Assignment: The critics of Islam For the department of English and Media studies. By Prof DR Sohail Ansari Dead line: 30th April
الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَصَدُّوا عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ أضَلَّ أعْمَالَهُمْ
Those who disbelieve and hinder [men] from the Path of Allah, He will render their deeds vain.
Making students the critical consumer of information.
Initiating students into the art of academic writing.
This assignment is the
first of the series that analyzes the assertions of the detractors of
Islam and of prophet
(P.B.H.U)
Same but different:
Students will read the article titled ‘The critics of Islam’ four
times. Each time they will find different exercises to do. This is the first time
they read.
(The
assignments are in compliance to instruction from higher authorities so that
learning remains uninterrupted despite the closure of university)
Eurocentrism is the inspiration
Alexis Heraclides states:
Stemming from
Eurocentrism's innate bias towards Western civilization came the creation of
the concept of the "European Society," which favored the components
(mainly Christianity) of
European civilization and allowed eurocentrists to brand diverging societies
and cultures as "uncivilized."
Critics
of Islam are committed advocate of “The White Man's Burden’’
The rooted belief of the inferiority of non-white and non-Europeans has given
justification for racial discrimination. These all critics of Islam are committed
advocate of “The White Man's Burden," condoning ‘Western
Imperialism’ colonialism, coercion, imposition and the colonial exploitation
of Muslim World as a mission-of-civilization: civilizing the unwilling savages (Muslims of
the world).
These all critics of Islam are committed to promoting the Eurocentric racism inherent to the idea by way
of Development aid or development cooperation the Western
world delivers civilization to the Muslim nations: the savages of the world.
Racialized narratives
The narratives
of these all critics of Islam are even heavily racialized, shaping beauty standards by racializing biological and popular beauty
ideals to suggest that mixture with whiteness is better.
Critics of Islam apply idealist construct to
account of Islamic cultures
The figurative
superiority resulting from the rise of
"European
Civilization" and the labels of "civilized" and
"uncivilized" are partly responsible for eurocentrism's denial of
Islamic social evolution, giving these critics of Islam the advantage of
dismissal of such ideas regarding Oriental civilizations through comparisons to
the West.
The rooted
belief of the inferiority of non-white and non-Europeans has given these
critics of Islam justification for bringing discredit
upon the Islamic world, they, therefore, are unscrupulously eager for
preventing the account of lower-level explanation and account of Islamic
cultures and their social evolution, mainly through eurocentrism's
idealist construct, espousing the notion that the evolution of societies and
their progress are dictated by general tendencies, leading to the Islamic
world's evolution becoming more of a philosophical topic of history instead of
historical fact, thus these all critics of Islam tend to trivialize and
marginalize the philosophies, scientific contributions, cultures, and other
additional facets of the Islamic
world.
Only Islam comes under vitriolic scalpel.
Almost all critics of Islam converted from Islam to Christianity
and migrated (immediately before or after conversion) to USA
or any European country and were immediately wrapped up in cocoons of cotton
wool, therefore the criticism of theirs has always been cocooned in humbug. Never known
as writers before conversion, these all critics of Islam
immediately after arriving to foreign lands became as if by magic
writers (those who do not believe in magic say that writings of
theirs are ghostwritten). Surprisingly
it is only Islam which comes under the vitriolic scalpels
of these magician writers.
Prophet (P.B.U.H) is bête
noire and Jesus is Redeemer
To these
critics of Islam countries with European civilizations are the only civilized
societies and as the western societies favor Christianity as their main
component; therefore, almost all of these critics converted to Christianity
such as Ali Sina, Magdi Allam to name (but) a few
and started speaking of nirvana they had
attained because of conversion and condemning Islam and prophet for depriving
the world of peace.
Critics of Islam are obsequious
Zionists
As The Israel lobby or
the Zionist lobby has pervasive influence over U.S and there are many Jews in
positions of influence in Hollywood, in network television, in sports and
entertainment, and in many other areas of American and European public life,
these critics of Islam before long become the avid supporters and political
activists on behalf of Israel; for example, Nonie Darwish founded the pro-Israel web site ‘Arabs for Israel’.
Interestingly, despite this symbiosis,
critics of Islam are
sycophants, groveling to
Jews for wooing and acting like the political toady. They condemn the anti-Semitism and identify with Israel’ in the face of unprecedented
violations of international law and human rights standards by Israeli
occupation forces and never even
acknowledge the seriousness
of Israeli violations of human rights and international law.
Raheel Raza (born
1949/1950) is a Pakistani-Canadian Muslim critical of "Islamic
extremism" and of what she has called "inequality’’ toward Muslim
women but
never condemns Israel due to Israel’s systematic denial of Palestinian human
rights.
These critics
of Islam are pro-Indian
These critics of Islam claim
to have a rational, enlightened and humanistic outlook
but these critics of Islam endorse Israel as a modern state based on the
right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their historical
homeland, but respond to
news indicating the trampling of human rights with impunity in Kashmir after
the abrogation of Article 370 as the "fabricated narrative" and do
not even acknowledge the right of the people of Kashmir
to self-determination in their historical homeland (despite the rights of
latter are supported by United Nations Security Council Resolution 39 resolution unlike the rights of former those are
disputed).
These critics
of Islam are not non-partisan
These critics of Islam
claim to have a rational, enlightened and humanistic outlook
but Tarek
Fatah is a
Pakistani- secular activist he likes, many other secular activists, is the
greatest proponents of secularism in the Pakistan. These all critics of Islam
want to see Pakistan dissociated from spiritual
concerns but never talk of the secularization of Israel and condemn BJP for de-secularization of India.
Disquisition of Faisal Devji
‘Faisal Devji’s
elegantly argued treatise, which explores the idea of Pakistan as an expression
of Zionism, an ideology most commonly associated with the creation of the
country’s closest ideological twin—Israel. Devji’s argument is simple: in order
to understand the enigma represented by Pakistan and Israel we must cease to
assume that either is a ‘nation’ in the conventional sense. Instead, Pakistan
and Israel represent political manifestations of an ideal form of the
Enlightenment state that harks back to an earlier moment in the Enlightenment when
the coming together of peoples was seen to rest on (the fantasy of) political
consent, legitimized by the force of an idea alone. In this sense, both
countries stand apart from the trajectory of nineteenth-century European
nationalism, which judged the nation to be the hallmark of a collective
attachment born of shared blood and soil….. Devji argues what distinguished
Pakistan and Israel from these earlier state forms was the conscious invocation
of religion as the basis of their social contracts…..
The focus of Devji’s
interest is neither Islam in Pakistan, nor indeed Judaism in Israel, after
independence. Instead he is concerned to highlight the nationalist moment when
religion as ‘the empty idea of a national will untrammelled by anything given
outside the idea itself’ was pregnant with radical possibilities (Devji
2013: 47). This is not to say that Devji is indifferent to the trajectory
of ‘religion’ in the unfolding of the social contract in Israel and Pakistan.
As he observes, ‘religion’ as an idea of belonging that holds the ‘nation’
together still endures in one important respect in the life of these two
independent states. For notwithstanding their statehood, both Israel and
Pakistan still determine their nationality by reference neither to shared territory
nor common descent but by the question: ‘who is a Jew and who is a Muslim’
(p. 48).
These all critics
of Islam deny established realities and say:
·
That
the migration of Indian Muslim to Pakistan should not be seen to rest on
political consent, legitimized by the force of an idea alone.
·
Religion
was not the ‘the empty idea of a national will untrammeled by anything given
outside the idea itself’ for the creation of Pakistan
· Against all evidence on the contrary that Pakistan
was created for entirely
economic reasons and religion simply merely intervened
These secular critics of
Islam never criticize Israel but always Pakistan
These critics of Islam
claim to have a rational, enlightened and humanistic outlook
but these
secular critics of Islam never criticize Israel for the conscious invocation of
religion as the basis of its social contracts and determining
its nationality by the question: who is a
Jew
The Objectives
Resolution is vigorously condemned by these secular critics of Islam because it
simply proclaims that constitution of Pakistan would be modeled on the
divine sovereignty and democratic faith of Islam.
Additional
reading:
‘Scholarly writing is
also known as academic writing. It is the genre of writing used in all academic
fields. ...
This is objective and
not offensive to anyone’.
Exercise:
‘And were immediately wrapped up
in cocoons
of cotton wool’
‘Interestingly despite
this symbiosis, critics of Islam are
sycophants, groveling to Jews for wooing and acting like the political toady’.
Question:
This language is not academic because it is not impartial or unbiased as
it has the potential to offend readers, and can negatively affects
the writer's credibility and distracts from the message being
conveyed.
This
language is not academic as there is the note of sarcasm and the use of irony
to convey contempt.
What
do you suggest what to do?
Should we delete these lines?
Should we make them impersonal?
Should we
keep lines but give evidence so that they can serve as the conclusion.
Exercise:
‘The narratives of these all critics of
Islam are….. whiteness is better’.
Question: Check overall unity
Are these lines
incongruous if so should they be removed or some lines are to be added so they
blend with the rest?
Explain lines within
context
‘Critics of Islam apply idealist
construct to account of Islamic cultures’
‘The figurative superiority’
‘Preventing
the account of lower-level explanation’
‘Progress
are dictated by general tendencies’
‘More
of a philosophical topic of history instead of historical fact’
Comments
Post a Comment