What do you think?
Rate this book
دڵی ئیسلام: بەها هەمیشەییەکان لە پێناو مرۆڤایەتیدا
لە جیهانێکدا کە بە خراپەکاری و خۆپەرستی بەستراوەتەوە، بۆ ئێمە هیچ شتێک بە ئەندازەی حیکمەت و عیشق بۆ ئایینی دڵ ئازادکەر نییە، "دڵی ئیسلام" شتێکی زیاتر نییە جگە لە گەواهیدان بە وەحدەتی خودایی و هەمەلایەنی حەقیقەت و پێویستی تەسلیمبوون بە ئیرادەی خودایی و ئەنجامی بەرپرسیارێتییە مرۆییەکان و پاسەوانیکردن لە هەموو هەبوویەک.
"دڵی ئیسلام" ئێمە لە خەوی بێئاگایی و غەفڵەت بەئاگادەهێنێتەوەو لەگەڵ ئەوەی بەیادمان دەهێنێتەوە کە کێین و بۆچی لەم جیهانەداین، فێریشمان دەکات ئایینەکانی تر بناسین و لە نزیکەوە ڕێزو حورمەتیان بگرین. دەبێت موسوڵمانان ئەم بانگەوازە کە لە "دڵی ئیسلام"ـەوە سەرچاوەی گرتووە، ئاوێزانی گوێی خۆیانی بکەن و ژیانی ئاخلاقی بدەنەپێش.
ئەو دەستەیە لە ڕۆژئاواییەکانیش لە ژیانیاندا بەدوای دۆزینەوەی "مانا"وەن، دەبێت بگەرێنەوە بۆ سەرچاوە سەرەکی و ڕەسەنەکانی خۆیان و بزانن ئەگەر بێت و "دڵی ئیسلام" باشتر بناسن، ئەوا دید و تێڕوانینێکی فراوانتریان لا درووست دەبێت سەبارەت بە ئایین و ژیارەکانی تر.
"دڵی ئیسلام" ئێمە لە خەوی بێئاگایی و غەفڵەت بەئاگادەهێنێتەوەو لەگەڵ ئەوەی بەیادمان دەهێنێتەوە کە کێین و بۆچی لەم جیهانەداین، فێریشمان دەکات ئایینەکانی تر بناسین و لە نزیکەوە ڕێزو حورمەتیان بگرین. دەبێت موسوڵمانان ئەم بانگەوازە کە لە "دڵی ئیسلام"ـەوە سەرچاوەی گرتووە، ئاوێزانی گوێی خۆیانی بکەن و ژیانی ئاخلاقی بدەنەپێش.
ئەو دەستەیە لە ڕۆژئاواییەکانیش لە ژیانیاندا بەدوای دۆزینەوەی "مانا"وەن، دەبێت بگەرێنەوە بۆ سەرچاوە سەرەکی و ڕەسەنەکانی خۆیان و بزانن ئەگەر بێت و "دڵی ئیسلام" باشتر بناسن، ئەوا دید و تێڕوانینێکی فراوانتریان لا درووست دەبێت سەبارەت بە ئایین و ژیارەکانی تر.
600 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2002
163 people are currently reading
4009 people want to read
About the author
Seyyed Hossein Nasr
247 books725 followersSeyyed Hossein Nasr was born on April 7, 1933 (19 Farvadin 1312 A.H. solar) in Tehran into a family of distinguished scholars and physicians. His father, Seyyed Valiallah, a man of great learning and piety, was a physician to the Iranian royal family, as was his father before him. The name "Nasr" which means "victory" was conferred on Professor Nasr's grandfather by the King of Persia. Nasr also comes from a family of Sufis. One of his ancestors was Mulla Seyyed Muhammad Taqi Poshtmashhad, who was a famous saint of Kashan, and his mausoleum which is located next to the tomb of the Safavid king Shah Abbas, is still visited by pilgrims to this day.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, currently University Professor of Islamic Studies at the George Washington University, Washington D.C. is one of the most important and foremost scholars of Islamic, Religious and Comparative Studies in the world today. Author of over fifty books and five hundred articles which have been translated into several major Islamic, European and Asian languages, Professor Nasr is a well known and highly respected intellectual figure both in the West and the Islamic world. An eloquent speaker with a charismatic presence, Nasr is a much sought after speaker at academic conferences and seminars, university and public lectures and also radio and television programs in his area of expertise. Possessor of an impressive academic and intellectual record, his career as a teacher and scholar spans over four decades.
Professor Nasr began his illustrious teaching career in 1955 when he was still a young and promising, doctoral student at Harvard University. Over the years, he has taught and trained an innumerable number of students who have come from the different parts of the world, and many of whom have become important and prominent scholars in their fields of study.
He has trained different generations of students over the years since 1958 when he was a professor at Tehran University and then, in America since the Iranian revolution in 1979, specifically at Temple University in Philadelphia from 1979 to 1984 and at the George Washington University since 1984 to the present day. The range of subjects and areas of study which Professor Nasr has involved and engaged himself with in his academic career and intellectual life are immense. As demonstrated by his numerous writings, lectures and speeches, Professor Nasr speaks and writes with great authority on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from philosophy to religion to spirituality, to music and art and architecture, to science and literature, to civilizational dialogues and the natural environment.
For Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the quest for knowledge, specifically knowledge which enables man to understand the true nature of things and which furthermore, "liberates and delivers him from the fetters and limitations of earthly existence," has been and continues to be the central concern and determinant of his intellectual life.
Seyyed Hossein Nasr, currently University Professor of Islamic Studies at the George Washington University, Washington D.C. is one of the most important and foremost scholars of Islamic, Religious and Comparative Studies in the world today. Author of over fifty books and five hundred articles which have been translated into several major Islamic, European and Asian languages, Professor Nasr is a well known and highly respected intellectual figure both in the West and the Islamic world. An eloquent speaker with a charismatic presence, Nasr is a much sought after speaker at academic conferences and seminars, university and public lectures and also radio and television programs in his area of expertise. Possessor of an impressive academic and intellectual record, his career as a teacher and scholar spans over four decades.
Professor Nasr began his illustrious teaching career in 1955 when he was still a young and promising, doctoral student at Harvard University. Over the years, he has taught and trained an innumerable number of students who have come from the different parts of the world, and many of whom have become important and prominent scholars in their fields of study.
He has trained different generations of students over the years since 1958 when he was a professor at Tehran University and then, in America since the Iranian revolution in 1979, specifically at Temple University in Philadelphia from 1979 to 1984 and at the George Washington University since 1984 to the present day. The range of subjects and areas of study which Professor Nasr has involved and engaged himself with in his academic career and intellectual life are immense. As demonstrated by his numerous writings, lectures and speeches, Professor Nasr speaks and writes with great authority on a wide variety of subjects, ranging from philosophy to religion to spirituality, to music and art and architecture, to science and literature, to civilizational dialogues and the natural environment.
