Will Islam ever reform

>>2640906
No. The entire point of Islam is that it considers original thought, secularising practices and reform as anathema to the idea of Islam as being already perfect.

>>2640906
doubtful. The unreformability would appear to be built in..

>>2640931
So is the reason Christianity has been more fluid and able to change is because there was never a rigid interpretation view of the bible?

>>2640937
the q'uran is recognised by muslims as 'miraculously perfect' in a way the bible is not.

>>2640948

but they did have the islamic golden age, yet somehow it didn't have a lasting impact

compared to the Enlightenment that had a huge impact on Europe/Christianity

>>2640953
The region was obliterated by the invasions of the Mongols, Timur the Lane etc. Islamic theology, obsessed with ideas of Tawhid regressed from its prior zenith, stopped widespread scholarly debate, declined massively under the Ottomans and with the alliance between the House of Saud and Wahhabi imams the final degeneration of Islam was complete.

>>2640966
but Europe had the black plague and had similar devistations but they were able to recover

>>2640967
Christianity is not the same as Islam. Major Christian teachings were yet to be formalised as late as the 1800s.

>>2640953
the extent to which it's predicated on the 'disovery' of Greek ideas present in the Sassanid empire is up for debate.

>>2640906
Yes.

It's called Quran alone, it cuts out 90% of the stuff that is incompatible with western life.

But its heavily oppressed by regular muslims though is slowly gaining ground.

>>2640967
In Islam, it is believed the that passages of the Quran were told to Mohammad, via Allah, in blessed visions. It was not until after Mohammad's death that his disciples, who had memorized his passages (or so they say), constructed the Quran. Thus, from the standpoint of a devout Muslim, the Quran is /literally/ the words of God, straight from God, and are perfect as a result. Any deviation against the word would be absolute heresy.
Of course, nobody sane ever claimed that every word in the bible is sent directly from god, and uttered ONLY by god, as the muslims believe, especially after King James had rewritten it.

The Quran is literally the most perfect thing created - this is undebatable. This is central to Islam.

So no, there's isn't much chance Islam will change. Best we can hope for is a massive upsurge in apostasy once Muslims learn to how to think rationally.

>>2640931
Thats because it is

>>2641014
Yeah, which is why Islamic countries are the best places in the world to live.

>>2640979
Hadith´s have also been added in the 1800´s

File: kek.jpg (25KB, 400x386px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 400x386px

>>2641014

>>2641006
did early Christians have the same view of the bible as a the most perfect thing ever?

>>2641024
no. That would be Jesus.

>>2640906
>Why doesn't this religion change itself to conform to the beliefs of modern Western liberals?

It's a mystery.

>>2641018
They are if you're not a degenerate

>>2641024
no where near to the same extent as in islam

>>2641030
yes lets remain a barbaric medieval religion just so we can say "fuck you" to western liberal values

>>2641044
Yeah, because that "barbaric" medieval religion is right.

>>2641032
Fuck off Hasan.

>>2641046

So some illiterate warlord merchant in arabia gets a message from Gabriel, and is able to write down this "perfect" document from God's words


sounds legit bro

>>2641024
>early christians
>chose which books went into the bible
>interpretations/doctrine agreed upon in councils
>pope/bishops had the power to promulgate encyclicals which emphasize particular teachings

So no. The bible was born in debate and agreements with leaders who can be persuaded to adapt and reinterpret passages according to changing times

>>2641055
so what if i start a movement to change some passages of Islam?

>>2641049
>>2641051

More legit than Christianity, which will soon be overtaken

>>2641058
stoning?

>>2640953
Golden Age was a result of the Mutazilite doctrine actually. It was a movement which started in the early 800s and which claimed the Quran was not infallible (as well as the rest of the sunnah) as opposed to the contemporary orthodox mainstream view. It didn't last very long and got BTFO within 100-150years from its conception and gave way to a reactionary backlash, the asharite school and the Al-Gazelus doctrine (author 'incoherence of philosophers", which averroes try to debunk with his 'incoherence of incoherents' but never could undo the damage). However within the 100-150 years it had the ear of the caliphs, it was enough to pass all the reforms which made the Islamic Golden Age possible.

