Distinctions Between
Scholarly Writing, And Just Being An Emblematic Smart Ass
“Roar! Movafucka, I am the Movafuckin’ Emblematic One. I will
break your movafuckin’ eye socket with a right hook quicker than Pacquiao could,
flow through the Quran like a nigga was born in Mecca Arabia, and write with a
freshness that unsettles those who may have a problem with a nigga. Yes! Yes!
Bravo-‘Bra-mova-fuck-in-O’ to me’! Since the inception of this blog I think I’ve
maintained a rather consistent voice-a voice strangely cocky, somewhat abrasive
and yet at the same time humble, refined and collegial. Generally in the ink
that I’ve spilt a mural of Bronx-like graffiti art emerges, carrying in its colors
an ever prevailing egalitarian spirit.
On those occasions that
I go off on my God tangent I very rarely if ever express a Mystery God complex.
A nigga is True and Living with my feet so far down to Earth that a movafucka
has bunions. Maybe at times I may go a little too hard at those goodie two shoe
pussy type Gods who nauseatingly ‘Will Smithenize’ the Culture-a Culture that
at one time was known for whoopin’ yo’ ass for misquoting a degree. I suppose
such behavior would constitute as poor citizenship and a lack of civilization nowadays.
Allah is one reality that manifest in a multitude of forms, it has taken me a
while to both accept and realize that I am no gate-keeper of forms, nor do I
represent a standard etched in stone as it pertains to how ‘Self Styled’ wisdom
should be made manifest in I-God Culture. I have no right whatsoever to deny those few
pussy niggaz amongst us the right to make knowledge born, not everyone was born
to fight as if a pit set lose by Vick. Softer voices must also be heard. Taking
lessons from the ‘softer types’, I realize that a path of the least resistance
must at times be traveled, continuing to mature I seek a path with less
fare-ones, and though I’m proud of my ability to be comfortable squared-up and
to both bark and bite when need be, I’ve learned to pick my spots with the
forethought of one before moving a chess piece. Speaking of spots, a Ph.D.
recently punched me in the face, academically of course and no, it wasn’t Dr.
Supreme Understanding Allah, it was my professor for my class: Islam And The
Modern World. He hit me with what I think was the hardest academic punch of my
life, a punch that didn’t knock me out but instead woke me the fuck up, and let
me know that I was indeed in a boxing ring of sorts. While on all fours, I
clumsily tried to pick up my mouth- piece like Tyson in the Douglas fight.
This is how he ‘Mayweathered’ me in front of the entire class:
“Thank you for your lengthy response.
However, I am afraid it is totally irrelevant. The main point of these
discussion questions is to make you think about the readings assigned and deal
with them critically. So kindly stick to the content of the readings from now
onwards.
Now let me comment on your response. You chose a specific narrative of a specific incident of debate between a Muslim and a Christian theologian. Hundreds of these debates exist in the medieval period particularly during the flourishing of Islamic Civilization particularly under the early Abbasid rule in Baghdad. This attests to a very progressive spirit of intellectual and academic freedom which was never paralleled in medieval Europe during the dark ages. There were debates about the unity of God in Islam and Judaism versus the concept of Trinity in Christianity among many figures in theologians in Baghdad and later the great Andalusian philosopher Averroes made a long critique of it in his Grand Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. As for the positions taken in the debate you mentioned they are highly reductive of how medieval Muslim theologians proved the prophecy of Prophet Muhammad. If you are interested in such debates please email me or come and see me in my office and I will happily direct you to sources on these debates and also happily discuss them with you if you are interested. I specialize in Philosophy so this is at the core of my interests. However, as I explained above, you have to stick to the text in choosing your examples to allow your colleagues to participate and engage with you on a common ground.
As for the second question, I agree with you that all religions have a transcendent dimension to them but the presence of a belief in transcendent notions does not necessarily contradict rationalism. Muslim as well as Christian thinkers found many ways to ground their metaphysical systems even the belief in Angels on rational basis. Take the attempts of Averroes and al-Ghazali in Islam or Aquinas or late Kant in Christianity.
Your claim about al-Khwarizmi, which is also completely irrelevant to the subject matter of the question, is contradicted by his own statements in his original works which I am not sure you read or not let alone in their original language if you want to have a proper scholarly position. As we will see when we get to Islam and Science, Muslims were the first to develop the experimental method vis-a-vis Aristotelian biological naturalism that tended to conflate theology with physics. This was partly due to the call to think and reason that is most recurrent in the Qur'an. Hence, I would say yes it is true that al-Khawarizmi is a genius in his own right but the methods and the nature of his scientific discourse was definitely colored by the Islamic worldview. Mozart of whom I am a great fan by the way is a product of 18th century European enlightenment. Enlightenment and particularly German Enlightenment is my other specialization in Philosophy by the way. There is no question that he was an artistic genius in his own right but if you look at Mozart's music especially the rupture in his tempos versus Hayden before him or the romantics after him you will find that he articulated a specific worldview that was inspired by a rational and moral reconstruction of science and metaphysics that all Enlightenment thinkers were intent on in response to the medieval world and its theology.”
Now let me comment on your response. You chose a specific narrative of a specific incident of debate between a Muslim and a Christian theologian. Hundreds of these debates exist in the medieval period particularly during the flourishing of Islamic Civilization particularly under the early Abbasid rule in Baghdad. This attests to a very progressive spirit of intellectual and academic freedom which was never paralleled in medieval Europe during the dark ages. There were debates about the unity of God in Islam and Judaism versus the concept of Trinity in Christianity among many figures in theologians in Baghdad and later the great Andalusian philosopher Averroes made a long critique of it in his Grand Commentary on Aristotle's Metaphysics. As for the positions taken in the debate you mentioned they are highly reductive of how medieval Muslim theologians proved the prophecy of Prophet Muhammad. If you are interested in such debates please email me or come and see me in my office and I will happily direct you to sources on these debates and also happily discuss them with you if you are interested. I specialize in Philosophy so this is at the core of my interests. However, as I explained above, you have to stick to the text in choosing your examples to allow your colleagues to participate and engage with you on a common ground.
