Orthodox Islam being crushed?

[i_m_tipu]

It is true to some degree. There ia a hadith in which the Prophet (Salallahu Alayhe wa Sallam) says: (paraphrased) "Islam will return to Medinah as a snake will return to its hole (when all the other Muslim countries turn corrupt). So in a sense it is true, but in the end, those who follow the Qu'ran and the Sunnah will return to Medinah. You can read the real hadith @ www.sahihalbukhari.com

can't find there:-\
can u give the source of this hadis

 

[KAding]

Watch out when you post stuff like this, I have a very good history teacher!

1. I have no idea what corporatism is.
2. Islam is anti-nationalistic. The prophet (pbuh) even compared nationalism to biting your father's genitals.

Sorry, that is simply not true. Islam is indeed against all non-Islamic nationalism, but only because it has to compete with it. After all Islam has all the attributes of an nationalist ideology. Thats why Muslimsin the West always struggle with this dual loyalty towards their current state and their nation, that is the Ummah.

• A common identity and a sense of brotherhood
• Common myths about heritage and history
• A desire to self-rule (the Ummah)
• Exclusionairy, non-Muslims do not belong to the Muslim nation

What do you believe nationalism has that Islam has not?

3. Islam is slightly anachistic, as it urges obedience to Allah (swt) alone.

I am not convinced. Islam urges obedience to the state, especially if it's an Islamic state. The state in Islam is quite powerful, clearly it has the right to intervene in civil society and even private affairs in order to ensure the Islamic identity of society. Islam strongly believes in rules and regulation, otherwise it wouldn't be such a legalistic religion.

4. Islam is only anti-communist because communism is a man-made ideology, and because it promotes atheism. It shares many values with communism, such as equality between leaders and the people, giving to the needy, and wishing to unite all humanity. In fact, I would say Islam has much more in common with socialism and the left than fascism and the right.

To a certain extend I agree with that. Although, many would say that Communism and Fascism have much in common also, both being totalitarian ideologies that demand their population follow state doctrine.

Btw I disagree that Islam wants to unite all of humanity. It only wants to unite all Muslims. Islam also does not share the communist desire to eradicate private property and while it does promote solidarity, one must not forget that solidarity which the own nation is also one of the central tenets of Fascism. I have to say that so far, I have seen little solidarity of Muslims with oppressed non-Muslims, 99% of the attention on for example this forum goes to oppresion of 'us Muslims' by 'them non-Muslims'.

From how my history teacher explains fascism, he says that fascists believe that some people are physically or naturally better or inherently worth more than others. Thus, if someone believed that whites are inherently superior to blacks, or that disabled people are worth less than the rest of people, that is fascism. Neither Islam nor any other religion I know believes these things.

That is true I suppose. Although, to quote from another thread in the Comparative religion section: "you disbeliever, for you are one of the worst of living creatures"

That smacks of superiority thinking. And I must say, generally Islam does not speak with much respect about polytheists or atheists. But again, this is not based on race, so it is certainly not as bad.

Islam believes that good Muslims are ideologically and morally superior to others. Islam believes that all people and races are of equal value except by piety. An Arab king who was born a Muslim could end up with less in the hereafter than a female black convert who is disabled in such a way that she cannot pray properly, or vice-versa.

Very true again. Islam is not rascist like fascists generally were! A very big difference indeed!

Also, communism believes that it's true followers are ideologically superior to non-communists, and as we all know, communism is completely anti-fascist. I think there are quite a lot of similarities between communism and Islam. Both were started by a man who rose and awakened the masses against tyranny, both seek to unify humanity, both believe that all humans are physically equal, both have been mistreated and bad-mouthed by the West, and both have had followers who committed terrible atrocities in their name. But today people accept communists and hate

BTW, I'm not saying that communism is compatible with or better than Islam. One of communism's demands is an atheist state, which is considered totally unacceptable by Islam. Communism is also a man-made political ideology, whilst Islam is a divinely-relvealled theological ideology.

Conclusion: Bush should not be saying Islamic fascists, but Islamic commies!

