"Each of us must use our own mind in pursuit of truth. (17:36; 10:100; 39:17-18; 41:53; 42:21; 6:114-116; 10:36; 12:111; 20:114; 21:7; 35:28; 38:29)." (Edip Yuksel here.)
If Edip Yuksel believes that "each of us must use our [sic] own mind in pursuit of truth," then why does he feel compelled to list verses from the Qur'an as textual authority for this unremarkable statement? Does he want "each of us" to use our minds "in pursuit of truth," or does he, Edip Yuksel, rather, want "each of us" to be, as he apparently is, blindly and blandly obedient to the Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira? For what else can one conclude when a banality is asserted with which no one would think of taking issue ("each of us must use [his] mind in pursuit of truth"), and yet he feels it necessary, in order to ensure that this obvious statement be accepted by his Muslim audience, that he dutifully list Qur'anic passages by way of Authority, so akin as it is to the medieval "auctoritee" we find in Chaucer: 17:36; 10:100; 39:17-18; 41:53; 42:21; 6:114-116; 10:36; 12:111; 20:114; 21:7; 35:28; 38:29.
And there's a bit more about Edip Yuksel that can be learned, after two seconds of googling, and that suggest or rather reveal that he is a bit of a nut, theorizing about the "mathematical" structure of the Qur'an and focusing on the number 19. Here's what I found in an interview with what I presume is a magazine ("Furkan"):
Furkan: Let's turn to the subject of 19. Can you mention briefly the theory of 19?
Edip: All units, that is, letters, words, sentences and chapters of the Quran are mathematically designed on a prime number which was prophesied in a Chapter called "The Hidden One" for more than 14 centuries. The simple to understand but impossible to imitate mathematical harmony, in my opinion, is beyond human capacity to construct. Integration of arbitrary human language with the precise and universal rules of mathematics in the Quran and in the original Bible is a marvel that can be appreciated only by those who study it with critical and truth-seeking mind. The examples of this mathematical design are demonstrated in several books, including my Turkish book "Uzerinde 19 Var" (published by Milliyet Yayinlari) and its forthcoming English version "Code 19".
Furkan: Why do you think most people ignore or disagree with this thesis?
Edip: Because most people follow religious or anti-religious ideas with their hormones, rather than their intellect.
Furkan: Contrary to traditional acceptance of the Islamic world, you concluded that two parts that are regarded as verses at the end of Surat al-Tawba do not actually belong to the Quran. I wonder what you experienced psychologically in the process of this important decision.
Edip: In addition to the mathematical evidence indicating that those two "verses" do not belong to the mathematically designed book (Kitabul Marqum), God blessed me with a personal experience that made me certain about my decision. I begged my Creator for a sign to save me from confusion and guide me the truth. My sincere and persistent search for truth was responded by my Lord. He fulfilled his promise of 41:53 by supporting my faith through BOTH objective and subjective evidences. I believe that every person who seeks the truth and is ready to acknowledge it regardless the cost of such an admission, that person will witness objective and subjective divine signs.
And later in the same interview, Edip Yuksel makes special mention of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
He is, in short, a gentleman in a dustcoat trying to make Muslims and non-Muslims hear, but he's still caught in the coils of Islam, and can't get out (said the starling). Now it doesn't often happen that John Crowe Ransom, Laurence Sterne, and Vladimir Nabokov appear in the same sentence, but it does happen.
Returning to our Eid el-Fitr lambs, we may find unsurprising that Edip Yuksel overlooks the fact that for non-Muslims, the number 19 has entered their consciousnesses as the number of calmly smiling mass murdering Muslims -- mostly Saudis, with that one Egyptian, Mohammad Atta (a frustrated urban-planner whose rage over the destruction of old buildings in Cairo was, in Hamburg, somehow diverted into hatred for the Infidels, the same Infidels who did not treat him, a Muslim, in Hamburg as he thought Muslims should be treated) -- who took direct part in the attacks of September 11, 2001 when the members of that Novemdectet employing their aerodynamical wind instruments to play a murderous theme. And variations on that theme have been played by others before, and also ever since.
