A friend of mine told a friend of hers who used to be Muslim of my interest in Sam Harris. He read my posts on Harris, especially the ones discussing what Harris says about Islam in The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason. (You can call up all of my posts that have the Sam Harris label by clicking on that label at the bottom of this post.) As a result, he wants to meet me, and I've agreed to join my friend and him for lunch.
In thinking about what a former Muslim might ask me, I've begun to think of what I might ask him. And in doing that, I've found myself thinking of questions I might ask other people, such as a cousin whose father (like my mother) was very religious and regularly attended an Assembly of God church. I've always suspected that this cousin isn't what you'd call particularly "religious." But I don't really know, and I'd sort of like to find out before it's too late. After all, it has been many years since we were teenage cousins together (and even rode in the same car to that Assembly of God church).
That's sort of where this survey comes from. If you'd be so kind as to take it and give your answers publicly (as it were), I'd appreciate it. (If you're not familiar with how to make a comment, click on "Comments" below.):
- Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself? (not religious, Christian, Muslim, Judaic, other: _________)
- Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
- If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
- If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
- If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians?
- Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
In fairness, I'll answer these questions myself:
- Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself?
agnostic Christian
- Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
While I'm uncertain as to whether God exists and do not believe that Jesus was the "son of God" in a way different from how you or I might be "a child of God," I have been raised in the Christian tradition, and I more or less try to imitate Christ's example of love and doing unto others.
- If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
Surprisingly (to myself), I'd say quite a bit, but in the "liberal way" of influencing me to vote "for the common good." To me, Jesus was a champion of social justice.
- If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
not applicable
- If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians?
not applicable
- Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
I once gave an impromptu sermon in an Episcopal church in San Jose, California. In the couple of minutes I had to prepare, I "called on the Holy Spirit" to come to my aid, and I spontaneously chose as my text the passage from the Book of Exodus in which the burning bush says unto Moses to tell the people that he's been talking with "I AM THAT I AM." In the short sermon that I then delivered I said that God is as God is, and God is going to be that way regardless of what you or I believe God is. Either or both of us could be wrong. I said that, in that sense, it doesn't matter what we believe about God.
I'd add now that God is, OR IS NOT, as God is, OR IS NOT, and what we believe doesn't affect it one way or another. So let's not fight over it.
Hi. Came over via Steve's blog.
ReplyDelete1. Not religious but Christian culturally.
2. My past. I was brought up to be Christian but then realised my parents had doubts - because of the awful things done in the name of religion, mostly, not because they doubted Christian values.
3. Not at all.
4.N/A
5. N/A
6. Only that I believe in love.
Will be back to visit your interesting and thought-provoking blog soon.
1. Not religious.
ReplyDelete2.Religion and faith in a higher power don't always go hand in hand.
3. I have to go with your answer on this one. Reason I stopped voting republican-period.
4.n/a
5.n/a
6. I'm pretty anti-religion. I do believe in God, but I think religion has deeply warped what Christ taught.
Welshcakes Limoncello and Roxan, thank you so much for being the first to take the survey. Your "not religious" responses prompt me to qualify my own answer ("agnostic Christian"). I am "not religious" either in the sense of no longer trucking with organized religion. And my ambivalence about "God is/God is not" derives from my feeling that there "must be" some "higher power" and my not knowing what to make of it. I tend to dissociate myself from "religion" and embrace "spirituality."
ReplyDeleteAnd I think we're all three more or less agreed on the primacy of love (or of Christ's teaching, at any rate). By the way, Sam Harris thinks that "the data" prove that Christ's ethic is a superior morality. But he also thinks that we don't need Christ to see this.
Thanks again for sharing your views. I really appreciate it.
1. Christian (born-again, if that doesn't conjure up images of George Bush!)
ReplyDelete2. I believe in God. I believe that on the cross Jesus, son of God, paid the price for my sins. I believe in repentance and forgiveness. I believe that God loves me just as I am (hard though that is for me to believe sometimes - not that he doesn't want me to improve!) I believe that the Holy Spirit is active today. I have trillions of doubts, uncertainties and questions but underneath it all I maintain a faith that is solid.
3. I think I would probably vote the same way even if i weren't Christian because the way I vote reflects what i believe. Does that make sense? Justice, fairness, care. As you say, Jesus was a champion of social justice.
4, n/a
5. n/a
6. I hope I am never religious. Religion has given God a bad name.
Liz! That's wonderful, born-again but "never religious"! I don't believe I've ever met anyone like that. Good on you.
ReplyDeleteI'm not certain that my own Christian background really has anything to do with how I vote. In fact, I never thought so, but when I was taking my own survey and realized that "voting for the common good" does seem like "the Christian thing to do," I decided to answer the way I did. It's possible that I'd vote the same way even without that background.
At any rate, I'm sure that I got my sense of not being any more deserving than anyone else from my mother, who many times showed me the pain she felt when innocents were treated unfairly.
