IDEAS
به زبان فارسی
PICTORY
LATEST MUSIC
SEARCH
When taboos must be broken
01-Feb-2008
Islam, as a religion, is a composite of beliefs and traditions from divergent monotheistic prophets, those who would teach the belief in one God. It is as a social order that Islam distinguishes in creeds and practice from other religions. It is as a social order that Islam is distinct in creed and practice from other religions; it is both a social order and a functional political system. Islam in its development abandoned the initial period of spiritual teachings in favour of strict social and judicial rules for Muslims. To see how this happened, let us take an unbiased look at its development.
The alleged prophecy of Muhammad Ibn Abdullah started with the revelation of the Koran when he was 40 and living in Mecca. He started believing that he was chosen to communicate a divine message to his fellow city dwellers. Thus his prophecy began when in one of his usual meditations in Mount of Hira, near Mecca, he received the first revelation of the Koran delivered by angel Gabriel. The revelation began with the first “Ayah” (verse) of the Koran, to illiterate Muhammad, commanding him to “read with the name of Allah”. In such moments of initial revelation, he was in a kind of trance (ecstasy), with accompanying features, such as perspiring, convulsions, clouding of or loss of consciousness. All those symptoms suggest to some scholars that he was probably epileptic. Perhaps because of excessive suffering in his past, he looked to his unconscious for sources of enlightenment.
The Koran is alleged to be God’s message to mankind. It contains 114 “Surahs” (chapters), which are sub-divided into “Ayah” (verses). The writings of the Koran remained in separate pieces for some 23 years. The doctrine of the Koran emphasises strict “Tawheed” (monotheism). It challenges the pantheism of both ancient Greek and Oriental religions, which prior to Islam had identified God with the forces of nature and with the natural substances within space and time. Tawheed also rejects the Christian Trinity, which claims that God is three persons in one substance. It considers any idea of joining others with God as a “shirk” (an unforgivable sin). Everything is created by God and is limited to divine predestination. Nothing can escape the Divine Laws, including Jinn (an intelligent being created from pure fire) and man (created from earth). However, it incorporates the idea of some ancient Greek philosophers who believed in the primary element (arche) for all that exists. Ancient Greek philosophers were the first to emphasise the rational unity of things by rejecting mythological explanations of the world. The elements of soil from Empedocles and fire from Heraclites (as the first elements of man and Jinn) have also been incorporated into the Koran.
A major part of the Koran consists of commands and warnings for Muslims; a smaller part contains stories, myths, and events also related in other Holy Books (Torah, Bible)--sometimes with some differences in detail. The allegations that the Koran is intact can be very controversial since its characteristics such as repetition, arbitrary succession, and variations in rhythmic style reflect a human collective modification in its origin. Many secular scholars are less than willing to attribute the entire Koran to Muhammad. For many critics, the Koran, taken as whole, is obscure, is both linguistically and conceptually incoherent, and it can be simply argued that the book is the product of belated editing of materials Intended for different purposes. Despite many prudent “Tafsir” (interpretations), the Koran is left untouched by criticism by Muslims. Muslims believe that the Koran is the infallible word of God, it can neither be influenced nor modified by circumstances: refuting one single verse of the Koran means to “condemn” the whole of Islam in its perfection. Muslims’ general belief is that that the righteous Koran can contain no mistake and it cannot be suppressed by any new discovery and can apply to any circumstances with no temporal or geographical border. The origin of the Koran is supposed to be inscribed as God’s eternal word on golden tablets in paradise.
The main taboo in Islam is that no Muslim should be allowed to blame the Koran for contradictions or mistakes. To bear more resemblance to logical commands, some “modern” Muslims attempt to interpret the surahs of Koran differently. Sometimes, the forged interpretations are so controversial that these interpretations are new causes of splits among Muslims. For example, Muhammad Abduh, the founder of modernism in Egypt, interprets Jinn as a microbe (though existence of Jinn with its myths and fables was a traditional belief of the Arab pagans and has been mentioned many times in the Koran as a living being equivalent to man). In another verse, God says, “And I created not the Jinns and humans except they worship me”.
Though religion’s teachings of the creation scenario and any scientific theory are fundamentally incompatible—religious interpretation says it all happened several thousand years ago and took six literal days to complete--some other “modern” Muslims do not deny the whole scheme from the Big Bang, or from the singled-celled organism to homo sapiens, but they grotesquely attempt to patch up the verses of the Koran with established sciences like Evolution, the theory of General Relativity, aerodynamics, and quantum theory to prove that Islam has the final solution for everything.
Muhammad was before the prophecy a reliable businessman (Muhammad-al- amin), working for his wealthy wife, Khadijah. As a prophet in Mecca, he was a sage thinker, a quick speaker, who could invite people to believe in the only God “Allah”. He was decent, humble and generous to the poor, with whom he shared his meal. After 10 years of prophecy, he had to leave Mecca and his migration--“Hijrat”-- to Medina in 622 marks his new career.
