9 ms·

It is important to get a diverse set of opinions about this situation. Here is a response to the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/

It is important to get a diverse set of opinions about this situation. Here is a response to the article: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/what-muslims-really-want-isis-atlantic/386156/ http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/02/wha...

duaneb 11y ago
Frankly, I think the response completely missed the point of the article, which is about the intentions of ISIS. However. There is definitely an ideological fight here over what Islam is. I just think it is a separate discussion altogether. I didn't read the article as attempting to do anything but discern the intentions of the state. Could someone explain? I'm having a difficult time not seeing these issues as a projection of fears.
agarden 11y ago
I read both. I wish the article you linked to had more substance. It provides no argument that ISIS is misinterpreting Islam, only assertions. If someone has an article that actually makes that case, citing texts and explaining the misinterpretation, I'd like to read it.
- throwaway_user 11y ago
  It is hard to explain the idea of the narrative and give all the details within a couple of pages. There are detailed (and somewhat tedious) refutations from Islamic theologians such as al-Yaqubi's Refuting ISIS (http://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Religious-Ideological-Foundations/dp/1908224126 http://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Religious-Ideological-Fo...). Mohammad al-Yaqubi is an orthodox Sunni scholar who was the Imam of the largest Mosque in Damascus until being forced into exile by the Syrian government. There are other works by scholars from different currents within Sunni Islam. As a lay Muslim, I will give a few examples. The interpretation of correct Islamic creed and behavior according to Sunni Muslims is according to the Qur'an and Hadith as understood by the early Muslims, principally the first four caliphs and some of the closest students of the Prophet, succeeding generations, and four or five schools of law established thereafter. Within these schools, there is debate and re-interpretation. So simply citing a snippet of text to support your position, if it contradicts other texts, established practice, or informed consensus opinion is not going to fly. For example, Daesh burned a captured Jordanian pilot alive while his tribe and the Jordanian government wanted to have him released under a prisoner exchange. There are specific Hadith and verses to support that prisoners of war can be ransomed or exchanged. More pointedly, there is a well accepted Hadith that burning is specifically prohibited as a punishment for even the severest enemies. This is a well-known Hadith and is accepted by all schools of law. So Daesh not only ignored all the Islamically available options which they might have used, but did an act to further inflame specific Sunni Muslim communities that they claim to defend. Further, they did something which would offend all people ethically and goes against specific Islamic rules. While slavery in the medieval period was practiced against enemies that would do the same, there has been a consensus among Muslims and non-Muslims alike that this is a thing of the past. Muslim governemnts have signed specific international conventions banning it. Even extremely vile outfits like their predecessors like AQ had never mentioned bringing it back. They however chose to revive it against communities that were not doing this to them. Sending irregular forces under the guise of a Muslim community which is bound by a legal agreement with a country and endangering said agreement is something that is again prohibited. i.e., the Muslims living in France as citizens or foreigners are under a legal framework of citizenship or diplomatic recognition of Muslim countries wherein they are given legal protection in France in return for obeying French law and not fighting them.
- kashifzaidi1 11y ago
  If you'd like to read how they are misinterpreting islam, here is the longer version in the book : http://www.amazon.com/No-god-but-God-Evolution/dp/1400062136 http://www.amazon.com/No-god-but-God-Evolution/dp/1400062136 the gist is, They are interpreting things literally without any history and context of what a verse of Quran meant and revealed for, one would argue that should have been fine, but it isn't because it reduces islam to their interpretation. Arabic is a very diverse language, with tens of meanings for a word (often contradictory) and which one you pick and choose depends upon what type of a person you are, if you are a hate mongering terrorist, you would find those meanings to justify your terror like isis is doing, if you are a peace loving feminist, you would find plenty to justify that (using the same verses). This would mean that their interpretation would depend alot on their socio economic status, the kind of society they live in, the world view they have etc. People often judge islam by the norms of 6th century arabia, Islam has a evolutionary process in place called ijtihad, which the intolerant people don't seem to use. But if you would have to judge islam, you would have to either assume yourself to be in 6th century to see why they were relevant at that time, or to remove them so to understand the general direction islam gives.
