sgttomas has his mind opened.

[KR Wordgazer]

Thanks for the information, Sgt. Tomas. Can you give me a perspective on the Muslim view of women? Of "infidels"? How much of the problems we see are actually Arabic culture, and how much are actually in the Koran?

[Metacrock]

I am sophisticated enough to know that not all Muslims will wnat to cut off your hand for stealing, or make women wear veils. But I just can't really get my mind around Islam as something post modernism would lead one to. It really does not fit. Liberal Christianity would be a perfect destination for Post modernism to lead someone, but Islam??? come on!

LMAO....YOU'RE TELLING ME!!!!! I'm as surprised as you are. It might help to know that I have "resolved" post-modernism. What I mean is that I conceive post-modernism as the undermining of the authority of modernity (all of its various "offices"). To resolve this is to come to terms with a pragmatic approach to truth. Islam is VERY pragmatic. So perhaps it isn't that surprising.

I have come to the same conclusion about PM. It just unseats modernism, with its secular assumptions and anti-clerical framework, but it doesn't really negate the possibility of a meta narrative. Well it's cardinal premise is that there is no meta narrative. But that doesn't preclude truth without meta narrative. As long as you can distinguish between ultimate truth (such as Christianity) and meta narrative )totalizing truth) then you can have truth in postmodernist and be a pM Christian.

As you can see in my post to KR, I went through the liberal Christianity phase. But to me, it makes no sense to be a "Christian" who denies the divinity of Christ. This is nonsense. To deny the divinity of Christ is to allow Jesus (pbuh) to be the Logos of God that the Koran speaks about. So again, perhaps it isn't that surprising.

then don't deny the divinity of Christ. Most liberals don't!

If you become a Muslin

No "if", brother! I am a Muslim.

you will have about three people in your whole faith you can actually to.

Sorry...huh?

how many Muslims will understand how you get ilsam form post modernism? hardly any post modernists will understand that!

I don't mean that because Moslims are not intelligent, they are. I know some Muslims who grew up in Arlington Texas. Their father is a fan man I like him a great deal. He's Afgan (hate the Tailban with a passion). They are just as American as any two kids, very serious about Islam, understand Christianity because their mother is a Christian. They are not dumb, they are bright well read kids. But even so I can't see them being led to Islam by post modernism!

Apparently lots of people are being led to Islam. If we live in a post-modern world (a gross over-generalization, for sure) perhaps Islam and post-modernity are not divorced from one another.

well because of their father.

I certainly CAN tell you that MOST of the Muslims I know are thoroughly modern in their thought. In that sense, the ummah has some work to do to "catch up" to Christianity. ...kind of interesting to see from this new perspective. Islam is flexible - a lot more flexible than many Muslims seem willing to admit or are able to come to terms with - but the history of Islam reveals it is so, without compromising what is essentially true.

I think you are going to find the same dichotomy between liberals and fundies. but they have more fundies and their fundies are more serious than our fundies, their liberals are harder to find.

So perhaps it is right to say that Islam and post-modernity can't co-exist....but then I have to add that NO religion can survive a complete and absolute encounter with post-modernity. Only by resolving to know nothing can we begin to know everything that Allah (swt) has revealed to us. For instance.....did I write a post here about the names of God? (no...but, I did here ) One resolution to post-modernity is by attributing truth to meanings that are distinct. So we determine what is distinct about God.

Peace,
-sgttomas

you have to deny Post modernism to be a true postmodern. Because otherwise it becomes a totalizing meta narative. So ti has to be wrong on somethings to be right overall.

[Theognosis]

Just curious, sgtt. What's your stand on Turkish persecution of the Orthodox? Would you want to give Agia Sophia, one of our most-Holy Churches, back to us?

http://www.freeagiasophia.org/history.php

[KR Wordgazer]

I don't really understand the need to "come to terms" with post-modernity in the first place! Why would I need to come to terms with what seems to be universal skepticism? Why do post-moderns feel such a need to be skeptical about everything-- even (apparently) skepticism?

It makes much more sense to explore different systems of thought, keeping an open (instead of a skeptical) mind about them, and eliminating what doesn't seem to work/make sense.

[sgttomas]

Thanks for the information, Sgt. Tomas. Can you give me a perspective on the Muslim view of women? Of "infidels"? How much of the problems we see are actually Arabic culture, and how much are actually in the Koran?

Firstly, I have been astonished by how consistent this message has been relayed to me by the numerous Muslim brothers I have met in the past week: "Oh! You have to visit the Middle East. To see the birthplace of Islam. You must visit Muslim countries to absorb the presence of Islam all around you".

...then, a pause, for consideration. "Oh, but you have to be careful, because so much of what you see over there is not Islam"

...then a litany of wrongs: hoarding of wealth, not feeding the poor, persecution, corruption of government, etc.

So often the culture of the "Islamic world" is conflated with Islam. So these Muslims who come here, and largely praise Western values in terms of: being honest, cooperating, trying to judge fairly, trying to distribute wealth equitably, etc. They have this fond notion of the Islam of their homes, but then it occurs to them just how un-Islamic their homes are in many respects - despite the outward appearances, or the "show".

