“Had your Lord wished, that all those who are on the earth would be believers, would you then force people until they become faithful?”                              
(Quran: Chapter 10, Verse 99.)

The verse from the Quran clearly discourages the use of force in the process of calling people towards faith and preaching religion. This rejection is equivalent to accepting the freedom of an individual to agree and accept or to disagree and leave religion.

Blasphemy means a speech that causes injury or speaking evil. Initially, blasphemy was understood in Islamic tradition as attacks on core ideas and symbols, mainly God and Prophet.

In Quran, the term equivocal for blasphemy is “Sabb”. Sabb-Allah or Sabb-Al Rasul means to abuse God or the messenger. All utterances that express contempt for Allah, his law, attributes, commands or prohibitions and scoffing at Muhammad or any of the prophets are considered as Sabb.

The word “Sabb” comes twice in Quran, in verse 108 of Chapter 6,

“Do not abuse (La Tasubbu) those whom they invoke besides Allah, lest they should abuse (Tasubbu) Allah out of hostility without any knowledge. That is how to every people We have made their conduct seem decorous/beautiful (Zeena)”

In this verse, there is no mention of corporeal punishment for blasphemy. Even in the case of apostasy, Quran in Chapter 2, Verse 217 says,

“Those whoever if you turn away (Yurtad) from his religion and dies faithless. They are the ones whose works have failed in this world and Hereafter.”

All the punishments if we look at Quran are non-physical and not hudud punishments. The approach that Quran follows, especially towards its opponents is encouraging tolerance and perseverance among Muslims.

In Hadith literature, we do have reports that contain references to blasphemy and punishing them. One of the famous examples is Ka’ab al-Ashraf. An in-depth examination of this Hadith reveals that he was not just charged with blasphemy but with extensive anti-Muslim activity, slander of the Prophet and plot to kill the prophet. He was perceived to wage war against the Muslim community.

 The present concept of blasphemy as an offence has been developed by Muslim jurists in the post Prophetic period. Blasphemy against Prophet was considered a greater legal offence than blasphemy against God. Since the prophet had passed away and was not able to defend himself, it was thought that it was the responsibility of the community (Ummah) to guard his honour by imposing punishment.

It stemmed from the idea that it was a violation of the “right of humans” (Huquq ul Abd). Since it is the right of people and not God, there can be no repentance by itself.

Abdullah Saeed, Tariq Ramdhan and Mohsen Kadivar are some contemporary scholars of Islam who present a different approach to understanding these hadiths. According to them, critical analysis and hermeneutical reading of these Hadith reveals that most of them have a weak chain of transmission and others have been taken out of context or the proper context has been ignored.

In Islamic history, blasphemy and apostasy have been used both to suppress thoughts and debate and to harass religious minorities, both inside and outside Islam. They were used as vicarious arguments to serve political and economic interests or to settle scores. Muslim rulers in the post-Prophetic era used/ abused this law to strengthen and consolidate their position by charging people and groups who oppose them as apostates and rebels (Baghi). Similar to the way the law of sedition is used in today’s politics

The accusation of blasphemy or apostasy extends beyond the law and judiciary by putting people at risk of extrajudicial killings whether in jail or on the outside. It also tends to elevate all critique of religious knowledge to blasphemy. Attacking or punishing someone just because you think that they have insulted or criticised what you consider sacred is neither in line with the teachings of the Quran nor the Sunnah of Prophets but the Sunnah(way) of Pre-Islamic Arab Jahiliyah and the oppressors like Namrud.

Quran condemns the elites of Quraysh who decided to captivate, kill or expel Prophet Muhammad. They did so because they believed that the message of Islam was an insult to their gods and the tradition of their forefathers.

Similarly, Namrud had ordered Prophet Abraham should be burned in the fire. Namrud and other priests considered Abraham’s way of preaching and denying the lordship of Namrud as an insult to their Gods.

Stabbing a 75-year unarmed old man in an education centre is bereft of any Zeena and can never be in line with the themes of peace, justice and humanity prescribed by the Quran.

 In conclusion, I would like to convey my message to the author of Satanic verses in the form of a quote by Voltaire,

“I may not agree with what you have to say, But I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

The post Corporal Punishment for Blasphemy or Apostasy not in line with Quranic Ethos? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image courtesy: Huffington Post

The question “Is Islamic reform possible?” pre-supposes that reform is necessary. Many Muslims would say it is not.

Even many liberal and progressive Muslims insist Islam is perfect and it is only Muslims themselves that need to be reformed. It is Muslims who are misguided and hold erroneous interpretations – the Qur’an is the perfect word of God. It can never be wrong.

They argue extremists like al-Qaeda and ISIS are not “true” Muslims and are only using Islam for their own power and political ends. They dismiss countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran or Afghanistan as not following Islam correctly and they go to great lengths to come up with all sorts of apologetics to distance Islam from real-life practices of Muslim countries and groups around the world.

Yet it has to be asked if Islam is perfect and has absolutely nothing to do with the actions of extremists like ISIS or regimes like Saudi Arabia – then why is it that these Muslims have so grossly misunderstood their religion? When one points out actions such as execution of apostates and gays they tell us this is completely against Islam and Islam is very clear about it. But then why don’t these groups and regimes realise they are going completely against Islam? Don’t they realise the terrible mistake they are making when it is all so clear and obvious? The truth is that it is not as clear and obvious as they claim.

If the message [of the Qu’ran] has been so badly misunderstood by so many Muslims what does that say about the message?

If it is true that they have completely misunderstood Islam – what does that say about Islam and the Qur’an – the clear book Kitabun Mubeen – the final and complete revelation to man? If the message has been so badly misunderstood by so many Muslims what does that say about the message?

My view is that the Qur’an is not perfect and I believe it’s time we Muslims admitted that the Quran and Sunna can indeed lend itself to very harsh and violent – yet perfectly valid interpretations. The solution is not to try and twist the texts to come up with a counter-interpretation but to simply accept the fact that the Quran is not perfect. It is not infallible. It can be wrong.

