Salman Rushdie calls for 'Muslim Reformation'

  • Thread starter Thread starter LtTony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

LtTony

Guest
How is Salman Rushdie looked upon by the Muslims who post here and do those opinions reflect mainstream Islam? (I mean, for all I know, Rushdie could be a complete kook.)

Salman Rushdie calls for 'Muslim Reformation’


LONDON, England (CNN) – British author Salman Rushdie on Thursday called for a reform movement that would move Islam into the “modern age” to combat jihadists and closed Muslim communities in the West that produce disaffected youths wielding “lethal rucksacks.”

In 1989, Rushdie was forced into hiding when the late Iranian Islamic fundamentalist leader Ayatollah Khomeni issued a religious death decree for alleged blasphemy against Islam in Rushdie’s novel “The Satanic Verses.”

The Indian-born Rushdie made his statement in an essay published Thursday in The Times of London titled, “Muslims unite! A new Reformation will bring your faith into the modern era.”

“What is needed is a move beyond tradition – nothing less than a reform movement to bring the core concepts of Islam into the modern age, a Muslim Reformation to combat not only the jihadi ideologues but also the dusty, stifling seminaries of the traditionalists, throwing open the windows of the closed communities to let in much-needed fresh air,” Rushdie wrote.

Much of the article addresses the positions of Sir Iqbal Sacranie, head of the Muslim Council of Britain.

“It is high time, for starters, that Muslims were able to study the revelation of their religion as an event inside history, not supernaturally above it,” Rushdie wrote.

“It would be good to see governments and community leaders inside the Muslim world as well as outside it throwing their weight behind this idea, because creating and sustaining such a reform movement will require, above all, a new educational impetus whose results may take a generation to be felt, a new scholarship to replace the literalist dictates and narrow dogmatisms that plague present-day Muslim thinking,” he wrote.

According to Rushdie, Islam comprises millions who are “tolerant” and “civilized” but many others whose viewpoints are “antediluvian, who think of homosexuality as ungodly, who have little time for real freedom of expression, who routinely express anti-Semitic views, and who, in the case of the Muslim Diaspora, are – it has to be said – in many ways at odds with the cultures among which they live.”

Rushdie pointed to the English city of Leeds – where police have said three July 7 London suicide bombers grew up – as a place where “many traditional Muslims lead lives apart, inward-turned lives of near-segregation from the wider population.”

The July 7 bombs, on three Underground trains and a double-decker bus, killed 52 commuters as well as four bombers. It’s thought that the attackers carried their weapons in rucksacks.

“From such defensive, separated worlds some youngsters have indefensibly stepped across a moral line and taken up their lethal rucksacks,” Rushdie wrote. “The deeper alienations that lead to terrorism may have their roots in these young men’s objections to events in Iraq or elsewhere, but the closed communities of some traditional Western Muslims are places in which young men’s alienations can easily deepen.”

Rushdie wrote that “the insistence within Islam” that the Quran “is the infallible, uncreated word of God renders analytical scholarly discourse all but impossible” and the rigidity “plays right into the hands of the literalist Islamofascists.”

“If, however, [the Quran] were seen as a historical document, then it would be legitimate to reinterpret it to suit the new conditions of successive new ages. Laws made in the 7th century could finally give way to the needs of the 21st. The Islamic Reformation has to begin here, with an acceptance that all ideas, even sacred ones, must adapt to altered realities.”
-30-
 
I don’t think it was either. In a way, I consider it good that it wasn’t… given the fact that no one has actually did a VanGogh on him. I mean, it can indicate just how far on the fringe are these violent radicals.
 
ayatolla khomeini was a kook, and so is rushdie.

one statement from prophet muhammad is enough to show the error of rushdie’s views as expressed in this article (i.e., his call to leave traditionalist thinking): “i have left you upon the clear [path], its night is like its day. no one deviates from it, except that he is destroyed.” this clear path that prophet muhammad has left us muslims upon is his sunnah (sometimes translated as his traditions).
 
r.gonzales,

Does this mean that the world can never see a peace loving Islam unless Islam dominates the world? Does this mean that Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims will always have to look over their shoulders wondering when the next attack will come from some Muslim group? Will Islam never interpret itself as a religion content with showing examples of holy living and teaching but will forever resort to violence and bloodshed in order to dominate others?

Come Lord Jesus!

Dan L
 
Let me re-phrase (with no qualifiers) the question to keep the thread on track…

What level of support within Islam does Rushdie’s call for reformation have?

Jim
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
r.gonzales,

Does this mean that the world can never see a peace loving Islam unless Islam dominates the world? Does this mean that Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims will always have to look over their shoulders wondering when the next attack will come from some Muslim group? Will Islam never interpret itself as a religion content with showing examples of holy living and teaching but will forever resort to violence and bloodshed in order to dominate others?
does this mean that you don’t know much about islam, its teachings and the traditions of prophet muhammad? i think so…
 
Gonzales,

It could mean that, but it doesn’t. Your lack of an answer may well mean that you don’t know very much.

But how does the insult help answer the questions? Is Islam ready to take on the reforms outlined not only by Rushdie but by many American Muslims or aren’t they?

