Light of reason at the opposite extreme of Islam

[Skybird]

The guy rightly points out corrctly the existence of the Islamic mystics, but although hard to prove this by the interview he may overestimate their influence and ignores that all in all the mystic tradition pretty much was successfully prevented in Islam and played an even smaller role than the mystic tradition in Christianity.

Nevertheless, his statements on the Quran being a work of man and not being infallible, are nothing less than an extreme position in Islam - like superstitious, fundamentalism being the other. It is known that I would argue to describe Islam as a fundamentalism in itself, in general, so thoughts expressed like in this interview are nothing less but revolutionary, although not so new. They popped up time and again, here and there, but they never were successful in creating a tradition that could influence the othodox main branch of Islam.

If more Muslims would think like this man does, and more Muslims would support his positions and would stand up against those we usually hear talking instead of silently, passively accepting their deeds and thus: accept their leadership, we all would be better of in this clash of medieval versus modern times, and this clash of two civilizations.

I do not agree with many of his remarks on divine and human self, and the nature of revelation, since my position is more hostile to religion in general while he nevertheless defends it, nevertheless if what he summarizes in this interview would be all differences between Islam and me, I would be perfectly able to tolerate it peacefully and leave it alone as long as it leaves me alone and becomes not missionising.

That originally he followed Khomeni and then turned away from him, and left behind the classical concept of an Islamic theocracy, in my book shows a sense of seriousness and honesty in his search.

http://www.drsoroush.com/English/Int...0Mohammad.html

Muhammad is the creator of the Koran. That is what well-known Iranian reformer Abdolkarim Soroush says in his book The Expansion of the Prophetic Experience that will be published early next year. With this view, Soroush goes further than some of the most radical Muslim reformers. In an interview with Zemzem, he gives a foretaste of his book.
Abdolkarim Soroush is regarded as the intellectual leader of the Iranian reform movement. Initially, he was a supporter of Khomeini. He held several official positions in the young Islamic republic, among which that of Khomeini’s adviser on cultural and educational reform. But when the spiritual leader soon turned out to be a tyrant, Soroush withdrew in disappointment. Since the early 90s, he is part of a group of ‘republican’ intellectuals who started out discussing the concept of an ‘Islamic democracy’ but gradually moved away from the entire idea of an Islamic state.

Soroush’s basic argument is simple: all human understanding of religion is historical and fallible. With this idea he undermines the Iranian theocracy, because if all human understanding of religion is fallible, no-one can claim to apply the shari’a in God’s name, not even the Iranian clergy.

In The Expansion of the Prophetic Experience Soroush makes clear that his view on the fallibility of religious knowledge to a certain degree also applies to the Koran. With thinkers such as Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd and Mohammed Arkoun, Soroush belongs to a small group of radical reformers who advocate a historical approach to the Koran. In his new book, however, he goes one step further than many of his radical colleagues. He claims that the Koran is not only the product of the historical circumstances in which it emerged, but also of the mind of the Prophet Mohammed with all his human limitations. This idea, says Soroush, is not an innovation, as several medieval thinkers already hinted at it.