MANIFESTO for Islamic Reform
-
Peace All,
The message is good, it calls for unity. The only problem I have is that it is not very universal although the book from the Most High is, it still promotes 'Islam' with a capital I. I know that a few people refer to the secterians faith as Hislam but either way Islam is the label used. Why try so hard to defend the label?! Why are names even important?!
Language is very important I think, key priniciples should be outlined and all this 'Islam' and 'Quran' is unnecessary, I know that it won't be altered but this is my opinion, these are all just names created and loved, its just unneccesary.
The most important thing is to just promote the search for knowledge and peace, to promote this glorious book we have too. Maybe I am being too fussy but I personally feel that the language could be better.
Nural
-
Dear Nural Amin,
I quite agree on the point concerning labels. We still fall into the trap of highlighting something we say are not labels with a capital letter, and in the next instance we call out and say that ?this is not a proper name? it just means...................
We should perhaps drop the label and begin regarding islam and qur?an for what it is, also in the way we write it?
I have not reacted on this fact of things until now.Regds
Ali Omar
-
Dear Elena,
On a more serious note, when a choice is to be made, what criteria do we set up in order to make it?
Look at the qur?an!
An example
It has a ?ground rule? that you shall not take another human life.
Is the decision you are about to make breaching this criteria?Thereafter you will have to find out if the loss of lives is justified in any way, and the rules for that are also laid down in the qur?an.
The reason, therefore, can be found in Gods words and the Universe around us, and by reflecting over these.
What wars would have been started if this simple rule was followed?
Regards
Ali Omar
-
On my part, I will never let the self-appointed aristocrats like Ayman take government by force. I will be on the side of the majority fighting against their "benevolent" tyranny.
Oh Mr. Yuksel, can you not say anything nicely without personalising it?
You could have easily said Ayman's analysis of the Quran and Democracy is incorrect.Thanks.
Regards,
-
Thank you Lote Tree
But, the issue here becomes very personal, when someone tells the majority that they do not have the right to govern themselves, to make decision that involves their daily lives. Such a person, considers himself in the position of monopolizing the power.
Thus, I might be wrong in other places, but here the person who claim authority is the center of the argument.
In authocratic regimes, you cannot criticize the system without criticizing the perosn who leads it. Here, Ayman is proposing himself or dittoheads as the sole candidates for leadership roll
Peace,
Edip -
Peace Edip, all,
But, the issue here becomes very personal, when someone tells the majority that they do not have the right to govern themselves, to make decision that involves their daily lives. Such a person, considers himself in the position of monopolizing the power.
The majority has the right to govern themselves in the same way that the majority of Muslims has the right to bow to a stone cube or a majority of Christians has the right to venerate a cross. Although they have the right to take a certain course of action, that doesn't mean that this is the correct course of action.
Thus, I might be wrong in other places, but here the person who claim authority is the center of the argument.
I am sure that you will quickly see that you are wrong here too if people in any Sunni country were free to vote and they voted on whether followers of Dr. Khalifa should be banned, persecuted, and their personal property confiscated and distributed to Sunnis.
Although I appreciate you giving me the honor of being "the center of the argument", I think that the issue is that most people, including highly educated ones, are generally ignorant of democracy, its history, and how it inevitably leads to dictatorship. It seems that like most people, you have bought recent propaganda touting democracy.
Democracy simply means "rule of the majority".
It is ironic that you are advertising democracy when one of the few convincing pieces that Dr. Khalifa wrote was his criticism of the majority based on evidence from the great reading.
In addition to the evidence from the great reading, one can easily verify from empirical observation that democracy is an inherently deficient system. As far as the history of democracy, we don't even have to look far. Just look in the past 100 years or so.
It is a fact that 1936 Germany was the most democratic country in the world, the Nazi party was the most popular democratically elected political party, and up to near the end of World War II, Hitler was Germany's most popular and beloved democratically elected leader. He became popular through a nationalistic patriotic agenda and revival of the Christian faith (what he called a "New Christianity").
Democracy thrives on nationalism ("us against them" mob mentality), which dehumanizes dissenters, minorities and other nationalities. Democracy also thrives on religious zeal and dogmatic ideology. The more zealous and ideologues people are, the more popular religion touting self-righteous leaders will be. This is why it is inevitable that democracy leads to dictatorship and Fascism as happened with Germany and in many other countries.