Dan L
 
islam as a religion is not in need of any reforms, the muslims, however, are another story…

Allah says in the Quran, “today I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you and I am pleased with islam as a religion.” you cannot reform something that is already perfected without marring its perfection. and just as the quote i posted from prophet muhammad says, “no one devaites from it (his traditions and teachings) except that he is destroyed.”

the muslims need to start learning it and practicing it as it was meant to be instead of following their desires and faulty understandings - as is the case with the vast majority of muslims today… this is the reform that needs to take place.

oh and btw, the original question posted by LtTony:
40.png
LtTony:
How is Salman Rushdie looked upon by the Muslims who post here and do those opinions reflect mainstream Islam? (I mean, for all I know, Rushdie could be a complete kook.)
was answered by my first post to this thread… :rolleyes:
 
40.png
r.gonzales:
does this mean that you don’t know much about islam, its teachings and the traditions of prophet muhammad? i think so…
hmmm…polite

lets see those traditions include, spitting thrice on your left side, to seek refuge from the devil whilst praying

sounds perfectly logical to me!

Book 029, Number 5613:
Code:
Abu Salama reported: I used to see dreams (and was so much perturbed) that I began to quiver and have temperature, but did not cover myself with a mantle. I met Abu Qatada and made a mention of that to him. He said: I heard Allali's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A good vision comes from Allah and a (bad) dream (hulm) from devil. So when one of. you sees a bad dream (hulm) which he does not like, he should spit on his left side thrice and seek refuge with Allah from its evil; then it will not harm him.
Book 029, Number 5615:
Code:
This hadith has been reported on the authority of Zuhri with the same chain of transmitters, but it does not contain the words:" I felt disturbed because of that," and there is an addition of these words in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Yunus:" Then spit thrice on the left side when you get up from sleep."
Book 029, Number 5616:
Code:
Abu Qatada reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A good vision is from Allah and a bad dream (hulm) is from the satan; so if one of you sees anything (in a dream which he dislikes, he should spit on his left side thrice and seek refuge with Allah from its evil, and then it will never harm him. Abu Salama said: I used to see dreams weighing more heavily upon me than a mountain; but since I heard this hadith I don't care for it (its burden).
Book 029, Number 5618:
Code:
Abu Qatada reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The good vision are from Allah and the evil dreams are from the satan. If one sees a dream which one does not like, one should spit on one's left side and seek the refuge of Allah from the satan; it will not do one any harm, and one should not disclose it to anyone and if one sees a good vision one should feel pleased but should not disclose it to anyone but whom one loves.
well the list goes on and on over here

islam.us/hadith/muslim/029.smt.html

I think the prophet had just listened to too many old wives tales

😃 😃 😃
 
40.png
r.gonzales:
how nice of you to notice [/sarcasm] 👍
If you spill salt you’re supposed to throw it over your left shoulder immediately. This is because when you spill it the devil appears above your left shoulder and you’re suppposed to blind him with the salt. If you don’t do this then the devil takes you over.

eeps…sorry that isnt mohammed its a real old wives tale…shocking similarities though ! say what? 😃 😃 😃
 
40.png
LtTony:
What level of support within Islam does Rushdie’s call for reformation have?
None. He is basically asking Muslims to stop being Muslims and become secular, like much of Christendom.
 
Why are the Sufis hated so much by the Wahhabists? Do the Wahhabists really represent traditional Islam or are they an enemy of Islam as many of those who call themselves traditionalists suggest?

As far as claiming that Islam is the perfect religion because someone said it was…well, many people claim many things. History has shown that those who claim perfection are perfect. They are perfectly accurate but not as they think. Every movement that claims itself to be perfect is absolutely wrong.

Dan Lauffer
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
Why are the Sufis hated so much by the Wahhabists? Do the Wahhabists really represent traditional Islam or are they an enemy of Islam as many of those who call themselves traditionalists suggest?
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
Why are the Sufis hated so much by the Wahhabists?
Probably because they view Sufis (which are not properly a sect of Islam) as innovators in their mystical approach to religion.
Do the Wahhabists really represent traditional Islam or are they an enemy of Islam as many of those who call themselves traditionalists suggest?
Wahhabism is not a sect of Islam, but more properly a puritannical reform movement. See, Wahhabism arose in the 1700’s in response to a time when Islam had become ‘polluted’ by popular innovations into Islam’s theology that societies had unwittingly allowed to creep into the faith over the centuries. These traditions were innovative because they weren’t scripturally supported practices from either the Qur’an or Hadith, and in fact, many of them constituted what Islam labels as disbelief.

Wahhabism carried out this purge with a strict, by-the-book, literalist doctrine, that took a hard line against all these things that were threatening to destroy the sould of Islam. The purge was enormously successful, and Wahhabis gain credit for returning Islam back to its true theology.

However, after this was completed, the Wahhabis’ hardline fervor and literalism didn’t cease. They helped to swing Islam’s pendulum from the left back to the center, but the Wahhabis’ own pendulum never stopped swinging to the right. Consequently, by the mid-20th century or so, their own conservative theology, which hated all things non-Muslim, and which served them so well early on in their goals of reform, now grew reactionary, and began to be extreme. Their theology grew to be really closed-minded and very rigid, and swung so far to the right, that it itself became innovative (ostensibly falling victim to that which they started fighting against)–this time from the right side of the scale, instead of the left.

That’s basically where they are today. Do the Wahhabis need reform? Absolutely, they must swing their theology back from the extreme right to the center, where the rest of the Muslim world is today, and where it would have been way left of, and way lost, if it had not been for them. But they are not terrorists, and nor do most of them condone what Bin Laden and his ilk has done.
 
“islam as a religion is not in need of any reforms, the muslims, however, are another story…”

I appreciate that, because I think the same thought can be applied to Christianity and Christians.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top