| Reply to Thread New Thread |
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#21 |
|
|
I think what Umar wanted this:  for the recapitulation brother. Strangely I can not figure out the difference at the moment but that is my idiosyncrasy and others should continue the discussion. (Intending to join you people, IA.)Wassalam. |
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#22 |
|
|
In my humble view reformists followed the last option. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#23 |
|
|
There exists intellectual currents withing the west that are against everything the modern world stands for; all the products of the enlightenment.
There are writers and philosophers who are more or less 'in accord' with muslims, in that they are anti-democratic, anti-liberal, anti-modern, pro-tradition. And I'm not talking about Christians, since they have basically embraced liberalism and democracy, giving up. The people I'm talking about are the likes of rene guenon, martin lings, martin heidegger, julius evola. Not everything they had to say is entirely acceptable to muslims, but their arguments can be put to good use in attacking modernity. Lings and guenon converted to islam as well. Then of course there's plato and aristotle, who spent their whole time attacking ideas that are popular today; the ideas of Moral relativism, democracy, atheism, egalitarianism, scientism, these guys all provide good intellectual ammunition against such ideas. There was also a movement called the counter-enlightenment, which attacked the whole enlightenment project (the enlightenment being the root of all the ideas prevalent in the world within the last 200 odd years such as communism etc) I'm not suggesting you adopt all their ideas, but their arguments can be put to good use in attacking modernism. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#24 |
|
|
This tendency of reforming Islam somehow correlates with colonialism.A new and powerful culture with all its values invaded the lands of Islam.On our side there was a situation of military and political defeat.Generally people follow the winners and feel inferior to them.The question was : How to deal with this situation?.One option was complete surrender;The second option was total rejection;The third option was to be wise,'take what is good and leave what is bad';And the final option was to do none of the above,rather try to be a muslim,but somewhow distort Islam to the likings of the new Masters. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#25 |
|
|
This tendency of reforming Islam somehow correlates with colonialism.A new and powerful culture with all its values invaded the lands of Islam.On our side there was a situation of military and political defeat.Generally people follow the winners and feel inferior to them.The question was : How to deal with this situation?.One option was complete surrender;The second option was total rejection;The third option was to be wise,'take what is good and leave what is bad';And the final option was to do none of the above,rather try to be a muslim,but somewhow distort Islam to the likings of the new Masters. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#26 |
|
|
Now I feel slightly connected. In fact my focus in the last blog in my signature below is on this topic itself and it will be nice to discuss it in threadbare detail. And I feel elated to hear views that resonate with my own. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#27 |
|
|
One more point Maripat,i would be very interested to read your views on it.There is a question of MUSLIM NATIONALISM vs ISLAM AS A RELIGION ; Under political pressure from the west,the Umma produced a particular breed of leadership,who considered Muslims as a Party/hizb,who needed to be defended,uplifted,positioned back to their glorious past,but who had no or little interest in Islam as a Din OR they did have an interest in Din,but were misguided.Some examples : Sir syed Ahmad Khan ,Muhammad Ali jinnah......and the recent past Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto etc.Many more example may be found if we think.These were honest and sincere people ,but the their prime objective was Muslims....not Islam. Of course the problem is not solved at the practical level. Nearly all the isms adopted by Muslims are still present in some form or the other and it is difficult to bring people around to your way of looking at the situation. Being an Indian Muslim some of these isms have practical consequences for me and others here. Personally I find it difficult to refute Jinnah's theory because he is not the person who invented Ummah-it was already defined. The problem in his case, as I see, was the decision that we will not live with the others. The end result is that some of us were left to live with those others with the added resentment on part of the latter. This problem itself is not solved in its physical manifestation. The evidence to this effect is the oft repeated Indo-Pak type friction filled discussion here at SF itself. (I'll not wish the present discussion to spill out into another round of that in this thread.) Then there is the case of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. This of course is even earlier. This is a case which is not at all amenable to Ta'weel ( reconciliation oriented explanation). (To be contd.) |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#28 |
|
|
This is a very useful thread. Brothers dropping knowledge |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#29 |
|
|
I second that.  Or brothers dripping with knowledge? |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#30 |
|
|
One of the best articles I've ever read in my life.
