9/13/07 7:07 PM What is a fanatic? Is it a person who accepts a matter of faith as a fact, and will not heed contrary evidence? Do religions foster fanaticism?
A fanatic. Let me check the dictionary. Single-minded, certainly. Single minded, i.e., a self imposed prohibition of considering contrary ideas as plausible. No thinking required. We have the truth and it is clear and certain. And it is to be acted upon.
The Muslim fanatic, my primary interest, is certain of the origin and transmission of the sources and of the voice within him, like a dream, telling him that only those who never falter in faith (like Abraham and Ishmael) will be thoroughly happy with God. He is taught to disregard the obvious codes of moral conduct, and not dare to presume to tell God what is moral and not, and to rely on the sincerity of his conviction of a divine imperative, the fulfillment of which will result in the greatest of happiness, unfathomable to the human imagination. And this (death, let us say) cannot be in vain, for it is in faith, i.e., in the absolute certitude that it is a command of God, and it is this faith (alone??) that is true mark of the martyr. Therefore act wrongly in a suicide bombing, perhaps, but never imprudently, for regardless of the truth, you get the treasure for having wanted to serve God before all things whatsoever.
The Islamic Koran (Sura 18) has young Moses being horrified at the Teacher for killing an innocent person, only to learn that the young man would become a terrible son and would eventually cause his parents great and unnecessary anguish, and since they were very pious and deserved a good son, and in order to spare the parents and make way for a new son, the Teacher killed the thus far innocent child so that his evil nature would never surface.
This has to do with the Muslim notion of “patience”. The Muslim is not to consider the commands of God (the Great Teacher) as moral in his eyes. He knows that the final outcome of all actions will be a great good, and he is willing to wait until then to discover how it is that this act of murder of the innocents, let us say, result in good. The Muslim is willing to wait.
This means that Kant's brake on religious excesses is removed, namely that God cannot be assumed to command you to commit an act which you know to be immoral. Per the lesson of Moses we are to put that behind us. This is not to say that God is immoral. Never. Take a man who is on the way to murder a pious woman, and whom the Teacher has some one kill, merely by command and not be reason, and who therefore does not commit the hideous crime.
Such is the Muslim thinking. There is no moral brake on the Muslim with regard to what he is permitted to understand to be the “guidance of God”.
Abraham has the dream to sacrifice and Ishmael goes along “with patience” knowing that something wonderful will happen to and through him. Abraham shows the extreme pinnacle of submission to God, where he takes a mere dream of a command for a command,, knowing that it didn't really matter whether it was a command or not, knowing that the sincerity alone counted, and in his zeal to exemplified his submission, but only with the free concurrence of his son, was willing to slay his son. The question of morality, again, does not enter in. The only thing that counts is the sincerity of the belief and not the act itself (which simply follows from the belief as a matter of course upon perceived opportunities). As far as the human moral judgment is concerned, just wait, we are told, just wait until God makes all things clear on the Day of Judgment.
Now the Christians have been pretty well “defanged”, I think, due to the scriptural witness of John 5 and Acts 15. In the latter the gentile Christian is set free from all statute law, including all scriptural law; and in the former the Christian is required to disregard any interpretation of scripture or other sources, which is not in accord for the law of love. Never again can the Christian individual hide behind the skirts of a church or the tails of a pastor and feel safe in conscience when committing in the name of God what is clearly immoral to him. The question of patience does not arise and has no bearing.
It seems that the Muslims understands “moral” to mean that which has a final outcome which is ordained by God, i.e., all means leading to the end that God has in mind, which would certainly be things like mercy, justice, etc. and happiness for the pious, etc. And so the judgment of the morality of a man's actions must wait until the Day of Dread.
This is far different from Western meaning where moral is that which accords with the universal law of free men in society.
And so we have a problem, it seems to me, as to how to consider and understand Islam as a faith. As far as I am personally concerned I would appreciate some icon of common moral supremacy over all alleged commands of God.
A fanatic derives from the Latin for temple and expressed himself in a way that could only be accounted to gods or demons.
Most Christians will be amazed at the icon of individual moral supremacy over all interpretations of revelation given by John 5. It is brilliant and absolute telling. Jesus violates the Sabbath Law in order to do a good act now, without waiting.
Such an icon must be forthcoming from Islam. Otherwise we will have reason to think that the lesson of Moses and Abraham will be taken to heart and moral questions are discarded, and all morality becomes the dictate of Allah (whoever that may be? Gabriel posing as Allah? Satan himself taking charge a la Job?), and any discord is merely apparent, a human illusion, and will be made plain on the Day of Reckoning.
In Moses we learn that what appears immoral is not always so. And in Abraham we learn that it is sincerity that counts, and not the act itself.
Now this opens the door to the Muslim martyr who gives his life to “show the Jews a lesson” or “give slay for slay”, being a fanatic in his belief in his call to commit a crime. And not worrying too much if he is wrong even, for he knows that it is sincerity alone that counts and he is to be strong and not think other thoughts but those of submission to Allah and not even think of the rewards, but to wait to see what delight Allah has cooked up for those who are truly submissive in their hearts, like Abraham.
I need to get this straight: Moses teaches the suspension of individual moral judgment, which means that moral brake on the excesses “of God” is gone, and so where, at least theoretically, everything goes, everything is in play, and there are no moral rules at all.
Abraham teaches that it is sincerity alone that counts. For only in anticipation of a great reward would Ishmael have been willing to go along with his father's decision, knowing that if he did in submission he would have this reward, and it didn't matter whether it were true or not, but only whether it were sincere or not.
So the sincerity and the “moral patience” together work to give us the martyr, where sincerity alone is at play and where morality is cast aside for the sake of personal reward, i.e., personal paradise. Islam is a solitariest faith, where there is only a configuration of individuals working on their individual paradise. Let each fend for himself.
An element in Islam that I cannot yet confirm is the idea that Allah created the hells and paradises before the humans, and so the humans are in a zero-sum game, which is graded on the curve. That is highly suggestive for wanting to outdo others in zeal.
In this sense then the sources of Islam foster fanaticism. It is incumbent upon the Muslims to supply an icon such as that of John 5, so that a fanatic will have to be judged as insane.