time and all places is the verse that Muhammad is “A Mercy to the Worlds” “Rahmatan lil Aalameen” It is claimed that this shows that the Divine Code (Shari’ah) was not sent just for the Arabs at the time, but for all time and all creation including, the animals, the plants, the Jinn etc. This is because the word “Aalameen” means ‘the Worlds’ – plural – meaning ‘all Creation.’

    However it should be clear that this cannot possibly mean that the Shari’ah in all it’s detail applies to the whole of creation at all times. If that’s what it meant, then it would have to be applied to the ‘whole of creation’ including the Plants, the Birds and Bees? It is of course an absurd idea and is obvious that “Mercy to the Worlds” is a simply a general statement meaning that Muhammad was a mercy to the whole of creation, the benefits of which are and will always be felt by the whole of creation.

    Ironically another factor that contributed to misunderstanding the nature of Muhammad’s message was the dramatic political success of Islam during the early years. Those early generations were obviously unaware and understandably unconcerned about how the world might change in the future. They were only interested in consolidating and safeguarding the great success of Islamic Society at that time. The following generations of Muslim Scholars soon canonised and detailed all the laws and commentaries derived from the Qur’an and Sunna into the Shari’ah and then declared the door of Ijtihad (application of human reasoning to the divine sources) closed. Thus was set in stone the final and complete source of Divine Code and blueprint for all human society until judgement day. It was very difficult for anyone to question this perception in the face of the obvious intellectual, political and economic success of the Islamic State at the time. It seemed perfectly natural that this wonderful state of affairs must be preserved for all time.

    Unfortunately few were able to foresee the gradual stagnation and decline of Islamic civilization and thought over the centuries as both intellectually and spiritually the Muslim world lost it’s dynamism and ability to contribute or adapt to the changing conditions. This mantle was then taken up by Europe during the Renaissance as the Muslim world slipped further and further into it’s own dark ages and the gulf between the ideals and the reality have grown ever wider. Now Muslims today are left in an intolerable dilemma. Torn between the stark reality that conditions have changed radically and remaining true to their faith by trying to apply laws and rulings that are grossly out of step with today’s conditions.

    The problem is that most Muslims are still unable to fully understand the problem let alone begin searching for a solution. If any Muslim dares to suggest any sort of change in perception of the Qur’an and Sunnah it is immediately seen by the orthodox as tantamount to the destruction of Islam itself. The only way we can begin to solve this crisis is to allow questioning and discussion to actually take place without hysterical calls for death penalties and censorship.

    It has also been much more convenient for those who do perceive problem with the orthodox and literal understanding of Islam to seek solutions that avoid confronting orthodoxy. Seeking refuge – for example - in Sufism which offers a less literal interpretation of Islam. But although this offers an excellent solution for those who are inclined to a more esoteric spirituality – it will never offer a solution to the vast majority of Muslims who will continue to be more inclined to a literal understanding.

    What we need is an honest analysis of the classical understanding of Islam without all the modern apologetics that have tried to obscure the realities. Because simply papering over the cracks will not make them go away as our recent experience with Islamic extremists proves. Only then will we be able to begin searching for solutions that draw their legitimacy from an authentic appreciation and understanding of Islam in line with the present context.

    One such attempt has been made by Sudanese Scholar Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na'im in his recent book “Toward an Islamic Reformation” (Published by Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1990) where he presents arguments for radical reform of the Shari’ah which as An-Na'im says, “is perceived by many Muslims to be part of the Islamic faith.” However he questions this perception and asserts that although the Shari’ah takes the divine text of the Qur’an and Sunna as it’s main source, the Shari’ah itself is not divine and is in fact based on the interpretation and reasoning of the early jurists. He argues that the use of Ijtihad (juristic reasoning) should not only be applied to today’s conditions but that it’s scope should be widened to encompass direct verses of the Qur’an and Sunnah, just as the early companions had done – in particular Umar ibn Khattab when he actually contradicted clear verses of Qur’an and statements of the prophet in order to keep to the overall spirit and underlying message of Islam.

    But perhaps the most radical of his assertions is what he calls “the evolutionary approach” which he attributes to the Sudanese reformer Mahmoud Taha who argued that there are two ‘levels’ or ‘stages’ of the divine message in the Qur’an. “one of the earlier Mecca period and the other of the subsequent Medina stage… the earlier message of Mecca is in fact the eternal and fundamental message of Islam, emphasizing the inherent dignity of all human beings, regardless of gender, religious belief, race… equality between men and women and complete freedom of choice in matters of religion and faith.”

