Islam and Fear of Freedom of Thought

[Solomon2]

The Prophet, may the prayer and peace of Allah be with him, entered Mecca as conqueror; the people converted to Islam, some willingly and some reluctantly. The Prophet, may the prayer and peace of Allah be with him, still on his mount, made the tawaf around the temple and around the Ka"ba, where 360 idols were displayed. And every time he passed by a sanam, pointing his cane, he declaimed, "Truth [al-haqq] has come, and falsehood [al-batil] has vanished," for it is the nature of falsehood to vanish. As this sentence was pronounced, each sanam slid from its pedastal and smashed to the ground. The most important sanam was Hobal.

This passage from Ibn Sa'd is the key to decoding not just one but several enigmas that modern Islam confronts. The first is fear of personal freedom, from which comes the ban on the artistic reproduction of the human face. The second is the exclusion of women from politics, which is tied to the triumph of the monotheistic One...

Before 630 freedom of thought did exist, and gods swarmed in the Arabian heavens and had their place in large numbers in the temples, and also in each household. At the time that Judaism and Christianity were comfortably established among their neighbors in the Mediterranean area, the Arabs continued to reject monotheism and became "famous for the worship of idols"...

Shirk is the most appropriate word for translating the word "freeedom" in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is posed as an ideal to be attained: "everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion...." This article is the very definition of the jahiliyya, the chaotic pagan world before Islam. What it proposes is regression to the zero time. The United Nations translators, charged with putting the charter into Arabic, reeled under the weight of the task, using four words to render "freedom to change his religion": haqq hurriyat taghyir al-diyana, instead of the more appropriate word, shirk, which is found in the Koran, from beginning to end, not less than 160 times. It is in that brief Article 18 and the concept of shirk that the conflict between Islam and democracy lies as a philosophical debate, a fundamental debate that was blocked for fifteen centuries, supported by the power of the palaces. The question is simply this: Do we love Islam because the police impose it on us? Obviously not. We love it for all the beautiful things that the police can neither offer nor take away -

...Islam, with its sole God, triumphed in 630 because it succeeded in realizing what the 360 gods enthroned in the Ka'ba, expressing pluralism and freedom of thought and belief, were powerless to guarantee: the establishment of rahma {sensitivity, tenderness, forgiveness, nourishment}. Violence was so widespread in Mecca at that time that even the gods were battered...

The jahiliyya saw the unbridled reign of hawa, desire and individual egotism. Islam was to realize the contrary...Rahma in exchange for freedom is the social contract that the new religion proposed...Renouncing freedom of thought and subordinating oneself to the group is the pact that will lead to peace...Desire, which is individual by definition, is the opposite of rahma -

From the beginning Islam was able to establish only a fragile peace, one that was constantly threatened from within by desire...Submission to the group was confused with 'aql (reason) and all indulgence of preferences and individual desires was labeled irrational -

...hawa is not to be excluded or eradicated; it must rather be managed in such a fashion that it will not exceed the hudud, the sacred limits...an individual can be forced to submit, but his imagination can never be controlled.

...The fact is that for fifteen centuries the imagination has been condemned to pursue its course beyond the hudud, outside the walls. That presents no danger if our great minds are in Paris or London or the United Sates...It is absolutely necessary that the umma root its security somewhere else than in the ban on free thought. We cannot continue to stifle the imagination, the freedom to ponder and dream, for that is the locus of invention, the source of wealth in the electronic age! This is the great issue that Muslims are called on to confront and resolve. Fanatical, uncultured leaders, little versed in modern science, cannot give us a solution -

- Excerpts from Islam and Democracy: Fear of the Modern World, Fatema Mernissi, Perseus Publishing, 1992.

 

[UchihaCG]

has a sense lot of in it =)
thanks for the article bro.

 

[Materialistic]

The Prophet, may the prayer and peace of Allah be with him, entered Mecca as conqueror; the people converted to Islam, some willingly and some reluctantly.

No one was forced to turn to Islam, all those who converted, did it on their own will. Forgiveness was declared for all of non-muslims who will enter the home of Abu Sufiyan, who was not a muslim at that time and considered as a leader of non-muslims of Makkah. This was the way to bring peace and harmony between Muslims and Non-Muslims and also a way to give respect to Abu Sufiyan.

Islam allows every one to follow the religion of their choice, and Muslims are asked to provide freedom of religion to non-muslims but once a person embraces Islam, then switching the religion is a sin. As per every religion after recognising true God how can one divert again. Islam asks even Muslims to discover and find the signs of God in nature which he has given to be seen and recognised. So, there is no prohibition on freedom of thought or expression.

Anything which serves evil purpose or brings harm to any one is prohibited no matter an action, a word, a thought or an expression(abusing some one).

Y is democracy compared to Islam cant get it through my mind, A formula to safisfy the most, no matter if their satisfaction lies in good or bad. A rudderless boat which drifts where the majority takes it, no matter in the flow or against it, any direction, any way just for the sake of to keep it going, is compared against something that emphasis to bring the right path to every one, which takes the boat where it should go rather than leaving it on the mercy of the flow.

 

[fhassan]

Before 630 freedom of thought did exist, and gods swarmed in the Arabian heavens and had their place in large numbers in the temples, and also in each household.

This is false. Here are some practices in Arabia prior the arrival of Muhammed (pbuh):

- Burial of baby daughters.

The pagan Arabs preferred male children and daughters were viewed as a "shame". The Pagan Arabs regularly buried baby daughters alive and Islam quickly forbade this evil practice (female infanticide)

“And when one of them is informed of [the birth of] a female, his face becomes dark, and he suppresses grief. He hides himself from the people because of the ill of which he has been informed. Should he keep it in humiliation or bury it in the ground? Unquestionably, evil is what they decide.” [Quran 58:59]

- People would buy and sell men and women as slaves.

Slavery was commonplace in pagan Arabia. One of the most important personalties in Islam is Hazrat Bilal (RA), who was a slave of Ethiopian descent freed by the Abu Bakr (RA), a close companion of the prophet (pbuh).

Hazrat Bilal, a non-Arab, was actually chosen by the prophet (pbuh) to be the very first Muadhin in Islamic history (the one who calls to prayer).

The prohibition of making free people slaves, and the encouragement to free slaves soon wiped out slavery from Arabia.

Yet, slavery is viewed upon as a freedom by whoever it is you are quoting!

- The strong would oppress the weak, there was very little justice and rule of law, you could say "might was right" in pre-Islamic Arabia. With Islam, the rule of law and justice soon prevailed, One of the greatest Empires to ever exist emerged from this desolate dessert.

The Muslims were oppressed and driven out of Makah, and this is what happened when the Muslims recaptured it:

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay...RBS661E8bC-AaUmslD&q=conquest+of+mecca&hl=en#

Not a single person was harmed, and those who had once oppressed the Muslims were granted amnesty and safety.

 

[BATMAN]

has a sense lot of in it =)

Do you hold degree in Islamiyat?
You didn't even waited for a response from other members!

thanks for the article bro.

What article? got links?

IMO... I see this thread as nothing more than troll.

I strogly suggest Solomom to look into genocide of women and children in hinduism before he post non authentic stuff on Islam and use this forum to spread out missinformation.

If needed i can post interviews of the victims of hinduism.

 

[UchihaCG]

Do you hold degree in Islamiyat?
You didn't even waited for a response from other members!



What article? got links?

IMO... I see this thread as nothing more than troll.

I strogly suggest Solomom to look into genocide of women and children in hinduism before he post non authentic stuff on Islam and use this forum to spread out missinformation.

If needed i can post interviews of the victims of hinduism.

it's alright; i could comprehend well enough without a degree on it.

I'm sorry, then, i meant "thanks for the post"

You're the one trolling.

Where does Hinduism come in here?
Misinformation? I think not. I find it the truth. Don't blame the quality of his post because you don't like him pointing something about Islam.

 

[Solomon2]

What article? got links?...nothing more than troll -

No link, I typed it straight from the book. Hence the reference at the bottom of the post.

(As for your suggestion: I take direction more kindly from people who (1) read more closely and (2) aren't calling me names, thank you.)

 

[qsaark]

Pakistani/Muslim members,

Please do not take up the bait. Such threads are not started to open up a scholarly debate, they are started to sling as much mud on Islam as possible. Whatever Islam is being blamed for, other two monotheistic religions, Judaism and Christianity can equally be blamed for the same. What religions do to their followers? They introduce their followers to discipline, to a way of life that revolves around certain dos’ and don’ts based on experiences and logical assumptions. No religion in the world is devoid of the dos’ and don’ts philosophy whether mono or polytheistic. Those Hindu members who have read the ‘Puranas’ or those who are aware of Hindu religious teachings adequately will also agree with me.

There is no concept of a smooth operation in the absence of rules and regulations at any level. When we are kids, we follow certain rules devised by our parents, we may not like those rules, but they are there for our own benefit. When we attend academic institutions, we face yet more rules and regulations, again they exist so we could achieve the goals we inspire to achieve during our academic life. When we enter in our practical life, some more rules and regulations are waiting for us and this continues like this where ever we go and what ever we do for earning our living.

It is not only Islam but all the religion even the so called secular or democratic societies set some limits. Freedom…what is freedom? You want to walk naked in the middle of the road and want to have sex on the roof of your car; is this freedom? You want to kill people and take their belongings; is this freedom? You want to drive under the influence of drug and don’t care about the safety of the others on the road; is this freedom? You want to pickup fights and behave as a gangster; is this freedom? What is prohibited by religion that is allowed in a secular or democratic society?

And lastly, if there are certain limitations in Islam, so what? I can understand if you are Muslim living in an Islamic country and having problem with those; Being a non-Muslim, and living in a non-Islamic state, who is asking you to observe those limits? You have enough freedom in your country right? Go enjoy that freedom…why complaining about something that has nothing to do with you, nor it has any affect on your life? Live your life the way you like and let others live their’s the way they choose; what is so difficult about it?

 

[Gin ka Pakistan]

Pakistani/Muslim members,

Please do not take up the bait. Such threads are not started to open up a scholarly debate, they are started to sling as much mud on Islam as possible. Whatever Islam is being blamed for, other two monotheistic religions, Judaism and Christianity can equally be blamed for the same. What religions do to their followers? They introduce their followers to discipline, to a way of life that revolves around certain dos’ and don’ts based on experiences and logical assumptions. No religion in the world is devoid of the dos’ and don’ts philosophy whether mono or polytheistic. Those Hindu members who have read the ‘Puranas’ or those who are aware of Hindu religious teachings adequately will also agree with me.

There is no concept of a smooth operation in the absence of rules and regulations at any level. When we are kids, we follow certain rules devised by our parents, we may not like those rules, but they are there for our own benefit. When we attend academic institutions, we face yet more rules and regulations, again they exist so we could achieve the goals we inspire to achieve during our academic life. When we enter in our practical life, some more rules and regulations are waiting for us and this continues like this where ever we go and what ever we do for earning our living.

It is not only Islam but all the religion even the so called secular or democratic societies set some limits. Freedom…what is freedom? You want to walk naked in the middle of the road and want to have sex on the roof of your car; is this freedom? You want to kill people and take their belongings; is this freedom? You want to drive under the influence of drug and don’t care about the safety of the others on the road; is this freedom? You want to pickup fights and behave as a gangster; is this freedom? What is prohibited by religion that is allowed in a secular or democratic society?

And lastly, if there are certain limitations in Islam, so what? I can understand if you are Muslim living in an Islamic country and having problem with those; Being a non-Muslim, and living in a non-Islamic state, who is asking you to observe those limits? You have enough freedom in your country right? Go enjoy that freedom…why complaining about something that has nothing to do with you, nor it has any affect on your life? Live your life the way you like and let others live there’s the way they chose; what is so difficult about it?

Thank you Sir , Couldn't have said it better .

 

[Solomon2]

Pakistani/Muslim members, Please do not take up the bait -

My posting of these excerpts as threads is intended as a public service. I do not participate save to answer clarifications relating to their origin, and occasional requests for clarification in return. Yet I see no reason why discussion must inevitably decay to some sort of mud-slinging fest.

 

[qsaark]

My posting of these excerpts as threads is intended as a public service. I do not participate save to answer clarifications relating to their origin, and occasional requests for clarification in return. Yet I see no reason why discussion must inevitably decay to some sort of mud-slinging fest.

You are not doing any public service, you are only satisfying your own ego and expressing your disgust and distastefulness for Islam. You Sir, are known for your hatered towards Islam and Muslims. This is not the only thread where you have attempted to sling mud on Islam, there are many posted before and there will be many more posted after this.

 

[Awesome]

This passage from Ibn Sa'd is the key to decoding not just one but several enigmas that modern Islam confronts. The first is fear of personal freedom, from which comes the ban on the artistic reproduction of the human face. The second is the exclusion of women from politics, which is tied to the triumph of the monotheistic One...

