Why is there no outcry anywhere about Muslim religious leaders in the ME staying on the sidelines?

[snagglepuss]

Why aren't Shite, Sunni, Alawite religious leaders in the Middle East convening a peace conference to work out their differences? Many Syrians are upset that the world seems to be dismissing their horrific suffering but they say nothing about the underlying sectarian hostilites. Prior to French involvenment in Syria the Alawites were treated like second class citizens by Sunni Muslims because of the Sunni arrogence. Now the shoe is on the other foot. What is it going to take for sectarianism in Islam to end? Who better to end it than religious leaders?

[shenmue]

1. Shshhhhh

Don't ask The Question. You know you're only allowed to blame America or Christians.

[longship]

2. Well, for one, Islam doesn't have a Pope.

There is no central mosque with an equivalent central authority figure. It's like the Protestant sects have no central authority either.

I don't know if this holds up, but I've heard at least one of the Four Atheist Horsemen suggest this (cannot recall which one).

Just putting it out there for consideration.

[snagglepuss]

3. What complete nonsense. They may not have a pope but there's certainly clerics who without being

popes have no problem writing fatwas. Can these clerics not pick up a phone and convene a meeting to discuss peace amongst themselves? Discuss how they can achieve peace amongst themselves. Most religions on Earth don't have power centralized into one figurehead.

[longship]

4. Yes, and I provided a counter example.

But the infighting amongst Islamic sects involves some really wacked out violence. I think the suggestion is that if there were a central figure, that might not be the case.

I know. If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon.

Regardless, I am not a big fan of Islam, or any other religion. But Islam's behavior is not very good worldwide, especially where they have political control. And nobody within Islam of any authority at all has addressed these issues, that I know of.

It seems to be only apostates who are speaking out, people like Ibn Warraq, for example. Of course, apostasy earns the death penalty which is why Ibn Warraq is a pseudonym.

[snagglepuss]

5. lol. "If my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon"

I've never heard that expression and it took a minute wondering how your grandma fitted into the picture. Oops gotto sign off

[longship]

7. The quote is from Montgomery "Scottie" Scott.

I like it for ridiculing contrafactus statements, like the one I posted.

[Xithras]

9. There's no such thing as a "cleric" in Islam.

In Sunni Islam, there are two types of leaders who come into contact with the people.

The first are Imams, which basically means "teacher". ANYONE can be an imam. It may be a person who has dedicated his life to teaching others about Islam, or it may be the local baker who leads prayers at the mosque next door to his bakery on afternoons. There is no central authority for training or vetting imams. If you can convince the people in the local mosque to let you lead prayers, you become an imam. Because many mosques don't have regular imams, it's a fairly easy thing to do.

The second are the muftis, which is sort of a blend of an Islamic scholar and a lawyer. Every Islamic nation has a grand mufti recognized by the government, and that grand mufti is followed by many other muftis. Many of these muftis also act as imams at their local mosques, though its not required. Think of the muftis as the "Attorney General" of Islamic law in that nation, and the muftis as the local lawyers and judges (it's not an exact comparison, but I'm trying to fit Islamic concepts into an American structure, so it's close enough for this discussion). While the grand mufti and local muftis may be respected authorities, they're not really seen by the people as "leaders". They have no authority to negotiate anything, and the people wouldn't listen to them if they tried.

This is one of the defining differences between Sunni and Shia Islam. In Shia Islam, you have the Grand Ayatollah, more ayatollahs below him, and a well defined structure beneath them. The ayatollah's have authority within their faith and are recognized as leaders by their followers. Sunni Islam rejected this model, claiming that the only authority they needed to follow was Muhammad's. This has led to a very decentralized religion that allows anyone to become a religious "leader" while deliberately preventing any of those leaders from having any kind of real power.

I would also point out that many of the "fatwas" we hear about aren't actually legal anyway. Many imams issue fatwas over relatively stupid things, and even Osama bin Laden issued fatwas on more than one occasion. Because only fatwas issued by muftis are considered "legitimate", none of these carry any real power...except to the people who choose to follow them. I could declare myself an imam and declare a fatwa banning chocolate ice cream right now, and it would carry just as much authority as most of the idiotic fatwas we tend to hear about via the press.

[snagglepuss]

12. The term cleric is widely used to refer to Islamic religious leaders,it is not synonymous with

the term clergy. See Wiki for further comment but nitpicking the term is beside the point. The point is that concerned "wise men", muftis, ayatollahs, leaders or mullahs (however you wish to describe those who feel impelled to lead) could take it upon themselves to grapple with the issue of how Islam deal with its own pluralism. It seems to me that given the glaring lack of direction from on high Muslims have adopted a fierce fatalism which seems only to benefit those with power.