In the batty mathematical mystagoguery of Edip Yuksel, the number 19 is an instrument he employs to find a way both to exalt the supposed mathematical structure of the Qur'an (That Must Come Only From God) and, at the same time, to provide tortuous justification for regarding as extra-Qur'anic some verses now found in the Qur'an that he, Edip Yuksel, finds particularly dangerous. This surely will not work.
Edip Yuksel hasn't been able to free himself from the mind-forged manacles of Islam. He cannot, as yet, allow himself to follow the examples of Ibn Warraq and Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Wafa Sultan and many others who, through no fault of their own, were also born into Islam, yet who found the mental stamina, and the moral determination, and the physical courage, not only to jettison that Total Belief-System, but to tell the world about what led to their decision.
Someday he may take that same path, and at long last be able to free himself from the mental desarroi that many of those who engage in apologetics on behalf of Islam so often display. Those who wish him well would certainly wish for such an outcome.
I learned a long time ago (from a college professor) that "bullshit is bullshit, but the study of bullshit is scholarship."
That plays automatically in my brain whenever I hear the oxymoron "Islamic Scholar"
The number 19 is a big deal, eh? Sounds like million-man math.
As for using one's mind in the pursuit of the truth, as with all totalitarian systems of thought, if one reaches any conclusion that is not in agreement with the accepted truth promulgated by whatever totalitarian ideology (take your pick----Islam, fascism, Marxism, etc.), then this is ipso facto evidence of the individual abusing the pursuit of truth and thus the individual is no longer to be accorded any respect. Indeed, he can be done away with. Same old same old.
"The simple to understand but impossible to imitate mathematical harmony, in my opinion, is beyond human capacity to construct..." -- quote from Edip Yuksel
Being "beyond human capacity to construct" apparently reflects Mr. Yuksel's extremely limited abilities in arithmetic. Of course, the number 19 probably does appear to be unfathomable, except perhaps by god, to anyone who can't count beyond 3, but almost everyone I know over the age of three years old is not so afflicted. The quality of this kind of thinking is reminiscent of recent discussions with AM here on JW regarding the Qur'an's being able to specify the speed of light accurately to eight decimal places.
And we give these guys access to advanced weaponry?
I for one have always been greatly impressed by the Holy Koran: by its oft-hailed beauty, by its putative science, by its nonsensical structure, by the seedy and queer wonders it holds.
*** 86:13 ***
Lo this Koran is a conclusive Word; it is not a thing for amusement. It is no pleasantry. And it is no joke.
No the Holy Koran is not a joke. There is no amusement in the Koran, and there is no fun in Islam. There is, however, an ample supply of confusion, incoherent prose, drudgery, menace, hate, and hopelessness.
*** Tabari 1:360 ***
If these things are somehow denominated by he number 19, we can add numerology to the list.
From the interview:
Houston, we have a problem. If I recall correctly, Muhammad said this his "god" could not be approached nor talk with/to any mere mortal human being.
Complete and utter bullshit. Pure physics can place a man on the moon, but simple numerology can fabricate any text based on any number.
Edip Yuksel can make his assumptions all day long that the KKKorant is "divinely inspired" based on the number 19, but that still doesn't mean it makes any sense. So much for allah's perfect language.
For Edip Yuksel the Koran is the ultimate wisdom, the beginning and the end, and the answer to everything. I shudder over this inbred madness.
But I would love to get your opinion on Zuhdi Yasser, Hugh:
Here there are 9 parts of youtube of a congressional hearing which might interest you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfFe3FI01oo&feature=related
If everyone should use his/her own mind to know the truth,why does Islam require that the qur'an be followed blindly.With threats to anyone,Muslim and non-Muslim who
tries to scrutinise and critique said book.
