The two faces of ‘Muslim’ Modernists

[Zibago]

you are right though @T-72M1 must correct himself and not call it "islamist thought" but "corrupted understanding of islam".

and towards the base question i will quote from my earlier post in page 1 :



okay, it's tv time... i'll be back in 20 mins.

To put Libya under their influence they burned it to the ground and now they dont like the end result oh wow

 

[Jaanbaz]

Muslim societies are going through same period Europe went through before seperation of church and state the reaction what we see here will continue for a few more decades
Keep the kahrij ul Islam fatwas coming

Its a process that will eventually happen, the Islamic clergy is shaking in their pants while they witness their grip on their societies loose. Rise of extremism is the direct fault of corrupt religious clergies which for centuries has done nothing but produced brain dead Islamists(including the OP). By not allowing freedom of expression and thought, they have reduced the Islamic world to a laughing stock. The biggest enemy to Islam are not the Jews, Hindus or the evil Qadianis, its the Mullahs.

 

[v9s]

Fully concur on this one. You're either one or the other. There is no middle-ground. The books, scriptures and other religious teachings clearly state how a person ought to lead his life. That applies to all religions and systems we can follow. You cannot cherry pick to add and remove certain aspects to your liking. The whole concept becomes diluted and altered.

The problem is he defines modernity as rationalism.

 

[T-72M1]

yes that,s interesting .In the west people don,t like liberals and call them libtards.

why just the west, the non muslim world is vast, India is also a secular democracy and people are getting fed up with the left liberal madness here too.

true liberalism has been hijacked by nutjobs, I suppose one could make the same argument about Islam too.

Just because they think not every muslim is a terrorist and promote tolerance.Conservatives definitely think different.

that's another big fail, paint all right leaning folk in the non muslim world to be bigots and Islamophobes who think "every muslim is a terrorist"

for example in India, a recent poll showed that most of the people, and by a wide margin too, who supported decriminalizing LGBT were actually BJP voters, think about that.

the press here has also described the leftist 'freebie handing and minority pandering' parties as "aggressively" secular when compared to the BJP, who are the true secularists. In India, its only the religious far right reactionary groups and the left supported religious abrahamic minorities who will oppose secularism, an overwhelming majority will be fine with getting rid of religion from laws.

but this whole liberal vs conservative debate must always be viewed in context, its different when its in an Islamic country as opposed to a non Islamic secular country, west or east.

 

[jamahir]

I strongly concur with secular nationalists views. Several of my blogged points on the topic:


Why do we fear Secularism?

By Havi Z Sultan

Many Pakistanis have a built in aversion towards the word secularism while taking an excessive pride in the Islamic Republic attached to Pakistan’s name. Despite the fact that many Pakistanis fail to follow the tenets of Islam and the word Islamic Republic makes a mockery of the meaning it remains a source of excessive pride. Scholars claim that today the country is very far from Islam because very few people in Pakistan really follow the tenets of Islam however very few of them can answer the question whether it's worthwhile to have an “Islamic Republic” only in name. However the real question is do we really have anything to fear from Secularism in the first place?

According to its dictionary meaning Secularism refers to the equal treatment of each and every religious group within the Nation and to the idea that religion should have a smaller role in politics and decision making because when it has too large a role people spend their time over their own separate interpretations of religion rather than Nation building and the tasks at hand.

Many Muslims in Pakistan fear secularism because they have a perverse idea of the concept fearing Islam will be diminished with Secularism. This is completely untrue. Pakistan’s Islamic identity will not be lost with a Secular system.

Will Secularism decrease Islam’s value in Pakistan?

Many Pakistanis continually fear that secularism will decrease Islam's value or worse will eliminate Islam from Pakistan.

The fact is no one is pushing Islam away and with 95% of the population of Pakistan being proud and extremely pious Muslims for the most part it is impossible to even try. Islam will still be practiced by the majority of people as it is being practiced today without any hindrance whatsoever. The only difference perhaps will be that religion will be a personal matter. A person who does not follow Islam devotedly or a follower of a different religion or a sect of Islam will not be persecuted for having his own separate beliefs.

