Dr Tawfik Hamid is a Muslim thinker and writer whom I consider to be a real Muslim moderate. His website is linked on this blog. He has just come out with a sensible guide for us as to whom we should really consider Muslim moderates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Your Local Mosque 'Moderate' or 'Radical'?
(Please circulate)
Ask the Imams of Mosques, the Muslim leaders, and the Islamic organizations in the US and worldwide to sign this declaration (See below)
by Tawfik Hamid
www.tawfikhamid.com
After the problem of Ground Zero Mosque has escalated it becomes an urgent necessity to distinguish 'Moderate' from 'Radical' Islam. Without making such a distinction the US and the rest of the world will remain divided regarding this issue. Debates about the issue can be endless unless we define the words 'radical' and 'moderate'.
Mosque leaders, Islamic scholars, and organizations who want to be considered Moderates MUST clearly and unambiguously declare the following declaration in their media outlets and on their websites.
I suggest that you send this declaration to Mosque leaders and the Islamic organizations inside the US and worldwide to see if they are ready to accept such a declaration or not.
Please feel free to circulate this newsletter so that we can start a process that allows us to distinguish radical from moderate Islam.
Declaration of Beliefs of Muslim Moderates -
I (We) are Muslims who want contemporary understandings of Islam to replace currently predominant harsh and radical (Salafi/Wahabbi) interpretations of our religion. We therefore declare that:
1- Redda Law, the Sharia Law that allows the killing of Muslims who convert to other faiths, must be banned in Islamic teachings and in Sharia legal doctrine. Islamic countries that practice Sharia must stop the practice of this law and must admit that Freedom of belief and the right to convert to other faith or believe is a basic right that must be given to all Muslims.
2- Current mainstream Sharia doctrines justify the use of violence against women. They encourage men to beat their wives to discipline them. They allow women accused of adultery to be stoned to death. These doctrines are barbarically inhumane, non-egalitarian, and teach Muslim children to be violent. These teachings must be ended by reinterpreting the Islamic text that justifies such violence.
3- Traditional Sharia doctrines teach Muslims that they must engage in war so that Islam will dominate the world. When Islam becomes dominant, Non-Muslims are offered three options: to convert to Islam, to pay Jizzia (a humiliating tax), or to be killed. These doctrines run contrary to modern respect for diversity and for personal freedom of speech and belief. This understanding of Jihad that seeks domination of Islam over other peoples must no longer be regarded as an Islamic value and its teaching as a duty for Muslims must end.
The early Islamic wars known as "Futohaat Islameia" were fought to implement this doctrine of Jihad. These wars therefore should now be regarded as un-Islamic and un-justifiable.
4- Jews are individuals who deserve the same respect accorded to all individuals. They should not be called "pigs and monkeys." The Islamic teaching that Muslims must fight and kill all Jews before the end of days is totally incorrect and unacceptable as it does not exist in the Quran. All teachings that encourage anti-Semitic attitudes, violence or disrespect toward Jews must be declared un-Islamic.
5- Slavery is a crime against humanity. All Sharia laws that justify slavery in our modern times must not be taught any more. Muslim scholars must have a clear and loud voice against slavery.
6- Islamic Sharia laws currently permit the killing homosexuals. These laws also are advocating a crime against our fellow human beings. They must be declared un-Islamic and their implementation must be considered criminal.
Signed,
Dr. Tawfik Hamid
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fousesquawk comment: I would say the first person these questions should be directed to would be Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, the man who is leading the mosque project at Ground Zero. Thus far, he has failed one test as to his opinion of Hamas. Maybe our illustrious State Department could send him a questionaire before they spend tax-payer money to send this guy to the Middle East as our emissary.
What say you, Mr Rauf?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Dr. Tawfik Hamid appears to be ignorant of a good deal of Muslim history that I can learn from the detailed scholarship of an American historian, even a Christian one. If I were a Muslim, I would not sign this statement. I could write an alternate one of my own, which would have a similar impact in practical terms, but I wouldn't sign this one.
Hamid makes unnecessary and invalid statements ascribing all kinds of evil as inextricably central to Islamic belief, then announces that any good practitioner of Islam must renounced these un-Islamic practices that are fundamental to Islam.
It is rather like telling an American citizen resident in Berlin to sign a statement that America is an inherently racist nation, therefore all good patriotic Americans must renounce racism.
It is also a bit like announcing that Biblical Christianity is contrary to well established scientific fact, therefore all good Christians must renounce the Bible and embrace science as the highest expression of Christianity.
Now I don't fall into any of these linguistic dead-ends. I know that any religious text which has been studied and expounded for more than a couple of centuries has many plausible interpretations and practical applications, some more worthy of respect than others. I know that if a devout Christian is expected to accept science and remain a Christian, science must be presented to that Christian in a manner which is Biblically acceptable, without flatly contradicting either Biblical text or scientific observation.
I know that America has many strands of racism woven into its history, and what at various times Americans have done to overcome them.
I know that Islam has an extremely diverse history, and that I can find orthodox Islamic writing, highly respected writing, which would sustain the practical imperatives in the modern world that Hamid properly struggles to put forward. I haven't studied Ya'qub ibn Ishaq al-Kindi, but from references I've read, he would provide a good foundation.
Finally, the terms "radical," and "moderate" and "extremist" are poor tools to distinguish much of anything. Moderation in pursuit of justice is indeed no virtue -- extremism in defense of liberty is an oxymoron. Bin Laden is not an "extreme" example of Islam, he follows a specific philosophy, perhaps best defined as Salafism.
We should exterminate Salafism, insofar as we are able, not because it is "extreme" but because it is homicidal and oppressive. We do non-Salafist Muslims no favors by pinning the label "moderate" on them. We should respect them as fervent and devout practitioners of Islam, with as good a claim or better than al Qaeda to be "the true faith."
Post a Comment