Myatt: Humility, Tolerance, and Islam

David Myatt

David Myatt

°°°°°°°

According to Myatt he has republished the texts below “since the problems and the attitudes described in them six years ago are still relevant – if not more relevant – now.”

°°°°°°°

Humility, Islam and The Need for Tolerance
(pdf)

Contents:

§ Prefatory Note
§ Of Learning Humility and Tolerance
§ Of Respect for Islam
§ Terror and Al-Quran
§ Of Islam and Violence
§ Conclusion

°°°°°

Islam, The West, Prejudice, and Islamophobia
(pdf)

Contents:

§ Prefatory Note
§ Prejudice, Extremism, Islamophobia, and Culture
§ Toward A Balanced View Of Islam and The West
§ Concerning Islamophobia

°°°°°
Source:
https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/2019/07/17/humility-tolerance-islam-and-prejudice/

°°°°°°°


Reichsfolk National Socialism

°°°°°°°°°

odal3

Reichsfolk:
A New Interpretation Of National Socialism

What is not widely known in the modern Western world is that there are two very different interpretations of National Socialism. “Ours” – that of groups such as Reichsfolk and of those who know and who appreciate the writings and deeds of people such as Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle {1} – and that of the majority of latter-day self-described “neo-nazis”.

Latter-Day Neo-Nazism And The National-Socialism Of Reichsfolk

The first and most well-known latter-day interpretation of National Socialism is that of the majority of self-described “neo-nazis”, and which interpretation is accepted by most anti-fascists who actively oppose such modern “neo-nazis”.

This is the National Socialism with a belief in a strong, powerful, nation-State, and with an overt racist ideology. A National Socialism with a dislike – often hatred – of non-White immigrants and non-White neighbours; with a belief in the instinct of “might is right” and the necessity of kampf; with a dislike – even a hatred – of those whose love is for someone of the same gender; a National Socialism with a misogyny based on the masculous instinct that it is the natural duty of most women to be wives and home-makers; and a National Socialism with a dislike – even a hatred – of Islam and Muslims.

The second, and not very well-known, interpretation of National Socialism is that of the “revisionist”, non-racist, National-Socialism developed by David Myatt in the 1990s and manifest in the Reichsfolk group {2} inspired as this version was by Myatt’s meetings with Waffen-SS General Leon Degrelle and by his correspondence with Jost Turner whose vision was of a new Aryan folk-community in America and of other “NS kindred” communities around the world.

In this Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism {3} it is regarded as both (i) “an ethnic philosophy which affirms that the different races, the different peoples, which exist are expressions of our human condition, and that these differences, this human diversity, should be treasured in the same way we treasure the diversity of Nature. National-Socialists believe our world would be poorer were these human differences to be destroyed through abstract ideas,” and as (ii) “a pure expression of our own unique Aryan ethics, based as these ethics are upon the idealism of duty to the folk, duty to Nature, and upon the nobility of personal honour.” {4}

It is also the National-Socialism which rejects the notion of a strong, powerful, modern nation-State in favour of new ethnic folk-communities and which National-Socialism is not politically active “on the streets” but instead is “a social, educational, cultural, and spiritual, movement based upon and dedicated to disseminating the noble principles of ethical, non-racist, National-Socialism which are honour, reason, fairness, loyalty, duty to one’s own folk and to Nature, and respect for and understanding of other cultures and other ways of life.” {2}

              In simple terms, the Myattian interpretation of National-Socialism is based on both honour and race, whereas the neo-nazism of most modern nazis and of modern neo-nazi political groups is based on the glorification of race and the glorification of “racial struggle” at the expense of personal honour; a difference Myatt emphasised is his essay A Brief Criticism of William Pierce, written in 114yf,

“The main weakness of the theorizing of Pierce is that he has failed to see that it is a combination of race and honour which defines National-Socialism, and which should define the racialist movement in general. Without the evolutionary, moral, concept of honour, there is only the inhuman ethics of the past, and in practice this leads to the creation of people who are ignoble and societies which are anti-evolutionary. Thus, Pierce is firmly stuck in the past: an ignoble past of unreason and dishonour.

