Comment 1:
So, there's a concept called the People of the Book in Islam, which includes all monotheistic religions that pre-date Islam, and have certain similar fundamental concepts: existence of hell/heaven, acceptance of all prophets and messengers (Noah to Muhammad - only a few are mentioned in the Qur'an, but according to Islam there were thousands).
Generally, though, Christians and Jews are considered People of the Book.
There are certain books specifically mentioned in the Qur'an as being revealed to the righteous (with the added bit about how they were over thousands of years changed): Injil or the Gospel revealed to Isa, Qur'an revealed to Muhammad, Torah revealed to Moses (Musa)and Zabur revealed to David (Dawood). There are other minor scriptures mentioned, too. Few centuries ago, Al-Biruni - one of the most respected Muslim theologians from Persia - considered Buddha to be a prophet, too (Yes, Muslim scholars used to seriously study Far Eastern religions - comparative religious studies was a big thing then, and it wasn't to malign other faiths). Islam used to be a lot more inclusive compared to what it is today.
In fact, there is an exhaustive source of Islamic literature - jurisprudence, interpretation, philosophical ideas, etc, etc. Until the Mongols screwed that s**t up, but it's unfair to completely blame them. In the modern context, you can fair and square point the finger at Saudi for taking the biggest Wahabbi dump over religion (I lived there for 18 crazy years with my own horror stories to tell).
Gabriel (Jibreel) also features heavily in Islam. He is considered one of the archangels, the other three being Mikhail (Michael), Israfel and Izra'il (Azrael, Angel of Death).
Israfel is the Angel of Trumpet. He is supposed to blow the trumpet from the holy rock in Jerusalem to announce Resurrection. Israfel is extremely hairy with a body covered with mouths and tongues that reach the seventh heaven. It is winged. One to shield himself, one to shield himself from God, one extends to the East and the other to the West. He is also called the Angel of Sorrow, because 'he' (Angels don't have a gender in Islam) weeps at the sight of Hell day and night.
Of course, these descriptions are more folklore than religion. But, it's still pretty neat s**t. A lot of amazing fictional literature came out (Arabic and Persian) from these folklore that people don't get to read.
Muqaddimah (Ibn Khaldun), The Incoherence of Philosophers (Al-Ghazili), The Incoherence of Incoherence (Averroes' rebuttal) and Faith and Reason in Islam : Averroes' Exposition of Religious Arguments (Averroes).
These are just 4 examples of fantastic medieval literature that I personally like. The only strain of Islam that continued to delve deep into religion was Sufism. It's so sad that madrasas nowadays are just these pathetic places devoid of all this beautiful knowledge, and, instead, argue about petty and irrelevant s**t like how long your beard should be (it's not even obligatory to grow one), or lengthy discourses about how 'Muslim' a particular person is before they're declared 'not a Muslim'.
Anyway... if anyone has more questions, I'd be happy to answer. I've always found most Islamic sites and Wikipedia to be extremely reductive, narrow, biased (Muslim scholars tend to deliberately neglect other sources that challenge their understanding) and largely insufficient.
---------------------
Comment 2:
My passion for all this research began when my dad once said to me, "I would rather Islam end under 10 great Muslims than spread under 10 million fools." He always taught me to stop and educate others about religion (all kinds of religion - he is a fairly devout Muslim, but believes all religions lead to the same point and begin from the same point) even if it meant you would be attacked, because other people's irrational violence will only prove your point further.
1400 years of knowledge and history is being white-washed (blood-washed?) to suit one political ideology - control of power.
Today, only three schools of theology have survived (legit): Maturidi, Ash'ari and Athari. The extinction of the others were due the same reasons not all economic philosophies have survived.
I can guarantee you, your first reading of major Islamic texts will confirm your beliefs about how crappy it is. I won't even challenge that. This is because contextual nuance is lacking.
This school of theology would be Athari: Literalism over kalam, ie, theologising scripture. Traditionalism over rationalism. They reject metaphors (very silly, quarter of Qur'an is metaphors). The Hanbali School of Thought uses this ideology. Hanbali is popular in Saudi, and gave rise to the Wahabbi sect. It also gave rise to the Kharijites, who are older, and terrorists today will trace their ideologies to Kharijite scholars. (ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, etc)
Ash'ari favours tasfir, ie, rigorous and contextual interpretation. Here, if the Qur'an was for all times, and time is relative (in Islam, time was different for Adam, is different for us, different for God), then interpretations are relative. Ijma (consensus by jurists) is favoured to pass propositions. Ash'ari is unique in that it claims all people to whom the message of Islam didn't reach properly or corrupted for whatever reasons will go to heaven, too,as they are faultless.
Maturidi, on the other hand, is more interesting. Maturidi rejects the idea of faith increasing. It is taqwa (righteousness) that increases by doing just and good deeds. Maturidi theology is similar to the Mu'tazili school of thought (extinct) which claimed that human beings have the innate ability to judge stark wrongs from rights, and the Qur'an is a revelation aimed to reinforce these morals.
Another interesting school of theology that went extinct due to its obscurity was Jariri by Muhammad ibn Jariri al-Tabari, a celebrated Baghdadi Muslim scholar. We've lost some of Al-Tabari's works (9th century).
He was a prominent critic of Hanbali school of thought. Al-Tabari was a supporter of women's rights and believed that the Qur'an and Hadith could easily be interpreted in a feminist light to expand religious roles to women. Unfortunately, there are no online Islamic libraries where all ancient and medieval Islamic texts are openly accessible to the public! They are public knowledge!
This lack of access has always been a big problem (Also, I'm a little piss poor right now,so can't buy these medieval texts).
But, some things are accessible to all Muslims, yet I see horrible practices encouraged by the State in Middle East. Eg:
Khadija, first wife of Muhammad for some 30-40 years (monogamous). She was a businesswoman who proposed to Muhammad by sending him a proposal through her friend. God forbid, if you propose to someone now.
Aisha, the 'controversial one', lead an army against Ali (4th Caliph) to avenge the murder of the previous Caliph. She felt Ali didn't do enough to catch the culprits. Can't even ride a camel now.
Lubna of Cordoba was a Spanish slave who was a mathematician, royal librarian, grammarian, poet and palace secretary in the Ummayad palace (Ummayad Caliphate).
Fatima Al Batayahiyyah was one of the greatest scholars of the 8th century. During her pilgrimages, she would hold smalls seminars, and men from various cities would come to hear her. Al Batayahiyyah, in fact, used to teach sitting next to Muhammad's grave, and in his mosque. Women aren't even allowed to see his grave now.
Another female scholar, Umm al-Darda once wrote, “I’ve tried to worship Allah in every way, but I’ve never found a better one than sitting around debating with other scholars.” The Caliph of Damascus was one of her students. The *ahem* ISIS 'caliph' would die before being taught by a woman.
When the Qur'an was being compiled, it was Hafsah, the daughter of Caliph Umar, who was entrusted with its safekeeping. Today, they're hardly part of the education system (horrible curriculum in Saudi! Horrible!)
Umm Umara was a female soldier who fought alongside Muhammad, who praised her strength and skill as superior to many seasoned male soldiers. She continued to be a part of small battles until she severed her arm in the Battle of Uqraba.
Umma Hakim is known to have killed seven Byzantinian soldiers in one fight on her own in the Battle of Marj al Saffar. So, bit of a legendary favourite in circles who're aware of women warriors.
There are a lot of stories of crazy retarded warrior women and female scholars in Islam - stories children desperately need to read to remove this pathetic idea of women as feeble and gentle.
To be fair, religion also has a hand in creating this stereotype as they developed in sexist cultures. Kinda like cultural backwash.
But, when the same religions also have enough evidence to the contrary, why are we sticking to the stereotype that makes an entire community stupider? Why not leave the inconsistencies out?
This is not to say discrimination, racism, sexism and religious intolerance did not exist then. States did execute people for heresy or what have you. Atrocities were also committed. Much like in the rest of the world! But, the negatives pale a little in comparison to all the positives. But, we've allowed our bigoted governments to embrace this negative and stomp on 1,400 years of wonder and progress. Back arsewards tomfuckery, if you ask me.
Even in 'freer' countries like India, women's contributions get swallowed. Take Razia Sultan (she hated being called Sultana) of the Delhi Sultanate from the 13th century (If I'm not wrong). Militarily trained, highly intelligent, very learned and a good leader, until she was overthrown by the nobility for being a woman Muslim ruler. Her story is such an incredible one, constantly overlooked by Indian textbooks. Movie material stuff. She was in love (apparently) with an Abyssinian slave, who was one of her advisors. So the Turkish noblemen couldn't stand that s**t - being of much more noble birth and superior race (eh racism was strong; still is in most of Asia). She fought a battle against her own people, and lost. She married the leader of the rebellion Altunia, and vowed to take back the Sultanate from usurper Bahram Shah, her brother and all-round douchebag. They lost, and were later robbed and killed by Jats (North Indian herder community).
These people are like my ancestors, pretty much. It is very hurtful to see their hard work being squandered this way, and their legacy being defiled.
For instance, Zaynab, the daughter of Caliph Ali, wrote her own goddamn biography,which no one is encouraged to read. She is famous for the sermon she gave against Yazid I, the usurper Caliph. I'd probably get beheaded if I did that today in public in Medina or Karbala (Iran). In fact, this post can be used by the Saudi government to charge me under their new supremely terrifying terror laws.
Dr Akram Nadwi who's compiling a 40-volume collection on Muslim women scholars. We're talking about some 8000 women lost to history that he discovered after pouring over hundreds of Islamic texts locked up in libraries. This coming from a very orthodox preacher who said in an interview: “ [Thomas] Gray said that villagers could have been like Milton. Muslim women are in the same situation. There could have been so many Miltons.” What was the response? 'Oh no! This is wrong! It will encourage... MINGLING OF THE SEXES!' (DUN! DUN! DUNNNN!)
Generally, I feel so much is not taught in schools about world religions and cultures. Like, the unique cultures of various African Jews, or how Christian texts developed from Africa to Europe, and with it, the understanding of Jesus/Isa. We have so many misconceptions (even Wikipedia! Ugh) about Yazidi religion, Druze religion and Zoroastrian religion. Hinduism! Which isn't even one religion to begin with. Sikhism is an equally badass religion, and there's this interesting historical love-hate relationship between Sikhs and Muslims. (They unite in their mutual hatred for Indira Gandhi)
I would any day sit and devour Miamonides' work (Muslims jokingly call him 'unintentional Muslim' because of how what he wrote was so much in line with Islamic jurisprudence and philosophy) than give one crap about what the Shoura Council comes up with.
It's a personal cause with me, because I cannot bear to see 1,400 years of diverse histories, cultures and experiences within Islam (and Middle East, too) reduced to 'mingling of the sexes', 'beard length', 'should I shake hands with a woman?' or 'do periods effect women's ability to be good leaders?' If you love knowledge, it's a disservice to religious study even from a secular standpoint.
There are naturally going to be differences in religion (duh - and so, friction), and there is this unfair repulsion towards paganism that is historic (perhaps, this is the reason why even non/less-religious people tend to mock modern pagan and Wiccan beliefs - it's a historical intolerance we've inherited). We're so obsessed with 'seeing the positive', we don't realise how to reap benefits out of negative friction, and turn it into a positive one.
We need to make these differences healthy differences, as we have done with other subjects like history and politics. Most importantly, admit historical mistakes and unfair treatment of minorities than be apologetic about it. Yeah, that's how s**t rolled then, but simply agreeing to the 'wrongness' of it is a great step in respecting other traditions. It's the first step to being part of humanity. Sharing histories, cultures, religions, responsibilities.
Our children not only inherit our wealth, they inherit our histories, and the history of our ancestors. They inherit the burden of our mistakes, too, even if not the blame. If we are responsible to bear the debts of our dead parents, then we must also proudly bear the responsibility of acknowledging these mistakes in sincere good will.
I see this lacking in a lot of people my age. It is a combo of arrogance and ignorance (eh.. they rhyme, even): 'Hey! I didn't do shit! So why should I apologise? Why should I justify my x-y-z for what someone else did.'
We are a product of so many things, not born in vacuum.
We must learn to find differences intriguing, similarities exciting, diversity humbling. Or, just learn to shut up.
---------------------
Comment 3:
@BoredMe
I fully understand you.
As the Al Saud tribe grew stronger, the Ottoman Empire grew weaker, eventually culminating to that point where the Al Saudi tribe was just strong enough and Ottoman Empire was just weak enough to create the perfect opening to topple the Ottomans.
Their educations system still sucks, loaded with religious nonsense with the sole purpose of encouraging hate, bigotry, racism, tolerance, sexism, violence and extremely selective history. My mum's friend was so tired of her son's syllabus - some 14 subjects, most of them religious. What the fuck?
I wouldn't blame anyone for hating Islam or Muslim if they were going by Saudi's example. But, if it counts, many Muslims across the world despise Saudi Arabia, because they actively destroy cultures in other countries. They fund the destruction of Muslim shrines across the world. They set up madrasas to spread their rubbish ideology. For many Muslims, it is actually a very scary ordeal, and opposing it in South Asian (or South-East Asian) countries could easily mean bloody riots ensuing. Everywhere they are, they are a strong and violent minority.
They're like the Private Villa of Corrupted Crops of religion, if that makes sense.
Their hatred for culture surprises me. Do check out the Mansoojat Foundation online to see the level at which Saudi Arabian culture has been suppressed and destroyed. When you do that to your own people, the hatred for other cultures becomes obvious.
Unfortunately, with how unstable the rest of the Middle East is, the Royal family is bound to get a lot of support from Saudis to protect the borders from ISIS.
There are rare people like Prince Talal, the infamous Red Prince, who wanted to introduce a Constitutional Monarchy in Saudi Arabia to hold the Saud regime more accountable. He was part of the Free Princes Movement (liberal), which died down. But, his status as a prince helped him keep his head.