Wow I'm impressed by the hate speech here. Couple of points you got wrong:
1. He lists the verses to show that this is what Quran tells people to do. By this, he's challenging traditional people that disagree.
2. He's not following Hadith and Sunna at all. He's categorically against them as religious sources.
3. He's not blindly following the Quran, he's questioning the traditional understanding of it and showing that it's actually an agreeable book of which parts have been misunderstood for benefit.
What are you lot doing bashing someone because of his beliefs? Did he harm anyone? Does he advocate starting a holy war against you? How many of you tried to understand what the 19 based pattern is about before calling him names?
You deserve to be quoted on some "ad hominem watch" website.
You do not win a case against a personality by caricaturing him, or against a religion or a religious book by making a mockery of it. Appealing to reason does not necessarily mean forsaking ideas presented in any book, let alone a religious book. Well, what is basically wrong with citing the universally accepted divine book of Muslims to urge Muslims, who have failed to apply reasoning, and are blindly following spurious teachings of the Hadith and Sunnah, to apply their mind to find the real truth. The Quran does not encourage blind obedience. Rather it brands those who fail to apply their reason or sense as “deaf, dumb, and blind (2:171).” Accepting divine revelation as truth is not foolish; rather rejecting it is foolish. As a prominent contemporary Muslim scholar Jeffrey Lang beautifully puts it, those who benefit the most from the Quran are ‘persons of insight,’ ‘firmly rooted in knowledge,’ ‘use their reason,’ and ‘stand on clear evidence and proof. While those who oppose revelation are ‘deluded,’ ‘in manifest error,’ ‘ignorant,’ ‘foolish,’ ‘have no understanding,’ ‘only follow surmise and conjecture,’ and blindly adhere to tradition (Losing My Religion: A Call for Help, Amana Publishers, Beltsville (Maryland), 2004, p. 65). The Quran also repeatedly asks us to think and ponder. Thus as Lang further notes: The message is plain enough: to gain truer faith, we need to free ourselves from inherited notions and examine our beliefs rationally (Ibid, p. 66).
Well, if you are determined to reject any faith, it is no use arguing with you. I believe that faith and reason are not necessarily inconsistent, or antithetical to each other.
As regards the other points about Edip’s position on the Number 19, one may have different opinions on it. But, to my mind, that does not imperil his standing as an outstanding contemporary Muslim thinker, and as a great champion of genuine Islamic reform among Muslims. He is a front-running leader of a movement that would definitely help the world move toward a more secure, peaceful phase. The Quran-only Islam is strongly against any form of wrongdoing on earth – transgression, injustice, intolerance, violence, and terrorism. Edip’s movement rejects the literature that has helped perpetuate the harsh, extremist version of Islam.
You do not win a case against a personality by caricaturing him, or against a religion or a religious book by making a mockery of it. Appealing to reason does not necessarily mean forsaking ideas presented in any book, let alone a religious book. Well, what is basically wrong with citing the universally accepted divine book of Muslims to urge Muslims, who have failed to apply reasoning, and are blindly following spurious teachings of the Hadith and Sunnah, to apply their mind to find the real truth. The Quran does not encourage blind obedience. Rather it brands those who fail to apply their reason or sense as “deaf, dumb, and blind (2:171).” Accepting divine revelation as truth is not foolish; rather rejecting it is foolish. As a prominent contemporary Muslim scholar Jeffrey Lang beautifully puts it, those who benefit the most from the Quran are ‘persons of insight,’ ‘firmly rooted in knowledge,’ ‘use their reason,’ and ‘stand on clear evidence and proof. While those who oppose revelation are ‘deluded,’ ‘in manifest error,’ ‘ignorant,’ ‘foolish,’ ‘have no understanding,’ ‘only follow surmise and conjecture,’ and blindly adhere to tradition (Losing My Religion: A Call for Help, Amana Publishers, Beltsville (Maryland), 2004, p. 65). The Quran also repeatedly asks us to think and ponder. Thus as Lang further notes: The message is plain enough: to gain truer faith, we need to free ourselves from inherited notions and examine our beliefs rationally (Ibid, p. 66).