The origins of one's own philosophy are difficult to tease out and pin down. I'm privileged to have your response as another occasion to think on this.
1. Christian
ReplyDelete2. I adhere to the tenets of a Christian faith.
3. If the guy you vote for fires missiles which take innocent lives, do you bear any guilt? Both parties have shown themselves capable in that regard. For a believer, involvement in today's political systems assumes a) that they are God's means of affecting positive change, or at least b) that he is okay with them. There are some Christians who would answer 'no' on both counts. Instead, they feel it well to remain neutral with regard to politics and confine their efforts to representing what they feel is God's kingdom, much as an ambassador stays neutral with regard to politics of his host country.
4 na
5 na
6 A recent NYT Magazine article on the evolution of Muslim thinking stated that Osama Bin Laden justifies attacks on American civilians because they choose their leaders and thus share responsibility for resulting policies. We should not imagine he is referring only to the current administration. 911 occurred before the Bush administration had tipped its hand militarily, which, in any case, was a response to those attacks. And consequences just as lethal were hoped for in the 1993 WTC attacks during a previous administration. Of course, OBL doesn't call the shots here, but what he says does find some parallel in neutrality based on religion.
I've not read Sam Harris' books, but I have read some interviews. He is not a fan of Bush, to be sure, but he is also very critical of Western reaction to Muslim extremists, who he calls 'very scary." Specifically, when Salman Rushdie incurred Muslin ire, he deplores that the West let him twist in the wind. Instead, he says, the next day should have produced 100,000 Salman Rushdies. Presumably, he would have the same position regarding the Danish cartoons. Since you are meeting with a Muslim, you might feel him out on these subjects.
Dear Tom, I was hoping you'd take the survey and I thank you for doing so, in the thoughtful way I was sure you would if you did.
ReplyDeleteI expected somebody to mention "adhering to the tenets of a Christian faith" as a reason for answering "Christian," and I am quite aware of course that I don't meet this criterion <smile>. But you say a Christian faith, rather than the Christian faith (and I think I know where you're coming from, from our previous conversations), so maybe there's an "agnostic Christian [lack of] faith" out there somewhere that I do qualify for. At any rate, I've heard that there are a lot of agnostics and even atheists in Unitarian and Episcopalean churches.
Thanks, too, Tom, for putting the question of voting in stark relief with the actual situation that by voting for virtually anyone for powerful public office we could be compromising our religious (or just our moral) principles. Sobering thought.
And thanks for suggesting another area to discuss with my friend's Muslim friend. I agree with Harris (and with you, I believe) that the West's response to the fatwa on Salman Rushdie left much to be desired.
I appreciate our continuing dialogue.
Oh, one more thing. You say "but what [OBL] says does find some parallel in neutrality based on religion." Do you mean that neutrality could be a kind of acquiescence in evil (à la my previous post on passively accepting evil)? The aforementioned moral dilemma has just gained another level of complexity. Huh! This might be another interpretation of "original sin," in that humans, by virtue of even having a moral conscience, may be, in the real world, damned if they do and damned if they don't. (Unless they accept Christ as their personal savior, I suppose. Or, if they're Muslim, unless they martyr themselves in defense of Islam?)
You didn't mention it in your e-mail, so I heard about it over at Steve's. Let's see...
ReplyDelete1. Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself? (not religious, Christian, Muslim, Judaic, other: _________)
Other. I'm more spiritual than religious. I like some things from the Buddhist, Hindu, and Christian faiths, but not all of it from any of them. I dislike organized religion in general.
2. Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
I've studied most of the religions of the world and base my opinions on what I've learned. Buddhists and Hindus seem to be more passive, less "in your face" about their beliefs. They don't go around knocking on your door, or corner you at cocktail parties and try to convert you to their way. Religion, or lack thereof, is a personal choice which should be private and respected. God and I are okay with each other, and I don't need anyone else's interference in that.
3. If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
I didn't answer Christian, but I'll tell you anyway. I don't believe the government has any right to force their morality or beliefs on everyone else. We need a complete separation between church and state. If kids want to pray in shcool, I have no problem with that, but I don't think any child should be forced to do it. When it comes to God being part of our country's anthems, such as in the Pledge of Allegience, it needs to be taken apart line by line and explained to children, then they should be given the option of whether or not they wish to recite it.
4. If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
N/A
5. If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians?
N/A
6. Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
Treat others the way you like to be treated. Remember that under the skin, we are all the same. Love each other.
Dear Southern, I so like what you say! I'm glad you found out about the survey. If I failed to mention it in the email, it wasn't because I didn't want you to take it. But more that I either just didn't think of it or I didn't want to be too forward. Thanks for your words.
ReplyDeleteHi Moristotle:
ReplyDeleteI have tried to answer your question posted three comments ago. But it doesn't really fit in with this post. In the words of Barrack, I don't want to gum up your survey. So I've attached my answer to your previous post, the one on passively accepting evil.
best regards.
