Muslims interpret Essay
After a brief treatment of how Muslims interpret the Qur’an to inform their attitudes toward and dealingss with non-Muslims.
this paper discusses Bosnia as an illustration of a surroundings where Muslims enjoyed good dealingss with non-Muslims. specifically with non- Christians and Jews. The period reviewed is the half-century or so prima up to the Bosnian War of 1992-1995.However. affable relationship between Muslims. Christians and Jews in Bosnia can be traced back to the beginning of Muslim presence in the Balkans. harmonizing to beginnings consulted.
Duran ( 1995 ) described Bosnia as “the other Andalusia” and compared interfaith dealingss at that place with the earlier period of Muslim regulation in Spain. With mention to harmonious coexistence and scholarly exchange in Andalusia. Mann ( 1992 ) and others use the term convivencia to depict harmonious interaction.Duran more than implied that Bosnian Islam before the war was the type of Islam Europeans should welcome as compatible with European values and ideals. the type of Islam Muslim minority communities in France. Great Britain and elsewhere ought to emulate because it removes many tensenesss that can be between Muslim minorities and the bulk population in these provinces. However. non all observers represent Bosnian Islam as holding enjoyed positive dealingss with non-Muslims.
Some represent Bosnian Muslims as holding oppressed non-Muslims for centuries during Ottoman regulation in the Balkans and see them as race-traitors purpose on set uping Muslim domination throughout the whole of Europe. Based on the authorship of Rusmir Mahmutc? ehajic? . a former Vice-President of Bosnia. Duran and Douglas M Johnston and Jonathon Eastvold. this paper upholds the position that Muslims in Bosnia enjoyed positive dealingss with non-Muslims and that Bosnian Islam offers lessons to others on how people of different faiths can co-exist in peace. with common regard and tolerance. Mahmutc? ehajic?. argues that Muslim-non-Muslim co-existence in Bosnia.
which he calls the harmonia Abrahamica. provides an indispensable balance against any individual tradition going perverse. idolising itself as the lone true religion. After a brief general treatment of Muslim attitudes toward non-Muslims. this paper turns to Bosnia. get downing with the beginnings of Islam there so discoursing Bosnian Islam in the 2nd half of the 20th century. This paper argues that.
as a effect of the West more or less abandoning Bosnia during the struggle. dealingss between the spiritual communities became embittered.Using chiefly texts by Bosnian authors. the methodological analysis used gives precedence to insider voices while besides listening to what foreigners have said.
Muslim attitudes towards non-Muslims Much has been written on this topic. Muslims relate to non-Muslims in a assortment of different state of affairss. On the one manus. Moslems are guided by the Qur’an and by Islamic tradition.
including Hadith ( expressions of Muhammad ) in covering with others. On the other manus. existent dealingss on the land are besides influenced by context. Where Muslims are a bulk or a minority exerting power. this context influences dealingss and attitudes with non-Muslims.
Where Moslems are themselves a minority without political power. their attitudes may be different. Qur’anic poetries relevant to attitudes towards other faiths have been widely discussed. for illustration. by Esack ( 1997 ) and Bennett ( 2008 ) . Some poetries have been described as “verses of friendship” .
others as “verses of hostility” . The first poetries inform a friendly attitude toward people of other religion. particularly toward Bible possessing communities ( Peoples of the Book ) and even affirm that they enjoy a echt relationship with God.
For illustration. Q2: 62 and 29: 46. The 2nd poetries inform a negative attitude and include 3: 85 and 5: 51.3: 85. which says that God will accept no faith other than Islam.
has been interpreted as call offing the poetries of friendly relationship. replacing them with ill will. Esack says that this reading represents a “significant opinion” among exegetes ( 1997. 162 ) . Esack argues that Muslims have tolerated others as social-political communities while denying the cogency of their faiths. In this position.
non-Muslims in Muslim society are to be humiliated. treated as second-class citizens. Restrictions on their frock.
businesss. travel and agencies of travel are found in classical texts ( Bennett. 115 ) .However. there are besides hadith on being sort to minorities.
known as dhimmis. to non over burdening or over taxing them. Many Muslim swayers employed Christians and Jews in of import stations. Others dismissed them.
Friedmann ( 2003 ) suggests that Muslim swayers choose which poetries and traditions they use to inform their traffics with minorities harmonizing to what they find compatible with their ain positions and ignore what is incompatible ( 116 ) . Dhimmis are those who agree to pay a particular revenue enhancement and to populate as a protected community. demuring certain limitations ( such as non bearing weaponries and seeking to change over Muslims ) in return for protection.Discussion of the experience of dhimmis is complicated because it has become portion of cultural war between critics of Islam and vindicators. Friedmann refers to the claim that minorities in Muslim society fared better than they did in Christian contexts ( 4 ) while Bet Ye’or ( 1996 ) caricatures the intervention of non-Muslims by Muslims universally rough.
roasting the claim of tolerance or that they dhimmis fared better than minorities did in Christian Europe. The dhimmi system. she says.
was designed to consistently work. humiliate. oppress and finally to destruct non-Muslim society ( 247 ) .Dhimmi may be bulks in district under Muslim regulation.
non minorities. Bosnian Islam Islam entered Bosnia with the Ottoman invasion and conquering. which took topographic point in 1463.
Critics speak of forced transitions followed by centuries of oppressive regulation. with longstanding hostility between non-Muslims and the Muslims. all of whom were called “Turks” although most were fellow Slavs. In 1991.
on the Eve of the Bosnian War. Bosnia had big Numberss of Serbs ( Bosnian Serbs ; 31 % ) and Croatians ( Bosnian Croats ; 17 % ) every bit good as those who saw themselves as Bosnian. although all were really Slavs.It besides had a significant Judaic presence. About 43 % of the population was Muslim ( 1991 nose count ) .
However. usage of the footings “Bosnian Croat” and “Bosnian Serb” are misdirecting. because these people are really Bosnian Catholics and Bosnian Orthodox who choose to place as Croats and Serbs because Croatia is a bulk Catholic and Serbia an bulk Orthodox province.
In both of provinces. there is a close relationship between national and spiritual individuality. Johnston and Eastvold studies that “99.5 per centum of Orthodox trusters besides considered themselves to be Serbs and 98. 1 per centum of Roman Catholics considered themselves to be Croats’ harmonizing to a 1953 census” ( 225 ) . It was non until 1968.
under the Yugoslavian Constitution. that Muslims could register as ‘musliman’ . or as ‘Muslim by nationality” although many preferable to place merely as “Bosnian” . In Yugoslavia ( which was Serb dominated ) Bosnians had to be either Serb. Croatian and after 1968.
Muslim. Mahmutc? ehajic?sees this as the start of a tendency that compelled Bosnian Muslims. who like to be called “Bosniaks. ” to prioritise their spiritual over their national individuality. driving a cuneus between themselves and non-Muslims. Mahmutcehajic and Duran say that most Bosnian Muslims at the clip that Yogoslavia began to go off saw their province as a multiethnic.
multi-religious world in which there was ‘unity in diversity’ . They opposed “all political orientations that are based on exclusivity and disregard the call for charity towards others” ( Mahmutcehajic. 2000a: 35 ) .
Duran ( 1995 ) described Bosniaks as “leading in democracy and modernness. in pluralism and secularization” and as prefering “a province for all Bosnians regardless of their spiritual affiliation” ( 31 ) . Duran points out that Bosnian Islam besides itself diverse and that different schools maintained good relationships with one another. A hidebound leader such as Hafiz Kamil Silaijich. Imam of Sarajevo’s largest mosque was in “close and amicable contact with reformer groups” ( 33 ) .
Assorted matrimonies were common.Islamic jurisprudence was non practiced and the prevailing look of Islam might best be described as “Islamic humanism” non “fundamentalism” ( 32 ) . Duran suggests that Bosnian Islam was merely the type of Islam that some European Muslims describe as ‘Euro Islam’ ( Tibi 2001. 226 ) . Sells offers a really similar description to Duran. with the celebrated Mostar span as a symbol of an ethos of bridging difference. or of integrity in diverseness ( see Sells.
148 ) . Mahmutcehajic argues that Bosnia has a long history. pre-dating the Ottoman period and the presence of Islam. of encompassing diverseness.He rejects the contention that different religio-ethnic groups in Bosnia had a record of ill will and hostility. a image painted by. among others. the political leaders of Serbia and Croatia before and during the Bosnian struggle.
for whom Muslims represent “the immorality Other. the incarnation of crudeness and inhumaneness … opposed to the civilised virtuousnesss of European culture” ( 2000a. 61 ) . Even if Bosnian Muslims and Christians had one time lived together in peace. they could no longer do so ; as Radovan Karadnic put it. “Serbs can non populate together with Muslims and Croats” ( cited by Mahmutcehajic 2000a. 46 ) .
Harmonizing to Mahmutcehajic. Bosnians have ever resisted centralising inclinations. valuing integrity in diverseness. Bosnian Christians. known as Bogomils. did non fear or kneel before icons or the cross ( 2000b. 121 ) .
While there was ne’er any formal understanding between Bosnia’s different spiritual communities that “no individual credo can hold precedence. nor that the right route ballad in duologue based on credence of the religions of all participants” . this consensus however emerged ( 2000a: 119 ) .Following the Ottoman conquering.
Islam became another spiritual option in Bosnia. so the phase was set both for non-icon. non-cross reverencing. Arianist-tending Bosnian Christians. or Bogomils. to change over to Islam and for all spiritual communities to go on to co-exist on the footing that each represented a feasible “path” . based on “respect for the statement that ‘God gave every people their jurisprudence and their manner of life’” ( 200a.
119 ; mentioning Q5: 48 ) .Conversion to Islam took topographic point over clip. There were some inducements for change overing but Mahmutecehajic argues that it was due to the work of Sufi instructors.
whose presence in Bosnia preceded the Ottoman invasion that encouraged transition. ( 2000b: 124 ) . Q5: 48 is frequently cited by Muslim pluralists to demo that spiritual diverseness is portion of God’s program. Jews besides lived in Bosnia. After the ejection of Jews from Spain ( 1492 ) . Bosnia was one of the Ottoman states where many found safety.“Bosnia” . he says.
“is possible the lone European province where antediluvian thoughts about the multiplicity of sanctum learning have managed to obtain a bridgehead before being consumed by the desire for nation-states” ( 2000a: 120 ) . As a consequence of the war. when some Serbs and some Croatians tried to destruct Bosnian Muslim society. Bosniaks developed a “more blatant Islamic individuality. ” which was precisely what their enemies had set out to accomplish – to cut down Bosnia’s Muslims to their Muslim individuality.
so to “portray” them as “radicals” who represented a “potential menace to planetary stability” .Mahmutc? ehajic? resigned from the Cabinet when he saw his vision of “unity in diversity” compromised by those who appeared to desire power for the interest of power. Despite this.
Bosnian Muslims portion power with Christians post- 1995 and many remain committed to populating in a democratic. pluralist. tolerant province although boundaries between communities are now more stiff. with “divisions between … entities turning them steadily into countries of ethno-national authorities that communicate chiefly through … international go-betweens. ” ( 2000a. 124 ) .
Mentions Bennett. Clinton. 2008. Understanding Christian-Muslim dealingss. London: Continuum. Duran. Khalid. 1995.
“Bosnia: The Other Andalusia. ” 25-36. Abedin.
Sayed S and Sardar. Z. Muslim Minorities in the West. London: Grey Seal.
Sells. Michael Anthony. 1998.
The span betrayed faith and race murder in Bosnia. Comparative surveies in faith and society. 11. Berkeley: University of California Press.