In Medina, as a powerful prophet with personal ambitions, Muhammad did not only used and abused the existing traditional norms of society; he s also violated ethical rules of his own religion to achieve his goals. As such, he had the privilege of having more wives than was permitted under his own Islamic law. He even had the controversial right to marry his daughter-in-law, Zainab--she divorced the Prophet’s adopted son (Zaid) to marry Muhammad. As a husband, he had the advantage to arbitrarily treat his wives as he liked.
In his financial exploits, he allowed himself the right to rob caravans (for which other robbers would have been beheaded), or to impose humiliating “Jizya” (taxes charged from non-Muslims) on “Dhimmis” (subjugated Christian and Jewish minorities living in the early Islamic community). He ordered the confiscation of lands and properties from “Dhimmis”, his enemies. He openly claimed that “the spoils of war were made lawful unto me”.
As a political leader he had the right to fight back against his rivals, and was merciless and revengeful toward his enemies and rivals, even so far as to give orders to murder many of them. He was the founder of the first Arab Empire (a Caliphate which became during a long period after the Prophet’s death one of the biggest conquerors in the world at that time). Historically, many believe that Muhammad was a religious and politically prominent leader. He undoubtedly left significant marks on the history of mankind. Many Western scholars, without believing in Muhammad’s prophecy, have confirmed this fact. However, the sources of information about the personal life of Muhammad are reduced to the Koran, “Sirah” (biography of the Prophet) and some part of the Hadiths which are considered as “sahih” (reliable).
Nabuwwat, or Muhammad’s claim of being God’s prophet ((Muhammad-al-rassul-Allah) is one of the pillars of Islam. Almost 100 surahs of the Koran attempt to confirm this claim. If all these surahs were not enough, Islamic scholars have additionally narrated different sayings over different periods and circumstances to endorse the belief on Nabuwwat. The only reason to endorse this belief however remains that the Koran is God’s word delivered to Muhammad; in other words, Nabuwwat or Muhammad’s claim of divine mission is written in the Koran which is allegedly the word of God, transmitted by Muhammad. In a certain logic, this entire puzzle looks like a tricky compromise between God and Muhammad himself, which has been difficult for rational people to believe. Nabuwwat can never be rationally proved, even for some Muslim scholars like the famous rationalist M.Z Razi, quoted by the Iranian writer, Ali Dashti in his book, “23 Saal” (23 years), a reference to the duration of Muhammad’s prophecy.
Another pillar of Islam is the conviction that Muhammad is the final Prophet, and his religion, Islam, is the last and only word of God to follow (Khatam-al-Nabiyin). It is not plausibly clear why an Almighty God should deprive mankind of new prophets to solve new problems in adaptive manners. And why one of these numerous gurus or alleged prophets around the world cannot be a new handpicked prophet by God.
But in the history of Islam, the Koran was often represented beside a sword—swords beside a verse of Koran on the flag of Saudi Arabia still represent this old Islamic symbol. “Seif-al-Islam” (sword of Islam) reminds how it could compensate for the lack of rationality and logic to expand Islam in “dar-al-Islam” (territory of Islam). Only, the effect of this symbiosis of sword / Koran was not rooted in ethics but in a moral failure--when “Dawa” (demand of conversion into Islam or accepting its values, for Muslims and non Muslims alike) cannot alone be enough to convert people to Islam or an Islamic way of life.
Nevertheless, the factor of fear behind this symbiosis impedes Muslims in posing simple questions about the authenticity of Islam, questions many of us may not have learnt to ask. However, the fear resulting from this symbiosis has a long history. The typical warmongering tradition of the clan society of Arabia was used cleverly by Muhammad. He divinised the tradition by calling it “Jihad-fi-sabil Allah” (war for the sake of Allah). Holy Jihad was served by Muhammad and his successors to expand “Islamic ummah” (Islamic society).
For the early Islamic ruling class, jihad was promoted into faith-based use of violence. Islam without the use of violence could never achieve its today’s growth. Among the terrors committed by Muhammad himself, some of them are more characterised because they inspire crimes of political Islam today. According to Ali Dashti, while Muhammad surrounded Mecca in 632, a compromise of capitulation was achieved: Muhammad accepted a peaceful capitulation of Mecca; in exchange of a general amnesty for the population, though excluding certain individuals like Ibn Abdullah, who was one of Muhammad’s early companions and wrote down scripts of Koran for him. He was executed because of having publicly denounced the man-made origin of the Koran. Although Muhammad accepted the peace treaty, on his return from Mecca to Medina, he attacked a group of Bedouins en route and so the treaty was voided. According to the Collection of Bukhari, a famous scholar, the Jewish peot Ka’b Ibn Ashraf, who wrote satirical verses about Muhammad, was killed for it. His voluntary killer was praised by Muhammad.
