Home »
World News »
Europe

Sun, 09 Apr 2006 13:47:00 Muslims hunt for new 'theology of integration'
VIENNA, Austria - Imagine a style of Islam in which mosques link up with churches to share ideas on spirituality and Muslim scholars spur new schools of thought on how to understand and appreciate life in the West. That's what Muslim leaders from across Europe described Saturday as part of broad visions that touched on everything from Islamic law to lesson plans for school children — all aimed at forging a clear European Muslim identity that retains traditions but does not clash with Western values.
Some speakers even gave it a name: the "theology of integration."
But in quieter tones at a conference on Islam's future in Europe, there was agreement that any significant changes are still a long way off for Europe's 33 million Muslims at a time when the pressure for reform is mounting.
One of the main reasons, experts and scholars said, is the current realities of Islam itself.
The Quran has many passages about tolerance toward non-Muslims amid Islamic settings. But there is almost nothing in Islamic codes or religious texts dealing specifically with issues facing Muslims living as minorities in different cultures, said many at the conference.
This puts Europe's moderate Islamic leaders in the challenging role of creating a body of reference for diaspora Muslims. They also could face a backlash from conservatives over accommodations to Western society, such as Muslim men shaking hands with unrelated women or taking loans that require interest payments.
"You don't go to Cairo or Saudi Arabia or Syria and ask an Islamic expert to solve a problem dealing with the Western society in Europe," said Trafa Baghajati, a Syrian-born assistant imam in Vienna. "You go to Islamic experts who know Europe and what it is like to live here. We are stuck between our new world of Islam and the old world."
The conference, which brought together more than 150 European-based imams and religious advisers, is working toward a final declaration expected Sunday. Some participants sought clear messages on efforts to reinterpret Islamic outlooks from a European perspective and train imams in Europe rather than the widespread practice of bringing mosque leaders from Arab nations or South Asia.
"It requires a whole new field of thinking," said Ayatollah Sayed Abbas Ghaemmagami, the chief Shiite Muslim mufti in Germany.
Others suggested more outreach to Christian groups and churches in Europe to explore common spiritual heritage, or requiring teachers in mostly Muslim schools to introduce lessons that stress the children's European bonds.
"We should bring them up to understand that this is their home," said Ahmed al-Rawi, president of the Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe. "And that non-Muslims are part of their family."
But many noted that European Muslims also need to take faster and more tangible steps to root out bigger problems, including radical movements and a sense of cultural isolation often expressed by young Muslims.
Muslim communities in Europe have been under intense pressure to work with terrorism investigations following the 2004 Madrid train bombings and the blasts last year on London's transit system. Anti-immigration groups — often focusing on Muslims — also have gained momentum following last year's riots in France and the worldwide Muslim protests and riots over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.
In March, Austria's right-wing Freedom Party launched a petition drive in opposition to the bid by mostly Muslim Turkey to join the European Union.
"This creates a vicious circle," said Beate Winkler, director of the Vienna-based European Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia. "Among Muslims this creates a feeling of helplessness and withdrawal from the larger community."
How much the so-called "theology of integration" can change this remains an open question. But the upheavals facing European Muslims may have shaken some leaders into action, said Yousif Alkhoei, a director of the Al-Khoei Foundation, a Muslim organization with offices around the world.
"We could be seeing the emergence of a new pragmatic Muslim theology, which will bring the essence and spirit of Islam out in the open," he said. "It will finally challenge some of the cultural baggage." |
Article Rating:
Your Comments: From: Hasan
Subject: Article :When the Shi'as Rise
Comment: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 22:18:16 - Home | Subscribe | Current Issue
When the Shiites Rise
By Vali Nasr
From Foreign Affairs, July/August 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary: By toppling Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration has liberated and empowered Iraq's Shiite majority and has helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the Middle East for years to come. This development is rattling some Sunni Arab governments, but for Washington, it could be a chance to build bridges with the region's Shiites, especially in Iran.
VALI NASR is a Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, and the author of The Shia Revival: How Conflicts Within Islam Will Shape the Future.
IRAQ THE MODEL
The war in Iraq has profoundly changed the Middle East, although not in the ways that Washington had anticipated. When the U.S. government toppled Saddam Hussein in 2003, it thought regime change would help bring democracy to Iraq and then to the rest of the region. The Bush administration thought of politics as the relationship between individuals and the state, and so it failed to recognize that people in the Middle East see politics also as the balance of power among communities. Rather than viewing the fall of Saddam as an occasion to create a liberal democracy, therefore, many Iraqis viewed it as an opportunity to redress injustices in the distribution of power among the country's major communities. By liberating and empowering Iraq's Shiite majority, the Bush administration helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the Middle East for years to come.
