The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 11. Jihad Inc.

The Arab Muslim.

In this chapter we have referred to Muslims in general but that fact of the matter is that most of the people in the Middle East are Arabs who happen to be Muslim and who also happen to have oil on their land.

The decline of Islam has led down a road to where the modern Arab, for the most part, wonders how his faith and culture fits in with a rapidly changing world. This is a far cry from originally belonging to one of the greatest cultures in the history of human kind.

Whether it is acknowledged or not, the Middle East (because of Israel and oil) is a vital part of the modern world and as such has to make changes and concessions to its own religion and culture.

As of this writing in the early part of the twenty-first century, Arabs, and Islam, have one hell of a public relations problem in the Western world.

One of the main problems with the Arab-Muslim religion of the Middle East today stems from outright religious intolerance combined with an insular culture that is still stuck in the tribal twelfth century!

It is a curious situation where on the one hand the average Arab confesses to overwhelming piety and subservience to Allah; while at the same time he looks with arrogance down on everyone else as being “infidels” and inferior.

This, combined with the rage average Arabs have against perceptions of them in the West as being nothing more than camel herders living somewhere in the middle ages, makes for a truly schizophrenic outlook on their part.

Just as Christianity was stuck in the Middle Ages for a long time, so the religion of Muhammad has, among certain groups, been stuck in the past.

It needs to be dragged into the modern age, kicking and screaming if need be!

One of the best examples of this can be seen in the recent practices of the Taliban in central Afghanistan. They held a whole nation hostage to their religious zealousness and it took the intervention of outside forces to finally remove them.

To gather some insight into this volatile situation in the Middle East, (other than the never ending conflict between Arabs and Jews over the Palestine issue) we need go back only a few short years to discover how the situation got to the point it is at today!

It all revolves around the discovery of oil!

Oil is both a blessing and a curse for the people of the Middle East. It brought the region great wealth, and at the same time exposed them to the rest of the world on a scale never before experienced.

Gone is a centuries old way of life as their governments and population are thrust unto the world stage. Their religion and lifestyle has been given a millennium long drop kick from the eleventh to the twenty-first century. The cultural shock alone has seriously disrupted the social order and fabric of their society.

The fact remains that without oil, this situation would also not get nearly the attention it does.

It is now fashionable to blame Western colonization and economic domination for most of the woes and predicaments of the Muslim countries.

** Nevertheless, I would like to point out that Muslims themselves bear the most responsibility for the situation they are in right now.

Their complicity in the rise of militant Islam must be borne just as much by themselves as by their former colonizers.

When we look at the tensions between East and West in the light of day, religion is a handy way to rile the population against the “infidels” of the West.

The fact of the matter is that it is more of a fear of Western ideals and culture, combined with jealousy of Western affluence that drives the leaders in the Middle East into such fits of rage.

The Western influence is a direct threat to their authority, especially amongst the young!

Don’t forget that no matter what form of government a Middle East country has, outside of some large urban areas it is still largely controlled by the tribes and Imams!

By the end of the 1970’s America, Europe and various Arab regimes extended too many fundamentalist and extremist groups military, diplomatic, financial and logistical support for two main reasons.

The first was to deflect the attention of Muslims around the world from the anti-American Iranian understanding of Islam that was being fostered by the clerics under the Ayatollah Khomeini.

The second was of course to reduce American casualties in trying to counter the U.S.S.R. incursions into Afghanistan.

Sponsored by petrodollars, all aggressive interpretations of Islam were published and abundantly distributed in the Muslim world.

This was accompanied by a vigorous publicity campaign assuring Muslims that this was the only right path and correct understanding of Islam.

Other interpretations quickly disappeared amongst the uneducated masses. Religious and cultural tolerance was slowly eroded while fundamentalism was on the ascent.

However, literature and propaganda didn’t work alone amongst the frustrated Arab citizens living under totalitarian regimes for the better part of a century. The extreme interpretations of Islam that were circulating provided them with a fascinating religion based Utopia.

A dream that the Imams were only too glad to foster and spread.

The truth of the matter is that Islam now enjoys the same sort of power over the masses as Christianity displayed a thousand years ago.

Why should the power structure of Islam give up any of their perks? It does not matter whether it is Al-Qaida, the Taliban, the clergy running Iran or the militants in Egypt and half a dozen other countries. They all want to turn their little piece of Eden into an Islamic state.