In authocratic regimes, you cannot criticize the system without criticizing the perosn who leads it. Here, Ayman is proposing himself or dittoheads as the sole candidates for leadership
Democracy is not even a system. Democracy is a logical fallacy (appeal to popularity).
What I am proposing is the rule of law not the rule of the majority. This is independent of leadership. Under the rule of law, even if the majority of people in any Sunni country were free to vote, they would not be able to ban, persecute or confiscate the property of followers of Dr. Khalifa no matter how much they disagree with them and this notion is popular. This is your God-given right and you would be foolish and unappreciative to want to delegate that to the democratic majority.
Peace on who followed the guidance,
Ayman
-
Ayman
You forget that the law, regardless of its truth-value, is too a subject of interpration and different readings. What you are promoting is a hundred percent dictatorship, and what I am promoting is an imperfet system that occasionally can be abused.
I will not consider any system democratic unless it provides unencumbered right to freely choose and express one's ideas or religion. So, with this qualification I believe that democracy is the best possible system we can have..
Jingoism or racism is not a necessary component of democracy. The connection is only a corelation.
Peace,
Edip -
You forget that the law, regardless of its truth-value, is too a subject of interpration and different readings.
What is wrong with interpretation and reading? At least they are productive activities.
On the other hand, in a democracy (rule of the majority), the law is subject to the whims of the majority. This is wholly unproductive.
What you are promoting is a hundred percent dictatorship, and what I am promoting is an imperfet system that occasionally can be abused.
Where did I promote dictatorship?
Democracy itself is a kind of abuse. The only difference is that unlike the tyranny of an unpopular dictator who can be easily overthrown, the tyranny of the majority and its popular dictators can't be overthrown. Often, the only way is for them to self-destruct.
I will not consider any system democratic unless it provides unencumbered right to freely choose and express one's ideas or religion. So, with this qualification I believe that democracy is the best possible system we can have..
That is an oxymoron. Democracy means "rule of the majority". So whatever the majority decides in a vote or any form of popular support is what goes. You know this and hence you have said above that democracy is "the majority's right to govern themselves" and you didn't say anything about any restrictions.
Once you start putting restrictions so that "majority's right to govern themselves" is restricted, then this is not democracy anymore and I would agree with your proposal.
Jingoism or racism is not a necessary component of democracy. The connection is only a corelation.
Those are tools of democracy. Telling the majority that they are better than everyone else is a sure way to get their support. I am sure that the criminals (6123) have thought of that and other equally sure ways.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace be upon you Edip,
The Quran blames majority for failing regarding their belief system, regarding their opion on God, resurrection, and related metaphisical issues. Thus, the Quran never asks the prophet or submitters to consult others regarding their philosophical conviction; they must seek the truth on their own. However, in matters that involve practical decisions that effect other people in this world, such as the tax code, traffic law, city ordinances, treaties with other nations, etc.; in this case we are instructed to get the concent of others.
Don't "belief systems" effect other people in the world?
I do agree that one must seek the truth for themself, but your beliefs are what guide you through life, and they CERTAINLY EFFECT all the people around you. For example, have you been around a MAN who BELIEVES he should act like a woman and seek other men for sexual pleasure? Or have you been around someone who BELIEVES they should steal from others to get ahaead in life? Or have you been around one who BELIEVES that all people who reject hadiths should be killed? These things certainly effect others.
We cannot seperate ANYTHING from the WHOLE. Oneness gives us the KEY.
Government should be run by people who KNOW, not BELIEVE, and we only KNOW by verification.
-
Once you start putting restrictions so that "majority's right to govern themselves" is restricted, then this is not democracy anymore and I would agree with your proposal.
Ayman
This restriction is a naturally occurring restriction. It is called social contract. If I am a minority and if my freedom to believe and to have my own opinion and to express them is restricted by the majority, I will either FIGHT against such a majority and its democracy or LEAVE such a community to find a better one.
So, smart majorities who take lessons from past experiences, will know in advance, that it is better for them and everyone to respect the rights of minorities, especially their freedom of expression. As for not so smart majorities, whatever you do you cannot change their condition!
As for your suggestion of "oligarchy" or "aristocracy" under the excuse of Rule of Law... Study the US constitution, and then compare it its practical application throught decades and the ever-changing opinion of Supreme Court cases based on the same constitution. Any law, including God's law, is subject to perception, filtration, and interpretation of humans, including you and your "wise" friends.