Wallahi I LOVE Khalid Baig! May Allah grant him long life with 'afiyat! --- Better, Try to See the Light By: Khalid Baig Source: http://www.albalagh.net/food_for_thought/quran2.shtml Modern day Christianity and Judaism have been through a series of "reformation" processes. Over the centuries tens of thousands of "reformed churches" and "reformed synagogues" have been established throughout Europe and America. Many see this revision and update as a continuous process. So, why not Islam? This question is a perplexing one for those looking at Islam from the outside. Unfortunately for many, it brings rage rather than reflection. Some are driven to do whatever it takes to make it happen. It is a measure of the intensity of such desire that, today, any ignoramus with a Muslim sounding name can become instant celebrity by declaring that Qur'an needs to be updated or Shariah needs to be rethought. In fact during the Satanic Verses affairs, when the entire Muslim world had been outraged by the support for pure filth shown by all sorts of pundits, many of these "experts" were secretly thrilled that the moment had arrived. A professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Southern California informed the Los Angeles Times readers at that time that the big question the Muslim world was debating was: "Who had really authored the Qur'an." Such psychotic scholarship has also been enlisted in all kinds of research projects as well as in secret plans by the U.N. and big powers to find ways of bringing "reform" to Islam. Some come disguised as friends. They appear to applaud Islam's teachings on tolerance and compassion. Islam does preach tolerance for those outside its boundaries. At the same time it is also very sensitive about its own boundaries and would not allow them to be blurred in a haze of tolerance. Some point to the principles of Ijtihad in Islam. But they fail to realize that Ijtihad does not mean second-guessing the Qur'an, Sunnah or consensus of the companions. Then there are those who resort to ridiculing Muslims for lagging behind the times. When all else fails, they may simply try to order an abrogation of Shariah, as the U.N. is trying to do now under the banner of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Wasted efforts, all! Their fight is with the Qur'an and they only need to turn to the Qur'an to get a response. Here it is, loud and clear: "But when Our clear revelations are recited unto them, they who look not for the meeting with Us, say: 'Bring us a Qur'an other than this, or change it.' Say (O Muhammad): It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I can only follow that which is revealed unto me. Lo! If I disobey my Lord I fear the retribution of an awful Day." [Yunus 10:15] If Qur'an could have been changed by worldly powers, it would have been changed long time ago. If it could be made controversial by secretly publishing and distributing corrupt versions, that would have been already done. But not an iota has changed in the Book that was revealed 1400 years ago. It is the only revealed book in the world that exists in the original language of its revelation. And if all the printed copies of it were to be destroyed today, the Book would remain for it is the only Book in the world that is memorized from cover to cover by millions upon millions of people. And it is the only revealed book that begins with this claim: "This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off evil."[Albaqarah 2:2] There is no doubt that it is the Word of Allah. No doubt that it contains the ultimate truth. No doubt that it was sent through the last Messenger (Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam) of Allah who also explained what it means. No doubt that all success and happiness and bliss lies in faithfully following its commands and all failure and sorrow and misery lies in rejecting it. You either believe in this statement or you do not. There is no third option. A Muslim, by definition, is the person who attests to the truth of this statement. He has received Allah's Word through Allah's messenger, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and he, by force of conviction, submits to this revealed truth. In fact, he stands as a witness to the mankind to the truth of this message. This witnessing is not meant to convert others, but only to deliver the Message, as a trust from Allah. The Message has been preserved precisely because no one is allowed to change it to make it attractive to the would be believers. Muslims do not do in Rome as the Romans do, because then they will have Islam no more. They rise above their surroundings by submitting to the Word of Allah and invite the whole world to the same. Those who accept it do it for their own good; those who reject it do so at their own peril. So, why is there no "reform" movement in Islam ala Christianity or Judaism? Because the latter lost their scriptures, Islam did not. Words of man replaced the words of God in their scriptures making the whole thing fallible. One can find hundreds of statements in the Bible that can be tested and found untrue. Or statements that contradict each other. There is not a single such instance in the Qur'an, and there will never be. Islam was never deformed that it should need reform. It is not dated that it should need to be updated. Its message is as true today as it was yesterday. All of its commands are as life giving today as they were yesterday and they will be tomorrow. It remains as the eternal beacon of light as humanity jumps from one extreme to the other in its ignorance. Right and wrong are eternal. Definitions of good and evil have to be constant. Otherwise, they will lose all meaning. In a world of shifting standards of good, there is no good. It is a great blessing for humanity that Islam provides that constant. If the entire world agrees that homosexuality is ok, Islam will still call it a great abomination. If the entire world agrees to destroy the institution of family, Islam will still be there to uphold it. If the entire world agrees that sickness is health and health is sickness, Islam will still be there to remove the confusion and safeguard health. You cannot ban light and legislate darkness. Better, try to see the light yourself. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#31 |
|
|
I would also recommend: http://www.occri.org.uk/ - This belongs to one of the hidden gems of this Ummah, especially in the UK, our beloved Shaykh, Dr Riyad Nadwi. Please pray for the Shaykh's health as he is ill at the moment. Edit: Added: http://issmstudents.wordpress.com/ - has some useful material, and the writers are classical taalibs. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#32 |
|
|
Let us never forget what Allah tells us in the Qur'an.
