Shared by Mirza Iqbal Ashraf:

History of Knowledge-Explosions — Part II

Post Greek Period of Knowledge

ABSTRACT: There have been two “Knowledge-Explosions.” In between these two periods of knowledge-explosions, there was a period of progression of knowledge, contributed partly by the Romans, but conspicuously developed by the Muslim philosophers, and scientists which made an enduring effect upon Western thinkers. The modern world is indebted to the Muslims not only for the revival of Classical Greek knowledge, but also to their own contribution to social and general sciences which helped in bringing about the European Renaissance. However, contribution by the Romans in laying the foundation of “philosophy of humanism” is a unique achievement which arose first with Cicero (106-43 BCE) and was developed by the thinkers of the Italian Renaissance in the 14th century. The Romans were proud of their “love of law.” For them their ancient customs and traditions codified into a unified law was the lifeblood of their empire. Throughout their empire, from England to Black Sea and from Spain to Egypt, one law ruled all men. … They, instead of promoting philosophy and science, were more interested in building roads to connect every region of their empire. They used arches not only for temples and amphitheaters but also for bridges and aqueducts which made possible to bring water from faraway mountains. … This does not mean that the Romans did not play their part in preserving Greek knowledge. They did translate Greek philosophy, plays, and many literary works of the classical Greek authors and thinkers into Latin. … However, the Romans were more concerned about establishing a strong state than promoting philosophical and scientific knowledge. But they spread the educational ideas of the Greeks and translated their know-how in the fields of ceramics, metallurgy, alchemy and many more themes into Latin. But they lacked interest in science and technology and thus did not contribute to any useful scientific invention and technological innovation. ~ MIRZA ASHRAF.

To read full article please go to my page: https://independent.academia.edu/MirzaAshraf

(This is a worth reading article by Olivier Roy, a well-known British Sociologist. Although the article is about “European Jihadists”, but it is also true about USA. The journey of Jihadi begins with disengagement with society, a search for identity and ends up with joining Salafism and Jihadi cause with perhaps no role played by Mosques, Imams or militant groups during this journey) F. Sheikh   

European Jihadists

Few excerpts:

Why Newly Converts And Muslims, Who Discover Their Faith lately, Are Attracted to Salafism And Jihad?  

The real starting point for the making of a homegrown jihadi is not ‘radicalization’ but social disengagement, a sense of estrangement from, resentment of, Western society. It is not surprising that many wannabe jihadis are either converts to Islam, or Muslims who discovered their faith only relatively late.  In both cases, disenchantment with what else is on offer has led them to the black and white moral code that is Islamism. It is not, in other words, a question of being ‘groomed’ or ‘indoctrinated’ but of losing faith in mainstream moral frameworks and searching for an alternative.

When they join jihad, they adopt the Salafi version of Islam, because Salafism is both simple to understand (don’ts and do’s), and rigid, providing a personal psychological structuring effect. Moreover, Salafism is the negation of cultural Islam, that is the Islam of their parents and of their roots. Instead of providing them with roots, Salafism glorifies their own deculturation and makes them feel better ‘Muslims’ than their parents. Salafism is the religion by definition of a disenfranchised youngster.

Almost none followed a real process of religious education. Their religious knowledge is low (some brought with them ‘Islam for Dummies’). When they said that they were going to learn Islam in Pakistan or Yemen, it is just to appease their parents: in fact they go for jihad.

Why Monitoring Militant Groups Does Not Yield Much Results?

“Very few of them had a previous story of militancy, either political (pro-Palestinian movements) or religious (local mosques, Tabligh, Muslim Brothers or even mainstream Salafism). They almost never were pillars of a local Muslim congregation. Contrary to a widely shared belief, they never mobilized for Palestine and (almost) never spent some times with the Muslim Brothers. A consequence is that a monitoring of legal but militant groups, either political (pro Palestine) or religious (Muslim Brothers) does not yield much information”

Why Monitoring Mosques and Imams Yields little Results?

Few of them were regular ‘parishers’ in a local mosque. None of them was active in religious activities (proselytism): when they preach Islam it is to recruit other radicals, not to spread the good news.

This explains why 1) the close monitoring of mosques brings little information 2) Imams have little or no influence on the process of radicalisation; 3) ‘reforming Islam’ does not make sense: they just don’t care about ‘what Islam really means’.

https://kenanmalik.wordpress.com/2015/12/10/olivier-roy-on-european-jihadis/