Here is a bit I did on where Islamic Philosophy went bad:

No Word For Liberty

M. Simon,

Interesting thoughts. Your comments about Islam's incompatability with science and rational thought reminds me of a question I've long puzzled about: Where do Christain fundamentalists think that the oil buried beneath the sands of Islaic lands come from? Or any fossil fuels, for that matter?

One of my concerns about your piece is that you equate Islam, a religion and therefore, like all religions, essentially irrational, with the societies that contain it. After all, a lot of people who think Jesus Christ was the on of God, died for their alleged sins and rose from the dead after 3 days, are still capable of putting a satellite up in space and broadcasting NFL games to TV sets all over the country. Lutherans, who believe in predestination are still able to get it up enough to go vote.

Why must the first comment be about Islamic philosophy gone bad when I just published an article about where it's going right? M Simon, are you reading or just reacting to the headline?

A good point. I knew a man who had worked at AT&T through divestiture, then Southern Bell and BellSouth. He worked installing phones and lines, worked through the change from wire to fiber cables, and the other various technological revolutions along the way. Very smart guy.

He also firmly believed that dinosaur bones were faked by scientists, in some sort of atheist conspiracy to fool people into not realizing that the world had been created according to a literal reading of the Bible. Honestly. He believed that, and would explain it to you if you'd let him.

Nice fellow, good-hearted, hardworking, never hurt a soul. He raised a family of good kids, who went on to pursue careers of their own.

The human soul has both rational and irrational parts. Most people either decide their feelings or their thoughts are more important to them. They either really believe what feels right, or what logic and evidence dictate.

Not everybody, though. Some don't really try to harmonize their claims. Some people are rational here and irrational there, and it still works out for them.

Mr. Totten - thank you for the job you are doing.

Is the cleric you inteviewed an anomaly?

Certainly in a world of 6.5 billion people there are quite a few variations. El Husseini sounds like he is on his own path, given that he sounds much more supportive of change similar to the Neo-con vision, than what one hears even from Western muslims and their leaders.

Second question: does he have any followers, and if so how wide a net does he cast?

My fear is that in wading the river Islam (at least in the Middle East) you stumbled into a quiet little pool cut off from the main stream, and that the mainstream is of another quite distinct character.

By the way, Mr. Totten, a very interesting post. By the way, am I right in thinking that alama is an alternative romanization for ulama or ulema? If so, it's a degree of scholarship, rather than a social rank as such. Or is it something else that's being expressed here?

I always find time to sneak away from my desk and take my time reading when another article comes up. Great work.

Grim,

Alama is the Lebanese pronounciation.

Is the cleric you inteviewed an anomaly?

Most traditional Shia are in the "quietist school" of Islamic thought. Unlike the Sunni, 12'er Shia believe that the only rightful leader following the death of the Prophet is a descendant of his son-in-law, Ali. The 12th descendant in that line disappeared in the 9th century, and the notion of legitimate Islamic rule is premised on the return of that hidden Imam.

This changed in 1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini's non-traditional views became the ideology of Iran. Khomeini brought external influences into Shia thought, such as the notion that an Islamic state should be the goal of the Shia and only after a just Islamic state is created will the 12th Imam return. Utilizing the apparatus of the police state, Iran has exported this ideology abroad, particularly to Lebanon.

I still think its Khomeini's views that are the anomaly and that much of what passes for dispersion of religious thought is simply Persian imperialism.

Michael,

I'm reading. The cleric you talked to may have his heart in the right place. He also may not have the whole answer.

Just having the ME at peace would be very good. If they don't get on with science and technology they may be in a world of hurt when the oil runs out. For Iran that could be as soon as 5 years.

We do have the example of the Catholic Church which started to come on board with cause and effect in the 1500s as my exposition noted.

Ask Armed Liberal has noted here numerous times we are at war with bad philosophy.

BTW I just saw in my referers log that I got a link from The Muslim Brotherhood. The link is at the bottom of the page in "Other Topics".

Is this good or bad?

That should be "As" not "Ask"

In any case the spread of real democracy relies on personal responsiblity.

You can't get that without a foundation of cause and effect.

Insha'Allah - if God wills it, is not the foundation of a free people.

That was what I was trying to get at. The cleric promotes democracy. Without personal responsibility democracy does not work well.

BTW socialism has a similar effect in the West, just not as severe. For socialists it becomes "the state is responsible".

"its Khomeini's views that are the anomaly and that much of what passes for dispersion of religious thought is simply Persian imperialism."

Absolutely correct.

"Is this good or bad?"

Considering which post they linked to, it is neither good nor bad.

The MB tries to put on a moderate face. And they are moderate compared with, say, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Hezbollah. But they are only really moderate compared with the armed factions. They aren't our friends.

Michael,

Thanks for the reply. And you got it exactly right on the mark. Brilliant.