The above examples explain many acts of atrocity committed by the IRI and Islamists around the world; among which figure the execution of several thousand political prisoners in the massacre of summer, ‘88 in Iran, the death-fatwa against “unbelievers” like the British author, Rushdie, and the Dutch Islam-critical film maker Theo Van Gogh—killed by a radical Muslim in charge of the blasphemy against Islam in his film called “Submission”-- and terror on innocent people.
The worst is that these early Islamic terrors have been promoted into the pattern model for the Constitution and especially for the judicial system of some Islamic countries. With the advent of the IRI and its atrocious methods of repression and violation to the most basic standards of human rights against the people of Iran, we need more rational debates to bring about a new capacity for secular and democratic options to unmask the ills of political Islam. It is only possible when we have courage to break any taboo on public displays of judgement.
| Recently by Jahanshah Rashidian | Comments | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Journée Internationale des Femmes | - | Mar 08, 2010 |
| Stop Indian Gasoline for Mullahs’ Repressive Machinery | 13 | Feb 04, 2010 |
| Iran Fails United Opposition | 5 | Jan 20, 2010 |
RECENT COMMENTS
IRANIANS OF THE DAY
| Person | About | Day |
|---|---|---|
| نسرین ستوده: زندانی روز | Dec 04 | |
| Saeed Malekpour: Prisoner of the day | Lawyer says death sentence suspended | Dec 03 |
| Majid Tavakoli: Prisoner of the day | Iterview with mother | Dec 02 |
| احسان نراقی: جامعه شناس و نویسنده ۱۳۰۵-۱۳۹۱ | Dec 02 | |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Prisoner of the day | 46 days on hunger strike | Dec 01 |
| Nasrin Sotoudeh: Graffiti | In Barcelona | Nov 30 |
| گوهر عشقی: مادر ستار بهشتی | Nov 30 | |
| Abdollah Momeni: Prisoner of the day | Activist denied leave and family visits for 1.5 years | Nov 30 |
| محمد کلالی: یکی از حمله کنندگان به سفارت ایران در برلین | Nov 29 | |
| Habibollah Golparipour: Prisoner of the day | Kurdish Activist on Death Row | Nov 28 |
Christianity judism are also
by Anonymousfair (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:54 PM PSTChristianity judism are also gar..ge just to be fair.
They allow slavery. They think they are chosen. All that is nonsense.
after realizing Moses was a joke I realized Islam is a joke since it accepts Moses and praises him. so I am without any religion that is man made. A religion that praises the prophet of ariel Sharon and other murderers is also garb...
so good bye to all hose three religions.
Dear Mr. Rashidian
by Just a believer (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:45 PM PSTThank you for the article and I personally respect everyone no matter what religion they have or even if they don't have any.
who am I to decide who's sincere or not. Who's honest and who's deceptive.
The same thing with you ( believer or non believer)I honor you for who you are.
But I have a request to ask you to go and read my comments, it might answer some of your questions.
Mr. Rashidian just remember WHEN and WHERE those laws or teachings were brought to light.
I don't believe in CLERGY,PRIEST, or Rabbi.We are all mature enough to go and seek any information, we don't need them to tell us what's right or wrong.
Sincerely,
Just a believer
You are killing a dead man
by Souri on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:18 PM PSTMr Rashidian
If you don't like the IRI, then say it.
We would listen to you more than when you try to abolish and kill a man who is dead almost 14 centuries ago ! Muhammad was ignorant, epileptic, opportunist...etc (according to you) or the other author who said he raped a 9 years old girl (your mother! your sister !)....etc etc
My question is:
What you guys are trying to prove us? in the other word "chera enghadr be Muhammad gir dadin?"
Muhammad was the beginning of Islam, true, but 14 centuries have been passed between the day of Muhammad with his Koran and today of your's with your keyboard !
Supposed you proved us that Muhammad was a false person and Koran is not God's paroles brought by Muhammad, we said then: ok, you are right. Then what you would do with the millions Muslim around the world who believe in Koran and Muhammad ? What you would say about so many people who came in and gone out from the world of Islam during the whole 14 centuries ? How about all their contribution to this belief ?
another question : You were not alive then to see who really was the man and what really he did, how could you judge people like this and launch free theory ? People these days, can't not even agree about Hitler who was there only 60 years ago, how could you expect to gather all true information about things and persons of 14000 years ago?
I would suggest you to read a good book from Bertrand Russell, named "Power". In the last chapter (Rahbaran va Peyrovan) he prove that the real power is always between the "Peyrovan/followers" hands and not the Leaders, contrary at what we all believe in.
My point is : Here, in this forum, we can argue an "opinion" but we can't argue a "belief". Islam as a real religion exist around the world. Many searchers and philosophers, clerics and theologises and others, studied, read and write books and articles (pro and against) for years, yet this belief is still there very strongly. Why do you people look like Don Qixote trying to kill the "Windmills" ?