As for the second question, I agree with you that all religions have a transcendent dimension to them but the presence of a belief in transcendent notions does not necessarily contradict rationalism. Muslim as well as Christian thinkers found many ways to ground their metaphysical systems even the belief in Angels on rational basis. Take the attempts of Averroes and al-Ghazali in Islam or Aquinas or late Kant in Christianity.
Your claim about al-Khwarizmi, which is also completely irrelevant to the subject matter of the question, is contradicted by his own statements in his original works which I am not sure you read or not let alone in their original language if you want to have a proper scholarly position. As we will see when we get to Islam and Science, Muslims were the first to develop the experimental method vis-a-vis Aristotelian biological naturalism that tended to conflate theology with physics. This was partly due to the call to think and reason that is most recurrent in the Qur'an. Hence, I would say yes it is true that al-Khawarizmi is a genius in his own right but the methods and the nature of his scientific discourse was definitely colored by the Islamic worldview. Mozart of whom I am a great fan by the way is a product of 18th century European enlightenment. Enlightenment and particularly German Enlightenment is my other specialization in Philosophy by the way. There is no question that he was an artistic genius in his own right but if you look at Mozart's music especially the rupture in his tempos versus Hayden before him or the romantics after him you will find that he articulated a specific worldview that was inspired by a rational and moral reconstruction of science and metaphysics that all Enlightenment thinkers were intent on in response to the medieval world and its theology.”
I find the last comment utterly unacceptable morally, intellectually and
academically. We will discuss Islam and Politics later in the semester. If you
want to make comments about Islam or Muslim scholars you have to be specific,
that is tell me whom you are talking about and what they were talking about.
Uttering generous claims and charges is by no means acceptable in this class
nor is conducive to the spirit of learning”
When I first received his response the first thing I thought was to come
back at ‘em, Instead I sat back, reflected and thought it would be best to not
allow my ego out of the cage, and he was right, I didn’t come out of the
reading he had assigned, instead I came off the top of my Power Hill Five
Percent dome, sassed around in the writing with that off the cuff smart ass blogging
type of wit and he let it be known that
that type of shit won’t fly in his class.
He flexed his academic ego as well as his credentials. Instead of loading
up and firing back with academic bullets of my own it’s best I learn to take a
punch. I’m going to study the things that I found interesting in his critique
of my writing, namely, Aristotelian Biological Naturalism; Al Khawarizmi’s
alleged contradiction in the original Arabic text; undertake a study of ‘Averroes’.
He quoted Al-Ghazzali and just so happened that I’m presently reading a work of
Al-Ghazzalli entitled: ‘Tahafut Al-Falasifah. So yeah, no barking or biting
back, instead I’ll absorb and learn from criticism. The following is my latest
submission, and unlike before it reflects the reading, it is succinct, and to
the point. No sense in beefing when I have an opportunity to be made better.
Feel me! And Yo, on the real God learns and learns and learns, mostly about Him
Self!___________________________________________________ ___________________________
“1:The
verse of light is considered one of the key verses in the Qur’an that determines the
relation between the human being and God. The degrees of the manifestation of
God are often understood as a metaphor referring to the levels of consciousness
different people may hold and experience of divine nature. To what extent do
you think this is in line with the first verses that were revealed to Muhammad
and the emphasis they lay on reading and seeking knowledge?
I think the passage refers to various levels of faith in human
beings, generally those who have no faith; those who have faith, and those who
have strong faith. The portion of the verse of light that says, “God citeth
symbols /parables for men”, relates directly to Muhammad’s command to
read. While in the act of reading an
individual cognitively processes symbols.
Muhammad’s command to, “’Read’ in the name of thy Lord who
created-created thee from a clot; Read and your lord is Most Honorable. Who
taught man to write with a pen, and taught man what he knew not” these ayahs of
surah Iqra correlate with the ayah of light, affirming that the human being
grows closer to God’s light via earnest educational pursuit.
2:What do you think of Prophet Muhammad’s
statement regarding the renewal of Islam on page 330? We often think of any religion as a
system of dogma that is, a well-defined canon of convictions and maxims. So
what do you think this call for renewing reflect about the nature of Islam as a
religion and its humanistic nature, that is, the way it is connected with the
historical consciousness and understanding of those who embrace it rather than
being a fixed corpus to which its followers are expected to subscribe and
accept as it is.
From what I’ve gathered from the reading, it appears that Muhammad
prophesied the coming of future Muslims who will have a high level of’
spiritual eminence’ and their spiritual eminence will provide the insights
necessary to renew the religion of Islam in a responsible way, not deviating from its historical context,
nor the foundational teachings of Muhammad or the Quran. ‘Renewal’ indicates
that a progressive spiritual understanding in Islam avails itself to Muslims,
preventing Islam from becoming arcane and dogmatic. As a humanistic force Islam
provides ‘right guidance’ for humanity. Muhammad said, “Islam began as a
stranger and will become once more a stranger.” and promised that God would not
abandon them and that a caliphat will be appointed every hundred years to lead
the community in this process of ‘renewal’.
3:The speech Abu Bakr gave after being
chosen as the first successor of the prophet is often taken as one of the
earliest discourses on Islamic political thought. What do you think are the
main theses Abu Bakr’s advances? What do you think these theses imply for the
relation between religious belief and political power in Islamic thought?
Peace,
Emblem
