|
Post by manijak on Feb 6, 2009 10:29:34 GMT -5
Who has read it?
I was impressed.
|
|
|
Post by tito on Feb 6, 2009 13:55:33 GMT -5
"Islam between east and west" is better.
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Feb 6, 2009 16:17:10 GMT -5
yea declaration is his older outdated type of thing...its obvious his views changed plenty by the 90's and even from book to book
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Feb 6, 2009 16:53:15 GMT -5
i found declaration online to read..is islam between east and west ava. online to read?
|
|
|
Post by tito on Feb 6, 2009 17:00:06 GMT -5
I don’t know, but you can always get it at the library.
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Feb 6, 2009 18:55:46 GMT -5
Did he indeed change his mind in that book and other books after Islamic Declaration?
And on what?
|
|
|
Post by kapetan on Feb 7, 2009 0:15:19 GMT -5
i meant you can see the evolution in his ideas like anyone
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Feb 7, 2009 9:38:00 GMT -5
like what?
Tell us some key points in islam between east and west
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Feb 7, 2009 9:56:22 GMT -5
I have read it, enough said :-)
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Feb 7, 2009 10:08:10 GMT -5
I have read it, enough said :-) which one? and what are your comments?
|
|
|
Post by manijak on Feb 7, 2009 11:20:07 GMT -5
btw, I think the Islamic Declaration is totally relevant for today.
To start, he argued that Islam is not just a religion, its a way of life. He argues its a major error to see it just as a religion because there is a conjunction of faith and knowledge, morals and politics, ideals and interests. The Conservative muslims and modernist muslims believe it is only a religion, and argues that is exactly why the results are bad - the former drags Islam back in the past, the latter moves it into an alien future. Both feel Islam can not organize the external world. He says, the issue with conservative muslims, that of clergy, is that too many of them are set on Islamic text only being able to be interpreted one way, which doesn't allow for new ideas to be accepted. The issue with modernists is that they get educated in the West, come back to their poverty stricken nations, and take out all the wrong reasons as to why the Americans/West are rich. They look at the fashion, nightclubts, the youth, the godlesness,(or that impression) and take that to mean that is why that nation does so well.
He uses examples of Japan and Turkey, two nations that went seperate ways, one continues to go strong today (Japan) and the other is thirdrate. He says Japan stuck to their traditions, while Turkey at one point decided to take the easy route, and get rid of their arabic alphabet.(for simplicity reasons) As a result, the nation lost its way, its direction. He basically argues when people take the easy way out, and accept "foreign" concepts, they lose the basis to continue developing in the proper manner. I couldn't agree more with that. Because ultimatley, foreign ideas have foreign spirit behind it, a whole philosophy on why that works. If that isn't in your head, how can you develop it properly?
He also very clear states that he is only for an islamic renewal in nations that have Islamic majorities and only with respect to the minority. And he is also for a DEMOCRATICLY elected govt. He is for women's rights. He is for education as the basis of a society. He is for unity as a basis of a society. None of that I disagree with or believe to be old ideas. You gain an Islamic order through education NOT power.
And one of the biggest thing he nails is that nationalism is actually the biggest evil we have. He says that countries working together, like EU, is one of the best things. He argues "nationalism is a western import" and Islam, which has none of that, is the spiritual base for all muslims. Nations change but the spirit of Islam does not and its ideals. He actually predicts then what is happening today. He actually nailed it right on when he argued that people would try to be more "European" (EU) and that this euro-economic arrangment is a great thing.
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Feb 7, 2009 17:54:23 GMT -5
To start, he argued that Islam is not just a religion, its a way of life.
Yep he sure did.
|
|
|
Post by sweetnugs on Feb 7, 2009 18:46:57 GMT -5
To start, he argued that Islam is not just a religion, its a way of life.Yep he sure did. Elaborate?
|
|
Trazi Vise
Amicus
Today's "church" has NOTHING to do with religion.
Posts: 3,126
|
Post by Trazi Vise on Feb 8, 2009 6:14:19 GMT -5
Islamic declaration, as I said before enough said; I don't really have any comments on it. Though parts of it inspired me and parts of it didn't. Pretty much like any book I have read.
True, it's a way of life not just a religion. But funny that most Muslims don't practice this.
|
|