Would you guys try to find a new topic, more interesting than those absurdities which are not new to anybody anymore ?
u2: You don't actually
by Anonymous3 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:05 AM PSTu2:
You don't actually deserve a reply because you're crudely presumptuous. However,I'm in a generous mood this morning so I will try to elaborate. I did not say anything about Scientific Method...Any belief system whatsoever...Scientific Method as a belief system is the end of knowledge.
Muslims have been the
by Anonymous3 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:57 AM PSTMuslims have been the largest contributors in the "dehumanization" of Muslim. They sit on there hands, and stick their heads into the sand. If they want the rest of the world (5 billion) to change our perception, it is up to muslims to do so. Please enlighten the infidels by explaining the "true Islam" with your scholarly refrences...please the whole world is waiting....
to Anonymous67
by U2 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:54 AM PST"Beliefs are not the beginning of knowledge, they're the end."
So belief in the Scientific Method is the end of knowledge? You are brilliant!
Ananymous- 2
by Jahanshah Rashidian on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:50 AM PSTInstead of blaming me and some other writers on this site, be correct to respect other ideas than Islamic. I personally do not care about any religion unless political Islam, a dictatorial social order.
Mr. pundit, please defend the cause and authencity of your political Islam instead of bodging and twisting the current results of it in our country.
I do not believe in any religion and am not against Muslims. I bet you that you never find a word in my writings disrespecting any religion, God, Prophet or mass of followers. I make analyses and of course criticism as every free soul has the freedom of expression to do so in the West. Furthermore, one should not be a scholar like you to analyse, it is enough to open the eyes to see the plague of the IRI and the plight of people.
Now if the plague of the IRI and its supporters or mercenaries do not accept this freedom, then they should propuse us how we, secular people and victims of islamism, can substantially analyse Islam, especially political Islam.
Mr. Rashidian: As usual,
by Anonymous3 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:44 AM PSTMr. Rashidian: As usual, original and thought provoking, creating severe "cognitive dissonance" among the ummah. You can't really fault them either. It is almost impossible to overcome internalization of belief system that your grew up with...you're pushing the envelope and that's a good thing...
Beliefs are not the
by Anonymous67 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:39 AM PSTBeliefs are not the beginning of knowledge, they're the end.
Beliefs are not the
by Anonymous67 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:33 AM PSTBeliefs are not the beginning of knowledge, they're the end.
Dear Jahanshah Rashidian, THANKS for the prompt replay
by Anonymous... (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 09:23 AM PSTDear Mr. Rashidian,
I appreciate your commitment to empower your fellow countrymen.
Please excuse me if I happen to be too intrusive …
But I am really interested to know your religious background. Can you please explain your journey to TRUTH as you see it....
Thanks.
Dildo Worshipping
by Dildo Worshipper (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 08:43 AM PSTMy journey towards Dildo Idol worshipping began when I read tozieh ol mesael (Explanation of Problems), by the late Musawi Khomeini, over thirty years ago. I was young and impressionable back then, ripe for the idea of change, but when one day I heard him say: “een toar nebashad keh een joor bashad” (it should not be like this to be like that), I decided right there and then that I should find a better religion than his, which eventually lead me to worship of Dildo Idols. The word Dildo, which is also known as Phallic that originates from phallus, is an erect penis or any penis shaped object, which I have a replica of it sitting on top of my drawer chest, as majestic as the George Washington Monument.
Every man, if they don’t have any physical impotency, from the day they are born, and even when they are still in a womb, experiences 3-5 erections while they are sleeping. This is nature’s way of assuring enough blood is supplied to the most vital organ in the universe. This nature’s prank is so important to human survival that even when some boys come out of their mother’s womb, they come out with an erection.
So, I do most of my praying to my Dildo Idol at sleeping time when I get my erections. However, my religion has a rigid rule, which requires that whenever there is a Dildo rising I should fall down on my knees and pray to my Idol, which represents fertility, life, and genesis. Dildo Idol is in opposition to God of Ass, which I don’t worship. The Ass is the god of infertility, death and destruction, which Khomeini worshipped. I do not worship my ass. When I pray to my Dildo Idol I am always facing in his direction, and I have to make sure my ass never faces Dildo. That would be a direct violation of my religion code of conduct, also very dangerous for my ass to be facing Dildo.
My religion is not a new one. The first signs of Dildo Idol worshipping appeared around 28,000 years ago. The oldest artifact indicating phallic worshipping is a siltstone phallus discovered in Hohle Fels Cave in Germany. That is how the Germans eventually became ahead on science and technology in the twentieth century. They had a good head start, but another asshole Ass worshipper called Adolf Hitler took over all the advances of Dildo worshipping Germans and turned this world into a hellhole. Fortunately Dildo worshipping Germans recovered rapidly from the devastation of the WWII; perhaps they had discovered Viagra long before Pfizer patented it in 1996.