If seen in such a light Secularism is nothing to be feared. We can be proud Muslims and defend Islam as much or even more with a secular constitution as we can by labelling a country ruled by very corrupt people with barely any link to Islam an “Islamic Republic”. An Islamic Republic where the rulers themselves have no link to Islam and others often use religion as a tool to fulfill their personal interests.

The fact is that a country that calls itself an Islamic Republic should have a constitution, laws (that are implemented instead of being cleared by people who can pay bribes), rules and regulations based on the tenets of Islam. A country lacking the Islamic economic and judicial system based on the teachings of the Prophet can't be an Islamic Republic. It's not that Pakistanis haven't tried. If proof is needed one needs to look at Zia's Islamicization. Pakistanis have tried to impose Islam in letter and spirit for 60 years and failed. It's more than time we revised our direction.

The tenets of Islam support Secularism & harmony

“To you be your Faith, and to me mine.”

Ayat 109:6

During the rule of Ali Ibn Abi Talib the fourth Caliph of Islam a Jew stole a shield that belonged to the Caliph and claimed that it was his. He was brought to the court of Ali to settle the dispute. However due to lack of proof and according to Islamic law the Jew was allowed to keep the shield as Hazrat Ali could not prove he owned the shield. This was a verdict going against a Muslim Caliph in his own court. However Hazrat Ali accepted the decision calmly. On the other hand the Jew was dumbfounded as he had indeed stolen the shield. He was quick to embrace Islam and declared that he had lied in front of the entire court.

This was one example of how Islam spread to become one of the largest religions in the World and won hearts and minds. It was due to the insight and tolerance our ancestors had that we got to where we are, that Cordova and Baghdad became centres of learning and Islam spread from the corners of Spain to the boundaries of the far east.

Unfortunately many people in Pakistan do not understand that human rights and the equal treatment of all individuals in the country is more important in Islam rather than a notion of Islamic pride and superiority where labelling a country an “Islamic Republic” is deemed necessary. This pride comes from a past that our ancestors built with policies that we fail to understand today.

The Quaid E Azams Principles

“In any case Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State — to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non- Muslims — Hindus, Christians, and Parsis — but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.”

Quaid E Azam, February 1948

The above quote is the greatest proof that Quaid E Azam did not want a state that was built solely on the basis of religion. Unfortunately since his death the constitution has been changed to suit every new leader that came and the title “Islamic Republic” untrue it may be has been added along with many laws that are completely out of line with Quaid E Azam's original ideas for Pakistan. If we look closely at many of his speeches we will notice Quaid E Azam was a staunch supporter of secularism with an added focus on Islamic thought and ideology. Therefore until he was alive the Islamic Republic was never attached to the countries name. That happened when Ayub Khan came into power.

Other speeches by Quaid E Azam that clearly supported the message of peace, harmony and equality between all groups whether they are ethnic or religious are stated below.

‘We are starting with the fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one state. No matter what is his colour, caste or creed is first, second and last a citizen of this state with equal rights, privileges and obligations….”

“In due course of time Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims – not in a religious sense for that is the personal faith of an individual- but in a political sense as citizens of one state.”

“[If you] work together in a spirit that everyone of you no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this state with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.”

11 August 1947

“The tenets of Islam enjoin on every Musalman to give protection to his neighbours and to the Minorities regardless of caste and creed. We must make it a matter of our honor and prestige to create sense of security amongst them.”

30th October 1947

Clearly Quaid E Azam understood that a Nation could not be built until differences were eliminated and people saws themselves as equal members of a single society regardless of faith or ethnicity.

Perhaps if that spirit was alive today Pakistan would not be afflicted with minor issues and infighting over Shia-Sunni, Barelvi-Deobandi, Wahabi-Mainstream Muslim, and the principles of personal freedom would have given way to building a Nation that was the most glorious one in history. Unfortunately this destiny still awaits the Pakistani race which dreams for justice and equality. Many conservatives continuously deny Quaid E Azam wanted a secular country believing that such a concept is against Islam when it is not. Perhaps they fear for their own interests but Quaid E Azam did indeed want a Nation that was Secular or Socialist and gave equal opportunity to all inhabitants.