You make a good argument. But nevertheless, Islam is anti-communist, both because of his acceptance of private property and it's rejection of and intolerance for atheism. Also, the way communists implemented equality was also different, it was generally highly feminist pushing women into the workforce. So I'm not sure Islamocommunists would be much better to designate that certain segment of Islamic political doctrine . What about Islamosemicommusemifascists? :X

 

[Fishman]

Sorry, that is simply not true. Islam is indeed against all non-Islamic nationalism, but only because it has to compete with it. After all Islam has all the attributes of an nationalist ideology. Thats why Muslimsin the West always struggle with this dual loyalty towards their current state and their nation, that is the Ummah.

• A common identity and a sense of brotherhood
  Certainly.
• Common myths about heritage and history
• A desire to self-rule (the Ummah)
• Exclusionairy, non-Muslims do not belong to the Muslim nation

What do you believe nationalism has that Islam has not?

Having feelings of 'nationalism' about the ummah is different to having feelings of nationalism for a country. If you say 'I will fight, struggle and die for England', you are not supporting an ideology, but you are supporting a place, something which I do not understand in the slightest. If I said 'I will fight, struggle and die for Islam', on the other hand, I am showing support for an ideology, something which I have always understood. I don't think there is anything nationalistic about expressing love for a group of people who believe the same thing as you.

• Exclusionairy, non-Muslims do not belong to the Muslim nation

Of course! A non-Muslim saying that they are part of the Ummah is like me (an Englishman) saying that I'm American!

I am not convinced. Islam urges obedience to the state, especially if it's an Islamic state. The state in Islam is quite powerful, clearly it has the right to intervene in civil society and even private affairs in order to ensure the Islamic identity of society. Islam strongly believes in rules and regulation, otherwise it wouldn't be such a legalistic religion.

Islam demands that you have complete obedience to Allah (swt). The government of the Islamic state cannot legally do anything except with Allah's permission. No new law can be made unless it follows what Allah (swt) has said, and no law that Allah (swt) has made can be removed except by Allah (swt)'s permission.

Islam does agree with rules and regulations, but does not agree with man-made ones, only with those made by Allah (swt).

Btw I disagree that Islam wants to unite all of humanity. It only wants to unite all Muslims. Islam also does not share the communist desire to eradicate private property and while it does promote solidarity, one must not forget that solidarity which the own nation is also one of the central tenets of Fascism. I have to say that so far, I have seen little solidarity of Muslims with oppressed non-Muslims, 99% of the attention on for example this forum goes to oppresion of 'us Muslims' by 'them non-Muslims'.

Islam wishes to unite all humans under it's belief system. So does every other ideology. Don't you feel like it would be better if everyone was united in athiesm, with no more religious wars? Didn't Marx think that the whole world must undergo a communist revolution and live united under communism? Don't animal rights proponents want everyone to believe that animals are equal to humans?

Although Islam does not believe in eradication of private property, it is against the right to 'use and abuse'. See that computer screen that you are looking at? That belongs to Allah (swt). See that house out of that window? That belongs to Allah (swt) too. See that body that your soul is in? That belongs to Allah (swt). He created all of these things, they all belong to him. He is just letting you use them.

According to the Islamic belief, everything on Earth belongs to Allah alone, and people are only entrusted with managing them, and live off the Earth and its products. This is contrary to the capitalist concept of ownership based on the Roman doctrine of "the right to use and abuse". It also lays foundation for ecology, as the creations of Allah (including plants and animals) should only be destroyed if absolutely necessary. This is similar to the concept of private possessions introduced by anarchist theorist Proudhon in his work "What is Property?".

That's from Wikipedia.

That is true I suppose. Although, to quote from another thread in the Comparative religion section: "you disbeliever, for you are one of the worst of living creatures"

That smacks of superiority thinking. And I must say, generally Islam does not speak with much respect about polytheists or atheists. But again, this is not based on race, so it is certainly not as bad.

As I was saying, Islam believes that good Muslims are ideologically (and thus morally) superior to other human beings, not inherently. If this disbeliever were to become a good believer, he would no longer be inferior.
This way of thinking is not confined to fascists either. Communists talk like this about capitalists, animal rights promoters talk like this about pro-testing organisations, and you probably talk like this about fascists and nazis.



Very true again. Islam is not rascist like fascists generally were! A very big difference indeed!

