Salaam OmarG,

You said,

“I think people use the adjective “moderate” when they really mean “moderate in political issues”.

You know as well as I do that this is a half truth. I noticed that you like to address issueS with inconclusive resolve. The term “moderate” is used in which ever way will benefit the person, group or agenda which attributes it to a hyphenated Muslim or Islam. C’mon Omar…

Then you said,

“I think this is part of the big problem with how Muslims mix temporal politics and conflicts with eternal faith. Non-Muslims pick up on this very well, mostly because they see so many of us doing it first and then use ‘Muslim’ as if it is in the same class as ‘Democrat’, ‘Capitalist’ and not in the same class as ‘Christian’, ‘Spiritualist’.”

Where do you come up with this stuff? So now you are blaming the use and manipulation of the colloquialisms on Muslims! Wow this topic bugs me Omar… mainly because we find “moderate-Muslim” being used to describe worldview and not necessarily politics only. For example a Muslim in many views of the world is not a “moderate-Muslim” if he or she believes in Sharia however… it is incumbent upon all Muslimun to believe in Sharia… is it not? Wiki describes moderate as such,

“In politics, a moderate is an individual who holds an intermediate position between those generally classified as being left-wing, liberal, or socialist and those seen as right-wing, conservative, or capitalist.”

This refers to politics… which means what for Muslims… the nature of Islam is not like that of the West begining with the separation of church and state… which is why the Ottoman Turks were always misunderstood by the West and the Arabs for that matter as well. These kinds of labels which acurately describe the condition of secular politics in Washington will be our downfall journalistically.

wasalaam

Salam Abu Sahajj,

>>I noticed that you like to address issueS with inconclusive resolve.

Because, in real life, there are often no conclusive resolutions. Someone can make a fatwa, but does anyone really believe that everyone drops what they were doing and adopts the fatwa? Your quote of what a moderate is echos the rhetoric I hear about Muslims being on the middle path. So, are you saying that Islam is inherently moderate? If so, yes, I think so too. But, are Muslims moderate in America when they desire shariah to replace the Constitution? No, its a radical position. Moderateness id relative.

I support the seperation of religion and state in every circumstance today. Here’s why: you’re dealing with the theoretical that shariah is awesome and fairly addresses human needs. Hood on Islamiclawetc mentioned recently that the way Muslims perform shariah through fiqh today is inflexible. I’d go further and say that in many cases it is oppressive because it is stuck inside the cultural influences of authortarian and inflexible and patriarchial societies. That’s very dangerous for Islam. You see a system of salvation, while I see a system in Iran that is turning so many people off from Islam. I saw the same in Afghanistan, where people had stopped praying in protest to the Taliban’s un-Islamic harshness. I would not encourage anyone to use prayer as a protest, but this is the reality of how some people react. You can say that “Allah did not guide them” but surely you cannot wish to be the instrument of someone being turned off from Islam?

Let the Muslims develop and then turn to a modern fiqh. Turkey experienced this: a radical break from Islam which looks unfortunate. But, after seperating religion from government and turning to nationalism, they did something the Ottomans had not done for centuries: they won wars. They kicked out the Greek army, intimidated the British, French and Russians into giving up thier claims. That’s impressive. Nowadays, they are prosperous, modern and progressing rapidly AND turning towards a good practice of Islam. This is something many other Muslim societies in the Middle East have been incapable of doing.

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.

Step Off AS

 It is like you picked a different topic and used Omar's post to make your unrelated point.

The heart of this post is: "I think this is part of the big problem with how Muslims mix temporal politics and conflicts with eternal faith." That is the crux of the matter and the main problem Muslims will struggle with for coming years. Succinctly stated. Other religions too but particularly Islam.

Define 'moderate' by it polar opposite, which is better known to us all: "Extremist." Radicalized, rebel, terrorist. The training and results of taliban or al-qaeda training is an extreme form of skewed justice and social order which is repressive even by 11th century standards. Men MUST wear beards? Women must not be educated or let out of the house? The agenda is highly political and lacking in spiritual substance. As is orthodox Islam but that is another subject.

Moderate Muslim is a reaction to the pressure that extremists have laid on the general umma at large and an expression of the sanity and healthiness of the practice of Islam. Moderate Muslims ought to be extreme about intolerance for extremists. When will enough be enough?

Islamic extremists, in some measure, have been a reaction to Western hegemony. More could be done by the Bush administration to fight al-qaeda if they built schools and offered assistance to struggling countries in the middle east.

That is an example of 'moderate' politics. So Moderate Muslims need not be apoliticized, their values are different and so are their means.

Buzz Kill

“But, are Muslims moderate in America when they desire shariah to replace the Constitution? No, its a radical position.”

OmarG… the bottom line is that as a Muslim it is incumbent upon you to believe in Sharia’ is it not? Therefore isn’t it most desireable for Sharia’ to govern the your affairs? It seems to me that every Muslim should want the same thing… Now whether one would actively pursue this to the point where the majority would be opposed that is radical, and exactly what Israel is doing as we speak… this however is not what Muslims who are in favor of Sharia are doing here in the US.