People try to deny this but the fact is, being Muslims this is not something for us to be ashamed of but something glorious. That a leader who did so much for Muslims, gave them a new homeland and independence, still understood the morals of our ancestors because of whom Islam to spread is truly remarkable.

Issues caused by the misinterpretation of Islamic Law & resources used to contain them

The fact that laws created to safeguard Islam are being used for the benefit and self interest of bad people does not do anything great for the image of Islam. A clear example is the blasphemy law, a law that makes an insult to Islam, the Prophet or the Quran illegal and punishable by death. This law has been used against minorities for a long time. However Muslims have fallen victims to this law as well.

An example of how this law is misused was the case of Mohammad Imran who was arrested in Faisalabad for blasphemy on the 28th of October 2007. He was falsely blamed because of a personal argument. After being arrested he was first tortured by the police, then the inmates and later he was placed in solitary confinement without anyone looking after his injuries. He was only released in April 2009 after being declared innocent.

Another example was the framing of Akhtar Hammed Khan, an 81 year old writer and sociologist by business interests and authorities unwilling to let his development work take place in Orangi, Karachi. He had launched a development project on the behalf of the people of Orangi. His project offering real estate loans on good terms and work to improve the condition of women through education, and access to employment and family planning was not well-liked by these authorities. Thus they decided to book him on false charges with the police under the blasphemy laws. He was later released due to inadequate evidence but the case proves how the law is being used to settle personal scores and disputes.

Minorities have many such stories to share as 60% of all victims who are framed under this law are Non Muslims. The law has become a tool for fanatics, murderers and people seeking to settle personal scores yet the law still hasn’t been repealed due to the fact that militants have some influence on governance. Land disputes or personal quarrels are by far the main reason for people to be booked under this law.

Another such law is the Hudood Ordinance where in a case of Rape four witnesses are required to confirm that a rape has taken place. This is practically impossible. However the woman who complains that a rape has taken place is often booked for being with another man while the culprits of the rape run free.

Therefore the Hudood Law became a tool in the hands of rapists and today any woman can be raped. But when she goes to the police to get justice the Hudood Law can be used to frame her because by claiming that she has been raped she also admits that she has been with another man and committed Zinah. Some figures claim that in the year 1979 there were only 70 women in Pakistani jails. A decade later, in 1988, this figure had risen to 6000 and over 80% of the women in prison were there because of these laws. It is said many more women do not even report rapes in fear of being persecuted due to this law.

Is Pakistan really Islamic?

Better to have a Secular constitution than Islam only in name

There is no doubt that our leaders found us a land that was a safe haven for Muslims and gave us freedom to make our own decisions without the fear of suffering biased treatment for the faith we followed. However the question today is how much Islam is being followed in the country?

For instance the Quran states “Keep yourselves away from bribes because it is kufr and one who receives them will never smell the scent of paradise”. The fact is in Pakistan taking and giving bribes is so common that even a noble person can hardly live without paying one. Some honourable folk still struggle on but their lives are much more difficult. If a person has money it is a possibility he has given or taken a bribe at least once. Unfortunately the entire bureaucracy is at the forefront of this rot. Justice is sold and witnesses can be bought.

On the other hand while drinking is not allowed and a license is required in order to drink in Pakistan, people who want to drink do so with impunity and with no fear of being punished. The law is not even being implemented while if a drunkard happens to get caught a simple bribe wins back the persons freedom. On the other hand while adultery is considered a punishable law under the constitution it is practiced by many people in the country without any fear of punishment. The same goes for many other laws.It is virtually impossible to implement these laws and it costs resources to do so.

The fact is many laws related to Islam exist in Pakistan but they are there only in name. They are either being misused by people for their own interests or they are not implemented and people who commit heinous crimes are allowed to go free because of them, without any fear of punishment while the innocent are framed.

The real question for Pakistan today is whether it is sensible to have a false, broken and corrupt “Islamic Republic” in name or is it better to have a secular constitution that guarantees freedom to everyone and ensures that there are no vaguely addressed laws that make a mockery of our religion and are misused for the benefit of a few criminals.

