Iran crisis
Altway
There appears to be a Political crisis in Iran. What do Muslims think about
what is happening there?
Answer:-
The fact is that most Iranians as in other so called Muslim countries are
not really Muslim except, perhaps in name. This is particularly the case
with the educated classes and the young students who have been exposed to
Western influence via the Internet. The Educational system is wholly
westernised and people are not receiving any Islamic education. The result
is that there is not much in depth knowledge and understanding of Islam.
But the government claims to be Muslim. It seems, however, that those who
have been educated in Islamic studies, a minority, tend to be old fashioned
and outdated - they have not kept up with modern developments in science,
technology, economic and cultural conditions and have not adapted Islam to
changing world conditions. They have not reinterpreted Islam in the light of
these developments, but follow the scholars and commentators of centuries
ago. But they still have influence among the majority of the less educated
people.
There is, therefore, an inevitable clash between the religious and the
secular section of the population.
It is evident that the kind of Political process Iran has is a mixture of
religious authoritarianism and Democracy taken from the West where
electioneering is a confrontational event because only one of the Political
parties gets all the power if it gets a majority of the vote though this
might be a small fraction of the whole population. The majority of the
population is then ignored. The political party that wins is the one that
can get the most financial support from the rich in order to mount
propaganda campaigns and can gain most publicity from the media which forms
public opinion. It is not real Democracy (government of the people) though
intense Western propaganda by those in whose interest it is claims to be so.
And the population in Western countries having been conditioned to this
state of affairs accepts it as not just inevitable but also good, to be
imposed on foreign people.
In Iran people have not been conditioned to accept this, and the conflicts
between the different points of view then inevitably erupts into
demonstrations and probably violence.
But there would have been no trouble at all if Iran had established a
Political system on Islamic principles where "mutual consultation" governed
all affairs. The type of Political system that should have been established
would have been something on the lines that was proposed in the articles
"Islamic Solutions". But we see that the publication of this was sabotaged.
We see the same kind of failures lead to troubles in Pakistan and will lead
to similar or worse troubles in Iraq and other Muslim countries.
We are living in a World that is undergoing a transitional period and the
process of adjustment to a balanced future is inevitably traumatic for
people trapped in habits that dull their intelligence. As predicted the
world must undergo a period of increasing troubles and suffering before real
reformation and spiritual awakening begins.
Hamid S. Aziz
DKleinecke
> The fact is that most Iranians as in other so called Muslim countries are
> not really Muslim except, perhaps in name.
Isn't that a bit excessive. It appears that you are not referring to
the non-trivial difference between Sunnis and Shi'ites, but rather to
the intensity of people's involvement in religion. It has always been
the case that most people in any religious community are rather weakly
involved - but that does not make them hypocrites or time-servers. I
feel sure that, if push came to shove, the Iranians would prove to be
very Muslim indeed.
> This is particularly the case
> with the educated classes and the young students who have been exposed to
> Western influence via the Internet. The Educational system is wholly
> westernised and people are not receiving any Islamic education. The resul=
t
> is that there is not much in depth knowledge and understanding of Islam.
Like people everywhere most Iranians do not trouble themselves with
dogma. They lead their lives in what they believe to be adequate
conformity to religion and culture.
> But the government claims to be Muslim.
Currently a government is considered Muslim if the rulers are Muslims.
Generally people waffle if asked about Turkey, but as far as I know
that is the only problem. But, of course, your statement is intended
in the opposite direction - you are concerned that governments claim
to be Muslim when you feel they are not.
> It seems, however, that those who
> have been educated in Islamic studies, a minority, tend to be old fashion=
ed
> and outdated - they have not kept up with modern developments in science,
> technology, economic and cultural conditions and have not adapted Islam t=
o
> changing world conditions. They have not reinterpreted Islam in the light=
of
> these developments, but follow the scholars and commentators of centuries
> ago. But they still have influence among the majority of the less educate=
d
> people.
I believe that, to most Muslims, this puts you outside normative
Islam. You have made a strong statement that innovation is what Islam
needs. Islam generally deplores conscious innovation.
> There is, therefore, an inevitable clash between the religious and the
> secular section of the population.
It has been argued that in Iran the reactionary policies that seem to
have been imposed for religious reasons are really good old-fashioned
secular power politics. That the old-wealth is using religion to
control populist changes. Karl Marx would understand. It is my
understanding that Iranian religious leaders are almost all members of
old wealthy families (as it was in the heyday of the Catholic Church
in Europe - a man not born to the nobility had little chance of
becoming a bishop).
I will skip your routine denunciation of western democracy.
And I submit that your political proposals were probably correctly
rejected by the moderator as having no relation to reality in terms of
either politics or Islam.
The thing that needs to be kept in mind is that there is NO Islamic
theory of government. This is not a disaster (neither is there a
Christian one). The Qur'an does not present us with any notion of
government, apart from a certain number of things that should be done
which only a government can do. for example, cut off the hand of a
thief. But it gives no hint about organization.
I believe the traditional explanation is that no organization was
needed because the community was relatively small (never more than a
few tens of thousands of people at the most) and Rasul Allah ruled
them by common consent.
Sunni tradition is unanimous that Rasul Allah made no provision for
leadership after his death. I believe we can discount the Shi'ite
stories about 'Ali being appointed. This fact can be explained by
revisionists like me as being because Rasul Allah never ruled anything
(all the traditions being mere legend) but traditionalists have mostly
just ignored the small oversight.