Tom
Peace Moristotle,
ReplyDeleteMy friend Tom (from Tom sheep and goats) wrote me a glowing review of your blog, and asked me to comment (if I chose to). I am Muslim, and I hope this is not offensive or uninvited of me to express my views on your survey.
Given that your friend's friend is a former Muslim, I don't think my responses will help you in that sense...
1) Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself? (not religious, Christian, Muslim, Judaic, other: _________)
Muslim
2)Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
I believe in God. I have never had questions about His existence. I believe in the tapestry of Truth that has weaved religions throughout time. That we were created for a purpose, not in vain. That we have a responsibility on the horizontal plane to make a difference in this world for the betterment of humanity (and all of creation) and to connect our deeds with a higher transcendental intention (not for self glory, or material gain etc). I believe in seeking meaning and an active connection to God in everything that I do.
3) If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
N/A
(it's always a juggle on who is the "lesser" evil in the equation.)
4) If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
There is no martyrdom in "defense of Islam" that vague terminology doesn't exist. Islam doesn't exist in a vacuum, it's not something that needs to be defended or died for.
If you are speaking about a specific socio-political situation, like Suicide bombers in Palestine or "insurgents" in Iraq then we can deal with that as a separate issue.
Why am I separating the two? Because religious theology has little to do with basic human struggle and instinct towards oppression/occupation and tyranny. Some groups like Al Qaeda have used the Quran and Islamic rhetoric to rally people and justify their actions; but looking at the religion itself as the problem is missing the entire point. The problems in the Middle east and the general discontent of people around the world against the US, have little to do with what the Quran says and more directly deal with our Foreign policy.
It's as simple as that. The US can't expect to rake up hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq and not create enemies for itself.
Blind support and taking of Israel as our bosom buddy without objectively looking at their actions and policies towards Palestinian people, is wrong and miscalculated no matter what lenses we choose to look at it from.
As far as suicide bombers in Palestine, I always understood it only in the context of the psychology of suicide anywhere else. People commit suicide when they feel like they don't have any more options, when they feel like there is nothing else worth living for. It has little to do with attaining heaven and 72 virgins (which are mentioned no where in the Quran by the way) and everything to do with wanting out because they are just sick and tired of being sick and tired.
There are very strict laws in Islam regarding war. No innocent casualty can be taken, no tree uprooted, no infrastructure destroyed. I know this sounds like a joke compared to what we've seen recently with 9/11 and other violent acts against innocent people; but again by refusing to look at the root socio-political-historic issues that gave rise to that violence, we will always miss the point.
Islam is not the enemy, it's a scapegoat and a distraction at best. Sitting here in relative comfort, enjoying my freedom and self determination, I have no thought or motivation or inspiration (and find it nowhere in the Quran) urging me to go "martyr myself in defense of Islam". Instead I have that privilege to be able to talk of peace and wanting a better world and striving for self betterment.
5) If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians? N/A
6) Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
It's funny I feel like the minority voice of a hated and misunderstood creed. I wish more people would take the time to find out what real Islam and what real Muslims are about, instead of relying on popular media/ sentiment. The irony is that undergoing this scrutiny has only inspired me to read more and understand more about my own religion in contrast to world affairs and to want to reach out more. At the end of the day, thanks to those extremists on both ends who want to hijack what it means to be a Muslim; they have only demanded of me to dig deeper into my soul and my faith and build that intellectual foundation necessary for me to grow as a human being. (Isn't it sad and ironic to have anything to thank extremists for?)
Peace,
ReplyDeletePS: I don't want that last answer to come off as whiny or victim-like. I think given the situation in the world, and the constant churning of fear in the media, my fellow Americans have every right to be fearful and suspicious.
It feels strange to say "fellow" Americans, and may elicit some snickering, but I am an American; although being a person of color, a woman, a Muslim, an immigrant, puts too many baggages on my shoulders to bear.
Either way, I still think the way forward is opening up these avenues for dialogue, building bridges and aspiring/working for peace even when the world seems bent on destruction.
Excellent response, Maliha, As I think you say, religion itself isn't the problem: its' the way it is used. In my answers I said that religion gives God a bad name; actually it's people who give religion a bad name as well.
ReplyDeleteMaliha, Far from being offended by your visit, I welcome you and thank you for your eloquent and passionate comments! I am delighted to have had a Muslim take my religion survey. You are to be commended for expressing your views.
ReplyDeleteMy friend whose invitation to lunch prompted my conducting the survey has another Muslim acquaintance who is still a Muslim and who, like you, is what Sam Harris would call a moderate. This person, as she describes him, seems to me to resemble moderate or liberal Christians who embrace Christ's teachings but abhor the perverted uses to which some of the rest of the Bible is put. (In that context, I myself am a very liberal Christian.) And it's far braver for a Muslim to be a moderate or liberal today than for a Christian, because, though Christians could be lethal during the Inquisition (and a few are still lethal when it comes to bombing abortion clinics), Islamist suicide-bombers are actively lethal today, fortified with religious belief that may or may not derive directly from passages in the Koran, but does seem to derive from such passages in Sharia Law, which is taught, in a virulently militant way, in the Muslim schools of indoctrination known as madrasahs (like the Wahabi ones in Saudi Arabia and others in Pakistan). Those schools certainly seem to me to contradict your statement (and I grant that it is your sincere belief) that "There is no martyrdom in 'defense of Islam'—that vague terminology doesn't exist."
