Comments on iFaqeer: Karen Armstrong on the Pope's Speech

caliibre, in my very humble opinion, there's anoth...

2006-09-22T09:26:00.000-07:00

caliibre, in my very humble opinion, there's another "I" word that you never hear about that is even more relevant and, to most Muslims (or at least it used to be, till very recently), even more authoritative.

What none of the people so often reminding us of a need for new "Ijtihad" will tell you is that Ijtihad has, more often than not actually been #4 on the list of what carries authority in matters Islamic. (Of course, the fact that Ijtihad has been dead for a while is an urban myth manufactured out of whole cloth and pushed forward by both those that would decry Islam AND by those that would have it stay hidebound is a matter for another time.) After the Qur'an, the Hadith, and the other "I" I want to talk about.

And neither Irshad Manji and people that tend to agree with her or support her NOR what today are called "Islamists" will breath that other word that begins with I. And what it is has a lot to do with why.

For that third source of authority on matters Islamic is none other than "Ijma".

Ijma is, simply, the majority opinion of the global Muslim community, the Ummah.

Or, in a word, democracy.

The word has the same root, J-M-A, as Jumuah, the day Muslims gather for congregational prayer. Or the word so many Islamist parties and groups around the world, ironically, use in their name: "Jama'a" (as in Jama'a Islamiyya"), "Jamaat" (as in "Jamaat-e-Islami", the party founded by Syed Abu'l Ala Maududi, a thinker of the same stature as Syed Qutub, and one the rest of us are ill-advised to ignore), "Jamiat" (as in Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, the student wing of the JI)...need I go on?

The Islamists will never talk about it because their ideology, their views are not in sync with the Ijma, the opinion, the democratic opinion of the global Muslim community, the Ummah--the latter being a conceopt a lot of people on the left are uncomfortable, too (and I am not talking about Manji, et al; I will come to them in a minute). Take Pakisan, about the largest country in the word that has the word "Islamic" in its official name; the sixth largest country in the world. So often in the news. The "Deeni Jamaathain", as we call them in Pakistan (or "religious parties"--notice the echo of J-M-A in the Urdu word for "party") have never gotten more than about 11% (and that's being charitable) of the national vote. When the majority of Muslims lined up behind Mohammad Ali Jinnah in the run-up to independence, which led to the formation of Pakistan, the major ones were against its foundation. Today, most Pakistanis will tell you the laws of "Hudood" that do such a hatchet job of trying to implement Islamic principles about rape and adultery are just that; a hatchet job, these so-called "Deeni Jamaathain" prevent any real progress on the matter. I could go on and on.

Now to the other folks that scream "Ijtihad" so often. For example, Irshad Manji. She will never utter the word "Ijma" in any meaningful way, or inform you that it has most often been considered above even Ijtihad in the pecking order of sources of Islamic authority because, very simply, as Dr. Michael Eric Dyson and Dr. Cornell West will tell you, "You can't lead the people, if you don't love the people."

So, my brother or sister, it is not that Muslims need to come up with something completely new. It is that ALL of us--you, me, Irshad Manji, Usama bin Laden, Daniel Pipes--need to stop pretending that the Islamists of today represent the traditional understanding of Islam, and try to go back and engage with Muslims as they have been and, though the Islamists gain ground with every outrage they cause to others or claim against Muslims, start from there.

I am not saying the traditional practise and understanding of Islam by my parents' and grandparents' generations is right and appropriate for the 21st century. In fact, I am saying the exact opposite: that we need to go to sources of Islamic authority and engage them and mine them anew for principles and wisdom relevant for this new century.

And Ijma--inclusive, democratic, decision-makiing--is right up there in the top row of principles, most Muslims used to know and believe, above the "I" word you hear so much about.

----

I guess this should be a separate post on this blog.

Myth. Right. Read some history. The Islamic world ...

2006-09-18T20:13:00.000-07:00

Myth. Right. Read some history. The Islamic world was as imperialist as they come. They ruled by the sword and died by it.

Islamophobia Questions - answer YES and the ‘phobi...

2006-09-18T04:52:00.000-07:00

Islamophobia Questions - answer YES and the ‘phobia’ will go away!

Will Muslims confirm that the expressed desire of some of the faithful for a worldwide caliphate is to be purged from their teachings (and their websites) and will Muslim leaders publicly renounce all those that support this worldview?

Will Muslims do something positive toward the radical elements within their own ranks by purging Mosques of radical clerics an hold them legally accountable for those that act on their instructions?

Will Moslems actively seek to broaden their junior schools’ curriculum and ensure that only students, that have reached the age of reason, attend institutions that are dedicated exclusively to studying the Qur’an?

Will Muslims actively and constantly rebuke, loudly and publicly, those that undertake violent jihad and denounce the concept as being defunct and belonging to another time (much as the Christians have done with their revolting concepts of the crusades)?

Will Muslims actively return to the now practically abandoned practice of broad spectrum “ijtihad” and as a world religion start a process of enlightenment in a similar way the Christians did with their period of reformation?

Will Muslim scholars and clerics actively endorse a program of democratization and work conscientiously and consistently seek to remove dictatorial governments?

Will Muslims walk away from the concept of a theocratic state and acknowledge that civil law must always out way sharia law?

Will Muslims publicly rebuke governments and organisations that fund violent Islamic movements in foreign lands, such as the one that has existed in Thailand for some years?

Will Islamic religious leaders publicly denounce brutal regimes that are involved in ethnic cleansing such as Somalia and Sudan and volunteer armed forces to United Nations missions involved in attempts to install democratic governments in failed states?

Will Muslims, through a process ijtihad suppress and deny the sura and hadith that are highly offensive to non-Muslims by insisting that their followers acknowledge and accept that they refer to specific historical times and events that no longer exist and therefore render them void?

Will Muslims allow those that wish to leave the faith to do so without retribution?

caliibre