In both given articles, “The Roots of Muslim Rage” by Bernard Lewis, and “The Roots of Muslim Rage Revisited” by Nicolaas J.E. van der Zee, argue about the enhancement of the Muslim fundamentalism with different perspectives; however, I believe that Lewis’ view may be quiet misleading to the actual perception. Lewis indicates that Muslim fundamentalism is conceived through the Muslim community’s oppression and dissatisfaction with the West’s political involvement, as well as “Islam is a source of aggression” . In defiance of Lewis’ opinion, the word ‘Islam’ comes from the word peace as well as the will of submission to God. The notion of aggression and violence that Lewis conceptualizes to be the headline of Islam does not have any supporting …show more content…
“We were witnessing nothing less than a war of Islamic fundamentalism against both secularism and modernism” , Lewis states that Islam is an oppressed religion and the lack of secularism caused many of the wars and conflicts with the West. This however is misleading because as he generalizes the whole religion, each religion has its own pleasing as well as its atrocious adherents. As he continues to generalize the Islamic religion as a whole and state that it is indeed oppressed, he seems to lack the information about how each individual may respond differently to other cultural traditions despite any religious aspects. Islam may be viewed to be an oppressed religion, but in fact, it supports freedom and one’s voice to be spoken and heard. For example, as Islam advises women to cover up with a hijab, it certainly does not mean that women have no rights and that they should be placed at home. Oppression defines power taken away from someone, while the hijab is an element of privatizing the woman, both which have no linkage whatsoever. In fact, Islam supports and praises women in many ways, the hijab is an approach to cover her up with no intentions of making a Muslim woman any less than a Western woman or any …show more content…
The very concept that I agree with regards Nicolaas’ article, is that he states Islam is diverse and accepting of others. Nicolaas says “In addition, Islam’s religious elite is defensive by default and often regard changes as a threat to the purity of the faith” . He clarifies that the only problem with the Muslim community is their fear of change within their religious beliefs and that is no harm to anyone or the West. As Lewis misunderstands, yet Nicolaas focuses on is that there are religious customs in which religion and legislative issues are contrastingly seen. Their dedication to their tradition was a barrier to their acceptance of the West’s freedom of speech. Every tradition is relied upon to be regarded by different societies and that the difference should not be a reason for disdain between both, the Muslims and the
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror is a book written by Bernard Lewis that ‘in particular charts the key events of the twentieth century leading up to the violent confrontations of today.’(Lewis) Lewis clearly and entirely pointed out key events explaining the choices to be made by the people of the Islamic faith. They must determine whether their religion takes its place alongside other religions in a global community, or whether it will revert back into conflict with non-Muslim nations.
Violent Jihad as a struggle against one’s enemies has its root in [these] situations. When the Islamic religion spread over the region, Jihad became a religious tenet and assumed the form of a peaceful, internal struggle to strive for the good and reject the evil in one’s action. Violent, external conflict was never r...
It is evident for some scholars that the goal of this amalgamation is to implement the terms Arabs and Muslims with terrorism as a connotation. “Arab” equals “Muslim,” and “Muslim” equals “terrorist;” all become identical. It can also the other way round; the signifier “terrorist” can prompt other signifiers such as “Arab...
some try to reach their goals through violence, the majority work through political parties within the electoral process. People like Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network are only at fringes. Even if fundamentalism is to encompass such aberrations, such brand of fundamentalism is a characteristic of all (Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Judaism) the religions. This paper by citing episodes of fundamentalism in leading religions substantiates the theseis that fundamentalism is not specific to any particular religion. Beginning with Judaism, the bombing of Hotel King David in July 1946 is an incident that starkly explifies the Jewish Fundamentalism.
Through the years the idea that Islam is an aggressive religion has been developed. This is mainly due to the fact that the word "jihad" -- a very important concept in Islamic faith -- is often misunderstood or its initial meaning is intentionally misrepresented. From the very beginning of Islamic invasion in Europe a sense of devotion to the religion was instilled in the Muslim soldiers and believers. Religion was a really important part of their lives. The soldiers were taught to die for Allah in their holy war against unbelievers -- this was the so-called jihad. However, if one examines thoroughly the Quran, the saint book for Muslims, he/she will find that jihad carries a completely different meaning -- this is an internal struggle with oneself for achievements in a certain filed or, simply, for self-improvement. Even though most Islamic believers know what jihad really is, there are zealots that still look for excuse for their appalling and inhumane deeds in the abovementioned word. Nowadays, this is still a major problem, especially concerning the...
Burns, Thomas J. "Islam." Religion and Society. OU Campus' Dale Hall, Norman. 14 Apr. 2014. Lecture.
According to Armstrong (2001), “The very word Islam, which means “surrender”, is related to the Arabic salam, or peace”(p. 48). Is Islam a violent religion? This is the issue that has been brought up by the class, and it will be debated towards the end of the semester. This question has been raised by many non-Muslims due to the numerous events that occurred throughout the years such as September 11, some managed to find the right answers while others are still doubting Islam and trying identify and understand how it is practiced and know it’s values in order to know whether it is violent or not.
Islam, a religion of people submitting to one God, seeking peace and a way of life without sin, is always misunderstood throughout the world. What some consider act of bigotry, others believe it to be the lack of education and wrong portrayal of events in media; however, one cannot not justify the so little knowledge that America and Americans have about Islam and Muslims. Historically there are have been myths, many attacks on Islam and much confusion between Islam as a religion and Middle Easter culture that is always associated with it. This paper is meant to dispel, or rather educate about the big issues that plague people’s minds with false ideas and this will only be touching the surface.
There is a strong belief that Islam and politics are directly tied. They are tied in the sense that the building blocks of the religion dictate how they ought to behave in the political environment. Through this mandatory follow up behavior that the religion delineates, many have come to believe that its teachings are a form of terrorism. Mandaville argues that what has challenged the Islamic link between politics and religion was the emergence of secularism, which went against the belief that politics and religion could go together. Islam has been a religion that has been accused of supporting terrorist activities in the world. Different assumptions have been brought up to understand better the linkages between what really lies behind the Islam religion and politics. Peter Mandaville argues that Islam is dynamic and that it has changed over time; situated within time and politics.
Lila Abu-Lughod’s article titled, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” takes a closer look at the problematic ethnocentric approach many have when trying to gain an understanding of another culture that may be foreign to that individual. In this analytical paper, Lughod looks at women in Islam, specifically the treatment of women and how it might be utilized as a justification for invading into a country and liberating its people. The country Lughod refers to in her article is Afghanistan, and Lughod points out the misunderstanding from the people to the Bush administration like First Lady Laura Bush who believed that intervention was necessary to free women from the captivity of their own homes. It is important to consider the role that different lenses play into all of this, especially when one’s lenses are being shaped by the media. Depictions of covered women secluded from society leave a permanent image in the minds of many, who would then later support the idea of liberation. This paper will discuss that the practice of using propaganda when referring to the lifestyle in the Middle East is not exclusive to the U.S; rather it has been utilized throughout history. Additionally, we will take a closer look on the importance of symbols, such as veils in this case; help to further emphasize the cause to liberate. Finally, we will analyze Lughod’s plea towards cultural relativism and away from liberal imperialism.
Women have always been thought of as something that needed to be controlled in Muslim culture. Their bodies are a source of shame that must be covered during prayer and also in the public (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 3). Veiling, done by a hijab or chador, is when women either wear a headscarf to cover themselves or they wear a veil that covers their entire body, excluding her hands and eyes (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 1; Mir-Hosseini 2003: 41; Berger 1998: 93; Smith-Hefner 2007: 390-391; Brenner 1996: 674; El Guindi 1999: 6). Veiling is used as a tool for oppression. By having women veil themselves, it enforces the control by the male run and male dominated society (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 7). Also, the punishment for women appearing without a veil transitioned as the concept of veiling was addressed, transitioning from seventy-four lashes, to being arrested and held between ten days and two months for being “immodest” women and offending public morality, or fined 50,000 to 500,000 rials (Mir-Hosseini 2007: 8). The oppression of veiling is perpetuated through the thought that it is a woman’s religious duty to wear one, condemning foreigners and women in society if they refuse. Although it is a tool for oppression, there was resistance the oppression. In ...
Thomas W. Lippman gives an introduction to the Muslim world in the book Understanding Islam. He has traveled throughout the Islamic world as Washington Post bureau chief for the Middle East, and as a correspondent in Indochina. This gave him, in his own words, "sharp insight into the complexities of that turbulent region." However, the purpose of the book is not to produce a critical or controversial interpretation of Islamic scripture. It is instead to give the American layman an broad understanding of a religion that is highly misunderstood by many Americans. In this way he dispels many myths about "Muslim militants," and the otherwise untrue perception of Islamic violence. In this way the American reader will become more knowledgeable about an otherwise unfamiliar topic. However, the most significant element of Lippman’s book is that it presents Islam in a simple way that makes the reader feels his awareness rise after each chapter. This encourages him to continue learning about the world’s youngest major religion. Understanding Islam dispels many misconceptions about the Muslim world, and presents the subject in a way that urges his reader to further his understanding of Islam through continued study.
Robinson, B.A. (2002, October 14). Islam: Is it a religion of violence or of peace.
Throughout history, violence and religion were always related, however, how this violence is formed and for how it is used differs in every religion and also on one’s view. Even the most serene religions are capable of supporting violence since all religions incorporate a violent nature along with the dedication and belief. In “Understanding Islam”, Kenneth Jost poses a question: Is Islam a religion that promotes violence? His answer is no but he does not answer it directly. He does bring up possible arguments from the opposite side and rebuts it. He “A CBS poll in April 2006 found that 46 percent of those surveyed believe Islam encourages violence more than other religions. A comparable poll four years earlier registered a lower figure: 32 percent. These perceptions are sometimes inflamed by U.S. evangelical leaders... [Franklin] Graham called Islam ‘a very evil and wicked religion’ and [Jerry] Vines, called Muhammed, Islam’s founder and prophet, a “demon-pos...