Malcom X p348-373

The chapter of Malcolm X's autobiography I read told all about his travels deep into Africa. He clearly came to Africa with much hatred for the white man, but while there he came to realize that simply blaming the white man wasn't going to solve any of their problems. He talks about how different the people in Africa feel towards white people. They don't have the same hatred, in fact they are able to peacefully co-exist with each other. Another thing I took notice of were the events that he attended. Malcolm X was a celebrated speaker to the African people at every event he attended. The last thing I say I would have to admire about Malcolm X in this chapter was his conflict with Cassius Clay. Malcolm X was afraid to be seen publicaly with Clay because Clay was an avid follower of Elijah Muhammad, and he was afraid that the media would bring up questions of Clay leaving Elijah Muhammad for him. Out of respect and to avoid major controversy, Malcolm X distanced himself from Cassius Clay when in public. I think Malcolm X's views are very interesting because he can be militant one second and peaceful another, I was wondering if anyone else felt the same way.

Nation of Islam

Class,

You can view a brief history of the Nation of Islam by going to NOI.org. To answer Dylan's question about where the doctrines of the NOI come from, here is a clip from their website:

In 1931, the Master was preaching this Great Truth of salvation when He met a man named Elijah Poole in Detroit, Michigan. He chose him to be His Divine Representative in continuing this most difficult task of bringing truth and light to His lost and found people. For 3 1/2 years He taught and trained the Honorable Elijah Muhammad night and day into the profound Secret Wisdom of the Reality of God...

...When the Honorable Elijah Muhammad asked Him to identify Himself He replied that He was the Mahdi. He signed His name in 1933 as Master Wallace Fard Muhammad...

Here, we see the use of the title of "Mahdi". From what you've learned this semester, how does this help the cause of the NOI? Could Fard or Elijah Muhammad have accomplished what they did without the claim of Mahdi? Feel free to post answers to these questions or ask any further questions you may have.

Hamitic Myth

Class,

I did a bit of research to help clarify Tanner's question brought up today in class about the origins of the Hamitic Myth. Here's what I found; please feel free to keep posting comments and adding to the information provided:

HAM IN THE BIBLE (Genesis 9:20-27)

20) And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: 21) And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22) And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23) And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24) And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

25) And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

26) And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

27) God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

Malcolm X pg1-44

One of the most interesting things that I found in reading these first couple chapters was the fact that both black and white people were prejudiced against black people to varying degrees. I thought it was very interesting that the black people found those who were shining shoes in the statehouse to be the most deserving of respect. This is probably mostly rooted in the fact that black people were allowed to succeed in life only so far as they didn't mess up the existing order of things. For example, Malcolm's father was not bothered until he started preaching about things that might possibly be giving black people cause to rise up against the whites. For this he was ultimately killed. Even though he was quite obviously murdered, the life insurance company still called his death a suicide. Though Malcolm's family very much needed the life insurance money, they were unable to receive it simply because of the color of their skin.

Islam Metal Heads

This lecture at the the bookstore last thursday was quite unexpected and original. Basically the lecturer traveled throughout different islam communities in different nations to investigate an underground movement that is going on in todays islam communities and making a difference...its a fusion of politics, islam and heavy metal rock. The lecterer wrote a book on it called Heavy Metal Islam. What is happening is the youth of islam are turning to Heavy metal to make political statements in nations that are very conservative and opressive. Because the movement is so underground they are able to really say how they feel and speak out against the government without the government really knowing.... the author said"its a way of articulating a political space where there is no political space" being that the movement is so underground the can say what they want. The reason Rock and Rap are important to study in these communities is that is is a window in to a sea of change going on underground, it exposes how people are able to be militantly progressive and politically engaged while still being islamic and not being fooled completely by westerners. The author made it that last point clear, that even though the heavy metal music has roots in western music, this music was clearly distinct and the creators were not trying to be westerners. When the author then asked why they choose heavy metal rock of all the music they could have choosen for the message the answer he got made sense..."our lives are heavy metal,we live in a community with little hope, a bad economy, and a corrupt authoritarian regime...Brittany Spears Pop and Bon Jovi is not going to cut it(for this type of message)."

Extra Credit

I attended the extra credit lecture in the Bookstore last week and I enjoyed it. Before going to the lecture I was a bit curious on how the speaker was going to tie Islam and Rock & Roll into one topic. He simply explained that the younger generation are finding their voice through rock & roll. Some of the kids were saying that they didn't even feel comfortable walking around their communities due to the way they looked. To fix that problem they decided to walk around at night time with the rest of the kids. Most of the kids were from poverty and the music that they were fans of, wasn't only music, it was their livelihood. I really enjoyed the lecture and the videos he showed....

