The Roots of Islamic Reform

[GeoffP]

I think what SG was driving at was that rationality results more often in a progression from ignorance to understanding. Whether or not rationality as a personal philosophy means greater understanding is debatable; it would be a given that applied, practical rationality leads to greater knowledge. There seems to be some hair-splitting here.

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM, I still don't understand what you're getting at.

if the gap between your expectations and reality is too wide it may lead to extremism. It depends on how idealistic you are.

e.g. if you are trapped in a society where the reality is completely against your expectations, you could be a realist (move to some place else) or an idealist (try to change the society).

The more you are convinced it is the right thing for everybody, the more likely you are to be an extremist.

 

[lightgigantic]

if the gap between your expectations and reality is too wide it may lead to extremism. It depends on how idealistic you are.

e.g. if you are trapped in a society where the reality is completely against your expectations, you could be a realist (move to some place else) or an idealist (try to change the society).

The more you are convinced it is the right thing for everybody, the more likely you are to be an extremist.

is such "extremism" (by such a definition) an inferior platform of existence compared to a "non-extremist"?
(its kind of addressing issues whether there are axiomatic values)

 

[S.A.M.]

is such "extremism" (by such a definition) an inferior platform of existence compared to a "non-extremist"?
(its kind of addressing issues whether there are axiomatic values)

I define extremism as one where people are willing to take drastic measures (war, revolution, uprising, coups, resistance) to achieve what they want.

Sometimes even a simple thing as going to protest in a march can end badly if the other side is willing to use violence for suppression. In that case, are you willing to stand up again? Take action for resistance? I differentiate a thinker from a doer.

A thinker may not have violence as part of the equation but he/she can rarely predict how a doer will interpret it.

 

[iceaura]

All opinions are ultimately colored by base ideology, which is dependent on social security and education

Some are better informed and better thought out than others, right? Ideologies, as well as opinions ?

Somewhere in here is a completely bogus contrast of an alleged "hyper-individualism" of the West (Voltaire's bastard child Lenin, emphasizing individualism ?) with an equally baseless "common good" of Islam.

And the consequences of sectarian schism among fundie theocrats are not anarchy, unless the Taliban is someone's idea of anarchism. They're chaos and war.

 

[lightgigantic]

I define extremism as one where people are willing to take drastic measures (war, revolution, uprising, coups, resistance) to achieve what they want.

Sometimes even a simple thing as going to protest in a march can end badly if the other side is willing to use violence for suppression. In that case, are you willing to stand up again? Take action for resistance? I differentiate a thinker from a doer.

A thinker may not have violence as part of the equation but he/she can rarely predict how a doer will interpret it.

so is it case that the "extremist doer" is operating on a lower platform than a "non-extremist thinker"? (or vice versa)

or is it the case lower or greater platforms are addressed by examining the value in contention?

 

[S.A.M.]

And the consequences of sectarian schism among fundie theocrats are not anarchy, unless the Taliban is someone's idea of anarchism. They're chaos and war.

Because of course you have a much better picture of what reality should be, based on your reasoning, and you absolutely know it is better than what they think it should be.

 

[S.A.M.]

so is it case that the "extremist doer" is operating on a lower platform than a "non-extremist thinker"? (or vice versa)

or is it the case lower or greater platforms are addressed by examining the value in contention?

Examine the value based on what?

Isn't it perfectly clear that mine has to be better than yours?

 

[lightgigantic]

Examine the value based on what?

Isn't it perfectly clear that mine has to be better than yours?

so there is no way to establish any sort of hierarchical assessment of values?

or is it that there is no way to establish any sort of hierarchical assessment of values amongst a certain class of individual?

 

[S.A.M.]

so there is no way to establish any sort of hierarchical assessment of values?

or is it that there is no way to establish any sort of hierarchical assessment of values amongst a certain class of individual?

Majority wins? Or majority power wins?

 

[lightgigantic]

Majority wins? Or majority power wins?

we are led to believe that if it involves fooling, not over all of the people all of the time .....

 

[S.A.M.]

we are led to believe that if it involves fooling, not over all of the people all of the time .....

There is always politics. :shrug:

Do you see the resemblance between the role of Islamic traditionalists and role of Brahmin priests in defining orthodoxy?

Though the reform movements in Hinduism ie Buddhism, Jainism, Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, were more successful than the parallel movements in Islam (ie Sufism), possibly due to the varna system?

 

[iceaura]

And the consequences of sectarian schism among fundie theocrats are not anarchy, unless the Taliban is someone's idea of anarchism. They're chaos and war. ”

Because of course you have a much better picture of what reality should be, based on your reasoning, and you absolutely know it is better than what they think it should be.

? What are you talking about ?

What reality should be ?

Do you agree with that analysis you posted, that assigned the flaw of "hyper-individualism" to Leninism ? Fascism ? All the events of reaction to what Voltaire, btw, did not start ?

 

[lightgigantic]

There is always politics. :shrug:

Do you see the resemblance between the role of Islamic traditionalists and role of Brahmin priests in defining orthodoxy?

certainly - traditionally they uphold "essential" practices - when they slip from such standards of "essence" they become mere "traditionalists" (aka institutionalists)

Though the reform movements in Hinduism ie Buddhism, Jainism, Arya Samaj, Brahmo Samaj, were more successful than the parallel movements in Islam (ie Sufism), possibly due to the varna system?

thats a complex issue - maybe you could give some criteria for determining "success" ...

