Why Islam is an aberration!

General philosophy message board for Discussion and debate on other philosophical issues not directly related to veganism. Metaphysics, religion, theist vs. atheist debates, politics, general science discussion, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Sam Arcot
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:42 pm
Diet: Meat-Eater

Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by Sam Arcot »

Hi! I am posting an article here, since I couldn't do it on my blog. My blog is being viewed by some of my Muslim friends and family. And as long as I am here I have to pretend to be a practicing Muslim. I really like the simple structure of this forum. Also, I like the fact that there is no rushing and cramming here unlike in other forums. I hope that my article remains safe here. So that I can look back at in the future and remember the standing of my belief and understanding at this period of life. Its going to be a long (and probable boring) article which will tell you why I consider Islam different and hence more treacherous than other religions.

Why Islam is an aberration even in the world of religions?
Let me begin my argument by first elucidating what religions are for and how they must have emerged. In the ancient times, when men were more inclined towards violence, loot and perjury (and all crime in general) there was a necessity for the existence of a civil code. And there was an even more necessity for people to abide by it. But with no education, people were less likely to follow these codes. The powerful and ruthless would dominate on the rest and leave these laws for them to follow. So, there emerged, either with or without the support of the ruling classes, the class of the priests. The spiritual teachers who taught people that they will be accountable for their sins whether or not they were convicted in this world. There was the need of mysticism and mythology to teach them the principle of an ideal human and that the people who do not follow this path end up on the losing side. This could be the first reason for the emergence of religion, i.e to maintain a civil society. The second reason, the mystery of our existence. As soon as Man began thinking, he must have wondered where he had come from. What was the truth behind his existence? With genetics far from his reach, he sought refuge among those who said they knew. The people with great imaginative skills. So his curiosity and his inability to answer the questions must have got him to yield. The third reason, he found the religious societies safer. Thanks to the first reason, religions provided security to the believers in its community. The social interactions also flourished with religious rituals. With all these boons, the priests enjoyed a special privileged and honored status in the society.

Religions also provided cross civilization authorities to the priests. The Buddhist for example, had a chain of religious schools extending from India to China and Korea. Have other religions emerged out of the influence of one particular religion or were they independent cannot be known. But however we can say that, one religion in one particular region did lead to the creation of an improvised form of the previous one. This can be proved from the Indian history as well. The Aryan Hindu religion was criticized by a group of scholars for some of it violent natures and they created Jainism which was more peaceful and eco-friendly. This further led to the emerging of Buddhism. Similarly in East Asia, the Jewish religion outshined the Persian and neighboring faiths and led to the coming of Christianity. As an ex-Muslim, I do not understand the nature of Christ as I understand Mohammed from his teachings and life stories. But I know that Christ made a good use of Moses’s prophecy of the Messiah. I am not sure why Moses had to prophecy the arrival but it seems Christ did not fit into his description of the Messiah to the local Jews. This got him crucified (feel sorry for that).

The Arabs had their local indigenous religions but the Christianity and Judaism were pervasive. Arabs, the pagans, watched these two cultures very closely. They had understood why Christ failed but had his faith succeed. They understood the strength of these monotheistic beliefs against polytheistic ones. Mohammed, with his 40 years of merchant life was said to have made acquaintances with Jews and Christians. He also had knowledge of some ancient Persian stories as stated by Al-nadr bin al-Harith http://www.answering-islam.org/Muhammad ... /nadr.html

Mohammed perfectly understood that superficial morality could be the best tool to lure people. The principles of aiding the poor, banning of adultery, punishment for murder, theft etc, which already existed in Abrahamic faiths were adopted along with new components like prohibition of alcohol and Hijab. While Prohibition could be traced back to 1600 bc, Hijab came from Jilbab that was prominent in the Arabian peninsula. It was worn for the sake of shielding the face against sandstorms, the same way Arab men cover their faces with the extension of their turbans. It was probably a fashion for women of higher classes. Mohammed promoted this concept and his companions did it with further extremism and compulsion.

Throughout his life, there is no doubt that he has been generous and kind to the people around him. He was famous for his humbleness, and it is said that most people converted for him rather than his message. Though focused on expanding the Islamic empire, his regime was secular for his time. There are actually not many reasons to hate him. Infact, he did abolish the ancient customs like the female infant burial. This nature is common to almost all the founders of faiths. But after his death, the throne fell in the hands of the less compassionate. The companions fought among each other for the throne and gave birth to sectarianism and conflicts, which till date has seen no resolution and continues to take more lives (shia-sunny conflict). Islam spread nimbly over the rest of the Arabic kingdoms. With the fall of the Seleucid and the alliance with the Turks, the Islamic empire saw no halters.
The probable reason for such lightning expansion over the Arab lands was the cultural similarities, the fall of Sassanid empire and the swift and fearless Muslim horsemen (imagine jihadist in medieval era). Persians wished for domination and tried overthrowing the caliphate by reorganizing the Shiite community. With the Turks accepting Islam, the caliphate strengthened up again. The history of Islam’s golden era is full of such rises and falls just like with any other empire. But it is not these parts of it that interests me, it is but the vast contribution to the sciences by Muslims of this period that makes it (the history of golden era) important.