Extremism

I believe that this reading on extremism in Islam can be applied to all religions of the world. The message givin in this reading by Mr. Kurzman rings 100% true in my mind and should probably be red by every religious minded person, especially the extremists of the world, but unfortunatly the people who need it most will probably never read it. The main message of the reading is clear, Extremism in Islam is bad as it will actually turn people away from the religion, even if some extremist practices are allowed according to the Quran. This seems just natural logic to most but for Mr. Kurzman his proofs throught the reading are so well formed and true that I dont see how anyone at the end of this reading can make a valid argument against him. First he brings up the point that other religions that have tried exreamism in there practices have been wrong. So he is stating the obvious...learn from others mistakes, dont be a fool. He makes point that being extreme ( far from the center) natually makes you unbalanced. An especially good proof he puts forth( called the first defect) is that "excessiveness is too disagreeable for ordiary human nature to endure or tolerate", this is a major point because if the natural tenteny for man is against extremism, how is any extremist movement going to last in the big picture of things...mostly it just makes people hate you. This is also his secong defect - excessiveness is shortlived. His third defect is that if you practice extremism then you will, in regards to islam, negelct your other obligations as a person. this can also be seen in other forms of extremism non-muslim related...if you are so busy with any one thing in life you will eventually neglect other duties that you have as a person. His points on bigotry made in paper are in fact so universal that i shall now make it a point to keep his arguments in mind when i do come across a bigot myself. I feel that this reading is also important because the worst consequence of extremism in islam is what is currently occuring right now in America. Because of extremism most Americans no very little of the truth about islam and instead prejucice notions based on the most extreme of extremist practices have formed following the twin tower bombings. It is now a widespead prejuice practice to associate a muslim with being a terrorist. So the very extremists trying to help themselves by practicing extremism in the long run have unfortunaly hurt not only themselves but the whole of muslims in the world.

Elias: Islam in Iran & Turkey

This reading from the Elias book made me realize that every country has its own conflicts just like us. They described polictics as a "dirty business", at the beginning Iran was in turmoil and people felt as though they weren't being treated fairly which lead to anti-government demonstrations, one of the reasons this happened was because of their ruler not handling situations correctly. This example is also present today, some presidents don't rule the same way as the previous ones and therefore can cause problems. In each country it seems as though there is one person that comes to rule and messes everything up, and then the following ruler has to fix the mistakes and regain the trust from the people. I felt this reading was basically just explaining how there was one ruler that caused problems and many people disliked them and then the next ruler most of the problems and then regained liking from everyone. Which is very true to what happens in our country today.

"Extremism"

While reading the essay written by Yusuf Al-Qaradawi on Islamic Extremism, I found one section particularly interesting. Al-Qardawi says that the negative aspects of extremism can be seen by looking back in history at the Christian and Jewish religions. "Muslims have therefor been warned not to follow in their steps: he who learns from the mistakes of others indeed lives a happier life" (pg. 197). I found this interesting as the Qur'an has passages in it telling the followers of Islam to look at other religions and learn from them. Even back when the Qur'an was being written people already knew that you could learn from history and that it would repeat itself if proper steps were not taken.

Theories of the Imamate

When reading the passage about the Theories of the Imamate I was intrigued by many aspects of the different sects of Shiite Islam. I found the Zaydi’s belief that in order to be acknowledged as the Imam, a person must have the ability to resort to the sword if necessary was very interesting. I think strength and military training are aspects a leader must contain to effectively run a nation. I was just wondering why other Shiite groups do not place this attribute as high as the Zaydi’s. One would like to assume that the leader of a group would have the maturity to fully complete the task. What I understood from the reading was, the other groups would allow for a child to dictate the way the religion was run. I was wondering if anyone had thoughts concerning these topics.