There is no such thing as pan-Shiism, or even a unified leadership for the community, but Shiites share a coherent religious view: since splitting off from the Sunnis in the seventh century over a disagreement about who the Prophet Muhammad's legitimate successors were, they have developed a distinct conception of Islamic laws and practices. And the sheer size of their population today makes them a potentially powerful constituency. Shiites account for about 90 percent of Iranians, some 70 percent of the people living in the Persian Gulf region, and approximately 50 percent of those in the arc from Lebanon to Pakistan -- some 140 million people in all. Many, long marginalized from power, are now clamoring for greater rights and more political influence. Recent events in Iraq have already mobilized the Shiites of Saudi Arabia (about 10 percent of the population); during the 2005 Saudi municipal elections, turnout in Shiite-dominated regions was twice as high as it was elsewhere. Hassan al-Saffar, the leader of the Saudi Shiites, encouraged them to vote by comparing Saudi Arabia to Iraq and implying that Saudi Shiites too stood to benefit from participating. The mantra "one man, one vote," which galvanized Shiites in Iraq, is resonating elsewhere. The Shiites of Lebanon (who amount to about 45 percent of the country's population) have touted the formula, as have the Shiites in Bahrain (who represent about 75 percent of the population there), who will cast their ballots in parliamentary elections in the fall.
Iraq's liberation has also generated new cultural, economic, and political ties among Shiite communities across the Middle East. Since 2003, hundreds of thousands of pilgrims, coming from countries ranging from Lebanon to Pakistan, have visited Najaf and other holy Shiite cities in Iraq, creating transnational networks of seminaries, mosques, and clerics that tie Iraq to every other Shiite community, including, most important, that of Iran. Pictures of Iran's supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and the Lebanese cleric Muhammad Hussein Fadlallah (often referred to as Hezbollah's spiritual leader) are ubiquitous in Bahrain, for example, where open displays of
From: Ali Naqvi
Subject: Shia State in the Middle East
Comment: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 15:47:39 - An independent Shia state is absolutely desirable for the following three reasons:
1) SHIA SECURITY: While Shias have been persecuted for 14 centuries, hostility against Shias has tremendously increased in the last 25 years. Ever increasing violence against Shias living in Sunni majority countries has left little choice than to seek alternatives. Shias living in Sunni dominant and hostile countries need a place where they can escape from Wahabi led persecution.
2) US SECURITY: Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have directly and actively supported international terrorism in the last two decades. Pakistan has become the breeding ground for terrorism and has created and nurtured more terrorists than any other country. Pakistan, with support from Saudi Arabia, created Taliban. Most of the 911 terrorists were Saudis. Extremism in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan is on the rise. Those elements are probably waiting for the right moment to strike America again. Hence any alliance between countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia would only mean one thing: more terrorists and more enemies of America. I don’t think that anyone with Saudi Wahabi influence can be trusted. Saudis do well with America in a master-slave relationship but if they acquire more power they would be the biggest threat to America, Europe and Israel. A powerful alliance with Middle Eastern Shias would add to American security. We, the Americans, need a buffer against the spread of Saudi Wahabi movement. We need to think a decade down the road when Saudis would have nuclear arms in collaboration with Pakistan. They have already proven their extremist tendencies.
3) SUNNI SECURITY: Perhaps more than anything else Wahabism has destroyed the fundamental doctrines of Sunnism and caused tremendous damage to Sunnis by modifying their religion to a point where it has destroyed the sanctity of Prophet. Sunnis also need to counterbalance the spread of Wahabism so that they can return to their original, peaceful doctrines.
Accordingly, Shias need an independent state where they can feel safe. Shias are the most progressive Muslims, with solid theological foundations and good institutions. They deserve a chance. Meesam is right – my vision is for a democratic nation that supports and protects human rights. A country that resembles the vision that once created a great country – the vision of Thomas Jefferson.
From: Ali
Subject: Secular - some thoughts
Comment: Mon, 22 May 2006 01:43:34 - ------PAKISTAN's Establishment as a Secular State--------
--Pakistan was established as a "Muslim State" BUT its constitution was mainly a replication of "British Model". Conclusion : As long as you follow a Western Model there is no problem!!
-- Pakistan's "guide" was a non-religous "scholar?". Conclusion: As long as Muslim Ummah is guided by a non-religious leader, there is no problem.
-- Pakistan is one of the most corrupt countries of the world being ruled by a dictator. Conclusion: No problem as long as you do not oppose foreign policy of "that" country!!
-- Pakistani Madresas are cradles of contemporary radical wahhabism. Conclusion: No problem as long as they are preaching killing "other Muslims" !!