This lack of an ethical dimension to his thinking leads to him supporting the old concept of racial struggle and the inhuman consequence of considering that some races are superior to others.” {5}

Myatt expanded upon this in his seminal text Esoteric Hitlerism: Idealism, the Third Reich and the Essence of National-Socialism,

“An affirmation of race without an affirmation honour is not National-Socialism, just as an affirmation of honour without an affirmation of race is not National-Socialism.

It is this living, organic, dialectic of honour and race which defines National-Socialism itself, and a National-Socialist is an individual who strives to do their honourable duty to both their own race and Nature herself, of which other human races are a part.

That is, a National-Socialist must always be honourable, whatever the consequences, or the perceived consequences. Quite often, this means a National-Socialist is faced with what seems to be difficult choices and difficult decisions, although in reality if National-Socialism itself is properly understood, there is no conflict, no moral dilemma and no difficulty in doing the right, the honourable, thing.

Thus if something, some act or deed, seems to affirm race – or be beneficial to one’s race – but is dishonourable, then that something is not something a National-Socialist should do. What honour does is define our duty to our race and other races – it prevents us from committing hubris.” {5}

In addition, in Myatt’s revisionist version of National-Socialism there is no misogyny, for the NS Code of Honour applies equally to both men and women,

“A man or woman of honour treats others courteously, regardless of their culture, religion, status, and race, and is only disdainful and contemptuous of those who, by their attitude, actions and behaviour, treat they themselves with disrespect or try to personally harm them, or who treat with disrespect or try to harm those whom the individual man or woman of honour have personally sworn loyalty to or whom they champion.” {6}

Our National-Socialism

The National-Socialism of Reichsfolk is Myatt’s revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism.

This is the National-Socialism where

“a true National-Socialist knows or feels that some things are honourable, and other things are dishonourable. It is dishonourable, for instance – cowardly and unfair and uncivilized – for several people to attack and try to injure or kill a single individual.

Thus, if several Caucasians attack one Negro, they are acting dishonourably – they are being uncivilized and cowardly. A true National-Socialist would never do such a thing. They would always want to see, or take part in, a “fair fight”.

Furthermore, I myself – a life-long National-Socialist – would go to the aid of a Negro if I saw him being attacked by several Caucasians, for that would be the just, the fair, the honourable, the civilized and the National-Socialist thing to do. That so many people today who adhere to ‘political National Socialist’ organizations do not agree with this just shows how far these so-called ‘National Socialists’ are from genuine National-Socialism. Which, incidently, is why I always write ‘National-Socialism’ rather than National Socialism.”

This is also the National-Socialism where there is respect for the Muslim way of life and Muslim culture, with honourable co-operation between National-Socialists and Muslims regarded as desirable {8}.

That this revisionist, non-racist, ethical, version of National-Socialism is not appreciated – and certainly not understood – in the societies of the modern West is regarded by our kind as just one more indication of just how successful the Magian, the hubriati, and the neo-nazi hordes of Homo Hubris, have been in propagating the Magian latter-day (mis)interpretation of National Socialism as something “racist”, homophobic, misogynist, anti-Muslim, and uncivilized.

R.S.
Reichsfolk
December 129yf
v.1.07

°°°

{1} Waffen SS General Leon Degrelle was awarded numerous medals for war-time bravery including the Knight’s Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a German military award similar to the British Military Cross. His writings include:
° The Eastern Front: Memoirs of a Waffen SS volunteer, 1941-1945. Institute for Historical Review. 2014. ISBN 9780939484768.
° Hitler, né à Versailles. 1–3. Paris: Art et histoire d’Europe. 1986. ISBN 2906026085.
° Ich war Gefangener. Nürnberg: Hesperos Verlag. 1944.
° Hitler pour 1000 ans. Paris: La Table Ronde. 1969.
{2} qv. https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/intro-reichsfolk.pdf
{3} qv. Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings (pdf).
{4} Myatt, Why National-Socialism is Not Racist, 111yf. The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{5} The essay is included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{6} The Code is given in the third edition of Myatt’s The Meaning Of National-Socialism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{7} Myatt, The Spirituality of National-Socialism: A Reply to Criticism, included in Myatt: Selected National-Socialist Writings.
{8} See, for instance, the essay Islam and National-Socialism in https://regardingdavidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2018/12/ns-islam.pdf

°°°°°°°

Related:

David Myatt And Reichsfolk

°°°°°°°°°


Article source:
https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/12/26/a-new-interpretation-of-national-socialism/