For Professor Seyyed Hossein Nasr, the quest for knowledge, specifically knowledge which enables man to understand the true nature of things and which furthermore, "liberates and delivers him from the fetters and limitations of earthly existence," has been and continues to be the central concern and determinant of his intellectual life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 60 reviews
June 17, 2016
This book aims to educate the general Western public about the "authentic Islam," but at times I wondered whether the author had remembered this objective. Some of the chapters were esoteric and some delved deep into the very basic tenets of Islam. Some, on the other hand, were used to make snarky remarks about "secularism" and the West.
Throughout the book, the author kept repeating that Islamic extremism was mainly caused by Western imperialism. This is a common apologetic claim by jihadist sympathizers. Islamic extremism/violence has existed long before the existence of what someone would call the modern west. For example, during the very beginning of the US as a country, when sailors were being captured by pirates from the Barbary states, Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with the ambassador of Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. When he was asked why do they keep looting and enslaving American goods and sailors when the US has never done anything to the Islamic world, the ambassador essentially replied that because the Quran gave them the right to do so. That everyone who didn't believe in Islam were infidels and Muslims had a right to destroy them (source). Now I'm not one to hold an ambassador of Tripoli to be the decider of what the Quran tells, but this is simply to point out the claim that Islamic extremism exists mainly as a reaction to western colonialism is not entirely true.
I'm sure you have noticed that I made a claim about Islamic extremism and then gave a specific example to support said claim. The same could not be said about plenty of the author's claims.
What evidence does the author provide for such a claim? None. And this isn't the only instance. He also claims that the pilgrimage is called the world's first international scientific congress by some Western scholars, but gives absolutely no source.
Also, he cleverly tries to justify why a woman's testimonies count half that as of a man, why a woman inherits only half the wealth as that of a man, and why under Islam a woman cannot be a polygamist but a man can. He also gives justifications for why the death penalty for apostasy is valid—the justification being that Islam doesn't separate the church and the state; therefore, leaving the religion is counted as treason against the country. To that I must ask: whose fault is that?
He also mentions how the People of the Book were exempt from forced conversion but stays silent about what should be done about polytheists and idolaters. Says that jihad is only permissible as a self defense but I know many verses and hadith that call Muslims to go on waging war against the the nonbelievers. See chapter 2 and verse 193 of the Quran for example,
The commentary on this verse by one of the most reputable commentators of the Quran, Ibn Kathir, essentially says that this verse orders the believers to fight until the dominant religion is that of Allah (source).
Further, I have lost count of the times he says something similar to "I know these things in Islam seem bad but Christianity and Judaism have them too!" He also treats the the West as a monolith, the same thing he accuses the West of treating Islam as.
It's a joke of an academic work. I only picked this up in order to understand Islam from an Islamic point of view but it was difficult to go through it. He also made it difficult to read because of his contempt for secularism, and to a certain extent, the West. For someone who wants to tell the West about the "true Islam," he sure does seem to be a hypocrite. He accuses the western media of demonizing and presenting a false picture of Islam (to some extent, this is true). But then goes on to present a simplistic picture of Islam that will only satisfy someone who hasn't any knowledge of this religion—or a believer.
Notes for personal use:
Since no manifestation of the "truth" has been revealed in 1400 years, Islam's claim of Muhammad being the last prophet is true (18). Poor argument since what constitutes as " the Truth" is defined by Islam.
Author asserts that the fact that Islam has a multiplicity of prophets and one God while Christianity says "no salvation outside the church" has an impact on the different way Muslims have viewed Jews and Christians and how Christians have viewed Muslims and Jews (21). Also says how the Torah and Gospels are sacred according to the Quran and this means Islam doesn't denigrate those religions but fails to mention how in the Quran they're also claimed to have been corrupted from their original state--thus denigrating them.
Interesting way to explain the role of Quran in Islam by comparing it to Jesus' role in Christianity (23).
"The rationalist and agnostic methods" of Quranic textual criticisms are apparently painful and blasphemous to Muslims. As blasphemous as a Muslim archaeologist analyzing whether Jesus was truly born of a virgin (23). No alternative to this blasphemous practice is suggested.
"Sacred history in the Quran contains...moral and spiritual lessons for us here and now" (25). Such as?
"Secularism is the common enemy of all the Abrahamic traditions" and secular societies have eroded moral authorities (45-46).
Asserts that the relationship between Muslim and minorities living among them has been mostly peaceful except when severe political issues deteriorated it (46).
Willfully ignores how minorities are treated as second class citizens in countries ruled by Islamic law and the historical tax imposed on those of other faiths.
Says that the peaceful relationship between Muslims and nonbelievers in Muslim majority countries have been upset recently by Christian missionaries (47).
Defends death as a punishment for apostasy. Says it is a law that is only in the book and not applied (50). Hahahaha.
Asks us to consider what would happen if a Christian in medieval Europe had converted to Islam (51). Unknowingly asks us to evaluate the Muslim majority countries based on a standard of behavior equivalent to that of medieval Europe instead of the present.
Throughout chapter two, the author presents Islamic extremism simply as a reaction to Western imperialism and injustices.
Criticizes Western laws for being dynamic and shaped by societies instead of societies being shaped by them. However, does not see the irony when he accepts the consensus of the community (which is dynamic) to be a source of law (121).
Says Islamic law considers males and females equal but Quranic verses and hadiths directly contradict him (125).
"In a society ruled by the Sharia and in which Muslims are the majority, accepted religious minorities are absolved from following the Islamic sharia except in that which concerns public order" (125). What concerns public order?
The pilgrimage being called the world's first international scientific congress by some Western scholars but no sources (138)
Says that religion "has never been totally separated from political life" in America however provides no evidence for this assertion (148).
Tries to defend stoning for adultery and amputation for stealing/robbery by citing the rarity of the crimes or punishments (152-153). Does low crime rate justify barbaric punishments?
Religious and other freedoms are guaranteed to be protected for "the people of the book" but doesn't mention what about the other minorities. Defends the jizyah, a religious tax imposed upon nonbelievers (166).
Says Islam ordered slave owners to treat slaves more humanely and encouraged to set them free (181-182). But given that Islam is a manual for all of mankind, why not ban slavery? The scriptures can still be used to justify slavery and this should have been anticipated by the almighty, if indeed it was his intention to see the best of slaves.
Defends domestic abuse? Ambiguous (185).
Gives a mumbo jumbo justification for polygyny in Islam. Also uses the same justification for why a woman can't marry a person of the book but a man can (185). The justification has something to do with males and females being different "spiritual prototypes," whatever that means.
Cleverly, tries to justify why a woman's testimony counts half that of a man, why a woman inherits only half of the wealth, and some other belittling Quranic verses (192-193).
Just thought about this. The author accuses the west of treating Islam as a monolith but goes on to do the exact same thing in almost all of his condescending little remarks towards the west.
The challenges due to secularism and globalization are greater than the Mongol invasion, the author asserts (198). Wow.
In trying to defend his claim that Islam is a peaceful religion, he succumbs to tu qouque and essentially says "hey, Christians did these things too, don't forget!" (216)
Has not the "no compulsion in religion" verse been abrogated? Look up.