For any empire to stand, there is a need for technological advances. Realizing this and the fact that Prophet himself encouraged sciences(of his time), the Caliphs paid the scholars to gather the knowledge from Indian and Greek sources. They not just studied the sciences but also contributed greatly for its progress. The factor that promoted this movement was the notion of the medieval Muslims that they have actually acquired the truth and the knowledge of universe and felt the need to tackle other beliefs and theories. Another factor was the Islam’s encouragement to observe the nature for the signs of God. Also, Mohammed was indeed influenced by the Greek philosophers like Homer and Aristotle, and his followers felt encouraged to explore and study them. One more important factor was the absence of insecurity from the sciences, something that would later bring the fall of the same intellectualism in Islam. The first scientist in the world also comes from the Islamic period, Ibn al-Haytham. The period of scientific discoveries came to a decline by the end of 15th century. After which the sciences flourished in Europe, thanks to the crusades.

One thing that made European scientific advances special were their study of social sciences. The medieval westerners were just as shortsighted as the rest of the world. But with the fall of the feudalism due to the crusades, people moved towards thinkers. A revolution occurred in its society. The one which was unlike any other. The renaissance. Western society stepped into a period that we can see today in India and Arab world. The enlightenment age. The time when people admired a women’s modesty and a man’s nobleness. This of course caused them to dominate the rest. This meant dominating the rest not just by military advances but also in the fields of medical, instrumental, social, physical sciences along with literature, art and philosophy. It took them two world wars to realize that they were but equals to their fellow human beings. They opened up to diversity and changes. This did not happen in other civilizations. We Indians get outrageous when we see westerners discriminating other races. But we are fully aware that back in our homeland, our people are several times more racist. How many times do we get to see a darker person being labelled ‘ugly’ in Indian television? Isn't it quite common? Ask a far easterner, how he felt when he visited India. I am sure the Chinese are not so fond of other races either. These civilizations have clearly skipped an important step of their evolution- the renaissance. However, thanks to the globalization, we won’t need more world wars for them to learn these lessons. With a common education, an education that focuses on rationalism, equality and liberty of everyone, we can learn the hard learned lessons from the west. So, it is important to understand that we humans need to work as one society and discourage diversity. This, may be a bit slowly but is happening in Indian, Chinese, Columbian and African cultures (include their neighbors in them) except for in the Muslim world. This is what makes Muslims and their beliefs an exception. Below are the reasons (according to me) that is making Muslims reject globalization-


The first is- The hatred for the westerners. Muslims particularly abhor western society. Mohammed himself saw Jews and Christians as his rivals and prepared Muslims against them. And it seems, he also prophesied a powerful Christian and Jewish nation dominating the world and putting pressure on Muslims. Not sure if he actually prophesied it or whether his companions fabricated it. Every move that they (westerners) are to make, is only to obliterate Islam. And those who appreciate them, are among them. Take them not as allies. This is the first reason why Islam is an aberration from other religions and communities.

The second is, the suppression of sexuality. Human beings are designed to achieve these three things in their life- food, shelter and reproduction. Everything else could be linked to these three. And through reproduction, we have our sexual desires that need urgent attention. If any person declares that he or she is fine abstaining from sexual tension in his life, he or she is abnormal. Sex is a vital part of our life. This is something the medieval Muslims understood better than the modern ones. Polygamy and early marriages are a sign of a sexually healthy medieval society even after the abolition of prostitution. But a closed society with no male and female interaction and polygamy is a sign of a very unhealthy and ghoulish modern society. Sex without marriage is considered an awful sin. And polygamy is discouraged to the extent of abolition in today’s times. You cannot have sex until you get married. And the ideal time of getting married in today’s Muslim world is 27 years. It is proven that men are most sexually active in their late teen and early twenties. But a Muslim can never even dream of practicing his desires at his most active stage of life. Now this is not even the greater problem, which is- the purdah. If Islam was forbidding just the fornication, it could be justified to some extent but that is not even it. Islam goes to the extent of forbidding even a simple stare at the women, leave aside interaction. According to it, Zinah(illegal sexual intercourse or rape) are of three kinds- the zinah of talk, that is talking to a girl who isn’t your sister or mother. The zinah of seeing- seeing a girl for a long time. And zinah of thoughts for which you get an erection. Though these zinah’s are not punishable, they are abhorrent and condemned. And Islamic countries have built their societies in such a way that men are abstained from these things. Even though the Indian Muslim society is considerably liberal compared to the Arabs, I had a very hard time.

The third- the praying system. A muslim is supposed to pray five times a day leaving all his jobs aside. These prayers require at least ten minutes (given the time for preparation) to complete. Ten minutes may seem weightless but when in an important task, it can cause its total disruption. If this was not enough, Muslims are encouraged to extend their prayers with the promise of more and more reward. People argue that these prayers bring discipline in life and it might to some. But the disturbance it causes is actually unaccountable. And Muslims are not very well known for their discipline, a paradox.

