From: lhermi@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Lotfi Hermi)
Subject: Golden age of Islam vs Islamists utopianism (was Women in Islam)
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:59:31 GMT

In Article: 24902 of soc.culture.turkish hubey@pilot.njin.net (Hubey)
writes
>>>>>>

Ok. It seems that you are saying the the Islamic world had great
thinkers until about the 13th century. That would mean that the 
leaders and the scholars were open minded and willing to criticize
what they thought were ridiculous ideas that some overly
zealous people might have tried to pass off as the way that 
life should be because the Koran said so. If this was the case, then
we would expect at least some writings from that era pertaining to
the attitudes of the intellectual and political leaders of that era
about what life was about and how liberal they were. I'll provide
one below. 

<<<<<<<

Islamic civilization created people that can stand and say that: Yes, a 
just non-Moslem ruler is better than an un-just Muslim ruler - Ibn Taymiyya-"
He had to spend the rest of his life in jail for such a statement.  Yes, it 
produced people with croocked minds like Hallaj, and Ibn al-Arabi, Ma'arri, 
Ikhwan as-Safa, and so on.  Yet, it was tolerant enough to debate such people 
in Mosques, go and search for Abu Hanifa's debates with atheists and his famous
twenty questions.  It also produced people like Averros -Ibn Ruchd-, ibn 
al-khatib, Ibn-khaldun, and others who are very well known statesmen, and who 
paid prison time for their independent political thoughts.  People, like Ibn
Khaldun, who can stand and say that, by their very nature, scholars are not
good politicians, because they spend their lives in deductions, and derivation
of laws.  I just advice you to make a small trip to your local library and 
check by yourself, some of their books.

You add>>>>>>>

Now this is where problems start. Sunnah is supposed to fill in the
details of life that the Koran  gave only in broad brush strokes.

And how do we do this ? Of course, it already exists in codified form;
accretians of past n centuries. And how were people who gave this
codified law (Sharia) reach their conclusions ? By reading and
thinking of course. In order to accept that nothing in it can be
wrong and thus should not be changed, we have to accept that
these human beings who produced this were almost godly. They never
made mistakes, and in the infinite wisdom of their brains, they
looked accross the universe and looked forward in time to infinity.
Thus it is valid for every planet in the universe and until the end
of time, when the universe either collapses or keeps expanding
and dies its heat death.

If this is not true, then why is it impossible to say so?

How many people on this net ever said that the Sharia might be
changed? What kind of answers do people who suggest it receive?
>>>>>>

Well, the answer to this is simple.  There are parts of Charia which are fixed
and that cannot change, there are others which depend on the situations and
the conditions for them to be applied.  For example, in the time of Umar there 
was a big famine, Umar therefore stopped the rule of cutting the hand of the
theaf. Is is a breeching of the rules of Islam by Umar? Of course not.  Also,
Umar adopted some of the methods that the Persians used in their governments
does that constitute a violation if laws of charia? What happenedprior to the
13th century is that people accumulated so much information and got stuck with
it,  therefore they closed the door for Ijtihad, from that time on, there were
no innovation in the intellectual circles of the Muslims.  People who tried to
revolt against this 'Taqlid' concepts had to face their fates of imprisonment 
and alienation.  Nobody says that the Ulema, or scholars are holy men, that 
their words are intrinsic, that is of course silly.  As they say, Fatwa depends
on the situation, time and space for its application.  

>>>>>
It comes in a couple of flavors. They usuall amount to "There are
people who have studied this for N years, so don't get smart, kaffir."

It's a nice Catch-22. If you really did study for N years, they
could still find an old fogey who studied for N+1 years. 

Besides that the whole argument is ridiculous. There are plenty of
people in their 60's and 70's in the USA who have spoken, read
and written in English for many years. But there are many people
in their teens whose English is better.

Let's continue.
<<<<<<<<<

What are you trying to prove here.  This is really a silly argument and none of
the Muslim people buys it.  If it was a question of knowledge then, presumably,
Satan would be more knowledgeable than us, since he must have more knowledge 
than us, but he transgressed.  

>>>>>>>>>>>
<Silly joke deleted>

The account of Ibn Fadlan's travels can be found in English.
Anyone who is interested should check the library. I think the
copy I read was written by Crichton.
			   ^^^^^^^^^
Book is Eating of the Dead - I believe-
In it also he talks about what he calls the "filthy" Russian, in which
he describes their ways of living.
Care to supply page number and reasons Ibn fadhlan gave for his joke.

>>>>>>
What would happen to a man who told this story (joke) in public
today in Iran or Saudi Arabia ??? What would happen to the man
who wrote this story in a newspaper in those countries?
<<<<<<

Who said that Saudi Arabia or Iran represent the True state of Islam.  One
is a Monarchy, the other is a sectarian state. 

>>>>>>>
Who's going where ?? Do the people who post continuously about
what Islam means really think that they are pointing in the
direction of the Golden Era of Islam ? 
I don't think so. Many of these people probably would have
had jokes made about them in Baghdad around 900 AD by
people like Ibn Fadlan--maybe even the Caliph.
Let's see how many people call me what kinds of names now ?
<<<<<<<

You might know so much about Islam, I don't know but you seem very prejudiced
about it.  Islamists call for one thing and only one thing: leave your 
western paternalism on our lands.  We can manage our own affairs.  The golden
age of Islam was not during the time of the Abbasides and the Ummayades or even
the Turks, it was during the time of those desert mobs, who with their handful
of weapons brought two great empires to their knees. It is about self-deter-
mination.  I do not want to be an apologetic person, but there are so many
people who have tones of prejudices and are not ready to give them up.

Lotfi