Yes, it has. The author interestingly mentions how the People of the Book were exempt from forced conversion but stays silent about what should be done about polytheists and idolaters (262)
When is jihad permissible? Only mentions self defense, although that isn't the only condition for jihad (266)
Takes a jab at evolution and how it reduces humans to simple results of blind forces. Since humans are inanimate particles, the question of human rights apparently becomes meaningless for a secular person (275)
"The rights of non-muslims to practice their religion is also guaranteed by Islamic Law... unless it is a pseudo-religion or cult..." (282-283)
The most unsophisticated and cringe-worthy argument against free speech on page 287-288.
Throughout the book, the author kept repeating that Islamic extremism was mainly caused by Western imperialism. This is a common apologetic claim by jihadist sympathizers. Islamic extremism/violence has existed long before the existence of what someone would call the modern west. For example, during the very beginning of the US as a country, when sailors were being captured by pirates from the Barbary states, Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with the ambassador of Tripoli, Sidi Haji Abdrahaman. When he was asked why do they keep looting and enslaving American goods and sailors when the US has never done anything to the Islamic world, the ambassador essentially replied that because the Quran gave them the right to do so. That everyone who didn't believe in Islam were infidels and Muslims had a right to destroy them (source). Now I'm not one to hold an ambassador of Tripoli to be the decider of what the Quran tells, but this is simply to point out the claim that Islamic extremism exists mainly as a reaction to western colonialism is not entirely true.
I'm sure you have noticed that I made a claim about Islamic extremism and then gave a specific example to support said claim. The same could not be said about plenty of the author's claims.
Sacred history in the Quran contains...moral and spiritual lessons for us here and now
What evidence does the author provide for such a claim? None. And this isn't the only instance. He also claims that the pilgrimage is called the world's first international scientific congress by some Western scholars, but gives absolutely no source.
Also, he cleverly tries to justify why a woman's testimonies count half that as of a man, why a woman inherits only half the wealth as that of a man, and why under Islam a woman cannot be a polygamist but a man can. He also gives justifications for why the death penalty for apostasy is valid—the justification being that Islam doesn't separate the church and the state; therefore, leaving the religion is counted as treason against the country. To that I must ask: whose fault is that?
He also mentions how the People of the Book were exempt from forced conversion but stays silent about what should be done about polytheists and idolaters. Says that jihad is only permissible as a self defense but I know many verses and hadith that call Muslims to go on waging war against the the nonbelievers. See chapter 2 and verse 193 of the Quran for example,
And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression
The commentary on this verse by one of the most reputable commentators of the Quran, Ibn Kathir, essentially says that this verse orders the believers to fight until the dominant religion is that of Allah (source).
Further, I have lost count of the times he says something similar to "I know these things in Islam seem bad but Christianity and Judaism have them too!" He also treats the the West as a monolith, the same thing he accuses the West of treating Islam as.
It's a joke of an academic work. I only picked this up in order to understand Islam from an Islamic point of view but it was difficult to go through it. He also made it difficult to read because of his contempt for secularism, and to a certain extent, the West. For someone who wants to tell the West about the "true Islam," he sure does seem to be a hypocrite. He accuses the western media of demonizing and presenting a false picture of Islam (to some extent, this is true). But then goes on to present a simplistic picture of Islam that will only satisfy someone who hasn't any knowledge of this religion—or a believer.
Notes for personal use:
Since no manifestation of the "truth" has been revealed in 1400 years, Islam's claim of Muhammad being the last prophet is true (18). Poor argument since what constitutes as " the Truth" is defined by Islam.
Author asserts that the fact that Islam has a multiplicity of prophets and one God while Christianity says "no salvation outside the church" has an impact on the different way Muslims have viewed Jews and Christians and how Christians have viewed Muslims and Jews (21). Also says how the Torah and Gospels are sacred according to the Quran and this means Islam doesn't denigrate those religions but fails to mention how in the Quran they're also claimed to have been corrupted from their original state--thus denigrating them.
Interesting way to explain the role of Quran in Islam by comparing it to Jesus' role in Christianity (23).
"The rationalist and agnostic methods" of Quranic textual criticisms are apparently painful and blasphemous to Muslims. As blasphemous as a Muslim archaeologist analyzing whether Jesus was truly born of a virgin (23). No alternative to this blasphemous practice is suggested.
"Sacred history in the Quran contains...moral and spiritual lessons for us here and now" (25). Such as?
"Secularism is the common enemy of all the Abrahamic traditions" and secular societies have eroded moral authorities (45-46).
Asserts that the relationship between Muslim and minorities living among them has been mostly peaceful except when severe political issues deteriorated it (46).
Willfully ignores how minorities are treated as second class citizens in countries ruled by Islamic law and the historical tax imposed on those of other faiths.
Says that the peaceful relationship between Muslims and nonbelievers in Muslim majority countries have been upset recently by Christian missionaries (47).
Defends death as a punishment for apostasy. Says it is a law that is only in the book and not applied (50). Hahahaha.
Asks us to consider what would happen if a Christian in medieval Europe had converted to Islam (51). Unknowingly asks us to evaluate the Muslim majority countries based on a standard of behavior equivalent to that of medieval Europe instead of the present.
Throughout chapter two, the author presents Islamic extremism simply as a reaction to Western imperialism and injustices.
Criticizes Western laws for being dynamic and shaped by societies instead of societies being shaped by them. However, does not see the irony when he accepts the consensus of the community (which is dynamic) to be a source of law (121).
Says Islamic law considers males and females equal but Quranic verses and hadiths directly contradict him (125).
"In a society ruled by the Sharia and in which Muslims are the majority, accepted religious minorities are absolved from following the Islamic sharia except in that which concerns public order" (125). What concerns public order?
The pilgrimage being called the world's first international scientific congress by some Western scholars but no sources (138)
Says that religion "has never been totally separated from political life" in America however provides no evidence for this assertion (148).
Tries to defend stoning for adultery and amputation for stealing/robbery by citing the rarity of the crimes or punishments (152-153). Does low crime rate justify barbaric punishments?
Religious and other freedoms are guaranteed to be protected for "the people of the book" but doesn't mention what about the other minorities. Defends the jizyah, a religious tax imposed upon nonbelievers (166).
Says Islam ordered slave owners to treat slaves more humanely and encouraged to set them free (181-182). But given that Islam is a manual for all of mankind, why not ban slavery? The scriptures can still be used to justify slavery and this should have been anticipated by the almighty, if indeed it was his intention to see the best of slaves.
Defends domestic abuse? Ambiguous (185).
Gives a mumbo jumbo justification for polygyny in Islam. Also uses the same justification for why a woman can't marry a person of the book but a man can (185). The justification has something to do with males and females being different "spiritual prototypes," whatever that means.
Cleverly, tries to justify why a woman's testimony counts half that of a man, why a woman inherits only half of the wealth, and some other belittling Quranic verses (192-193).
Just thought about this. The author accuses the west of treating Islam as a monolith but goes on to do the exact same thing in almost all of his condescending little remarks towards the west.
The challenges due to secularism and globalization are greater than the Mongol invasion, the author asserts (198). Wow.
In trying to defend his claim that Islam is a peaceful religion, he succumbs to tu qouque and essentially says "hey, Christians did these things too, don't forget!" (216)
Has not the "no compulsion in religion" verse been abrogated? Look up.
Yes, it has. The author interestingly mentions how the People of the Book were exempt from forced conversion but stays silent about what should be done about polytheists and idolaters (262)
When is jihad permissible? Only mentions self defense, although that isn't the only condition for jihad (266)
Takes a jab at evolution and how it reduces humans to simple results of blind forces. Since humans are inanimate particles, the question of human rights apparently becomes meaningless for a secular person (275)
"The rights of non-muslims to practice their religion is also guaranteed by Islamic Law... unless it is a pseudo-religion or cult..." (282-283)
The most unsophisticated and cringe-worthy argument against free speech on page 287-288.
February 16, 2017
کتابی جالب در معرفی اسلام به غیر مسلمانان
این کتاب پس از حوادث 11 سپتامبر و بعد از آن موج های گسترده ضد اسلام نوشته شد تا اسلام واقعی را بشناساند و با تقریب خوبی، این کار را انجام داده!
این کتاب پس از حوادث 11 سپتامبر و بعد از آن موج های گسترده ضد اسلام نوشته شد تا اسلام واقعی را بشناساند و با تقریب خوبی، این کار را انجام داده!
June 2, 2017
الكتاب للبروفيسور سيد حسين نصر .. عدد صفحات الكتاب 351 صفحة .. ويتكوّن من 7 فصول
الفصل الأول (وحدة الخالق و تعدد الأنبياء) : تكلم عن وحدة الحقيقة وكثرة الوحي
الفصل الثاني دائرة الإسلام ونطاقه (التّسنن . التشيع . والتصوف) : يتطرّق إلى القراءات التقليدية (للحداثيين والأصوليين) في الإسلام المعاصر
تحدث كذلك عن التشيّع والتسنّن و شعبهما كما خصّ بالذكر الأئمة الأربعة ثم خصّص جزءًا من هذا الفصل للحديث عن فرقة الإسماعيلية .. كما ركّز في حديثه عن التنوع الفكري والكلامي .
الفصل الثالث (الشرائع الإلهية والقوانين الإنسانية) : عرج الكاتب الى مفهوم فلسفة الفقه في الإسلام ومصادر التشريع بحيث أجاب عن سؤالين مهمّين : من هم المخاطبون بالشريعة ؟ وما مفهوم الشريعة ؟ تطرّق بعدها إلى الطقوس الإسلامية الصلاة .. الصوم .. الزكاة .. الحجّ عاقدا مقارنة بينها في الإسلام و في الأديان الأخرى
الفصل الرابع (نظرية الأمة و المجتمع) : يتحدث عن مفهوم الأمة من خلال فهمه لآيات القرآن الكريم .. ودار السلام والحرب .. والأقليات المسلمة في المجتمعات غير الإسلامية .. والأقليات الموجودة في دار الإسلام .. والمجتمع الإسلامي وبنائه .. وموقف الإسلام من الرّقِّ والعبودية .. والأسرة في المجتمع الإسلامي .. والمرأة ومكانتها في الإسلام.
الفصل الخامس (الرحمة، العشق، السلام، و الجمال) : تحدث عن مفهوم الرحمة والرحمانية
الفصل السادس: العدالة الإلهية و العدالة الإنسانية
الفصل السابع مسؤوليات الإنسان و حقوقه : تطرق إلى مفهوم حقوق الإنسان و الحرية و مفهومها في السياق الغربي و الإسلامي كما طالب المسلمين بالإجابة عن أسئلة العصر و قبول التحديّات و ذلك من خلال خلفيتهم الإسلامية مع تأكيده على أهمّية إعطاء تفسيرات و رؤية لمختلف تحديّات العصر
لتوصّل بعدها الكاتب إلى قناعة مفادها أن فهم الإسلام مرتبط بفهم تلك الرسالة الجامعة النابعة من قلبه و أن قلب الإسلام ليس سوى الشهادة بالتوحيد للحقيقة
الإلهية و شمولية و جامعيةالحقيقة و ضرورة التسليم للإرادة الإلهية و أداء الإنسان لمسؤولياته و أدائه حقوق الآخرين
إن قلب الإسلام يوقظنا من نوم الغفلة إلى صحو السؤال عن : من نحن ؟ و لماذا نحن في هذا العالم ؟ و يدعونا إلى معرفة الأديان الأخرى و إبراز الإحترام لها إن من الضروري أن يضع المسلمون هذه الدعوة و النداء النابعين من قلب الإسلام نصب أعينهم
02/06/2017 .. السابع من رمضان 1438
محمد هشام
الفصل الأول (وحدة الخالق و تعدد الأنبياء) : تكلم عن وحدة الحقيقة وكثرة الوحي
الفصل الثاني دائرة الإسلام ونطاقه (التّسنن . التشيع . والتصوف) : يتطرّق إلى القراءات التقليدية (للحداثيين والأصوليين) في الإسلام المعاصر
تحدث كذلك عن التشيّع والتسنّن و شعبهما كما خصّ بالذكر الأئمة الأربعة ثم خصّص جزءًا من هذا الفصل للحديث عن فرقة الإسماعيلية .. كما ركّز في حديثه عن التنوع الفكري والكلامي .
الفصل الثالث (الشرائع الإلهية والقوانين الإنسانية) : عرج الكاتب الى مفهوم فلسفة الفقه في الإسلام ومصادر التشريع بحيث أجاب عن سؤالين مهمّين : من هم المخاطبون بالشريعة ؟ وما مفهوم الشريعة ؟ تطرّق بعدها إلى الطقوس الإسلامية الصلاة .. الصوم .. الزكاة .. الحجّ عاقدا مقارنة بينها في الإسلام و في الأديان الأخرى
الفصل الرابع (نظرية الأمة و المجتمع) : يتحدث عن مفهوم الأمة من خلال فهمه لآيات القرآن الكريم .. ودار السلام والحرب .. والأقليات المسلمة في المجتمعات غير الإسلامية .. والأقليات الموجودة في دار الإسلام .. والمجتمع الإسلامي وبنائه .. وموقف الإسلام من الرّقِّ والعبودية .. والأسرة في المجتمع الإسلامي .. والمرأة ومكانتها في الإسلام.
الفصل الخامس (الرحمة، العشق، السلام، و الجمال) : تحدث عن مفهوم الرحمة والرحمانية
الفصل السادس: العدالة الإلهية و العدالة الإنسانية
الفصل السابع مسؤوليات الإنسان و حقوقه : تطرق إلى مفهوم حقوق الإنسان و الحرية و مفهومها في السياق الغربي و الإسلامي كما طالب المسلمين بالإجابة عن أسئلة العصر و قبول التحديّات و ذلك من خلال خلفيتهم الإسلامية مع تأكيده على أهمّية إعطاء تفسيرات و رؤية لمختلف تحديّات العصر
لتوصّل بعدها الكاتب إلى قناعة مفادها أن فهم الإسلام مرتبط بفهم تلك الرسالة الجامعة النابعة من قلبه و أن قلب الإسلام ليس سوى الشهادة بالتوحيد للحقيقة
الإلهية و شمولية و جامعيةالحقيقة و ضرورة التسليم للإرادة الإلهية و أداء الإنسان لمسؤولياته و أدائه حقوق الآخرين
إن قلب الإسلام يوقظنا من نوم الغفلة إلى صحو السؤال عن : من نحن ؟ و لماذا نحن في هذا العالم ؟ و يدعونا إلى معرفة الأديان الأخرى و إبراز الإحترام لها إن من الضروري أن يضع المسلمون هذه الدعوة و النداء النابعين من قلب الإسلام نصب أعينهم
02/06/2017 .. السابع من رمضان 1438
محمد هشام
March 11, 2021
2 stars
این کتاب به عنوان کتابی در معرفی اسلام، خارج از دگماتیسم ناشی از سلفی گری و.... در مجموع کتاب خوبی نیست به دلیل اینکه
اول: در برخی از موارد به تبلیغ صوفی گری پرداخته است ...با توجه به اینکه نویسنده این کتاب خود از صوفیان فرقه ( گروه) شاذلیه هست این امر تعجب برانگیز نیست اما برای کسی که می خواهد با اسلام آشنا شود ( که این کتاب برای آنها نوشته شده است) معرفی اسلام، از منظر و نگاه صوفیان، امری صحیح به نظر نمی رسد و بهتر است یک نگاه عمومی از اسلام ارایه شود.... ضمنا نویسنده نقل قول هایی که از بزرگان شاذلیه دارد بیشتر از نقل قول های امامان شیعه یا اهل سنت است
دوم: معرفی اسلام با تمسک بر متافیزیک و ماوراءالطبیعه به نظر با عقل و خرد انسان غربی جور در نمی آید در حالیکه در کتاب به وفور تمسک بر متافیزیک را شاهد هستیم ...به نظرم اگر نویسنده به امور اخلاقی حاکم بر اسلام می پرداخت ماهیت اسلام را برای انسان غربی بیشتر قابل درک میکرد
سوم: در بخشی نویسنده به توجیه مجازات های حدود( شلاق، سنگسار، اعدام و...) می پردازد که موفق عمل نکرده و عموما از مسیحیت مثال آورده که در مسیحیت و آیین یهود هم همچین مجازات هایی بوده... در حالیکه انسان غربی که این کتاب را می خواند از مسیحیت و آیین یهود گذر کرده و عملا آتئست هست پس نمی توان به انسان غربی گفت این مجازات ها در آیین خود شما هم بوده چراکه او اصلا آیین یا دینی ندارد
چهارم: در خصوص بسیاری از احکام فقهی خصوصا در باب مجازاتها ( خصوصا حدود) متاسفانه آن چیزی که نویسنده می گوید با آن چیزی که اجرا می شود متفاوت است و بهتر است نویسنده استنادات بهتری در خصوص اجرای مجازاتهای حدی، به خواننده غربی ارایه می نمود
پنجم: نویسنده عموما، جامعه غربی را یک جامعه سرگردان که درگیر مشکلات متعددی هست معرفی می کند و عنوان می کند که در اکثر کشورهای اسلامی گرایش به تفکر غربی وجود ندارد ..... صرف نظر از اینکه این صحبت چقدر درست یا غلط است ( خواننده خود می تواند تصمیم بگیرد) نمی توان تسلط اصول و سبک زندگی حاکم در غرب را در جوامع اسلامی نادیده گرفت و سوال اینجاست که چرا در کشورهای اسلانی این گرایش به تفکر یا سبک زندگی غربی رشد پیدا کرده است
این کتاب به عنوان کتابی در معرفی اسلام، خارج از دگماتیسم ناشی از سلفی گری و.... در مجموع کتاب خوبی نیست به دلیل اینکه
اول: در برخی از موارد به تبلیغ صوفی گری پرداخته است ...با توجه به اینکه نویسنده این کتاب خود از صوفیان فرقه ( گروه) شاذلیه هست این امر تعجب برانگیز نیست اما برای کسی که می خواهد با اسلام آشنا شود ( که این کتاب برای آنها نوشته شده است) معرفی اسلام، از منظر و نگاه صوفیان، امری صحیح به نظر نمی رسد و بهتر است یک نگاه عمومی از اسلام ارایه شود.... ضمنا نویسنده نقل قول هایی که از بزرگان شاذلیه دارد بیشتر از نقل قول های امامان شیعه یا اهل سنت است
دوم: معرفی اسلام با تمسک بر متافیزیک و ماوراءالطبیعه به نظر با عقل و خرد انسان غربی جور در نمی آید در حالیکه در کتاب به وفور تمسک بر متافیزیک را شاهد هستیم ...به نظرم اگر نویسنده به امور اخلاقی حاکم بر اسلام می پرداخت ماهیت اسلام را برای انسان غربی بیشتر قابل درک میکرد
سوم: در بخشی نویسنده به توجیه مجازات های حدود( شلاق، سنگسار، اعدام و...) می پردازد که موفق عمل نکرده و عموما از مسیحیت مثال آورده که در مسیحیت و آیین یهود هم همچین مجازات هایی بوده... در حالیکه انسان غربی که این کتاب را می خواند از مسیحیت و آیین یهود گذر کرده و عملا آتئست هست پس نمی توان به انسان غربی گفت این مجازات ها در آیین خود شما هم بوده چراکه او اصلا آیین یا دینی ندارد
چهارم: در خصوص بسیاری از احکام فقهی خصوصا در باب مجازاتها ( خصوصا حدود) متاسفانه آن چیزی که نویسنده می گوید با آن چیزی که اجرا می شود متفاوت است و بهتر است نویسنده استنادات بهتری در خصوص اجرای مجازاتهای حدی، به خواننده غربی ارایه می نمود
پنجم: نویسنده عموما، جامعه غربی را یک جامعه سرگردان که درگیر مشکلات متعددی هست معرفی می کند و عنوان می کند که در اکثر کشورهای اسلامی گرایش به تفکر غربی وجود ندارد ..... صرف نظر از اینکه این صحبت چقدر درست یا غلط است ( خواننده خود می تواند تصمیم بگیرد) نمی توان تسلط اصول و سبک زندگی حاکم در غرب را در جوامع اسلامی نادیده گرفت و سوال اینجاست که چرا در کشورهای اسلانی این گرایش به تفکر یا سبک زندگی غربی رشد پیدا کرده است
March 4, 2009
In the introduction the author states this book was “written with express purpose of explaining certain basic aspects of Islam and widely discussed issues in a manner acceptable to mainstream Islamic thought and comprehensible to the general western public.” He does an excellent job in achieving his purpose. In some respects the work is similar to Khaled Abou El Fadl’s excellent book, "The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists." Both have injected history into their discourse and both explain key elements of Islam. "Heart of Islam" provides more of the philosophy in a straight manner. El Fadl’s book uses the dichotomy between ‘puritans’ and moderates to show the differences in interpretation. Both books should be read to understand that much of the misunderstanding of Islam is due to erroneous interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah by both Muslims and non-Muslims.
June 19, 2018
definitely does not worth reading. maybe it will be good for someone who knows nothing about Islam. but if you are born in the Middle East, there is pretty much nothing new for you. I thought it will be a thoughtful book with deep ideas. so disappointed. meh.
