Tweet
Knowing the general Muslim attitude towards all things pre-Islamic, I was quite pleasantly surprised when I came across the news that Iranian clerics had condemned the movie "300".
In general, Muslims consider all things which came before Islam to be "pagan" and thus "ignorance" and "unclean". This attitude usually severs the convert's link with his mother culture. The convert has to draw upon Arab stories, Arab language, Arab customs, Arab everything, in order to be a "true Muslim", because the code formalised by Mohammed was Arab-based.
This has led to the export of Arab nationalism and superioritism and Islam as one package. Indeed, I still partly believe that they are inseparable.
Coming back to the Iranian issue - the Quran praises the Romans for defeating the Persians, because the Romans were Christians, and thus monotheists, while the Persians were "pagans" or Zoroastrians. It celebrates this victory, in fact. It revels in it, the same way the Arab barbarians later revelled in the ruins of Persia.
It is to the defence of this same "pagan" and condemned culture that the clerics have come. This is totally unexpected, because it means that the clerics have, for once, chosen their own history and culture over their religion, over the Arab imperialism their religion brings. Here, I see a ray of hope - that Islam may finally be divorcing itself from its Arab origin.
This is a positive sign, because it will to better assimilation, and less conflict, if Muslims do not insist on equating their cultural identity with their religious one, and if they are able to adopt to their host country's culture, to become part, to finally contribute constructively instead of destructively.
In general, Muslims consider all things which came before Islam to be "pagan" and thus "ignorance" and "unclean". This attitude usually severs the convert's link with his mother culture. The convert has to draw upon Arab stories, Arab language, Arab customs, Arab everything, in order to be a "true Muslim", because the code formalised by Mohammed was Arab-based.
This has led to the export of Arab nationalism and superioritism and Islam as one package. Indeed, I still partly believe that they are inseparable.
Coming back to the Iranian issue - the Quran praises the Romans for defeating the Persians, because the Romans were Christians, and thus monotheists, while the Persians were "pagans" or Zoroastrians. It celebrates this victory, in fact. It revels in it, the same way the Arab barbarians later revelled in the ruins of Persia.
It is to the defence of this same "pagan" and condemned culture that the clerics have come. This is totally unexpected, because it means that the clerics have, for once, chosen their own history and culture over their religion, over the Arab imperialism their religion brings. Here, I see a ray of hope - that Islam may finally be divorcing itself from its Arab origin.
This is a positive sign, because it will to better assimilation, and less conflict, if Muslims do not insist on equating their cultural identity with their religious one, and if they are able to adopt to their host country's culture, to become part, to finally contribute constructively instead of destructively.
Besides, they've been calling the country "Iran" since before there was a West.
Comment