As for speaking out (and not passively accepting evil), how timely that Thomas L. Friedman writes today in his op-ed column "Martin Luther Al-King?" in The New York Times:
"It’s hard to know what’s more disturbing: the barbaric sectarian murders by Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq, or the deafening silence with which these mass murders are received in the Muslim world. How could it be that Danish cartoons of Muhammad led to mass violent protests, while unspeakable violence by Muslims against Muslims in Iraq every day evokes about as much reaction in the Arab-Muslim world as the weather report? Where is the Muslim Martin Luther King? Where is the 'Million Muslim March' under the banner: 'No Shiites, No Sunnis: We are all children of the Prophet Muhammad.'
"I can logically understand the lack of protest when Muslims kill Americans in Iraq. We’re seen as occupiers by many. But I can’t understand how the mass slaughter of 70 Baghdad college students last week by Sunni suicide bombers or the blowing up of a Shiite mosque on the first day of Ramadan in 2005 evoke so little response. Every day it’s 100 more...."
Maliha, Friedman refers to "sectarian murders," but I suspect that you might classify them differently, as not really having anything to do with religion, but more with people's perversion of religion (to echo Liz's comment above)? If so, would you perhaps argue further than Sam Harris's misconceptions about militant Islam are based on a semantic misunderstanding?
Note that Friedman effectively grants your point about Muslims having justification for grinding their axes with respect to America. I grant it too. America's history of imperial behavior is burdened with numerous transgressions around the world.
Peace!
Peace,
ReplyDeleteThank you Liz! Isn't it the worst position to be stuck in: apologizing/explaining for your co-religionists? sigh...
In the small space of this comment box, I can't go too much into why I don't like the term "Moderate" Muslim (it conjures up the 'good' Muslim versus 'bad' Muslim dichotomy). But yes that one can be peace-loving and Muslim is quite possible; and I don't have to split hairs or look too far into the Quran to find many injunctions on being God conscious, just, peaceful in my affairs.
Now on Iraq and Thomas Friedman: Muslim Martin Luther Kings are too many but who is giving them a voice? After 9/11 every single major organization and Imam issued categorical press statements numbering in the tens of thousands stating that it was wrong and the taking of life in such an indiscriminate manner is *not* Islamic. Not a single one of them was published or announced in any of the major media portals (and yes, they were submitted.)
This is the quandry we are stuck in. There is an assumption/myth that a whole large body of Muslims are just quiet and placcid while extermists have taken over as our spokepeople. The reality is where the spotlight chooses to shine; let's ignore all the healthy debates and the billion plus peaceful people living in our ranks and contributing to our economies (and yes, Muslim immigrants to the states at least, are among the most professional and affluent of the lot)...
But there are two related points to this: (1) Peaceful rational muslims are not sensational and what they have to say will not sell. (2) In an era of fear churning and selling of war as a way of life (or war= peace) we have to keep putting up irrational, misogynistic, violent images of bearded men on TV to remind people what we are up against.
Another example of what we do with the Muslim Martin Luther kings... Dr. Tariq Ramadan; (highly intellectual brilliant European scholar) was invited to become a Professor at some ivy league or another; and get this, his visa was revoked by our incompetent Dept. of homeland security as he was listed as a "threat." If you read any of this guy's work, you will know this is the kind of reasonable voice eschewing violence that we need to encourage, but of course civil servants see it otherwise.
My point is this, there is no place in our public discourse for a "Martin Luther King" figure to be spot-lighted...but within Muslim circles there is a lot going on and the discussions are a lot more nuanced and intelligent than we'll ever be credited for.
As for Iraq: Sunni/Shia/Kurdish this is what happens when a civil war erupts...it's not about secretarian violence as much as these killings are also happening across clean ethnic lines (and being fueled by neighboring interests). It is upsetting, and it's sad that those rogue, tyrannical, puppet regimes in the neighborhood, who were quick to jump on the Danish cartoon stupidity, would not lift a finger to stop the madness or a valve to allow popular sentiment to express themselves.
Sam Harris' is no doubt very eloquent and rational; but his arguments against Islam suffers from two weaknesses:
a) It is obvious he knows very little about the nuances of the religion and nothing on the Quran: So even when he makes claims on what the religion is about; he is merely drawing examples from really messed up events that have more to do with everything happening on the ground and less to to do with what the religion says.
Eg: Yes, Islam is against depictions of the Prophet, but when illiterate frustrated Afghanis who see it as yet another slap in the face from "Western powers that be" take to the street and go crazy; You have to look at what fueled that anger? Is it merely a picture? Or is it the history, coupled with poverty, mayhem, rampant killings, illiteracy, unemployment etc and blaming all that on the "west" and then feeling like they were slapped in the face.