I said all of that because, in Islam, there is no intercession. Surrender to God is a You-God direct channel. Everyone stands alone before Allah, therefore no one is favoured and no one is discriminated against, except by their faith and deeds. Women and men are "equal" before Allah.

At the same time, Islam is intended to be the answer for our struggle with our human nature. Islam is a "natural" religion. Islam prescribes practices that are in harmony with our nature in such a manner that we find peace. So men and women have different prescribed roles.

I have to be honest that my knowledge does not extend much further than that, at this point. But all things are to be investigated. Nothing should just be true, just because someone else says so. Only Allah's word is trustworthy, and the example of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

This is from the Koran, Surat 4 ("Women"), verse 34:

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women because God has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance): for God is Most High, Great (above you all).

I agree that the word "(and last) beat them (lightly)" means exactly that. This is understood to be the action of a righteous man, done for righteous reasons, acting in complete compliance with the will of Allah. So what is the will of Allah? The opening verse of this Surat says:

O mankind! Be careful of your duty to your Lord Who created you from a single soul and from it created its mate and from them twain hath spread abroad a multitude of men and women. Be careful of your duty toward Allah in Whom ye claim (your rights) of one another, and toward the wombs (that bore you). Lo! Allah hath been a Watcher over you.

Allah goes on to prescribe that men should make every effort to treat their wives fairly and equitably. Men are to give women a portion of their wealth upon marriage (women are not obligated to give anything). Men and women are entitled to a share of inheritance (which is described for various scenarios). Prostitutes are to be confined to the house until they die, unless they repent and change, in which case they are free on their own accord. Men cannot forcibly take women - it's a relationship of mutual consent. If a man feels he must leave a woman he cannot take anything back which he has given her. Men are not to marry (or have sexual relations with) their mother or daughter or close female kin (more details are given). Men are forbidden from adultery and marrying to satisfy debauchery. And if a man marries his maid, she is to be treated as a "free woman" and given the dowry, etc. But if she strays, she only receives half the punishment of a free woman - though patience is even better. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. All this is intended to make our burden light, for we are created weak. Women are free to make their own living and one should not become envious of this. And women (and men) who are your servants, give them their fair due.

And then we arrive at verse 34, and it's instructions on how a man is to rebuke and correct his wife. After hearing the (to me) equitable treatment prescribed for the marriage "contract" and relationship, I find less to shirk away from. The notion that an indentured woman, who is taken as a wife and commits adultery or some other betrayal, should be treated with patience and mercy even before physical correction - this seems to then imply that a free woman, a Muslim woman, should be treated more harshly because her error is that much more striking against the will of Allah (that we ought to treat the marriage union with the utmost respect).

...I can go on with examples like this, where a tapestry of human relationships are formed and equitable treatment prescribed. Note that women are free to make their own way. But their first duty is within the context of the reproductive nature of man and woman. The next generation of humans are more important than a present occupation - the burden is on the man to provide what is necessary. Even though clear roles are laid out, there is flexibility within Islam for each to approach Allah on his or her own terms. There is no compulsion in religion. The act of the marriage union is intended to be a natural extension of man and woman's desires. If this natural union is corrupted, then a separation will be negotiated. It's a practical approach to peace - containing absolutes, but rarely absolute in every single context imaginable.

As for infidels? Well, sometimes evil needs its ass kicked. The Koran is clear that one must be wise in differentiating amongst people according to their intention. So sometimes a person will be found among infidels (for whatever reason), but is not intending to be one and makes no wish to stand in the way of righteousness. Such a person cannot be harmed (this would be murder). So it's not a clear-cut matter of: this group of people is bad, so they should die. Such indiscriminate treatment is never allowed in Islam. If a person comes from the midst of infidels in the name of peace, his peace is accepted. So "infidel" is a particular standing against righteousness and killing of infidels is particularly spelled out within the context of warfare. And warfare is understood as the infidels seeking to destroy Islam and the way of life which is Peaceful Submission to Allah. Also, an infidel is particularly someone without any orientation towards God. People of the Book and people in whom the reality of God is manifest are not infidels. Infidels is a particular orientation of pursuing death and destruction - often accomplished by pursuing selfish gain at the (grave) expense of others.

....interestingly this is all coming from Surat 4, "Women", and the narrative has returned to the topic of wives:

If a woman fears ill-treatment, or desertion, from her husband, it is no sin for them to split apart if they make terms of peace between themselves. Peace is better. But greed has been made present in the minds (of men)

"Of men" means dudes - us guys - not "mankind", which would be made distinct if it were so (such as seen in Surat 114, "Mankind").

