To contact the author with questions, please email BioIslam101@gmail.com
*** UNDER CONSTRUCTION. Content is incomplete. Please revisit in a few months. ***
 What is true Islam?
Nobody really knows what the true original Islam was, as practiced in the first century, contrary to the ‘cult of certitude’ of Traditional Islam. Although BioIslam attempts to salvage the early ethos, we must be intellectually honest and admit to uncertainty. BioIslam is a humble attempt at perceiving and comprehending the infinite truth, merely a placeholder until ultimate clarity is conveyed by the return of Isa/Jesus ï·ș.
Having said that, some books on Traditional Islam are far better than others. As noted in Reading List, they are divided into five categories. Inspirational, Devotional, Polemic, Islamophobic and Scholarly.
What is ‘canonization’?
This term is increasingly used by academic scholars to describe the wide acceptance of certain post Quranic books, especially Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. Some scholars include additional books. The term ‘canon’ is borrowed from the Christian tradition and means ‘rule’ in Greek, suggesting a rule book of orthodoxy or tradition. The problem with canonizing post-Quranic books is that they were put together by fallible humans about two centuries after the Prophet ï·ș, and undermine the assumption of Quranic infallibility. Also, questioning the canon’s accuracy is viewed as heresy by most Traditional Muslims; in some Islamic countries it could result in violent retribution.
Is there revelation and Prophets after Muhammad?
No, but BioMuslims believe will be a second coming of Isa/Jesus ï·ș, the Messiah/al-Masih.
BioIslam does not accept the claim of some Muslims that there was a Prophet after Muhammad ï·ș (e.g. the Ahmaddiyya) and that additional revelation was sent down (e.g. the Bahai).
BioIslam’s third axiom of finality is identical to Traditional Islam’s belief in the ‘seal of Prophethood’. However, BioIslam acknowledges this is a faith-based claim and can not be proven, and the exact meaning of the word ‘seal’ is debatable due to the Dictionary Problem. However, although there is no logical reason why there should not be additional Prophets or revelation, BioIslam rejects that possibility, since there is sufficient depth in the latent principles of the Quran to establish eternal spiritual guidance. However, with every generation there will be reformers and renewers who lead a fresh interpretation through their intellectual and spiritual efforts, a welcome development that will hopefully reduce wordly suffering and help solve the Big Five problems.
What to make of the claims of newer faiths like the Sikhism (circa 1500 CE) and Bahaism (circa 1880 CE)? These religions were born in lands inhabited by Muslims, and perhaps as a reaction against the demerits of Traditional Islam. As perennial people, BioMuslims strive to learn and appreciate new religions, and respect their founders, Guru Nanak and Bahaullah, respectively, as divinely inspired visionaries and valuable social reformers. However, they do not rise to the status of Prophets, since they did not perform miracles, which true Prophets are known to do. Thus, while we can grow spiritually by studying their teachings, they do not seem to offer lasting universal appeal beyond that offered by BioIslam’s five Inner Pillars.
Is the Quran for all people of all eras?
The Quran was revealed to address the particular social situation of the Arabian peninsula, but it did not address all global issues of the day. For example, the Quran offered no specific guidance for people who do not identify as cis-heterosexuals (a modern term). Nor did it offer guidance to people in distant lands like India where people practiced a far more sophisticated polytheism than in Arabia.
BioIslamâs Inside Pillars and Latent Principles offer wisdom to people in those categories, but whether they accept that wisdom, and if so how exactly to translate it into practice should be left up to the leaders of that category. The universal claim of many ulama â that the Quran and Sunnah are guides for all people in all eras â is not found in the Quran. It was an imperial interpretation in service of an extensive multi-ethnic empire.Â
Why the ‘No Utopia’ axiom?
Failed utopias include many attempts to create glorious Empires, from Alexander’s Greece to the German Third Reich, and wishful ideologies like Communism. Tragic realists would extend this list to present-day attempts to create trans-national utopias through the grand experiments of Democracy, Capitalism, Globalism and Consumerism. In the absence of alternatives, these might indeed be worthy emollients until the dystopia of post-postmodern philosophers like John Gray catches up to us in the (hopefully distant) future. By accepting that God/Allah speaks not just through prophets but science, we are better positioned to be techno-optimists, and use the fruits of science to solve the Big Five problems
Is BioIslam Bidah?
Is BioIslam an innovation or a return to the original true Islam? Is not innovation forbidden, bidah? Why not simply live like the millions of good people who are indeed excellent outputs of the system of Traditional Islam? Because, if you do, there are inconvenient implications, that you might be oblivious to, and which contribute to the Big Five problems listed earlier.