Introduction to Shi'i Islam

The history of Shi'i Islam is a kind of a long and complicated history. It began with the fourth Caliphate Ali. Ali was the cousin of Muhammad and this put him in line for leadership. Ali was faced with major conflicts. He moved his headquarters from Medina to Kufa. Kufa was seen to be the place where Shi'ism was to remain. One of the conflicts that Ali was faced with was from Mu'awiya. Ali was assassinated by the followers of Mu'awiya. After the assassination the Shi'i had to find their next leader. They looked towards the leadership of Ali's son Hasan. Many western historians say that Hasan was a disgrace but the Shi'i historians say that his abdication was an important mood. They believed that it was a way of preserving himself because of his fathers assassination. Hasan ended up dieing and the Shi'i Islams looked to his brother for leadership. Husayn is seen as one of the greatest leaders in the sight of the Shi'i. Husayn was faced with a large probletaking on the leadership role. His adversary Umayya had followers called the Umayyads. These people started talking bad about the Shi'i so Husayn had to take action about what they said. He decided to go to war against them but was told he would have support from the Shi'i. In October 680 Husayn was killed because the Shi'i army was never delivered. He fought his last fight with 78 people. The records say that Husayn was told that the army was not going to be delivered. His death is the most celebrate event to the Shi'i. So why do you think Husayn decide to continue to fight? Why didn't he turn back? Why do you think the Shi'i never sent their army to help their leader?

Schools of Law

I found this reading to be very interesting. I was questioning how they could make laws that have to do with modern day issues like technology when the laws are said to have come from the time of Muhammad. Obviously things like computers and the Internet weren't around in those times. I thought it was interesting how they decided that using loud speakers for the Call to Prayer were acceptable based on the things that Muhammad had done in his lifetime (getting a person named Bilal to do the Call to Prayer since his voice was very loud and many people could hear it). But I'm not sure all things could be traced back to the times of Muhammad, how do you think the lawmakers interpret laws that really don't have any reference in the Qur'an or in Hadiths. This reading also talked about the different types or strengths of Islamic law. I am wondering if this sometimes causes conflict in the Islamic world because one place has a different set of rules or severity of those rules. I also thought it was interesting that in Islamic law people are not accused by a larger party like the state or county in which the crime took place (Western Practice) they are accused by an individual of doing a wrongdoing. And instead of coming to a verdict or punishment, they try to resolve their law cases by coming to an understanding or an agreement. I wonder if this causes more peace in their cultures or leads to more misunderstandings. What did you guys think of this reading?

The Creed of Al-Iji

There were a few interesting parts to this particular reading, so I was wondering if anyone found any particular significance to their being 73 sects, and 72 of them being in hell? Also, it is curious as to why there are 27 beliefs listed- is this number significant in any way? Perhaps the most interesting part of this reading is belief number 3, which says that there is no need for a teacher, because all knowledge is obtained through reflection. If this is the case, why is there a need for a religious leader or teacher at all? Also, wouldn't everyone's particular beliefs be different, and therefore almost nobody would be saved because they would not have the exact beliefs of Muhammad? What of these 27 beliefs do you find present in other religions? I found the concepts of God being perfect, God being all knowing, and God being present everywhere. Another interesting thing I found was the idea of repentance, which is present in 26. I am wondering if in other religions, if you repent, you're automatically forgiven, since you acknowledged your sins. In Islam, it is apparent that God decides everything- whether or not you have or have not done enough good to get into heaven, whether or not your forgiven, what is good or bad. Share any thoughts you have on these beliefs.

The Caliphate of Ali

As I was reading through "The Caliphate of Ali", a passage on the topic of revenge interested me. Ali is attempting to remove 'Uthman's leaders when he encounters a problem in Syria. The governor of Syria, Mu'awiya, is a powerful leader with high local support and a military. Mu'awiya "had a moral claim against the murderers of the caliph; as the nearest survivng relative of the dead man, he had a right, even a duty, to see vengeance for the wrong done to his clan. Historians have tended to treat this claim as a feeble pretext for his actions but this does not, perhaps do justice to Mu'awiya's position" (Pg. 76). Do you think Mu'awiya's moral claim to vengeance is ethical in the Islamic sense? Do you feel Mu'awiya has more of a right to be the caliph than Ali?

Conquests of Islam (Donner ER reading)

In the begginning of the text the author states there might be a lot of discrepencies between different sources in how the conquests, battles, etc, occured. I was just curious to what everyone thought were the motivations for the Islamic people early on in these conquests. I know it was heavily based on the drive for political, economic, and military power but it was also driven from a religious point of view as well (getting rid of the polytheists and pagans being a major factor). Starting with pg. 567 and on if you have an opinion either way to which factor you think was more influential in the spread of Islam: political/economic/military or religious/spiritual?

Seth

Legal Hadith

As I was reading this blog a couple points stood out to me that seem to be things that would have happened in the older days but I am wondering if these things are still happening today in the Islam community. A reoccurring theme in the hadiths concerning divorce was that men would divorce their wives while they were menstruating and than take her back when she is "clean". This is obviously something that cannot be controlled by the woman so does anyone have any thoughts on if this hadith is still being practiced? One of the other themes in the divorce hadiths have to do with divorces when there is a child. The way they decided who has custody of the children is to tell the child to run to which ever parent they wish, is this still the way they take care of custody issues? Also, in both of the hadiths, the child ran to the mother. I think that the mother, as is the general "stereotype" in all families, is the comforter and the care-giver so children are prone to choose their mother over their father. Does anyone disagree with that? The last hadith I thought was interessting was that "Whoever drinks wine in this world and does not turn away from it in repentance, will find it forbidden to him in the Hereafter". Are Muslims who drink alcohol looked down upon? What are some of your thoughts on the hadiths I brought up and if they are still being practiced. 

Prophetic Ethics

"Yet many Muslims firmly believe in the possibility of intercession, not just by Muhammad, but also by a variety of other saintly figures including members of Muhammad's family, prominent mystical figures or Sufi, and other individuals with who miracles are associated or who are known to be uncommonly pious."

Prior to this quote there is also a sentence about the orthodox tradition not recognizing saintly figures interceding for other human beings. This whole paragraph confuses me. What I am getting out of this is relating to prayer. I am understanding that, the orthodox tradition believes that during prayer you can not pray to saintly figures to intercede your message to God. Yet, Muslims currently believe in the intercession. I am relating the text to prayer, what do you think? Is there a message I am missing within the text?

Warfare Verse

"When the four forbidden months are over, wherever you find the polytheists, kill them, seize them, beseige them, ambush them - but if they turn to God, maintain the prayer, and pay the prescribed alms, let them go on their way, for God is most forgiving and merciful" (9:5).

In Islam, polytheism is considered the greatest sin. Therefore, Muslims have the right to kill any polytheist, unless he/she turns to God. In order to turn to God, one must submit to the will of God, there is no other god besides God..

I'm not sure what to think about this passage. My initial thought is Attrition... = when you regret your sins, but not because you love God. The polytheist does not submit to God because he/she truly believes and loves God, but rather for the fear of death. If someone holds a gun to your head because you are a polytheist, do you submit to God for the wrong reason.. i.e because you want to live, and not because you love God? I would think so... after all, proclaiming that there is no other god besides God, doesn't seem like a difficult task given the situation; even though there will be consequences later on... If the polytheist's life is spared, does God forgive him, even if He is all forgiving and merciful? Personally, I think that attrition is morally wrong and that God does not forgive the polytheist, or anyone for wrongfully submitting to Him. I think that attrition is just as big of a sin as being a polytheist.
I also think that one should not submit to God for the wrong reasons, whether it be fear or certain circumstances. Stating your beliefs and proclaiming your love for God is a dangerous matter; you shouldn't have any disbelief or uncertainty. I don't think it is just to proclaim your love and belief in God if you fear the consequences presented to you on Judgement Day.

Family Laws and Virtues

This section of the Qur'an covered many different family laws.  Here are a few that I found interesting.

"Give orphans their property, do not replace their good things with bad, and do not consume their property with your own-a serious crime.  If you fear that you will not deal fairly with orphan girls, you may marry whichever women seem good to you, two three, or four.  If you fear that you cannot be equitable to them, then marry only one, or your slave, that is more likely to make you avoid bias.  Give women their dowry as a gift upon marriage, though if they are happy to give up some of it for you, you may enjoy it with clear conscience."

I am wondering if by this passage, the Qur'an is telling Muslims to marry orphans before they marry someone with a family.  Or was the Qur'an simply talking of orphans before moving onto the dealing of marriage.  I read this passage over and over again and cannot figure out as to why the Muslim men are supposed to marry orphans first.  

Then, my next question is, it says that a man is allowed to marry more than one wife as long as he is equitable to all.  Later in the passage, it says that it is impossible for a man to be equitable to all wives.  So why would they be allowed to marry more than one woman in the first place.  Just out of curiosity, I am wondering what percentage of men actually do marry more than one woman.  In the United States, it is illegal to have more than one wife at a time.  Does this have any effect on a Muslim's belief about marriage and do they object to America's law?

Other interesting points I found, was that it says divorce can happen twice, a widow must wait four months and ten nights before marrying etc.  Do these numbers have any significance toward something Muhammad did with his wives in the past or are these numbers just an amount that the Muslims think is fair?

"There is no god but Him, the Ever Living, the Ever Watchful.
Neither slumber nor sleep overtakes Him. All that is in the heavens
and in the earth belongs to Him. Who is there that can intercede
with Him except by His leave? He knows what is before them and
what is behind them, but they do not comprehend any of His
knowledge except what He wills. His throne extends over the
heavens and the earth; it does not weary Him to preserve them both.
He is the Most High, the Tremendous."

This verse, also called the throne verse seems to be a very powerful description of what he is for believers. It just made me wonder how most followers use this in daily life, I know in some other religions they have a similar belief which helps them stay good under god's view.

Sura of Mary

“When she bore him, she isolated herself to a faraway place. The birth process came to her by the trunk of a palm tree. She said, (I am so ashamed;) I wish I were dead before this happened, and completely forgotten. (The infant) called her from beneath her, saying, do not grieve. Your Lord has provided you with a stream. If you shake the trunk of this palm tree, it will drop ripe dates for you.”

When reading this I was intrigued by a certain statement, “If you shake the trunk of this palm tree, it will drop ripe dates for you.” Middle Eastern dates ripen in early October, thus meaning Jesus was born around the month of October. This is completely different from the Christian beliefs (ignoring all the other differences). I read this passage literally; does anyone take this differently?

Le post...Horne

There is no doubt in my  mind that other people saw the "Constitution"  as something that stressed unity. All of those who were associated with the idea played key parts and were extremely important to the Islamic community. How can it not be considered a document of "unity" when it is for the community and the people of the Islamic religion as well as other religions.  It did  not encourage assimilation or making those of another religion convert to another, it simply provoked peaceful methods between cultures, so they could come together as one and become a stronger unit. Thats all I have to say about the Constitution of Medina..peace

The Constitution of Medina

I believe that the Constitution of Medina greatly emphasizes the importance of unity among the Islamic community (known as the umma). In this document, Muhammad creates laws for the citizens in Yathrib that will protect the Muslims as well as their faith. However, it is clear that it will take a strong community effort in order for Islam and its followers to flourish. Muhammad says that muslims must not let others spread evil among the umma and that "the hand of every man shall be against him" who attempts to do so. If a muslim is wronged or killed, other muslims are expected to "avenge the blood of one another" as well. I think that these types of laws stress how important each member of the umma is and explain that everyone's cooperation is needed. Another important idea presented by Muhammad is that all muslims and jewish tribes mentioned in the document must protect one another. Even though they have different faiths, they must fight together as one in order to fend off large enemies such as the Quraysh tribe of Mecca. Without this type of alliance, it seems doubtful whether or not the Islamic faith would have survived it's enemies attacks.

Did other people think that the "Constitution" stressed the importance of unity? Are there other facets of the document that seem important that I forgot to discuss?

The story of Angels

"According to the popular legend, one day while Muhammad was herding sheep he was visited by two angels who laid him down and opened up his chest. They then took his heart out and washed it in a golden basin filled with snow before replacing replacing it in and closing him up, which probably symbolizes the removal of all existing sin from his body. However, neither the notion of primordial sin nor the belief that one's can inherit one's parent's sin is prevalent in Islam." Ch. 2, page 32, Islam. 

This paragraph caught my attention because I found it interesting that a story such as this would exist because it suggests primordial sin. I understand how in Islam one must be clean (showered) before prayer, but in this story the angels took out Muhammad's heart to clean with snow (purity) not bathed his body.  

From my perspective, his heart represents his soul and the  angels  "cleaned his soul" from any "sin" to prepare Muhammad. According to the author this story shares the Christian belief of original sin which contradicts Islam's belief. Does anyone have any more insight to this particular story that could better explain why  his heart was washed, not his body? Coming from a Christian background this is where I see a similarity, but according to the author there is a contradiction with the beliefs in Islam regarding original sin. 

Blog rules

1. Discussion leader(s) will post their thoughts, opinions, questions, criticisms, reactions, etc. The rest of class will reply accordingly.

2. No flaming! This is not a forum to attack each other's ideas. Please debate responsibly and respectfully.

3. Your participation grade will reflect your blog activity. Blog wisely.

4. Discussion leader, have your post ready by Tuesday night at midnight (the earlier, the better). Everyone else, please post your reply before Wednesday at midnight (again, the earlier, the better).