What they linked to was:

I Found A Moderate Muslim

I'm disenchanted by the peace mantra. I wish someone would engage this gentleman with the proposition that, "there are more important things than peace." That "peace" is not the end-all, be-all of human existance, and sometimes you have to fight, and kill, to attain a more-or-less peaceful existance.

I think just repeating over and over and over again, "I am for peace" is a very simplistic world view. Or chanting that Islam is a "religion of peace" when we can see that statistically and historically Islam is anything BUT a religion of peace and since a majority of Muslims refuse to speak up and do anything about their murderous brethren, then a majority of Muslims are necessarily not peaceful, either.

What about equality among people(s), women's rights, freedom of speech, abolishment of slavery, the pursuit of happiness, the opportunity to get up in the morning and go to work to do a job that you have decided for yourself to do, the importance of a feeling of self-worth and self-respect ...?

NONE of these things are synonymous with peace, but most people in the west would agree that many if not all of them are worth going to war over, which means that they are all more important than mere "peace".

It sounds soooooo very strange that such a learned person like Husseini, with all his books and degrees still tries to "sell" you that the word Islam means peace!!!! while everyone in every remote corner of this world knows that it means sunmission (from the root slm). He goes on trying to persuade everyone that Islam prohibits terrorism (just a note shows you the contrary: "Allah came to them from quarters from which they little expected (it), and cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their dwellings by their own hands and the hands of the Believers, take warning, then, O ye with eyes (to see)!" (59:2))
So why are you believing a person that is obviously trying to apply taqiya?

Gebre Egzavier

M.Simon:

"If they don't get on with science and technology they may be in a world of hurt when the oil runs out."

Imagine my concern. The Arabs and Persians have only had a few trillion dollars of the rest of the world's hard-earned money, for nothing more than being lucky enough to be sitting on something the rest of the world wants.

What have they done with it? Well, let's see. They have bought a few tens of billion dollars' worth of luxury cars, huge mansions in Western cities, and of course a small lake of alcoholic drinks, a big pile of drugs and the services of several thousand hookers. Oh, and by the way, they have spent a fair bit on explosives and weapons for their terrorist friends.

What they haven't done is spend any worthwhile amount on their own infrastructure. When the money and the oil run out, they will be back to being what they were before oil; a gang of illiterate savages who divide their time between killing each other and rubbing their faces in the sand five times per day. And once again, nobody else will give a damn.

#18 Fletcher,

A bit harsh I must say, but essentially true.

Fletcher, a relatively tiny group of Muslims live the life you describe, the greatest bulk of them with the last name Saud.

The question is what we can do to help a man like this considering the mass of resources Iran is pouring into his rivals. Direct aid from the US government would probably be a death sentence, so how do we help nurture alternate philosophies in the Middle East in general?

I think the answer here points back to the failure of Westernized Muslims to step up to the plate and make the battle against extremism there own. American Muslim organizations could support people like Husseini in a legitimate and significant fashion, but where are those voices? Why are organizations like CAIR the only ones we hear from consistantly and loudly, when all they seem concerned with is comparing getting hasseled at the airport with Nazi Germany?

Gebre Egzavier: "So why are you believing a person that is obviously trying to apply taqiya?"

What a stupid reaction.

I have five of his books. Do you actually believe he writes hundreds and hundreds of pages (thousands, actually) in support of peace and democracy and that he's lying about it?

If he's just lying, why does Hezbollah and Iran threaten him and shut him down? Get a clue! Geez.

while everyone in every remote corner of this world knows that it means sunmission

Some argue that the word Islam derives from the root Al-Salaam, which means "peace." This is reinforced by the notion that Islamic law divides the world into dar al-harb (House of war) and dar al-Islam. I am not an etymologist, but the assertion that everyone knows that there is a single, unambiguous meaning or origin of the word "Islam" is clearly falsifiable.

PD,
I'm not sure it is falsifiable, but it certainly seens plain old false. Interesting, etymology, btw, & work nicely done.

Hei Michel
you ousted me out just bcs I asked you a very simple question?
You gave me twice the appellative of idiot and beeing stupid, but this tells eveybody more about you than about me. Obviously I touched a very sensitive nerve!
Ex-ante, having written 1000 books ore having five at home doesn't explain anything, if you start saying something that is totally misleading and false!
Even the last child knows that the wordl "islam" doesn't mean peace but comes from the root s-l-m that means submission. So at least, when someone comes at first telling you something ridicolous,a little bell should ring in your head! But obviously you prefer not to reply to this simple question or you havent carefully tried to understand my question.

Moreover, I tell you why "Hezbollah and Iran threaten him to shut him down". Because it's a political and not a religious issue ,but btw to understand this a little finesse is needed, isn't it? Hez and Iran don't appreciate dialogue and different opinions about their political intentions (or would you suggest that Hez and Iran are democratic entities)?
We are just talking now about the issue of taqyya on religious issues, but it seems you missed the point.