You make a good argument. But nevertheless, Islam is anti-communist, both because of his acceptance of private property and it's rejection of and intolerance for atheism. Also, the way communists implemented equality was also different, it was generally highly feminist pushing women into the workforce. So I'm not sure Islamocommunists would be much better to designate that certain segment of Islamic political doctrine . What about Islamosemicommusemifascists? :X

Islam is much more anti-fascist and anti-capitalist than anti-communist. There are a few important differences, such as the atitude to athiests, and a few small differences, such as the attitude to feminism, but Islam is much closer to communism than fascism.

 

[QuranStudy]

Nice post, brother Fishman. Reps to you.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Some good, thought provoking posts by KAding and Fishman.

Let's look at the supposed attributes of "fascist" Islam that haven't been addressed:

corporatism, authoritarianism, extreme nationalism, militarism, anti-anarchism, anti-communism and anti-liberalism. Isn't Islam all of these things?

Firstly, a reminder that these attributes are being listed as a way of persuading people that Islam constitutes some kind of fascism. Fascism, it seems to me, has become more of a term of abuse rather than a distinct ideology. These days, it would be a brave politician who sought to encourage support under a platform that called itself fascist. The term has consequently become rather meaningless, so any characterisation of Islam as being fascist is more likely to indicate some sort of bias in the speaker rather than being any sort of meaningful description.

Let's look at the charges though:

Corporatism

This term refers to a corporative state or system - one whose principal organising factor is that of a corporation. A corporation is, according to dictionary.com:

1. "A body that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members" or

2. "Such a body created for purposes of government" or

3. "A group of people combined into or acting as one body".

I don't know enough about Islam to answer to the charge given, but I would guess that (3) is a given, and that if such an organising principle was the sole criterion justifying the charge of corporatism, then Islam would fall into it (at least in its ideal state). Would the same be true of definitions (1) and (2)?

Authoritarianism

Once again, dictionary.com:

1. Characterized by or favoring absolute obedience to authority, as against individual freedom: an authoritarian regime.
2. Of, relating to, or expecting unquestioning obedience.

With its total reliance on the Qur'an and Sunnah for guidance and the answers to all of life's issues, I don't see how Islam can be described as anything other than an authoritarian system.

Militarism

1. Glorification of the ideals of a professional military class.
2. Predominance of the armed forces in the administration or policy of the state.
3. A policy in which military preparedness is of primary importance to a state.

(You guessed it - dictionary.com)

I'm really not sure about this one, so it'll be up to people who are better informed than me to answer the charge.

In Islamic culture, the mujahideen are given huge respect by many adherents, but are they a "professional military class"? I don't know the answer to that question, so I'll leave it open.

In an Islamic society, do the armed forces predominate? I would think not. Surely imams and scholars would be the primary motivating forces.

(3) is more of an issue. I'm sure that religious instruction would be of primary importance in an Islamic state, but given the amount of military orders given in the Qur'an, an outsider could be forgiven for thinking that this formed a major part of the religion.

Anti-Liberalism

First of all, here's liberalism according to dictionary.com:

1. The state or quality of being liberal.
2.
1. A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority.
2. often Liberalism The tenets or policies of a Liberal party.
3. An economic theory in favor of laissez-faire, the free market, and the gold standard.
4. Liberalism
1. A 19th-century Protestant movement that favored free intellectual inquiry, stressed the ethical and humanitarian content of Christianity, and de-emphasized dogmatic theology.
2. A 19th-century Roman Catholic movement that favored political democracy and ecclesiastical reform but was theologically orthodox.

And my own precis of the same:

In political terms, liberalism stands for individual autonomy, free intellectual inquiry and public consent to government laws; in economic terms, laissez-faire capitalism, and, in its (dominant) Protestant form, the rejection of dogmatism, whether religious or otherwise.

With the exception of public consent to government laws, is it not the case that Islam is opposed to all of these things?

We've witnessed a good debate on some of the charges levelled against "fascist" Islam - I'd be interested to hear what people have to say about these other ones.

Peace

 

[QuranStudy]

Islam is being degraded by ignorants, which is somewhat influential.

http://www.islamicboard.com/general-chat/27509-anybody-realize.html

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Islam is being degraded by ignorants, which is somewhat influential.

http://www.islamicboard.com/general-chat/27509-anybody-realize.html

What a good way to promote your thread! I hope you find the attention you seek.