In other words, a state that is run according to their own ideals, beliefs and benefit; and to hell with everyone else! (Literally)

The problems in the Middle East are not only religious, insofar as the clergy is all to glad to foster discontent to further their own ends, but is also cultural and political. It is what might be described as a:

“Political agenda seeking justification in religion!”

The Islamic State, as it has come to be known, exists in the Middle East on the principal of obedience being due to God only and that Muslims reject the Western, secular idea of separation of church and state!

This is a nice trick fostered by the Islamic clergy to hold on to as much power as possible in spite of the emergence of democratic and populist movements in the world at large.

TOMORROW: The "Infalibility of Islam!"

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 11. Jihad Inc.

It would be a major mistake to think, as some people do, that Islamic fundamentalists form a homogeneous group with common beliefs, objectives and a united leadership!

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Even within the different groups, as with the Shiite and Sunni sects, there are disparate groups and movements. All of which are lumped together by the media as being fundamentalist.

The “fundamentals” that they go back to are an attempt to renew their religion once again by going “back to the basics.”

It is either that or watch their religion slide into secularism.

Now remember that all religions are capable of rise and fall. All cultures have their ups and downs over the course of their existence. Any religion, as well as any civilization, is always vulnerable to decadence and therefore has to be continually renewed.

One of the great strengths of Islam is that it does not have any one “official” person or institution. (Even though “unofficially” the Imam’s carry the same clout as the cardinals, or even the Pope, as they do in Christianity)

In theory every Muslim, every believer, has direct access to God and direct access to the sources of his religion.

Unfortunately, in practice they are all swayed by the hierarchy of the religion and affected by both the dogmatic and cultural forces at play.

There are many different man-made interpretations of the Holy Koran (just as in the bible), and this leads to the fact that many sayings and traditions were fabricated and attributed to the Prophet Muhammad in order to support one or more understandings of the Koran text according to the interpreters.

These understandings were constantly adjusted to fit the socio-economic situation as well as the political views of the time. As a result, they were in a constant state of flux, sometimes close to the intended message and at other times quite removed.

In spite of this, the Koran and the religious philosophy it espouses is arguably the most pristine and simple of all the major world religions with the possible exception of Baha’i.

(With the meaning that simple is less convoluted and therefore better and more to the point. As in “clear and simple”)

Where we run into a problem is that, as in the case of Jesus of Nazareth, there is no actual copy of the Koran that can be said to have come directly from the hands of Mohammed.

The earliest written record of the Koran (and the 45 scribes who supposedly documented it) was written in the biography of Mohammed by a certain Ibn Ishaq who wrote Sirat Rasul Allah, (The life of the Prophet of God) about 100 years after the death of the prophet Mohammed!

From this point on, it gets even hazier since there is no actual record of this document as well, but rather, it is extensively quoted in an even later work by al-Tabari who lived close to 200 years after the death of Ibn Ishaq. Suddenly we have a space of 350 years (close to 1000 C.E.) that cannot be properly documented.

With this in mind we can look back to about 620 C.E. when Mohammed, (or someone like him,) started on a campaign of dominance.

Here in less than 100 years Arab tribesmen, riding on horseback, emerged out of the Arabian deserts to conquer Syria, Mesopotamia, Persia, Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya and Spain.

Now the great question we have to ask here is whether the Arab armies were fuelled during their expansion by religious fever; or was the religion “spiced up” during the 350 years where it was not documented properly.

In other words, was this re-vamping of Islam the manipulations of a politically dominant group whose aim was to establish a religious justification for Arab imperialism?

Or was it based on a religion that advocated the expansion of its ideals by force?

Don’t forget, during the first 200 years of this great expansion Arab conquerors were a minority against a non-Moslem majority.

Then, once the Arabs had acquired a sizable empire—a coherent religion was necessary in order to hold that empire together.

(Note: in the long run, over the centuries, the main purpose of any religion, once it had gone beyond the “sect” stage, was to perpetuate itself and also act as a glue to hold the empire together.)

So once again, was the religion in place and acting as the fuel for Arab hegemony, or was it the glue that was manufactured “after the fact” to hold the whole empire together.

This is a question that will never be properly answered - as it is now lost in the mists of time.

However, we can draw certain inferences from it.

One of the facts that we have to consider is that while Christianity was founded on the premise of “love” for others, the main driving force behind Islam is that it was bound up in war and aggression from its very inception.

