• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Turkey in radical revision of Islamic texts

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DarkThinker

Platinum Member
Mar 17, 2007
2,823
0
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Originally posted by: palehorse74
....
YAYyyy for 1000 more years of unchecked Islamic fanaticism!! YaayyyyyYYY!!
Silence blood sucking Zionist, you are the last person to label people as extremists or fanatical, understand?
I'm not a Zionist. In fact, I personally believe all organized religion is ridiculous.

What makes you think that I'm a Zionist?
That's a good one, dude your like a spokesman to Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affaits to Anandtech Forums or something...ask them hell they might even say yes hehe

Oh and silly palehorse Zionism is not a religion....

I, for one, hope that genuinely moderate Muslims are more willing to listen to Turkey's good ideas than the appropriately named Mr. DarkThinker here...

Isnaad has never gone far enough, and its use is much too subjective in nature to EVER fix the Hadith mess.
Fix the Hadith mess? I am sure you have been very concerned about this issue, but please explain to me what the problem is from your POV oh great Sheikh pale face I am all ears to your wisdom.......

, and the article in the OP, have done a fantastic job describing all of the problems inherent in the Hadiths, and the silly in which they were derived and perpetuated throughout the centuries.

They are a large part of the reason many fanatical Muslim sects are stuck in the 7th century -- so-called "fundamentalists" often refer to the most extreme Hadiths as the justification for much of their hatred and hostilities.

Any group of Muslims willing to take the risk of confronting that mess gets a big :thumbsup: from me! Anyone who resists such moderation and modernization? Well, they become suspect...


Oh I see, so those who resist the new push of ideology become some new type of terrorists? OR maybe mental insurgents? :D

Also, Haddiths of an extreme nature usually if not always have a very weak to NO Isnaad indicating something fishy to begin with. As I have seen many times before. It's only whatever group that adopts such haddiths fault for not taking it's Isnaad into consideration and consulting Scholars with solid background in Haddith examining.

BTW Isnaad is never to be taken as an absolute indicator and God knows best, but it's just a good indicator of truth not a guaranteeing and necessary factor.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: DarkThinker
Originally posted by: palehorse74
....
YAYyyy for 1000 more years of unchecked Islamic fanaticism!! YaayyyyyYYY!!
Silence blood sucking Zionist, you are the last person to label people as extremists or fanatical, understand?
I'm not a Zionist. In fact, I personally believe all organized religion is ridiculous.

What makes you think that I'm a Zionist?
That's a good one, dude your like a spokesman to Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affaits to Anandtech Forums or something...ask them hell they might even say yes hehe

Oh and silly palehorse Zionism is not a religion....
Trust me, I know what a Zionist is; and I've never met one who is also a Deist, like me.

I do not "speak" for Israel, I simply agree with them on most issues. I've also traveled there and seen most of those issues first-hand -- not to mention the hawt Israeli women and great parties! ;)

Oh I see, so those who resist the new push of ideology become some new type of terrorists? OR maybe mental insurgents? :D

Also, Haddiths of an extreme nature usually if not always have a very weak to NO Isnaad indicating something fishy to begin with. As I have seen many times before. It's only whatever group that adopts such haddiths fault for not taking it's Isnaad into consideration and consulting Scholars with solid background in Haddith examining.

BTW Isnaad is never to be taken as an absolute indicator and God knows best, but it's just a good indicator of truth not a guaranteeing and necessary factor.
We've been over this already, Isnaad is too subjective; and, as we can see, it hasn't done jackshit to eliminate the fanaticism -- too many Imams still reference the fanatical Hadiths throughout the Islamic world.

If I were a Muslim, I would take those who are tying to eradicate the fanaticism very seriously, which is exactly what Turkey is trying to do by issuing a modern and moderate version of the Hadiths.

The goal here should be to get their new book into as many Muslims' hands as humanly possible.
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,207
65
91
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: Squisher
I wonder if the Turks might be willing to say that they were at least sorry for trying to wipe my Armenian ancestors off the face of the globe?
irrelevant
I guess it's irrelevant to someone who didn't have to sit around as a child and hear your aunt talk about being gang raped by the turks after they killed her husband and threw two of her children off the cliff.

Your sympathy is appreciated, thanks for the effort.



The gist of what I'm trying to say is that I'm reluctant to trust the Turks.