Muslim reformers, such as there have been throughout Islamic History have never challenged this idea that the Qur’an is perfect. In fact the usual word for reformer in the context of Islam does not actually mean reform – the word used is Mujaddid which means “renewer”. Reform in the Islamic context means calls to return to “true, pure and unadulterated” Islam of the Qur’an and Sunna. Their “reforms” have been about halting change rather than bringing about change.

Many puritanical groups have arisen throughout Islamic History such as the al-Muwahideen, Almurabiteen, and the Khawarij – all with the same aim of bringing Islam back to its pure unadulterated roots. As such the Wahhabis and Salafis of today can be seen in this tradition of Tajdeed – renewing Islam and ridding it of corruptions and innovations. Most if not all Muslim reformers have been restricted within this paradigm.

Even liberal and progressive Muslims of today who seek to bring about a more peaceful and inclusive form of Islam never claim they are reforming Islam. Instead they claim they are bringing Islam back to it’s true message… in my view there is no such thing as “True Islam”.

Even liberal and progressive Muslims of today who seek to bring about a more peaceful and inclusive form of Islam never claim they are reforming Islam. Instead they claim they are bringing Islam back to it’s true message. They accept the same starting point of a perfect divine Qur’an and so instead of simply rejecting problematic verses they are forced into absurd linguistic gymnastics in order to claim that God’s perfect word never actually said what it appears to have said – and what 1400 years of scholarship believed it said. Liberal and progressive arguments depend on tenuous nuanced readings of the Qur’an and forcing new meanings out of ancient words. They scrape the barrel of the ancient texts to find something that will support a more progressive view.

But by playing this game within the rules of a perfect divine Qur’an they only hand victory to the traditionalists and fundamentalists because it is the traditionalists who have by far the greater evidence to support their views. Any theological workarounds a liberal can come up with can be easily countered by traditionalists with a vast array of Qur’an and Hadith at their disposal.

Now I’m not saying the traditionalist and fundamentalists represent the true Islam, because in my view there is no such thing as “True Islam”. Islam is not and never has been a single homogenous entity. Of course many Muslims argue that there is a True Islam, but that is because they believe the Qur’an is perfect and is the carefully planned work of an Omniscient and Omnipotent God. They are compelled to defend it’s integrity and consistency against all reason.

Ironically many far-right anti-Muslim bigots also insist there is only one “True Islam” and they say it is the Islam of ISIS and the extremists.

Ironically many far-right anti-Muslim bigots also insist there is only one “True Islam” and they say it is the Islam of ISIS and the extremists. They want to convince everyone – including Muslims themselves – that moderate forms of Islam are wrong and that real Islam is the terrorists’ version. Muslims who deny this are practicing Taqiyya or are ignorant. They do this because they want to justify their hatred and violence towards Muslims.

But those of us who take the view that the Qur’an is the rather less carefully planned work of a human mind, should not make the mistake of expecting a perfectly consistent and non-contradictory message over 23 years from a 7th century human being reacting to events as they happened. There are certainly interpretations that can be argued to be closer to what Muhammad brought in 7th century Arabia. But one cannot claim they all constitute a single consistent view. When liberal and progressive Muslims accuse the Salafis of being selective in how they interpret Islam, choosing to overlook the more peaceful and tolerant verses, they are right. But what they forget to mention is that they are just as selective when they choose to overlook the more harsh and rigid verses.

When liberal and progressive Muslims accuse the Salafis of being selective in how they interpret Islam, choosing to overlook the more peaceful and tolerant verses, they are right. But what they forget to mention is that they are just as selective when they choose to overlook the more harsh and rigid verses.

What Muhammad did and said varied at different points over the 23 years of his Prophethood. His message changed shape and direction as events did and with the need to please and attract differing tribes and individuals. From the early days in Mecca to the position of power he found himself in Madina. The Qur’an contains contradictions, ambiguity and vagueness leaving the door open to a multitude of interpretations.

Some argue that the principle of abrogation means that the more peaceful and conciliatory verses are no-longer valid. This is a favourite argument of the far-right anti-Muslim bigots who again want to insist that more liberal versions of Islam are wrong and “true Islam” is the violent forms. However the doctrine of abrogation is largely a creation of later scholars who were compelled to reconcile the contradictions in the Qur’an – which of course cannot exist since it is the perfect word of God. They took their cue from two similar but rather ambiguous verses in the Qur’an. For example verse 106 of al-Baqara says:

“Any revelation We cause to be abrogated or forgotten, We replace with something better or similar.”

They used this to argue that any verses that contradicted each other could be explained by the later one abrogating the earlier one which usually meant Medinan verses abrogating Meccan ones. However they didn’t agree on which verses abrogate which since there is not always agreement on when verses were revealed or even the reasons they were revealed (Asbab Nuzul). Some scholars even went as far to argue that a verse that was revealed in Mecca was then revealed again in Medina in order to make it fit their view.

Many modern Muslims reject the whole idea of abrogation which of course gives them a little more scope to argue that early peaceful and conciliatory verses are in fact more valid than later violent ones since the violent ones are tied to the specific context of Muhammad’s struggle with the Meccan while the earlier ones are of a universal and general in nature. This was the argument of the Sudanese scholar Mahmoud Taha and his student Abdullahi Al-Naeem.

Mahmoud Taha was executed for apostasy in Sudan which shows how dangerous and difficult it is for liberal and progressive Muslims to challenge the status quo.

Even when they are listened to they cannot decisively defeat the fundamentalists using scriptural arguments as long as they concede the Qur’an is perfect. Because the harsh literalist interpretations of the fundamentalists will always have the greater weight of classical scholarship on their side. Their hands will never be free to simply pick and choose using reason, since God’s divine words trumps flawed human reason every time.

The belief that the Qur’an is the perfect word of God shuts down all argument and sidelines human reason and conscience. There can be no stronger motivation than “God said it”. One can’t argue with God.

