This 'n' that

This post was a collection of several commentaries on news stories and blog posts. These posts are being rearranged. The comments have been left intact. Click on what you're looking for below:

• Frighteningly fascinating: A four part series at Chapati Mystery on religion in the USA. Sepoy's guest blogger provides a discussion on the state of religion in the USofA.
• Avaristically audacious: Haroon Moghul's short and brief critique of racism. In the form of a story.
• Disingenious disquisition: My response to an article that appeared in The Economist at the end of 2004.

Comments

[sepoy]

Thanks for the comments on Holy Writ. Luxenberg, and Ibn Warraq, have been touting these Aramaic-inspired texts for at least 10 years now. Yet, nothing ever gets published. The absurdist 72 virgin meme has now been firmly entrenched in the western presentations of suicide bombers. No hope there.

[Brian Ulrich]

I think I wrote like 5 posts on this Luxenberg stuff in Summer 2003. The pseudonym angle is so sensationalized, when as you mention plenty of scholars work under their own names with no problems whatsoever. However, we can't disrupt the narratives of Islam as a religion in need of reform by Western ideas...

[bdr]

Great post. Hate to be neurotically picky, but why spell Ramadan as "Ramadhan." I think the "dh" gives the impression of the "dhaal" sound moreso than the that of the "daad." Since there really isn't a way to represent the "daad," I think settling for the "daal" is a better alternative.

Keep up the good work.

[thabet]

Seopy: You're welcome. Yes, the number "72" have taken a life of its own. It may well exist in a particular tradition (try looking through al-Tirmidhi). However, it seems _The Economist's_ foray into Qur'anic studies is marked by difficulties in grasping "truth and logic".

Brian: "However, we can't disrupt the narratives of Islam as a religion in need of reform by Western ideas..." That about sums it up. My own concern is not even to do with Luxenberg's work, per se. I am cetainly no expert on Arabic, Aramaic or any other language. It is the lazy way in which such endeavours are used that catch my eye. The Grauniad and NYT were just as guilty.

Bdr: It is sometimes rendered that way; and I rarely proof read a post before clicking "Publish Now" (I do however, proof read it afterwards!). Since I'm such a nice person, I've changed it.

[thabet]

Please note: I had two copies of this post. I published the wrong one. The new post has replaced the old post. There weren't many differences anyway (apart from half a dozen, strategically placed, words). My apologies.