As a result, no matter how close or far from the intended message of the Koran it was, portions of it were always used to justify an Arab extremist and expansionist view.

History has now given us an almost unbroken string of militant Islamic movements from the “Assassins” of the 11th-12th century to the Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers.

(Even if he is technically a Persian and not Arab.)

The crusades were the first catalyst that got Islam to “rally round the flag” in Middle East terms and the second was the Mongol invasion shortly after.

Arab society became full of hatred to both Eastern and Western invaders. Many lives were lost and cultures destroyed before the infidels were defeated by the religiously mobilized Islamic armies.

The early result of this hatred was the emergence of Ibn-Taymeyah as one of the first Arab extremists. He was born in 1263 C. E. during the Mongol invasion and died in jail for his extremist views in 1328 C.E.

During his lifetime, almost all of the main Islamic schools of theology (to their credit) rejected his extremist views and he was constantly at odds with the authorities, but had a great and loyal following among the masses.

This seems to have set the tone for the following centuries with constant upheaval among theologians and clergy. (Much the same as in the early Christian church)

One of the modern day results of this dissension in the religion was the establishment of Wahhabism in the mid part of the sixteenth century.

This brand of ultra-conservative Islam, which we now loosely call fundamentalism, was established by Mahammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab around 1715.

Mahammad ibn ‘Abd Al-Wahhab’s ideas spread amongst the villagers of Dar’iyya and were adopted by their chief, Mahammad ibn Su’ud.

Those who accepted his ideals, which were termed Wahhabiyya, were called Wahhabis.

Al-Wahhab was very aware of the fact that he was not a mere preacher but the leader of a movement that sought to effect a real change in society.

Like all practical social reformers, he was convinced of the necessity of power for the realization of the goals that he advocated.

Unfortunately, like so many before him, he mistakenly turned the Divine message from God “outward” to try and influence others instead of turning it “inward” to effect personal betterment as he was supposed to.

Islam makes the same mistake that Christianity and most other religions make.

That is taking the “message” of God and applying it outwardly against people who are not in sync with their own personal idea of how things should be.

Rather, we should all be turning the message inward and changing ourselves for the better.

In other words our goal is to change “ourselves,” not to “get others to do what we think is best for them!”

*Take God’s message and turn it inward to attain a state of grace.

*Turn it outward to control others and it becomes corrupted.

*Lead by example; do not use the example to lead!

The Wahhabis main practitioners were the Bedouin tribes in the deserts of what is now Saudi Arabia.

The Wahhabis point of view is that anyone who does not follow their particular brand of Islam is a disbeliever and infidel.

As they increased in number, Wahhabism was firmly established by 1737 C.E.

It now forms the basis for most of the religious and political life in Saudi Arabia, and by extension of their money and influence, other areas of the Middle East.

It has slowly become the standard by which a lot of Islam is being held accountable to.

TOMORROW: The Arab Muslim

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com

The Plain Truth About God

A serialization of the book, The Plain Truth About God.

Chapter 11. Jihad Inc.

After the Prophets death however, the growing population of his followers found that a great many problems of religious and community life were arising. Problems to which there was no specific guidance in the Koran!

Guidance was therefore sought in the “Traditions” as to what the Prophet had said and done. (Or, was reported to have said and done.)

This vast accumulation of genuine, partly genuine, and often quite spurious traditions was digested into the collections of Hadith, six of which are considered the canonical collections.

It is well known to Muslims that much of the Hadith material was spurious. But, for the study of Islam even those traditions, which the community invented and attributed to Muhammad, have their value!

Often as much value as those that may actually have come down from him.

One such rule is provided in the Shariah, which is in the first instance the Koran.

In the second instance comes the Hadith, or “The Traditions,” and the third is “Ijma,” which is the consensus of the community.

The fourth instance relies on Giyas, which is the application of analogical reasoning to the other three sources for the deduction of new rules.

This combination of rules starting with the Shariah combines to form a religion that is supposed to be open to revision. Yet it is structured in such a way as to give adherents a set of guidelines on the method of proper conduct.

Unfortunately, due to the very nature of Islam with the traditions and consensus of the community playing such a vital part, the stagnation of the creed is all but assured.

There is great comfort amongst the faithful in the structured environment of Islam.
It places importance in the observance of daily routine and ritual.