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: Squisher
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: Squisher
I wonder if the Turks might be willing to say that they were at least sorry for trying to wipe my Armenian ancestors off the face of the globe?
irrelevant
I guess it's irrelevant to someone who didn't have to sit around as a child and hear your aunt talk about being gang raped by the turks after they killed her husband and threw two of her children off the cliff.

Your sympathy is appreciated, thanks for the effort.

The gist of what I'm trying to say is that I'm reluctant to trust the Turks.
ahhh, deep-rooted historical hatred is just so juicy, isn't it? the way it melts in your mouth.. mmm... sooo good!

:roll:
 

Squisher

Lifer
Aug 17, 2000
21,207
65
91
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: Squisher
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: Squisher
I wonder if the Turks might be willing to say that they were at least sorry for trying to wipe my Armenian ancestors off the face of the globe?
irrelevant
I guess it's irrelevant to someone who didn't have to sit around as a child and hear your aunt talk about being gang raped by the turks after they killed her husband and threw two of her children off the cliff.

Your sympathy is appreciated, thanks for the effort.

The gist of what I'm trying to say is that I'm reluctant to trust the Turks.
ahhh, deep-rooted historical hatred is just so juicy, isn't it? the way it melts in your mouth.. mmm... sooo good!

:roll:
Well, it certainly gives me a frame of reference to draw from when trying to access someone's true motives.

 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
the reason i said it is irrelevant is because it has noting to do with this. Those Turks who ganged raped your aunt and killed your husband are almost certainly not the same turks who are engaged in this project. You can't blacklist a people for the actions of a few. And before you pause and say an entire war was going on - you can't blacklist every generation of Turks for what a single generation did. The Turks treated where I came from (Iraq) like crap as well, but you don't see me trying to stereotype them. I'm not going to hold anything aginst them, or against the average Brit when they tried to control Iraq. Your logic indicates that I should.

As time changes, people change - and you should get through it that no one wants to accept the sins, or even take responsiblity for sins that they were not a part of.
This is not a lack of sympathy towards your aunt and uncle at all...
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Originally posted by: palehorse74
BTW Isnaad is never to be taken as an absolute indicator and God knows best, but it's just a good indicator of truth not a guaranteeing and necessary factor.
We've been over this already, Isnaad is too subjective; and, as we can see, it hasn't done jackshit to eliminate the fanaticism -- too many Imams still reference the fanatical Hadiths throughout the Islamic world.

If I were a Muslim, I would take those who are tying to eradicate the fanaticism very seriously, which is exactly what Turkey is trying to do by issuing a modern and moderate version of the Hadiths.

The goal here should be to get their new book into as many Muslims' hands as humanly possible.[/quote]

IMO I'm much more interested in seeing QURANS go into people hands and letting them READ and COMPREHEND the texts for themselves. That itself takes a long time and would have a much greater impact than simply releasing different kinds of hadith.

Isnad is not support to rid fanaticism - its goal was never that that. Hell the goal of hadith is not even fanaticism so you might be mis understanding something, or I'm just not getting you. It is simply to provide a method to determine the probability of a hadith being true. It isn't the best method, but anyone can still take a hadith that has been shown to be nearly false and still cite it.

What you seem to want is simply homogenizing Islam. that simply cannot happen beyond the very basics (Quran and 5 pillars of Islam) in the way you describe it. This is why there is no pope, this is why there is no recognized head and why its very heterogeneous.

And IMO I was disturbed when you said anyone who wasn't pushing for modernization and moderation is suspect - sounds like a "with us or against us" attitude. If you push it to that - even I am against you because I also have my own feelings about what should be done and how to proceed and I'd rather reason with other muslims no matter how fanatical and discuss with them then with someone who gives the perception of being an outsider trying to dictate to a group.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: magomago
BTW Isnaad is never to be taken as an absolute indicator and God knows best, but it's just a good indicator of truth not a guaranteeing and necessary factor.
Originally posted by: palehorse74
We've been over this already, Isnaad is too subjective; and, as we can see, it hasn't done jackshit to eliminate the fanaticism -- too many Imams still reference the fanatical Hadiths throughout the Islamic world.

If I were a Muslim, I would take those who are tying to eradicate the fanaticism very seriously, which is exactly what Turkey is trying to do by issuing a modern and moderate version of the Hadiths.

The goal here should be to get their new book into as many Muslims' hands as humanly possible.
IMO I'm much more interested in seeing QURANS go into people hands and letting them READ and COMPREHEND the texts for themselves. That itself takes a long time and would have a much greater impact than simply releasing different kinds of hadith.

