|
40 of 49 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Worse than a sentimental pamphlet on Islam! Skip It., May 6, 2004
This book is worse than the sentimental pamphlets on Islam one sees on the streets of London and New York. Most information in it is a narrow cherry-pick. This is such a confused account of Islam that it does major damage on several fronts. Specifically:1. Asma is wrong to state that freedom of speech is a core value of both Islam and America. In fact freedom of speech occupies a totally different context in Islam than it does in America. American culture values individual freedom even at the expense of collective culture. On the other hand, Islam places the highest value on stability of the community, even at the expense of individual freedom. The Qur'an has defined strict limits to behavior - no drinking, no pork, no sex outside marriage, no homosexuality, no blasphemy, prohibition to convert out of Islam, modesty in manners for both men and women, Muslim women not allowed to marry non-Muslim men, women's legal testimony in financial matters weighted half that of men, etc. Asma seems oblivious to these basic facts about Islam. 2. Asma commits a major blunder by claiming throughout the book that "Muhammad founded Islam". This is the incorrect and irritating language of 19th century European Orientalists who Asma seems to have blindly copied. No Muslim will ever say that Prophet Muhammad (Upon Him Be Peace) "founded" Islam. If anyone "founded" Islam, it is God. Muhammad is only a messenger. 3. Asma goes on to write that according to Armstrong, "If Muhammad had known about other religions, he would have celebrated these religions too". Is Asma implying that Prophet Muhammad (Upon Him Be Peace) created the laws of Islam himself or that God is unaware of non-semitic religions? 4. Asma claims to know why Satan did not bow down to Adam. She asks "Was Satan right not to bow down to Adam?" She then responds, "Of course, humans are not perfect". Such flaky and dangerous logic makes travesty of the rich Muslim theological tradition of 1400 years. In her hubris, Asma does not even end such statements by the characteristic Muslim expression "walla hu alam" (which means "God knows best") and is always appended to personal opinions by Muslims where answers to difficult questions cannot be established with certitude. She also claims to know what God meant in the Qur'an when God said to the angels "And I know what you know not". Her presumptuous and nonsensical answer is that "we, as humans, are sometimes lucky enough to reach the highest of highs". 5. The child-like writing leaves much to be desired. An example of disjointed sentences littered throughout the book: "Islam is a simple religion. It is not as complicated as everyone makes it seem. It can be complicated if you want it to be. "Therefore stand firm in the straight path as thou art commanded," the Qur'an says (11:112). When Monir called me, I answered the phone. In Islam, God is just a call away, too." 6. Asma's claim that "Islam has had little problem with science" is only the position of modern apologists who want to see Islam validated by science. I suggest that Asma and the serious readers get a copy of Nasr's "Religion and the Order of Nature" to get to know the hierarchical principles under which Islamic Science is cultivated. It stands in contrast to the profane principles of modern science. 7. Asma displays arrogance by stating her views on polygamy thus: "In the end, the view that a reasonable person would take away is that polygamy is no longer allowed." I want to know what if a situation gets created in Palestine or Iraq or Kashmir or Afghanistan or Chechnya in future where large numbers of men are killed fighting on-going wars. Will Asma's feminist streak then allow Muslim men the responsibility of multiple wives to take care of homeless women and orphans or not? 8. Asma says that American Law and Islamic Law are similar. This again shows how little she knows. You're better off reading El Fadl or Rahman's analysis on the key differences between American and Islamic Law. 9. Asma insists that she respects freedom of speech, which she calls core values of both Islam and America. But then she smugly suggests that those who criticize America should leave America (in her words "if you don't need America, then we don't need you"). What sort of logic is this? Why won't she let others express themselves freely? What sort of tolerance is Asma displaying by demanding the expulsion of those who want to make America better by criticizing its darker aspects? (e.g. Middle East policy, anti-Muslim attitudes and Iraq policy immediately come to mind, not to mention US government's support of tin-pot dictators and petty tyrants like Saudi Royal family, Hosni Mubarak etc.). 12. Asma cannot see that America is a secular society, which is radically different from Islam's God-centered vision of society. Islam recognizes tolerance but does not endorse secularism. The élan of the Qur'an is that you should "never ever forget God" but always keep God present in your consciousness and fear the Day of Judgement. All secular cultures by default marginalize religion so cannot be compatible with an Islamic society. Serious readers should read Rene Guenon's "The Reign of Quantity" to see how both secularism and democracy are the profane indicators of a modern human society racing towards dissolution. My advice to readers: save your precious time and money by skipping this book. It was not for nothing that Prophet Muhammad (Upon Him Be Peace) warned against learning about Islam from those who are not trained and qualified for the task. If Asma reads this review, she might ask me to leave America as well. But I'm not going anywhere, Asma! I too am an American Muslim and America is my home so I'm staying put!
|
by Katsu Kokichi
by Anne Lamott
by Asma Gull Hasan
See all Editorial Reviews