In the northeast of Iran, in Golestan Province, at the border of Turkmenistan, at the top of a chain of mountains, there are stone statues of Phalluses, most likely from Elam era in the ancient Persia about 5000 years ago. So, my Dildo Idol worshipping religion is definitely rooted in my past heritage, however for five thousand years we have been deprived of this glorious cultural heritage because of all the assholes that have invaded our homeland throughout history and have changed our culture.
In Hinduism, which is the oldest religion known to mankind (and womankind); a symbolic marker called lingam was used for phallic worship of the Hindu God Shiva in the form of a phallus stone pillar in the Yoni (womb) of the Hindu temples. Oh Shit! This is too confusing! To put it simply, in some aspect of Hinduism God is a penis residing in a vagina. OK, that’s much better!
Dildo worshipping Indians eventually produced such things as Kama Sutra, which deals with human (and huwoman) sexual behavior and intercourse positions. They also produced a man called Mahatma Gandhi who knew many of those Kama Sutra positions, but kept them to himself. I am convinced he was a Dildo worshipper, but he never admitted it in the public.
Former President Jimmy Carter’s Iranian Ambassador, William Sullivan, said "Khomeini is a Gandhi-like figure." Carter himself viewed Khomeini as more of a religious holy man. His ambassador to the UN, Andrew Young, said "Khomeini will eventually be hailed as a saint." Carter’s adviser James Bill proclaimed in a Newsweek interview on February 12, 1979 that Khomeini was not a mad mujahid, but a man of "impeccable integrity and honesty." Carter, Sullivan, Young, and Bill made asses out of themselves prematurely, as the last three decades have shown that Ass worshipping Khomeini was not in anyway comparable to Dildo worshipping Gandhi.
Of interest in the life of Gandhi is that he attempted several times to abstain from having sexual intercourse with his life long wife, Kasturba, but he failed every time because he underestimated how badly Phallic lingam wanted to be in the midst of Yoni temple.
Now, if you will excuse me please, I have to fall on my knees and pray to Dildo.
To: Just Believer excellent! Mr. Rashidian is misinformed!!
by Anonymous-2 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 08:28 AM PSTUnfortunately, many seem to be more than willing to bash Islam without having significant knowledge about the religion; have not read the Qur'an or if they have, not understood it, nor do they have a clue about the life of Prophet Muhammad and what life was like in pre-Islamic Arabia.
I do not need to reiterate what Just Believer has said, because he said the truth. It is obviously coming from someone who has a deep knowledge about Islam.
However, the author of this article is a different case.
Mr. Rashidian may feel that he has the widest freedom to write whatever he likes even if the information is not credible, not thoroughly studied or understood. However, while your article can both stimulate the readers it can also miseducate, by disseminating, superficial, inaccurate information leading the readers toward a wrong conclusion. The victims of such dangerous misinformation will be an entire people who follow this faith, which to date account for over 1.5 billion of our planets population, while you resolve yourself of any responsibility.
We have already witnessed how lies, propaganda and faulty information led this country to a catastrophic war in Iraq, whose victims are innocent civilians and U.S. soldiers. We have also noted that the media, journalists and writers played a significant role in perpetuating such lies to the masses without fulfilling their responsibility of professional journalism, in providing credible and accurate information.
For whatever reason you seem to have an obsession and hatred toward Islam, your constant Islam bashing is not going to change people’s faith about their religion. I would hardly think that they would look at you as an expert on Islam. However, if your target audience are those who have little to no knowledge about Islam, your writing demonstrates your irresponsibility in misusing the public trust!
Mr. Rashidian, you, Amil and Kourosh Sassanian have been going on a daily Islam bashing campaign. You have all become part of the "Ministry of Misinformation on Islam" . In doing so you have lost all credibility in being a source of valid information on this subject.
Your subvertive agenda is not going to be fulfilled by such articles. I would suggest a new approach!!
R:Ananymous
by Jahanshah Rashidian on Sat Feb 02, 2008 08:14 AM PSTPlease see my last reply . I respect people's beliefs, as long as the beliefs respect other people too.
I am sorry for this Idian immigrant. I worked for 2 years for the German Red Cross, as a social assistant for African immigrants, and 6 months for the Ausländerbehörde (foreigners' office). The latter is a democratically elected body by foreigners living in Germany and run by a German “Geschäftsführer” (manager). I witnessed individual problems or lack of respect for foreigners, but not such a thing which happened for our unlucky friends.
It is true that German society is relatively closed to foreigners, especially to non-Europeans or white people. The language is difficult and in structure and grammar very different from English.
I had personally no important problem with racism or xenophobia, my study from France was completely accepted by the German university.
Like any German citizen, I take part in social and political life of Germany while criticising any right wing or racist attitude and encourage foreigners to integrate after all .