--------------------------------

Lets note that the purpose of Pakistan to be a secular state was highjacked from the very beggining. Jinnah had made statement after statement and his 11 august speech is proof that he envisioned a secular Pakistan. Throughout the beggining of Islamic thought there have been scholars who have promoted secularism and the Rashidun Caliphate since it was dealing with a huge population of conquered non muslims in the beginning maintained a secular system. Ibn Rushd, Pir Rokhan and Daral Shikoh later supported it as did the Muta'zilite movement. We need to open up to the idea of secularism in Pakistan. At least talk about it if not adopt it.

Lets note despite the superiority of the secular system no one can shove secularism down the mouth of our arrogant conceited people who are led by mullahs. This change has to come from within. Also being anti Islamic is non synonymous with being a secularist. We just want what original muslims wanted. Freedom of all.

Let us remember that we are from a religion where Ali's own gave back a shield to a jew he had stolen and Umar RA refused to pray at a church in fear it would be turned into a mosque by his supporters in the future. It also highlights our duty to protect minorities.

wonderful writing, havi bhai... precise.

do think of posting this as a thread.

To them a girl wanting equal inheritence is a bigger threat than terrorism,illiteracy and poverty

exactly.

reminds me of the shahbano case in india :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohd._Ahmed_Khan_v._Shah_Bano_Begum

To put Libya under their influence they burned it to the ground and now they dont like the end result oh wow

yes.

the city of sirte in 2011 was called 'the new stalingrad' via the nato destruction of it and the resolute defense of it by the green fighters ( jamahiri fighters ).

nevertheless, the greens are taking back towns and outposts one at a time and this is why nato wants to send contingent to libya... i will post vids and photos of these current events soon.

This thread reminds me of another closed thread
https://defence.pk/threads/main-bhi-kafir-tu-bhi-kafir.315806/
@jamahir @SecularNationalist

yes, good re-post and it needs wider circulation.

locally, i have forwarded the poem to my friend with whom i discuss politics and all, and asked him to forward, considering the times we are living in india now.

@Luffy 500 , have a read.

 

[haviZsultan]

wonderful writing, havi bhai... precise.

do think of posting this as a thread.



exactly.

reminds me of the shahbano case in india :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohd._Ahmed_Khan_v._Shah_Bano_Begum



yes.

the city of sirte in 2011 was called 'the new stalingrad' via the nato destruction of it and the resolute defense of it by the green fighters ( jamahiri fighters ).

nevertheless, the greens are taking back towns and outposts one at a time and this is why nato wants to send contingent to libya... i will post vids and photos of these current events soon.



this needs wider circulation.

locally, i forwarded the poem to my friend and asked him to forward, considering the times we are living in india now.

@Luffy 500 , have a read.

Its already posted as a thread. I dont want to repeat. Thanks for liking the article though.

 

[Zibago]

Its a process that will eventually happen, the Islamic clergy is shaking in their pants while they witness their grip on their societies loose. Rise of extremism is the direct fault of corrupt religious clergies which for centuries has done nothing but produced brain dead Islamists(including the OP). By not allowing freedom of expression and thought, they have reduced the Islamic world to a laughing stock. The biggest enemy to Islam are not the Jews, Hindus or the evil Qadianis, its the Mullahs.

Machli marney sey pehley pharpharati hay

 

[haviZsultan]

Its a process that will eventually happen, the Islamic clergy is shaking in their pants while they witness their grip on their societies loose. Rise of extremism is the direct fault of corrupt religious clergies which for centuries has done nothing but produced brain dead Islamists(including the OP). By not allowing freedom of expression and thought, they have reduced the Islamic world to a laughing stock. The biggest enemy to Islam are not the Jews, Hindus or the evil Qadianis, its the Mullahs.

Jaanbaz as an Ahmedi you are my brother. No mullah will ever dictate to me who I should respect or not. What is happening in Pakistan is brutality against my brotherly minority communities who Jinnah told us to protect. Most specifically Zafarullah Khan was an Ahmedi and Jinnah called him a son. You are my countryman and I am willing to die protecting you. Long live unity in Pakistan and down with the mullahs.