If you'd like to respond to any of the (on-topic) points raised in my post, then feel free.

Peace

 

[QuranStudy]

My post did not point to your posts, but it is related to the topic. Othodox Islam is being destroyed due to outspoken ignorant atheists who find Islam as a means of attaining political popularity.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

My post did not point to your posts, but it is related to the topic. Othodox Islam is being destroyed due to outspoken ignorant atheists who find Islam as a means of attaining political popularity.

Seeing as atheists oppose all of Islam, rather than any particular sect of it, why do you think that they are responsible for the destruction of orthodox Islam?

Isn't that just a bit paranoid?

Peace

 

[QuranStudy]

Seeing as atheists oppose all of Islam, rather than any particular sect of it, why do you think that they are responsible for the destruction of orthodox Islam?

Isn't that just a bit paranoid?

Peace

Personally, I do have fear of atheists. I avoid them whenever I can (other than in forums).

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Honestly brother ive mentioned this before. Everyone is different. The way ur talking would make people think twice about Islam. Allah says in the Quran "invite to the way of your Lord with beautiful preaching". Im sure u know that. I have friends who are atheist and are open to knowing Islam. Allah guides who he wills.
Both of u should stop here and end it.
Peace

 

[i_m_tipu]

lot of off topic

now what will be answer

Orthodox Islam mean =?

 

[i_m_tipu]

lot of off topic

now what will be answer

Orthodox Islam mean =?

*bump*

 

[KAding]

Having feelings of 'nationalism' about the ummah is different to having feelings of nationalism for a country. If you say 'I will fight, struggle and die for England', you are not supporting an ideology, but you are supporting a place, something which I do not understand in the slightest. If I said 'I will fight, struggle and die for Islam', on the other hand, I am showing support for an ideology, something which I have always understood. I don't think there is anything nationalistic about expressing love for a group of people who believe the same thing as you.

Sorry, I just don't see the difference. People who fight for their nation don't do so just for the 'place', they obviously fight for an ideal. Americans will say they are fighting for "liberty and justice for all". A frenchman will say he is fighting for "liberté, égalité, fraternité". Usually they just fight for their way of life, for their family, but also their neightbours, because they feel a bond.

I just don't see how that is any different from a Muslim who says he will fight for Islam. Islam the nation is no different from other nations, all nations have a common identity and common ideals. Heck, religion is still very much part of what defines many nations across the globe. Perhaps what they are fighting for is more outspoken in Islam, but that only proves my point no? That Muslims feel they are 'a people' that need a state controlled by these same 'people'. That is the definition of nationalism. I don't believe it is any different emotionally or even rationally from say, American nationalism.

Christianity certainly does not share that with Islam, IMHO nor does Buddhism or frankly any other religion, except Judaism.

Of course! A non-Muslim saying that they are part of the Ummah is like me (an Englishman) saying that I'm American!

Yep, exactly.

Islam demands that you have complete obedience to Allah (swt). The government of the Islamic state cannot legally do anything except with Allah's permission. No new law can be made unless it follows what Allah (swt) has said, and no law that Allah (swt) has made can be removed except by Allah (swt)'s permission.

Islam does agree with rules and regulations, but does not agree with man-made ones, only with those made by Allah (swt).

I agree. But Islam is certianly not anarchistic, not even a bit. Islamic rules are there to be followed, not just in public life, but also in private affairs. It is my impression that most Muslims think it is the purpose of the Islamic state to ensure that Islamic law is followed by all Muslims. Any Islamic state for example will simply outlaw pork, although eating pork in private is clearly a personal choice. But that does not matter in an Islamic state. You are Muslim, thus you shall not eat it, if you do, even in in private, you will have to be punished. It does not say, eating pork is between you and God, no I have the strong impressions Muslims think it is the job of the state to eradicate these victim-less crimes. This is not anarchistic, this is the complete opposite. It is totalitarian.

to·tal·i·tar·i·an (tō-tăl'ĭ-târ'ē-ən) pronunciation
Of, relating to, being, or imposing a form of government in which the political authority exercises absolute and centralized control over all aspects of life

Islam wishes to unite all humans under it's belief system. So does every other ideology. Don't you feel like it would be better if everyone was united in athiesm, with no more religious wars? Didn't Marx think that the whole world must undergo a communist revolution and live united under communism? Don't animal rights proponents want everyone to believe that animals are equal to humans?