The belief that the Qur’an is the perfect word of God shuts down all argument and sidelines human reason and conscience. There can be no stronger motivation than “God said it”. One can’t argue with God. Few Muslims have the courage to challenge the idea that the Qur’an is God’s word. Those that do are immediately labelled apostates and they are either executed or forced to leave Islam thereby silencing all dissent from within Islam.

Contrary to popular belief all the Arabs at the time of Muhammad did not swoon at the words of the Qur’an, believing it to be of divine origin. The Qur’an itself testifies that many Arabs rejected the Qur’an’s claim to being the word of God.

However contrary to popular belief all the Arabs at the time of Muhammad did not swoon at the words of the Qur’an, believing it to be of divine origin. The Qur’an itself testifies that many Arabs rejected the Qur’an’s claim to being the word of God. Muhammad was accused of being a soothsayer and a poet. He was accused of recounting nothing but myths and fairytales and it took a long and violent struggle to win over Arabia – not an intellectual one.

Even after Islam there were Muslims who rejected the Qur’an’s claim to be inimitable. For example Al-Jaʿd ibn Dirham, tutor to the Umayyad Caliph Marwan, said, “The Qur’an’s eloquence is not a miracle and people can do the like of it and better.” The Mu’tazilite scholar Abu Musa said, “People are able to produce the like of the Qurʾān as regards eloquence, and composition and rhetorical beauty.” The Sunni scholar Abu al-Qushairy said: “We do not claim that everything in the Qurʾān is in the highest rank of eloquence.” Ibn al-Rawandi a Mu’tazilite scholar – who was accused of being a Zindiq (heretic) – said, “Indeed the Qurʾān is not the speech of a wise god. In it are contradictions and mistakes and passages that are in the realms of the absurd.”

During the Islamic Golden Age this movement of dissent grew and was labelled al-Zanadiqa (The Heretics) by its opponents. But it nevertheless boasted some great scholars and poets in its ranks including the Muslim physician al-Razi, the poets Omar al-Khayyam and Abu Ala’ al Ma’arri (whose statue was destroyed by ISIS fighters when they took his home town of Ma’arrat al-Nu’maan near Aleppo in Syria). All these scholars and poets openly questioned the view that the Qur’an was of divine origin and it’s ironic that for a period at least during the Islamic Golden Age such bold expression was tolerated to a greater extent than it is today.

 Al-Razi was particularly scathing about the Qur’an saying:

“You claim that the evidentiary miracle is present and available, namely, the Koran. You say: ‘Whoever denies it, let him produce a similar one.’ Indeed, we shall produce a thousand similar, from the works of rhetoricians, eloquent speakers and valiant poets, which are more appropriately phrased and state the issues more succinctly. They convey the meaning better and their rhymed prose is in better meter. … By God what you say astonishes us! You are talking about a work which recounts ancient myths, and which at the same time is full of contradictions and does not contain any useful information or explanation. Then you say: ‘Produce something like it’‽”

However with the rise of Europe during the Renaissance came the decline and stagnation in the Islamic world and what little free-thought had existed during the Islamic Golden Age came to an end. The doors of Ijtihad were closed and scholars no longer braved new frontiers. Instead they concentrated on preserving and imitating the past.

Today however there are signs that there is a new awakening of free-thought despite the rise and alarming spread of Islamic neo-conservatism – in fact it may be in part a reaction to such regressive movements that are in such stark contrast to reason and reality in the 21st century and are a never ending source of cognitive dissonance for many rational and educated Muslims.

For example the modern Iranian scholar Abdul Karim Soroush writes:

“According to the traditional account, the Prophet was only an instrument; he merely conveyed a message passed to him by Jibril. In my view, however, the Prophet played a pivotal role in the production of the Koran… Like a poet, the Prophet feels that he is captured by an external force. But in fact the Prophet himself is the creator and the producer. The question whether the inspiration comes from outside or from inside is really not relevant, because at the level of revelation there is no difference between outside and inside. The inspiration comes from the Self of the Prophet.”

In Iraq the scholar Ahmad Al-Qabbanji states quite openly in his lectures that the Qur’an is not perfect nor flawless and has compared it to human texts in which he highlights passages that are superior to passages of the Qur’an. (For this who speak Arabic you can find plenty of his lectures on YouTube.)

The Moroccan scholar Saeed Nasheed published a book in Arabic last year titled: Modernity & the Qur’an. In it he says:

“The Qur’an is not the speech of God, just as the loaf of bread is not the work of the farmer. God produced the raw material, which was inspiration, just as the farmer produces the raw material, which is wheat. But it is the baker who turns the wheat or flour into bread according to his own unique way, artistic expertise and creative ability. Thus it is the Prophet who was responsible for interpreting the inspiration and turning it into actual phrases and words according to his own unique view.”

My own view is perhaps even more radical. I am both Agnostic and Muslim. I don’t know if God exists or not – though I do believe in “something” – something I cannot define nor quantify but I call it God. I enjoy many aspects of the Islamic traditions that I have been brought up in and practiced for over 50 years of my life. However when I went through a period of doubts and became convinced that the Qur’an was not the perfect word of God but very much the product of a human being from the 7th century – I left Islam for a while. I thought I had no choice. I had always been led to believe that if you don’t believe in the divinity and perfection of the Qur’an you can’t be a Muslim. But I never felt entirely comfortable identifying as an ex-Muslim and still found myself attending prayers and Islamic events with my family and friends.

I am both Agnostic and Muslim. I don’t know if God exists or not – though I do believe in “something” – something I cannot define nor quantify but I call it God. I enjoy many aspects of the Islamic traditions that I have been brought up in and practiced for over 50 years of my life.

