Deborah Harrell wrote: > While I _understand_ why Boykin* has done so, I > strongly disagree with him; all who cast this "war on > terror" in a religious frame invoke Crusade on the > western (which Boykin has equated to 'fundamentalist > Christian') front, and jihad on the Muslim. That is a > recipe for bloodshed. It is wrong-headed, divisive, > and arrogant; it invites, nay demands! further > extremism and absolutism.
I agree. > *IMO he ought to be demoted, retired or least > sidelined to a non-sensitive administrative position, > and he should _never_ be allowed command of a fighting > unit or missile site. I don't know how efficient a military commander he is but he certainly should not be a spokesperson for the war against terror. Boykin is good for laughs [and Brad linked to a wonderful satire on his blog the other day wherein Boykin focused on the Hindus] but it really is too sensitive an issue, and a rather crucial time. His outpourings don't really help - actually, it would be less harmful to give OBL airtime. > I came across this in a search for sites on the > Enlightenment (which I wanted WRT America's founding > principles); the article is much longer. While the > author, Abdal-Hakim Murad, clearly believes in the > moral superiority and universality of Islam, he also > calls for tolerant engagement and for Islam to be a > "prophetic, dissenting witness within the reality of > the modern world." > > http://www.themodernreligion.com/ht/faith-future.html > "...I want to talk about religion - our religion - and > address the question of what exactly is going on when > we speak about the prospects of a mutually helpful > engagement between Islam and Western modernity. I > propose to tackle this rather large question by > invoking what I take to be the underlying issue in all > religious talk, which is its ability both to propose > and to resolve paradoxes. Thanks for the link, it was an interesting article. :) > Islam does not limit itself to the > upliftment of any given section of humanity, but > rather announces a desire to transform the entire > human family. This is, if you like, its Ishmaelite > uniqueness: the religions that spring from Isaac > (a.s.), are, in our understanding, an extension of > Hebrew and Occidental particularity, while Islam is > universal..." [He overstates his case here, as most > Christians consider Jesus 'given for the sake of the > world' and I think there is a Jewish concept of 'being > a light unto the world' also.] Not directly related to the discussion at hand but I do find myself wondering why none of the texts/scriptures of the Sanatan Dharma mention anything similar. <massive snippage> > So this Islamic scholar does not illustrate Spengler's > > viewpoint that "the Islamic world view is bad, > repulsive and nasty." While he points out some of the > failings of Western society, to be sure, they have > been discussed by Western scholars as well! I > disagree with his belief in 'Islam for all' and > 'sacred kingship,' but his approach of tolerance and > moderation is, I hope, the voice of the Muslim > majority. His view is a familiar one for me - sufism, the concept of a tolerant Islam where the extremists occupy the fringes, the rationalist/socialist vision of Iqbal - these are the versions of Islam I grew up with. In books and literature; movies and plays; schools, colleges and neighbourhoods. The advent of terrorism didn't alter the perception all that much either but then, we Indians were lucky/unlucky enough to see three major terrorist movements in three parts of the country and the terrorists were from three different religions: Sikhs, Muslims and Christians. Independent India's first terrorists were the Naxalites though and they are marxists. Hmm, now I find myself wondering if the Hindutva lunatics would form terrorist organisations once they are deprived of govt. patronage.... Anyway, I digress. From where I sit, his view does seem to be the view of a vast silent majority of muslims. The worrisome thing, though, is that relentless pressure, suspicion, demonisation and heckling to prove their humanitarian credentials could easily change that. Ritu PS - I'd recommend Iqbal very highly - poetry more than political essays. He reads the best in Urdu though. :) _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
