Those who are self-taught about Islam are called ignorant, since they taught themselves.
A theological school teaches religious Islam, not political Islam. Universities do not teach about the evil of Islamic politics and a history of persecuting Kafirs. But if you choose to learn by your efforts, you are told you cannot possibly understand it, yet an illiterate Muslim can.
Islamic doctrine consists of Koran, Sira and Hadith. The Sira is a biography and the Hadith is a collection of small stories about Mohammed. Anybody can understand Mohammed’s life and hence, understand Islam. The only part of the Koran that matters to a Kafir is the part that deals with them. Any Kafir can understand what the Koran says about him.
When people say you cannot educate yourself about Islam, what they are really saying is they are afraid or too lazy to read for themselves. If you cannot teach yourself then no need to try. But today anybody who can read can understand political Islam.
————-
Самообразование в области Ислама
Самоучек в области Ислама принято называть дилетантами, так как они сами себя учили. Теологическая школа изучает религиозный, а не политический Ислам. Университеты не изучают зло исламской политики и историю преследования Кафиров. Однако, если вы захотите учиться своими собственными силами, то вам скажут, что вы, возможно, не можете этого понять, хотя неграмотный мусульманин может.
Исламская доктрина состоит из Корана, Сиры и хадисов. Сира — это биография, а хадисы —сборник небольших рассказов о Мухаммаде. Любой может понять жизнь Мухаммада, а, стало быть, понять Ислам. Единственная часть Корана, которая рассматривает вопросы Кафиров — это та часть, которая занимается ими. Любой Кафир может понять, что Коран говорит о нем.
Когда люди говорят, что вы не можете самостоятельно изучать Ислам, они в действительности говорят, что они боятся или слишком ленивы, чтобы самостоятельно прочитать. Если вы не можете сами учиться, то и пытаться не стоит. Однако сегодня любой, кто может читать, может понять политический Ислам.
6 Responses
levon425
excellent point -RCH
anti-statist
Terrific presentation Dr. Warner! And as RCH said above; “I completely second ur observation”.
elisko
(typos corrected)
I had exactly this argument with someone some months ago, and my response was rather different.
The fact of the matter is that much of Western intellectual life is based on the idea that we CAN know something meaningful about a subject when we are less than expert. Do we expect someone to be intimately familiar with all the works by a particular author or filmmaker, and of all other works in the same genre, before s/he can write a book or movie review? Of course not! While we might attach additional weight to the work of the person meeting those criteria, that doesn’t prevent us from accepting the review as an assessment of the work.
Similarly, it is common in any discipline to start the educational process with “survey” courses, wherein one surveys the field, and that includes religion. In an “Intro to Religion” course, several weeks might be spent on each major faith, but no more, and Islam would be entitled to no more or less time than any other major faith. During that course, we wouldn’t expect the student to convert willy-nilly from one religion to the next, every few weeks, in order to “properly” understand each faith s/he was studying; we’d label any student doing so as not only intellectually shallow but emotionally unstable, and probably send them for psychiatric evaluation! At the end of the course, we would expect students to have a meaningful understanding of each faith, including Islam, capable of assessing them and passing an examination of their understanding.
Further in academia, we award degrees in the field of Comparative Religion. A degreed individual in this discipline is expected to have a deep knowledge of several faiths, a smattering of understanding (but more than survey course’s worth) of most faiths, including at least one from each major family of religions, and another set of knowledge about the assessment of religions, to meet the “Comparative” portion of the field’s moniker. Yet nowhere in the course requirements for such a degree would we find the practitioner to be required to practice ANY faith — a confirmed atheist, who does not believe in ANY religion, could acquire such a degree! And the possessor of such a degree would be expected to know something about Islam, too, WITHOUT needing to observe the strictures of the Mohammedan way in life or thought.
For further example, the early Greeks actually developed mathematics as part of a philosophical/religious school. They thought mathematics was a divine understanding of the way of the world. Nowadays, however, we do not expect anyone to become an intitiate of the Pythagorean sect in order to learn geometry. Anyone claiming today that “only Pythagoreans can understand mathematics” would be laughed out of any institution one cares to name, except a mental institution. We find such a claim ludicrous!
Anyone who claims differently is denying the validity of ALL Western intellectual thought. OF COURSE we can understand Islam without being Mohammedans, and even without being indoctrinated by a fanatic devotee of Mohammed. This whole position is simply one more attempt to force Mohammedans into any crevice in Western intellectual and social life into which they can infiltrate, by requiring that all teachers of Islam are “faithful,” or else incapable of teaching. The very existence of this position should serve as a warning to any thinking individual about Islam’s attempt to take over Western culture.
elisko
I had exactly this argument with someone some months ago, and my response was rather different.
The fact of the matter is that much of Western intellectual life is based on the idea that we CAN know something meaningful about a subject when we are less than expert. Do we expect someone to be intimately familiar with all the works by a particular author or filmmaker, and of all other works in the same genre, before s/he can write a book or movie review? Of course not! While we might attach additional weight to the work of the person meeting those criteria, that doesn’t prevent us from accepting the review as an assessment of the work.
Similarly, it is common in any discipline to start the educational process with “survey” courses, wherein one surveys the field, and that includes religion. In an “Intro to Religion” course, several weeks might be spent on each major faith, but no more, and Islam would be entitled to no more or less time than any other major faith. During that course, we wouldn’t expect the student to convert willy-nilly from one religion to the next, every few weeks, in order to “properly” understand each faith s/he was studying; we’d label any student doing so as not only intellectually shallow but emotionally unstable, and probably send them for psychiatric evaluation! At the end of the course, we would expect students to have a meaningful understanding of each faith, including Islam, capable of assessing them and pasing an examination of their understanding.
Further in academia, we award decrees in the field of Comparative Religion. A degreed individual in this discipline is expected to have a deep knowledge of several faiths, a smattering of understanding (but more than survey course’s worth) of most faiths, including at least one from each major family of religions, and another set of knowledge about the assessment of religions, to meet the “Comparative” portion of the field’s moniker. Yet nowhere in the course requirements for such a degree would we find the practitioner to be required to practice ANY faith — a confirmed atheist, who does not believe in ANY religion, could acquire such a degree! And the possessor of such a degree would be expected to know something about Islam, too, WITHOUT needing to observe the strictures of the Mohammedan in life or thought.
For further example, the early Greeks actually developed mathematics as part of a philosophical/religious school. They thought mathematics was a divine understanding of the way of the world. Nowadays, however, we do not expect anyone to become an intitiate of the Pythagorean sect in order to learn geometry. Anyone claiming today that “only Pythagoreans can understand mathematics” would be laughed out of any institution one cares to name, except a mental institution. We find such a claim ludicrous!
Anyone who claims differently is denying the validity of ALL Western intellectual thought. OF COURSE we can understand Islam without being Mohammedans, and even without being indoctrinated by a fanatic devotee of Mohammed. This whole position is simply one more attempt to force Mohammedans into any crevice in Western intellectual and social life into which they can infiltrate, by requiring that all teachers of Islam are “faithful,” or else incapable of teaching. The very existence of this position should serve as a warning to any thinking individual about Islam’s attempt to take over Western culture.
Self-Taught about Islam | PatriotsBillboard
[…] post Self-Taught about Islam appeared first on Political […]
Jaylinnstrom
As far as I know, Dr. Warner is the only scholar who emphasizes the dualistic nature of Islam and of Koran. With that one understanding alone, Dr. Warner has made a HUGE contribution to the study and understanding of Islam. Anyone who is not cognizant of Dr. Warner’s work is simply being ignorant about the totality of Islam as a religion and as a culture.