Well, early in the mornin’
‘Til late at night,
I got a poison headache,
But I feel all right.
I’m pledging my time to you,
Hopin’ you’ll come through, too.
(Bob Dylan)

Yahya Birt’s blog is host to a Pledge of Mutual Respect and Cooperation Between Sunni Muslim Scholars, Organizations, and Students of Sacred Knowledge which has been signed by an impressive list of Muslim clever people.

Founding conference attracts diverse gathering resolved to create physical spaces for progressive Muslims

Bronxville, NY/Los Angeles, CA: The progressive Muslim movement in the United States took a significant step forward as a diverse collection of activists, organizers, and academics gathered at Sarah Lawrence College in Bronxville, New York, May 15-17, for the first conference of Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV, website: www.mpvusa.org). Coming together in fellowship, they joined in communal devotion, shared the various personal, intellectual, and spiritual journeys that brought them there, discussed how to formulate their positions on political, social, and cultural issues and how to interact with other progressives and other Muslims. They also elected an Executive Board to lead them for the next two years.

Personally, over the last few years, I have been, I find, drifting—others might say coming home to—the Left. You see, I grew up in South Asia where, except for those—and there are an increasing number of them in this day and age—we have great reverence for local historical figures like Khusrau and Kabir and a bevy of what were essentially anti-establisment figures that cared more for hearts and people; more about God than strict ritual.

(Originally written: 2/25/07)

Let’s be blunt: I want stuff to happen, and I’ll generally do my darndest to make it happen—as long as the means are morally permissible, of course. Three examples will suffice.

A big problem with the Progressive Islam discourse is that many of you North Americans seem to think you are the world. You arent! The term "Progressive Islam" didnt start in North America, the term "Progressive Muslim" did not start in North America. "Progressive Islam" was a movement long before the founders of PMU discovered the term (and I use the word "discovered" in the same way that colonialists used it to talk of parts of the world they'd never seen and suddenly landed on).

And since the term didnt start in North America, i doubt it will be killed in North America. Eteraz, while the PMU started, formed its board and stuctures, then died a death that was sometimes slow and somtimes fast, the term "Progressive Muslim" was still being used and continually debated in other parts of the world. In South Africa, for example. With the debaters mostly being blissfully unaware of the shenanigans of the PMU. And why should they care? After all, they were using the term before the PMU was conceived, before Omid Safi even conceived his book. And it always meant to them something different to what it meant to the "big-tenters" of the PMU.

Ali Eteraz has declared Progressive Islam "dead."

I guess we should board up the windows and close up shop. I'll call Kecia Ali, Omid Safi and Ebrahim Moosa and let them know. Someone call Naeem Jeenah over in South Africa and Abdennur Prado in Spain, the world needs to know! An American blogger has decided it is all over! Sheesh, we all thought we were in this for the long haul. We really should have asked Ali Eteraz about it first.

Forgive the sarcasm, but I feel a bit like the Geico cavemen: "Sorry we couldn't get those changes to you sooner!" I recall when PMU first got together one member said that everything we do will be for 3 generations from now, maybe longer.

The Guardian has an interesting report about how quite a few well-known British Jews are speaking out against their community spokespeople for being unrepresentative of the community's diverse views on Israeli policy:

"We come together in the belief that the broad spectrum of opinion among the Jewish population of this country is not reflected by those institutions which claim authority to represent the Jewish community as a whole," the letter says. Jewish leaders in Britain, it argues "put support for the policies of an occupying power above the human rights of an occupied people" in conflict with Jewish principles of justice and compassion.

Sometimes I wonder if there isn't truth to conservative accusations that progressives merely pursue the morality of the moment, and that when our beliefs are no longer en vogue, they would change- that we are morality fashion victims. This is a particularly pernicious charge to level at the followers of a faith that values tradition over progress, that creates a curse word out of the concept of innovation. If this were indeed true, that would indicate that progressives are truly on thin ice, Islamically speaking. Like most charges leveled by conservatives, it's a low blow, but I decided to see where it led.

Many Muslims try to emulate the earliest Muslim community, that of the Prophet's companions in Medina. This produces a variety of results, with some developing a lifestyle that would be a Walt Disney-fied version of 7th century Arabia, complete with immaculate polyester garb. For them, at least, the customs and values of that time are of a piece- that without the attempts to imitate the dress, cuisine, and other cultural features of that place and time, one cannot fully emulate the values and teachings of Islamic texts. I must admit I fail to see the wisdom in costuming oneself in an endeavor for a more ethical lifestyle, especially if those costumes are made of synthetic fibers in questionable conditions. Also, their practices often demonstrate a lack of knowledge of just what 7th century Arabia was like, borrowing indiscriminately from rural and urban, Arab and Persian and even South Asian practices without accounting for the variety, taking it all for a true copy of Medinan life. Nonetheless, those who adopt such a lifestyle believe that this is indeed the best way to approximate the moral beauty that the Prophet (SAWS) exemplifies.

Sometimes I wonder if there isn't truth to conservative accusations that progressives merely pursue the morality of the moment, and that when our beliefs are no longer en vogue, they would change- that we are morality fashion victims. This is a particularly pernicious charge to level at the followers of a faith that values tradition over progress, that creates a curse word out of the concept of innovation. If this were indeed true, that would indicate that progressives are truly on thin ice, Islamically speaking. Like most charges leveled by conservatives, it's a low blow, but I decided to see where it led.

Before we move on to other subjects, here's a round-up of reaction about the Pope's speech that I found interesting:

George Friedman of StratFor, has a very interesting take on the whole thing, calling it "A Deliberate Move", saying:

"Let's begin with the obvious: Benedict's words were purposely chosen. The quotation of Manuel II was not a one-liner, accidentally blurted out. The pope was giving a prepared lecture that he may have written himself -- and if it was written for him, it was one that he carefully read. Moreover, each of the pope's public utterances are thoughtfully reviewed by his staff, and there is no question that anyone who read this speech before it was delivered would recognize the explosive nature of discussing anything about Islam in the current climate. There is not one war going on in the world today, but a series of wars, some of them placing Catholics at risk."

You can read the whole commentary at: http://halldor2.blogspot.com/2006/09/limits-of-tolerance.html

Tariq Ramadan, who has been referred to Europe Islam's Martin Luther King, weighs in with:

"...Throughout the Muslim world, religious leaders, presidents, politicians and intellectuals joined their voices with protesting masses angered by a perceived “insult” to their faith ... Whatever the judgements of these scholars and intellectuals, one would have hoped that they adopt a more reasoned approach in their critical remarks..."

You can read his commentary at: http://www.digitalnpq.org/articles/global/114/09-19-2006/tariq_ramadan

Daniel Pipes, yes, Daniel Pipes; I said interesting, not necessarily "positive contribution to the discussion" weighs in with a predictable--but not-so-incendiary-as-you'd-expect op-ed, includiing some interesting (as promised) comments, including:

• "First reflection: Benedict has offered elusive comments, brief statements, and now this delphic quotation, but he has not provided a much-needed major statement on this vital topic of Islam. One hopes it is in the offing...."
• "In the Italian original, however, Benedict says only sono rammaricato, which translates as "I am disappointed" or "I regret."

You can read his whole piece at: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3968

[To complete the picture in terms of academics and thinkers, and if you haven't already, please don't forgot to check out my post about Karen Armstrong's comments on the issue at: http://ifaqeer.blogspot.com/2006/09/karen-armstrong-on-popes-speech.html ]