“I’d go further and say that in many cases it is oppressive because it is stuck inside the cultural influences of authortarian and inflexible and patriarchial societies.”

I think that people here are smart enough and courageous enough to develop a system within Sharia’ that is approapriate for American Muslims shoudl Sharia’ every be appropriate for America.

“A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.”

To me this means that you are 2/3 Muslim… here is why:

I wrote in an article entitled,”Is This My America?“ a piece about securlarism and it reads,

Secularism

The second definition that I would like to address is secularism. Secularism is defined as “the state of being free from religious or spiritual qualities”. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as such,

sec·u·lar·ism (sÄ•k‘yÉ™-lÉ™-rÄ­z‘É™m)
n.

1. Religious skepticism or indifference.


2. The view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.

 

In terms from an Islamic standpoint, secularism is a materially motivated ideology. In fact there is “no common ground between secularism and Islam”. Secularism rejects belief in God, Revelation and the Hereafter. Its functional goal is to acquire material well-being as a means to fulfill ones purpose and be truly happy. A Muslim and well known author AbdulWahid Hamid wrote of secularism and claims,

“Secularism makes religion ‘an individual personal matter, a thing of the conscience, a matter of private faith’ which has little to do with a person’s social, economic or political life.” (A.W. Hamid, Islam the Natural Way)

Secularism and materialism developed as a result of Marxism. Marx proclaimed that,

“Communist-Man must believe that the entirety of history is the creation and work of man… He must further be convinced that he possesses tangible proof that he created himself, and that he can pursue the course of this creation.” (K. Marx)

Marx also wrote,

“The religion of the workers consists in denying God and in attempting to revive the divinity of man.” (K. Marx)

After Marxism evolved, its extreme form which has similarities to Neo-Conservatism (because some of its founders were in fact Socialists) was an expression of fanaticism which was propagated by Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov also known as Vladimir Lenin. Lenin’s Marxist influence drove him to deny religion however his own hatred for religion led him to declare,

“Now we must go to the limit: to a definite and final elimination of religion.” (V. Lenin)

wasalaam

I think unfortunately you overemphasize the role of shariah. The US is 98-99% non-Muslim and therefore one cannot override the majority and impose an Islamist regime or legal structure on the people. And, what I was disparaging was what passes for fiqh these days, both among traditionalists who think they got it all right, and the literalists who think they got it all right. Fiqh is less of a flexible process today and more of an ideology. I think your overemphasis of it shows well how it is (mis)used as a tool to attempt to control people. Most expressions of fiqh only allow for a Muslim regime to be in charge. In any case, modern pluralistic societies have already achieved some of what is mandated in shariah: good governance; security of property, freedom of worship. Does it have to be executed by Muslims in order to benefit people? I think not. And, please, Lenin is hardly representative of what secularism is; he called for and implemented atheism, which is quite different.

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.

Also, Abu Sahajj, secularism actually developed centuries before Lenin and even Marx. British and French philosophers devised it as a way of alleviating the obscene and bloddy religious conflicts which plagued pre-modern and early modern Europe (16th-18th centuries CE). It is better described as “Liberalism”. I don’t think it is accurate to equate Socialism or Communism (both of which I despise) with Liberlism or secularism in political affairs.

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.

“The US is 98-99% non-Muslim and therefore one cannot override the majority and impose an Islamist regime or legal structure on the people.”

I agree… which is why I wrote,

“Now whether one would actively pursue this to the point where the majority would be opposed that is radical, and exactly what Israel is doing as we speak… this however is not what Muslims who are in favor of Sharia are doing here in the US.”

Perhaps Muslims would pursue a minority government ruling the majority in the US if it were possible but that would be speculative and therefore unimportant… for this discussion.

...not to mention providing fodder for the anti-Muslims!

>>this however is not what Muslims who are in favor of Sharia are doing here in the US

I’ve not heard of such people before, I mean, ones who had actually thought it out. Are you referring to Hezbi types? In any case, since I’m not familiar with the people you speak of, what form do they envision shariah being implemented in the US?

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.

this however is not what Muslims who are in favor of Sharia are doing here in the US

That is exactly my point… no one is pursuing Sharia’ here its just talk which is my point… you were the one who asked,

“But, are Muslims moderate in America when they desire shariah to replace the Constitution? No, its a radical position.”

I’m saying, yes they can remain moderate… radical would be if they actually made plans to organize and implement such a thing when Muslims are such a minority. That is what I’m saying, I hope thats clear or are you playing confused on purpose?

No, not on purpose. It was not clear to me. So, intention to establish it is not radical, only the actual efforts to do so? While that may accurately describe the reality, its not much better than saying, “don’t worry; although we want to dominate you, we just are too weak now.” I would hope that the embedded assumption of eventual victory is not lost on you.

- A Salafi in worship, a Sufi in society, a Secularist in government.