    But the nature of the harsh conditions in seventh-century Arabia meant that this message could not be implemented at the time. It was revealed in order for it to be preserved for the future generations, since the Qur’an was the last revelation and Muhammad the last prophet. As for the message contained in the verses of the later Medina period, they were an essential response to the immediate needs of the new and fragile Muslim community which had to survive the violent and hostile conditions that threatened to extinguish it before it had time to grow.

    This accounts for the apparent contradiction of some parts of the Qur’an and explains why the methodology of ‘abrogation’ was applied extensively by the early jurists to legislate Shari’ah law using the later verses that contradicted the earlier ones. An-Na'im argues that today we must now reverse this process and use the earlier Meccan verses to abrogate the later Medinan ones, for Shari’ah purposes, in order to reformulate the Laws based on the earlier and universal message of the Qur’an and Sunnah. He argues that this will resolve the conflicts that exist between the classical model of Shari’ah and it’s application in today’s conditions.

    One example of this conflict is between the position of classical model of Shari’ah regarding “Offensive Jihad” – namely the use of force to spread the rule of the Islamic State - and today’s situation regarding international relations with modern and peaceful non-Muslim states. He says:

    “Islam was born in an extremely harsh and violent environment and received a very hostile and aggressively violent reaction from the tribes of seventh-century Arabia. The first Muslims had to fight for survival until Islam prevailed throughout Arabia by the time of the death of the Prophet. The preexisting norms of intertribal relations were heavily, if not completely, dependent on the use of force by the claimant of any right, even the right to exist.”

    “The use or threat of force was also the norm among the various entities or polities of the region, including the two powerful empires to the northeast and northwest of Arabia, the Sasanian and Byzantine empires. Thus, when the fist Muslim State was established in seventh-century Arabia, force was the basic method of conducting what is known today as international relations. It was therefore inevitable that Islam should endorse the use of force in Muslim relations with non-Muslims. In doing so, however, Shari’a introduced new norms to control the reasons for going to war as well as its actual practice.”

    “Whereas warfare among the tribes of Arabia and among the political entities of the region had been motivated by such considerations as tribal honor, territorial rivalry and economic greed, Shari’a restricted the use of force in international relations to self-defense and the propagation of Islam. To Muslims, these were the only legitimate reasons for war. Moreover, Muslims were constrained by certain rules regulating the actual conduct of warfare. For example, before using force in propagating Islam they were required to offer the other side an opportunity to embrace the faith without fighting. If it was necessary to fight, hostilities had to be restricted to enemy combatant soldiers and then only in the battlefield…”

    He goes on to explain that although this response was necessary and valid at the time, it is not necessary or valid in today’s environment and that the Medinan verses requiring such use of force should be abrogated by the earlier Meccan verses that rightfully apply now to the situation today:

    “To argue that Shari’a was fully justified in endorsing the use of force in international relations in that historical context, and that it did in fact restrict and regulate the use of force, is not to say that such use of force is still justified. Rather, since the use of force was justified by the historical context of violent intercommunal and international relations, it must cease to be so justified in the present context, in which peaceable coexistence has become a vital necessity for the survival of humanity. Besides the growing trend toward an enlightened view of human relations and in favor of peace, modern means of nuclear warfare have made hostile international relations unthinkable.”

    The obvious criticism that many Muslims will level at this argument is that the changing needs of man cannot be the source of the Shari’ah. Otherwise it would simply become subject to the whims and desires of man rather than the decree of the Divine. He answers this by saying:

    “It must be emphasized, however, that for Muslims the historical context, as such, can neither be the source of Shari’a in the past nor its source in the future. According to Muslim belief, Islamic law in the past, present, and future must be based on the Qur’an and Sunna. I fully accept this position and only wish to suggest that the historical context is merely the framework for the interpretation and application of these basic sources of Islam. In other words, it is not suggested here that Islamic law should simply follow the developments in human history regardless of the provisions of the Qur’an and Sunna. What is suggested is that the Qur’an and Sunna have been the source of Shari’a as the Islamic response to the concrete realities of the past and must be the source of modern Shari’a as the Islamic response to the concrete realities of today.”