July 8, 2020
إلهي كما أن إرادتك في السماء حاكمة، كذلك اجعلها في"
الأرض" -- من أقوال السيد المسيح
بهذا الدعاء ابدأ هذه المراجعة .. حقيقة انا أكن للعالم سيد حسين نصر الكثير من الإحترام والمحبة ، فكتاباته عن الفلسفة الخالدة انتشلتني من طريق ضياع محقق وسط تفكك الكتابات الإسلامية الحالية بل وركاكتها ..
يبدأ هذا الكتاب بالحديث عن وحدة الخالق وتعدد الأنبياء ويتدرج فيما بعد بشرح أطياف الإسلام الأساسية الحالية (سنة وشيعة ومتصوفة) ثم يتحدث عن مفاهيم أساسية كالرحمة والسلام والجمال ، ولا يغفل أيضاً الحديث عن المجتمع الإسلامي وتوسطه بين الفردية المطلقة أو الجماعية كما لا يغفل الحديث عن تشرذم العالم الإسلامي الآن .
أفضل الفصول في نظري كان الأخير حيث تحدث عن واجبك كمسلم وسط عالم الحداثة الذي نعيشه وكيف نستطيع إجراء حوار حقيقي بين العالم الإسلامي و الغرب والأهم كيف تنظر إلى داخلك عزيزي المسلم فأنت صورة الله في أرضه!
* * * *
مقتطفات:
=======
إن قلب الإسلام، أو الإسلام القلبي هو ذلك الإحساس
الذي يمنحنا القدرة في هذا العالم على رؤية الله في كل مكان، وعلى أن نكون عينه و سمعه ويده.
وفي باطن هذا الدين قلب، وهو الحكمة الخالدة التي هي جوهر يضيء في مركز كل رسالة إلهية.
وفي هذه المرحلة المظلمة المضطربة، تظل هذه الحكمة فقط، كنور معتدل نابع من معرفة أصيلة، يشع لنا ويتحفنا بالمحبة والرحمة للآخرين.
إن قلب الإسلام ليس سوى الشهادة بالتوحيد للحقيقة الإلهية، وشمولية وجامعية الحقيقة وضرورة التسليم للإرادة الإلهية وأداء الإنسان لمسؤولياته وأدائه حقوق الآخرين. إن قلب الإسلام يوقظنا من نوم الغفلة إلى صحو السؤال عن: من نحن؟ ولماذا نحن في هذا العالم؟ ويدعونا إلى معرفة الأديان الأخرى، وإبراز الإحترام لها ، إن من الضروري أن يضع المسلمون هذه الدعوة والنداء النابعين من قلب الإسلام نصب أعينهم.
الأرض" -- من أقوال السيد المسيح
بهذا الدعاء ابدأ هذه المراجعة .. حقيقة انا أكن للعالم سيد حسين نصر الكثير من الإحترام والمحبة ، فكتاباته عن الفلسفة الخالدة انتشلتني من طريق ضياع محقق وسط تفكك الكتابات الإسلامية الحالية بل وركاكتها ..
يبدأ هذا الكتاب بالحديث عن وحدة الخالق وتعدد الأنبياء ويتدرج فيما بعد بشرح أطياف الإسلام الأساسية الحالية (سنة وشيعة ومتصوفة) ثم يتحدث عن مفاهيم أساسية كالرحمة والسلام والجمال ، ولا يغفل أيضاً الحديث عن المجتمع الإسلامي وتوسطه بين الفردية المطلقة أو الجماعية كما لا يغفل الحديث عن تشرذم العالم الإسلامي الآن .
أفضل الفصول في نظري كان الأخير حيث تحدث عن واجبك كمسلم وسط عالم الحداثة الذي نعيشه وكيف نستطيع إجراء حوار حقيقي بين العالم الإسلامي و الغرب والأهم كيف تنظر إلى داخلك عزيزي المسلم فأنت صورة الله في أرضه!
* * * *
مقتطفات:
=======
إن قلب الإسلام، أو الإسلام القلبي هو ذلك الإحساس
الذي يمنحنا القدرة في هذا العالم على رؤية الله في كل مكان، وعلى أن نكون عينه و سمعه ويده.
وفي باطن هذا الدين قلب، وهو الحكمة الخالدة التي هي جوهر يضيء في مركز كل رسالة إلهية.
وفي هذه المرحلة المظلمة المضطربة، تظل هذه الحكمة فقط، كنور معتدل نابع من معرفة أصيلة، يشع لنا ويتحفنا بالمحبة والرحمة للآخرين.
إن قلب الإسلام ليس سوى الشهادة بالتوحيد للحقيقة الإلهية، وشمولية وجامعية الحقيقة وضرورة التسليم للإرادة الإلهية وأداء الإنسان لمسؤولياته وأدائه حقوق الآخرين. إن قلب الإسلام يوقظنا من نوم الغفلة إلى صحو السؤال عن: من نحن؟ ولماذا نحن في هذا العالم؟ ويدعونا إلى معرفة الأديان الأخرى، وإبراز الإحترام لها ، إن من الضروري أن يضع المسلمون هذه الدعوة والنداء النابعين من قلب الإسلام نصب أعينهم.
August 15, 2015
The book gives insights about many facts related to the history, the geography, the demography, the pillars of Islam / Islamic world. It is explained well for those who wish to learn about Islam and those Muslims who aim to review it and think about what it seems obvious and well known.
I think it's worth reading
I think it's worth reading
January 25, 2012
Nasr's book may have a lot to offer for someone who knows almost nothing about Islam.He tries to give a simple clear-cut picture of Islam to fight off ingrained prejudice which is imprinted on individuals,inculcated in the bosom of some Western societies which are swayed by the mainstream media.But if you are an educated person who actually knows something about Islam, the book does not have much to offer you. What's more if you are a Muslim, the book has nothing to offer. That's why I regret paying for this book. Besides, Nasr supposes that he really knows about every Muslim country as he does not refrain from saying major things about secular Muslim countries like Turkey.In spite of the fact that he clearly mentions " Human imperfection is not the monopoly of any single people,
race, or religious community; it exists everywhere." he compares Islam with Christianity on any occasion he means something like "Well yeah this happened in the history of Islam but it happened less often than in Christianity and Judaism". In every page, he says what Islam orders but he does not actually question the fact that many Muslims do not live properly according to these rules. At his each point, if he does not have anything to say about Christians and Jews, he absolutely has something to say about agnostics and secularists. This writer may be a professor but somebody should clearly define him what secularism actually is. He definitely mistakes it for "atheism". At a point he writes
"The old modernist and liberal schools of thought be-came discredited, as did the modernists as a political class, which had failed to solve any of the major problems that society faced in addition to suffering humiliating defeats, especially in the several Arab-Israeli wars. Nevertheless, modernism continued, often with a new Marxist component, and remained powerful because it controlled and still controls the state apparatus in most Muslim lands. But its intellectual and social power began to wane and weaken nearly everywhere except in Turkey, where Ataturk’s secularism remains strong, held in place by the force of the army.”