Isnad is not support to rid fanaticism - its goal was never that that. Hell the goal of hadith is not even fanaticism so you might be mis understanding something, or I'm just not getting you. It is simply to provide a method to determine the probability of a hadith being true. It isn't the best method, but anyone can still take a hadith that has been shown to be nearly false and still cite it.

What you seem to want is simply homogenizing Islam. that simply cannot happen beyond the very basics (Quran and 5 pillars of Islam) in the way you describe it. This is why there is no pope, this is why there is no recognized head and why its very heterogeneous.

And IMO I was disturbed when you said anyone who wasn't pushing for modernization and moderation is suspect - sounds like a "with us or against us" attitude. If you push it to that - even I am against you because I also have my own feelings about what should be done and how to proceed and I'd rather reason with other muslims no matter how fanatical and discuss with them then with someone who gives the perception of being an outsider trying to dictate to a group.
I just want to see Islam clean itself up. Period.

Rewriting your various texts, without the fanatical hatred included, would be a swell start -- and I believe that's exactly what Turkey is trying to do with a standardized moderate version of the Hadiths.
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Originally posted by: palehorse74
I just want to see Islam clean itself up. Period.

Rewriting your various texts, without the fanatical hatred included, would be a swell start -- and I believe that's exactly what Turkey is trying to do with a standardized moderate version of the Hadiths.
Sometimes even hadith are going to come down to interpretation. Ultimately what constitutes a "hadith" is whoever chose to label it as such. Of course the reason we don't have any more new "hadiths" is that its been so long that its impossible to really make up our own and actually carry and establish the isnad chain 1400 years back. So whatever was compiled in that period now simply carries that title, whether it is true or not.

Even if all of these were "Cleaned up" (I'm not exactly sure how to define cleaning up) it won't resolve everything. The Mid East is such a volatile region right now that religion or not, it would have the same type of conflicts. Iraqis wouldn't suddenly accept our occupation if they were all Christians or Hindus, Palestinians would still be fighting back against the wrongs that occur even if were not Muslims, and most other idiotry would have some other way to be justified. Even other groups who are labeled as Islamic Terrorists would look for other ways to propagate their weakly veiled thuggery(Abu Sayyaf anyone?)

This re assessment of how "strong" a hadith is, or if something is actually a hadith will not change that. Men who want to oppress women will still find another way to do that. I'm interested in them NOT being able to lean on Islam by making up weak justifications based on what a person 1000 years ago called a hadith. If a hadith clearly contradicts any principle in the Quran , I have a problem with it and would challange its authenticity. I'm more interested in making it clear to any given Muslim community that growing a beard, or having a pant leg pulled up is not a "hassanah"(think of it as the opposite of a sin) and simply comes down to style (and there are enough people that believe this that I find it a problem from a religious POV). I want to prevent restriction of women - if you are a chauvanist I'd rather deal with you as you are then mask it as "being a Muslim".
I'm more interested in insuring that the QURAN is the source and final authority (along with any and all interpretation and debate that comes with that), and that it isn't quietly pushed aside for to make room for the human fabrication of hadith.

I'm not interested in purposely changing what a text says because you have the perception that it is more docile...when it is questionable if things will change.

that doesn't mean there are issues I think that can be fixed through this - but from my perspective I want to remove irrelevant cultural baggage that as built up from religion. The types of things I want to see result would be the disenfranchisement of clerics in SA because they can't make B.S. justifications based on hadith to oppress women, or engage in super segregation, or line up their own pockets at the expense of others. Hell the fact I don't prefer them to be in control of the government is not necessarily religious - this is a political view of mine.

So lets be realistic about what this will actually do and what it is intended for, rather than take it to the other extreme and think that people will stop fighting back (As opposed to completely dismissing their work). You'll be disappointed when you realize that in the majority of the situations the root cause isn't religion.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,547
0
76
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: palehorse74
I just want to see Islam clean itself up. Period.

Rewriting your various texts, without the fanatical hatred included, would be a swell start -- and I believe that's exactly what Turkey is trying to do with a standardized moderate version of the Hadiths.
Sometimes even hadith are going to come down to interpretation. Ultimately what constitutes a "hadith" is whoever chose to label it as such. Of course the reason we don't have any more new "hadiths" is that its been so long that its impossible to really make up our own and actually carry and establish the isnad chain 1400 years back. So whatever was compiled in that period now simply carries that title, whether it is true or not.