A check for 87 cents (US) for Rashidian --- bring a valid ID
by Management of $75M Club (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 07:23 AM PSTMr Rashidian,
There is a check for 87 cents (US -- don't blame the messenger) for you at the headquarters. Please bring a valid ID and pick it up. This fund is for your current artcile and is part of $75M that US government under president BUSH has allocated to "de-estabalize" iran. Please note that you should come pick up your check within 30 days, or it will be dispersed to Shaboon BiKalleh. He writes better than you.
Club Management
R: Ananym17
by Jahanshah Rashidian on Sat Feb 02, 2008 07:07 AM PSTI paste the current comment on Mr. Imani's article that you mentioned. You see that my comment does not target any religion or person.
Furthermore, I did not insult or disrespect the Prophet, God--written all in capital--not because of fear, but to respect Muslims . So, here is the comment:
"Mr. Imani
This is an excellent article with a deep analysis.
Formation of morality in Islamic society is more or less religion. Such a religious morality goes behind any rational value and routinely creates right ideals or principles of human conduct. In a higher degree, religious morality creates a moral judgement which is a cliché for any thing regarded as good or evil. This is in fact the reason that such a judgement is charged with an “irrational” absolutism. The judgement, which is an important psychological faculty, conducts major attitudes of us and only through it we realise and evaluate our relations with the environment.
Now, if such an important faculty is preconditioned by a primitive belief system, which has no objective and adaptable premises, then we can be lost in a dark horizon for ever. This is what psychologists call it “Primacy effect”, a tendency to build every thing after a model of information or belief received at first, even regardless of its rationality. Psychology is however in progress and finds optimist methods to remove such a stereotyped barrier. Once the ills of a belief system are morally and emotionally explained, the believer, who relies on these two values, will progressively abandon his irrational belief and can open rational eyes to his environment.
What we should do, we have to consider their moral aqnd emotional values and try to inject rationality through them, so that we can remove their primacy effects."
What is the fantism stuck in this comment? Whm did I disrespect?
As you know in all democratic societies, people can discuss, criticise--of course, not insult or slander--any ideological or religious belief. In this perspective, Islam as a political entity (political Islam) is not exempt.
Can you prove that political Islam does not exist?
DearJahanshah Rashidian
by Anonymous.... (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 06:21 AM PSTHow are you? this is ... 100%
The things you attribute to Islam are not really part of Iranian culture (as you know) and generally not part of Islamic world in general … All the way from Africa … Algeria to Egypt and Lebanon … Moslems are very tolerant and are not so closed minded except for the few fringe groups such as Al-Qaeda ...
In the west especially in US they never specify or have ever discussed how big is "Al-Qaeda" ...
In my opinion "Al-Qaeda" is no more than 5000 people world wide ... surly "Al-Qaeda" doses not represent Islam...
Any way, I do agree at some point we Iranians need to over come the existing Islamic Laws and restrictions on the books …
Since you have brought up your daily encounters, can you please share some personal experience and information if at all possible? What is your religion (Family?) …
I came across Spiegel recent articles on difficulties experienced by foreigners living in Germany …
//www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518...
If at all possible can you share some of your experiences … I think this will give more insight to understand your critic and world view of Islam …
Thanks…
Rashidian, Amil Imani and fanaticism!
by Anonym17 (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 06:13 AM PSTJahanshah, I am as atheist as it gets .... but don't you think you and Amil Imani (//iranian.com/main/member/amil-imani) are overly obsessed with Islam?
You and Amil Imani have many differences with Muslim fanatics but with all due disrespect you are all fanatics.
BTW here is one of Amil Imani's article that you posted a comment on (//iranian.com/main/2008/never-mind-bombpage...).
With respect for all who
by Jahanshah Rashidian on Sat Feb 02, 2008 04:17 AM PSTWith respect for all who left their comments, unfortunately, I see some Muslims reacting with emotional hindsight.
My article is simply ispired from normal and daily discussions due to the result of Islam or Islamism, especially in daily life of Iranians , Muslim or not, political or not, ideologically oriented or not. so, I am not inspired from any ideology or political agenda, but from the daily facts.
Fanatic Muslims from any calibre rely on the Koran, Hadiths, Tafsirs and etc., with an eager to deduce deeper meanings and patterns for everything, if sometimes the source falls into contradiction or cannot plausibly shed light on the issue; the poor will never “sinfully” give up and never accept an “un-Islamic” truth. Instead, they will attempt with any excuse to prove that the source is misinterpreted or misunderstood. This is exactly the fear that impedes these Muslims from growin and waking up, this the taboos that I think must be broken.
I may agree with some of you that Islam could apply to the norms and needs of the clan society of Arabia, but I am sure that it cannot apply to our today's diverse societies. The concepts like Jihad, Murder, Pillage, Infidel, Marriage of a 9 year old girl, polygamy, Mouring rituals, praying, Fasting, Hijab, Gender segregation, sharia and etc. will never find a plausible interpretation and logic for the modern societies.