Well, if you are determined to reject any faith, it is no use arguing with you. I believe that faith and reason are not necessarily inconsistent, or antithetical to each other.
As regards the other points about Edip’s position on the Number 19, one may have different opinions on it. But, to my mind, this does not imperil his standing as an outstanding contemporary Muslim thinker, and as a great champion of genuine Islamic reform among Muslims. He is a front-running leader of a movement that would definitely help the world move toward a more secure, peaceful phase. The Quran-only Islam is strongly against any form of wrongdoing on earth – transgression, injustice, intolerance, violence, and terrorism. Edip’s movement rejects the literature that has helped perpetuate the harsh, extremist version of Islam.
To the poster above:
1) I know that Edip Yuksel is trying to reform, or "reform," Islam.
2) I know that he is, in the grand scheme of things, not a bad guy, and the fact that he has made an enemy of, by being unafraid to attack, Adnan Otkar (the Harun Yaha crazy), is in his favor.
3) He is trying to somehow "reform" Islam through the same method -- Qur'an only, skip the Hadith and the Sira -- that another, younger Turk, Mustafa Akyol, keeps claiming is the way out.
4) I am not a Muslim. I don't apply the standards of Muslims in judging rationality or sense. I apply quite different standards.
And applying those standards, I find telling the felt need, on Edip Yuksel's part, to quote copiously from the Qur'an when stating what should be an obvious thing: look for the truth. In the Western world, no one would think of needing to quote some Higher Authority.
5) The whole business about the number 19 is sheer mumbo-jumbo. Perhaps in his desperate attempt to help himself, and others, escape what I called, borrowing from Blake, the mind-forged manacles of Islam, Edip Yuksel finds the mystagogic play with numbers appealing or convincing, I find it neither.
6) I doubt if any of these "reform" movements will help much, and they certainly won't be accepted by many Muslims, or by enough of them to head off what is clearly not a "clash of civilizations" but, rather, a fight between Islam and -- not the West -- but All the Rest. This is not a clash of civilizations. This is merely Muslims feeling, because of OPEC trillions and Muslim migrant tens of millions, that they now possess the power to conduct the Jihad, that is, the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam.
7) I do not think I should be expected to conform to Muslim ideas of what constitutes advanced criticism. We in the West have our own standards.
To the poster above:
1) I know that Edip Yuksel is trying to reform, or "reform," Islam.
2) I know that he is, in the grand scheme of things, not a bad guy, and the fact that he has made an enemy of, by being unafraid to attack, Adnan Otkar (the Harun Yaha crazy), is in his favor.
3) He is trying to somehow "reform" Islam through the same method -- Qur'an only, skip the Hadith and the Sira -- that another, younger Turk, Mustafa Akyol, keeps claiming is the way out.
4) I am not a Muslim. I don't apply the standards of Muslims in judging rationality or sense. I apply quite different standards.
And applying those standards, I find telling the felt need, on Edip Yuksel's part, to quote copiously from the Qur'an when stating what should be an obvious thing: look for the truth. In the Western world, no one would think of needing to quote some Higher Authority.
5) The whole business about the number 19 is sheer mumbo-jumbo. Perhaps in his desperate attempt to help himself, and others, escape what I called, borrowing from Blake, the mind-forged manacles of Islam, Edip Yuksel finds the mystagogic play with numbers appealing or convincing, I find it neither.
6) I doubt if any of these "reform" movements will help much, and they certainly won't be accepted by many Muslims, or by enough of them to head off what is clearly not a "clash of civilizations" but, rather, a fight between Islam and -- not the West -- but All the Rest. This is not a clash of civilizations. This is merely Muslims feeling, because of OPEC trillions and Muslim migrant tens of millions, that they now possess the power to conduct the Jihad, that is, the struggle to remove all obstacles to the spread, and then the dominance, of Islam.
7) I do not think I should be expected to conform to Muslim ideas of what constitutes legitimate criticism. We in the West have different criteria and standards.
To the poster above:
1. My friend, what you are saying as legitimate criticism sounds like nothing other than Islamophobia (hate expression such as “manacles of Islam”), which I think can backfire against the Western world. By pitting Islam against all the rest, you are in fact sowing the seeds of hostility between the two worlds, the Islamic and the rest. You conveniently forget that Judaism, Christianity and Islam have common roots. The Quran upholds the original religions brought by the Prophets Abraham, Moses, Jesus and others. All earlier prophets of God are respected prophets of Islam, who are excellent examples to emulate for all Muslims. Our Prophet Muhammad was specifically urged to follow Abraham as an excellent example and follow his religion (60:4-6; 3:95; 2:135; 4:125; 16:123).
2. When you can think of true Islam as one that shuns violence and aggression, you should be able to see it as a friend and an ally, not a foe. But unfortunately, you have blinded yourself to understanding Islam as a religion of the extremist Muslims. You conveniently forget that the vast majority of Muslims are peace-loving, not extremist jihad-mongers. In fact, the jihad-mongers - the suicide bombers - are condemned as much by peace-loving Muslims as by non-Muslims.
It is ironic that you do not see the message of Islam, as embodied in the Quran, as essentially peaceful and tolerant. The Quran supports only defensive wars, and unequivocally and strongly condemns aggressive wars and persecution and torture, and asks believers to cease hostility, if the enemy inclines to peace (2:190-193; 4:90; 8:61-62). You are blind to its message that killing a man unjustly is like killing the whole of humankind, and saving a man is like saving the whole of humankind (5:32).
3. You deride the Quranic appeal to rationality as “the standards of Muslims in judging rationality or sense”. This is an unfair, irrational criticism. Please do not make an artificial divide between Muslims and non-Muslims or Western people. When it comes to judging things rationally, Muslims would do the same thing as any other community – not look for an authority to judge things rationally. But the context you are referring to is quite different. Edip Yuksel takes recourse to the Quran to convince Muslims who are more attentive to spurious teachings other than the Quran.
4. You cast doubt on the ability of current reform movements along Quranic lines to make any substantial progress toward gaining support of many Muslims to head off what you term as “a fight between Islam and -- not the West -- but All the Rest.” This is sheer nonsense. I sincerely hope you return to sanity, and think in terms of possible peace and reconciliation, and peaceful co-existence, rather than this kind of irresponsible talk of belligerency.
I do not understand why you are always hounding an honest man who promotes peace and justice in the world and fight intellectually all forms of dogmatism and terrorism? I have only one explanation for your attitude: you and your allies are fanatics who dream only to sow terror and conflict between the Arab-Muslim world and the rest of the planet.
All Edip’s work shows that he is against fake Islam based on the books of Bukhari, Muslim and all idiot scholars who promote such books. The only source of Edip is the Quran, but unfortunately you can not see the truth and the beauty that emerges from this outstanding book.
It's good that I make the following recall: Islam of the Koran is an Islam of peace; it must be fully distinguished from corrupted Islam practiced by most Muslims. Edip is practicing and promoting the true Islam and risks his life by fighting the false Islam. Edip refers to the Qur'an in his articles mainly 1) to show the non Muslim the wisdom and knowledge in the Qur'an and 2) to notify and alert the traditional Muslim for his voluntarily or involuntarily ignorance of the Quranic truth.
You already know all what I have said. There is an Arab proverb (not a Quran verse) which says: “In the repetition the donkey understands (Inda Tikrar Yata’allamu Lheemar)” Unfortunately, there are Homo sapiens sapiens worse than Equus africanus asinus (7: 179; 25: 44 these are Quran verses not proverbs)
Mehdi