Sahih International [5:3] |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#33 |
|
|
  One of the best articles I've ever read in my life. What if there IS a global attempt to manufacture a reform movement in Islam to be compatible with a unIslamic political ideology which happens to dominate the world? To add to these Baig's observations, I am inclined to draw an IDEOLOGICAL LINK between America's political ideological influence over both Christianity and Judaism and the consequental emergence of a reconstructed version of Islam. To no surprise, it has been prophecized that Muslims would follow previous generations into degenerate misguidance: Abu Said Al-Khudri reported that the Messenger of Allah (saws) said: "You will surely follow in the ways of those before you, span by span and cubit by cubit, so much so that if they were to enter an iguana's hole, you would follow after them." We said, "O Messenger of Allah, do you mean the Jews and the Christians?" He replied, "Then, who else?" In another hadith of Imam Tirmidhi's Sunan it is reported on the authority of Abdullah Ibn Amr that the Prophet of Allah (saws) further said, "If there was a person among them who went unto his mother publicly, there will also appear some in my Ummah who will do the same." It can be ascertained that ONE VIRULENT STRAIN OF ISLAMIC MODERNISM or Islamic Reformism was initiated largely at a ‘Religious’ level with the emergence of interfaith Dialogue. Then it manifested in political and legal affairs, specifically the fatwa permitting participation in kufr politics and the Fiqh of Minorities. But while its original founders may have wished to keep the barn door closed on everything else, it has been opened anyways. Social reformism is a major emphasis of deviant elements and has given rise to multiple fronts: gay rights, feminism, marital restructuring, and more. I have personally had to argue with a ‘modernist’ who exclaimed that Muslim women can marry Christian men based on deviant interpretations of Quranic text. And of course, the now infamous gay Daiyee AbdulLiwat, the gay chaplain who marries men who pretend to be Muslim in America. And this trend is growing in throughout the world. One of the fundamental bases of a reconstructed Islam is the usuli (mis)concept of Fiqhul Aqaliyat: Fiqh of Minorities. Fiqh of Minorities emerged from the Alzhari trained scholar Tahir Jabr al Alwani with association with Al Azhari trained Ismail Faruqi. Faruqi preceded al Alwani when he concieved the concepts of 'Abrahim Tradition and Interfaith Dialogue' in the early 1980s, almost as a precursor. Faruqi was later murdered in 1986 (may Allah forgive him). But Faruqi and al Alwani’s legacy would live on in their think tank: IIIT “International Institute of Islamic Thought”. IIIT is one of the influential sources of this ISLAMIC MODERNISM. To note, it's founders Faruqi and al Alwani have stretched their influences in many other regions of the Muslim world through IIIT in particular. Some of its important fellows and cohorts include Anwar Ibrahim important political activist from Malaysia, Abdul Hamid Suliman, rector of Islamic University of Malaysia, Abdur Rahman al Amoudi, founder of American Muslim Council, Louay Safi, founder of CSID (Center for Study of Islam and Democracy) and former director of ISNA, among many others. It should be noted that while I have not documented how, this Islamic modernism has spread beyond just Malaysia. Fethullah Gulen became a major proponent of Ismail Faruqi's theory of Interfaith Dialogue and al Alwani's adoption of participation in secular politics. In the early 1990s, Gulen's movement in Turkey grew in political influence until a Gulen protege first became PM, Erbakan, in 1997. While he was overthrown by a nonviolent coup, Erdogan, another Gulen protege, would go on further than Erbakan and sustain his political role. How much of a role did IIIT play in shaping the Gulen movement's ideas of politics, secularism, etc? What role has this modernism played in shaping Turkey today? It can be said that the Gulen movement is alleged to have connections within the CIA, as CIA official Fuller protected Fethullah Gulen from extradition/deportation to Turkey. And Gulen has had connections with Ishak Alaton, a wealthy Jewish Turk with major businesses in Central Asia. And that the CIA coordinated support for the Gulen movement in Central Asia to counter Iranian Shiite influence. Turkey's "Islamist" influence in Central Asia has really been through the spread of its Gulenist style movement. And it is