 

[S.A.M.]

certainly - traditionally they uphold "essential" practices - when they slip from such standards of "essence" they become mere "traditionalists" (aka institutionalists)

Hmm so you think traditionalists are by definition, institutionalised?

Thats an interesting notion. The article discusses how after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the clergy was non-participative for two centuries because without a social structure that recognised their contribution, they became essentially irrelevant.

thats a complex issue - maybe you could give some criteria for determining "success" ...

I would say a significant impact on "social reform", though of course my criteria are entirely subjective.

 

[S.A.M.]

? What are you talking about ?

What reality should be ?

Hmm yes of course. Do you see your civil war or revolution as chaos, for instance?

 

[lightgigantic]

Hmm so you think traditionalists are by definition, institutionalised?

certainly - if there is no institution, there is nothing for the next generation to grasp (or alternatively, society becomes very turbulent due to being repeatedly reformed by the latest messaih)

Thats an interesting notion. The article discusses how after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, the clergy was non-participative for two centuries because without a social structure that recognised their contribution, they became essentially irrelevant.

if they were non-participative, how did they survive for 200 years?

I would say a significant impact on "social reform", though of course my criteria are entirely subjective.

in that sense the varna system would be a contributing factor since social reform becomes easier through designated communities - for instance breaking the 4 varnas into 4 areas of social concern (intellectualism, politics, commerce and livelihood) makes it easier to apply whatever measures are deemed appropriate (Oh you have intellectual social issues? - take it to the brahmins ... Oh you have commercial social issues? - take it to the vaisyas etc etc)

Interestingly, the collapse of the varna system (which has been transpiring for quite a few centuries now) is due to blurring the distinct pursuits - you know, sons of brahmins going off to become software engineers - Hence many of todays "brahmins" are influenced by livelihood social issues more so than intellectual ones

 

[S.A.M.]

certainly - if there is no institution, there is nothing for the next generation to grasp (or alternatively, society becomes very turbulent due to being repeatedly reformed by the latest messaih)

Hmm, so a centralised system is more effective? But doesn't that predispose to stagnation and resistance to social flexibility? I would presume that if there was no adaptation to social changes, it would make the orthodox more prone to narrower definitions of right and wrong?

if they were non-participative, how did they survive for 200 years?

Just supported the politcal leaders they were under I guess. Traditionalists in Islam tend to consider revolution antagonistic to social order, which is why corrupt governments persevere, it is, I believe a remnant of the system of tribal loyalty going back to their distant past, when they lived in small cabals governed by a system of honor.

in that sense the varna system would be a contributing factor since social reform becomes easier through designated communities - for instance breaking the 4 varnas into 4 areas of social concern (intellectualism, politics, commerce and livelihood) makes it easier to apply whatever measures are deemed appropriate (Oh you have intellectual social issues? - take it to the brahmins ... Oh you have commercial social issues? - take it to the vaisyas etc etc)
Interestingly, the collapse of the varna system (which has been transpiring for quite a few centuries now) is due to blurring the distinct pursuits - you know, sons of brahmins going off to become software engineers - Hence many of todays "brahmins" are influenced by livelihood social issues more so than intellectual ones

But wasn't that what the varna system was meant to be originally? A flexible social class, not a fixed caste? Would that infer that Hinduism too is slowly changing back to its roots?

 

[lightgigantic]

Hmm, so a centralised system is more effective?

centralized or not, its more important to be standardized - for instance before the states standardized medical practice it was full of quacks and magic tonics

But doesn't that predispose to stagnation and resistance to social flexibility? I would presume that if there was no adaptation to social changes, it would make the orthodox more prone to narrower definitions of right and wrong?

hence a necessary yet vastly unpopular task of institutions is to constantly re-evaluate their status to see if they are on track, and never think "now that we have finished all the work, ...."

if the institution doesn't make the grade, it goes out of office, even if it takes quite a long time to get the ghost out of the machine (eg Russian communism)

Just supported the politcal leaders they were under I guess. Traditionalists in Islam tend to consider revolution antagonistic to social order, which is why corrupt governments persevere, it is, I believe a remnant of the system of tribal loyalty going back to their distant past, when they lived in small cabals governed by a system of honor.

I was not aware that such a view of non-revolution existed - admittedly I was drawing on the medieval accounts of muslim kings breaking treaties amongst themselves when the ink was barely dry (as opposed to any pertinent current social observation).

It seems industrial warfare has made democracy (or at least," if enough people don't like you sooner or later you go down") the only tenable political system (even going out in public without a team of body guards can be dangerous for a politician - what to speak of leading with displays of bravado on the battlefield)- successful democracy relies on having a well informed voting public to enable the cream to float to the top - thus it seems that poorly functioning political systems of this world can be traced to a lack of education (or persecution of students, intelligentsia, etc)

But wasn't that what the varna system was meant to be originally? A flexible social class, not a fixed caste? Would that infer that Hinduism too is slowly changing back to its roots?

the varna system works by designations of quality and activity (guna and karma) - more recently the notion of janma (birthright) has been introduced, which kind of spoiled the whole thing (imagine if you had the sons of doctors claiming to be qualified medical practitioners on the basis of their birth)

The current problem is not so much that the sons of brahmins are endeavouring wholeheartedly in issues of sudras and vaisyas, but that they continue to hold themselves as properly qualified brahmins.

IOW the very meaning of a brahmin (or any other varna) has been commonly reduced to issues of janma, despite only references to guna and karma in vedic literature. If this trend continues it will be just like the redundant feudal titles that still exist in Britain

 

[Arsalan]

The roots of Islamic reform are in Islam itself, namely the Mujaddids.