The fourth- The lesser love for life. When you are made to believe that everything in this world is temporary and artificial, and the actual life shall begin after this. Will you actually hold anything for this world? Blowing up yourself to kill the infidels is just a short cut for you. Would you like to live in a world where you cannot stare at a women instead of a world where you’ll have 70 virgins for yourself? And 70 virgins ain’t just it. The gardens under which the rivers flow is described in such a flamboyant way that you will feel like leaving this life as soon as possible. Though Quran encourages people to thrive for success in both this life and the after one, it takes away that charm of a normal ambitious hard working human being.

The fifth- Aping the life of Mohammed. The prophet’s life is considered ideal and is supposed to be followed by all. Taking his example to deal with different situations of life. This includes how to eat, to sleep, to pee, to talk etc. What this does is it narrows the freedom and choices. Islam fails to understand that there are more than one kind of people in this world and that diversity of thoughts has to be tolerated. The perspective has no place at all. There is no understanding that there are people with different natures like the introverts, extroverts, altruist, ascetic, misanthrope etc. How can the whole of people ape one man whom they never saw nor met? And who lived in a different time?

The sixth- Everything else. Since this topic is getting too long I am going to wrap up everything that’s left. And that would be- sexual discrimination, aim for a world conquest, hatred for non-Muslims, festival of slaughter, etc etc… Islam was designed in such a way that it can stand the test of time. Do not expect the Muslims to become liberal and give away their religious beliefs like the rest of the world. Not until at least ten generations. While the eastern arab countries like Turkey, Lebanon may have adopted modernism (from what I know), the majority of the Muslims population who live in countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc are under strong Extremist Muslim grasp. And their younger generations are even more fundamental and anti-modern.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Thanks for writing this, it's interesting to hear your take.

Make sure you save this on your computer too, just in case. :)


I'll try to supply some better comments soon. I need more time to read carefully.
User avatar
Sam Arcot
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:42 pm
Diet: Meat-Eater

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by Sam Arcot »

I am eager for your comment :D
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by brimstoneSalad »

First I want to say how great it is to have your unique insight into Islam; you're in a position of distinct cultural context I don't think anybody else has, and it's good to read your thoughts on this :)

I'm going to do this part by part, I think, it could take a few posts.
Sam Arcot wrote:This could be the first reason for the emergence of religion, i.e to maintain a civil society.
I mostly agree, and I like the way you put that. Though I would say it's not just about ignorance, but also about lack; when people lack things in this life, they become more desperate, and in ancient times, that was a fact of life with primitive medicine, and lack of personal security. Once you start having a safe and comfortable life, religion seems less necessary.

I think people were going to turn to one religion or another -- or one warlord, or another, at least -- because they were looking for something to believe in. People often crave direction in this battle against the evils in life.

The problem is, if it wasn't a unified religion (as Islam accomplished, and many before it as well), then it was disorganized and fractured tribes fighting each other over their differences, which were magnified by their needs, and their superstitions. Which, ironically, had they just worked together in the first place, they would have needed less, and not developed the superstitions ... but that's not how human work.
Sam Arcot wrote:The second reason, the mystery of our existence.
I think this is not so much the reason religion exists, because mythologies can exist in chaos and without such structure, but more the reason that religion can have such a hold- because it can convince people with answers, which are traditional for them, that it is the correct way.
Sam Arcot wrote:The third reason, he found the religious societies safer. Thanks to the first reason, religions provided security to the believers in its community. The social interactions also flourished with religious rituals.
I think that's the first reason- but community might be the third. Once society was stable, religion provided a kind of community which unfortunately secular attempts have fallen short of over the centuries. Part of that may be the compulsion and shunning, which is founded upon their absolute dictates, which holds people in.

The only thing that has come close to solving the question of community without religion has probably sport.
But that's another topic :)

Sam Arcot wrote:Religions also provided cross civilization authorities to the priests. The Buddhist for example, had a chain of religious schools extending from India to China and Korea.
They were never that organized. More than the distance a horse could travel in a day was a stretched empire indeed.

I think the spread of religions has more to do with a memetic kind of Darwinian fitness for the society at hand.
Sam Arcot wrote:Have other religions emerged out of the influence of one particular religion or were they independent cannot be known.
Memes cross-pollinate much more freely, because they don't speciate as living things do.
One would THINK they would speciate, due to some memes contradicting each other, but religion has never had a big problem with internal contradiction (perhaps unfortunately, or perhaps thankfully in a historic sense).

Studying the phylogeny of religion is very complex, and you actually have to follow not the religion as a whole, but the individual memes that make it up since they mix and mutate to freely to get the most accurate picture.