  - dpark 11y ago
    > If you'd like to read how they are misinterpreting islam ... They are interpreting things literally That is an odd definition of "misinterpreting". Biblical literalists are generally not accused of "misinterpreting" the Christian Bible. They are commonly accused of being antiquated, crazy, or dumb, but it's hard to accuse someone of "misinterpreting" something because they follow its literal meaning. It similarly seems incorrect to say ISIS is "misinterpreting Islam" by reading the Koran literally. It may not be the popular interpretation, and it may not be a pleasant interpretation, but that doesn't mean it's an incorrect interpretation. Christian groups like to accuse each other of misinterpreting the Bible. Church of Christ members say that Catholics have misinterpreted the organization of the church. Catholics say that Baptists have misinterpreted the apocalypse. Etc. These accusations in reality say very little about the validity of the accused's interpretations, and merely serve as a way for the accuser's to assert the correctness of their own interpretations. "Your interpretation of the Bible is wrong" has no more validity than "Your choice of religion is wrong" in general.
- _nedR 11y ago
  Here is an article that IMO better describes ISIS's actions : (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file...)
- _nedR 11y ago
  Not exactly what you asked for but Here is an article that IMO better describes ISIS's actions : (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file...)
- duaneb 11y ago
  They are definitely taking non-traditional interpretations along with traditional ones. I still don't see how this is at all interesting—what matters is that ISIS members buy into it.
musha68k 11y ago
The Nation also has some very insightful articles which further illustrate the complexity of the issue: "What I Discovered From Interviewing Imprisoned ISIS Fighters." http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-isis-prisoners/ http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-inte... "To Defeat ISIS, We Must Call Both Western and Muslim Leaders to Account" http://www.thenation.com/article/we-cannot-defeat-isis-without-defeating-the-wahhabi-theology-that-birthed-it/ http://www.thenation.com/article/we-cannot-defeat-isis-witho...
_nedR 11y ago
This Der spiegel article has IMO provided the best model to explain ISIS's actions :(http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file... ) I don't agree with the parent article. They are basically parroting the official stance of ISIS which has been covered (in a much better way)before : http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/anne-speckhard/isis-iraq_b_5541693.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/anne-speckhard/isis-iraq_b_5... Yes. ISIS has cultivated a doomsday cult through their propaganda machine. ISIS wants to be seen by the world as a doomsday cult, and all their propaganda is aimed at this. But ISIS's actions in the past have not matched their propaganda. For example why is an organisation that claim's to adhere to Salafist fundamentalist principles, in war with pretty much every Salafist faction in Syria?During 2013 - mid 2014, they were in a truce with Assad's government. At the time they almost exclusively attacked Rebel outfits. Many groups including the Syrian Observatory kept claiming that several major ISIS offensives on rebels, were often preceeded by airstrikes from the Syrian govt indicating coordination and cooperation. The truth is that ISIS is a purely opportunistic faction that won't allow any moral or even religious considerations from getting in the way of its ambitions.
- agarden 11y ago
  That was an interesting read. It did sound like ISIS has a powerful faction, at least, that is only using religion as a pretense and tool. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that all of ISIS is like that. It could be that such men as Bakr were instrumental in getting things started, but those brought in to provide religious pretense eventually became the more powerful faction. Also, I don't see how temporary alliances with a secular regime indicate lack of true religious conviction. If making temporary, strategic alliances with Assad and fighting agianst the Syrian rebels was plainly hypocritical, I would think that would staunch the flow of true believers to their ranks. And while we may debate whether or not ISIS is the haven of belief it portrays itself to be, I don't think we can question that there are many, many people on the outside that it successfully recruits because they believe it to be that. Which requires at least that the hypocrisy not be blatantly obvious.
  - 11y ago

duaneb 11y ago

Frankly, I think the response completely missed the point of the article, which is about the intentions of ISIS. However. There is definitely an ideological fight here over what Islam is. I just think it is a separate discussion altogether. I didn't read the article as attempting to do anything but discern the intentions of the state. Could someone explain? I'm having a difficult time not seeing these issues as a projection of fears.

agarden 11y ago

I read both. I wish the article you linked to had more substance. It provides no argument that ISIS is misinterpreting Islam, only assertions. If someone has an article that actually makes that case, citing texts and explaining the misinterpretation, I'd like to read it.

throwaway_user 11y ago
It is hard to explain the idea of the narrative and give all the details within a couple of pages. There are detailed (and somewhat tedious) refutations from Islamic theologians such as al-Yaqubi's Refuting ISIS (http://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Religious-Ideological-Foundations/dp/1908224126 http://www.amazon.com/Refuting-ISIS-Religious-Ideological-Fo...). Mohammad al-Yaqubi is an orthodox Sunni scholar who was the Imam of the largest Mosque in Damascus until being forced into exile by the Syrian government. There are other works by scholars from different currents within Sunni Islam. As a lay Muslim, I will give a few examples. The interpretation of correct Islamic creed and behavior according to Sunni Muslims is according to the Qur'an and Hadith as understood by the early Muslims, principally the first four caliphs and some of the closest students of the Prophet, succeeding generations, and four or five schools of law established thereafter. Within these schools, there is debate and re-interpretation. So simply citing a snippet of text to support your position, if it contradicts other texts, established practice, or informed consensus opinion is not going to fly. For example, Daesh burned a captured Jordanian pilot alive while his tribe and the Jordanian government wanted to have him released under a prisoner exchange. There are specific Hadith and verses to support that prisoners of war can be ransomed or exchanged. More pointedly, there is a well accepted Hadith that burning is specifically prohibited as a punishment for even the severest enemies. This is a well-known Hadith and is accepted by all schools of law. So Daesh not only ignored all the Islamically available options which they might have used, but did an act to further inflame specific Sunni Muslim communities that they claim to defend. Further, they did something which would offend all people ethically and goes against specific Islamic rules. While slavery in the medieval period was practiced against enemies that would do the same, there has been a consensus among Muslims and non-Muslims alike that this is a thing of the past. Muslim governemnts have signed specific international conventions banning it. Even extremely vile outfits like their predecessors like AQ had never mentioned bringing it back. They however chose to revive it against communities that were not doing this to them. Sending irregular forces under the guise of a Muslim community which is bound by a legal agreement with a country and endangering said agreement is something that is again prohibited. i.e., the Muslims living in France as citizens or foreigners are under a legal framework of citizenship or diplomatic recognition of Muslim countries wherein they are given legal protection in France in return for obeying French law and not fighting them.
kashifzaidi1 11y ago
If you'd like to read how they are misinterpreting islam, here is the longer version in the book : http://www.amazon.com/No-god-but-God-Evolution/dp/1400062136 http://www.amazon.com/No-god-but-God-Evolution/dp/1400062136 the gist is, They are interpreting things literally without any history and context of what a verse of Quran meant and revealed for, one would argue that should have been fine, but it isn't because it reduces islam to their interpretation. Arabic is a very diverse language, with tens of meanings for a word (often contradictory) and which one you pick and choose depends upon what type of a person you are, if you are a hate mongering terrorist, you would find those meanings to justify your terror like isis is doing, if you are a peace loving feminist, you would find plenty to justify that (using the same verses). This would mean that their interpretation would depend alot on their socio economic status, the kind of society they live in, the world view they have etc. People often judge islam by the norms of 6th century arabia, Islam has a evolutionary process in place called ijtihad, which the intolerant people don't seem to use. But if you would have to judge islam, you would have to either assume yourself to be in 6th century to see why they were relevant at that time, or to remove them so to understand the general direction islam gives.
- dpark 11y ago
  > If you'd like to read how they are misinterpreting islam ... They are interpreting things literally That is an odd definition of "misinterpreting". Biblical literalists are generally not accused of "misinterpreting" the Christian Bible. They are commonly accused of being antiquated, crazy, or dumb, but it's hard to accuse someone of "misinterpreting" something because they follow its literal meaning. It similarly seems incorrect to say ISIS is "misinterpreting Islam" by reading the Koran literally. It may not be the popular interpretation, and it may not be a pleasant interpretation, but that doesn't mean it's an incorrect interpretation. Christian groups like to accuse each other of misinterpreting the Bible. Church of Christ members say that Catholics have misinterpreted the organization of the church. Catholics say that Baptists have misinterpreted the apocalypse. Etc. These accusations in reality say very little about the validity of the accused's interpretations, and merely serve as a way for the accuser's to assert the correctness of their own interpretations. "Your interpretation of the Bible is wrong" has no more validity than "Your choice of religion is wrong" in general.
_nedR 11y ago
Here is an article that IMO better describes ISIS's actions : (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file...)
_nedR 11y ago
Not exactly what you asked for but Here is an article that IMO better describes ISIS's actions : (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file...)
duaneb 11y ago
They are definitely taking non-traditional interpretations along with traditional ones. I still don't see how this is at all interesting—what matters is that ISIS members buy into it.

musha68k 11y ago

The Nation also has some very insightful articles which further illustrate the complexity of the issue: "What I Discovered From Interviewing Imprisoned ISIS Fighters." http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-interviewing-isis-prisoners/ http://www.thenation.com/article/what-i-discovered-from-inte... "To Defeat ISIS, We Must Call Both Western and Muslim Leaders to Account" http://www.thenation.com/article/we-cannot-defeat-isis-without-defeating-the-wahhabi-theology-that-birthed-it/ http://www.thenation.com/article/we-cannot-defeat-isis-witho...

_nedR 11y ago

This Der spiegel article has IMO provided the best model to explain ISIS's actions :(http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-files-show-structure-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/islamic-state-file... ) I don't agree with the parent article. They are basically parroting the official stance of ISIS which has been covered (in a much better way)before : http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/anne-speckhard/isis-iraq_b_5541693.html http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/anne-speckhard/isis-iraq_b_5... Yes. ISIS has cultivated a doomsday cult through their propaganda machine. ISIS wants to be seen by the world as a doomsday cult, and all their propaganda is aimed at this. But ISIS's actions in the past have not matched their propaganda. For example why is an organisation that claim's to adhere to Salafist fundamentalist principles, in war with pretty much every Salafist faction in Syria?During 2013 - mid 2014, they were in a truce with Assad's government. At the time they almost exclusively attacked Rebel outfits. Many groups including the Syrian Observatory kept claiming that several major ISIS offensives on rebels, were often preceeded by airstrikes from the Syrian govt indicating coordination and cooperation. The truth is that ISIS is a purely opportunistic faction that won't allow any moral or even religious considerations from getting in the way of its ambitions.

agarden 11y ago
That was an interesting read. It did sound like ISIS has a powerful faction, at least, that is only using religion as a pretense and tool. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that all of ISIS is like that. It could be that such men as Bakr were instrumental in getting things started, but those brought in to provide religious pretense eventually became the more powerful faction. Also, I don't see how temporary alliances with a secular regime indicate lack of true religious conviction. If making temporary, strategic alliances with Assad and fighting agianst the Syrian rebels was plainly hypocritical, I would think that would staunch the flow of true believers to their ranks. And while we may debate whether or not ISIS is the haven of belief it portrays itself to be, I don't think we can question that there are many, many people on the outside that it successfully recruits because they believe it to be that. Which requires at least that the hypocrisy not be blatantly obvious.
- 11y ago