no secret that America, from SecState Baker to Obama, have encouraged the Muslim world to follow the Turkish model, intimating support for the Gulen movement. (Gulen resides in the Pocono mountains in northeast Pennsylvania- about 3 hours from Washington DC) As for al Alwani and al Faruqi, these two trained scholars founded IIIT, and Al Alwani went on to found the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA). FCNA has since contributed to the founding of European Fiqh Council. Al Alwani has since founded his own university: Cordoba university located in Virginia just outside of Washington DC. Since then, and despite the more restrained urgings of Al Alwani regarding the use of his usuli principles, several Muslim leaders have taken his opened door and pushed it wider. He has also opened doors from America to the Muslim world. I want to stop there and make a statement:  This is not new information. It is public info and known to deceiving and diabolical disbelievers in America. But I wanted to share it here to show that not only is there a reform movement being promoted, but in many ways, it started or gained fruition in America and has spread to Malaysia, Turkey, and more countries. How much of this is 'reform' and how much is actual reform? Is this part of the gradualsim methodology of the MB? Do certain players play the game of nations (eg. work with CIA) in order to advance their own game? Allah knows best. |
|
|
|
09-04-2012, 04:22 AM
|
#34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-21-2012, 10:45 AM
|
#35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-21-2012, 03:06 PM
|
#36 |
|
|
I think what Umar wanted us to concentrate on was,, this: |
|
|
|
09-21-2012, 04:18 PM
|
#37 |
|
|
Personally in many ways I would consider myself to be a 'modern' Muslim and I am quite fond of several Sunni scholars (such as Fethullah Gulen, Ali Unal, Abdullah bin Bayyah, Yusuf Qaradawi, Hamza Yusuf, Sheikh Ahmad Kutty etc) who may sometimes be accused of accommodating themselves too much with the modern world.
So I was quite interested to see a website called newageislam.com that claims to be about the future of Islam etc and I read a few articles on there.... and observed how it is full of contempt for the Ulema - full of articles written by self appointed experts who accuse the Ulema of being ignoramuses on Islam when that is what they themselves are, articles declaring the hijab un-Islamic and all sorts of other satanic ranting in the name of 'modernity'. some things struck me about this website... 1. it is apparently very well funded (I wonder is it another Quilliam Foundation or Sufi Muslim Council payed for by those hostile to Islam) 2. it is clearly engaged in a war against the real understanding of Islam and promoting a 'new version' of Islam based upon whatever fits in with the fashions, whims and fancies of the modern non-Muslim society. Now as we know, only Allah can see into the hearts of these people but for me that website is like an awful echo of the mosque mentioned in Surah Tawbah when Allah says... As for those who have set up a mosque, causing harm and out of disbelief, to create division between the believers, and in readiness for those who previously made war on Allah and His Messenger, they will swear, "We only desired the best." But Allah bears witness that they are truly liars. Do not ever stand in it. A mosque founded on fear of Allah from the first day has a greater right for you to stand in it. In it there are men who love to purify themselves. Allah loves those who purify themselves. Who is better: someone who founds his building on fear of Allah and His good pleasure, or someone who founds his building on the brink of a crumbling precipice so that it collapses with him into the Fire of Hell? Allah does not love wrongdoers. The buildings they have built will not cease to be a bone of contention in their hearts, until their hearts are cut to shreds. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. (Surat at-Tawba, 107-110) Not everyone who smells fishy is a fish, and I am not accusing anyone of anything, only Allah knows people's hearts and intentions, but really that website gives me the 'heebie jeebies', especially when I think about how many people it may potentially lead off the straight path and into misguidance. |
|
|
|
09-21-2012, 05:40 PM
|
#38 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Reply to Thread New Thread |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
Linear Mode
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