David Myatt and Tommy Robinson: A Contrast

odal3

°°°°°°°°°

Editorial Note:

We republish here an article from 2013 which raised suspicions about the person using the alias Tommy Robinson. The article was first privately published in Das Reich, the internal bulletin of Reichsfolk, and then publicly posted on the well-known Right-Wing Stormfront internet forum. {1}

The 2013 article contrasts the showmanry, publicly-seeking behaviour of “Tommy Robinson” with the restrained behaviour of David Myatt, with Mr Robinson announcing his apparent “change of heart” in 2013 in public at a Press Conference broadcast live on Sky TV News. In contrast Myatt did not publicly mention his private conversion to Islam in 1998 until two years later when interviewed by the BBC for the Panorama TV programme about David Copeland and which brief remarks by Myatt about his conversion were cut from the programme and never broadcast.

The article also drew attention to the fact that the person behind the alias Tommy Robinson – Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – was associated with and friends with influential Zionists such as Richard Spencer and Pamela Geller. Which influential people perhaps explains why the 2013 Press Conference and Mr Robinson himself attracted so much Media attention at the time.

            In the five years since the article was published it has become public knowledge that “Tommy Robinson” is now and has been for over a year not only mentored and financially aided by wealthy Zionists such as Ezra Levant, Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz, but also is supported by British Establishment figures like Eton-educated millionaire Lord Pearson and influential American figures such as the Republican Congressman Paul Gosar. {2} Gosar, incidently, is a staunch supporter of the pro-Zionist Middle East Forum run by millionaire Daniel Pipes which group paid for the July 2018 trip to England by Gosar where he met with “Tommy Robinson” and spoke at a pro-Robinson public rally organized and paid for by Daniel Pipes and Ezra Levant.

In summary, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon – a convicted criminal who has been jailed for violence and fraud – is a man who is not only, as the 2013 article states, a publicity-seeker “hooked on attention” but is also, as more recent articles have revealed, a useful muppet whose strings are being pulled by his Zionist paymasters while Establishment figures like Lord Pearson massage his ego by wining and dining him in exclusive venues such as the British Houses of Parliament with the muppet now well-dressed and well-coiffured courtesy of his wealthy mentors but still spouting the same old Islamophobic rhetoric he spouted five and more years ago.

In contrast David Myatt – despite also being a convicted criminal who has also been jailed for violence – is a man who not only now lives like a reclusive mystic but who also as a result of pathei-mathos has, in extensive writings, renounced both his extremist past and all forms of extremism. {3}

RDM Crew
November 2018

{1} http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t999405/

The Das Reich bulletin published by Myatt’s Reichsfolk group was mentioned in the Nazi Satanism And The New Aeon chapter of the book Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism, and the Politics of Identity, authored by Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke (page 223 of the edition published by NYU Press in 2003). It was also mentioned – in the section headed David Wulstan Myatt – in the earlier book Encyclopedia of White Power: A Sourcebook on the Radical Racist Right, edited by Jeffrey Kaplan and published by Rowman & Littlefield in 2000.

{2} See for example https://reichsfolktimes.wordpress.com/2018/11/05/an-example-of-zionist-power/

{3} For an overview of Myatt’s recent writings see the book The Mystic Philosophy Of David Myatt (pdf)

°°°°°°°

David Myatt and Tommy Robinson – A Comparison

In early October 2013 the founder and leader of the anti-Muslim EDL, one Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Lennon aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon aka Andrew McMaster aka Paul Harris, or whatever his real name is) with much fanfare publicly announced he had left the English Defence League (EDL) because he had “concerns over the dangers of far-right extremism”.

He subsequently gave many interviews to journalists and even held a press conference which was not only broadcast live by Sky TV but also was widely covered by many mainstream newspapers and media including The Guardian and The Sunday Times.

In several of these interviews he announced his intention of continuing to combat what he termed Islamic extremism and even spoke of forming or being part of some new group dedicated, among other things, to preventing the establishment of any new mosques in Britain and propagating the belief that “the Koran promotes violence”. He also declined, when pressed by several journalists, to renounce his association with and support for prominent anti-Islam activists and propagandists such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer with whom he had a long-standing association.

Unsurprisingly, many anti-fascist groups and commentators were suspicious of Robinson’s sudden ‘conversion’ with one association – the Measuring Anti-Muslim Attacks – even going so far as to say that unless Robinson met with the victims of anti-Muslim prejudice where the perpetrators were EDL sympathisers they would not believe his ‘conversion’ was genuine.

Contrast the public shenanigans of Robinson with David Myatt, the founder and first leader of the NSM (of which David Copeland was a member) who was, for thirty years, a violent neo-nazi activist and regarded not only as the “ideological heavyweight behind Combat 18” but also as “the mentor who drove David Copeland to kill”.

In the Fall of 1998 Myatt privately, and without any public fuss, converted to Islam at a Mosque in Worcester. Following this conversion he gained a reputation, according to the author Martin Amis, as a “fierce Jihadi”, and – according to Professor Robert Wistrich – travelled and spoke in several Arab countries and wrote one of the most detailed defences in the English language of Islamic suicide attacks, with the Simon Wiesenthal Center commentating in 2003 that,

“David Myatt, the leading hardline Nazi intellectual in Britain since the 1960s […] has converted to Islam, praises bin Laden and al Qaeda, calls the 9/11 attacks ‘acts of heroism’, and urges the killing of Jews. Myatt, under the name Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt supports suicide missions and urges young Muslims to take up Jihad. Observers warn that Myatt is a dangerous man.”

Over ten years later (in 2010) Myatt, again privately, and without any public fuss, renounced all forms of extremism, admitted his past mistakes, expressed regret regarding his extremist past, and wrote, in an oblique reference to his former political opponents (such as those involved with the Searchlight organization), that –

“I harbour no resentment against individuals, or organizations, or groups, who over the past forty or so years have publicly and/or privately made negative or derogatory comments about me or published items making claims about me. Indeed, I now find myself in the rather curious situation of not only agreeing with some of my former political opponents on many matters, but also (perhaps) of understanding (and empathizing with) their motivation; a situation which led and which leads me to appreciate even more just how lamentable my extremism was and just how arrogant, selfish, wrong, and reprehensible, I as a person was, and how in many ways many of those former opponents were and are (ex concesso) better people than I ever was or am.” Source – http://www.davidmyatt.info/genesis-of-my-unknowing.html

Myatt then withdraw from public life, to reclusively concentrate on developing his rather mystical ‘philosophy of pathei-mathos’ which extols the virtues of compassion, humility, empathy, and love.

This comparison of Myatt with the shenanigans of ‘Tommy Robinson’ leads to the inevitable conclusion that, as one journalist wrote, Robinson’s “defection is not a transformation” and that Robinson “is a man who is hooked on attention” who is simply “changing his method” (his tactics) and not his fundamental beliefs.

°°°°°

Related:
Latest: Criminal Case Against Zionist Muppet Postponed
The Zionist Muppet Archives – Part One

°°°°°°°°°


David Myatt: Sinister Proclivities And Intent?

Order of Nine Angles

O9A

°°°°°°°°°

Myatt And Islam: Sinister Proclivities And Intent?
(pdf)

This is an insightful and well-referenced analysis of David Myatt’s Muslim years. Revised and updated 3rd August 2018.


Quite By Chance

°°°°°°°°°

Shurooq Amin. The Dates Of Wrath

Quite By Chance

Quite recently, and quite by chance, I found myself in an art gallery. The paintings so wyrdfully discovered rather resonated with me, causing me in subsequent days to learn more about the art, and life, of the artist: Shurooq Amin.

For her art seemed to make a connexion between the West and Islam; a quite personal connexion for me, given my somewhat outré past involving as it did a ‘reversion’ to Islam by a former fanatical exponent of Western culture who while travelling as a Muslim in the Muslim world had, albeit briefly, been engaged to a Muslimah in Egypt.

Thus was there for me, in that gallery at that time, another and quite numinous and quite fortuitous intimation of the importance of love, of the importance of the muliebral: beyond the rather stark, and often violent, most decidedly (in my view) misogynist, patriarchal, ethos that still seems to so dominate our world, East and West.

There was also a reminder, for me, of how Art can not only sometimes transcend human manufactured causal abstractions (such as nation, religion, and ethnicity) but can also be a rather acausal vector of that slow social, non-violent, evolutionary change whereby what is numinous, honourable, and so very human, can be presenced, to the benefit of us all.

David Myatt
2014

°°°

Image credit:
Shurooq Amin. The Dates Of Wrath.
Mixed media on canvas mounted on wood. 2012.
Ayyam Gallery, Dubai


Article source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/quite-by-chance/


Islamic Terrorism: A Voice of Reason

David Myatt

David Myatt

Editorial Note: We republish here an article by Mr Myatt written in 2015 which concerns the causes of what has been described as “Islamic terrorism”. Myatt’s provides an alternative – a rational and a philosophical – explanation that is at odds with the strident political rhetoric of the past decade.

°°°°°°°

Extremism, Terrorism, Culture, And Physis
A Question Of Being

Disinclined as I am, and as I have been for many years, to comment on recent events, I have – after much reflexion – decided to respond to certain questions asked of me, given that several friends and diverse individuals (communicating through correspondence forwarded to me through intermediaries) have expressed an interest in my opinion about some recent events in France because of my forty years of (now regretted) practical experience of extremism [1] and extremists and which experience included not only being an advocate, as a Muslim, of what has become known as ‘Islamic extremism’, but also of being a neo-nazi activist and ideologue who preached and who advocated subversion, insurrection, hatred, and terrorism.

The recent events in France, where seventeen people were killed at four locations between the 7th and 9th of January 2015 – and similar events on other lands, from September 2001 (9/11) onwards – have led many people to speculate about the problem of, about causes of, and what may be required to prevent, such acts.

My admittedly fallible view, derived from my personal decades of experience, is that simple cause-and-effect answers are rather misguided, however naturally instinctive and/or politically expedient they might be – and/or however effective (or perhaps necessary) some of them might be in the short-term: of years, of a decade or more. For I incline toward the view that the long-term solution does not lie in more legislation, or in more security measures, or in idealizing one culture over and above another (as in the West verses Islam), or in invading other lands, or even in attempting to combat ‘extremism’ by means of advocation of a ‘moderate’ interpretation of some religion or some political ideology. Rather, the long-term solution lies in understanding our basal physis [2] as human beings and then considering how – or even if – that basal physis can be changed, evolved.

For the reality – the truth – of our being is that we humans can always find, and have always found – century after century, millennia after millennia – some cause or some ideology or some ideation or some interpretation of some religion or some dogma or some leader to allow us to express, to live, what is solely masculous [3]. For as I know from my own experience and involvements such an expression, such a living, vivifies, excites, and has so often provided us (or a significant portion of us) with a sense of purpose, an identity, and thus given our lives meaning.

Thus, for that significant portion of us, it is our basal nature – our basal character – as human beings which is at fault, the cause; not some current or past harsh interpretation of some religion or of some weltanschauung; not some ‘extremist’ ideology, per se; not some failure to tackle extremism; not some deficiency of law nor some failure (of intelligence, or otherwise) by the Police or by some State security service. That is, the harsh modern interpretation of a religion such as Islam (manifest for example in al-Qa’ida and in groups such as ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyah fil ‘Iraq wa ash-Sham), or the extremism manifest in nazism and fascism (past and present) are symptoms, not the cause.

For it is my considered opinion – fallible as it is and based as it is on what (admittedly limited) knowledge I have of the circumstances – that the perpetrators of recent events in France simply found, in a harsh interpretation of Islam, something which not only gave them a sense of purpose, a goal – which gave their lives meaning – but also provided them with an excuse to behave according to their physis or what they believed their physis should be: to be what they were or had become or should become. That is, lacking that empathy – such compassion and such honour, such muliebral virtues – as would have engendered within them a feeling for, an intuition of, and thus an appreciation of, innocency [4] and of individuals as individuals and not as abstracted ‘enemies’ or as somehow ‘inferior’ to them or as a means whereby what they believed in, or desired (such as some after-life), could be achieved.

In other words, a harsh modern interpretation of a particular religion hallowed what is masculous to the detriment of what is muliebral, making such a basal, such an unbalanced, masculous physis an ideal to be imitated and strived for, and which masculous ideal included the notion of a personal immolation, via kampf and a dishonourable disregard for the innocency of others, as a means to some posited goal. An unbalanced masculous physis also evident in – and idealized by – the ideologies of communism, nazism, and fascism, and in and by the ‘puritanical’ and inquisitorial interpretations of Christianity centuries before.

How then can that basal physis be changed or evolved? How can the masculous be balanced with the muliebral thus avoiding such unbalance, such bias toward the masculous, as has brought so much suffering recent and otherwise? All I have is a rather philosophical, quite long-term, and quite personal answer. Of, in terms of individuals, the development by individuals of empathy and the cultivation of the virtue of personal honour; and, in terms of society, Studia Humanitatis: that is, education to form, to shape, the manners and the character, of individuals by not only acquainting them with such topics as are, and were traditionally, included in that subject, but also of them being educated in such knowledge concerning our physis as our thousands of years old human culture of pathei-mathos has bequeathed to us [5].

David Myatt
January 2015

Notes

[1] As I have explained in many of my post 2009 writings, by ‘extreme’ is meant “to be harsh”, so that I consider an extremist is a person who tends toward harshness, or who is harsh, or who supports/incites harshness, in pursuit of some objective, usually of a political or a religious nature. Here, harsh is: rough, severe, a tendency to be unfeeling, unempathic, uncompassionate.

Hence I consider extremism to be: (a) the result of such harshness, and (b) the principles, the causes, the characteristics, that promote, incite, or describe the harsh action of extremists. In addition, a fanatic is considered to be someone with a surfeit of zeal or whose enthusiasm for some objective, or for some cause, is intemperate.

[2] I use the term physis (φύσις) as a revealing, a manifestation, of not only the true nature of beings but also of the relationship between beings, and between beings and Being. Physis is often apprehended (and thus understood) by we humans as the nature, the character, of some-thing; as, for example, in our apprehension of the character of a person.

[3] By the term masculous is meant certain traits, abilities, and qualities that are conventionally and historically associated with men, such as competitiveness, aggression, a certain harshness, the desire to organize/control, and a desire for adventure and/or for conflict/war/violence/competition over and above personal love, compassion, and culture. In my view, extremist ideologies manifest an unbalanced, an excessive, masculous nature.

Masculous is from the Latin masculus and occurs, for example, in some seventeenth century works such as one by William Struther: “This is not only the language of Canaan, but also the masculous Schiboleth.” True Happines, or, King Davids Choice: Begunne In Sermons, And Now Digested Into A Treatise. Edinbvrgh, 1633

[4] I use the term ‘innocence’ to refer to a presumed attribute of those who, being personally unknown to us, are therefore unjudged by us and who thus, as honour requires, are given the benefit of the doubt. For this presumption of the innocency of others – until direct personal experience, and individual and empathic knowing of them, prove otherwise – is the fair, the reasoned, the honourable, the cultured, the virtuous, thing to do.

[5] Refer to my May 2014 essay Education And The Culture Of Pathei-Mathos, and my more recent Some Conjectures Concerning Our Nexible Physis.

°°°°°°°

Article source: https://davidmyatt.wordpress.com/extremism-terrorism-culture-and-physis/


Related:

The Ignorant Vulgarians And Islam


Anti-Islam Propaganda: An Illustrative Example

madina5

Anti-Islam Propaganda: An Illustrative Example
The Case of Bill Warner

For well over a decade an assortment of Western-based (and often well-funded) individuals and political groups have produced an immense amount of propaganda intended to discredit Islam. One of the most common traits shared by such English-speaking propagandists is that they, being unable to read Arabic, and having no academic expertise in relevant fields such as fiqh, use various published English interpretations of fundamental Islamic texts such as the Koran and Ahadith.

An illustrative example here is an American calling himself ‘Bill Warner’ – real name William French – who, although he cannot read Arabic and has no academic expertise in relevant fields such as fiqh, has published a number of books about ‘political Islam’, has established a so-called ‘Center for the Study of Political Islam‘, and whose books and ‘statistical analysis’ of texts such as the Koran have been trumpeted by various political groups and by individuals opposed, for whatever reason, to Islam. Both Warner himself – and those using his works for propaganda purposes – claim that his analysis of Islamic texts is “scientific”.

However, his analysis of Islamic texts is hardly scientific and most definitely unscholarly because he uses, not the actual Arabic texts (such as, in the case of the Koran, the Uthman codex), but rather the English “interpretations of meaning” published by others. In addition, he uses an English interpretation of the Koran – written in modern “newspaper style” English – that does not even follow the traditional (Arabic) arrangement of Quranic chapters (starting with Surah Al-Fatihah) but which instead places them into a particular conjectured “historical order” for which there is no scholarly consensus and no historical evidence. {1}

Thus, his much vaunted ‘statistical analysis’ is simply his personal opinion about the interpretations of someone else and has no scholarly (or even academic) value whatsoever given that Warner relies on secondary, and sometimes tertiary, not primary sources. For one of the attributes of modern scholars is that they have a detailed knowledge of primary sources acquired from reading such sources in their original language and thus do not rely on the translations or interpretations of others. One of the attributes of non-scholars in the milieu of academia and otherwise is that they base their writings on secondary sources and thus in the main just interpret or reinterpret the interpretations and conclusions of others. In the case of Islam, the primary texts – such as the Koran and Ahadith – are all in classical Arabic.

To give just one example, of literally thousands, of the folly of the English interpretation Warner/French used, the word “war” occurs in surah 9:29 as the “translation” for a certain Arabic word – transliterated qatilu – and which Arabic word, correctly understood in context, implies fight, struggle (against), oppose: فَقَاتِلُوا أَئِمَّةَ الْكُفْرِ إِنَّهُمْ لَا أَيْمَانَ لَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَنْتَهُونَ

In respect of the matter of English interpretations of important texts such as the Koran there is an interesting essay by David Myatt (who actually can read Arabic), first published in 2012, and in which essay Myatt writes:

“The problem of sometimes projecting modern interpretations onto ancient texts by the injudicious use, in a translation, of a particular English word is especially relevant in the matter of the Quran, for it seems to be increasingly common for someone reliant on translations – on the interpretations of meaning given by others – to misunderstand the text of the Quran and then, from that misunderstanding, not only form a misconceived (and sometimes prejudiced) opinion about the Quran in particular and Islam in general but also to give voice to such an opinion.

For example, an ayah (verse) often (mis)quoted is Ayah 151 of Surah Al ‘Imran, which is usually interpreted as “Soon shall we cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers.” However, the word ‘terror’ is an inappropriate interpretation for several reasons.” {2}

Myatt then quotes the Arabic of that verse in full and argues that the particular Arabic word in question does not imply ‘terror’ but rather “the fear/the dread and ‘the astonishment/awe’ – that is, that human feeling inspired by apprehending or experiencing some-thing supernaturally or extraordinarily powerful and numinous.” He then provides a comparison with a passage in Greek from the New Testament – Luke 24.37 – and goes on to provide his own quite poetic interpretation of meaning of the Arabic Ayah:

“Into the hearts of they who disbelieve We shall hurl redurre because they, without any authority revealed about such things, associate others with Allah; and for their home: The Fire, that harrowing resting place of the unjust.”

Myatt further writes that

“I have used the unusual English word redurre, with a meaning of ‘awe combined with a trembling fear’. A word suggested by its occurrence in religious works by Richard Rolle and John Gower, and also by texts such as Morte Arthure and which word therefore places this Ayah from the Quran into the correct context, which is that of a religious revelation, a spiritual message, comparable to that of Christianity, and of the particular ontology that Islam offers as answers to questions concerning the meaning and the purpose of our mortal lives; of how that purpose may be attained; and thus of what wisdom is. Answers which have nothing whatsoever to do with ‘terrorism’, or even with ‘terror’ as that word is now commonly understood.”

Myatt’s measured words and scholarship, evident in his post-2011 writings, place the works of the likes of Bill Warner into the correct perspective: as works of prejudiced propaganda.

JB & KS
2017

{1} Islamic scholars have argued – for over a millennia – about the chronological order of the Koran. All the scholars, however, agree that the traditional arrangement was inspired by the Prophet Muhammad himself and is thus how the Koran should be read and used, by Muslims, as a guide.

{2} Myatt, David: Exegesis and Translation: Some Personal Reflexions, 2012. Myatt included part of this essay as an appendix to his book Poemandres: A Translation of and Commentary on the Poemandres part of the Corpus Hermeticum. Third edition, 2014. ISBN 978-1495470684

Myatt’s 2012 essay is currently [January 2017] available in pdf format from his weblog: https://davidmyatt.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/exegesis-and-translation-partsone-two.pdf