True. Islam is hardly different in this than many other ideologies. I would also want everyone in the world to live under liberal rule, although I must say I care little about what religion people follow.

But there is a difference between, say, Liberalism and Islam in this respect. While liberalism essentially says: "to each his own"; Islam says "Islam is the only way". As I just explained the all-encompassing nature of Islam, it's strong desire to influence even private affairs, makes it somewhat more dominant in the life of human beings. A world living in a liberal order would thus be much more pluralistic than one under Islamic order.

Although Islam does not believe in eradication of private property, it is against the right to 'use and abuse'. See that computer screen that you are looking at? That belongs to Allah (swt). See that house out of that window? That belongs to Allah (swt) too. See that body that your soul is in? That belongs to Allah (swt). He created all of these things, they all belong to him. He is just letting you use them.

That's from Wikipedia.

Good point. So as far as capitalism is concerned Islam seem very close to what social-democrats believe. That is: okay we can live with private property, but we have to abolish the execesses. Obviously, the logic is kinda different, but the policies would essentially be the same.

I really wonder how an Islamic state would manage a modern economy.

As I was saying, Islam believes that good Muslims are ideologically (and thus morally) superior to other human beings, not inherently. If this disbeliever were to become a good believer, he would no longer be inferior.
This way of thinking is not confined to fascists either. Communists talk like this about capitalists, animal rights promoters talk like this about pro-testing organisations, and you probably talk like this about fascists and nazis.

True. Although not all ideologies are as explicit in expressing their moral and ideological superiority.

Islam is much more anti-fascist and anti-capitalist than anti-communist. There are a few important differences, such as the atitude to athiests, and a few small differences, such as the attitude to feminism, but Islam is much closer to communism than fascism.

Well, Islam is unique. So it's safe to say it is neither communist nor fascist . I stand by my point though, that is shares one thing with both ideologies, namely its totalitarian nature. And as a religion it only shares with Judaism the idea that religion = nation.

 

[xlisax]

Islam is being degraded by ignorants

but not by the the Muslims who behead people, who walk into a school in Beslan Russia and murder over 300 children, or try to blow up 10 airliners, or fly 2 planes into buildings, or blowing up nightclubs in Bali, or kidnapping innocent people, or killing innocent people in London, or the way Muslims treat women, ect ect.

 

[north_malaysian]

but not by the the Muslims who behead people, who walk into a school in Beslan Russia and murder over 300 children, or try to blow up 10 airliners, or fly 2 planes into buildings, or blowing up nightclubs in Bali, or kidnapping innocent people, or killing innocent people in London, or the way Muslims treat women, ect ect.

those Muslims you mentioned are the ignorants of the exact teaching of Islam

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

but not by the the Muslims who behead people, who walk into a school in Beslan Russia and murder over 300 children, or try to blow up 10 airliners, or fly 2 planes into buildings, or blowing up nightclubs in Bali, or kidnapping innocent people, or killing innocent people in London

Islam isn't degraded by the actions of a few criminals anymore than any other religion is when their adherents commit crimes. The fact that such actions have absolutely nothing to do with Islam should be apparent from the unanimous condemnation they have recieved from Muslim scholars. Do yourself a favour and learn the truth about how terrorism is condemned by Islam.

or the way Muslims treat women, ect ect.

It is quite audacious to come to a forum with literally several thousand Muslim women and then inform them about how [you imagine] they're treated! Here's another link with many articles which shatter western myths about women in Islam:
http://www.load-islam.com/family_society.php?topic_id=14

 

[Cabdullahi]

I hate it when they say there are moderate muslims and extremists this is an act to create divide this is the way western government deal with strong groups that disagree the governments ideas
what they do is slowly bring an issue up publicize it and then they just sit back and watch both parties have a ago at each other this how they dismantled countries like somalia(US supporting the warlords)

Its a big tactical game