Then the mongols arrived, burning down baghdad and the House of Wisdom (the islamic version of the library of alexandria) in 1259 and many muslim theologians took it as a sign of God that intellectual/philosophical inquiry was haram as fuck. Also Jihad as a political/military doctrine was gaining traction at the very same time under the tutelage of Ibn Taymiyah (under the logic that jihad meant armed resistance to invaders - the mongols in this context).

It's hard to argue that the islamic GA was congruent with orthodox muslim doctrine, it happened preciseoy because they dared to put the quran on the back burner. Something they havent really had the guts to repeat since.

It doesn't need to, not least because fuck your feelings and anyone else who gets all reee about it

>>2641063

It most definitely does if Muslims expect to be welcomed in western society.

You don't get to march into secular free societies and use your very freedoms to impose draconian theocratic laws upon others. It's completely anathema to the entire concept of western civilization.

>>2641062
its also important to add that alot of the Golden Age of Islam was predicated on Greek/Hellenistic knowledge

>>2641083
Where in europe is sharia the norm then anon?

>>2641090
They mainly relied on the intellectual contributions of the conquered Sassanids (basically the "last" persians). It's not even a meme that the overwhelming majority of islamic intellectuals during that period were of persian origin. And if they weren't chances are they were from Al Andalus. Really makes one think.

Define civilized.

Sounds stupid but Islam in its expansion has had a series of reforms and stringent measures sweep a myriad of cultures that it becomes hard to define a clear trend or development for Islam modernizing.

For example, up until only a few decades ago it was very common not to see a hijab ANYWHERE in North Africa. Many Islamic schools and communities became very relaxed with the modesty laws and the Islamic philosophy was relatively liberal. Even further back, towards the middle ages, Islam had solidified itself in Pan-Arabia through a means of intellectual compromises.

I do not mean to say that these compromises excused one required custom of Quran to fit into the local culture (though this did happen often, especially in India). The general understanding of religion and how it ties into truth and philosophy evolved. You had intellectual centers in Baghdad and Islamic Spain translating and carefully studying works of the founders of Western thought: Plato, Aristotle, Epicurus, Sophocles, Democritus, and other Greek thinkers whom obviously didn't fall within the ideological mold of Muhammad. Nonetheless, these teachers were praised for their works in philosophy and the early sciences and their knowledge was incorporated into the religious and intellectual traditions of the new Islamic communities spreading from Spain to Persia.

Even at the risk of receiving flack, Muhammad and his followers adopted foreign ideas and traditions that would define the text and methodology of the Quran and Islam. The limit of having four wives: it was a regulation of polygamy enacted by the Talmudic thinkers and rabbinical leaders of the Arabian Jewish community. Prostration in prayer: a ritual practiced among Jews in times when synagogues did not have chairs. Washing, laws of finance and trade, clean and unclean foods, judicial institutions, textual study and interpretation, and even the hijab were either co-developed with or adopted from the rabbinic communities.

>>2640932
>would appear
It's literally forbidden according to the Quran.

>>2641058
Presumably you will have a fatwa made against you and you will be stabbed with a machete in broad daylight while out buying your dragon dildos.

>>2641108
Civilized in today's usage isn't necessarily the intermingling of historic practices and ideas. I presume you mean civilized in the context of post-enlightenment zeitgeist: the scientific method, critical analysis freed of traditional truths, individualism, et cetera.

In these specifics, some are cultural revelations that simply cannot be transferred into the Pan-Arabia communities. You cannot teach individualism to an Iraqi just as you could not teach individualism to a serf in the middle ages. Such an idea has to be discovered and sought after the populace. Individualism can only be achieved as a virtue by internal struggle. The Western world can help guide and accelerate an enlightenment in the African coasts of the Mediterranean or the flat lands encompassing the Tigris and Euphrates, but enlightenment is not given to another. Enlightenment is discovered.

The necessity of this struggle drains, but does not empty, in the other areas of civility and modernity. While individualism is an optional virtue to adopt by a people, the scientific method is not. I mean to say that if a people wish to develop their villages, cities, and country, they necessarily need to adopt the fundamentals of the scientific method. A Muslim cannot say "This bridge will stand without arch support, Allah wills it!" If the bridge is not engineered correctly, it will fall. And since a religious foundation to a people must necessarily follow, even begrudgingly, an acceptance of the laws and workings of the universe, the Muslim will have to correct himself. "This bridge stands with arch support, Allah be praised for the wonders of the architect."

So when will Islam civilize itself? Well first the vestiges of unscientific thinking will wash away as the logistical needs of its followers will overpower the mystic thinking. Roads need to be build, hospitals need to be maintained, crops need higher yields, or the next generation will die out and disperse.

>>2641164
And when the scientists and engineer fulfill the basic needs of life and living, people will climb up Maslow's pyramid. They will seek a modern understanding of sociology, psychology, religious teachings, parable, and ethics. Maybe their answer to these questions of higher understanding will differ from our own. Who is to say that an idea of individualism will ever arise in Pan-Arabia. Maybe a Kant will never be born in Iraq or a Nietzche in Egypt. Maybe something entirely new will arise to answer these greater inquiries into the purpose of humanity. We may agree that civilized Islam is not here, but what civilized Islam will look like may differ entirely from what you and I can imagine.

>>2641044
You don't seem to understand the point: They actually believe in their dogma. God told them to live this way, "lol dont you want an iPhone and sitcoms haha" is not a valid response to that." Especially considering they can get many of the the material benefits without compromising anything in the faith itself.

>>2641108
>>2641164
>>2641178
tl;dr also
> Prostration in prayer: a ritual practiced among Jews in times when synagogues did not have chairs. Washing, laws of finance and trade, clean and unclean foods, judicial institutions, textual study and interpretation, and even the hijab were either co-developed with or adopted from the rabbinic communities.
can you cite that?

>>2641183
Many do it out of spite because they can't handle western banter. Also hating the west is pretty much the only "2 minutes of hate" their oppressive regimes allow them to have. A prime example of that is the qud's festival in Iran with their "death to america death to israel" maymays.

>you can criticize the foreigners habibi
>but dont you dare to the same to your rulers
Sadly many fall for the memes

>>2640906
Doubtful.
If there's one thing all Muslim sects seem to hold I similarity is their interpretation of the Quran. Their main differences stem from post-Mohammad politics, namely everything to do with Ali.

>>2641062
I'm not too keen on this subject, but could you or someone else give examples as to how these reforms catalyzed the "Golden Age"? And I'm assuming the golden age was more economic than technological.
Please, by all means, correct me if I'm being a dumbfuck.

>>2641083
Except that's the very thing that's happening in Yuropoorland :^)

>>2641198
Not him, but I have come across at least a couple of those things as being absorbed from Jewish culture in unrelated books.

>>2641225
mind laying some examples out?

>>2641200
I agree that the political situation is not the least bit helpful but the whole notion of "why don't they just change lol" runs into very real philosophical problems.

>>2641234
I wouldn't but I honestly can't remember most. The only one I can remember was from a book I read recently on the history of rhetoric during the middle ages. In a chapter about the practice of preaching they touch upon the Jewish traditions of it and they talk specifically about the practices of biblical study and how the Christians later continued that tradition. As if the Muslims also adopted those same traditions as they expanded their empire I have no source to give you, but it seems more than plausible.

>>2641024
The only thing Christians can agree on is that they disagree about everything. The history of the religion is practically based on conflict over what the "correct" interpretation is.

>>2641218
I'm not an expert on Islamic history, I just have a general overview understanding of their culture. I mostly took an interest in how their empire spread (the rashidun and ummayyad period) and got checked at the frontiers of western europe; and how it ended (the waning years of the Ottomans).

But from what I understand about the Mutalizite is that it developed mostly out of academic dispute over the assassination of Osman (the 3rd caliph before Ali and the Sunni/Shia schism). As I said, not an expert of islamic doctrine but from I've read Osman was assassinated because he held on to the "orthodox" view that he was rightly appointed by Allah to rule, whereas the people did not want him in power. So at the heart of this debate is a debate over fatalism and free will. Which is basically the very heart of the mutazila philosophy. They were also major greekaboos.

So it didn't take root for another 100years til the Umayyad got BTFO by the rising Abbasid in the very late 700s. And from what I remember it was Al-Mamoun the great reformer who officially adopted mutazila as the main islamic interpretation of Islam. Namely they rejected fatalism and the infallibility of the Quran - they instead believed that if Quran is the word of God, the God must have preceded the Quran and since the Quran is evidently written & recited by men, then only the existence of Allah is a certainty, and everything that is dogmatic must be taken with a large grain of salt.

Some cynics (and arguably rightfully so) believed Al-Mamoun utilized the Mutalizite as a mean to an end by purging his more "conservative" rivals. There was indeed an inquisition of sort at the hands of the mutazilites (the Midna) during the mid 800s. The mutazilite were not particularly angels and in a weird way, they are partly responsible for the conservative sects of islam starting to codify their dogmatic beliefs even more strongly.

>>2641044
Medieval barbarism is objectively better than Western liberalism

>>2641083
>draconian theocratic laws
>anathema to the entire concept of western civilization

Kys

>>2640906
Islam was a good system when it first emerged and Islamic empires were prosperous and comfy for hundreds of years. the problem is this >>2640931 mentality, which is basically true notwithstanding disagreements between Shiite and Sunni Muslims

File: 1491706058258.jpg (125KB, 642x726px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 642x726px

>>2641243
>but the whole notion of "why don't they just change lol" runs into very real philosophical problems.
I agree but I think it has more to do with institutions than anything else, at least in practice. Islam does not have a catholic church, a vatican, a source of authority to which to pin 95 theses. It's for the most part fairly decentralised and lacks clear sense of hierarchy. Sure you have certain centres like AlAhzar in Egypt which hold more weigh than others, but they still aren't the direct superiors that one could hope to challenge in order to push for a reform. There just isn't that central authority that all the members follow to argue and debate against.

So whatever "authority" you might force to reforme, most muslims can just say "not my imam/ I disagree" and that's that. There is no compulsion to take the reformation effort seriously UNLESS it comes from all muslims themselves. And the idea that 1billion people would suddenly all agree on religion at the same time is a ludicrous notion. That's why I pretty much believe "islamic reformation" is a pipedream coming from a christian outlooker mindset. It just doesnt fit the model of islam.

Also let's not forget the christian reformation led to countless massacres, inquisitions, wars of religion including one of the deadliest in Europe (30 year war) and encouraged mass flight/migration from one continent to the next. I don't know if we really want/need that right now.

>>2640906
Wtf, Bektashijja for example; all Sufi schools are reformed Islam. Also, there are some heretics as Druzes, Alawits and so on, which are pretty civilized. Also, if you'll focus only on Quran, it doesn't look as barbaric as today Islam; it's fucking mystery why Islam looks now as it looks. For example, Quran doesn't force any special way for women to wear they clothes.

Okay, and now seriously, fuck all religions equally

File: tmp_15743-fremen624146164.jpg (14KB, 300x170px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x170px

>>2640906
Yes, but it'll take a while.

I don't get your statement OP, is it a troll? It's almost like you have no clue about the Reformation or about Islam in Central Asia or the Balkans and Turkey, which isn't fanatical in the least.

>>2641093
I never said sharia was the norm. But there are Islamic groups that are lobbying government to make it so. Im pretty sure there's at least one sharia court in the UK.

>>2641222
That's my point. I'm saying it's a bad thing.

>>2641393
They are dumbass. In the USA freedom of expression and religion are the core tenets on why it was founded. Using your freedom of religion to subjugate others just because your religion says to is a violation of the constitution.

>>2641598
>Western civilization = USA

Please never ever post again

>>2640906
Possibly if it achieves totality.

>>2641489
Assuming Sufism doesn't predate Islam.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKQ2NQ7BR9Q

>>2641624

It was an example.

But do tell how the imposition of an external religion on your rights and personal behaviors in any western society allows for the growth of free thought and expression.

Turkish revolution after WW1 is a good example for modernised Muslims. It actually didn't let "radical" or any oppressive Islam to stay alive, instead boosted secularist doctrines and enforced non-religious education. And Muslim population become more civilized until conservatives&reactionaries showed up.

But, there is no way that Islam, as a religion, can be civilized. The religion itself is against modern civilization. It has it's own system and that is not civilized.

So answer of the OP's question is no. Only way is having secular-autocratic governments in Muslim countries for decades.

>>2640906
No. Islam is the final perfect word of God (According to Islam)
It cannot be reformed.

>>2641676
This. It's about enforcing secular doctrine, namely separation of church & state and that becomes the consensus among the muslims in the developing world then the battle is essentially won. You have the right to think fags and traps are sinful BUT it is not your job to intervene, you can leave that to your God(s) in whatever afterlife or reincarnation system you subscribe to.

Trying to force secular thinking on religious beliefs is never gonna be accepted, but trying to argue temporal =/= eternal might be workable. Christians and jews did it afterall.

Muslims unironically take pride in the fact that Islam has remained the same.

They have no incentive to work or do anything because they they are in the Perfect One True Religion and the rest of humanity are filthy kafirs. The only obligation they need to fulfil is to rid the world of infidels.

>>2641014
>-t. Muhammad bin-wasabi al shishkebab

>>2641058
Invest in Bollards.

>>2640906
Islam reformed many times in its life time, sometimes not so good as others. Today there are many versions of Islam sharing alot of things and most of them are peaceful and merging with western societies. The problem is with the wahabis controlling most of middle eastern religious media and screwing muslim minds up

>>2641062
This is the most accurate thing ive seen on this board, congrats for you knowledge

>>2641717
Yes. The Quran is really direct. In fact, it's orders are very clear and can't be judged because the book says it can't be judged by any mean. Those are the words of God. So the only way to civilize Muslim world is enforcing secularist ideas.

Turks did it once, they become civilized for more than 50 years. Arabs are sandnuggers so basically it's better to destroy whole middle east and keep Constantinapole as a museum.

>>2640906
>IDK 300 fucking years ago

You people have no sense of self-awareness. Not even 100 years ago in the UK, women couldn't vote, sodomy was illegal, divorce was illegal, and there was an enforced state religion. At that same time there was a Catholic Taliban wrecking shit in Mexico.

>>2640906
Christianity didn't reform in to something better, the secularists simply contained it. After the protestant reformation christians became more violent(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_wars_of_religion). It wasn't until the secularist did all they could to stop what was happening, did the west become more tolerant. And it took until ww2 before the west decided to to fully commit to those ideas. If anything the salfist, wahabbist, islamists movements are the muslim equivalent the christian reformations.

religions changing are irrelevant; it's the politics that must change. There are too many dictators oppressing average people until they start sympathizing with terrorists. There are too many butthurt intellectuals who want to get back at the west for colonialism. And there are too many defense contractors advising world leaders to take actions that destabilize regions into buying more weapons.

The muslims will not join the civilized world until borders are redrawn, democracies with reall checks and balances are instituted, and economic stability is enforced.

>>2640906

>Christianity
>civilized

Just because its religion lost its prominence to the state Post-Westphalia doesn't mean it became "civilized" all of a sudden. We were still prosecuting laws based in religious principles up to 50 years ago here in the states.

The fact that as christian nation states we have wrote all sorts of arbitrary by-laws of what constitutes a "just war" in what is supposed to nominally be a pacifistic faith of universal brotherhood shows just how far people would go to justify killing someone different from them.

This is coming from a catholic who espouses the idea of just war as purely defensive principle.

But Islam is not beyond reformation. If anything the Salafist and Wahabbi zealotry we witness today is actually a reformist arm of Islam that was brought about near the end of the 18th century.

>>2640906
No. Now let's go and bomb them and take their oil.

>>2640906
>Christianity
>Civilized
top kek

>>2640906

>Islam
>reform

Are you saying Muhammad got it wrong?

>>2640906
Islam will never reform as it had major splits 4 rulers in, unlike with Christianity where the first heresies never got enough followings

File: 1489104982106.jpg (25KB, 462x480px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 462x480px

>>2640906
>Christianity did
>I don't understand what the reformation is
>but it must do with the violence in the OT and stuff

Maybe after a long time.