Challenge - a more sane Islam in the Middle Ages

Status
Not open for further replies.
I want this thread to be distinct from my thread in post-1900 history - it is about something different and I want an earlier POD here.

The point is, Sunni Islam in it's predominant form is not only incompatible with humanistic values, but also unimaginably resistant towards any kind of reform. So what kind of "reform" do I want? Well, the main points are:
1. Getting rid of the emphasis on violent Jihad, together with rabid obsession with martyrdom in battle that pretty much characterizes Islam up to this day - or at least mitigating the Jihadi drive to the point that allows a peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims most of the time
2. Abolishing or mitigating the harsh hudud punishments - death penalty for apostasy and adultery, chopping off hand for theft, lashing people for drinking alcohol and so on so forth.
3. Making women equal to men.
4. Abolishing legal differences between Muslims and non-Muslims
5. Abolishing the concept of Caliphate as the sole legal political authority.

I. The point of divergence is in the so called "Islamic Golden Age" - between 9th and 12th century. The postulates listed above do not have to be implemented at the same time. But you know - the goal is to create a much more "fluid" religion, one that can successfully progress with changing times and be consistent with humanistic values - much like Roman Catholicism. It does not matter how it's done - it may be done through reforming the Orthodox Islam or by creating some ultra heterodox sect or something else.
2. What historical events should evolve for such a liberal sect to become predominant through much of Arab World at least?
 
The point is, Sunni Islam in it's predominant form is not only incompatible with humanistic values, but also unimaginably resistant towards any kind of reform. So what kind of "reform" do I want? Well, the main points are:
1. Getting rid of the emphasis on violent Jihad, together with rabid obsession with martyrdom in battle that pretty much characterizes Islam up to this day - or at least mitigating the Jihadi drive to the point that allows a peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims most of the time
2. Abolishing or mitigating the harsh hudud punishments - death penalty for apostasy and adultery, chopping off hand for theft, lashing people for drinking alcohol and so on so forth.
3. Making women equal to men.
4. Abolishing legal differences between Muslims and non-Muslims
5. Abolishing the concept of Caliphate as the sole legal political authority.

Some points:

1. Jihadism is like the Flat Earth Idea, in that it claims ancient roots but is a modern phenomenon. It is the result of Salafism/Wahhabism in Arabia, colonial oppression, and fears of modernity. While the Arab conquests were violent the idea of forcibly converting everyone, killing yourself for the faith, or the idea that Christians and Jews are evil really only got off the ground between 1700-1960.

2. That should be changed.

3. The problem is that in the Middle Ages Islam was actually probably better for women than either the old system or Christianity. People often cite the Muhammad saying that you can beat your wife four times as long as it doesn't leave a mark, forgetting that this was a regulation to prevent men from beating their wives have to death. Aisha, one of Muhammad's wives, was one of his biggest preachers.

4. The status of Jews was actually better under medieval Islam than under medieval Christianity. They were allowed to openly practice their religion, didn't fear pogroms, and the rules in place didn't really oppress them, but instead defined the difference between Jews and Muslims.

5. The Caliphate is based on three things: precedent (there had already been a Caliph since the death of Muhammad), the Quran, and the Hadiths (sayings attributed to Muhammad). Getting rid of the legal/political significance of the Caliphate wouldn't have happened in Middle Ages, sort of like the Pope wouldn't lose his power in the same time period.

Basically a lot of the problems listed here are not problems of Medieval Islam, but of modern Islam. You would need a POD far later (like the 1700s-1899 since this is in the pre-1900 forum) to first see many of these problems arise, and second to have them fixed.
 
1. Jihadism is not something that was created in 19th or 20th century. Armed Jihad existed since the time of Muhammad and the first Caliphs. All schools of Islam agree that it is obligatory, even if they disagree on everything else. Our goal should be creating an alternative scenerio in which some liberal sect of Islam is created at some time betwenn 800 and 1100 AD, becomes predominant and then makes armed jihad forbidden at some point prior to 1900 AD
3 and 4. What is progressive now may not be progressive in the future. Once again, the goal is not to have a sect that is liberal by medieval sandards but one that is progressive continuously, i.e. can evolve with changing times and become more liberal over time. Christianity in general is a good example of that.

What about such a scenerio? The Mutazilite school instead of dying out, survives and becomes the dominant school of thought and a state ideology of the Abbasid Caliphate, displacing Ashari theology. With it's main competitor and state persecution now gone, Mutazilites start absorbing even more influences from Greek philosophy and with time, drifts futher apart from the harsh, legalistic Islam that we know from today from the writings of classical Islamic jurists. As even more time passes, it starts liberally adopting ideas from heterodox Alawism and Isma'ilism, including abrogation of sharia law. Subsequently, a new religion arises that still calls itself Islam but is essentially syncretic. Plausible?
 
I want this thread to be distinct from my thread in post-1900 history - it is about something different and I want an earlier POD here.

The point is, Sunni Islam in it's predominant form is not only incompatible with humanistic values, but also unimaginably resistant towards any kind of reform. So what kind of "reform" do I want? Well, the main points are:
1. Getting rid of the emphasis on violent Jihad, together with rabid obsession with martyrdom in battle that pretty much characterizes Islam up to this day - or at least mitigating the Jihadi drive to the point that allows a peaceful coexistence with non-Muslims most of the time
2. Abolishing or mitigating the harsh hudud punishments - death penalty for apostasy and adultery, chopping off hand for theft, lashing people for drinking alcohol and so on so forth.
3. Making women equal to men.
4. Abolishing legal differences between Muslims and non-Muslims
5. Abolishing the concept of Caliphate as the sole legal political authority.

I. The point of divergence is in the so called "Islamic Golden Age" - between 9th and 12th century. The postulates listed above do not have to be implemented at the same time. But you know - the goal is to create a much more "fluid" religion, one that can successfully progress with changing times and be consistent with humanistic values - much like Roman Catholicism. It does not matter how it's done - it may be done through reforming the Orthodox Islam or by creating some ultra heterodox sect or something else.
2. What historical events should evolve for such a liberal sect to become predominant through much of Arab World at least?

Signed up via proxy, immediately posted a thread saying a widespread religion practiced by hundreds of millions, including board members is "incompatible with humanistic values", also your email address is the name of a notorious architect of genocide. This is not the place for you. Goodbye.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top