Sam Arcot wrote:The Aryan Hindu religion was criticized by a group of scholars for some of it violent natures and they created Jainism which was more peaceful and eco-friendly.
My understanding is that Jainism predates what we would recognize today as Hinduism, but that they co-evolved into their modern forms. Buddhism comes mainly from the Vedic line, and was not (as far as I can tell) inspired strongly by Jainism. Buddhists are like... protestant Hindus, sort of. But the philosophy took on a life of its own.
Sam Arcot wrote:Similarly in East Asia, the Jewish religion outshined the Persian and neighboring faiths and led to the coming of Christianity.
Modern Christianity was mostly originated by Saul of Tarsus, or "Saint" Paul, and is largely Greco-Roman in nature, particularly since it purged the gnostics and other sects. It claims lineage from Judaism, and because Torah was included in the Bible there is some superficially shared tradition there, but most of the memes found their origins from Roman culture, or after 300-ish C.E. with the Nicene creed, and the Apologists who followed.
Sam Arcot wrote: As an ex-Muslim, I do not understand the nature of Christ as I understand Mohammed from his teachings and life stories. But I know that Christ made a good use of Moses’s prophecy of the Messiah. I am not sure why Moses had to prophecy the arrival but it seems Christ did not fit into his description of the Messiah to the local Jews. This got him crucified (feel sorry for that).
If he existed as a single historical man, Jesus was probably ultimately crucified for his "Cleansing of the Temple", and his criticism of the temple's superstitious practices of blood sacrifice (as cruel and superstitious/useless), and strict adherence to outdated laws, in general.

I don't think anybody took seriously the idea of him being the Jewish messiah (nor did Jesus) until much later.

The prophecy fulfillment was more of an ad hoc thing that was forced by apologists (along with his lineage).

And then some idiots decided that Jesus wanted to be a blood sacrifice himself, despite his being killed for opposing the concept of blood sacrifices and rejecting them on philosophical grounds (people are responsible for their own actions and your wrong doing can't be washed away by sacrificing another).
Hmm...

And that lie, which was directly against any message that remains from the man (if he existed as a single man, more likely one of several in a movement), is the foundation of modern Christianity.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Sam Arcot wrote:He also had knowledge of some ancient Persian stories as stated by Al-nadr bin al-Harith http://www.answering-islam.org/Muhammad ... /nadr.html
I'm not sure what you mean, or what the relevance there is, can you elaborate a bit?
Sam Arcot wrote:along with new components like prohibition of alcohol and Hijab. While Prohibition could be traced back to 1600 bc, Hijab came from Jilbab that was prominent in the Arabian peninsula. It was worn for the sake of shielding the face against sandstorms, the same way Arab men cover their faces with the extension of their turbans. It was probably a fashion for women of higher classes. Mohammed promoted this concept and his companions did it with further extremism and compulsion.
Did Mohammed mandate the Hijab, or do you mean that was more the work of his companions and later Muslims?

I had the impression that the concepts for the Hijab may have come more from Christianity, wherein women are the glory of men, and should cover their heads before god- which is common in many more conservative Christian traditions.
Sam Arcot wrote:For any empire to stand, there is a need for technological advances. Realizing this and the fact that Prophet himself encouraged sciences(of his time), the Caliphs paid the scholars to gather the knowledge from Indian and Greek sources. They not just studied the sciences but also contributed greatly for its progress.
Do you think it was this conscious?

In Christianity, it was more that the priests just had a lot of time for study, and a lot of funding (for any reason), that they were able to pursue human curiosity. I doubt that it has as much to do with religion as just having the ability to follow human nature. The structure and funding provided by religious hierarchy just made this possible in a time where people would otherwise be more focused on subsistence.
Sam Arcot wrote:The factor that promoted this movement was the notion of the medieval Muslims that they have actually acquired the truth and the knowledge of universe and felt the need to tackle other beliefs and theories. Another factor was the Islam’s encouragement to observe the nature for the signs of God. Also, Mohammed was indeed influenced by the Greek philosophers like Homer and Aristotle, and his followers felt encouraged to explore and study them.
I think this may be an attempt to ascribe cause in hindsight. There are pro and anti- scientific/knowledge notions in many religious traditions, but I doubt anything is stronger than the curiosity of the intellectual elite.

Sam Arcot wrote:One more important factor was the absence of insecurity from the sciences, something that would later bring the fall of the same intellectualism in Islam.
What do you mean?
Sam Arcot wrote:The first scientist in the world also comes from the Islamic period, Ibn al-Haytham.
I doubt that. Basic scientific thought dates back into ancient Greece where we have records, and probably much before, and gave birth to atomism- which may have been the first scientific world view. There were also Vedic and Jain thinkers before then who had more scientific outlooks.

If you're talking about objective and rigorous experimentation, that is modern science, you have to go to the Renaissance where the notion of objectivity and repeatable experimentation really came to the forefront. William Gilbert, who did work in magnetism, may have been the first modern scientist, as far as we can tell- thanks to his methodology and outlook on experimentation being divorced from speculation.