I wonder whether this guy has actually ever been to Turkey. Turkey is run by a pro-Islamic political party at this very moment and the leader of this party, Prime Minister Erdogan,who himself is admired by many Arabs as he's been the swash-buckling heroic imagination of an Ottoman Sultan, recently said in Egypt “Do not be wary of secularism. I hope there will be a secular state in Egypt”.It did not take long for him to realize that Arabs were utterly shocked by his remarks so he felt obliged to add “Turkey prefers a model of secularism that is not identical to the “Anglo-Saxon or Western model,”. “Individuals cannot be secular, states are. A devout Muslim can successfully govern a secular state”
Of course he never expatiated upon the Anglo-Saxon or Western model but he now indeed accepts that he was mistaken in the past. Husein Nasry may be a college professor but the education he has had seems to be not enough to make him understand that secularism is the only way to create a democratic society where one religion does not have domination over the other so that different religious groups can live peacefully. I don’t think the modern world (in which there are lots of nation states) has an answer better than this one.
It may be just a reflection of how important Turkey is now regarded in the world, because of its strategically placed position in the east, we feel many Westerners and as well as many Muslims who are bound to live under the jackpot of tinpot dictators Turkey is the best model for Islamic countries and this model was created by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Unfortunately Nasr belittles and insults his legacy as he writes
"“From the ranks of the modernists rose nationalists and liberal think-ers, men who sought to modernize Islamic society, on the one hand, and fight against the West in the name of national independence, on the other. The colonial wars fought against Western powers for national independence by such figures as Ataturk, Sukarno, Bourgiba, and others The Spectrum of Islam 103 were carried out in the name of nationalism, not Islam. Consequently, when Western powers left their colonies, at least outwardly, in many areas they left behind them ruling groups who were Muslim in name, but whose thinking was more like that of the colonizers they had replaced.”
The great leader Ataturk was a source of inspiration in the fight against imperialistic powers. To regard him as the same as a colonizer?! What can I say about this? Nothing!
Nasr mentions secularism so many times that you sometimes ask yourself whether he is obsessed with denigrating it. In another page he writes "...Consequently the welfare of the poor is left to a large extent to the mercy of private individuals and institutions, all motivated, not by
some kind of secularist altruism, but by the Islamic empha-sis upon the importance of compassion, charity, kindness,and mercy to those less fortunate who turn to those better off for help."
Piety can be a reason for a lot of people to help out others in need but does anybody have to be religious to be just good and altruistic? Can't an atheist or a secular person do something good? We do know there are lots of volunteers who work for humanitarian purposes not because they are dreaming of their place in paradise but they hope for a better future for the humanity in this fleeting world! What's more Nasr supposes that every secular person/ agnostic believes in evolutionary theory as he writes "...ten those same champions of humanity believe that hu-man beings are nothing more than evolved apes, who in turn evolved from lower life forms and ultimately from var-ious compounds of molecules..." Not everybody who believes in some sort of evolution is a Godless person, while not every atheist has to believe in evolution...Nasr writes "Anything less than mutual respect in understanding the other side makes a sham of the question..." I wish he could actually stick to this in the whole of his book and he had not done so many pointless comparisons and he had not reflected his opinions as clear-cut formulas.
race, or religious community; it exists everywhere." he compares Islam with Christianity on any occasion he means something like "Well yeah this happened in the history of Islam but it happened less often than in Christianity and Judaism". In every page, he says what Islam orders but he does not actually question the fact that many Muslims do not live properly according to these rules. At his each point, if he does not have anything to say about Christians and Jews, he absolutely has something to say about agnostics and secularists. This writer may be a professor but somebody should clearly define him what secularism actually is. He definitely mistakes it for "atheism". At a point he writes
"The old modernist and liberal schools of thought be-came discredited, as did the modernists as a political class, which had failed to solve any of the major problems that society faced in addition to suffering humiliating defeats, especially in the several Arab-Israeli wars. Nevertheless, modernism continued, often with a new Marxist component, and remained powerful because it controlled and still controls the state apparatus in most Muslim lands. But its intellectual and social power began to wane and weaken nearly everywhere except in Turkey, where Ataturk’s secularism remains strong, held in place by the force of the army.”
I wonder whether this guy has actually ever been to Turkey. Turkey is run by a pro-Islamic political party at this very moment and the leader of this party, Prime Minister Erdogan,who himself is admired by many Arabs as he's been the swash-buckling heroic imagination of an Ottoman Sultan, recently said in Egypt “Do not be wary of secularism. I hope there will be a secular state in Egypt”.It did not take long for him to realize that Arabs were utterly shocked by his remarks so he felt obliged to add “Turkey prefers a model of secularism that is not identical to the “Anglo-Saxon or Western model,”. “Individuals cannot be secular, states are. A devout Muslim can successfully govern a secular state”
Of course he never expatiated upon the Anglo-Saxon or Western model but he now indeed accepts that he was mistaken in the past. Husein Nasry may be a college professor but the education he has had seems to be not enough to make him understand that secularism is the only way to create a democratic society where one religion does not have domination over the other so that different religious groups can live peacefully. I don’t think the modern world (in which there are lots of nation states) has an answer better than this one.
It may be just a reflection of how important Turkey is now regarded in the world, because of its strategically placed position in the east, we feel many Westerners and as well as many Muslims who are bound to live under the jackpot of tinpot dictators Turkey is the best model for Islamic countries and this model was created by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. Unfortunately Nasr belittles and insults his legacy as he writes
"“From the ranks of the modernists rose nationalists and liberal think-ers, men who sought to modernize Islamic society, on the one hand, and fight against the West in the name of national independence, on the other. The colonial wars fought against Western powers for national independence by such figures as Ataturk, Sukarno, Bourgiba, and others The Spectrum of Islam 103 were carried out in the name of nationalism, not Islam. Consequently, when Western powers left their colonies, at least outwardly, in many areas they left behind them ruling groups who were Muslim in name, but whose thinking was more like that of the colonizers they had replaced.”
The great leader Ataturk was a source of inspiration in the fight against imperialistic powers. To regard him as the same as a colonizer?! What can I say about this? Nothing!
Nasr mentions secularism so many times that you sometimes ask yourself whether he is obsessed with denigrating it. In another page he writes "...Consequently the welfare of the poor is left to a large extent to the mercy of private individuals and institutions, all motivated, not by
some kind of secularist altruism, but by the Islamic empha-sis upon the importance of compassion, charity, kindness,and mercy to those less fortunate who turn to those better off for help."
Piety can be a reason for a lot of people to help out others in need but does anybody have to be religious to be just good and altruistic? Can't an atheist or a secular person do something good? We do know there are lots of volunteers who work for humanitarian purposes not because they are dreaming of their place in paradise but they hope for a better future for the humanity in this fleeting world! What's more Nasr supposes that every secular person/ agnostic believes in evolutionary theory as he writes "...ten those same champions of humanity believe that hu-man beings are nothing more than evolved apes, who in turn evolved from lower life forms and ultimately from var-ious compounds of molecules..." Not everybody who believes in some sort of evolution is a Godless person, while not every atheist has to believe in evolution...Nasr writes "Anything less than mutual respect in understanding the other side makes a sham of the question..." I wish he could actually stick to this in the whole of his book and he had not done so many pointless comparisons and he had not reflected his opinions as clear-cut formulas.
