Peace.
It's been a long time, and I apologize. I've been busy with university work, as well as pursuing my own personal research into Islamic topics.
Some time ago I finished transcribing Allamah al-Hilli's book "Bab al-Hadi 'Ashar" for tashayyu.org . It goes over logical and philosophical reasoning for Shi'i aqeeda, starting with the existence of God and ending off with the Resurrection.
You can read it in its entirety here: http://www.tashayyu.org/kalam/al-bab-al-hadi-ashar
The other reason for the lack of updates is because I've been trying to do a lot more reading than speaking. I feel that I still need to study Muslim literature and finalize my position on several topics before writing more blog entries. Insha'allah you will see more soon. For now, I leave you with this:
From the ShiaChat thread: "Are the shia wasting their knowledge?"
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234971647-are-the-shia-wasting-their-knowledge/page__pid__1992929__st__0&#entry1992929
...Apologeticism (through speeches, debates, etc.) is essentially a basterdization of knowledge. Actual tangible literature will always be worth more academically than a speech or debate, because through writing, one could present references, quotes, and simply more precise and resourceful language in general. Actually pulling out an Islamic source and reading it will usually do you better than listening to what a sheikh has to say. So from that perspective, yes, our school's standards are much higher than the likes of Jimmy Swaggart and Zakir Naik.
But where I disagree is here: how many people pursue religion as an interest? How many have the time and patience to look through resources for themselves? How many have the mind to think about deep theological, political, historical and philosophical matters? Very few. Most people are disinterested in this sort of thing. We're losing Islamic youth pop culture; music, sex, drugs, alcohol, parties, secularism, liberalism, "conservatism", and worst of all, ignorance.
Speakers are necessary to reel in those of either simple mind or simple taste. So even if that means simplifying knowledge and getting it out there in a charismatic manner, I think it's well worth it, because it will at least slightly push the masses in the proper direction, and inspire more to look into matters closely. The only request is that such people are knowledgeable. And I don't mean a university graduate; I mean someone who has really spent many years and even decades learning before speaking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think you have made so good points but I don't necessarily think that apologetics is as bad as you present it. It depends on the form certainly. Apologetics can be rather sophisticated and perhaps not as much of a distortion as those of the modern persuasion (i.e. Zakir Naik). Apologetics is not too much different from a person defending a position and giving reasons for their belief. The Quran essentially does this through argument against certain groups. However, the main distinction is that we are not those who defend the Quran but the Quran is the one who defends us, guides us and is our light rather than unlighted candle who is dependent on the match of another.
Post a Comment