--------------Iraq and 'secular' ??----------------
&&&& Newspapers all over the world reported that as per the Iraqi Constitution, Islam will be the main source of lagislation and in case of conflict with 'other' sources Islamic principles will prevail.
---------Conflict between two "Islamic Republics"---------
## How can there be FOUR (independent) marjas in NAJAF giving 'independent' Fatawas which may be conflicting sometimes ??
Logically, all of them cannot be right and 'independent' at the same time.
-------Living in Peace??--------
@@ Huh! We thought that the world will be filled with peace and justice only when the IMAM (a.s.) will come and fill it with peace ??
-------"Shaitaan e Buzurg" ----------
Definition: "One who starts all the Fitnas
~~~~ Gentlemen, Wahhabism is the greatest evil of all the time, it is even in the prophesies of the prophet (saw). Beware of it, condemn it and forget about other Shaitaans. But wait a minute, How it got started ?? Uh oh .. We do not remember it. Anyway ask the sunni brothers at http://www.hizmetbooks.org/British_Spy_Hempher/
----------Hudood Laws ---------------------
******What is punishment for murder in Iraq ? According to ALL human rights organization it is not a sign of civilized society and should be abolished. What will be Ayt. Sistani's response on this or regarding punishment for a rapist? Remember, Islam is the main source of Laws as per constitution.
****** Wasn't there a big fuss recently about Ayt. Sistani's response to a question about treatment of the gays ??
From: Syed Meesam Razvi
Subject: Re: Experiment
Comment: Mon, 08 May 2006 21:40:09 - I suggest you keep your presumptions and assumptions about me to your self, because they are WRONG.
If Ali Naqvi's idea of another Shia state in middle east is a "Secular Shia state" then I am all for it. Much like the Pakistan envisioned by Mohammad Ali Jinnah, where Shi'a would finally live with peace, dignity and freedom while affording others the same.
If, however, he is arguing for a Shia theocracy then I am afraid I see a fundamental problem with it. You can not have two states called "Islamic Republic"; logically, both states can not be right and be seperate sovereign nations at the same time.
All I am saying is, if a country is "treading the path of destruction" we have to see why and not repeat that mistake again. No offense intended. Just my two cents.
From: Syed Hasan Zaidi
Subject: Experiment
Comment: Mon, 08 May 2006 17:33:38 - Addressed to Syed Meesam Razvi:
Having another Shia state in the Middle East is the least of all experiments. I suppose you would prefer a lazier path and not invest Shiism in other parts of the world and depend solely on a country already treading the path of destruction. No, Shias must invest in other parts of the world also. It is clear that you have lost touch with the basic principle of relegion, to spread it with peace, to be a missionary, not a Taliban. Having another Shia state in the Middle East can only increase Shia influence and power. Salaam.
Alaykum.
From: Ali Naqvi
Subject: Whatever Happened?
Comment: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 18:37:31 - Let us begin with your last point "whatever happened to the other 26 year old shia state in the middle east." Let us see what happened: 1) They were able to bring about a peoples revolution that took out a powerful dictator (Shah) - something that not a single Arab country was able to do. 2) They fought a long war against Saddam and persevered despite Saddam getting support from all over and using chemical weapons. 3) They introduced democracy in the region - a democracy that is yet underdeveloped - but still better than you'd find anywhere else in the region. 4) They faced global isolation and economic sanctions yet made progress and were able to attract Western investment.
Agreed -- they have failed to establish friendship with America but I think we in the US are equally at fault here. In fact there was a long controversy between pentagon and the state dept. regarding the Iran policy. We could've better understood the value of friendship. Europeans took advantage and got all the business - from building their roads to constructing power plants - we missed out on some serious opportunities. Shooting their airplane didn’t help either.
I attend mosque regularly and I have never heard any Aalim addressing West as "Satan" or asking Muslims not to live here. If Iranians make statement against America, let us not forget that our president calls them “Axis of Evil”. This political battle of words from both sides is illogical. I don’t think anyone takes these comments seriously. I also have absolute confidence in the patriotism of Muslim Americans. 911 was a sad event but it wasn’t engineered by anyone living here in the West. It was an extremist doctrine imported from Saudi Wahabism – something we all need to worry about. Fighting against terrorism doesn’t mean modifying our religion.
Regarding your "cultural baggage" - my friend - in America we call it "heritage" and we respect it and consider it as one of our most important values. Granted 911 aftermath combined with neo cons and other extremist influences have seriously damaged our civil liberties but I am confident of a recovery. No one needs to give up their culture and religion even if it is different than mainstream America and no one should be forced to modify their religion to become "integrate-able".