Before 630 freedom of thought did exist, and gods swarmed in the Arabian heavens and had their place in large numbers in the temples, and also in each household. At the time that Judaism and Christianity were comfortably established among their neighbors in the Mediterranean area, the Arabs continued to reject monotheism and became "famous for the worship of idols"...

Shirk is the most appropriate word for translating the word "freeedom" in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which is posed as an ideal to be attained: "everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion...." This article is the very definition of the jahiliyya, the chaotic pagan world before Islam. What it proposes is regression to the zero time. The United Nations translators, charged with putting the charter into Arabic, reeled under the weight of the task, using four words to render "freedom to change his religion": haqq hurriyat taghyir al-diyana, instead of the more appropriate word, shirk, which is found in the Koran, from beginning to end, not less than 160 times. It is in that brief Article 18 and the concept of shirk that the conflict between Islam and democracy lies as a philosophical debate, a fundamental debate that was blocked for fifteen centuries, supported by the power of the palaces. The question is simply this: Do we love Islam because the police impose it on us? Obviously not. We love it for all the beautiful things that the police can neither offer nor take away -

...Islam, with its sole God, triumphed in 630 because it succeeded in realizing what the 360 gods enthroned in the Ka'ba, expressing pluralism and freedom of thought and belief, were powerless to guarantee: the establishment of rahma {sensitivity, tenderness, forgiveness, nourishment}. Violence was so widespread in Mecca at that time that even the gods were battered...

The jahiliyya saw the unbridled reign of hawa, desire and individual egotism. Islam was to realize the contrary...Rahma in exchange for freedom is the social contract that the new religion proposed...Renouncing freedom of thought and subordinating oneself to the group is the pact that will lead to peace...Desire, which is individual by definition, is the opposite of rahma -

From the beginning Islam was able to establish only a fragile peace, one that was constantly threatened from within by desire...Submission to the group was confused with 'aql (reason) and all indulgence of preferences and individual desires was labeled irrational -

...hawa is not to be excluded or eradicated; it must rather be managed in such a fashion that it will not exceed the hudud, the sacred limits...an individual can be forced to submit, but his imagination can never be controlled.

...The fact is that for fifteen centuries the imagination has been condemned to pursue its course beyond the hudud, outside the walls. That presents no danger if our great minds are in Paris or London or the United Sates...It is absolutely necessary that the umma root its security somewhere else than in the ban on free thought. We cannot continue to stifle the imagination, the freedom to ponder and dream, for that is the locus of invention, the source of wealth in the electronic age! This is the great issue that Muslims are called on to confront and resolve. Fanatical, uncultured leaders, little versed in modern science, cannot give us a solution -

- Excerpts from Islam and Democracy: Fear of the Modern World, Fatema Mernissi, Perseus Publishing, 1992.

Your research lacks the basic understanding of everything it strives to elaborate. Shirk != Freedom, idolatory remained in practice amongst the few after Islam, hence signifying that there was a lack of followers not imagination, idolatory does not require imagination but the lack of it, where you need to quantify a God, there have been many Muslim artists all over, the restrictions on art were placed after the prophet's death, NOWHERE in the Quran does it mention it so, not everyone thus believes in it, of course Islamic calligraphy always existed, do a google on it, There is no mention of women in that quote, Islam triumphed over idols because of the simple realization that hey we make the idols, they don't make us.

Oh and this topic does not have anything to do with Pakistan. We're not an Islamiaat forum.

 

[Awesome]

Your research lacks the basic understanding of everything it strives to elaborate. Shirk != Freedom, idolatory remained in practice amongst the few after Islam, hence signifying that there was a lack of followers not imagination, idolatory does not require imagination but the lack of it, where you need to quantify a God, there have been many Muslim artists all over, the restrictions on art were placed after the prophet's death, NOWHERE in the Quran does it mention it so, not everyone thus believes in it, of course Islamic calligraphy always existed, do a google on it, There is no mention of women in that quote, Islam triumphed over idols because of the simple realization that hey we make the idols, they don't make us.

Oh and this topic does not have anything to do with Pakistan. We're not an Islamiaat forum.

My bad in addressing this to you, Solomon2 as these views weren't yours. However the topic still has no place on Defence.pk