I am not justifying those actions, I wasn't one to take to the streets, but again understanding where people are coming from is half the battle.
2) It's not a matter of semantics but perspective: As I said before Faith is only one component that predicts are person's reactions. If we are truly sincere about reform, then let's look at the issues plaguing these "hot beds" of extremism: Poverty, illiteracy, unemployment,violence, repression from puppet regimes, etc. But the reality is, we are not too interested in real reform, so we can sit and talk about reforming "Islam" as if that would solve the real issues on the ground.
Last thing, I was laughing to read this quote "on all terrorism is committed by Muslims" as if, the indiscriminate bombing of Afghanistan after 9/11 and Iraq, (and Israel's insane attack on Lebanon) resulting in hundreds of thousands dead...could be declared as anything else but terrorism (or is it the civilized kind where smart bombs and daisy cutters are dropped; or is it somehow that we've decided some lives are more weighty than others?)
Sorry one more thing, as much as we can blame Christians for the current U.S. administration's stance and Jews for Israel, and Muslims for Alqaeda...and quickly make a case to end all religions, what about Khmer Rouge resulting in the deaths of at least a million (if not more people) under the leadership of a "Godless" state?
My point again, Faith is the wrong "enemy" to point our guns to...just as quickly any other institution we build in the place of "religions", will still deal with the evils of corruption, power hunger, oppression, greed, etc. This is the human condition after all, isn't it?
Peace my friend and I hope you don't tire of this discourse.
Thank you, Maliha! I can empathize with you for seeming to be (as you said to Liz) stuck in the position of "apologizing/explaining for your co-religion." I never assume that position for Christian literalists, so I think I understand your reluctance to assume it for certain of your own "co-religionists."
ReplyDeleteI have to assume that you are right that the reporting of Muslim views and reactions has been unfair and unbalanced. I deeply regret that I seem to have fallen into the trap that it appears Mr. Friedman has fallen into. Can you provide some reliable sources of good information that I might consult (and plan to follow as regularly as possible)? I would appreciate that (and so might other readers of these comments).
I am also struck by your pointing out that faith is but one of a number of important factors. Or, as you said, "Faith is the wrong 'enemy' to point our guns to." I think it's an arrow that finds its mark on Harris's work. His "agenda" obviously includes demolishing (his word) religious faith, so he has to ignore the good that contemporary religious faiths promote and find ways to generalize arguments from Islamic suicide bombers and Christian inquisitionists to taint the "good beliefs" as well. So much the worse for him, but also for me for having been too enthusiastic (having gone too far) in supporting his work. Thanks for the tonic your comments give me.
While I'm not sure that I share completely your suggestion that American bombing itself is "terrorist" (if I understand you correctly), the bombing is often irresponsible and done with little regard for "collateral damage." And I deplore that.
Harris would, I think, try to set aside your "Godless state" example (the Khmer Rouge) by pointing out (as he does in The End of Faith) that 20th century totalitarian regimes exhibited their own variety of "religious faith" (of the atheist variety). That is, he'd reject the Khmer Rouge atrocities as something not related to "religious faith." But that may only be a semantic argument. I'm not sure. At any rate, your point does seem to be valid with respect to "religious faith" as usually understood.
I really appreciate your comments, especially because I think I've learned a great deal (and have much still to learn).
Thank you. And be peace be with you as well.
Peace Moristotle,
ReplyDeleteThank you again for allowing me to say my piece; and for being so open.
A couple of references that come to mind:
1) http://www.tariqramadan.com/
Dr. Tariq Ramadan;(check out his articles) brilliant, i love him.
Dr. Muqtader Khan: http://www.ijtihad.org/
Very profilic writer in matters of religion and politics.
Eteraz community: http://eteraz.org
A cool ezine of young Muslims battling it out on the hot issues of the day. Non Muslims are encouraged and welcome to participate.
Alt Muslim: http://altmuslim.com/
I am not sure how frequently updated this is, but also another portal for like minded Muslims to comment on issues of the day.
(If I come across, or think of more relevant sites, I will bring them to your attention. There are other scholars as well, but their discourse is geared *only* to Muslim audiences..which may turn outsiders off..Zaytuna.org, zaidshakir.com, and radicalmiddleway.com - are examples of some of that intra-Muslim dialogue going on)
On Terrorism: That may have been pushing it (ascribing the dreaded word terrorism to our administrations actions) but to me, the end results are the same. Countless innocent lives lost for no reason at all and the perpetrators in both cases could care less for the worth of those human lives. Going by numbers alone, we have wreaked more havoc and damage beyond any terrorist's wildest dreams (Osama must be proud of Bush and his cohorts- for their actions only proves his theories and justifications.) It's sad all around and yes, deplorable is a good word.
