69 million page views

An Islamic World

Reader comment on item: "The Battle against Islamism Has Not Yet Started"

Submitted by Pied Piper (United States), Jul 31, 2016 at 19:17

1- Comparing Islam to Hinduism or Confiucianism is like comparing apples and oranges. It can't be done without sounding....well....ignorant. (It's not Dr. Pipes that's comparing them....he's just reporting an idea that Global Review (GR) brought into the interview).

In Islam, the "central idea" specifies there is only one Allah, that Mohammad is his Messenger [لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله] and that the Koran contains the final revelation of Allah to mankind through Mohammad. [One could call this the Islamic Trinity. Allah, Mohammad and the Koran. (No one has, as far as I know, but one could).]

(Note also that the Arabic Shahada calls Mohammad a MESSENGER, not a PROPHET). I can't recall coming across study on the appearance, use, meanings etc of these two terms. There must be important differences between them and these differences must indicate something fundamental, I would assume.)

All this leads to a startling conclusion seldom mentioned: As far as Islam is concerned, the apex, the summit of Mankind's experience was the Coming of Mohammad and the Revelation of the Koran........EVERYTHING SINCE THEN has been a steady erosion of the human condition. NOTHING that has been done since then is of any significant or lasting value. This is why Islamic societies have tended to give such little importance to "development".

Hinduism/Confiucianism have nothing like this.....not even close. Therefore, trying to find "solutions" to the "Islamic Problem" by studying what has happened to Indian/Chinese societies in the modern world is simply unrealistic. H and C have no world-wide aspirations......Islam has been charged and tasked with seeking a world-wide human adherence to Islam, if not a Caliphate. The differences are fundamental and go one and on.

2- The vast majority of Muslims, as Dr. Pipes has often mentioned, basically want nothing to do with the "Islamists" or terrorists. Most Muslims simply want to live in peace. I agree.

But at the same time, I'm convinced that even the most liberal of Muslims, even non-practicing Muslims are, in their heart of hearts, committed to an Islamic World. These pseudo-Muslims would never "fight" to see an Islamic World come to fruition....but they certainly don't oppose it. And that, I contend is the problem.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Daniel Pipes replies:

Two quick responses. Muhammad is called interchangeably both "messenger" and "prophet."

To mistrust all Muslims is a mistake. Muslims are individuals and, like all humans, have to be dealt with individually.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)