 

[livingdead]

What is a "Muslim" modernist? The concept itself is oxymoronic same as a "Hindu" modernist or anything else. Either you are a Muslim or you are "Modern" in the true sense accepting Rationality as the One and Only value by which you live your life. The moment you are trying top fit your religion within the concept of "Modernity", you are becoming a hybrid and a hypocrite at best. You are keeping your feet on two boats which are bound to go on separate ways and we all know how that ends!

Since most religions including islam has multiple interpretations(even though many muslims will disagree because it means there is ambiguity in God's message), one can use modernness as a parameter in the spectrum, with extremely literal interpretation on one end to extremely liberal/modern(that is in tune with modern sensibility) interpretation on other.

This suits better however for religions which does not have any central 'definitely true' dogma, like hinduism.

 

[Zabaniyah]

'Modernist' Muslims? The author appears to have been been living in a cave for too long. Though, the one thing about pro-Western Muslims is that appeasing to Western interests had failed miserably in the past. What is important is that it serves the interests of the state in question, and no one else (no matter how powerful the opposing forces may be). Those Muslim conservatives ought to get that memo too if ye know what I mean!

Secularism does not automatically translate into anti-religion. It simply ensures that the rights and security of all the country's citizens regardless of caste or creed. And it'd be better for any Muslim-majority state to do it. I mean, the stigma associated with being a Muslim these days is just cruel, really. It's dehumanizing. I feel violated already. Those vested non-Muslim quarters who may want to threaten any individual Muslim nation just because it is Muslim should not be given an ounce of room to maneuver their malice.

If there's any ideology that is anti-religion, that would be Communism which by the way is a failed ideology that ended up becoming a laughing stock.

So @Luffy 500 those 'scholars' won't give you any enlightenment. I mean just think about it, Bangladesh under its current problems is like a long lost sick pup that nobody wants, not even the so-called 'Ummah'.

 

[Luffy 500]

this kind of interpretation is had become much hurdle for the development of Muslim society.


This is despite the fact that Terrorists too claim they have a valid Islamic opinion, and that it should be respected under the Islamic right of difference of opinion. The Terrorists argue that no one can condemn a Muslim out of the fold of Islam for their actions, nor their mere ‘difference of opinion’. In response, Terrorists call those Liberal ‘Muslims’ traitors and apostates.

my personal experiences dictates me, it was those radicalist Muslim who usually branded the non-believer of their teaching as Kafr, not vice versa as the liberalist Muslim usually get busy with their own work and life instead getting busybody by teaching other on how they should acts and behave according to their own "teaching".

Understandably, Muslims respond by declaring Modernist beliefs to be not Islamic, and clear kufr (rejection of truth). The arguments and ideas of Modernists are rejected by Muslims, as not from Islam, and if it weren’t for the possibility of ignorance in this current declined state of the Muslim world – the Modernists themselves would rightly deserve to be denounced as outside the fold of Islam.


which Muslim is deserved to declared other as clear kufr? the judgment of other belief is the prerogative act of Allah, not by human. Are the one who working out themselves with five principal of Islam, like praying to the God, fasting, paying their zakat, getting pilgrimage and other deeds, and is only have open mind and liberal thought is can be declared as Kafr?

No offense but why do u even want to call yourself a muslim in the first place? If u believe in liberalism and desperately identify yourself with western worldview and philosophy why even bother abt islam? DO u realize that Liberalism is a western ideology , the religion of post-christianity west that was born out of Europe's tussel with catholic church NOT islam and muslim. Liberalism is an alien european ideology formulated in an alien europe at a particular time based on socio-political context unique to Europe. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ISLAM. U trying to mold islam into liberalism force muslims to accept your views shows how intellectually disingenuous u are. And yes liberals in the muslim world are desperate to mold islam to their liking and since they run the state they resort to tyranny and barrel of the gun to hold on to power and maintain the sttus quo granted to them by their colonial masters. Anyone challenging the post-colonial status quo is labeled a extremist at best and terrorist at worse.