Okay, again, I need to step back and thank you. Your responses and willingness to prode and listen affirm my inclination to always search for and meet the best in others. There may be hope for a brighter future after all (a girl can dream huh?)
Peace (we can't have too much of it) :)
Dear Maliha, thank you for the web addesses. I really appreciate them and will spend time perusing them to become better informed as to what "the Muslim world" is saying about these serious issues. It is possible to contact Thomas L. Friedman, and I think that he too might be open to gaining a more balanced view of what they're saying. Consider attempting to share this information with him. Obviously, if you could influence him, he could in turn influence many others. Bringing me up to speed will hardly make any difference in the large world. (Alas, though, I just tried to find his email address at the NY Times and couldn't. Another way would be to write a letter to the editor. You could write letters to other newspapers and magazines as well, whenever they had an article that seems to need to have been better informed in this. They can be sent by way of email.)
ReplyDeletePeace and good on you.
I was happy to see Maliha comment on your blog, for I knew she would express herself cogently on her faith, of which most people don't have a clue. A visit to her blog is well worth the trip. Her political and religious writings are powerful. But when she turns to her more frequent genres of poetry or fiction, her writing is hauntingly beautiful.
ReplyDeleteWith that backdrop, is it right for me to use one of her remarks as a springboard for my own harangue? Isn't she, in a sense, my guest at this blog? But I will do it anyhow because my point is not exclusive to her or her people....it is the universal human condition brought into stark relief by the specific example she writes of. Besides, she won't mind. She easily holds her own in any discussion.
Maliha cites the root socio-political-historic issues, not a given belief system, as the cause for Iraq chaos. I'll grant her the point. Still, as regards socio-political-historic issues, you can't always get what you want. Socio-political-historic issues come and go. Perhaps it's better to go for what you need: a conscience which will guide you, not just when times are good, but also when they suck.
So a belief system isn't to blame for chaos. Okay, but should people be happy with that state of affairs and rally around their belief system, as one might rally around a favorite baseball team on a losing streak? Hasn't the belief system (and the conscience that derives from it) proven it's limited worth? It's not enough that one's conscience doesn't cause mayhem. To be really valuable, it should safeguard against it. Liz, for example, is happy not to dis the faith....it's the socio-political-historic issues to blame. But shouldn't useful conscience prevent depravity?
Iraq is traveling a well-trodden road of atrocities, following Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Malawi, Northern Ireland, Nazi Germany, the present Darfor, and "atheist" nations like Cambodia, China, and the Soviet Union. Where are Muslims in this scenario? If anything, they are underrepresented. So depravity is not specific to any religion, and, I suspect to Sam's chagrin, lack of religion doesn't prevent it.
Such calamities could easily happen here, but haven't yet because socio-political-historic issues are good. Even so, we have groups who can barely keep their contempt for one another in check. Yes, the abortion clinic bombers you've mentioned, but also various non-religious groups such as environmentalists, the animal rights people, and the anti-WTA folks. In the best of times, we seek to destroy each other. Remove the socio-political-historic issues here as it has been removed in Iraq, and all hell will break loose. The West will give worthy competition to the worst of the above list, and people's self-defined consciences won't aid them in the slightest....not if history is any guide.
There's more to this comment, but it needs the prelude of the "passively accepting evil" comments in order not to appear overly blunt. I wish I'd never posted there, but I did. So I've put this entire comment and some additional paragraphs on the other thread. It's only pixels, and you've got lots.
Tom, I'm going to the continuation paragraphs now. Or, rather, after I have breakfast <smile>...
ReplyDeletePeace Moristotle,
ReplyDeleteYou think someone like Friedman can be swayed to rethink his positions? I find the likes of him so unapproachable!
Would rather forge small little connections with regular folks like me:)
but you have a point, I have no excuse for not writing more Letters to the editor... thanks for the reminder!
Tom, I am moving to the other post :)
Dear Maliha, Of course, I can't speak for Friedman, and he's used to talking to people a good deal more "high-powered" than you and I are!
ReplyDeleteAlso, I was thinking later (after my reply to you, above), that Friedman might have been speaking about the silence of protest coming from government officials, thinking that would "mean more" than the lone voices of reason such as you adduce. But I need to go back and study Friedman's op-ed piece again, and I've gotten very busy within the past 24 hours, alas.
Speaking of voices of reason, I've bookmarked all four of the URLs you gave me yesterday, and I look forward to visiting them soon. Thanks again for providing those.
Tom Sheepandgoats recommends that I visit your blog, but I don't know its location. If you have a reason for not telling me publicly (in a comment), please email me. Thanks.
Peace,
ReplyDeleteIf you just click on my name it should come up..but here goes: http://lightnessofbeing.wordpress.com
I don't know to what extent it may be relevant on these topics, I've a few short stories up, poetry and my writing tends to be on reflective spiritual matters moreso than overt political pieces.
Enjoy nontheless, and feedback is always appreciated :)
Yes ("Duh!"), that worked...and I'm flummoxed to figure out why I couldn't think myself of just clicking on your name-link!
ReplyDeleteI am by no means interested only in "these topics." My own blog contains all kinds of stuff, including poems, light and serious. Even a short story "Karl Rove's Revenge." And an occasional joke. Correspondence between me and the President of Yale University (regarding Yale's ill-advised honorary degree to Bush in 2001). Etc.
You are clearly a poet of power, and more power to you, as well as peace!
I have left a comment on your "This helpless body of mine..." <smile>
Peace Moristotle,
ReplyDeleteI didn't mean it to come off that way... I just meant I don't really spend much time explaining the Islamic position (kind of what I told Liz before, I really dislike being the sorta spokesperson...although it seems like i took on this role here)
I will check out the rest of your blog, poetry and especially that short story!
I don't know if you have time, but I thought this poem really captures the spiritual struggle that I am dealing with, it's directed to my "co-religionists":
http://lightnessofbeing.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/keep-your-islam/
This was dedicated to Mr. Bush:
http://lightnessofbeing.wordpress.com/2006/08/14/the-empire-burns/
Enjoy :)
Ooh, Maliha, I am sorry that my "Duh!" was misunderstood. It was addressed to myself, not to you! It was my way of poking fun at myself. I apologize for not making that clearer. I regret your taking it as a jibe at yourself.
ReplyDeleteYou wrote a poem dedicated to "Mr. Bush"! I have myself written "open letters" to Bush (a few weeks ago on this blog).
Me wonders if you still be reading the comments to this post. Me reads your words and although Me don't comment me takes the time to digest and hopefully come to understand what me believes to be one of the more erudite blogs Me has encountered.
ReplyDeleteBack to the questions at hand:
1.Me embraces the spirituality of the world around me. Me cannot say believe due to your response to me last comment. There may or may not be a higher being, but even proof of that would not change the way I treat people and asses me morals and ethics. Does that make me agnostic? A freethinker? Don't know, don't care, really.
2. Me pop was Roman Catholic and mom is Jewish. according to Israli law nthat makes me jewish, but according to me it was just confusing when me was just a youngin'. Me was given the freedom to determine(to some extent)which path Me would take to find me own way through the spiritual miasma that confronts most folks.
3. Don't vote (the reason has nothing to do with religion)
4.Does one have to be muslim to discuss this?
5. Me thinks that it would be better if the two groups could get along, but Me cannot imagine that happening. Isreal has been defending itself from overwhelming opposition for so long that they don't seem to be able to accept an alternative to the way things are going. On the other hand the continued aggression towards them by certain Palistinians don't make them want to change. Maybe someone like Ghandi or Dr, king will make an appearence and set things on the correct path, who knows, stranger things have happened.
6. Me ain't much of a "brain", but me does look at people. I grew up in a city that provided me with encounters with people from all over the world. And me was fortunate enough to be friendly enough to have people talk to me. The only comment me can say is that we are all sharing this planet. Intolorence just fucks things up (pardon me)we not only betray our stewarship towards the the plants, animals, seas and air that have provided us with the means to exist. We are all just people simple people. We eat, breed, cry, love, shit, laugh, cry some more, love more I hope, pay respects and taxes. Talk to shakespeare, he said it all much better than I could ever do.
Thanks for taking the survey, Scary Monster, and for your compliment on my blog's erudition, which comes mainly from the intelligent and thoughtful people who comment on my posts.
ReplyDelete1. I'm sorry if I appeared overly critical of your use of "believe" (in the phrase "believe in global warming"). I think I worded that a little too bluntly.
(In that same comment I also said that your profile's statement of your interest—in destroying buildings and bridges—seemed to indicate that you were maybe scary in more than your name. If you come back and see this, please tell me, if you would, what that's all about? In fact, why "Scary Monster"?
I laud the independence of your moral values from the question whether or not God exists. I'm entirely with you on that.
2.You may have noticed that you're the first Jewish person to take my survey. Thanks for that as well.
4. No, you don't need to be Muslim to say whether you approve of martyrdom in defense of Islam, but I can't imagine a non-Muslim's saying he does. Hmm, maybe someone who is interested in destroying buildings and bridges would approve of such martyrdom? Feel free to say so. (I'd think you even scarier than I already do <laugh>.)
5. The Israeli-Palestinian situation is indeed a dismal mess. I'm hoping that the storm our mild President Carter has stirred up with his use of the word "apartheid" to characterize Israel's policies towards the Palestinians will leave the air a little clearer after it has blown over.
6. You seem to have a pretty good brain, Scary Monster, but I guess it wouldn't be consistent with your "me" talk for you to say so <smile>.
Good on you. And peace, as Maliha says.
all this discussion but people stopped taking the survey (except for scary monster) :) so i will try. came here by way of maliha's blog.