However, excepting that very narrow qualification, trying to put a name to the first "scientist" as we might commonly see it is probably doomed to failure through the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, as you're forced to reason why those who came before and displayed many of the same traits were for some reason not true scientists. Pre-Renaissance, it's all a gradual process of philosophical and experimental improvement over the past two or three thousand years.
Sam Arcot wrote:The period of scientific discoveries came to a decline by the end of 15th century. After which the sciences flourished in Europe, thanks to the crusades.
I don't think that was a causative event, more correlation. Europe bloomed, and with this extra wealth and idle time people pursued the sciences, while the church thought it suitable to carry on crusades. Trade was important, but that's always the case, and it probably wasn't essential. Arabic mathematics certainly contributed a great deal, but I don't think we can lay the credit there exclusively. Many concepts in mathematics have been independently discovered.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Sam Arcot wrote:The time when people admired a women’s modesty and a man’s nobleness.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
The Renaissance was in part about overcoming those preconceptions.
Sam Arcot wrote:It took them two world wars to realize that they were but equals to their fellow human beings. They opened up to diversity and changes.
I don't know what the world wars have to do with anything...
You might be a little bit confused there?
Sam Arcot wrote:These civilizations have clearly skipped an important step of their evolution- the renaissance.
Yes, in a sense you may be right there.
Sam Arcot wrote:However, thanks to the globalization, we won’t need more world wars for them to learn these lessons.
I really don't think the world wars have anything to do with what you're talking about though...
Sam Arcot wrote:With a common education, an education that focuses on rationalism, equality and liberty of everyone, we can learn the hard learned lessons from the west.
I hope so.
Sam Arcot wrote:So, it is important to understand that we humans need to work as one society and discourage diversity.
Not clear what you mean here.
Sam Arcot wrote:This, may be a bit slowly but is happening in Indian, Chinese, Columbian and African cultures (include their neighbors in them) except for in the Muslim world. This is what makes Muslims and their beliefs an exception. Below are the reasons (according to me) that is making Muslims reject globalization-
You're right there. It's a slow and steady process in most of the world. Parts of the Islamic world are accepting globalization, though, and they aren't alone in shunning it; there are Catholics in South America who have been resisting it almost as hard, as well as in Africa. And historically, isolated community of Christians in the U.S. (like Amish).
Sam Arcot wrote:The first is- The hatred for the westerners. Muslims particularly abhor western society. Mohammed himself saw Jews and Christians as his rivals and prepared Muslims against them. And it seems, he also prophesied a powerful Christian and Jewish nation dominating the world and putting pressure on Muslims. Not sure if he actually prophesied it or whether his companions fabricated it. Every move that they (westerners) are to make, is only to obliterate Islam. And those who appreciate them, are among them. Take them not as allies. This is the first reason why Islam is an aberration from other religions and communities.
Islam also says they are people of the book, and that there is no compulsion in religion, right?

It seems like a lot of this is political propaganda.

When a totalitarian regime wants to stay in power, they have to establish an "other" as a powerful enemy to stand against and unite the state, allowing them to maintain that grip. If the world is less hostile, it's harder for them to hold onto that power.

I'm not sure how much of that originates with Islam itself, as with those governments' propaganda.
Sam Arcot wrote:The second is, the suppression of sexuality.
Ubiquitous in Christianity too.

The issue in the Middle east is polygamy, which means there are fewer available women for the large number of single men. The sexual frustration this creates is different from anything we typically see in the Western world.

This is also another aspect of political power, and rule by the wealthy. Monopolization of women by rich and powerful men- it's something they don't want to let go of, and in the process it produces social strife.
Sam Arcot wrote:If any person declares that he or she is fine abstaining from sexual tension in his life, he or she is abnormal. Sex is a vital part of our life.
Asexuality isn't that uncommon. Sex isn't vital. But for a horny teenager filled with hormones and short on education, who has few prospects, it's a very powerful motivator.
Sam Arcot wrote:This is something the medieval Muslims understood better than the modern ones. Polygamy and early marriages are a sign of a sexually healthy medieval society even after the abolition of prostitution. But a closed society with no male and female interaction and polygamy is a sign of a very unhealthy and ghoulish modern society.
What?
Sam Arcot wrote:Sex without marriage is considered an awful sin. And polygamy is discouraged to the extent of abolition in today’s times.
There's nothing inherently wrong with an isolated case of polygamy (beyond the tendency for abuse due to the social deviancy of the practice), but polygamy is unsustainable without war. In order for one man to marry multiple women, you need multiple men not to every marry- which means either they are driven mad with unsatisfied desire, or they're killed off in conflict.
In medieval society, there were more women than men, so this was more sustainable, since a large number of men were being killed off. Prostitution also makes it more sustainable- and it happens whether it's legal or not- but where religion comes in, this can cause complications (there are also perfectly secular reasons to be wary, particularly of unregulated prostitution).
Sam Arcot wrote:Now this is not even the greater problem, which is- the purdah.
It's not terribly dissimilar to conservative Christianity.
Sam Arcot wrote:The third- the praying system. A muslim is supposed to pray five times a day leaving all his jobs aside.
I doubt that's a big issue; most people waste more time smoking.
People take breaks during the day, and five is less than hourly.
I think you might be stretching a bit here.
Sam Arcot wrote:People argue that these prayers bring discipline in life and it might to some. But the disturbance it causes is actually unaccountable. And Muslims are not very well known for their discipline, a paradox.
I think we'd need to see real evidence either way. The claims that either they improve discipline, or that they are problematic to productivity, both need substantiation.

Sam Arcot wrote:The fourth- The lesser love for life. When you are made to believe that everything in this world is temporary and artificial, and the actual life shall begin after this. Will you actually hold anything for this world?
Christians think largely in the same way. Again, there are a lot of parallels. And while these things are in many ways unfortunate- particularly this last one- they are not inherently guarantors of abuse in themselves.
Sam Arcot wrote:The fifth- Aping the life of Mohammed.
Christians often think the same way about Jesus, and other figures. Humans are obsessed with imitation, and sometimes feel uneasy about making their own choices.

Fortunately for Christianity, there's much less evidence of who Jesus was and how he lived, so perhaps more room for interpretation.

This may be your strongest argument. The grueling detail in the Hadith may be enough to drive one mad.

The solution there is education. Understanding cultural relativism. Casting doubts on the authenticity or legitimacy of any Hadith, and asking Muslims to use their own moral judgement and reason- which will usually end up superior- in determining how Mohammed would have lived today.

Sam Arcot wrote:The sixth- Everything else. Since this topic is getting too long I am going to wrap up everything that’s left. And that would be- sexual discrimination, aim for a world conquest, hatred for non-Muslims, festival of slaughter, etc etc…
All common in Christianity.
Sam Arcot wrote:Islam was designed in such a way that it can stand the test of time. Do not expect the Muslims to become liberal and give away their religious beliefs like the rest of the world.
Islam is a lot stronger than Christianity in some respects, and notably, because we have more documentation and text available from that time. Most of it is just as suspect and subjective as anything in the Bible, but it's also very detailed.

That said, it doesn't necessarily take a lot of education to show Muslims that their own judgement can be a source of inspiration. And particular, most Muslims are capable of learning to reject the worst of Hadith.
Sam Arcot wrote:While the eastern arab countries like Turkey, Lebanon may have adopted modernism (from what I know), the majority of the Muslims population who live in countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Bangladesh etc are under strong Extremist Muslim grasp. And their younger generations are even more fundamental and anti-modern.
This is with thanks to secular governments, and even more so to improved standards of living and less wealth disparity.

The majority of Muslims are living in societies with extreme poverty, and class differences, along with great general social unrest. These are the environments in which religious extremism most effectively breeds.
User avatar
Sam Arcot
Newbie
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:42 pm
Diet: Meat-Eater

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by Sam Arcot »

I am going to apologize first for cramming in so much into one post. I just felt the need to condemn the community that's kind of making me stifle. But as I began writing I added almost everything that was running on my head that time. Anyways, whatever I wrote I did so under total consciousness. The whole point of my article was to educate readers that Islamist are more stubborn and difficult to handle than the other religious groups. I can totally understand that my language is different and difficult to understand for I was educated in a missionary under British English medium. Also, we Indians(not all) have a relatively weaker vocabulary and find it difficult to express an idea in simpler and shorter sentences. I thank you Brimestolesalad for giving my article a read and making the effort to understand it.
The problem is, if it wasn't a unified religion (as Islam accomplished, and many before it as well), then it was disorganized and fractured tribes fighting each other over their differences, which were magnified by their needs, and their superstitions. Which, ironically, had they just worked together in the first place, they would have needed less, and not developed the superstitions ... but that's not how human work.
You are right at that. A religion can reduce the cultural differences and make people look beyond race, creed and regionalism. Islam can be credited for uniting the Arab world with some parts of Africa, Subcontinent, Anatolia and South east Asia. It has caused the total wipe out of Byzantine culture and annexed Turkish, Lebanese and Syrian people into Arabia. Muslims usually put the faith prior to other variations. Many Muslim families readily gave away their young girls to the Sheikhs in return for money. They wouldn't give their daughters to the rich Hindus. There was relatively lesser racism in Arab nations thanks to the religion. However, the fact that these major religions fall into sectarianism like its almost inevitable again breaks people. (I am not sure that made sense to you. If not, I will elaborate later)
I think that's the first reason- but community might be the third. Once society was stable, religion provided a kind of community which unfortunately secular attempts have fallen short of over the centuries. Part of that may be the compulsion and shunning, which is founded upon their absolute dictates, which holds people in.
That's right. Even the national festivals are not as social as the religious ones in the sense that there is lesser interaction. The customs and traditions that involve people working together makes them... work together. Which in turn makes them more social. This may not always be true.
My understanding is that Jainism predates what we would recognize today as Hinduism, but that they co-evolved into their modern forms. Buddhism comes mainly from the Vedic line, and was not (as far as I can tell) inspired strongly by Jainism.
There was nothing as Hinduism before the arrival of the Muslims in India, who recognized the non-Muslims Indians as Hindus. Before this, there were scholars and priests debating on existentialism, human origin, myths etc. There were classifications of people into sects based on their social standing. This system resonated throughout most of India. My point here was to show that religions might have emerged out of the influence of one another. In short, the Darwinian memetics. People could think of better and more suitable ideologies from the ideologies that already existed. Memetic mutation, if you call it. Jainism was definitely a replacement of the laws and philosophies of the people of that time and place. Jains call themselves Hindus today. Buddhism was also, as you said, influenced by vedic culture. It may or may not have anything to do with Jainism. Sorry for being so inaccurate.

I'm not sure what you mean, or what the relevance there is, can you elaborate a bit?
I will write on this later. Its quite interesting.
Did Mohammed mandate the Hijab, or do you mean that was more the work of his companions and later Muslims?

I had the impression that the concepts for the Hijab may have come more from Christianity, wherein women are the glory of men, and should cover their heads before god- which is common in many more conservative Christian traditions.
Hijab is nothing like the covering of head in Christianity and conservative north Indians. Hijab is strictly the total absence of women from a man's sight. Though the Quranic version of Hijab may be not as strict and applicable in today's society. The Hadiths are very specific about the covering of face. From an incident, Prophet scolded his daughter for appearing hijabless in front of a blind man as he said purdah has to be done from both sides. Isn't that a bit too far?
Sam Arcot wrote:
One more important factor was the absence of insecurity from the sciences, something that would later bring the fall of the same intellectualism in Islam.

you said:-
What do you mean?
The believers of Islam are usually confident that their beliefs go in parallel with the science. This is the reason why you find Muslims pointing our miracles like the embryology from the Quran. I figured, this could have caused them to explore more theories and ideologies. I could be wrong.
I doubt that. Basic scientific thought dates back into ancient Greece where we have records, and probably much before, and gave birth to atomism- which may have been the first scientific world view. There were also Vedic and Jain thinkers before then who had more scientific outlooks.
I studied from somewhere that Ibn Al Haytham was known as the first scientist due to his scientific approach on his subject. I am now clueless from where. It was either from the internet or an encyclopedia. I recommend you to do a bit of study on this to verify (if you are interested, cause I am kind of busy right now). Of course, as you said the atomism is the most vivid scientific theory of the ancient times showing how deep the thinkers might have been.
If you're talking about objective and rigorous experimentation, that is modern science, you have to go to the Renaissance where the notion of objectivity and repeatable experimentation really came to the forefront.
Scientific achievements in the renaissance period were greatly inspired by the Arabs. You can look it up on wikipedia (I wish I had time to provide direct links to prove this, I will later).

You have to however agree that there was a significant contribution from the Muslims to the sciences. I am not saying that there's anything great about it. I am just pointing out that Islam did not act as a barrier for these scientists. Though, it is acting today.
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
The Renaissance was in part about overcoming those preconceptions.
Renaissance was not a total make over of the European society. The nobleness and loyalty mattered to the society even during the enlightenment age and beyond it. Renaissance was just the initial stage of what was to come.
I don't know what the world wars have to do with anything...
I think they do. The racial superiority existed until recently among the western Europeans. The peek of which was the Fascism of the Axis that promoted Aryan superiority. Though the allies might have been more tolerant than the totalitarian regimes, even they had discrimination for other races. The world wars taught people why nation running on fascist ideologies is not a good idea. Also, the decline of colonial power by the world wars caused Western Europeans to open other ways of trading with the Asia. This explored the intellect and scientific abilities of the Asians and Africans which were otherwise undermined.
Sam Arcot wrote:
So, it is important to understand that we humans need to work as one society and discourage diversity.

You said:-
Not clear what you mean here.
I meant that the diversity of the cultures can sometimes make people overlook crimes against humanity. For example, Sam Harris has given the example from the book The Blank Slate- If only one person in the world held down a terrified, struggling, screaming little girl, cut off her genitals with a septic blade, the only question would be how severely that person should be punished. But when millions of people do this, instead of enormity being magnified million-fold, suddenly it becomes 'culture' and thereby overlooked. And is even defended by some Western moral thinkers, including feminist.

It would be better to have one law for all people rather than a variation. We can debate on this later but I hope it is clear what I meant here.
Asexuality isn't that uncommon. Sex isn't vital. But for a horny teenager filled with hormones and short on education, who has few prospects, it's a very powerful motivator.
Asexuality may not be uncommon. But you cannot force a whole people into a system built for asexual. I am not very comfortable sharing my personal experiences, but I guess I will to promote my statement here. I have never seen my first cousins. Do you think that is normal? I have memories of them when we were kids. I do not have any problem with them not wanting to see me but the fact that the community is forbidding me from seeing any girl is felt like being treated as a criminal or a rapist. I have many hindu and some 'bad' muslims girls as my friends and don't really need the good muslim girls to talk to me. But it is this treatment that I detest. And, I am not a teenager anymore, I am 20 :twisted: .
This is something the medieval Muslims understood better than the modern ones.

You said:-
What?
The medieval Muslims and those in the time of Prophet did practice purdah but at the same time did not have to suppress their sexuality. They were encouraged to marry at early ages. This is of course not possible in the modern age and hence as a Muslim, you may feel deprived.
I think we'd need to see real evidence either way. The claims that either they improve discipline, or that they are problematic to productivity, both need substantiation.
If you need substantiation, I would ask you to travel to Saudi Arabia and study why the Sheikhs prefer non-Muslims over Muslims in their companies even though their policy was the converse a few years ago. As I said, the prayer includes preparation and give more time for organizing it. There are people who can manage their work even with the prayers, but for the majority it is a bane.

I think we'd need to see real evidence either way. The claims that either they improve discipline, or that they are problematic to productivity, both need substantiation.
I think you are right. May be Islam is not that different. But it is more difficult to prove wrong and is less tolerant towards diversity and modern thinking.
The majority of Muslims are living in societies with extreme poverty, and class differences, along with great general social unrest. These are the environments in which religious extremism most effectively breeds.
The countries like pakistan and indonesia are very well resourced and fertile. Their poverty can be linked to Islam again that has encouraged overpopulation, rejection of modern education and unawareness through banning of cinema. Movies could have drastically changed the society there the way they did in India. But Islamic countries have a ban on film industry too.
User avatar
brimstoneSalad
neither stone nor salad
Posts: 10273
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 9:20 am
Diet: Vegan

Re: Why Islam is an aberration!