You give examples of media hyped and super amplified publicity against Islam - somehow making it look like a clash of civilizations which it is not. Afghan convert news became a huge publicity event but Hindu extremist parties have killed thousands of Christians in India and have forced them to convert to Hinduism. We certainly didn't hear about that and in fact went ahead and offered India nuclear technology.
If you think that Shias of the world were meant to be ruled, persecuted, enslaved, tortured and ridiculed - you have the right to continue believing in your fatalistic, masochistic and self deprecating views. I am sure that there are many Iraqi and other Shias living all over the world who have confidence in their ability to manage their self autonomy.
From: Syed Meesam Razvi
Subject: Theology of integration
Comment: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 11:57:50 - ‘Theology of integration’ does not necessarily mean evolution of it. It is not a question of changing or compromising, but rather of shedding the cultural baggage we bring along with us. Many of the Muslim youth living here in USA – many of whom born citizens – share the idea of ‘shaitan-e-buzurg’ (Big Satan). Unfortunately they get this syndrome from some of our ‘scholars’ in the east. They associate every evil in the world with the west even corruption and red-tape culture of their own countries. This is an easy way out for them from the responsibility of bringing their own house in order. You, I and our social, political and religious leaders have to own-up to these grave responsibilities. Instead of simply saying it is haram to live in the west, ways to purposefully live here should be brought to light. ‘A Code of Practice for Muslims in the West’ of Ayatollah Sistani is a good start.
The zeal of having an Islamic legal system sometime takes Muslims to a point where they find themselves vulnerable. Case in point being the recent apostate in Afghanistan and in recent past of Salman Rushdi. This zeal consequently results in dissatisfaction from the secular system of government in turn making us un-integrate-able. We are fortunate, however, that most of the mainstream Shii theologians agree that hudood laws can not be implemented during the absence of an infallible leader.
Your ‘two nation theory’ argues for a shia state in middle east. Whatever happened to the other 26 year old shia state in the region? Do you think it is not enough, and that we should have another experiment?
From: Ali Naqvi
Subject: Disintegration of Theology
Comment: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:44:51 - Rebranding yourself on the premise of "we are integrate-able" is such a myth and anyone having half a brain can see through it. Muslims have been branded as "terrorists" and such petty maneuvers wouldn't easily change that image. Religions are not meant to be integrated - in fact every religion has a built in mechanism to ensure that it retains its individual identity. Cultural integration is a different thing and it should not be led by religion. One can be a great American and a great Muslim simultaneously. Theology should not be changed or compromised. No theology has ever claimed itself to be pragmatic and there is no reason for it to do that. Just because the world thinks that few maniacs influenced by extremist philosophies indulge in crimes against humanity and they do that in the name of Islam doesn't speak for the whole Islam and certainly doesn't demand change in the theological framework of Islam.
West fails to understand Islam because it approaches the concept of church on the basis of its own experience with church. Christian Church, at one time, did conduct violent crimes against humanity. Killing women by suspecting them to be witches led to over 5 million killings. Scientists were not allowed to even suggest theories such as Earth revolves around the Sun and not vice versa. When West looks at Islam, it is not the Islamic church that makes it nervous as much as its own experience with its own church. This fear is understandable and every time there is a crime committed under the misapplication of Islamic doctrines - it brings back the memories of the Catholic Church.
Hence fear rises when Islamic based governance principles prohibit certain social evils. Banning liquor, nudity and gambling should not be construed as human rights violations. Hijab shouldn’t be viewed as lack of integration.
I think that true American values are so much more developed than of these Europeans bigots. Our Founding Fathers recognized this when Jefferson said "The constitutional freedom of religion [is] the most inalienable and sacred of all human rights." and "Among the most inestimable of our blessings, also, is that... of liberty to worship our Creator in the way we think most agreeable to His will; a liberty deemed in other countries incompatible with good government and yet proved by our experience to be its best support."
Hence, there is no need to change the theological framework on such baseless demands for integration. It is our right to practice our religion as we like. There is no need to create this image of pragmatism as if Islam lacks anything that will somehow be miraculously filled in by these new pragmatists. The problem with Islam is that Shias have not gotten a chance to live their lives and practice their religion and pursue their freedoms to demonstrate the power of a well civilized Islamic state. Shias need a separate country in the Southern Iraq. This country would serve as the role model for the coexistence of democracy and religion without compromising either one of them. All efforts should be made to secure a homeland for Iraqi Shias. That state could be the most important step in our war against terrorism.
Submit Your Comments:
|
|
OTHER TOP STORIES
ALSO IN THE NEWS
| VIDEO AND AUDIO |
|
|
|
| MOVIE NEWS |
|
| |