ReplyDelete1. Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself? (not religious, Christian, Muslim, Judaic, other: _________)
Muslim
2. Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
to be honest, mostly my past. but I've had various experiences, mostly small here and there, that to me were signs of a Power i could not refute. there is an element of logic in accepting Islam as a true path, for me, but i think it's mostly a matter of faith - belief in the unseen, a knowing in your heart. there is much that i accept without questioning because i don't see the need to question everything. but some other questions remain in my heart and still rankle - those, i'm either ignoring or working on :)
3. If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
n/a
4. If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
like maliha, i take exception to the form of the question. i believe that it can be honorable to have died for one's beliefs, and i would define a martyr as one who dies for a cause. i don't think killing yourself along with other innocent people really falls under that definition. i won't talk about it too much here - it has already been discussed - but i posted about this on my blog a few days ago, after watching the film "paradise now".
5. If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians?
n/a
6. Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
i ought to, but baby just fell asleep and if i don't take this time to have my shower i won't get it in for another few hours... :)
Dear Ayesha! Thank you for coming to take my "religion survey." I appreciate it very much, and I'm really glad to have encountered the wonderful dialogue on Maliha's blog.
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks for the alert that you address suicide bombing in a recent post on your own blog. I'll come there to check it out. Of course, it was indeed the suicide bombing thing to which I alluded by my "vague phrase" (to quote Maliha), "martyrdom in defense of Islam."
[Sent privately to Moristotle on 4-15-2007, posted with permission]
ReplyDelete1. Religiously, how would you describe or classify yourself?
I am a Jew. [Name withheld] says he does not believe in god and maggi averred the same, but I do. I also believe in “the force,” in elves and fairies, go figure, oh, and throw in a few Norse and other myth gods while you’re at it. Oh! And god as depicted on Dad’s album cover for My Fair Lady – George Bernard Shaw. But I also have fears that there is nothing there, and that this is all there is and it has NO MEANING, cause after we leave?? And cause we can’t seem to really improve as a species and I now have trouble with the passover seder language, as I don’t believe in better, I don’t see peace in our time
2. Whatever you answered, what is it about you that leads you to say that?
As you know, I was raised a liberal jew and I remain such, years after education and regular temple attendance. And I believe in both the christian (activist) version "DO unto others as you would have them do unto you" and the jewish version “DO NOT do unto others that which you would not have them do unto you” (stay outta my face). I went to easter services at a Lutheran church as mike wound up singing in a choir, it was nice, I liked the Ner Tamid (eternal flame) same as ours, (I always seem more that is the same all over- like, all cuisines have a blintz) I liked the pastors homily, I liked the choir, I did not say ‘he is risen” at every opportunity, I believe Jesus was one of many great and good prophets but that he was the one with GREAT PR, so he has lasted. I suspect Peter on that account, and as the reading for the day said it was Peter who went back to the cave and saw the “linen” I immediately wanted to know if he had gone alone, were there other witnesses, where did the linen REALLY come from etc (too much CSI)?
Further (I was obviously dying to share all this, thanks for the opportunity) I noticed also in the bible readings for the service that at first Jesus felt that the Jews were discriminating and he wanted everyone to share in gods blessings, but in the next reading the “church” said, “only us that is good [our definition] get to play” hunh? Turned his inclusiveness right around, that’s ORGANIZED religion and bureacracy for you!
3. If you answered Christian, how much, if any, do your religious beliefs influence how you vote?
As a jew, I’m liberal to my core, too many relatives would roll in their…ashes, if I voted republican, ‘sides, never agreed with one as much as I agree with dems. daddy never admitted to voting FOR anyone, only against someone worse, when I asked him who he WOULD like to vote FOR, he said “Chester Bowles”
4. If you answered Muslim, do you approve of martyrdom "in defense of Islam"?
na, but I know that is wrong in terms of the Koran when it kills others
5. If you answered Judaic, how do you feel about Israel's policies toward the Palestinians?
Frequently not happy, but I haven’t lived with suicide bombers in my market (just old dudes with their lead foots on the accelerator) I think that in the face of that, it takes super-human and/or insanity to continue to love and try to get folks to see we are more the same than different, but someone has a great stake in keeping folks apart, I suspect power greed and not enough water to go around, and some non-jews are bred to hate us and want us pushed into the mediterranean, no matter how we try to get along, they think we should never have been given part of Palestine, and so it goes on and on and on
6. Anything else you'd like to say by way of your "religious statement"?
good lord! I think I’ve said quite enough!!!
Susie, you seem to be, like me and my learned poetic friend, a "believer in all things." If you haven't read my posts on the subject of "believing all things," you might like to do so?
ReplyDeleteIt has turned out, quite unexpectedly and to my deep gratification, that my musings about how it is possible to "believe all things" have led to a number of insights (or what appear to me to be insights) into the paradox of freedom that seems to inhabit "the seminal nut of being." These insights seem to shed light on "the nature of the human condition" (at the very least), and also on "the nature of God" (that He/She/It is morally neutral, or amoral, which explains a lot about the futility of the different parties in a bloodbath all calling on God to bless their killing enterprise...).