Malise Ruthven's book, A Fury for God: The Islamist Attack on America, seeks to understand the forces behind Islamic terrorist attacks. It is a difficult book to read, and yet parts of it clarified and illuminated Islamic terrorism better than anything I've ever read. And A Fury for God is one of the very few books I've read that has no obvious ax to grind. Below are some selected quotes from the book:
As almost every account of Islam will explain, the word Islam (self-surrender) derives from the same root as salam (peace). In its self-definition Islam is primarily a "religion of peace." The problem consists not in the idea of peace as a good, but in the means deployed to achieve it. In the Quranic discourse, as in the legal formulations derived from the Quran and the Prophet's traditions, the very notion of peace is conditional on the acknowledgment of the Islamic idea of God.The Quran implies that the world will be at peace when every person on Earth submits to the will of Allah (by force if necessary). In that sense, Islam is a religion of peace. Another quote from the book:
The jihad was integral to Islamic expansion. Understood as a political-military struggle, it provided the rationale for the Islamic imperium.Ever since I read that, I've thought differently of jihad. If you are a devout person, if you want to please Allah and show him how much you worship Him, but you do not have the avenue of expression called asceticism, how can you demonstrate your devotion? Muhammad gave the answer: Jihad. Express it in action. Express it by striving mightily in the name of Allah, not just in your mind, but in the world. Advance Allah's cause by defending Islam, and by trying to make every country on earth follow the law of Allah. Work at it. Put your money where your faith is.
...Jihad, as is now widely known, means "struggle:" it has the same root as ijtihad, the interpretative "effort" needed to fathom the law as revealed by God and his Prophet. According to a well-known hadith, jihad is the "monasticism" of faith. "Every nation has its monasticism and the monasticism of this nation is the jihad." Muhammad disapproved of asceticism: there was to be "no monkery" in his community. Jihad held the place occupied by asceticism in early Christianity.
This is a powerful idea. It makes sense. It is compelling. And that is what we are up against. A belief like that is a force to be reckoned with. Luckily, in free democracies, we have a force even more powerful: A commitment to living as free people.
1 comment:
Yes, Najistani, there is that.
But you have to admit that if someone grew up in an Islamic state where it is a forgone conclusion by everyone in authority that Allah exists and Islam is the true religion, then the idea of expressing or proving your faith to Allah through action rather than through monkery is an idea that makes sense and could easily become a compelling motivation from within that worldview.
For us infidels, of course, it makes no sense whatsoever.
While it is worthwhile to know where we stand, it is also I think worthwhile to know what we are up against. And a compelling belief (such as proving your devotion to Allah) is more formidable than a weaker belief (such as multiculturalism).
To compete with and defeat a powerful, motivating belief, you would need an even more powerful, motivating belief, like a belief in living as free people.
And I think it would be worthwhile to reinforce that more powerful belief. To strengthen it. To clarify it and even glorify it.
Post a Comment