Post by brimstoneSalad »

Sam Arcot wrote:However, the fact that these major religions fall into sectarianism like its almost inevitable again breaks people.
Right. It seems like religions have a half-life, they're inherently unstable. You get a few good years of unity out of them, and then they break down- since none of the scripture or anything like that actually has any real authority behind it to keep things unified.
Sam Arcot wrote:From an incident, Prophet scolded his daughter for appearing hijabless in front of a blind man as he said purdah has to be done from both sides. Isn't that a bit too far?
Interesting, that's in one of the Hadith? Quite extreme. Certainly the blind man couldn't see her anyway.
Sam Arcot wrote:I figured, this could have caused them to explore more theories and ideologies. I could be wrong.
Those kinds of things are stretches, and you see the same thing with Christians who think the Bible contains science.
It's a peculiar Islamic ignorance of science that leads them to claim that the Qur'an contains so much of it (e.g. at that time, that level of embryology was primitive relative to many learned humans- it's nothing Mohammed wouldn't have known).

Sam Arcot wrote:I recommend you to do a bit of study on this to verify (if you are interested, cause I am kind of busy right now). Of course, as you said the atomism is the most vivid scientific theory of the ancient times showing how deep the thinkers might have been.
He's certainly an important history, but it's not clear what his methodology was, and there are things that go back long before him. Science was a gradual process, and involved many cultures contributing to it.
Sam Arcot wrote:Scientific achievements in the renaissance period were greatly inspired by the Arabs.
Arabs, and ancient Greeks, and really any knowledge people could get their hands on.

The Arabic numerals were a big contribution.
Sam Arcot wrote:I am just pointing out that Islam did not act as a barrier for these scientists. Though, it is acting today.
Certainly, during the golden age, there was a lot of study. And quite a bit of mathematics.
Sam Arcot wrote:The nobleness and loyalty mattered to the society even during the enlightenment age and beyond it. Renaissance was just the initial stage of what was to come.
Maybe it wasn't lost entirely, but I'm not sure what it has to do with the renaissance.
Sam Arcot wrote:The world wars taught people why nation running on fascist ideologies is not a good idea.
Oh, I understand what you mean. Yes, while many Islamic countries deny the events the holocaust, etc.
They could have learned from it, but it seems they're not ready to abandon fascism.

Sam Harris has given the example from the book The Blank Slate- If only one person in the world held down a terrified, struggling, screaming little girl, cut off her genitals with a septic blade, the only question would be how severely that person should be punished. But when millions of people do this, instead of enormity being magnified million-fold, suddenly it becomes 'culture' and thereby overlooked. And is even defended by some Western moral thinkers, including feminist.
Sam Arcot wrote: It would be better to have one law for all people rather than a variation. We can debate on this later but I hope it is clear what I meant here.
Ohh, OK, I see what you mean. We don't call that diversity, so much as moral subjectivity, or cultural relativism.

Diversity is seen as a good thing. Of course, just because people are diverse, doesn't mean we should respect barbaric traditions as part of culture.

People can be diverse in better ways- like having different musical tastes and types, or different great literary works, different art, etc.
Sam Arcot wrote:but the fact that the community is forbidding me from seeing any girl is felt like being treated as a criminal or a rapist.
Yes, that's unfortunate. Do you know the Golem theory, in psychology? It goes, if you treat somebody a certain way, and expect a certain thing from them, you'll usually get it.

In classroom studies, if a teacher is told, of two equally performing students, that one is smart and the other is stupid, the smart labeled one will become smart by the end of the year, and the stupid labeled one stupid.

In many ways, the phobia of men being wild sexual fanatics may be a kind of self fulfilling prophecy. By treating people like that, Islam may cause the behavior.

Sam Arcot wrote:The medieval Muslims and those in the time of Prophet did practice purdah but at the same time did not have to suppress their sexuality. They were encouraged to marry at early ages. This is of course not possible in the modern age and hence as a Muslim, you may feel deprived.
Oh, I see. You mean it mitigated the effects of purdah.
Yes, I can see that.
Sam Arcot wrote:If you need substantiation, I would ask you to travel to Saudi Arabia and study why the Sheikhs prefer non-Muslims over Muslims in their companies even though their policy was the converse a few years ago. As I said, the prayer includes preparation and give more time for organizing it. There are people who can manage their work even with the prayers, but for the majority it is a bane.
That's interesting. They must have done some studies on that to find that was the case. Maybe some are available somewhere.
Sam Arcot wrote:The countries like pakistan and indonesia are very well resourced and fertile. Their poverty can be linked to Islam again that has encouraged overpopulation, rejection of modern education and unawareness through banning of cinema. Movies could have drastically changed the society there the way they did in India. But Islamic countries have a ban on film industry too.
I can see how the repression might reinforce the poverty, which causes the problems.

And if the claims about the burden of prayer are right, that could be a very serious matter.
Post Reply