All the things that I had loved and drew comfort from during my 50 years as a practicing Muslim were still there. I still enjoyed prayer and connecting with that something beyond this material existence I call God and I was surprised to find that having doubts as to whether there was anyone actually listening didn’t take away the comfort, hope and relief I gained from sharing my thoughts and feelings. I still enjoyed the verses and Hadith I had always loved and treasured. Seeing the Qur’an as fallible didn’t change all that. So why should I be forced to leave Islam? Particularly when Islam so badly needs voices of dissent and change from within. And when Muslims – including loved ones – are being bullied and oppressed by religious authorities who rely on our silent compliance.

So yes I am a Muslim who believes the Qur’an is not the word of God. Plain and simple. Like all human books it contains good and bad. It is inextricably tied to its context and environment. I openly and unashamedly pick and choose the good parts and reject the bad parts based on my conscience, human reason and our 21st century context.

I see no reason to abide by the definition of the very fundamentalist authorities I oppose and who are the cause of our problems and I propose a new definition for a Muslim. One who is freely able to place reason above revelation. Who does not have to apologise for picking and choosing – for “cherry picking” as our detractors like to scoff at. Selecting the good and leaving the bad according to human reason is the eminently rational and reasonable thing to do. It is the “All or Nothing” approach that is irrational and leads to the suppression of one’s humanity.

Why should being honest and admitting what is patently obvious mean you can’t be a Muslim? Why should we have to keep on defending (or dishonestly wriggle out of) passages that are simply wrong?

Why should being honest and admitting what is patently obvious mean you can’t be a Muslim? Why should we have to keep on defending (or dishonestly wriggle out of) passages that are simply wrong. Let’s reject them and move on. It really is as simple as that.

Though of course the journey getting to that point is not simple. Embracing doubt while retaining faith is not an easy process but it is possible and enlightening. Doubt can accommodate faith, but crucially it eliminates extremism. Fanaticism cannot occupy the same space as doubt and reason. As Voltaire said: “Doubt is an uncomfortable condition, but certainty is an absurd one.”

The irony is that most Muslims already pick and choose – the only difference is that I’m simply proposing they do this openly and unashamedly without the ridiculously tenuous and disingenuous apologetics that are ultimately self-defeating.

Perhaps the irony is that most Muslims already pick and choose – the only difference is that I’m simply proposing they do this openly and unashamedly without the ridiculously tenuous and disingenuous apologetics that are ultimately self-defeating.

I will give you an example from verse 34 of Sura al Nisa which in microcosm reflects the dilemma Muslims face and how belief in a perfect Qur’an prevents us from reform. The verse says:

“As for those women from whom you fear rebellion (first) admonish them (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) hit them.” (4:34)

This has been the cause of endless problems and cognitive dissonance for rational and liberal Muslims in this day and age where humanity has evolved beyond such a barbaric mentality and where the relationships and roles of men and women have changed drastically from 7th century Arabia.

However the insistence on a perfect divine Qur’an has meant that Muslims must either defend wife beating against their very conscience and rational mind, or they are forced to invent dishonest and ridiculous apologetics to try to make the verse mean something completely different. Apologetics which fool none but a tiny minority of Muslims who have retreated to an ivory tower of the absurd – a make-believe land where up means down and left means right and anything can be as you wish it to be.

Muslims are as yet unable to simply say. “The Qur’an is wrong.” They can’t say this because of the insistence that the Qur’an is perfect and infallible.

Reform can only come once we get over this hurdle of an infallible Qur’an. It is not infallible. It is not perfect and it is not the word of God. That doesn’t mean it is all bad. There are many beautiful and mystical verses such as Ayat u Nur, Ayat ul Kursi, verses about giving charity, helping others, seeking comfort and strength from prayer, helping the poor, good behaviour and character, honesty, personal responsibility, kindness, humbleness and so on…

But there are also verses about eternal torture in Hell, chopping hands off thieves, flogging fornicators, and keeping slaves. As for Hadith I won’t even go there as they have already begun to be seriously doubted and jettisoned by many Muslims, due to cruel, barbaric as well as absurd and comical nature of some of their content.

It’s time we Muslims realise that recognising the human origins of the Qur’an do not mean we have to lose comfort and solace Islam gives us. It means we will have the dual benefit of eradicating extremism while preserving that which is worthwhile.

To those who say that is impossible to combine faith with doubt and scepticism I would say, firstly, I myself have reached that point. Secondly, why should such a pragmatic realism be harder than the massive efforts most believers put into struggling with cognitive dissonance?

To those who say that is impossible to combine faith with doubt and scepticism I would say, firstly, I myself have reached that point. Secondly, why should such a pragmatic realism be harder than the massive efforts most believers put into struggling with cognitive dissonance?

And as someone who was born and brought up in the UK I am surrounded by plenty of examples of secular Christians, Jews, Hindus and others who pray in church or temple, christen their children, have religious weddings, attend festivals and services. Who draw comfort and identity with their faith and yet can still embrace doubt and maintain a healthy scepticism. Muslims are not a different species. They are human beings like everyone else and have the same capacities and possibilities as everyone else and I consider it racist to think otherwise.

As for those who say we are better off without religion, perhaps that’s right. But regardless of what one thinks about religion the fact is it has and continues to provide a great many people with meaning, comfort and motivation in a world that is often confusing, cruel and full of conflict. The fact that all these religions are man-made does not negate their effectiveness as a vehicle to ease the anxiety of life and to reach out to the unknown.

Recognising the Qur’an’s human nature does not have to mean the end of Islam, but it will mean the end of unreasonable defence of tenets that belong to an earlier stage of human evolution.

Recognising the Qur’an’s human nature does not have to mean the end of Islam, but it will mean the end of unreasonable defence of tenets that belong to an earlier stage of human evolution. It will mean freeing human reason and conscience and allow Islam to evolve as humans evolve. It will mean the end of religion poking its nose into every facet of our lives by self-appointed moral busybodies. It will free us to make our own decisions and life choices and leave judgment to God not man. Religion is between you and God. Believe as you wish but do not impose it on others.

Muslims must take the bold and essential step of challenging the belief that Qur’an is infallible. It is an essential step, because once you stop protecting ideas on the basis that “God said it”, you create a level playing field where good ideas can battle it out with bad ideas on an equal footing – without some being protected on the false basis that “God said it.” It allows reason to be the deciding factor for whether something is accepted or rejected, rather than: “Because it’s written!” No more searching for tenuous interpretations or changing the meaning of words into something else, just so we can avoid the problematic and uncomfortable meanings.

As long as we refuse to appreciate that the Qur’an is human-authored, we will be forced to continue playing the game within the traditional paradigm that the fundamentalists are best at. We will disarm ourselves of the only weapon that can defeat them – reason. Only when we recognise that the Qur’an and Sunna are fallible can we free Islam from the prison of dogma we placed it in.

Islam is far more than the Qur’an and Sunna. Like any major religion, it is the amassed wisdom, practice, cultures and beliefs of millions of believers in different parts of the world over many centuries. Religion at its most fundamental level is a way of seeking comfort, solace, strength and meaning in a harsh world where man finds himself alone and vulnerable, an aid to help us get by, a way to reach out to the heavens. But it must never be allowed to replace reason and humanity.

It is the fundamentalists who are destroying Islam by stripping it of the very things that has made religion relevant to human beings.

It is the fundamentalists who are destroying Islam by stripping it of the very things that has made religion relevant to human beings. They want to reduce Islam to a blind following of ancient texts and strip away any semblance of progress, human reason and humanity. They want to take us back 1,400 years to a harsh and barbaric context and place that has no place in the 21st century.

Accepting that the Qur’an is fallible will not destroy Islam. It will destroy the fundamentalists. For the rest of us it will free us and free our reason so we can take what is useful and reject what is not.

———

I want to finish with some quotes from an Egyptian author who goes by the pen name of Abbas Abdu-Noor. He wrote a book called “My Ordeal with the Qur’an” which I have translated from Arabic to English. It is a unique book in that he comes from a very devout Islamic background and was a preacher and Islamic teacher and yet in later life came to believe the Qur’an is not the word of God but human and flawed. He says:

“We must storm this lion’s lair that guards the text of the Qur’ān. We must tear away the layer of sanctity and holiness that surrounds this text. Without doing so, it will be impossible to properly study the text. We must disrobe the text, see it naked, and question its sanctity. We must apply the methodology of reason. It is only through this process that new horizons will open themselves up to us.

We must reconsider the distinction we have created between the sacred and the profane… for there is nothing sacred but humanity”.

(Belief in the divinity of the Qur’an) has confiscated our reason, isolating it from reality and from the life of man. Because of this confiscation of reason and the knowledge that reason produces, (Muslim) culture appears as though it has nothing to do with life, except that which concerns the next life and all it contains of heaven and hell, houris, and fruit from that which they desire. The time has come for us to climb over the walls built around us as a result of the confiscation of reason. There is no other way to do this other than by starting a revolution of understanding, a revolution in our perceptions and most basic assumptions of the texts and readings. It must be a revolution that will come from seeing the texts in a new way, and treating them as we would treat any object that is subject to analysis and reason.

We must not remain imprisoned in this dark, cramped room while the world around us marches on, growing and evolving without us. We must throw open the curtains and go out into the light. We must rediscover the spirit of dynamism and enterprise that we had before retreating to this time capsule and locking the door behind us.

The tyranny of the text has prevailed over every attempt at a renaissance — even the dream of a renaissance — so that all efforts to produce one came to nothing, and all of our hopes of achieving a plan for a renaissance are dashed. Instead, we have seen that the Salafis, the fundamentalists, the bloodthirsty and the regressive have all conspired to throttle the tentative breaths of any renaissance, and disabled all initiatives that might lead to one.

It is a pity that the march of history never sleeps or stands still, except in our countries. And what can I say? Even in many Third World countries, we see the march of progress and movement. Almost the whole world is moving forward like a surging river, even if, at times, with choppy waters. The exceptions are our countries, where there is a still lake, stagnant and unmoving. I have no other objective or motive in this book other than to throw a stone into this lake so that, perhaps, it might make it stir, disrupting its calmness and composure”.

Hassan Radwan graduated with 1st class honours in Classical Arabic from SOAS University of London in 1984, his specialist subjects being Quranic commentary and Pre-Islamic poetry. For 3 years he served as president of SOAS Students Islamic Society. He spent 15 years as a teacher at Islamia Primary School in London and has written four books for Muslim children as well as leading an Islamic circle. After going through a period of questioning and doubting his faith he first identified as an ex-Muslim but eventually came to identify as an Agnostic Muslim and campaigns for radical reform within Islam – in particular the need to recognise the Quran’s human origin. He recently translated the book, “My Ordeal with the Quran” , from Arabic to English and founded the Agnostic Muslims and Friends Facebook group. He also runs the Agnostic Muslim Khutbahs blog. Hassan is also an active member of the Inclusive Mosque Initiative in London.

(Republished with permission from New Age Islam.)

The post To fight fundamentalists and extremists, Muslims should radically reinterpret their faith appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Demonstrators outside the Supreme Court. The banner says: ""We demand the execution of Ould Mkhaitir immediately".

In December 2013 engineer Mohamed Ould Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir wrote an article for a website about Mauritania's caste system, including prejudice against the low-status blacksmith class. His article also referred to similar practices in the time of the Prophet. 

Two days after the article appeared Ould Mkhaitir was arrested and has been in jail ever since. His family reportedly disowned him, his marriage was dissolved on grounds of apostasy and his lawyer abandoned him. A Mauritanian businessman also offered a substantial reward for anyone who succeeded in killing him.

In December 2014 Ould Mkhaitir (also known as Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mohamed) was convicted of apostasy "for speaking lightly of the Prophet" and sentenced to death. Ould Mkhaitir told the court it was "not his intention to harm the prophet", according to a judicial source quoted by AFP. For more background on the case see previous blog post and a recent article in IB Times.
 

Facing execution: Mohamed Ould Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir

Apostasy is a capital offence in Mauritania though no one has been executed there for many years. Those convicted of apostasy are allowed three days to repent – in which case they will be spared execution but imprisoned for an unspecified time.

The purpose Tuesday's Supreme Court hearing was to determine whether Ould Mkhaitir, now aged 31, has "sincerely" repented. The court has been coming under heavy external pressure not to accept his repentance.

Last month, Mauritania's Forum of Imams and Ulemas called for him to be executed "with no exception made for his repentance". Their statement said: "We demand that the competent authorities apply the law: kill him and bury him in conformity with the law of God."

According to the International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU), which is monitoring the case through local contacts, some of the demonstrators outside the court on Tuesday were armed. One banner, bearing the name of the "Group of Lovers of the Prophet" said in Arabic: "We demand the execution of Ould Mkhaitir immediately".

IHEU also said prosecution lawyers were accusing Ould Mkhaitir's lawyers of apostasy and calling on them to "repent" for defending him.

The case was adjourned until December 20 when a final verdict is expected.
 

More protesters outside the court

This story was first published  on Al-Bab.

The post Mob Calls For Death Of Mauritanian ‘Apostate’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Through half-page advertisements published this morning in all editions across six states of the Urdu daily Rashtriya Sahara, 17 prominent ulema and muftis from different sects have issued a joint statement warning all Muslims to beware of a man named Shakeel bin Hanif and his followers. Hanif, who is ‘Hazrat JI’ to his band of followers, claims to be Jesus and Imam Mahdi whose return to earth at the end of times forms part of the belief of Muslims.

Though Hanif claims to be a devout follower of Islam, according to the statement, he is a fraud and an apostate and so his followers too are apostates. Thus they are “outside the fold of Islam” and Muslims are advised to beware of the “mischief” of this “Dajjal”. Muslims believe Dajjal is an evil figure who will surface close to the Day of Judgment pretending to be Jesus returning to earth.

The joint statement asks Muslims to remain on high alert, immediately inform religious leaders of the activities of any of his followers, severe all relations with them and not allow them to enter their mosques.

The immediate prompt for the ad-blitz is the incident in Delhi two days ago when four followers of Hanif reportedly entered the Hari Masjid in Jamia Nagar to propagate their belief. The Rashtriya Sahara yesterday reported that “caught red-handed” they were handed over to the trustees of Hari Masjid.

The trustees reportedly tried to reason with the young men and later asked them to leave the mosque. As soon as they came out of the mosque the foursome allegedly resorted to stone throwing following which they were apprehended and handed over to the police who have registered an FIR against Hanif’s four followers.

Hailing originally from Darbangha in Bihar, young Hanif moved to Delhi in 1991 after being disowned by his family who refused to subscribe to his claims of being the promised Imam Mahdi and Jesus. He is currently believed to be living underground and propagating his faith among Muslims in Aurangabad in Maharashtra.

While his present contacts are not known, a booklet in Urdu may be accessed online – wherein Hanif rebuts the many allegations against him – provides some interesting details of his background.

Here is ‘Hazrat Ji’ in his own words: “In 1991 I was studying in a college in Darbangha city and staying in a lodge. While the battle between Saddam Hussain and the Allied Forces was in its last stage, around the time of the last namaz of the evening, I received a command from Allah to dedicate my life in the service of Islam. I, therefore, had to abandon my college studies to devote myself to the task assigned to me.”

The joint statement says Muslims and the ulema who have already been fighting the “kufr” of the Ahmeddiyas for a long time have now to join battle against the new “apostates”. The Ahmeddiyas who consider themselves to be Muslims and followers of Islam but according to the other Muslims they are apostates and have had to face severe prosecution in Pakistan.

The post Ulema warn Indian Muslims to Beware of a ‘False Prophet’ in Their Midst appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Islamic State (ISIS) executed a poet Mohammed Bashir al-Aani and his son Elyas on accusations of apostasy in Syria's Deir al-Zour province two days ago.

Al-Aani and his son were kidnapped in the eastern town of Deir Ezzor in September 2015 and taken to an unknown location. The poet had returned to the area with his son to bury his wife, who had died in Damascus after the family travelled to the capital to get better medical treatment for her. 

Born in 1960, Al-Aani was one of the prominent poets from the eastern Deir Ezzor province and a member of ‘Arab Writers Union in Syria’.

Little is known about the poet’s son Elyas, but photos circulated by activists show a young man in his early 20s.

Al-Aani was noted for his civilian opposition to the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

Known for his lyrical style, he wrote and published three books of poetry in Syria. Aani is the most high-profile cultural figure known to have been executed by terrorist gangs in Syria in 2016.

According to the Middle East Eye, Aani had returned to the area with his son to bury his wife, who had died in Damascus after the family travelled to the capital to get better medical treatment for her. 
 
His last published poem, The Banishment of the Loser, spoke of “long exhaustion,” and ended with the line, “I am the one who will trade tranquility for defeat.”
 
ISIS which holds large areas of Deir Ezzor under siege has executed large numbers of civilians, mostly on charges of apostasy or spying.
 
In December last year militants from the group assassinated respected journalist Naji Jerf, who had come to be nicknamed “Uncle” due to his work training young Syrian reporters.

(Based on reports from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and the Syrian Free Press Network).
 

The post ISIS extremists kill Syrian poet, son on charges of apostasy appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Aims:
Raise awareness within British Muslims and the wider public, of democracy particularly ‘secular democracy’ helping to contribute to a shared vision of citizenship (the separation of faith and state, so faiths exert no undue influence on policies and there is a shared public space).

• Encourage religious understanding and harmony, respect for different systems of beliefs, and encourage an understanding and celebration of the variety of Muslim cultures, values and traditions which are present in British society.

bmsd will achieve this by:

• Facilitating discourse and raising awareness of democracy particularly ‘secular democracy’ and its benefits.
• Facilitating broad and enlightened theological discourses, to enable British Muslims and the wider public to be better informed about the Islamic faith.
• Raising awareness of religious influence on UK domestic and foreign policies, particularly those which may lead to undue effect on civil liberties.
• Addressing Islamophobia and prejudice against Muslims and Muslim communities.
• Working with UK and global Muslim and other organisations, opposing radicalism and intolerant beliefs.
• Ensuring that politicians and community leaders encourage and practise transparency and ensure legitimate voting practices are followed.
• Engaging with marginalised Muslim communities, helping to identify root causes of deprivation and social exclusion, and help work towards a solution.
• Providing a lively and interesting social/educational programme which showcases the variety of Muslim histories, cultures, values and traditions in the UK today.
• Be responsive to the changing needs and pressures on succeeding generations of British Muslims and adjust and add to its programmes and projects accordingly.

About bmsd: bmsd was founded in 2006 by Nasreen Rehman and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. We bring together a diverse group of Muslim democrats from a variety of ethnic and social backgrounds. We want to challenge perceptions, ideas and current thinking about British Muslims as a collectivity and the issues that affect the wider society. bmsd is not a theological group but one that advocates civic engagement and good citizenship. We are not concerned with judging or being judged on the basis of religious practice. If you call yourself a ‘Muslim’, you are most welcome to be a part of our movement. If you are non-Muslim, we equally welcome your association.

bmsd is about social inclusion, co-existence and harmony. Together we can all make a difference. It is now time to work towards this goal. bmsd aims to:
Raise awareness within British Muslims and the wider public, of democracy particularly ‘secular democracy’ helping to contribute to a shared vision of citizenship (the separation of faith and state, so faiths exert no undue influence on policies and there is a shared public space).

Encourage religious understanding and harmony, respect for different systems of beliefs, and encourage an understanding and celebration of the variety of Muslim cultures, values and traditions which are present in British society.

Contact: Not available on website

Website: http://bmsd.org.uk/

The post British Muslims for Secular Democracy (bmsd) appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Manifesto
We, non-believers, atheists, and ex-Muslims, are establishing or joining the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain to insist that no one be pigeonholed as Muslims with culturally relative rights nor deemed to be represented by regressive Islamic organisations and ‘Muslim community leaders’.

Those of us who have come forward with our names and photographs represent countless others who are unable or unwilling to do so because of the threats faced by those considered ‘apostates’ – punishable by death in countries under Islamic law.

By doing so, we are breaking the taboo that comes with renouncing Islam but also taking a stand for reason, universal rights and values, and secularism.

Whilst religion or the lack thereof is a private affair, the increasing intervention of and devastation caused by religion and particularly Islam in contemporary society has necessitated our public renunciation and declaration. We represent a majority in Europe and a vast secular and humanist protest movement in countries like Iran.

Taking the lead from the Central Council of Ex-Muslims in Germany, we demand:

1. Universal rights and equal citizenship for all. We are opposed to cultural relativism and the tolerance of inhuman beliefs, discrimination and abuse in the name of respecting religion or culture.
2. Freedom to criticise religion. Prohibition of restrictions on unconditional freedom of criticism and expression using so-called religious ‘sanctities’.
3. Freedom of religion and atheism.
4. Separation of religion from the state and legal and educational system.
5. Prohibition of religious customs, rules, ceremonies or activities that are incompatible with or infringe people’s rights and freedoms.
6. Abolition of all restrictive and repressive cultural and religious customs which hinder and contradict woman’s independence, free will and equality. Prohibition of segregation of sexes.
7. Prohibition of interference by any authority, family members or relatives, or official authorities in the private lives of women and men and their personal, emotional and sexual relationships and sexuality.
8. Protection of children from manipulation and abuse by religion and religious institutions.
9. Prohibition of any kind of financial, material or moral support by the state or state institutions to religion and religious activities and institutions.
10. Prohibition of all forms of religious intimidation and threats.

Contact: exmuslimcouncil@googlemail.com

Website: http://ex-muslim.org.uk/
 

The post Council of ex-Muslims of Britain appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Objects: Exposing deviant ideologies, extremism, terrorism and their proponents

About: No details provided on the organisation’s website

Contact: Message box provided on the website

Website: http://www.islamagainstextremism.com/
 

The post Islam Against Extremism appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Mission:

10 Principles:
Collective Identity
We accept as Muslim anyone who identifies as such. The veracity and integrity of that claim is between the individual and God, and is not a matter for the state nor an issue which other individuals can or should judge. We welcome all who are interested in discussing, promoting and working for the implementation of progressive values – human rights, freedom of expression, and separation of church and state – as well as inclusive and tolerant understandings of Islam.

Equality
We affirm the equal worth of all human beings, regardless of race, sex, gender, gender identification, ethnicity, nationality, creed, sexual orientation, or ability. We are committed to work toward global societies that ensure social, political, educational, and economic opportunities for all.

Separation of Religious and State Authorities
We believe that freedom of conscience is not only essential to all human societies but integral to the Qur’anic view of humanity. We believe that secular government is the only way to achieve the Islamic ideal of freedom from compulsion in matters of faith.

Freedom of speech
We support freedom of expression and freedom of dissent. No one should be legally prosecuted, imprisoned or detained for declaring or promoting unpopular opinions whether political, artistic, social or religious, even when that expression may be offensive and that dissent may be considered blasphemous.

Universal Human rights
We are committed to social, economic and environmental justice. We believe that the full self-realization of all people, in a safe and sustainable world, is a prerequisite for freedom, civility, and peace. We support efforts for universal health care, universal public education, the protection of our environment, and the eradication of poverty.

Gender equality
We support women’s agency and self-determination in every aspect of their lives. We believe in women’s full participation in society at every level. We affirm our commitment to reproductive justice and empowering women to make healthy decisions regarding their bodies, sexuality and reproduction.

LGBTQI Inclusion
We endorse the human and civil rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and intersex (LGBTQI) individuals. We affirm our commitment to ending discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity and we support full equality and inclusion of all individuals, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, in society and in the Muslim community.

Critical analysis and interpretation
We promote interpretations that reflect traditional Qur’anic principles of tolerance, inclusiveness, mercy, compassion, and fairness. We call for critical engagement with Islamic scripture, traditional jurisprudence, and current Muslim discourses. We believe that critical thinking is essential to spiritual development.

Compassion
We affirm that justice and compassion should be the guiding principles for all aspects of human conduct. We repudiate violence, whether on an individual, organizational, or national level.

Diversity
We embrace pluralism and the diversity of inspirations that motivate people to embrace justice. We affirm that one’s religion and belief system is not the exclusive source of truth. We engage with a diversity of philosophical and spiritual traditions to pursue a more just, peaceful and sustainable world.

Contact: info@mpvusa.org
Website: www.mpvusa.org/
 

The post Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Motto:

Declaration:

PREAMBLE
We are Muslims who live in the 21st century. We stand for a respectful, merciful and inclusive interpretation of Islam. We are in a battle for the soul of Islam, and an Islamic renewal must defeat the ideology of Islamism, or politicized Islam, which seeks to create Islamic states, as well as an Islamic caliphate. We seek to reclaim the progressive spirit with which Islam was born in the 7th century to fast forward it into the 21st century. We support the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by United Nations member states in 1948.
 
We reject interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam. Facing the threat of terrorism, intolerance, and social injustice in the name of Islam, we have reflected on how we can transform our communities based on three principles: peace, human rights and secular governance. We announce the formation of an international initiative: the Muslim Reform Movement.
 
We have courageous reformers from around the world who have written our Declaration for Muslim Reform, a living document that we will continue to enhance as our journey continues. We invite our fellow Muslims and neighbors to join us.
 
A. Peace: National Security, Counterterrorism and Foreign Policy

1. We stand for universal peace, love and compassion. We reject violent jihad. We believe we must target the ideology of violent Islamist extremism in order to liberate individuals from the scourge of oppression and terrorism both in Muslim-majority societies and the West.
2. We stand for the protection of all people of all faiths and non-faith who seek freedom from dictatorships, theocracies and Islamist extremists.
3. We reject bigotry, oppression and violence against all people based on any prejudice, including ethnicity, gender, language, belief, religion, sexual orientation and gender expression.

B. Human Rights: Women's Rights and Minority Rights

1. We stand for human rights and justice. We support equal rights and dignity for all people, including minorities. We support the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights.
2. We reject tribalism, castes, monarchies and patriarchies and consider all people equal with no birth rights other than human rights. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. Muslims don't have an exclusive right to "heaven."
3. We support equal rights for women, including equal rights to inheritance, witness, work, mobility, personal law, education, and employment. Men and women have equal rights in mosques, boards, leadership and all spheres of society. We reject sexism and misogyny.

C. Secular Governance: Freedom of Speech and Religion

1. We are for secular governance, democracy and liberty. We are against political movements in the name of religion. We separate mosque and state. We are loyal to the nations in which we live. We reject the idea of the Islamic state. There is no need for an Islamic caliphate. We oppose institutionalized sharia. Sharia is manmade.
2. We believe in life, joy, free speech and the beauty all around us. Every individual has the right to publicly express criticism of Islam. Ideas do not have rights. Human beings have rights. We reject blasphemy laws. They are a cover for the restriction of freedom of speech and religion. We affirm every individual's right to participate equally in ijtihad, or critical thinking, and we seek a revival of ijtihad.
3. We believe in freedom of religion and the right of all people to express and practice their faith, or non-faith, without threat of intimidation, persecution, discrimination or violence. Apostasy is not a crime. Our ummah–our community–is not just Muslims, but all of humanity.

We stand for peace, human rights and secular governance. Please stand with us!

Launch: In the early morning of Friday, Dec. 4, 2015, courageous Muslim reformers from Europe, Canada and the United States stood at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., announcing the formation of a new initiative, the Muslim Reform Movement, each one reading a precept from the movement's Declaration of Reform.

In each one of their communities, from Copenhagen, Denmark, to Phoeniz, Arizona, each one of these reformers have been fighting against violent Islamist ideologies, social injustice and political Islam, motivated by a vision for an Islam of peace, human rights and secular governance. 

A group of the reformers piled into a Kia Rodando and a yellow taxi to journey west on Massachusetts Avenue, to the Islamic Center of Washington, a mosque largely run by the government of Saudi Arabia. There, the brave group posted the Declaration of Reform on the doors of the mosque and, after the pleas of men to the mosque managers, three women from the Muslim Reform Movement prayed in the main hall of the mosque, otherwise forbidden to women on the Muslim holy day of Friday. 

Muslim reform has begun. The revolution has begun. We invite you to join us!

Founding signatories: 
1. Tahir Gora, Author, Journalist, Activist, Toronto, Canada
2. Tawfik Hamid, Islamic Thinker and Reformer, Oakton, VA, USA
3. Usama Hasan, Imam, Quilliam Foundation, London, UK
4. Arif Humayun, Senior Fellow, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Portland, OR, USA
5. Farahnaz Ispahani, Author, Former Member of Parliament, Pakistan, Washington, D.C., USA,
6. Zuhdi Jasser, M.D., President, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Phoenix, AZ USA
7. Naser Khader, Member, Danish Parliament, Muslim democracy activist, Copenhagen, Denmark
8. Courtney Lonergan, Community Outreach Director, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Professional facilitator
9. Hasan Mahmud, Resident expert in sharia, Muslims Facing Tomorrow, Toronto, Canada
10. Asra Nomani, Journalist, Author, Morgantown, WV, USA
11. Raheel Raza, Founder, Muslims Facing Tomorrow, Toronto, Canada
12. Sohail Raza, Vice President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations
13. Salma Siddiqui, President, Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations, Toronto, Canada

Contact: MuslimReformMovement@gmail.com
Website: http://muslimreformmovement.org/
 

The post The Muslim Reform Movement appeared first on SabrangIndia.