Even if all of these were "Cleaned up" (I'm not exactly sure how to define cleaning up) it won't resolve everything. The Mid East is such a volatile region right now that religion or not, it would have the same type of conflicts. Iraqis wouldn't suddenly accept our occupation if they were all Christians or Hindus, Palestinians would still be fighting back against the wrongs that occur even if were not Muslims, and most other idiotry would have some other way to be justified. Even other groups who are labeled as Islamic Terrorists would look for other ways to propagate their weakly veiled thuggery(Abu Sayyaf anyone?)

This re assessment of how "strong" a hadith is, or if something is actually a hadith will not change that. Men who want to oppress women will still find another way to do that. I'm interested in them NOT being able to lean on Islam by making up weak justifications based on what a person 1000 years ago called a hadith. If a hadith clearly contradicts any principle in the Quran , I have a problem with it and would challange its authenticity. I'm more interested in making it clear to any given Muslim community that growing a beard, or having a pant leg pulled up is not a "hassanah"(think of it as the opposite of a sin) and simply comes down to style (and there are enough people that believe this that I find it a problem from a religious POV). I want to prevent restriction of women - if you are a chauvanist I'd rather deal with you as you are then mask it as "being a Muslim".
I'm more interested in insuring that the QURAN is the source and final authority (along with any and all interpretation and debate that comes with that), and that it isn't quietly pushed aside for to make room for the human fabrication of hadith.

I'm not interested in purposely changing what a text says because you have the perception that it is more docile...when it is questionable if things will change.

that doesn't mean there are issues I think that can be fixed through this - but from my perspective I want to remove irrelevant cultural baggage that as built up from religion. The types of things I want to see result would be the disenfranchisement of clerics in SA because they can't make B.S. justifications based on hadith to oppress women, or engage in super segregation, or line up their own pockets at the expense of others. Hell the fact I don't prefer them to be in control of the government is not necessarily religious - this is a political view of mine.

So lets be realistic about what this will actually do and what it is intended for, rather than take it to the other extreme and think that people will stop fighting back (As opposed to completely dismissing their work). You'll be disappointed when you realize that in the majority of the situations the root cause isn't religion.
I respect what you've written; however, as with most things, I simply choose to be more optimistic -- especially when considering initiatives, such as this one by Turke, that are done with good intentions. (I don't buy into the "road to hell is paved with good intentions" nonsense).

I'm the eternal optimist... perhaps to my own detriment, and eventual downfall; but it's simply how I choose to live my life. I also have much of my life invested in the success of your culture. I wake up every day hoping to see successes and improvements in those parts of the world that were in such pain just yesterday...

So, with that in mind, in this case, I simply hope that Turkey's idea does some good, for all of Islam. We'll just have to wait and see...
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
I'm optimistic as well ....but I know that religion isn't the source of many of these conflicts as mentioned earlier. You optimism is slightly confusing only because it isn't related. It is like saying we need to remove Saddam to make the world safe from terrarism ;) Not exactly! Different ideas, different topics.
But like I said - issues such as what the Taliban did, the death of Theo Van Gogh etc are examples of what can be fixed with a) taking the Quran OVER the Hadith and b) Reanalyzing the hadith to find out what is potentially not true and if not reclassify then outright remove certain sayings as hadith if they are patently false (And this imo will most likely remove that which doesn't line up with the Quran). Things like death because of apostasy should not occur (although in the Mid East this isn't exclusively a Muslim thing - other groups don't take religious conversion too kindly either).

And btw - my culture is that of an American culture...unless you want to challange that ;) I don't believe that the "American culture" is homogeneous by any means.

I do feel Arab cultures (ie: where my origin was) has certain issues that need to be resolved (But is otherwise a beautiful culture like any) and one of the best ways to remove those weaknesses in this case is to eliminate those ties to religion...simply because religion exists a strong cultural influence on Arab culture...
 

Noobtastic

Banned
Jul 9, 2005
3,721
0
0
im sure bbc will do what i can to rationalize the justifications, but unfortunately there are none.


question: why does it say, "radical renewel". i cant imagine how islam could be more radical in general.

islamo-states have been "interpreting" religious text to suit radical ideology. that's what they've been doing for centuries. how else could they rationalize the persecution of women, execution of homosexuals, ostracizing of rivaling ethnicities, charging jews/christians dhimmi, baring press and media that insults islam, and sanctioning of anti-israeli and anti-western terrorism??

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY