Now I cannot take this approach for two reasons: firstly it is not true and if I somehow managed to catch this contagion I would be thrown out of my University should I be foolish enough to commit such statements to academic scrutiny and secondly, as a student of Sufism it is not a view that it is possible to hold.

It seems to me that under the “firstly” you have given two reasons, making it 3 in all. I will comment on each.

Firstly 1: I cannot see what supporting evidence or argument you have given to demonstrate that “it is not true”. You’ve made reference to prophetic statements of Mohammad but this means nothing to a kafir like me. They are just alleged sayings of an alleged prophet. There is not a single recorded prediction by Mohammad that is non-trivial and actually came true. (Just as there is not a single recorded “scientific miracle” in the Quran that can stand up to unbiased and informed scrutiny.) It sounds to me much more like Mohammad couldn’t trust base human nature to manage without him in the living flesh. To my mind, there is no evidence that it was managing well while he was alive either.

Firstly 2: I daresay that you would indeed have a hard time at your university were you to “catch this contagion” of identifying Islam with terrorism. Unfortunately, that doesn’t bear on the truth or otherwise of the identity. Academics in the past have had both obsequious and critical attitudes to Islam and the overall impact of their views is pretty neutral.

Secondly: If you identify Sufism as a discipline having the prerequisite of being Muslim, then of course you have a problem. I learn from Rumi every day and I don’t find it problematic that I despise Islam. There are authoritative views in both camps here and, at the end of the day, it’s your choice. However, this problem does not render the identity between Islam and terrorism false simply because it introduces inconveniences. The identity is there for all to see and will not go away because you don’t like it.

There is a compromise position that has some attractions. That is that Islam had a value and a purpose in its day and within limited geographical and cultural areas. For example, in Rumi’s day, it provided the cultural cohesion that allowed at least some parts of the Middle East to withstand the Mongol invasion. It provided the material and military security that allowed good work to be done in the arts and sciences. However, it also made some bad theological, philosophical and legal decisions that would prove fatal.

I believe that Christianity can survive what science and secular humanism has thrown at it. I don’t believe that Islam can do this. We in the West will not let it kill off what we have achieved so far and at such great cost. Ergo, Islam cannot survive. It will explode as surely as the fuse in Mohammad’s turban will explode, as depicted in that cartoon. That is precisely why that cartoon is so offensive to Muslims. It is offensive because it is the truth and Muslims have forgotten how to face the truth.
-----

Some good points - I will pick up on just a few:

There is not a single recorded prediction by Mohammad that is non-trivial and actually came true. (Just as there is not a single recorded “scientific miracle” in the Quran that can stand up to unbiased and informed scrutiny.

Firstly, this is not the nature of Prophethood. One could say the same of Moses or Abraham say in the Judaic tradition. Essentially, a Prophet is a ‘warner’.

Secondly, it is not actually the case. I can think of several prophecies from the hadith, those that relate to the ‘Last Days’. The hadith are suspect in many ways, true - but some of the Prophecies (coincidentally or otherwise) have come to pass.

I will post on this in more detail when all this furore has died down because it is interesting in it’s own right and I don’t want to tie the two together.

If you identify Sufism as a discipline having the prerequisite of being Muslim, then of course you have a problem.

Agreed. Luckily this is not a problem I have.

As you will know from your studies of Rumi, he had Jewish , Christian and Zoroastrian disciples. Bayazid Bistami’s teacher is said by some to have been a Hindu. There are contemporary Western Sufis who have no religious beliefs.

Also there is the uncomfortable fact that Sufis - and Rumi in particular - teach that Sufism is the essence of religion. ALL religions.

There is a compromise position that has some attractions. That is that Islam had a value and a purpose in its day and within limited geographical and cultural areas.

It depends on who is doing the compromising and why surely?

I personally do not feel the need for any compromises because I do not hold a mental framework in this area which necessitates I seek one.

If you do, I can imagine this compromise might work - but then again, so would removing the bias that requires the compromise, This last seems the sort of thing that could be done within the parameters of Sufism. The former is a more intellectual approach.

I believe that Christianity can survive what science and secular humanism has thrown at it. I don’t believe that Islam can do this.

Christianity is 500 years older than Islam. 500 years ago it was at more or less the same point as Islam is now in terms of the problems we are discussing.

I wonder if you would have made such bold predictions about Christianity then? I tend to think you might not have but it would still be the rationalist approach. In any event, against all odds, Christianity reformed.

That is precisely why that cartoon is so offensive to Muslims. It is offensive because it is the truth and Muslims have forgotten how to face the truth.

Maybe. Likely even.

But do you know how to face the truth?

What is truth?

looking forward to more “satire and juvenile behaviour.” it beats what is spilling out of the television screen, and in my opinion, its much needed. there is a noticable sadness and anxiety among many forward-thinking muslims in light of recent global events and perhaps this will finally push many to become more reflective and even outspoken about how things have strayed off course. perhaps we are nearing the threshold of tolerance for what the silence of muslim communities has done in aiding radical elements to demean and take hostage their own faith. i earnestly hope that we will begin to look at ourselves through a critical lens and begin to clean our own house before we pelt stones at others. if anything, i hope the cartoons have galvanized muslims to simply think of what it means to be a muslim in today’s world.

I continue to enjoy reading your posts.

Thanks sufizen!

I was listening to a cleric the other day on the radio. he was being interviewed about all this (btw, I have yet to hear a Muslim cleric or caller to a talk show articulately state the case as it is - the most sense I have heard was from an atheist who claimed that free-speech is nothing without attendant responsibilities, like a child waving a loaded gun around was his phrase I think), anyway, this cleric (wish I could remember his name) was asked whether the debate would have been more permissable (ha) if it wasn’t stemming form a cartoon.

You know what he answered?

He said ‘yes’ - and here his voice rose to a shriek as he yelled “there is no humour in spirituality - it is a serious matter!!!!!!!’.

This is part of the problem I think. No sense of humour. Leads to aggression. I’m being quite serious.

Might be time for a Mulla Nasrudin post later...if I can find something suitably appropriate.

how about a cartoon of (insert name here) looking for a key under a street lamp? sorry, couldn’t help it. i totally agree with you. we seriously need to giggle more. someone should issue a fatwa.

It is surely more than a coincidence that the European Union is putting harsh conditions on Hamas, including the acceptance of the state of Israel, if they want to continue receiving the huge funds for the Palestinian Authority, the Danish Muslim leader -a Palestinian, curiously- talking to Al-Jazeera denouncing the cartoons as an offense to Islam, and now the revolts against the EU embassies.

political islam is not mystical. it’s a social engineering tool. if i were muslim, i would in no way follow any muftie just because he’s orthodox. which is the same way i operate in my orthodox catholic practice: i don’t blindly obey the authority, although i recognize that authority and give it my due.

that mohammad pays some homage to christianity, is no big favor: after all he had a (nestorian?) bishop among his family.

i agree though the cartoons are tasteless, and the Danish paper’s Freedom paradigm is lame.

yet i don’t believe the force of religious fanatism can be combatted with renaissance-style metaphysical reflexion. only by fanatism can fanatism be averted.

strength of orthodox islam in our world lies in its negative and destructive attitudes in relation to that world. times of enlightened islam are gone beyond recovery. it is only for maverick nostalgics to lament it’s disappearance.

fanatically-minded pious orthodox christians can and should welcome the destructive forces of fanatical islam. spanish say: no hay mal que por bien no venga. out of all bad, some good things come.

help the social demons devour one another should be the order of the day for pious christians.

Only by fanatism can fanatism be averted

Interesting viewpoint.

he is not a cleric and i doubt he will call in to radio shows but i think dr tariq ramadan made very poignant points regarding the recent controversy. one of the things he said is that free speech has no legal limits but it definitely has civic limits…