Take Fear of Takfir...

Shmuel Bar

Foresees Kulturkampf?

Better than a Clash of Civilizations

(Image from Herzliya Conference)

Shmuel Bar, whom I mentioned yesterday as the author of "The Religious Sources of Islamic Terrorism," Policy Review (June & July 2004), has in that same article noted "the disinclination of moderates to confront the radicals" and has offered an explanation:

[This] has frequently been attributed to violent intimidation (which, no doubt, exists), but it has an additional religious dimension. While the radicals are not averse to branding their adversaries as apostates, orthodox and moderate Muslims rarely resort to this weapon. Such an act (takfir -- accusing another Muslim of heresy [kufr] by falsifying the roots of Islam, allowing that which is prohibited or forbidding that which is allowed) is not to be taken lightly; it contradicts the deep-rooted value that Islam places on unity among the believers and its aversion to fitna (communal discord). It is ironic that a religious mechanism which seems to have been created as a tool to preserve pluralism and prevent internal debates from deteriorating into civil war and mutual accusations of heresy (as occurred in Christian Europe) has become a tool in the hands of the radicals to drown out any criticism of them. (Bar, "Religious Sources," 'The dilemma of the moderate Muslim,' paragraph 5)

We may take fear of takfir, then, as based partly on the traditional fear of fomenting fitna in the Islamic community. Bar thinks that moderate Muslims nevertheless need to pursue a Kulterkampf:

Only by setting up a clear demarcation between orthodox and radical Islam can the radical elements be exorcized. The priority of solidarity within the Islamic world plays into the hands of the radicals. Only an Islamic Kulturkampf can redraw the boundaries between radical and moderate in favor of the latter. Such a struggle must be based on an in-depth understanding of the religious sources for justification of Islamist terrorism and a plan for the creation of a legitimate moderate counterbalance to the radical narrative in Islam. Such an alternative narrative should have a sound base in Islamic teachings, and its proponents should be Islamic scholars and leaders with wide legitimacy and accepted credentials. (Bar, "Religious Sources," 'Fighting hellfire with hellfire,' paragraph 3)

For the skeptics, Bar adds a footnote:

Here the pessimist may inject that, today, all the leading Islamic scholars in the Middle East who enjoy such prestige are in the radical camp. But there have been cases of "repentant" radicals (in Egypt) who have retracted (albeit in jail and after due "convincing") their declarations of takfir against the regime. In Indonesia, the moderate Nahdlatul Ulama led by former President Abdurahman Wahid represents a genuine version of moderate Islam. (Bar, "Religious Sources," footnote 11)

Straws in the wind? Presage of a storm on the way? Perhaps, but this coming Kulturkampf might take a little time unless the moderates receive some ammunition. Probably, the cultural battle within Islam itself will need to be prompted both by 'infidels' challenging Muslims to clarify their positions and by 'unpleasantries' such as the Fitna stinkbomb that Geert Wilders has tossed into the Muslim camp as well as by developments within the Muslim world itself as mainstream Islam grows weary of Islamist attacks on other Muslims and begins to critique Islamists interpretations of Qur'an, hadith, and shariah.

I'd probably have more to say about these points, but I'm still under the weather...

Fitna's Training

Edward William Lane

Defining Fitnah

(Image from Wikipedia)

Actually, this post has almost nothing to do with the movie Fitna, but I couldn't resist another pun.

It might, however, have something to do with fitna (فتنة), which Edward W. Lane, in his Arab-English Lexicon (1863-74), romanizes as fitnah (plural of fitn) and defines as follows:

a burning of fire, a melting of (metals) in order to distinguish the bad from the good, a means whereby the condition of aman is evinced in respect of good or evil, punishment, chastisement, conflict among people, faction and sedition, discord, dissension, difference of opinions, a misleading, causing to err, seduction, temptation. (page 2336)

For those more deeply interested, the lexicon can be downloaded at this site: Edward William Lane's Arabic-English Lexicon (Dictionary).

Lane has defined the term for us, but we should note that the word recalls two civil wars in early Islam, the First Fitna (656–661 AD) and the Second Fitna (683–685). If we assume that Geert Wilders is more clever than some credit him with being, then we should conclude that he knows these things and that he chose the title of his short film accordingly, either to describe or induce a civil war within Islam -- I do not know which.

I happen to think that there is a split within Islam between the Islamists and those opposed to them, which sometimes breaks out in military conflict. We've seen this in the Anbar region of Iraq, where the local Sunni populace, fed up with Al Qaeda's harsh brand of Islam, began to resist and even cooperate with the American military, as I noted in an earlier blogpost, "Mismanagement of Savagery?" The 'savagery' that Al Qaeda fomented in parts of Iraq was part of a strategy of deliberate destabilization, whereby Islamists first foment chaos and then offer assistance in a sort of "manufactured heroism," as you can read about in an even earlier post, "Abu Bakr Naji's Management of Savagery." One might even call the savagery a sort of fitna when it is fomented in an already Muslim region such as Iraq. In this Iraqi fitna, some side with Al Qaeda, but most have turned against them.

I'm reading another article by Shmuel Bar, "The Religious Sources of Islamic Terrorism," Policy Review (June & July 2004), who notes the following about the American occupation of Iraq, comparing the Islamists hopes there with their success in the jihad against the Soviet Union during its occupation of Afghanistan (the first wave of mujahidin referred to by Bar):

The politics of Islamist radicalism has also bred a mentality of bello ergo sum (I fight, therefore I exist) -- Islamic leaders are in constant need of popular jihads to boost their leadership status. Nothing succeeds like success: The [9/11] attacks in the United States gave birth to a second wave of mujahidin who want to emulate their heroes. The perception of resolve on the part of the West is a critical factor in shaping the mood of the Muslim population toward radical ideas. Therefore, the manner by which the United States deals with the present crisis in Iraq is not unconnected to the future of the radical Islamic movement. In these circles, the American occupation of Iraq is likened to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan; a sense of American failure would feed the apocalyptical ideology of jihad.

Bar is implicitly describing a division within Islam, with the undecided still waiting to see which side to join, the Islamists or their opponents -- a sort of fitna's training (to borrow my own pun). If the Americans are perceived as losing in Iraq, then many of the undecided will join the longer-term jihad.

But in Iraq, what would "winning" mean?

Physical Fitnas?

Large Hadron Collider

The fitna to end all fitnas!

(Image by Valerio Mezzanotti for the NYT)

We may seem to be headed for that much debated clash of civilizations that Samuel Huntington has written about, but Dennis Overbye, writing for the International Herald Tribune (March 29, 2008), reports on a new technological development might offer the solution to all our problems:

More strife in Iraq. U.S. financial system in crisis. Rice prices soar.

None of these headlines will matter a bit, though, if two men . . . in Hawaii turn out to be right. They think a giant particle accelerator that will begin smashing protons together outside Geneva this summer might produce a black hole that will spell the end of the Earth -- and maybe the universe.

Wouldn't that be a beaut of a fitna! A fitna ending, one might say. Unfortunately for us, this probably won't happen:

Scientists say that is very unlikely -- though they have done some checking just to make sure.

But if it were to happen, it would be a most appropriate deus ex machina ringing down a final curtain on the whole sorry drama.

It would also take care of my flu, a case severe enough to warrent such world-shaking intervention . . . in my humble opinion, of course.

Fitna to be tied?

Omar Bakri

Moderate in his extremism

(Image from BBC News)

Fitna offensive?

Apparently not for some Muslims, as reported by Michael Steen, Andrew Bounds, and Ferry Biederman in "Muslim reaction to Dutch film is muted," Financial Times (March 29, 2008):

Omar Bakri, the Libyan-based radical Muslim cleric who is barred from Britain, did not think the film was very offensive. "On the contrary, if we leave out the first images and the sound of the page being torn, it could be a film by the [Islamist] Mujahideen," he said.

Since Bakri himself is an Islamist (and based not in Libya but in Lebanon), we can perhaps conclude that except for the opening and closing images and commentary, some 14 minutes of the 15 minute film could be used as recruiting video for jihadists of the sort that Bakri himself supports.

By the way, the "15 minutes" refers to the official countdown in the film, for Fitna is longer than 15 minutes if one includes the credits.

I'd write more, but I'm still feeling under the weather. Perhaps tomorrow...

Throwing a Fitna?

John Hinderaker

Speaking truth to Power Line

(Image from Power Line)

I've got a sore throat and stuffy head this morning, so I'm taking it easy today with the blogging and leaving you all with a puzzle to solve concerning reactions to the film Fitna, a conundrum that John Hinderaker has articulated in response to the news that "LiveLeak, which apparently was the main source of the film online, has taken it down in response to threats of violence":

So, let's see: Fitna says that a propensity to violence is inherent in Islam, a deeply controversial proposition. The film can't be shown anywhere because people are afraid of . . . something. So instead, the film is posted online, where millions of people view it. But after 24 hours or so, the film is taken down because threats of violence are made by . . . someone. I dunno, it's really puzzling. The one thing that everyone agrees on is that it's ridiculous to think that Muslims can be violent. So the headchopping threats must be coming from . . . someone else.

You'll find Hinderaker's remark at Power Line, and something about the man himself here. Other than this, I know nothing about him or about Power Line.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a respected Islamic scholar who has studied at Cairo's Al Azhar University, has a popular al Jazeera program called "Shariah and Life," and has co-founded the website IslamOnline," has an answer to Hinderaker's puzzled query:

Sheikh Qaradawi, the president of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, regretted that many Muslims project a distorted image of their religion though their wrong understand[ing] of the Qur'an.

"We ask them to better understand the Islam's message of peace, mercy and human brotherhood," he added.

Qaradawi's own understanding of that message allows him to justify suicide bombings in Israel.

Anyway, back tomorrow...