You know Michel, you are not the only one who has been in Lebanon in the same very places where you have been before and after the war, so please don't think that this gives you an "aurea" of untouchness. More humility please.
Gebre Egzavier

Gebre Egzavier, Michael banned you from his website because he thought you were either stupid or bigoted. If you think he is going to answer you over here, he's certainly at least half right.

Following your logic, better half stupid/bigoted than 100% I presume ;-))

If he answers I'm at least...
If he doesn't I'm at most...

told by an eminent ethimologist it's an honour!

But funny.

Look, this is how I see it. You're claiming that the cleric is liar because he said the word "Islam" means peace. A number of moderate Muslims have made similar connections. For example:

The word “Islam” literally stems from the root “s-l-m” and the words “silm” and “salamah” which mean peace, and which indicate the “submission” or ‘surrender” of oneself to God Almighty . . ..

Source

This passage doesnt necessarily suggest that "peace" is the better meaning of Islam, but it does suggest that the cleric is not without an argument. I haven't read his book; neither have you. But you automatically elevated a disagreement to the level of dishonesty.

Nor do I find the actual issue that interesting. My Bible says:

Submit to God and be at peace with him;

in this way prosperity will come to you.

Accept instruction from his mouth

and lay up his words in your heart.

(Book of Job, 22:21-22)

I am aware of few religions that don't have as a fundamental precept that man should submit to the will of his God and his commandments. Alcoholics Anonymous has submission to a higher authority as one of its commandments.

As to the issue of "taqyya," I am only familiar with it in two uses. In the traditional use:

TAQIYAH. means "Guarding oneself." A Shi'ah doctrine. A pious fraud whereby the Shi'ah Muslim believes be is justified in either smoothing down or in denying the peculiarities of his religious belief, in order to save himself from religious persecution.

Sayyed Husseini is not engaging in that sort of subterfuge. He is publishing his opinions and being persecuted for them.

Which brings us to the second usage, the notion that all Shi'ites are taught to lie and all they do is lie. This is a libel that was used to justify oppression against Shi'ites. In the Christian Bible, the Apostle Peter denied knowing Jesus three times when asked by Roman sentries. If someone were to conclude that Christianity is all about lying about Jesus, I'd say they were stupid or bigoted.

Sayyed Husseini appears to be saying all the things that the West criticizes Muslims for not saying. But when he does, he gets called a lier. That's a no-win situation.

"Sayyed Husseini appears to be saying all the things that the West criticizes Muslims for not saying. But when he does, he gets called a lier."

Yep. There is no point in dicussing with someone who would do this.

Husseini may be "spinning" the religion in such a way that it matches his own instinctive desire for peace. If so, fine, great, that's what the Muslim world needs. But he's not lying. Hezbollah persecutes him for what he writes and says, and that's because he's a serious potential threat to them.

Reacting to everything this man says with TAQIYYA! is just painfully bigoted and reactionary. Total brain-lock.

As Rimbaud used to say: "Est-ce qu'ils ont quelque chose dans leur tête ces karroufun?"

"Reacting to everything this man says with TAQIYYA! is just painfully bigoted and reactionary. Total brain-lock"

You must be in a hurry otherwise you would read +carefully and try to understand what I'm writing instead of ad hominem arguments. I'm just pointing out 2 big, let's say "bizarre" elements from his very positive stance towards peace (I would do love, if everyone would really be like him, it would be a 2nd paradise (still thinking I'm reactionary ;-)) ).

To put it simple:
it is like if you are totally in love of a wonderful girl, then you meet her once....and she says 1-2 strange things (that actually would you not be in love would put you into alert). Just we close our eyes to something that should make us think.

Taqyya is most of the time a forma mentis, especially when a shiia is speaking to a foreigner. So, I would shurely not "destroy" all his arguments, but I would have expected more cultural insight from someone who is having to do with this culture!
You might be stupid or intellingent, hater or lover, reactionary or progressist, shia or sunni, druze or christian, fidel or infidel, jew or buddhist, bigot or taqyy-ist, but to all of you: nice we! ;-))

Taqyya is most of the time a forma mentis, especially when a shiia is speaking to a foreigner.

The general use of the word "taqyya" implies that the use of lies and subterfuge are inspired by religion and religious beliefs. However, lies and subterfuge, crimes of omission, tactical lies, etc., cross all religious borders. Christians lie, atheists lie, buddhists lie, communists lie...

Muslim politicians lie, especially in a time of war - so do Christian politicians, atheist politicians, buddhist and agnostic politicians. If they don't lie during a time of war, they usually lose.

Wondering if a politician is lying for reasons based on politics or war isn't bigotry, it's just common sense. Assuming (and declaring) that a Muslim is lying just because he/she is a Muslim is bigotry.