Unfortunately, I do not have much time to engage in a lengthy discussion on this topic with you, but I find your solution to be derived from a naive idealism, which reminds me the proverb, "the path to hell is paved with many good intentions."
Peace,
EdipPeace,
Edip -
Salaamun alaikum Edip, Ayman et al
Nowhere in Al-quraan is there a rule of majority or even a collective decision making. Nowhere at all.
Al-Quraan saysIt is part of the Mercy of Allah that thou dost deal gently with them Wert thou severe or harsh-hearted, they would have broken away from about thee so pass over (Their faults), and ask for (Allah's) forgiveness for them; and consult them in affairs (wa shawirhum fil amr). Then, when thou hast Taken a decision (fa iza azamTA) put thy trust in Allah. (3/159)
Therefore, the decision was made by ONE person. This person holds the office of ar-rasool, the one who bears the message and is the leader of the movement.
David and Solomon, both of which are our examples, were KINGS (malik) and examples of thier power are recorded in al-quraan.
-
Salaamun alaikum again,
I would also caution against this 'guilt trip' tactic employed by Lote-Tree. Democracy is a WORD used by the current hegemons. The majority in the west have NEVER had any power to decide much. The 'democratic system' has layers and layers of insulation from the real electricity of power. The need for a huge 'war chest' during the time of election should tell us who is REALLY behind the facade of political parties. Lets escape this banal superficiality please.
-
I would also caution against this 'guilt trip' tactic employed by Lote-Tree.
Guilt-Trip? Really?
So now questioning if Quran Promotes Democracy or not is a Guilt-Trip tactic?Regards,
-
Guilt-Trip? Really?
So now questioning if Quran Promotes Democracy or not is a Guilt-Trip tactic?Please dont flatter yourself, LT. The guilt-trip was induced by the overwhelming use of the word 'democracy, freedom, tolerance'.
Questioning the Quran is something everyone should do, it encourages questioning but from people who studied the Quran for 2 YEARS and still thinks it has the concept of 'dhimmis', we must be careful. Such people are clearly fakes and try to pretend to be evolved when clearly they are just full of it. -
Please dont flatter yourself, LT.
Hey those are my words!!! Get your own -)
The guilt-trip was induced by the overwhelming use of the word 'democracy, freedom, tolerance'.
So to you those are GUILT-TRIP words?
Blimey!Questioning the Quran is something everyone should do, it encourages questioning but from people who studied the Quran for 2 YEARS and still thinks it has the concept of 'dhimmis', we must be careful.
OK O wise one - answer me Does Quran Promote Democracy?
Such people are clearly fakes and try to pretend to be evolved when clearly they are just full of it.
It is usually those who call others fakes are themselves are fakes -)
But I am not calling you a fake. I have a word for you. But will not say it. It will burst your blood vessels.But lets put aside the personal stuff and answer the question.
If you want to go on 1-2-1 in personal insults with me then lets do it on the off-topic section. Just you and me using Queensbury Rules OK?
Regards,
-
OK O wise one - answer me Does Quran Promote Democracy?
This is why it's pointless to discuss anything with you. Even when the answer is 2 posts ABOVE, you still repeat the question.
If you want to go on 1-2-1 in personal insults with me then lets do it on the off-topic section. Just you and me using Queensbury Rules OK?
I will submit to this if you can tell me from ur 'quranic utopia' thread - who is a MUSLIM, according to the quran.
thank you.
-
OK O wise one - answer me Does Quran Promote Democracy?
This is why it's pointless to discuss anything with you. Even when the answer is 2 posts ABOVE, you still repeat the question.
I want to hear it again from you. In simple Yes or No.
Does Quran Promote DEMOCRACY?
Thanks.
Regards,
-
I want to hear it again from you. In simple Yes or No.
Does Quran Promote DEMOCRACY?
If I tell you, will you tell what a Muslim is according to the Quraan ? In simple yes or no
Oh Chap this is not a school play ground and we are not kids! This is a forum. Answer the question if you like, if not it does not matter -)
Regards,
-
Oh Chap this is not a school play ground and we are not kids! This is a forum. Answer the question if you like, if not it does not matter
LT, behind that facade of sophistication you project, lies an empty vessel. The truth is, you have done zero reading and even with that, you opine on the Quran. No wonder your opinions appear hollow. You don't even know what a 'muslim' is.
And no, the Quran doesn't promote democracy. Not at all.