So if we now consider this and the previous verse 34, how can "beat lightly" be seen as anything other than a fair and reasonable form of rebuke? A "beating" is certainly not in line with peace and fair treatment that Allah (swt) is CONSTANTLY returning to in the Koran. A beating is grounds for a woman leaving her husband. A woman scandalizing the marriage is grounds to be physically corrected, and even then only after previously trying to reason and then separating from her (and mercy is even better, except that it should make a mockery of the marriage). Clearly we are negotiating our way through real human relationships, here.

So, I return to the original notion of the present day activities in Islamic countries. I can say with certainty that the subjugation of women is in many respects un-Islamic. This is something that many Muslims recognize. It is an issue to deal with.

Peace,
-sgttomas

[sgttomas]

then don't deny the divinity of Christ. Most liberals don't!

....but.....he wasn't. so....

how many Muslims will understand how you get ilsam form post modernism? hardly any post modernists will understand that!

Well, so far....quite a few.

I think you are going to find the same dichotomy between liberals and fundies. but they have more fundies and their fundies are more serious than our fundies, their liberals are harder to find.

I was having this discussion tonight, about how "fundy" in an Islamic context is totally divorced from that which has been cultivated in Christianity as a kind of non-think. This notion is totally foreign to Islam. To be a fundamentalist Muslim is the highest form of praise, because it means one's heart is very close to Allah.

Extremism doesn't seem to be any more rampant in Islam than the proportion of people living in cultures of abject poverty and social inequality ....notions that are completely outside of the context of Islam, which would not allow such conditions to exist. So people who are living with a twisted form of Islam respond in a twisted manner. Imagine how those stupid Christian fundies would be acting if they weren't fat bastards living off the misery of other people.

Also, every fundamentalist Muslim is a liberal, because free-thought is so encouraged. It just happens that the truth is very cohesive so that liberalism and fundamentalism are not so far apart. There isn't this great chasm as in Christianity (not that I've observed, at least yet, but I don't expect to find a great chasm in any large proportion). These words have been conflated with their Christian context - applied without understanding of Islam.

you have to deny Post modernism to be a true postmodern. Because otherwise it becomes a totalizing meta narative. So ti has to be wrong on somethings to be right overall.

lol. yup.

Peace,
-sgttomas

[sgttomas]

Just curious, sgtt. What's your stand on Turkish persecution of the Orthodox? Would you want to give Agia Sophia, one of our most-Holy Churches, back to us?

http://www.freeagiasophia.org/history.php

Everything is God's.

Feed the hungry.

Peace,
-sgttomas

[sgttomas]

I'm glad you've figured this out for yourself.... Honestly, though, there's an even more general system of beliefs that can incorporate literally every belief, which is Hinduism. Have you looked into this? What made you choose Islam over Hinduism?

lol. Oh, I know a lot about Hinduism and Hindus (lived with 'em, traveled to India...I'm practically the adopted son of a Hindu family). Funnily enough this topic came up in a round-about way with one of my best friends (my "brother") and before I even really responded he said, "well, Hinduism is kind of a make-up-your-own kind of religion and it mostly just boils down to: be a good person". If I wanted that, I would have remained Christian

I hope in my other responses you can get the sense that Islam has answered my desired for knowledge of the Path of Righteousness. I believe we are most rightly guided along this Path by Islam.

It's also quite striking how much we agree on things, while I still remain an atheist and you're now a Muslim. I think you've got a decent understanding of my point of view. Can you talk about God and prophets a little in my language? Do you believe that these people literally heard a voice that was the voice of God?

I believe I can give you a good "translation", yes....but I've gone and exhausted my mental resources for tonight, so please, give me a little more time to prepare! =)

As for the voice of God, well....this will be made more clear when I give you the "translation", but essentially it is only the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who would have actually heard the voice of God. Everyone else must make do with the recorded words (Koran) and the inner inkling. ...but I'll explain better about this voice of God, soon.

Peace,
-sgttomas

[sgttomas]

I don't really understand the need to "come to terms" with post-modernity in the first place! Why would I need to come to terms with what seems to be universal skepticism? Why do post-moderns feel such a need to be skeptical about everything-- even (apparently) skepticism?

It makes much more sense to explore different systems of thought, keeping an open (instead of a skeptical) mind about them, and eliminating what doesn't seem to work/make sense.

Well....post-modernism is at it's heart just an endless series of questions, which may not necessarily be skeptical in nature. Resolving p-m is then about determining how to stop that series, grounding it in truth. It isn't something one MUST go through, but if one does begin, it's not always clear how to stop....until it's resolved.

-sgtt.

[fleetmouse]

Well....post-modernism is at it's heart just an endless series of questions, which may not necessarily be skeptical in nature. Resolving p-m is then about determining how to stop that series, grounding it in truth. It isn't something one MUST go through, but if one does begin, it's not always clear how to stop....until it's resolved.

-sgtt.

The best way to resolve unanswerable questions is to stop asking them and just live.

To talk little is natural.
High winds do not last all morning.
Heavy rain does not last all day.
Why is this? Heaven and Earth!
If heaven and Earth cannot make things eternal,
How is it possible for man?

I note in passing that given your spiritual peregrinations this is probably not your "final form" as the kids say these days.