This, combined with the strong family and social ties (tribal) that are encouraged, makes for a religion that is both vital and dynamic in its zealousness, while at the same time fostering a strong inertia and resistance to change from outside sources.

The main obstacle to growth and development in Islam is the overwhelming sense that there is absolutely no need for change. In fact, by its very nature, Islam preaches that it is complete and fully developed as the personal word of God.

This has also been the case in the Christian church and as such we have religions that are stuck in the nineteenth century in the case of Christianity, (both Protestant and Catholic) and the twelfth century in the case of Islam.

Where we have the conflict with most Christian and Muslim fundamentalists is that the answer to these criticisms will always be met with the question; “Well what’s the matter with that?”

In answer to that question we have to remember that in religious terms the path to good living is directed and regulated by the Koran.

On the other hand, when we talk about Shariah law there is no uniform opinion among Muslims on how this law is to be understood or applied.

Traditional authorities, beginning in the time shortly after Muhammad, viewed holy law as the revealed will of God and subordinated politics to holy decree.

Historically however, it was politics (tribal or otherwise) that invariable shaped Islamic law and led to complex discourse on a subject that was contentious on the surface but at its base rather simple.

The religious precepts are pretty straightforward, but the task of explaining them and choosing a method for their application is left in human hands.

This means they are automatically constrained by human limitations.

(Perhaps what Islam needs is a “Reformation” along the same lines as the upheaval of the Catholic Church by Martin Luther.)

On top of this, Muslims became politically divided early in their history with the division into the Shiite and Sunni sects (see below) and that oriented their respective understandings of the law and its applications.

After Muhammad’s death, Islam also got off to a rocky start when warfare was used to spread the faith and three of the first four Caliphs died by violence.

The fourth Caliph, Ali, was a cousin of Muhammad and his followers then tore the community in two by claiming that Ali should have been the first caliph by virtue of his blood ties to Muhammad.

These people came to be known as the Shi’a or Shiite sect while the great majority of the followers of Muhammad, who claim that succession does not rely on blood ties, are known today as the Sunni.

A great many differences exist to this day between these two main sects of Islam, and the distinctions go far deeper than just who should have succeeded Muhammad.

In fact, in the interpretation of the Koran itself, there were already differences between the sects.

There were passages that briefly summarized the things a Muslim should believe. These were too brief however, to be sufficient. And they were also too bare to be satisfying.

Because of this, we find different “creedal statements” circulating amongst the communities of both the Shiite and Sunni’s, as well as amongst the Sufi. (Who are mystical branches of Islam.)

These became the subject of discussion and commentary until in time they grew into different Islamic theologies and a Muslim science of dogmatism.

One result of this was that Islam developed its heretical sects, and so part of the task was to distinguish orthodox belief and practice as opposed to various schools of heretical teaching.

This led to a condition within the faith where almost anyone could at one time or another consider a person of another sect to be a non-believer and heretic.

The similarity between this and the situation between the Catholics and Protestants is not mere coincidence but the result of the schisms that can develop between different groups of even similar beliefs!

As we said, Islam became highly divisive right from its inception when it split into the Sunni, Shiite, and Sufi sects. Add to this the fact that Islam was spread through war and conflict as opposed to the philosophy of “love thy neighbor” that was the foundation of Christianity, and we have a religion that is ripe for dissention and conflict.

On top of the divisiveness amongst the practitioners of Islam, we can see how the faith slides still further with the triumph of fundamentalist interpretations of the Koran in the 11th century.

This resulted in the triggering of major conflicts amongst the population of the region and the gradual decline of Islamic, and then by default, Arab civilization.

Now the word “fundamentalist” was originally used in a broad sense to describe the American Protestant movement of the late nineteenth century in opposition to modernist tendencies in American religious and secular life.

The term itself is derived from a series of works, “The Fundamentals,” which was published in the U.S.A. in 1909.

However, this return to the fundamentals of a religion and a rejection of secularism was soon discovered to be a worldwide phenomenon.

There are today many groups that have organized themselves in such a way as to find alternatives to secularism! There are fundamentalist Jews, fundamentalist Buddhists, fundamentalist Hindus and so on.

However, it’s the Muslim fundamentalists who are most in the Western news.

Allan W Janssen is the author of the book The Plain Truth About God (What the mainstream religions don't want you to know!) and is available at the web site www.God-101.com

Visit the blog "Perspective" at http://God-101.blogspot.com