Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله
  • entries
    168
  • comments
    274
  • views
    34,677

Flowering of religions

Haji 2003

Entry posted by Haji 2003 in Interfaith

1,940 views

 Share

Summary

Since the inception of Islam, there had been various sects competing for prominence; many had died out, and the two major ones were Twelver Shia and the Sunni fiqh.

Then suddenly, from the start of the 19th century to the end of that century, we have the emergence of Ahmadiyya, the renewal of Ismailism and the creation of a new faith entirely, Baha ism. Go back a hundred years, and we can add Wahhabism to this list. I identify a common thread amongst all these new religions in this post.

Four religions in a couple of hundred years ... and three Knights

That's an unusually fertile period of spiritual spontaneity by any measure. Or is the explanation for such flowering of faith more mundane and perhaps guided by vested foreign interests or even stimulated by them? Because what marked that period, from the ones that preceded it was the growing recognition by countries from outside the middle eastern region that it was an important geographical location in itself and also for its proximity to the wealth of India. That latter point is important because there is little disagreement that British foreign policy towards the middle east paid due cognisance to the views and interests of the Government of India - of course, that is a pre-independence Government, so wholly controlled by Britain.

Wahhabism

Abdul Wahhab developed what is commonly referred to as an austere interpretation of Islam, one that denounces the rituals and beliefs that he felt had accreted over the centuries. There is a rich vein of (conspiracy) theories, easily found on the internet, that in his travel to Iraq in the early 18th century, he could have come across British agents (specifically a 'Mr Hempher'). Certainly, the British East India Company had been well established at that time, and a British consulate had been established in Iraq in 1802. Less widely commented on is the fact that the famous Danish/German explorer Carsten Niebuhr travelled to Arabia in 1761.

But leaving conspiracy theories aside, it's possible to develop an argument about foreign involvement based on far less controversial ideas. Britain may not have been a midwife to Wahhabism, but I think people of all geo-political persuasions would agree that Britain was a helpful nanny.

The person with whom the British did have extensive dealings was Ibn Saud, who had entered into a pact with Abdul Wahhab in 1744. British sources said he persistently approached Britain for support and was generally rebuffed. Saud was a political leader who continued to promote the Wahhabi philosophy after the death of its founder. Saud was no cleric. But he was shrewd enough to mould the ideology as the basis for providing a motivation for conquest and a glue that would hold his fighters together. British records show that he took responsibility for hiring and firing clerics based on his political agenda.

My source for this and some other information about Wahhabism that is presented here is a PhD dissertation submitted to King's College London in 2002 by Hassan Syed Abedin, titled "Abdul Aziz Al-Saud and the great game in Arabia, 1896-1946".

Ibn Saud (who would in due course be given the British title 'Knight Commander of the Most Eminent Order of the Indian Empire') was ultimately successful in his goal of receiving support from Britain in 1914 when Britain needed to have someone distracting the Ottomans so that they could devote fewer resources to World War I taking place in Europe.

Prior to that, it's argued that Ibn Saud had spent considerable efforts in achieving a status similar to the one held by Mubarak Al Sabah, the emir of Kuwait. This ideal status would have meant that Sauds and their territories would have been subjects of the Ottoman empire, but who would be given the protection of the British.

This version of events does not look very good for Ibn Saud, presenting him as someone who is willing to do business with non-Muslims in order to undermine a Muslim ruler, and he'd serve a useful role in helping Britain with the following objective:

What we want is not a United Arabia; but a weak and disunited Arabia, split up into little principalities so far as possible under our suzerainty-but incapable of coordinated action against us, forming a buffer against powers in the west.

Crewe private telegram to Hardinge, Viceroy of India, November 12,1914, cited in Busch Britain, India and the Arabs: 1914-1921, p. 62.

Ismailis

Further, east we find the rise of the modern-day Nizari Ismailis, whose Aga Khan in the mid-19th century created a new role for himself in providing services to the British Empire (Aga Khan I would receive an annual British pension of £20,000 per year). Mihir Bose (a noted writer on the subject) says that the Aga Khan had to plead his case for some time before the British took him seriously since they wanted to be sure that they were backing a local ally who'd present them with better value than the alternatives. His grandson Aga Khan III would be bestowed the title of 'Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Star of India'. Their esoteric faith was totally at odds with the one promulgated by Wahhab, but regardless of that difference served a useful purpose.

It must be known that the Aga Khan had tried to convince Nasir Khan, the Talpur Amir of Kalat, to cede Karachi to the British. Nasir Khan refused it; therefore, the Aga Khan disclosed his battle plan to Major James Outram. As a result, the British camp was saved from a night attack. The Aga Khan had also placed his cavalry at the disposal of the British. For his valuable services in Afghanistan and Sind, the Aga Khan was granted an annual pension of 2000 pounds with an honorific title of His Highness.
http://ismaili.net/Source/jerruk/1.html

Regardless of the support he gave, the British were aware of the hypocrisy of his religious position:

He is a God—his income immense. He lets none of his sect kiss his hand under twenty rupees, and is the greatest rascal possible, that is, a clever brave man, but being a God makes a virtue of any sin he likes to commit. I speak truly when saying that his followers do not and dare not refuse him any favour he asks, wives, daughters, slaves, money, houses, furniture, are all his, and he doesn’t let the privilege grow rusty. He could kill me if he pleased, he has only to say the word and one of his people would do the job in a twinkling and go straight to heaven for the same. He is too shrewd for that however, and they all have a great fear of me since the battles.

Sir Charles Napier to Governor-General of India, Earl of Ellenborough, 1843

The period around the 1840s is interesting for the following reason, as the following letter makes clear:

“It is desirable to hold an instrument by which we may at any time throw the South of Persia into rebellion and thus paralyze any attempt at an advance from Tehran to the Eastward. . . . The Aga Khan’s residence in Indian territories will certainly be viewed with extreme jealousy by Persia.” 17

Purohit, T. (2012) The Aga Khan Case (religion and identity in colonial India). Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

The writer of the letter is Major Henry Rawlinson, the military officer who worked for the commission in Persia from 1834 to 1838 and subsequently served as a political agent in Qandahar. So the British were interested in there being dislocation in Iran at around this time because of a perceived threat to their interests in Afghanistan.

This makes the genesis and development of the third religion covered here all the more interesting.

Bahai'ism

In roughly the same period, the mid-nineteenth century, we also see the rise of the Bahai faith in Iran. Mirza Ali Mohammad was born in 1820 and was executed in 1850. A focus of his attention was economic inequality in Iran. There were clear political implications, as  noted by the middle eastern commentator Juan Cole:

In the nineteenth century Iran, in contrast, the Bahais were a radical-reformist group advocating banned ideas such as parliamentary elections, some of their members held high political office, and they had not been forbidden to join political groupings or (later) parties.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/2000/urbanbh2.htm

The socio-economic aspect of Bab's teachings are also explained here:

In the teaching of Babiism it was said: the poverty of the peasants had brought the rich to wealth. "Now, the oppressed people of Iran... arise...",32 These practical teachings gained considerable support among the impoverished masses of the rural and urban areas.

In Gillan, Mazandaran and Khorasan the peasants joined the Babi movement in large numbers. In the cities people refused to pay taxes. In Zanjan, people attacked the prisons, attempting to free those imprisoned for failing to pay their taxes.33 The wide support the Babi movement received was an indication of the alienation of both the state and the ulama from the people. Even considerable numbers of the lower-ranking ulama joined the Babi movement. The total strength of the movement was estimated by competent authorities at nearly one and a half million or about twenty percent of the total population of Iran.

Mansoor Moaddel (1986) The Shi'i Ulama and the State in Iran. Theory and Society, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Jul., 1986), pp. 519-556. This extract: p526.

This socio-religio-poliitcal impact of a new faith did not go unnoticed by the colonial powers of the time and gained ground as a result of their support as a means of destabilising the Qajar dynasty. Like Ibn Saud, Abdul Baha, eldest son of the Baha'u'llah, would also be awarded the title of Knight Commander of the Order of the British Empire, ostensibly for his work in alleviating famine.

 

Quote

In the history of modern Iran, the Babi movement was the first manifestation of popular protest that challenged both the Qajar monarchy and the Shi’i clerical establishment. It gradually not only broke away from Shi’ism and Islam but also laid the foundations for a new religion—the Baha’i faith.

Russian diplomats tried to follow important events in Iran and informed their superiors at the so-called Persian desk or Persian section in the Asian department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Thus, when the early information about the Bab, his teachings, and his movement reached the Russian embassy in Tehran, it was immediately forwarded to St. Petersburg.

Sensing this Iranian sensitivity, Russia came to see in the new faith, its exiled leaders, and the local community as a means of pressuring the Iranian government.

Shahvar, S. (2018) ‘Oppression of Religious Minority Groups in Times of Great Upheaval in Late Qajar Iran: The 1892 Persecution of Jews and Baha’is of Jewish Origin in Hamadan Based on Two Newly Discovered Letters’, The Jewish quarterly review. University of Pennsylvania Press, 108(2), pp. 225–251.

 

Ahmadiyya

 

Going further east, we find the third innovation in the Muslim religion towards the end of the 19th century and one that would lead to charges of being the creation of a new religion entirely. The Ahmadis would destabilise Muslims in the Indian sub-continent. Their support for the British in India is expressed in their texts:

We acknowledge with great regret that Islam’s maulavis have focused on an improper definition of jihad and have taught the Frontier Region’s tribes to unjustly harm this friendly [British] government by spilling the blood of its honourable officers.

For example, every other day the Frontier Region’s violent tribes kill the British officers who are protecting their lives and property, as well as that of their Muslim brethren.
http://www.alislam.org/library/books/BritishGovt-and-Jihad.pdf

There is a reason for this approach; unlike the established religions of the Indian sub-continent, the leader of this new religion needed legitimacy. By acquiescing to the needs of the invaders, he sought to achieve that. For the established religions doing the same would have been challenging because they would have lost the legitimacy of their many existing followers; the new religion with far fewer followers had much less to lose in this respect but potentially a great deal more to gain. 

Conclusion

I am not saying that the British went into the middle east with the prior notion of introducing new faiths. However, it is reasonable to say that in an environment where there were new powers in the region, for someone starting a new faith, the potential for a symbiotic relationship with these new arrivals was obvious. 

For the invaders, these new religions provided a ready-made supportive constituency with which to challenge the established order, whether it be the Ottomans, the Qajars or the established religious order in India.

 Share

5 Comments

Recommended Comments

  • Forum Administrators
Haji 2003
  • Forum Administrators

Mirza Ghulam Ahmed

A couple of questions that I asked of chatgpt worth posting here in addition to the answers.

Q. Does the Ahmadiyya movement have beliefs supportive of the British occupation of India?

A. 

Quote

 

The Ahmadiyya movement, a relatively recent Islamic movement founded in the late 19th century in India, did not have a unified stance on the issue of British occupation of India. While some members of the movement supported British colonial rule and worked closely with the British government, others opposed British occupation and advocated for Indian independence.

The founder of the Ahmadiyya movement, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, initially expressed support for British colonial rule, seeing it as a means of protecting Muslims in India from persecution and promoting social and religious reforms. Ahmad believed that British rule would help to modernize Indian society and bring an end to the traditional caste system and other forms of social inequality.

However, as the movement grew and became more politically active, its stance on British rule became more complex. Some members of the movement became increasingly critical of British policies, such as the partition of Bengal in 1905, and advocated for Indian independence. Others continued to support British colonial rule and worked closely with the British government, including serving in the Indian Civil Service and other administrative roles.

Overall, the Ahmadiyya movement did not have a uniform stance on the issue of British occupation of India, and different members of the movement held different views and positions.

 

 

I tried again and this time got the answer I was looking for. Text below that is relevant to my argument is underlined.

 

Q. Did Mirza Ghulam Ahmad instruct followers not to attack the British in India?

Quote

 

Yes, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement, did instruct his followers not to attack the British in India. Ahmad believed that violence was not the solution to the problems facing the Indian people, and that non-violent resistance and peaceful protest were the best ways to bring about social and political change.

Ahmad emphasized the importance of loyalty to the British government and encouraged his followers to work within the system to effect change. He believed that the British could be persuaded to make reforms and that the Indian people should seek to engage with the government rather than oppose it.

In a letter to British officials in 1899, Ahmad wrote: "I am firmly convinced that the British Government is the means for the progress and well-being of India and that is why I offer it my heartfelt devotion and loyalty." He also urged his followers to cooperate with the British government and to support its efforts to bring about social and economic reforms in India.

Overall, Ahmad's teachings emphasized the importance of peaceful resistance and non-violence, and he encouraged his followers to work within the system to bring about change rather than resorting to violence or armed rebellion.

 

 

Link to comment
  • Forum Administrators
Haji 2003
  • Forum Administrators

Aga Khan I

I asked chatgpt

Q. What help did Aga Khan I render the British Empire?

The answer was:

Quote

 

Aga Khan I, the 46th Imam of the Nizari Ismaili community, was known for his loyalty to the British Empire and his willingness to cooperate with the colonial authorities. He rendered several forms of assistance to the British Empire during his lifetime, including:

Military support: Aga Khan I provided military support to the British Empire during the Indian Rebellion of 1857, also known as the Sepoy Mutiny. He mobilized his followers and raised a force of several thousand Ismaili soldiers to fight against the rebellion, and his forces were instrumental in helping to suppress the rebellion and restore British control over India.

Diplomatic support: Aga Khan I provided diplomatic support to the British Empire in its negotiations with other colonial powers. He used his influence and connections to help broker diplomatic agreements and alliances between Britain and other countries, including Persia and Afghanistan.

Financial support: Aga Khan I provided financial support to the British Empire through his business and banking connections. He invested in British businesses and provided loans and other forms of financial assistance to British colonial officials and institutions.

Overall, Aga Khan I's support for the British Empire was significant and helped to strengthen British control over India and other parts of the world. While his actions were controversial and sparked criticism from some members of the Ismaili community, they were seen as a reflection of his commitment to maintaining peace and stability in the regions under British colonial rule.

 

 

This was interesting because I was unaware of the support chatgpt says he gave the British during the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857. So I searched on Google Scholar and nothing obvious came up!

So I went back to chatgpt and asked:

What is the evidence that Aga Khan I mobilised troops to help the British suppress the mutiny in 1857?

The answer was as follows, somewhat more nuanced than the answer above, but chatgpt does make reference to specific texts which can be tracked down.

Quote

 

There is historical evidence to suggest that Aga Khan I, the 46th Imam of the Nizari Ismaili community, mobilized his followers to support the British in suppressing the Indian Rebellion of 1857, also known as the Sepoy Mutiny.

One of the primary sources for this information is the memoirs of Sir Bartle Frere, a British colonial administrator who served in India during the 19th century. In his memoirs, Frere describes how he met with Aga Khan I during the early stages of the rebellion and urged him to support the British cause. According to Frere, Aga Khan I responded by mobilizing his followers and raising a force of several thousand Ismaili soldiers to fight against the rebellion.

Other historical accounts also support the idea that Aga Khan I supported the British in suppressing the rebellion. For example, in the book "Aga Khan III: Selected Speeches and Writings of Sir Sultan Muhammad Shah," author Hasan Ali Khan cites several contemporary accounts that describe how Aga Khan I provided military support to the British during the rebellion.

While the precise nature and extent of Aga Khan I's support for the British during the Indian Rebellion of 1857 may be a matter of historical debate, there is certainly evidence to suggest that he played a role in mobilizing his followers and supporting the British cause during this tumultuous period in Indian history.

 

 

Link to comment
  • Forum Administrators
Haji 2003
  • Forum Administrators

What a coincidence?

As we all know, one of the faiths covered above has its international HQ in Israel. Although the Ba'hais have a deal with the Israelis that they won't proselytise to Jewish people.

What I did not know was the presence of Ahmadiyyas (founded in colonial India) in Israel.

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×

  • Latest Blog Entries

    • Haji 2003
      Scientific theory vs. unscientific utility
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         1 comment
      Edited 1st July 2024 to improve clarity. Edited 20th July 2024 to include a more detailed reference to face validity. Added reference to Lindt 27th August 2024.
       
      Summary
      Just because something is not created via the scientific method, does not mean it can't be useful - implications about how we think about religious precepts.
      Serendipity (pot luck)
      I have previously noted how, in some fields of human endeavour, the scientific approach is held to be the ideal. In reality however human scientific and technological discoveries have often been the result of luck and even mistakes.
      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn47zg3xgxxo
      Social science 'theories'
      There is a corollary in the field of the social sciences which also emphasise the value of the scientific approach to generate knowledge. In this domain the anomalies are various frameworks and models that are widely taught and even used, but which have no basis in rigorous scientific research.
      The famous work by Abraham Maslow on motivation and his resulting 'hierarchy of needs' is very widely studied and used. He posits that human motivation at the fundamental level is driven by physiological needs, and once these are satisfied (he did qualify this in later works) people try and address safety needs and then, social needs and self-esteem and finally self-actualisation. 
      But Maslow did not come up with this through any research that would hold up to scientific scrutiny.
      Does the lack of a scientific approach invalidate a model or framework?
      Yet the Maslow hierarchy is productively used by professionals in a variety of industries, managers, MBA students and others in universities. For example, people use it to understand why consumers buy certain products.
      The same issue applies to Bloom's taxonomy in the field of learning and also Elmo's buying funnel in the area of marketing. The three laws of robotics have their basis in science fiction and in the area of web searching there is no scientific basis for the information-navigational-transactional categories that are used.
      Face validity
      The implication from this is that while ideas and knowledge may ideally be the result of the scientific approach i.e. hypothesising and then testing, there are many instances where this is not the case. In the area of the social sciences and management the value of some types of knowledge seems to rest on their 'face validity', do they make sense to practitioners? Can those individuals make better sense of their external environment as a result of using these tools and if they can, that is good enough?
      I should point out at this stage that the term face validity has a specific meaning in the realm of research methods. It refers to whether for example, ordinary users of health services believe that the questionnaire items used to measure a specific condition make sense to them. The following paper provides an illustration of the concept with a worked example of how a measure used to assess Recovering Quality of Life was developed following input from lay patients.
       https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5997715/
      Implications for religion
      The same principle could surely apply to various aspects of religion. There may be no scientific proof underpinning various religious ideas and injunctions, but if they have face validity, if they help the individual make sense of their external environment, manage it and live what they consider a better life, surely that is good enough?
    • Haji 2003
      Art(ificial)
      By Haji 2003 in Stories for Sakina
         1 comment
      In a quiet, sunlit café nestled in the heart of an old city, two artists sat across from each other, their voices low and contemplative. The first, Clara, was a digital artist whose work had brought her acclaim over the past decade. Her short, tousled hair framed a face that bore the marks of countless hours spent in front of a screen, her fingers still twitching as if they were drawing on an invisible tablet. Opposite her sat Daniel, a younger artist who had recently burst onto the scene with his AI-generated masterpieces. His eyes sparkled with the thrill of new possibilities, yet there was a tension in his voice as he spoke.
      “It’s not just about the art anymore,” Daniel was saying, his tone a mixture of excitement and anxiety. “It’s about the code, the algorithms. I don’t even need to draw anymore; the AI does it for me. But I can’t help but wonder… what happens when the AI learns to create without me? What if I become obsolete?”
      Clara nodded, her expression understanding but conflicted. “I know the feeling. I’ve spent years perfecting my digital techniques, mastering tools that were meant to make my life easier, not replace me. Now, all I hear about are these AI programs that can mimic my style in seconds. It feels like the ground is shifting beneath my feet.”
      As if summoned by their words, the door to the café swung open, and a third artist entered. His clothes were splattered with paint, his hands stained with the colors of his latest work. He carried with him an air of nostalgia, as if he had stepped out of another time entirely. This was Vincent, a veteran of the traditional art world, who had made his name with hand-drawn and hand-colored pieces, long before the advent of digital art.
      He approached their table with a wry smile, having overheard the tail end of their conversation. “Mind if I join you?” he asked, not waiting for an answer as he pulled up a chair. “I couldn’t help but overhear. Your worries sound awfully familiar.”
      Clara and Daniel exchanged glances, intrigued by this interruption. Vincent continued, his voice thick with the weight of years spent battling his own obsolescence. “You know, there was a time when I was the one being pushed aside. When digital art first started gaining traction, I was furious. How could something created on a computer, with no paint, no brush, no tactile connection to the canvas, be considered real art? I watched as galleries that once displayed my work shifted to showcasing digital creations. I felt like the world was moving on without me.”
      Clara leaned forward, her curiosity piqued. “What did you do?”
      Vincent chuckled, though there was a trace of bitterness in his laugh. “I adapted. I learned to incorporate digital techniques into my work, found a way to blend the old with the new. But the feeling never quite left me—that nagging fear that everything I’d worked for could be erased with the click of a mouse.”
      Daniel frowned, his youthful confidence shaken. “So, this is just… a cycle? Each generation of artists fears being replaced by the next?”
      “Seems that way,” Vincent replied, his eyes softening with empathy. “But here’s the thing: art isn’t just about the tools we use. It’s about the vision behind it. Machines, AI, computers—they can mimic, they can replicate, but they can’t feel. They can’t see the world the way we do. That’s something they’ll never take away from us.”
      The three artists sat in silence, contemplating the inevitability of change, but also the enduring nature of creativity. In that moment, they understood the irony that connected them—a shared fear of obsolescence that, in truth, only underscored the timelessness of art itself.
    • Haji 2003
      Satan's slipstream or the good in evil
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         1 comment
      [Originally posted in 2021, updated with a summary and small corrections. Further additions in 2024, with references to Oppenheimer and supporting quotations.]
      Summary
      Good people can focus on doing good. Bad people who are motivated by the nafs can be told of the harms in engaging in it, but it's likely that they will persist. Sometimes however evil leads to some positive outcomes - good people can benefit from these, while still maintaining the wrongfulness of the initial action. 
      The slipstream
      Where you have two runners or cars, for example, the runner/car who is second benefits from the slipstream of the person in front. The slipstream refers to their meeting less air resistance due to the air being pushed to the side by the person/car in front.
      I still remember a Goldman Sachs report from around 2000 which predicted that the technology for streaming videos would initially be funded by the purveyors of porn - which is where the money was.
      Once online video streaming became mainstream, it was used by others, e.g., to educate others, pass on useful instructions to others, and even disseminate religious knowledge. Islamic scholars don't deny the use of such streaming technology because of its antecedents.
      It is said that Robert Oppenheimer lived with the guilt of his atomic bomb being used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki:
      https://www.nbc.com/nbc-insider/did-oppenheimer-ever-apologize-for-the-atomic-bomb
       
      But there was also a spin-off benefit for the rest of us:
      https://bioethicsarchive.georgetown.edu/achre/final/intro_3.html
       
      When evil leads to good
      We can see similar examples where evil people inspired and motivated by greed or domination go on to do things that can then be used by good people for better ends. Some medical advances in the 20th century (which we all use today) can be attributed to the evil of the Nazis
      https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/is-it-acceptable-to-use-data-from-nazi-medical-experiments-1.4388509
       
      and the NASA space programme was a prime beneficiary of Nazi developments in rocketry.
      https://www.nasa.gov/people/wernher-von-braun/
       
      An historical precedent
      I think an early example of bad people doing things with positive consequences is Khalid ibn al-Walid's initial foray into Persia followed by Umar ibn Khattab's conquest of the country.
      and the evil-doers acted out of free will
      Indeed, if there are people who, despite information to the contrary, are willing to undertake tasks that contravene moral/ethical scruples - then who are we to complain? No one held a gun to their heads to force them to take those actions. They acted out of free will. If their actions have unintended benefits for others who can put those achievements to good use - that's a gain courtesy of Satan.
      It's not just good and evil...
      At the moment there are various technologies that are problematic for Muslims e.g. using pigs for human transplantation. But these are only a point along the development journey to having similar technology being used without pigs. So the current work of non-Muslims has the potential for future Muslim benefit.
      A personal insight
      In the financial markets there are various financial instruments that to my understanding are haram. Spreadbets involve paying interest to a financial intermediary in order to buy far larger quantities of shares (or other commodity) than one could afford with ones own capital. The 'bet' is that the investment will rise and enable the investor to walk away with a much larger return than would have been possible without the leverage provided by the spread betting company. This type of investing can cause harm to the individuals practising it, because losses can be greater than the amounts invested and it can lead to greater volatility in the markets themselves. Knowing that some shares are popular with small investors using spread bets means that other investors may consider it wise to sell when shares are peaking (because leveraged investors are buying) and to buy when they collapse because leveraged investors have had their trades closed. What is wrong behaviour by market participants can therefore create an opportunity for those who are prepared to play the long game.
      Yet it could be argued that a capitalist system that encourages such a speculative mentality has enabled the funnelling of trillions of dollars across the world towards the development of e.g. internet technology that may otherwise not have happened or it would have happened at a much slower pace.
      For Muslims then, there needs to be a recognition that what is happening around them may well be beneficial in the long-run, but in the short-run there may be practices that are wrong and in which they should not partake.
      Individuals and societies
      This works at both the level of the individual and that of societies. The latter may well achieve great accomplishments, while still being 'bad', and there are historical examples of societies being much more advanced than others of their time in technological and scientific terms, but still undertaking evil cultural practices. Any scientific knowledge that they passed on would still have been valuable.
      Today there can be a tendency of those who have made technological gains to ascribe these to their cultural norms and values - which Muslims may consider to be wrong from an ethical perspective. The ideology of their cultures may or may not have facilitated the advancement - but it does not validate the the ethics of their ideology. For example communism brought a large section of Eastern Europe and Western Asia out of the feudal age and arguably enabled the world to beat Nazism - but does that endorse Communists' correctness of mass collectivisation and the stamping out of religion? No it does not.
      a. Communism
      Communism is an interesting ideology that shows how it is possible to achieve success for a limited period of time, but to ultimately lose out in the war of longevity. Individuals who subscribed to Marxism were wrong. The whole society was bad. But while condemning both, we can walk away with the benefits they left us with.
      b. European slavery system
      There was a whole ideology underpinning this purely evil practice. Argued by some to be based on a reading of the Bible that held black people to be sub-human and treated as property*, the system enabled the development of cash crops in the Americas and provided the foundation of modern consumer societies. Ultimately it came to be seen for the evil that it was.
      What Egyptians, Communism, Nazism and the European slavery system of the 19th century and other ideologies have in common is that they are now defunct. They enabled progress to be made in some areas, but in the long term they offered no solutions to address human needs.
      The lessons for Muslims (starting with Pharoah's wife) has simply been to hang around in order to pick up the pieces and ensure that our ideology persists and outlasts the next round of evil-doers.
      In an ideal world ...
      People would be inspired to innovate, create and advance based purely on the motivations provided by God. But this ideal does not always happen. 
      *Muslims have been accused of having slavery systems as well. But those were completely different in terms of both practice and moral implications.
    • Haji 2003
      Downsizing the Empire
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         2 comments
      The proposition that the British Empire "never really went away" but instead "downsized" reflects a view of post-colonial influence that suggests continuity between the British Empire's formal rule and its present-day economic and political ties, particularly with the rich Arab Gulf states. While the British Empire as a formal political entity dissolved in the mid-20th century, this perspective argues that Britain's influence persisted, transforming from direct colonial rule to a more subtle but still significant form of power and influence.
      Economic Ties and Arms Trade
      One of the most visible aspects of this continuing influence is the strong economic ties between the UK and the Arab Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and others. The UK is a significant exporter of arms to these countries, with Saudi Arabia being one of the largest customers. This arms trade not only supports British industries and employment but also reinforces political and military relationships between the UK and these Gulf states. The reliance of these nations on British military technology and expertise can be seen as a continuation of the influence that Britain once exerted more overtly during the imperial period.
      Investments in British Property and Economy
      Arab Gulf states have also invested heavily in the British economy, particularly in real estate, financial services, and other high-profile sectors. London's property market, for instance, has seen substantial investment from Gulf monarchies and sovereign wealth funds. These investments benefit the British economy and contribute to the UK's status as a global financial hub. The economic interdependence created by these investments is another form of influence, where former colonies (or regions within the imperial sphere) now play a crucial role in the British economy.
      Employment for British Expats
      The presence of British expatriates in the Gulf states, particularly in high-skilled sectors such as finance, education, and engineering, reflects another layer of this ongoing relationship. British professionals are often sought after for their expertise and experience, and their employment in these regions can be traced back to historical ties established during the colonial period. The continued demand for British expertise suggests a lasting influence and a form of soft power, where British culture, education, and professional norms continue to shape the region.
      Political Influence and Leadership Support
      The assertion that the leaders of these Gulf states were either appointed by Britain or have their tenure supported by Britain touches on the historical reality that many current Gulf monarchies have roots in British colonial or protectorate arrangements. For example, the Al-Saud family in Saudi Arabia and the Al-Thani family in Qatar consolidated power during periods when Britain had significant influence over the Arabian Peninsula. While these leaders are now independent, the historical ties and ongoing strategic partnerships suggest that Britain continues to exert some level of influence, particularly through defense agreements and diplomatic support.
      Continuity of Influence
      The idea that the British Empire "downsized" rather than disappeared reflects the continuity of influence, albeit in a different form. The mechanisms of control and influence have shifted from direct colonial administration to economic dependency, strategic partnerships, and soft power. The British Empire in its classical form may be gone, but the relationships, institutions, and dependencies it created continue to shape international relations and economics in ways that can be seen as a legacy of that empire.
      Counterarguments
      However, it is also important to consider the counterarguments to this proposition. The Gulf states are now sovereign nations with their own complex political dynamics, and their relationship with Britain is one of mutual interest rather than imperial domination. The influence of other global powers, such as the United States and China, also plays a significant role in these regions, which complicates the notion that Britain maintains a unique or dominant position of influence.
      In conclusion, while the British Empire as a formal entity no longer exists, the networks of influence, economic ties, and political relationships established during the imperial period have persisted in ways that benefit the UK. These relationships, particularly with the Arab Gulf states, suggest that Britain's influence did not vanish but instead evolved, leading to a form of continuity that some might argue represents a "downsized" empire.
    • Haji 2003
      Androids and inheritance
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         4 comments
      In this thread there was a half jokey but also serious issue that I raised:
      At some point Muslims will ask whether conjugal relations with androids are allowed and we can predict the answer will be no.
       
      Since I first started that thread a lot has happened and I think it's worth introducing some new variables to the discussion.
      There was a time when men who dressed as women (and vice versa) did so either for humour or if it was in some way related to their sexuality the attempt would seem a bit ridiculous. Nowadays though fantasy can be more readily realised with the aid of technology.
      In a similar vein men who play with dolls (this is serious, stay with me) are faintly creepy and weird. But technology moves on and at some point the dolls will pass for humans. While orthodox Muslims may well be aghast at the idea of relations between us and the androids, clearly this will be considered to be progress amongst some people. They may not currently regard it as such but their ideological progeny will.
      But then another issue will emerge. If someone gains emotional and other forms of support from their android, what if they want to pass on their wealth to the android?
       
      https://www.ft.com/content/b9b78aae-1f32-11e9-a46f-08f9738d6b2b
       
      So while we have had dystopian science fiction prognosticating about robots AI becoming 'self-aware' and stealing the planet from us what if such a loss can happen without such a confrontational dystopia?
      What if large numbers of humans give up on human-to-human relations and instead take up with androids who will never argue back, will always say yes and be physically whatever people want them to be.
      And as a reward for this their human companions leave their possessions to robots?
      It could be that it is selfishness and narcissism that disinherits us and nothing more sinister.
    • Haji 2003
      Would Palestinian passivity have led to a different outcome?
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         2 comments
      What follows below, starting with "Historical Context" is chatgpt's analysis.
      My initial prompt is in the next post. The analysis starts with a statement of historical 'facts', framed pretty much in the way you would expect a western source to analyse the issue. 
      But the section that chatgpt titles, "Hypothetical outcomes ..." and the "Conclusion" are not exactly what I would have expected such a source to say, perhaps it's the result of how I wrote the original prompt?
       
      The contention that Palestinian actions would not have altered the current situation, given Israeli military superiority and claims over Jerusalem, is complex and multifaceted. It involves historical, political, and social dimensions that have shaped the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the past century. Here are some key points to consider:
       
       Historical Context
      1. Balfour Declaration and Mandate Period:
         - The Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the subsequent British Mandate for Palestine established a framework that favored the establishment of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. This set the stage for future conflicts over land and national identity.
      2. 1947 UN Partition Plan:
         - The United Nations proposed a partition plan in 1947 to create separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem as an international city. Jewish leaders accepted the plan, but Arab leaders rejected it, leading to the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
      3. 1948 and 1967 Wars:
         - The 1948 War led to the establishment of the State of Israel and the displacement of many Palestinians (Nakba). The 1967 Six-Day War resulted in Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza Strip, solidifying Israeli control over these areas.
       
       Israeli Claims and Military Superiority
      1. Jerusalem as Israel's Capital:
         - Israeli leaders have consistently claimed Jerusalem as the undivided, eternal capital of Israel. This claim has been reinforced by various Israeli governments and supported by significant segments of Israeli society.
      2. Military Superiority:
         - Israel's military strength has been a decisive factor in the conflict. Its advanced military capabilities, supported by substantial foreign aid, particularly from the United States, have ensured its dominance in the region.
       
       Palestinian Responses and Strategies
      1. Armed Resistance vs. Diplomacy:
         - Palestinians have employed various strategies, including armed resistance and diplomatic efforts. Armed resistance has often been met with overwhelming military responses from Israel, leading to significant loss of life and infrastructure damage.
         - Diplomatic efforts, such as participation in peace processes (Oslo Accords, Camp David Summit, etc.), have sought to achieve a two-state solution but have faced numerous obstacles, including settlement expansion and internal political divisions.
      2. International Support and Advocacy:
         - Palestinians have garnered significant international support and recognition, with many countries and international organizations advocating for their right to self-determination. However, this has not translated into a resolution of the conflict.
       
       Hypothetical Outcomes of Palestinian Passivity
      1. Unlikely Changes in Israeli Policies:
         - Given Israel's strategic and ideological commitments to its territorial claims, it is unlikely that Palestinian passivity would have led to a significantly different outcome. Israeli policies have been driven by security concerns, historical claims, and political dynamics independent of Palestinian actions.
      2. Internal and External Pressures on Israel:
         - While Palestinian passivity might have reduced immediate conflict, it is uncertain whether it would have altered long-term Israeli policies. Internal Israeli politics, regional dynamics, and international pressures play crucial roles in shaping the conflict's trajectory.
       
       Conclusion
      The argument that Palestinian actions would not have changed the current outcome, given Israeli claims and military superiority, rests on the premise that Israel's strategic and ideological commitments to an undivided Jerusalem and broader territorial control are deeply entrenched. While Palestinian strategies have varied, the fundamental asymmetry in power and the entrenched nature of Israeli claims suggest that different Palestinian actions might not have led to a substantially different outcome. The conflict's resolution likely requires significant shifts in both Israeli and Palestinian policies, as well as sustained international engagement.
    • Haji 2003
      Hatshepsut & Nefertari
      By Haji 2003 in Contemporania
         0 comments
      The view from the Temple of Hatshepsut. Maryam had the idea for how this would work and it did with some post-processing.
       
      Both ancient Egyptian queens and both with a seemingly new cult in the 21st century.
      Obviously, the cult is not among actual worshippers but amongst tourists keen to see their monuments. Nefertari was the favourite wife of Pharaoh Ramesses II and as for Hatshepsut this is what Wikipedia has to say:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hatshepsut
      While I have been in Luxor this year with the family the itinerary for touring came up and I suggested to the guide that may be the Hatshepsut temple was a bit overrated (based on my last visit in 2016), but he insisted and so we went. As I remembered it's a golf buggy ride from the entrance to the foot of a long flight of steps and when you get to the top - not really a great deal and a fair bit is seemingly reconstructed. I still think it is overrated. I'd much rather spend more time in the riot of hieroglyphics and colour that is the Madinet Habu (from Wiki):
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medinet_Habu
       
      As for Nefertari the guide and the local Egyptians felt that it was overrated particularly in light of the US$60 (!!!) entrance fee. This is a few times the going rate and such is the demand that you get 10 mins in the tomb. Obviously we did not go there!
      So going back to my earlier contention - what's the cult?
      It's the contemporary interest in women's empowerment, their positions in leadership roles, and so on. I am not challenging the validity of this interest. I am just drawing attention to how it manifests itself in tourists making choices about what to see, how much they pay to see it, and how much effort they put into doing so.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Blog Statistics

    88
    Total Blogs
    492
    Total Entries
×
×
  • Create New...