So, like any set of laws and moral, Islam belongs to its "Golden"past and environment but is incompatible to our new world as some “non-fanatic” Muslims acknowledge too.
I agree with Author 100%
by Anonymous.... (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 03:05 AM PSTHowever, We have to USE ISLAM as a tool to fight with those who want divide IRAN .... Islam is a tool ...
An out dated tool ... At some point we have to free our selves from the Islamic Ignorance and grow up ...
If the cave man could enjoy a this (look bellow) ... why can not an Iranians enjoy this in Iran today ?
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlefZqQcZJM&feature...
The author is clearly bisavad
by atheist (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 01:30 AM PST"Nabuwwat, or Muhammad’s claim of being God’s prophet ((Muhammad-al-rassul-Allah) is one of the pillars of Islam."
"Another pillar of Islam is the conviction that Muhammad is the final Prophet"
Bisavad! Nabuwwat is a pillar of Islam. That part you got right. Muhammad being the final prophet is part of the same pillar and not "another pillar."
I am an atheist, don't claim to know enough to comment on the subject and even I know that much. You are clearly bisavad but seem compelled to offer advice. Why is that? A first grade student in Iran knows the 5 pillars of Shia Islam but you don't yet you are quick to philosophize about Islam. Just because this website provides a forum for any idiot to get published doesn't mean you have to take advantage of it.
If you can figure this out,
by Wondering (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 01:21 AM PSTIf you can figure this out, it is reasonable to assume that at the latest by 1979, the CIA, MI-6, Mosad, etc also had this type of analysis available to them. So why then did they force this regime onto Iran? Why did General Huyser, a high ranking American officer and second in command of NATO forces, was in Iran transferring the military power to Khomeini's regime through mediation with Iran's military leaders at the time? Why did these guys want to make sure the Iranian military would not kill the revolution? What would the US, Israel, Britain, etc gain from this? We do know that despite their rantings, the US, Israel and the West in general has enjoyed cheap oil since IRI came o power. We do know that if Shah was not taken out by them oil prices would be much much higher by now. Is it possible that now that Iran has started to become powerful these powers are planing to weaken it again under the excuse of bring democracy to Iran? Is it possible Mr. Rashidian that despite your good intentions, you may be only helping their cause by preparing public opinion for the approval of a military strike or crushing sanctions? Something to think about. Nothing is absolute in this world - you know that. So what cause are we helping here? Should we not attack the real culprit instead of their puppet? How is that valuable? So we let US/Israel/the West destroy Iran any time they feel Iran is starting to become powerful under the pretense that they are concerned about Iranians? Think about it please.
to sara
by non believer (not verified) on Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:56 AM PST"In one of the comments I read the commenter asking what is the alternative to replace the current system of belief? I question why is it needed at all?"
.
I think you are referring to me. Why is a belief system needed at all? That seems like a rather dumb question. Humans function best collectively and for this, a set of common belief system is necessary. You may argue that religion in not needed as a belief system and could be eliminated. But then you are replacing it with secularism, which in itself is a belief system. In short, there is no getting around having a belief system.
.
Furthermore, nature does not deal well with vacuum and humans are no exception. When you eliminate a belief system, you create a vacuum or a void and that necessarily needs to be filled somehow. Similarly when a vacuum is created in the power structure of a society, various forces naturally compete to fill that vacuum.
.
Our good author here is undermining a belief system but offers no alternative. This, as I mentioned in my previous post, creates an unnatural and unstable state in human affairs. It won't work. One can offer secularism in place of the current religious belief system that exists in Iran. This is fair enough but if the motivation is to improve human condition, secularism has a rather nasty track record, arguably worse than religion. All one has to do is to look at secular Europe over the past two centuries or US today with all its wars and strife it brought to the "uncivilized world" to see that secularism does not have a very good track record either.
.
I don't know what the answer is. But I do know that you can not simply advocate the undermining of a belief system without offering an alternative one.
Problem with religion is
by Anonymous3 (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:51 PM PSTProblem with religion is this, when they say god said this, there is no place for discussion. And that is where the the danger lie.
The underachievement of Muslims should come as no surprise to those of us who understand the true nature of Islam. Everything a Muslim needs to know is in the Koran, Hadith or Sunnah. Muslims are not encouraged to seek knowledge and better themselves. Muslims are against progress, modernity and science. Those that control Islam do not want to see Muslims educated as an educated Muslim will apply commonsense and logic to the Koran and see it for what its is, a collection of distorted Bible and Torah stories and in print the mind of a 7th century Bedouin bandit leaders.
when fanatic christian
by Asian man (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:42 PM PSTwhen fanatic christian neocons want to attack your country, maybe the best defense is religion. So now it is the wrong time to criticize your religion no matter what believe or not.
To all of you believers and non-believers in Quran
by Sera (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 09:37 PM PSTPlease be true to yourselves. No one, in a right mind and conscience, should ACCEPT or REJECT what they do not know about. If you have not read Quran cover to cover by yourselves, you shouldn't allow yourself to accept or reject it. You believers should not accept it because you were born in a muslim family and your father approved Quran while he himself perhaps had heard that from his own father. Also you non-believers should not reject Quran if you have not read it yourselves and you hate it because some muslims have committed horrendous crimes.
Personally have read Quran cover to cover many times and also have studied 6-7 other major religions and philosophies. My studies and searches were an attempt to answer the quest and urge I had from within to find a way to connect to my source(let's call it God). At the end of my search I landed at this conclusion that in order to connect to God, you do not need to follow any religion. Human beings were connected to God and were worshiping God since far before these religions and philosophies came to existence. In fact for most people, before these religions, God was mostly manifested in the forms of nature forces. This kind of realization of God proved compatible later on in most scriptures where God is described, for example, as the light of the universe. God doesn't mind if is called Allah or Jehovah, ... etc and doesn't mind if you connect to him through dancing or chanting or bowing down,...etc. Remember the story of Mosa va Shaban?
In one of the comments I read the commenter asking what is the alternative to replace the current system of belief? I question why is it needed at all? why any system of belief should be dictated to people by any leader or authority at all? why not let every one connect and worship God the way suitable for them? That doesn't mean we do not need a system to govern a society. That's a different matter.
Another fellow was accusing others of not having deep understanding of Quran. First of all I hope you have bothered to read that book yourself. It's a pity if a book or system of belief is conducting and shaping your entire life from birth to death without you ever knowing what it is. Secondly please tell me why is it that when you read Quran, you can have a deep understanding of it, but if X and Y read it they can't? why don't you credit every human being with equal intelligence, and more important than that, with equal willingness to find the truth? How come you are searching for the truth, and you realize it when you see it, but others are fooling and deceiving themselves? What is the basis of this self-righteousness? Please at least think about my question.
Thanks Mr Rashidian for your article and expressing your views. I hope you have read Quran yourself. Whatever your intentions, and you are totally entitled to them, this article provides an opportunity for different views to be expressed and shared.
Maybe
by Bavar (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 08:51 PM PSTThe hatred some have towards the so called 'Islamists' has blinded this group to the core of their beings.
What people practice - or rather, think they practice- and what has become of religions is a 180 degree turn from the actuality of true religions.
I was a non-believer who would be disturbed by the mere thought or mention of God, and therefore religion.
I found no justice in the system which was supposed to bring truth and Justice to humankind.
Death, destruction, inhumane behavior, atrocities of man/woman to man/woman and..... all of these I blamed on the existence of a man-made creation called god and religion.
I lived a life of anger...simply put... hatred and abomination.
One day I chanced upon a man... a modern day man,
who wore the clothes of the day and the life of 'now' and we began to 'talk'... then I began the years of reading and contemplating... this could not be the beginning and the end right here, there must be more to it.
Slowly but surely 14 years later I feel the existence of God and have discovered many an answer to my questions... and it continues... there is much more than we see on the surface.
One must give it a chance, and at first "believe it to be able to see it"! --like a little girl once said in a movie.
If only the ones who don't know would refrain from giving answers!
(the problem is they don't know that they don't know! and I gave all kinds of answers, because I was... one of them!)
I am free from this cult. Islamists, you deeds was the reason
by Free at last (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 06:19 PM PSTIt was my happiest day in life when I tore up all Qurans in our apartment and threw away anything and everything related to Islam.
Islamists, you deeds was the reason for my action.
Arrogance wearing tie & Suite
by Ye Irani (not verified) on Fri Feb 01, 2008 06:16 PM PSTAll I can do for articles like this is to analyse the writers mental issue, since there's no value in analysing th econtent - It's a mere blind and irrational statements. It's amazing how Tie & Suite has become symbol of Modernity and Civilization for some newbe secularists!!!!! Unfortunately, they have just obsorbed enough intelligence to be dangerous. Some draw joy out of irrational criticism and hatred against rich cultures and traditions in the name of Intellect and Freedom of speech. This type of people who come out and blindly insult majority have no idea what Freedom means - They think Freedom means irresponsible attack on what they do not believe in. The outcome is self-admiration for saying something out of ordinary. This type of behavior equates well with Fashism and Anarchy. So, imagine what this people will do if they run a country????????
If you have upset BRAIN, you can go and vomit at some psychotherapist. You will get better results.
Please read
by Daryush on Fri Feb 01, 2008 05:20 PM PSTPlease read "God but no god" by Reza Aslan. Really, it's not a pro Islamic book, read it. It's written nicely and will give you the answers you are looking for.