    With this in mind he goes on to compare Mecca and Medinan verses, and shows that the use of force against non-Muslims, “is an exclusively Medanese phenomenon” and that “Before migration to Medina in 622 A.D., there was no authorization in the Qur’an for the use of force against non-Muslims.” On the contrary the earlier Meccan verses advocated “freedom of choice in religious belief.”

    He shows that in order to resolve this conflict, the classical scholars used the process of ‘abrogation’ so that - for purposes of legislation in the Shari’ah - the later Medinan verses replaced the earlier verses that advocated freedom of choice in religious belief.

    However this exercise of judgement on behalf of the scholars – although appropriate for the conditions of the time – is not appropriate in our present conditions and he argues that in the example of international relations - as with all other areas of conflict between the classical model of Shari’ah and the realities of today’s conditions – the solution is to be found within the Qur’an and Sunna, using “the evolutionary approach”

    “The only way to achieve the necessary degree of reform is to substitute as bases of Islamic law those clear and definite verses of the Qur’an and related Sunna that sanction the use of force in propagating Islam among non-Muslims and upholding it among renegade Muslims with texts of the Qur’an and Sunna that enjoin the use of peaceful means in achieving those objectives… the proposed reform would replace those elements of Shari’a based on the Qur’an of Medina and related Sunna, and on the practice of that stage, with modern Islamic law based on the Qur’an of Mecca and related Sunna.”

    Likewise An-Na'im goes on to examine issues human rights, inequalities of gender and religion and in particular the issue of slavery within the classical model of Shari’ah and argues that the ‘evolutionary approach’ would resolve these issues by recognizing some texts of “the Medinan stage as having served their transitional purpose and implement those texts of the Meccan stage which were previously inappropriate for practical application but are now the only way to proceed.”

    Regarding Slavery for example, such an approach would recognise that Slavery was allowed in the past, because it was already part of the very fabric of society and had been for hundreds of years. A complete abolition could not be completed in a short space of time. The best that could be achieved immediately was to improve the treatment of slaves and encourage freeing. In fact the regulations set down about how to treat them along with the numerous incentives to free them was revolutionary in the 7th Century. Without doubt it resulted in huge improvements in the conditions of Slaves. There is no doubt that slaves were treated far better, in most cases, under Islamic rule than their counterparts under non-Muslim rule during the Middle Ages.

    But the fact that Islam allowed it at the time doesn't mean that Islam sought to maintain it for all time, but only to deal with the reality and pave the way for it's eventual abolishion. Somthing we must now do!

    This means appreciating the wisdom of the Qur’an in responding to the situation at the time of the prophet and it means understanding that our situation has now changed and we must abolish slavery in the "True Spirit of Islam".

    And for this to be done we must face the fact that this means Reform of the Shari'ah - it cannot mean anything else.

    Abullahi An-Na’im concludes:

    “Although many contemporary Muslims would privately object to Shari’a’s suppression of freedom of belief and expression, very few are willing to express their objections publicly for fear of being branded as apostates themselves – guilt by association. Other Muslims would find it difficult to admit their objections, even to themselves, for fear of losing their faith in the process.  As long as (the classical model of) the public law of Shari’a continues to be regarded as the only valid view of the law of Islam, most Muslims would find it extremely difficult to object to any of its principles and rules or to resist their practical implementation, however repugnant and inappropriate they may find them to be.”

    An-Na’im’s ideas represent one approach to resolving the current crisis. However whether we agree with his conclusions is less important than opening up a debate on such issues. Most Muslims still fiercely resist even discussing such issues as they feel threatened and fearful that this will somehow bring their own faith in God into question. But Muslims must realise that this it will not – on the contrary it will strengthen their faith and raise the true spirit of Islam for our age. The alternative is that we remain backward looking and disconnected from the world around us, imprisoned by the past.

    Of course any sort of change in perception of the Qur’an and Sunnah will be seen by some as tantamount to the destruction of Islam itself. But on the contrary, it is the extremists who are destroying Islam, by reducing it to nothing more than a manifesto for violence and it is only through honest and open debate can we begin to heal this sickness that truly threatens to destroy Islam.

