Rating: 
Summary: Critisizes Islam instead of prasinig it, thus: a bad book
Review: Please take this as a rule of thumb whenever you encounter a book dealing with Islam:
Only books about Islam that praise Islam are good books about Islam.
All books that critisize Islam are bad books.
Rating: 
Summary: Thank you for your "submission"
Review: Warraq takes a brave stance against Islam and "wicked" religion in general, and he deserves extra credit for starting this project in response to the Rushdie affair, and not Sept. 11.The comic collides with the tragic in his description of "modern" life in Muslim countries...where Miss Piggy is an Enemy of the State at the same time women are treated as propery and despite their sequestration from the world, are vulnerable to rape and "honor killings" by their husbands or other male relatives. The past is no more benign. Misrepresentations of centuries of bloody Muslim history have left many in the Western academic establishment (even today) defending Islam as tolerant, opposed to dogma, and a vibrant force in keeping civilization intact during the Medieval period. The Muslims opposed to the "colonial" invasions of Europeans in the 19th century were responsible for brutal conquest of much of Africa, India, Central Asia, and South Asia in previous eras. Crowning the sullied past and the uncertain present of the Muslim world are the confusing scriptures and traditions surrounding the "Prophet", often considered the most influential person in history, about whom very little is known. A sober look at the murky period of the 7th century ( in Arabia, maybe, but possibly in Palestine or Mesopotamia, too ) tells us that Muhammed could have indeed been the murderer of POW's, the polygamist, the pederast, the despot that the traditions indicate...or he may have been something completely different...maybe even a Christian cleric who decided to break with the established church. Sometimes, we of the West marvel at the richness of "Islamic" art and culture, but should realize that little richness could come from Arabia, and that the marvels are those of the conquered peoples. Without Byzantine, Greek, Coptic, Sassanian, Zoroastrian (where do you want me to stop?) culture, there could not have been an "Islamic" culture as we know it. I would encourage other apologists that are considering posting reviews to read this book before condemning it...
Rating: 
Summary: Unbelievable
Review: We all know that no one religion is liked by all mankind. I am a Muslim and am very offended by this book. The christians of the world wouldn't allow a book like this to be written on christianity, so it shouldn't be allowed for islam. Books like these should be taken off the shelves.
Rating:
Summary: DO I DARE SPEAK?
Review: Where to begin.......
This book is a blatant defamation of Islam and the Islamic movement. It was written and published to enhance the movement of `Modernizing' Islam, a movement which is devoted to disuniting Muslims in fear of the creation of a true Islamic state (a peaceful state).
I won't even go into the historical errors of this book and the many, many verses taken completely and purposefully out of context. But to disguise this book as an `informative' insight towards the truth of Islam written by a `scholarly' author, whom we don't even know if he or she exists of if he or she is `a' person or a people, is truly cowardice.
And as a Muslim female I am appalled at the pathetic sympathy the author gives to the poor, oppressed Muslim female who accepts her fate of inferiority because of her `brainwashed Islamic mentality.' Well here is an Educated American Muslim Female, who does wear the headscarf, and wears it with pride, and is telling you that she is FAR for from being oppressed. So thank you very much for your sympathy but I think I could survive without it.
It is a sad thing that a reader of this book may believe the authors distortion of Islam. Well to the reader: I challenge you to read other books, published by `known' scholars, of the history of Islam and see for yourself the historical errors in this book.
Islam appeals to the moral and logical nature of the human......why else would it be the fastest growing religion in the world.
Rating: 
Summary: You Have to Believe
Review: With 187 reviews already on Amazon for this book and counting, I ask myself why I bother offering one more opinion, but as a believing man who is not a Muslim, but who has considerable sympathy with Muslims, I feel it incumbent to add my views on this.
One might be justified in calling this book "Why I Don't believe in Organized Religion", since many if not most of the comments in this book can be transferred in one way or another to any institutional religion, despite the fact that the subject under the microscope is Islam.
That Muhammad's morality is open to question from several angles is not exactly a new theme for Western writers. One thing that is missing in the analysis, however, is a little more perspective about what it is that prophets do. On the matter of Muhammad's summary dealings with recalcitrant inhabitants of the Arabian peninsula, we should bear in mind that the Judges in the Old Testament were not any more lenient; rather the contrary. As for the question of Muhammad's sexual practices, a comparison with David and Bathsheeba would not be out of line. My point is that figures like David or Gideon are not considered any less prophets or judges because of their activities; it is rather up to the believer to sort out what their behavior is supposed to mean. On the whole, I couldn't resist the feeling that the base perspective of this book is that Muhammad cannot be a holy man, because he is not like Jesus. Well, that's very true; he isn't like Jesus. Nobody ever said that he was, and there's no reason why he should be.
As for the Quran, it is not fair to accuse it of having no historical perspective. True, most Muslims believe that it is historically accurate, but the point is that it is not primarily supposed to be a "history." It is a sacred book, and to the believer its primary purpose is to save, not to satisfy our historical interests. Westerners have spent so much of the last two hundred years trying to parse out the historical context of their own scriptures that they have managed to disembody the Bible of its saving graces; to criticize Muslims for not doing the same thing with the Quran is unfair.
The further into the book the more bemused I felt. I saw no purpose bringing up a poet like Ma'ari; it is true that he was a cynic who saw no virtue in Islam, or any other religion for that matter, but on the whole the fact that a man like that could flourish in medieval Islam is a testament to the relative broadmindedness of the culture rather than anything else. As for the brief survey on Sufism, I sincerely doubt that most Sufis, modern or medieval, would be comfortable with the idea that they believed what they believed in spite of what Islam taught. If they neglected the sharia it was because they had found something more valuable.
In the final analysis, all religions bear the mark of the society and affinities of the people who practice them. In general, Islam's "center of gravity" from a moralistic point of view, if one can use the term, is that all things are permissible but all things need to be kept under control. It is a different morality from Christianity. It doesn't necessarily make it any worse.
Regarding the author, allow me to make a speculation. "Ibn Warraq" is, of course, a pen name, meaning "son of paper", which is a time-honored soubriquet in the Middle East. The author is incredibly well-versed in Western perceptions of Islam, much more so than most Middle Easterners that I have ever met. I suspect that despite the information provided, the writer is not a Middle Easterner.
Which is not to say that he is not entitled to his own opinion, of course. Still, one does wonder.
|