Muslim societies are going through same period Europe went through before seperation of church and state the reaction what we see here will continue for a few more decades
Keep the kahrij ul Islam fatwas coming

This post shows how intellectually ignorant and shallow your thinking is. U have no understanding of liberalism nor Islam. U don't like islam since if doesn't suit your desires but liberalism allows your to follow your desires without bounds . Well that's your personal belief. Problem starts when u claim to be a muslim and want to mold islam and the society to your liking.

Now the reason i say u are intellectually shallow is bcs you are mesmerized by the west to such an extent and so intellectually colonized that u can't even comprehend questioning western ideas but accept them readily mind , body and sole. Since you never bothered abt knowing Islam you are ludicrously conflating Islam with catholic Christianity and superimposing an european socio-political narrative on the muslim world and expecting it to pass in due time? U realize how bizarre and ludicrous that is? There is no concept of separation of church and state in islam. Basic principles of islam are crystal clear with no dispute. Apart from liberals who don't believe in islam , there is not much contention abt the basic principles of islam among various islamic schools of thought. The Quran is preserved and the sunnah is preserved and Allah(swt) has promised the protection of Quran and sunnah. 90% of the muslim world is sunni. The 4 schools of thought that represents 99.99% of the sunni world are unanimous in aqeeda and have minute differences in fiqh. Even the sufis don't differ in issues liberals and the western world have problems with eg. inheritance laws, hudud laws, gender roles etc. The ideas and values islam promotes are so different from all other ideologies that u cease to be a muslim if you accept any other ism and ideology. Islam is nothing like christianity. Islam is a divinely-revealed religion, and it is revelation (wahy) from Allaah, may He be exalted. Every attempt by non-muslims to distort and destroy islam has ended in failure because Allaah has guaranteed to protect the foundations of this religion, namely the Qur’aan and Sunnah.


Btw this is not the first time that the muslim world had to face intellectually colonized people among its ranks. You know the philosophers in the 8th century were also intellectually colonized by greek philosophy so much so that they attempted to reconcile and mold islam to greek philosophy letter to letter. Greek philosophy gave rise to the mu'tazilah and jahamis who were an insignificant minority among minorities ( jahamis were thought to be not more than 40 ) and resorted to violence to promote their very liberal views (the western academics adore mu'tazilah and jahamis philosophy if u don't know). Now how many people remember these groups? General muslims don't even know who these groups are. They don't even exist and are not even foot notes in the pages of history but orthodoxy remains and is flourishing. Muslims know the names of abu hanifa , shafi , malik and ahmed ibn hanbal and have tremendous respects for these great scholars of orthodoxy.
@haviZsultan do u know what the mutazilahs promoted? Even a lay non-muslim who have a kindergarten level understanding of islam would call their philosophy heretical and unislamic. But the mutazilahs were far intellectually superior to you liberals. At least they bickered and thought abt theology , heaven and hell , concept of salvation etc etc much more important issues than what today's liberals fight for that is the right for women to wear bikinis and men to have extramarital affair. U liberals are a joke.

you are of course correct but i will add that the muslim community has had cycles of what you said like during the "golden age of islam" and in those times the hashisheen, who were the taliban of then, brought the illegal priest back into limelight and as with any mullah stream in our times, the hashisheen too collaborated with the crusaders against muslim leaders ( like salahaddin ayyubi ).

the priest class doesn't exist in islam and is one of the things islam stands against.

this was my thread from january 2016 that spoke of the modern socialist movements that muslims and muslim-majority countries/regions were involved in :

https://defence.pk/threads/the-comf...teryears-and-the-pious-muslims-of-now.417825/

this must be revived.

@Luffy 500 , what say you about zibago's text plus my addition??

and luffy, you are yet to answer to my long reply to you in the other thread.



islam was modern and sophisticated when it came about 1400 years ago because it was a early socialist movement... islam is more sophisticated even now in the socio-economic understanding than any non-socialist country in the world.

read my thread from december 2015 on how islam brought rights to the ladies of the world and how the modern indian civil laws derive from islam :

https://defence.pk/threads/prenups-in-indian-weddings-and-islam.413278/

however, the future of islam is melding into modernized marxian-jamahiriyan communism.