But as a consequence there is no chain of authority leading to any
kind of government. Perhaps an islamic theory of government is needed
but I cannot see how one could ever be agreed upon. I think Islam
should go along with Christianity and settle for secular governments -
hopefully good honest ones.
In other words Iran needs only to remove the overt religious control
(and to hold honest elections).
da...@untiredwithloving.org
So what is the difference between you and Robert Houghton?
Are you now even more ignoramus than that drahcir?
Did anyone from Iran ask you for commentary about their spiritual
ailments?
Can you read the Iranian media/books in Farsi? Did you live amongst
the Iranians? Do you even care about the Iranians?
Shouldn't the old men of Muslims stay at home, silent, keeping the
Dhikr so that our youth not to lose their way? Or should these old
Muslim men be like the shameless vulgar microphone worshipers of US
media who yearn for any opportunity to talk nonsense and falsehood?
Dara
On Jun 21, 2:55=A0am, "Altway" <alt...@binternet.com> wrote:
> Question:-
>
> There appears to be a Political crisis in Iran. What do Muslims think abo=
ut
> what is happening there?
>
> Answer:-
>
> The fact is that most Iranians as in other so called Muslim countries are
> not really Muslim except, perhaps in name. This is particularly the case
> with the educated classes and the young students who have been exposed to
> Western influence via the Internet. The Educational system is wholly
> westernised and people are not receiving any Islamic education. The resul=
t
> is that there is not much in depth knowledge and understanding of Islam.
> But the government claims to be Muslim. It seems, however, that those who
> have been educated in Islamic studies, a minority, tend to be old fashion=
ed
> and outdated - they have not kept up with modern developments in science,
> technology, economic and cultural conditions and have not adapted Islam t=
o
> changing world conditions. They have not reinterpreted Islam in the light=
of
> these developments, but follow the scholars and commentators of centuries
> ago. But they still have influence among the majority of the less educate=
d
> people.
> There is, therefore, an inevitable clash between the religious and the
> secular section of the population.
>
> It is evident that the kind of Political process Iran has is a mixture of
> religious authoritarianism and Democracy taken from the West where
> electioneering is a confrontational event because only one of the Politic=
al
> parties gets all the power if it gets a majority of the vote though this
> might be a small fraction of the whole population. The majority of the
> population is then ignored. The political party that wins is the one that
> can get the most financial support from the rich in order to mount
> propaganda campaigns and can gain most publicity from the media which for=
ms
> public opinion. It is not real Democracy (government of the people) thoug=
h
> intense Western propaganda by those in whose interest it is claims to be =
so.
> And the population in Western countries having been conditioned to this
> state of affairs accepts it as not just inevitable but also good, to be
> imposed on foreign people.
> In Iran people have not been conditioned to accept this, and the conflict=
s
> between the different points of view then inevitably erupts into
> demonstrations and probably violence.
> But there would have been no trouble at all if Iran had established a
> Political system on Islamic principles where "mutual consultation" govern=
ed
> all affairs. The type of Political system that should have been establish=
ed
> would have been something on the lines that was proposed in the articles
> "Islamic Solutions". =A0But we see that the publication of this was sabot=
aged.
>
> We see the same kind of failures lead to troubles in Pakistan and will le=
ad
> to similar or worse troubles in Iraq and other Muslim countries.
> We are living in a World that is undergoing a transitional period and the
> process of adjustment to a balanced future is inevitably traumatic for
> people trapped in habits that dull their intelligence. As predicted the
> world must undergo a period of increasing troubles and suffering before r=
eal
Altway
<da...@untiredwithloving.org> wrote
> Salaam Hamid
> So what is the difference between you and Robert Houghton?
> Are you now even more ignoramus than that drahcir?
Comment:-
Salaam Dara,
Thanks for your comments.
I merely keep my ears and eyes and mind open
and try to assess things in the world, both in Muslim and non-Muslim
countries.
But yes I have my limitations.
Perhaps you know more about what is going on in Iran
and will let us know instead of simply attacking.
Hamid S. Aziz
sam1528
> <d...@untiredwithloving.org> wrote
Assalamualaikum Bro Hamid ,
I too am interested in what is going on in Iran. Looking
at the polls , Ahmadinejad garnered 62.6 percent of the
votes which is about the same as the 61.69 percent he
received in the final count of the 2005 presidential
election
My take , the voting pattern is status quo. Wonder why
BBC and all claim rigging of the polls. The stats does
not reflect such.
Maybe someone who has first hand info would care to comment.
sam1528
Altway
"sam1528" <sam...@hotmail.com> wrote
> Assalamualaikum Bro Hamid ,
> I too am interested in what is going on in Iran. Looking
at the polls , Ahmadinejad garnered 62.6 percent of the
votes which is about the same as the 61.69 percent he
received in the final count of the 2005 presidential
election
> My take , the voting pattern is status quo. Wonder why
BBC and all claim rigging of the polls. The stats does
not reflect such.
Comment:-
See my comments on "Question about Egypt"
The fact, of course, is that Muslim countries are militarily weak
while the West, particularly the USA is militarily very strong.
So Muslim countries have to toe the Western interests lest they
be destroyed like Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Western policy is to keep them divided and weak and prevent them
from getting nuclear weapons while they themselves insist on keeping them as
"deterrents". But Muslim countries must not have "deterrents"!
However, if the Muslims were not so degenerate and did not fight each other
but combined together they would make a formidable force that could
defend themselves and begin to climb the ladder of development once more.
It cannot happen of course "until they change that which is in their
hearts".
Hamid S. Aziz