[AP]
After the so called "Jan. 25 Revolution" in Egypt (Lotus Revolution) and its sisters in Tinusia, (Jasmine Revolution), Lybia (Unkown flower revolution), The ordinary people in these countries and the west in general thought it is indeed a revolutionary spring train heading directly to the paradise of democracy, liberty, equality, justic and all that.. Later, when the islamists came to power, people started to wonder whether it is really a Arab spring or it is an Islamic Spring?!.. The majority of people (normal and ordinary people) became nervously, watching and waiting to see the fate of these revolutions and the future of their countries, rulled by the Islamists. So many were astonished by their arriveal to power as if it happened suddenly!
The Islamists showed a big failure in running the country, their only concern is to dominate every joint in the state and expand their influence in every corner more than finding solutions for tons of economical and poilitical problems..
Their voices became more loud, with more frown faces. Even more radical voices started to appear in the scene. Voices that considered "over" extreme, even for the ordinary Muslims.. Many assumed that the Islamic state is coming and the Islamic monster is coming back to dominate.
In the other side of this Islamic awakeness/ scream, was the fact that atheism is spreading in a country like Egypt. various increase of atheists and non-religious who have got enough of the sweetness of Islam and the inspiration of its Sheiks!. It's quite hard to estimate a specific number for many reasons.
The thing that drew a big logical question and wondering whether it's really an awakeness of Islam or it's compleltely different than it seems and what Islamists are trying to announce; and it's actually a begining for the demise of Islam as if it didn't rise but to fall the last fall.
Or it's just a stain on Islam and just a breakdown for the image of its spokemen and it's a begining for a revolution on its clericks, Islam itself is staying, a revolution that would take the extreme side and keep the "beautiful and tolerent" Islam?!
Those who knew Islam well and read history, know that from the begining, Islam has proved that it's an enermy for civilization, agaisnt human rights, against life itself, it hates science (and we're already living in the age of science and thanks to it) and fighting it, has a comlicated complex with the civic, modern state (the only successful model), but has its own concept about a state based in Sharia, terroristic laws and primitive tools, failed to catch the spirit of our age. the only difference in it that it never was suitable to be applied, all the examples and experiments tried to apply it are scary and absurd (Afganstan, Somalia, Suadi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Sudan ... )
All the attempts and efforts to "modernize" and "makeup" it to give some colours to it, ended to big failure and became just academic studies or specialized books, nobody read them but those don't get bored of reading. This reflects another big problem in islam; it's so stubborn to accept any renewal yet it's so fragile religion, no solution to fix part of it without destroy all of it.
Even those who tried to renew and civilize it, considered heresies; the skeptic and philosophical way they followed, was hard anyway to reach the ordinary Muslim, who was raised and brought up to follow the text blindly and the sanctity of using mind in it, who hasn't read any book except Quran, and Hadith and perhaps some interpretations (tafseer), these books basically disable his mind of thinking.
However, it wasn't that weird when those "renewers" were accused of apostasy and even got killed them because they simply showed how Islam is so fragile and weak.
The ordinary Muslim preferred to consider perosns like "M. Elghazali" or "M. Elshaarawy" or "Amr Khaled" or "Mostafa Mahmooud" and others to be the real renewers of Islam; the only thing they renewed was the language of speech and replacing the old language with ligher and easier one, anything else stayed the same.
"A.Sabour Shahine", a university professor and muslim clerik tried to fix the problem of story of creation as quran tells it and to reconcile it with Darwinism, in his book "Adam, My father" (some called him "Dicartes of Islam), he said that there was another kind of mankind existed before Adam but Adam himself ...
Shahine himself accused "Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid" of apostasy as long with Algghazali who accused Farag Fouda by the same and was defending his assaisne and blessing him for protecting Islam from such thoughts!!
ironically, Shahine himself became accused of the same thing for his book, that Islamic phenomenon since ever; not allowed to use mind with the text !!
Anyway, by time and thanks to open media and internet, people discovered that even those clerics who were considered tolerents and renewers, that they're not much different than other radical clerics!
Another confusing question came to surface; what if this radical Islam is the right Islam?! those radical Muslims don't do anything but to apply the ideology of Islam literrally as 'Muhamed' and his friends were doing and this Jihadism, Salfism isn't an option in Islam but it's actually the real life style of a real Muslim?!
And why, after more than 1400 years, Islam failed to present a successful experiment or to better the life of people?!
The thing that drew a big logical question and wondering whether it's really an awakeness of Islam or it's compleltely different than it seems and what Islamists are trying to announce; and it's actually a begining for the demise of Islam as if it didn't rise but to fall the last fall.
Or it's just a stain on Islam and just a breakdown for the image of its spokemen and it's a begining for a revolution on its clericks, Islam itself is staying, a revolution that would take the extreme side and keep the "beautiful and tolerent" Islam?!
Those who knew Islam well and read history, know that from the begining, Islam has proved that it's an enermy for civilization, agaisnt human rights, against life itself, it hates science (and we're already living in the age of science and thanks to it) and fighting it, has a comlicated complex with the civic, modern state (the only successful model), but has its own concept about a state based in Sharia, terroristic laws and primitive tools, failed to catch the spirit of our age. the only difference in it that it never was suitable to be applied, all the examples and experiments tried to apply it are scary and absurd (Afganstan, Somalia, Suadi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Sudan ... )
All the attempts and efforts to "modernize" and "makeup" it to give some colours to it, ended to big failure and became just academic studies or specialized books, nobody read them but those don't get bored of reading. This reflects another big problem in islam; it's so stubborn to accept any renewal yet it's so fragile religion, no solution to fix part of it without destroy all of it.
Even those who tried to renew and civilize it, considered heresies; the skeptic and philosophical way they followed, was hard anyway to reach the ordinary Muslim, who was raised and brought up to follow the text blindly and the sanctity of using mind in it, who hasn't read any book except Quran, and Hadith and perhaps some interpretations (tafseer), these books basically disable his mind of thinking.
However, it wasn't that weird when those "renewers" were accused of apostasy and even got killed them because they simply showed how Islam is so fragile and weak.
The ordinary Muslim preferred to consider perosns like "M. Elghazali" or "M. Elshaarawy" or "Amr Khaled" or "Mostafa Mahmooud" and others to be the real renewers of Islam; the only thing they renewed was the language of speech and replacing the old language with ligher and easier one, anything else stayed the same.
"A.Sabour Shahine", a university professor and muslim clerik tried to fix the problem of story of creation as quran tells it and to reconcile it with Darwinism, in his book "Adam, My father" (some called him "Dicartes of Islam), he said that there was another kind of mankind existed before Adam but Adam himself ...
Shahine himself accused "Nasr Hamed Abu Zaid" of apostasy as long with Algghazali who accused Farag Fouda by the same and was defending his assaisne and blessing him for protecting Islam from such thoughts!!
ironically, Shahine himself became accused of the same thing for his book, that Islamic phenomenon since ever; not allowed to use mind with the text !!
Anyway, by time and thanks to open media and internet, people discovered that even those clerics who were considered tolerents and renewers, that they're not much different than other radical clerics!
Another confusing question came to surface; what if this radical Islam is the right Islam?! those radical Muslims don't do anything but to apply the ideology of Islam literrally as 'Muhamed' and his friends were doing and this Jihadism, Salfism isn't an option in Islam but it's actually the real life style of a real Muslim?!
And why, after more than 1400 years, Islam failed to present a successful experiment or to better the life of people?!
No comments:
Post a Comment