I have a hard time accepting that u actually believe in the crap u write. U should spend your time studying islam rather than loitering in rag tag socialist party 1 room headquarters. Its abt time u come t terms with reality that socialism is a dead ideology that couldn't even stand the test of time of 50 years. Gaddafi jamahiriya jets and socialist palaces survived on oil money btw.

 

[IndusisHindu]

The problem is he defines modernity as rationalism.

Rationalism forms a very important part of the European post- Enlightenment ideals that came to define "Modernity" in later times (hegemonic "modernity" of the West). Its like how science has assumed such a sacrosanct position in our "modern" world just because it claims to be "rational". Always keep in mind that there is no one true version of "rationality" or "modernity". What seems "rational" to you can be "irrational" for me. Same is true for "modernity". And how one defines these things is influenced by the culture in which the person is brought up and which he begins to represent (often unconsciously).

Since most religions including islam has multiple interpretations(even though many muslims will disagree because it means there is ambiguity in God's message), one can use modernness as a parameter in the spectrum, with extremely literal interpretation on one end to extremely liberal/modern(that is in tune with modern sensibility) interpretation on other.

This suits better however for religions which does not have any central 'definitely true' dogma, like hinduism.

I believe every religion can be interpreted according to one's wishes. It's like history where one chooses a particular event, defines it to suit as one's ideology and then claim its universality, which ultimately results in the conflict.

 

[EasyNow]

I love the way these Internet islamic intellectuals are so quick to point fingers at liberals for trying to change Muslim society but don't have a word to say about kharji radicals that infest Muslim society and are corrupting it's very heart.

When mullahs won't muzzle other mullahs, who is going to stop them?

It's interesting that once these people have defeated liberals and moderates in their society, they turn on each other in a heartbeat. Witness nusra vs aq vs taliban vs ttp in our age. Mullahs are only good for spreading hate.

 

[Khan_patriot]

I don't give a damn about what anyone says about religion, be it a modernist, a conservative, or an extremist. At the end of the day it's just some random guy trying to shove their opinions down your throats.

Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.
-Al Quran

 

[jamahir]

I have a hard time accepting that u actually believe in the crap u write. U should spend your time studying islam rather than loitering in rag tag socialist party 1 room headquarters.

do you drink anything other than tableeghi brand brain-wash??

tell me, why do nato leaders hate socialist muslims like me, or the non-committed-socialist sensible ones like @Zibago and @haviZsultan ( did you read havi's article?? ), and so greatly love tableeghis like yourself?? so crusaders and capitalist-imperialists like sarkozy and cameron are now deciders of who is muslim and who is not??

you should recognize your enslavement to nato... in the old days people of your tendency used to be called "cia agent"... recognize your enslavement and release thyself.

U should spend your time studying islam rather than loitering in rag tag socialist party 1 room headquarters.

in the jamahiri movement, as with any socialist or progressive movement, a single adopter of the ideology is the first revolutionary committee in his/her region, so there is no problem at all in you saying what you did.

besides, you don't know the entirety of my previous or current socialist involvements and agendas.

Its abt time u come t terms with reality that socialism is a dead ideology that couldn't even stand the test of time of 50 years. Gaddafi jamahiriya jets and socialist palaces survived on oil money btw.

you know, you sound exactly like the sanghi members on pdf.

by the way, next year will be 100 years of the russian revolution.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Its a process that will eventually happen, the Islamic clergy is shaking in their pants while they witness their grip on their societies loose. Rise of extremism is the direct fault of corrupt religious clergies which for centuries has done nothing but produced brain dead Islamists(including the OP). By not allowing freedom of expression and thought, they have reduced the Islamic world to a laughing stock. The biggest enemy to Islam are not the Jews, Hindus or the evil Qadianis, its the Mullahs.

False logic. Unlike Roman Catholism and other religions, for the last 100 years the Muslim clergy generally speaking don't have any real power or influence. If they did, they would be ruling Pakistan. Their role is blown way out of proportion.