    If Islam is to once again make a dynamic and positive contribution to mankind and to his spiritual and material problems, it must re-kindle the vibrant force of inquiry and spiritual awakening that once made Islam the leading light in the world.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #19 - May 09, 2010, 11:19 AM
    well written article, sounds like you were on the verge of apostacy even back then!
    My Book     news002       
    My Blog  pccoffee
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #20 - May 09, 2010, 11:42 AM
    Quote from: IsLame on May 09, 2010, 11:19 AM
    well written article, sounds like you were on the verge of apostacy even back then!


    Yep - but I tried my best to hang on - tooth and nail.

    Eventually I knew I was flogging a dead horse - and more importantly - I knew I no longer believed the Qur'an was the word of God. This very process convinced me more than ever that the text in front of me was the work of a man - not a god.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #21 - May 09, 2010, 03:24 PM
    Quote from: abuyunus2 on May 09, 2010, 10:43 AM
    thanks islame. you may not agree, but i think islam can be reformed into something which is not 'poisonous' at all. and I definitley am going - i will register this week.


    rofl i love your signature
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #22 - May 09, 2010, 03:42 PM
    thanks for posting that Hass - an engaging read - in fact it was brilliant. you could easily be my reformist mentor  Wink
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #23 - May 09, 2010, 03:43 PM
    Quote from: BlackDog on May 09, 2010, 03:24 PM
    rofl i love your signature


    hehe
    ''we are morally and philisophically in the best position to win the league'' - Arsene Wenger
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #24 - May 09, 2010, 03:44 PM
    Great article Hassan! Irony:

    Most Muslims still fiercely resist even discussing such issues as they feel threatened and fearful that this will somehow bring their own faith in God into question. But Muslims must realise that this it will not – on the contrary it will strengthen their faith and raise the true spirit of Islam for our age

     grin12
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #25 - May 09, 2010, 03:47 PM
    I'm all for the reformation. Religion is not going anywhere, and I don't honestly mind, but I rather it is reformed to modern day temperament. And kept in the private sphere. Anybody that goes there should invite them to this forum.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #26 - May 09, 2010, 03:48 PM
    Quote from: Hassan on May 09, 2010, 10:42 AM
    Abdullahi an-Na'im is attending  Afro

    Before I left Islam I was an advocate of what he was suggesting after reading his book, "Towards an Islamic Reformation".

    Basically he argues that abrogation was created by the scholars - and give precedence to verses that were largely a response to the needs of the time. This resulted in abrogating the peaceful verses in favour of the belligerent. He says the needs of today have now changed dramatically and argues the process of abrogation must be reversed, with the earlier, peaceful, and conciliatory verses to replace the belligerent - arguing that they represent the true eternal message of the Qur'an as opposed to the verses that were aimed at the specific circumstances at that time.


    Doesn't that just leave it open to being abrogated once again, back to the less peaceful verses, in a fresh time of "war"?
    Inhale the good shit, exhale the bullshit.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #27 - May 09, 2010, 04:10 PM
    Quote from: Hassan on May 09, 2010, 10:42 AM
    Abdullahi an-Na'im is attending  Afro

    Before I left Islam I was an advocate of what he was suggesting after reading his book, "Towards an Islamic Reformation".

    I just started watching an interview with this guy and I really like him so far. Thanks for mentioning him and great article you wrote there BTW  Smiley

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg3hLdJLrOY
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #28 - May 09, 2010, 04:14 PM
    Quote from: abuyunus2 on May 09, 2010, 03:42 PM
    thanks for posting that Hass - an engaging read - in fact it was brilliant. you could easily be my reformist mentor  Wink


    lol... Well although I do believe Islam can and will be reformed - and I sincerely wish reformists good luck - for me it's a waste of time, since I don't believe there is anything divine to be salvaged from it. Better to move on and start realising it's us humans who need to sort the world out - on our own and without a god - who clearly has left us to do exactly that - even if he does exist.
  • Re: Islamic Reform Conference
     Reply #29 - May 09, 2010, 04:18 PM
    Quote from: BlackDog on May 09, 2010, 03:44 PM
    Great article Hassan! Irony:

    Most Muslims still fiercely resist even discussing such issues as they feel threatened and fearful that this will somehow bring their own faith in God into question. But Muslims must realise that this it will not – on the contrary it will strengthen their faith and raise the true spirit of Islam for our age

     grin12


    I know - the irony! lol

    Beware of Muslims saying: "You have strengthened my faith in Islam" in response to some crushing criticisms  Cheesy
  • 12 3 4 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »