Firstly, let me start of with Eid Mubarak! [Insert most awesome Eid text message here]
I felt I had to write something. Yes, I know its Eid. I also have a debilitating bout of the flu. My heads hammering because of some awful headache and my wrists feel like they’ve had metal stakes driven through them (always warm-up before you play Badminton). But if you watched “The Root of all Evil?” last night on Channel Four, you would also share the same agitation to say something.
For those missed the program: the famous Richard Dawkins, author of the The Selfish Gene, espoused in his intellectually arrogant way how religion with its irrational roots is, as he says “Ëœnourishing intolerance and murder’. The program goes on to case the primal backwardness of religion via examples of Catholics searching for spiritual healing in Lourdes and the emerging strength of evangelical Christians in the US. You even get glimpses of Muslims, as Dawkins goes onto describe Al-Quds as “Ëœthe least enlightened place on Earth’.
I’ve been hearing such arguments for quite some time over the past few years. I’ve also heard many secular Muslims pushing the same case through examples of sectarian Sunni/Shia violence.
You see, there are two things about the statement “ËœReligion is the root of all evil’ that seriously bothers me. One, the factual ignorance and two, the inclusion of Islam (since it also falls under the label of religion) as a part of the statement. Concerning the latter; just because the period of Christendom was referred to as the “ËœDark Ages’, this does not mean that Islamic civilisation deserves the same epithet by means of association with Christianity just because Islam falls under their definition of “Ëœreligion’. For people like Dawkins who merit themselves as being enlightened and rational free thinkers, he doesn’t seem to infer any intellectual method at all, when he brackets all religions as being the same. Surely, Islam which has its clear proofs and explanations must demand a totally different approach, especially if it is to be compared alongside, say, fire-worshipping Zoroastrians.
As to the factual ignorance of the aforementioned statement - true, some of the conflict zones around the world are underpinned by religious tensions, but what about those decidedly non-religious conflagrations and blood-lettings? If a our century is defined by “Ëœreason’, then what madness describes this -
- In WW2 an astonishing 10-20% of the total populations of the Soviet Union, Poland and Yugoslavia perished.
- In post-war Asia, Japan having two cities wiped off the map, also had 9 million displaced peoples and nearly 40% of all urban buildings destroyed by US bombings.
- As many as 4 million Indonesians died directly or indirectly as result of the conflict.
- One million Indians died as a result of war-induced famine in 1943, another million people in Indo-China two years later.
Just to make a point, I’ve purposefully not mentioned the suffering faced by the Muslim world. But on a final note, maybe it was the religion of Capitalism that has taken nearly 3.9 million lives from the resultant civil war in Congo?
January 10th, 2006 at 6:04 pm
Actually, you should precise that Secularism is central to the philosophy of Capitalism. Anyway, Eid Mubarak.
January 12th, 2006 at 8:59 pm
eid mubarak
January 13th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
mashAllah, brotherhood has an interesting blog.
January 15th, 2006 at 12:19 am
I was at a dawah stall at my Uni last year when a lecturer walked past and shouted: “Religion! It’s because of people like you that we have wars!”
One of the brothers asked if he would clarify what he meant. The lecturer snorted and rushed past.
We need to ask ourselves, what is it about religion that causes wars. If we look at Afs-M list on his post, this will give us a clue. There’s a range of reasons including greed and power.
So where does this “religion causes wars” statement come from? Some people who feel strongly about how society should be run try to convince others by open dialogue and discussion. However, if your beliefs on this particular issue have no intellectual basis then how will you convince others? It’s impossible - hence this is one reason for wars.
For example, Christianity has no intellectual basis. Faith in Christ is based on emotion, love and personal experiences - not something that can be rationally explained.
Hinduism is usually followed based on tradition and culture, as are most other religions.
The worst is Secularism which led to Capitalism. This has no intellectual basis whatsoever! It emerged after a bloody war between the clergy and the so-called pseudo-intellectuals of Europe. It was a simply a matter of circumstance. Though Capitalism has nothing to do with religion it has been involved in and caused more deaths in the last century than all the other causes of wars put together.
So it’s not religion but people who feel strongly about their way of life, yet have no rational explanation for it.