There is not one Traditional Islam â there are many variations within â the Islam practiced by the forty million Muslims in Saudi Arabia is different from that of the one hundred million in China or the three hundred million in Indonesia. However, a common denominator is the Traditionalist notion that the Quran cannot be understood without the aid of the tranmsitted-Sunnah and, more consequentially, that the assumed authenticity of the latter results in certitude about what is ‘correct’ Islam. Since the Prophet ï·ș is not alive to demonstrate the original-Sunnah, Traditionalists strongly rely on the Sirah and Sahih Hadith books, resulting in the complex system problem discussed earlier. If you accept the dictate of Khalifa Umar to not write down the Hadith, then perhaps Traditional Islam appears to be bidah.
By accepting Traditional Islam you are lending support to several beliefs that you might not be in favor of â the inconvenient implications that we discuss in Pitfalls of Traditionalism. These beliefs are disappointing or downright shocking, yet inevitable if you accept Traditionalism. In our experience, most practitioners are not aware of these beliefs since they have not comprehensively read the Quran in a language they understand, and have not read the Sirah or Hadith books that are a major part of their belief. To the degree they read, the masses often rely on selective readings of these texts, as handed down to them by their religious leaders. The simplified linear system of BioIslam is the best we can do to recover the original Islam that was practiced in the first century of Islam, it is not bidah, it is an intellectual obligation upon our community, a fard kifaya, given the scale and urgency of the Big Five problems. To the degree it is bidah, it is a good innovation, a bidah hasna.
Why Play The Shame Game?
When Traditionalists encounter taboo topics like riq-slavery and the alleged personal life of the beloved Prophet ï·ș, they feel shame and often go through stages of Shock, Anger and Denial. The final stage in that process varies tremendously: Reject, Ridicule or Rethink.
Most Traditional Muslims live in Asia and the Middle East, where a shame rather than guilt culture prevails. As such, they prefer you had not brought up this inconvenient information â and had allowed them to continue to live happily in their zone of blissful ignorance. Now that you have rudely shattered their bliss, they are in a state of shock which, depending on their personality, might translate into ignoring the information you conveyed (end of friendship, possibly) or, for the choleric types, an angry outburst. Then comes denial, accompanied by a search for information and rhetoric that contradicts your inconvenient information.
When Traditionalists fact check the Sahih Hadith books and realize that many of the ‘shameful’ assertions are accurate, the quickest way to limit their inconvenience is to ridicule you, through a process of character assassination. They might say you have no business to question Traditional Islam since you are not a submissive Muslim to begin with (i.e. lack taqwa), that you do not conform in the exterior to the Traditionalist prescriptions of appearance or ritual or whatever. Some are sufficiently shaken up that they reject the religion altogether, either quietly or loudly, and contribute to the Brain Drain problem discussed earlier.
After reading this, I hope more than a few will accept the last and most uplifting possibility â rethink their views of what the religion really is about â and perhaps find value in BioIslam. Also, you will likely come to realize that BioIslam more accurately captures the original spirit of Islam and that Traditional Islam, which was constructed and cemented through polemical negotiations about 200-300 years after the Prophet ï·ș. So the original Islam is mostly unknowable and the so called ‘Traditional’ Islam might be the real bidah.
Why advocate Vegetarianism?
BioIslam recommends but does not require vegetarianism for pragmatic reasons, such as the widespread meat-ism hurts the poor. For poor people who suffer from chronic calorie deficits, which is sadly a majority of the ummah, this recommendation does not apply.
For people with access to surplus food, BioIslam strongly recommends at most occasional meat consumption. Why? This is based on the principle of maslaha, or public interest. The practical considerations include higher food prices for the worldwide poor (a direct result of our meat consumption), extensive environmental damage from animal farming, human health risks from the widely prevalent excessive meat consumption (again, for people in wealthy nations) and the heart-breakingly cruel conditions under which large-scale modern animal farms function. Finally, BioIslam will withdraw this recommendation when synthetic meat becomes affordable to the masses, as discussed below. We pray that day arrives soon.
What about zabeeha? Most Traditionalist scholars only permit consumption of meat that has been slaughtered in the prescribed zabeeha manner. Their opinions are rooted in various Hadith. However, the Quran does not impose any such restrictions and only forbids pork. The zabeeha restriction inadvertently and indirectly hurts the poor. In the US, where there is a dearth of zaheeba meat outlets, this has resulted in an obsession with seeking out the best meat. Traditional Muslims have lost sight of the fact that meat was almost certainly a luxury good during early Islam and very small quantities were likely consumed. An eminent scholar writes about life in the 15th century Muslim world, “most people ate meat only rarely, on festivals or great occasions”. [A. Hourani, History of the Arab People, p. 127].
The majority of the world’s population is poor and undernourished, and several studies confirm meat consumption aggravates their poverty. Higher food prices for the worldwide poor are a direct result of our meat consumption. The amount of water and grain required to produce one serving of meat is far higher than that would be consumed to meet the calorific needs through a vegan diet [faq-grain]. By using copious water and grain for meat production (i.e. what is fed to animals to grow them), the fundamental economic laws of demand and supply push up the price of water and grain.
Other problems — XXX extensive environmental damage from animal farming XXX human health risks from the widely prevalent excessive meat consumption (again, for people in wealthy nations) and the cruel conditions under which large-scale modern animal farms function XXX. [faq-enviro]
BioIslam’s stance? For the next decade or two, BioIslam recommends but does not mandate vegetarianism. Meat consumption should be minimized, especially for people in wealthier nations with surplus food. The scientific dynamism of BioIslam will eventually allow for more meat consumption when we arrive at a point (in a decade or two) when meat is synthetically grown affordably. As of 2019, this has already been invented and is awaiting testing and regulatory approval [faq-synthetic]. Most importantly, BioMuslims welcome any effort to rapidly drive down the cost curve on synthetic meat, to a point where it can be produced in abundance, thus benefiting the protein-starved poor. Will Traditionalist scholars permit its consumption since it has not been slaughtered in the prescribed zabeeha manner?
Poverty Reduction
xxx
Environmental Damage
xxx
Health Risks
xxx
Animal Cruelty
xxx
Solution – Cultured Meat
xxx
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/08/is-lab-grown-meat-good-for-us/278778/
http://www.popsci.com/article/science/can-artificial-meat-save-world
http://www.futurefood.org/in-vitro-meat/index_en.php
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/09/in_vitro_meat_probably_won_t_save_the_planet_yet.html
XXX WAS PREVIOUSLY IN BLAME GAME
If you are a Traditional Muslim, it is likely that your emotions are perturbed by the content here, especially the Tragic Errors and Messy Role Model. You might be in the early stages of the continuum of shock-denial-anger-acceptance. Anger often transitions to blame along two dimensions. First, ridicule the person who delivered the bad news, label him or her as too-this or too-that. Second, redirect the anger to other non-theological problems, such as economic or geopolitical problems, of which we have plenty, and blame them on others. Blame is a soothing balm.
Which takes us back to the core problem that we opened with. Why is our ummah in poor shape? If you believe our ummah suffers more than it deserves to, how did we get here?
Who shall we blame? Terrible leaders? European colonialism? Neocolonial patrimonialism? Intellectual arrogance? A broken education system? Lack of governance institutions? An off-putting patriarchy that halves our potential?
Or shall we blame insufficient wealth redistribution through charity, too little zakat and sadaqah? Or is it due to bigotry against our religion, our deen? How about racism against our mostly non-White people?
Or are we just hapless random victims of a contingent historical process [faq-hapless]? That our misery is not so miserable if we simply realize that our past is driven by Godâs supreme will, as will our future, hence it is not for us to complain, nor to wait for an answer to our complaints, but instead to dutifully practice the five pillars and to quietly submit to whatever woes come our way.
While âall of the aboveâ is indeed a correct conjecture, it is not prescriptive, and it will not result in much-needed improvements in our dunya. Such worldly betterment is worth pursuing, despite our ultimate submission to Godâs will in the akhirat. It is easiest to blame someone else for our current condition. But I believe a better answer has been foredained in the Quran, âGod does not change the condition of a people unless they change what is in themselvesâ (13:11). So shall we chastise ourselves as individuals? Or as a community? To what end? And should we blame our intellectual ancestors? Which ones? And on what grounds?
Easy Street
Before we excoriate ourselves, let us briefly stroll down the easy street of blaming others.
European colonialism? This is everyoneâs favorite target. It indeed did incalculable physical, psychological and economic harm to many generations, far exceeding any incidental benefits it offered. Pre-colonialism, Muslim societies were far better places to live than much of the rest of the world, including all of Europe. Colonialism certainly set us back centuries and destroyed the potential of many generations. XXX quote [faq-Tharoor] But the big question is how did we let ourselves become colonial victims in the first place? Was it because the Europeans were more skilled at organized violence, as a leading western scholar claims [org-vio]? Or did we lose sight of true Islam and become easy prey? Also, let us not forget that in the era of empires, the colonizers of the Muslim lands included other Muslims, notably the Ottomans, who did not win any awards for good governance either.
Machiavellinism? If colonialism wasnât bad enough, we are victims of post-colonialism too. The Europeans, a couple of centuries or so after their so called Enlightenment [faq-GWT], finally abandoned their depleted colonies but left behind national boundaries that mismatched natural ethnic boundaries, both in the Middle East and Asia. This has resulted in decades of strife that will yet take generations to repair. But is there any blame for us Muslims to carry too? Why did we dig deeper into the colonial grave by rashly partitioning the largest ethnic block of Muslims, as occurred in the greater Indian subcontinent in the 1940s? But why have our attempts to heal, such as the pan Arab movement of the 1960s failed to deliver?
Crusades and Mongols? These invasions delivered a big nasty blow, but not just for the Muslim world. For example, Chinaâs population shrunk by 1/3 after the Mongol invasions. Europe suffered too — the Mongols devastated Eastern Europe and turned back just before they took Vienna, a stroke of luck for their intended victims. The fortuitous reason: their Khan died back home and they had to return to headquarters. There’s nothing like luck.
Bigotry? Yes thatâs true, too, but in more ways than explain our condition. While there has indeed been much bigotry directed at us, we are not the exclusive recipients of it since bigotry has sadly endured globally in the non-Muslim world too. Furthermore, non-Muslims have done a fine job of bigotry within their own communities, in structures that have nothing to do with Islam: slavery in the US, caste system in India, misogyny globally, genocides in Indonesia [faq-gen-Indo] and Turkey [faq-gen-Turk] and more.
Terrible leaders? True, we have our share of awful leaders, but so does everyone else. Name one large long-lived country that does not suffer them. And Singapore does not count; too small, too young. Look next door at slightly larger Malaysia, which has an ample share of leadership problems. The populous countries — America, India, China — all have had a mixed bag of a few good and many bad leaders, not so different from Muslim nations. It is not about leadership by individuals but by institutions. In the past half century, the countries that have done the best job of addressing the big five problems are those that have strong legal and political institutions. Why does such order exist in some countries but not others; there is no simple explanation for this even from prominent scholars [faq-poli-order].
The Path of Progress
Blame ourselves? I believe this is the path of progress, one that we have control over and therefore one that I prefer, unpalatable as it is. Also, this is a necessary path since our Muslim predecessors did not have entirely clean hands; as the history of every continent shows, rulers rarely remain innocent [faq-rule]. Sadly, perverted predators donned Muslim garb too; they invaded, exploited, and otherwise abased the core Islamic values of benevolence, mercy and justice. These self-serving leaders hijacked Islam, and often failed to deliver the just, merciful and balanced society that is central to the Islamic ethos. We can vigorously debate the calculus of empire, whether unjust Eastern (or Southern or Brown) Muslim rulers were measurably better than the brutal Western (or Northern or White) non-Muslim ones? But such polemics will only prolong the blame game and wonât fast track us to a better future. And again, if we Muslims claim to have been gifted the best of divine wisdom, must we not hold ourselves to a higher standard?
Self-inflicted Wounds
Slave rebellions
Inter-state rivalry: MidEast – Ottoman Turkey v. Safavid Persia, India — Tipu vs. Nizam
Partition follies – Indian Muslims abandoned, Pakistan v. Bangladesh
Ottomans in WW1
Support of Soviets post WW2
The Neglected Gift
We were gifted the light, around 609 CE, yet we failed to see clearly; this is the starting point for embarking on a path of progress. The principles for progress are encoded in the holy Quran, but we neglected to use them in a scientific and reasoned manner. And thus we eventually fell into a deep disappointing darkness from which we still struggle to emerge. Have you read the â1001 Inventionsâ, a beautiful book about the golden age of Islamic science and the âHouse of Wisdomâ that sparked it? This occurred around 820 AD, centuries before the European Enlightenment; it was a grand era when science, reason, debate and the assimilation of knowledge was valued in the Muslim world. The result relished: awesome scientific progress, in stark contrast to the darkness of medieval Europe.
The Great Loss
Why did our golden age of science and progress disappear? Why did we go from awesome to awful so quickly in science and technology? How did we slide so far down the scale that a few centuries after the golden age of invention XXX REWRITE, our highly evolved civilization was thoroughly routed by the Mongols in 1258? How is it that we were vanquished by crude horsemen who were fighting at a disadvantage, far from home? Importantly, why did our golden age of science not repeat during the longstanding Ottoman or Mughal empires, during whose reign Europe stole the lead in science and reason?
I contend we degenerated because we abandoned critical thinking, we feared reason, and as a consequence abandoned the scientific spirit. Instead of working through scientific principles, which I believe are certainly consistent with, if not explicitly encouraged by the Quran, we closed our minds with shallow literalism and rote learning, rejected knowledge from outside the Islamic world. This reactionary impulse compounded over centuries as we tolerated an excessive deference to dubious traditions and simpleton religious leaders. This departure weakened us slowly over generations. But how did we end up on this unfortunate path?