It need not even be individuals, Muslim organization could convene a peace convention to start the ball rolling.

[WinkyDink]

6. The Aga Khan would beg to disagree.

http://www.vanityfair.com/society/2013/02/aga-khan-spiritual-leader-multi-billionaire

[snagglepuss]

8. There is nothing in the article that pertains to the OP.

[WinkyDink]

16. Maybe because my reply isn't to the OP.

[liberal_at_heart]

10. wow this sounds just like what the republicans were saying after 9/11. Does that mean

that every Christian has the responsibility to publicly condemn those who practice fundamental Christianity and descriminate against others?

[snagglepuss]

20. The elephant in the room is the historic hostility between Shia and Sunni, nothing will be

resolved in Syrai until these two decide how too coexist. Who is going to resolve this Islamic problem if not Muslims?

[Xithras]

11. Muslim religious leaders tend to come from the most conservative wings of their faith.

There are a lot of liberal Muslims, but you'd be hard pressed to find a liberal mufti or ayatollah.

Westerners often make the mistake of assuming that the Islamic split is similar to the difference between Methodists and Baptists, or Catholics and Lutherans. Christians recognize that the other Christian sects are "Christian", but simply worship incorrectly or have a few misguided beliefs.

The split in Islam is more fundamental than that. If you ask a Sunni or a Shia what their faith is, they'll simply answer "Muslim". To a Muslim, there is only one Islam, and their faith is it. The other people worshipping Allah aren't a different Muslim sect...they aren't Muslim at all. In fact, most Sunni scholars consider the Shia to be idolaters...the same as animists and Hindu, and far worse than Jews and Christians. It's about as "legitimate" as the FSM in their worldview.

Until this view changes, there is no real hope of having any kind of religious harmony in the ME. As the motto goes, "Islam is exalted and nothing is exalted above it". When you believe that your faith IS Islam, it becomes difficult to resolve sectarian problems with other faiths, who generally aren't interested in accepting second class status or being told that they aren't really members of the faith they claim.

[snagglepuss]

13. Interesting. I myself thought the situation was similar to Christian sectarianism.

Are there not people within Islam who see this pigheadedness as untenable?

[Xithras]

14. Oh, there are.

There have been countless imams, ayatollahs, and muftis over the centuries who have tried to heal the rifts in the Islamic world, and the majority of everyday Muslims really couldn't care about the difference on a personal level. Nothing has ever come of it though.


The real problem comes down to this: Muhammad preached heavily that the teachings of God had been corrupted by the followers who came after the prophets. They believe that Abraham, Jesus, and others were great prophets of God, but that the Christians and Jews who came after them built religions and changed the purpose of the faith in order to suit their own purposes. He railed against this, and said in no uncertain terms that Islam had to be unchangeable and be practiced exactly as he outlined...forever. If people started changing things, even minor things, it would no longer be Islam. This is the main reason why Muslims the world over learn Arabic when they get serious about their religion. While there are unofficial translations of the Quran and Hadiths into many other languages, the "official" versions are only available in Arabic because that was Muhammad's language, and changing the language could lead to changing the religion itself.

So when a core tenet of your religion states that it CANNOT BE ALTERED, and you believe that you are practicing it exactly the way its founder intended, what does that make other people who are practicing it differently? This is the real root of the schism, and isn't something that can just be negotiated away. If a Sunni mufti were to proclaim that Shia were merely practicing a different version of Islam, he would be directly contravening the word of Muhammad himself. At a minimum, his days of being a mufti would come to a swift end. In many Islamic countries, the penalties would be far worse.

[snagglepuss]

15. I don't know if you are fan of the original Star Trek but there was an episode that came

to mind while reading your comment that the "majority of everyday Muslims really couldn't care about the difference on a personal level". Kirk was on a "planet" but it wasn't a planet it was a starship, something no one on the "planet" was supposed to know and the penalties for gaining knowledge of the true nature of the "planet" were severe. I have to wonder whether Muslims couldn't care about the difference or whether it behooves them not to ask too many questions.

[MNBrewer]

17. have you looked?

I don't particularly care, but it seems that you do. Have you checked into it?

[snagglepuss]

19. Actually I have and nada. If there were such a meeting it'd be headline grabbing news

if not here then in the ME.

[1-Old-Man]

18. You don't often see public outcry at people who are doing nothing.