Islam is the only ideology with an intellectual basis. It is a fact that human beings can never know the full consequences of their actions nor can a man fully understand a woman pr vice-versa. We can never know what an animal is thinking or whether a carrot feels pain when we chop it up. Our likes and dislikes are affected by the way we were brought up. A century ago in the UK, it was disgusting to wear a bikini on the beach, now it’s the norm. So there’s no point looking at Islam, Capitalism, Communism or any other ideology and discussing whether you agree with its laws since man’s views and ethics are in a constant state of flux. Instead ask yourself two simple questions:
1. Does a Creator exist?
2. Which of the Books (if any) are from Him?
The answer to these questions can be proven rationally, without any emotion or hocus-pocus involved. That’s why Muslims feel that they have the best way of life for mankind. Not because they arrogantly think they came up with the best way (like Secular Capitalists do) but rather because they humbly believe that it is truly from the Creator of the Universe.
How then can we submit to a man-made system when we have the system of God? Naturally, there will be people who vehemently disagree which means there will be a clash. We say, let’s make this a clash of ideas, discussion and debate and not let it come to war. Charles Clarke (and the like) says that the West will not even negotiate with Muslims who want Shariah in the Muslim lands… so who’s causing the war?
Babs-M
January 15th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Not because they arrogantly think they came up with the best way (like Secular Capitalists do) but rather because they humbly believe that it is truly from the Creator of the Universe.
I must object to this statement. Secular capitalists believe their system is the best because secular capitalist states have historically shown themselves to be more effective than socialist or Islamic states at acquiring wealth and power.
January 15th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Clarification:
Regardless of the reasons, there are many Secular Capitalists who believe that their system is the best for mankind - hence they wish to export their values to the rest of the world by force or otherwise.
What makes these people think that they have the ability to decide that their perception of right and wrong may be imposed upon others?
On what basis does this system entrust the few to punish the many simple because they have wealth and power?
Those people that were imprisoned for breaking laws that have since been changed - either they were unfairly imprisoned back then or people today are getting away with a crime… which is it?
January 15th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
George, you said it, the Secular Capitalists` criterion of good and bad is based on how much one can acquire wealth and power regardless of how. This is why in secular societies, mobs boss like Don Corleone, corporate criminals like the directors of Enron are held in high esteem by a large section of the population because they succeeded in acquiring wealth and power and thus were able to enjoy life as much as the wanted. In Islam, acquiring wealth is not the purpose in life and deefinitely not acuiring power. Rather fulfilling one s obligations is made a purpose.
January 16th, 2006 at 12:00 pm
George, you said it, the Secular Capitalists’ criterion of good and bad is based on how much one can acquire wealth and power regardless of how.
Yes, but I was referring to countries not individuals here.
Also, secularism is not central to capitalism - many have argued that the contempt for the poor that exists in many capitalist societies has its roots in Calvinist theology.
It is more accurate to say that the West’s defining characteristic is individualism, and that both secularism and capitalism have their roots in individualism.
January 17th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
It was not individualism that led to Secularism. It was the oppression of the Church upon the intellectuals of Europe that led to a bloody clash ending in a pathetic compromise excuse for a solution, namely, Secularism. They couldn’t solve the question of who should rule: God or Man… in the end they just gave up and left the system to be decided by all” people. Naturally, those that were rich and influential moulded a system that suited them. Thus Economics became fundamental in Government policy – hence the name Capitalism.
Salvation lies only in Christ”, T.U.L.I.P, Augustinianism and the multiple other off-shoots of John Calvin’s ideas may have had its influence on modern Society, however, contempt for the poor is an absolute consequence of Secularism (i.e. leaving Man to decide) simply because Humankind is prone to self-preservation.
Secularism gives the illusion that the people may decide for themselves. Instead, people are influenced by the dominant ideas and adopt the status quo. This is why the Muslim Governments attempt to implement Capitalist Systems. Once this has happened we see the same contempt for the poor in Bangladeshi, Pakistani and Saudi, etc policies that we see in American and British policies. It is Secularism that leads to Capitalism, which ends in Individualism.
Regardless, the above information is not relevant to the subject matter of the post. The point was that though religion is often accused as being the root of all evil, in reality we see that Capitalism and Communism can also be accused of the same and much worse in many cases. Hence, this line of argument leads us to a cul-de-sac.
(I mention Capitalism, in particular, only as this is the most dominant ideology in recent times - there would be no practical point in mentioning other ideologies).
Babs-M
January 24th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
You gotta look at the histories of all religions in this context.
The Abrahamic religons whish encompasses Judaism, Christianity and Islam is basically a master/slave model. In the holy books if one does not obey he/she suffers.
Secondly apart from Judaism which is introvert .. the other two religions have between them killed billions around the globe throughout their existence seeking to convert or destroy.
So what is their use?
Why is Islam the way forward? Is it nothing more than Arab Nationalism?
There is no question of faith .. here if God is Mother Nature.
Men have corrupted this idea for thie own purposes be they the Vatican, the Saudis or the Neo Conservatives …