February 21, 2024
This is the 14th book of SH Nasr that I’ve ever read and this book is undeniably, one of the best book written by him other than Islam in the Modern World and A Young Muslim’s Guide to the Modern World.
Though I disagree with SH Nasr’s problematic believe on Transcendent Unity of Religion in addition to the loose and confused translation of Islam as what has been eruditely and strongly criticised by Prof. Syed Naquib al-Attas in his latest work, Islam: The Covenants Fulfilled and his three-series extempore lectures on that book, in this book, SH Nasr pointed out the importance of shaping our own framework of thinking (Weltanschauung) and not merely copy from Rousseau and Locke. He proposed that Muslims need to be authentic and deeply rooted in Islamic tradition in order to response with the Western interpretation of human right.
He also suggested works such as Guenon’s The Crisis of the Modern World, Eliot’s The Waste Land and Roszak’s Where the Wasteland Ends which depicts the tragic condition of human life in modern society and drives the modern Western civilization to its destruction.
Though I disagree with SH Nasr’s problematic believe on Transcendent Unity of Religion in addition to the loose and confused translation of Islam as what has been eruditely and strongly criticised by Prof. Syed Naquib al-Attas in his latest work, Islam: The Covenants Fulfilled and his three-series extempore lectures on that book, in this book, SH Nasr pointed out the importance of shaping our own framework of thinking (Weltanschauung) and not merely copy from Rousseau and Locke. He proposed that Muslims need to be authentic and deeply rooted in Islamic tradition in order to response with the Western interpretation of human right.
He also suggested works such as Guenon’s The Crisis of the Modern World, Eliot’s The Waste Land and Roszak’s Where the Wasteland Ends which depicts the tragic condition of human life in modern society and drives the modern Western civilization to its destruction.
November 3, 2022
This book is alright, however, I think it's somewhat schizophrenic. He has quite a few criticisms for the Western world (not nearly as many for the Islamic) and yet he writes from the safety of a tenured position on faculty at George Washington University in DC. Overall I do think that the Abrahamic religions certainly can, and do need to, find common ground but Mr. Nasr might not offer the best way forward.
August 24, 2023
This book started as a solid 4, but as it went on, it just deteriorated.
The first issue I had with it was the vocabulary. It was excessively difficult if we judge it from the perspective of a standard English speaking individual. The use of harder vocabulary seemed unnecessary at multiple points.
The second issue was that it had a heavy focus on delving into the history of things. The geographical history particularly was far too extensive.
Then I also found it annoying how there was a constant comparison of Islam against the West, it gave a religious book an unnecessary political undertone and eventhough this book seemed to want to encourage mutual understanding, I felt that there was a clear intention of demonising the West and secularism at several points.
Lastly, I felt that as it seemed that this book aimed to clear out misconceptions people hold against Islam, the book really avoided a lot of important topics that Muslims are criticised for. Such as Muslim terrorist organisations, women's rights, and the reality of minorities in Islamic countries. The author would state how things are supposed to be according to Islam, accepted that these things aren't done in most Muslim countries and as if to defend these countries would go on to try to prove how the West is worse than said countries.
To some extent, perhaps this book was just not the one for me. But it definitely has some gaping flaws that get excessively annoying as we continue to read it.
The first issue I had with it was the vocabulary. It was excessively difficult if we judge it from the perspective of a standard English speaking individual. The use of harder vocabulary seemed unnecessary at multiple points.
The second issue was that it had a heavy focus on delving into the history of things. The geographical history particularly was far too extensive.
Then I also found it annoying how there was a constant comparison of Islam against the West, it gave a religious book an unnecessary political undertone and eventhough this book seemed to want to encourage mutual understanding, I felt that there was a clear intention of demonising the West and secularism at several points.
Lastly, I felt that as it seemed that this book aimed to clear out misconceptions people hold against Islam, the book really avoided a lot of important topics that Muslims are criticised for. Such as Muslim terrorist organisations, women's rights, and the reality of minorities in Islamic countries. The author would state how things are supposed to be according to Islam, accepted that these things aren't done in most Muslim countries and as if to defend these countries would go on to try to prove how the West is worse than said countries.
To some extent, perhaps this book was just not the one for me. But it definitely has some gaping flaws that get excessively annoying as we continue to read it.
February 7, 2021
Brief Review Of Seyyed Hossein Nasr's Book (The Heart Of Islam) By Bashir Abubakar
The flags of misconception, misunderstanding, and disinformation were hoisted in every angle of this world with "Islam" at the centre, even in the Muslims majority societies. Many questions are roaming in the minds of people seeking for an answers. In his philosophical approach, Seyyed Nasr began with telling the readers the purpose of human existence through Islamic points of view. God said “I was a hidden treasure. I loved to be known. Therefore, I created the creation so that I would be known.” As the Qur'an states "God created man in the best of stature” Q95:4) with an intelligence capable of knowing the One. The message of Islam is addressed to that primordial nature. It is a call for recollection, for the remembrance of a knowledge kneaded into the very substance of our being even before our coming into this world. In a famous verse that defines the relationship between human beings and God, the Quran, in referring to the precosmic existence of man, states, “‘Am I not your Lord?’ They said: ‘Yes, we bear witness’” Q7:172. The “they” refers to all the children of Adam, male and female, and the “yes” confirms the affirmation of God’s Oneness by us in our pre-eternal ontological reality. Then God gave human free will, this is why people divided into different religions and other identities. The author argued that "In light of what has been said of the Islamic conception of revelation and religious diversity, it is important to mention that before modern times Islam was the only revealed religion to have had direct contact with nearly all the major religions of the world." Even within the Islamic cycle, there's another division due to the free will that God created humans with, such division the author called "spectrum of Islam".
Dr Seyyed talked much about women, the east and the western civilization and human rights which he argued that human responsibility is what people should look to but "Before speaking of human responsibilities or rights, one must answer the basic religious and philosophical question, “What does it mean to be human?” In reality, each civilization, whether in East or West, has decayed and deviated in its own way and must pose the question to itself about what went wrong, rather than exclaiming with hubris and self-righteousness about what went wrong somewhere else because the people in that “somewhere else” have not followed its way of thinking and acting." He still argued that western women will say, eastern (Muslims) women lack freedom, while eastern women will say western children didn't get their right in term of parenthood.
To unify all these he added that "to understand both this unity and this diversity within unity is to grasp the way in which Islam has been able to encompass so many human collectivities, to respect God-given differences and yet create a vast civilization unified and dominated by the principle of unity. "Beyond the din of political and military confrontations going on today, Muslim thinkers must address themselves to the questions of human responsibilities and human rights, joining hands with both Western and other thinkers engaged in such matters globally, bringing to the table without apology the Islamic contribution to these vital subjects and especially the emphasis upon the theocentric worldview and sacred conception of creation, which are not only Islamic but are shared in one form or another by all the historical religions."
The book looks similar to "Islam The Misunderstood Religion" By Muhammad Qutb And Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes" By Tamim Ansary. One thing that catch my fancy about the book is, it answered some questions that the above books didn't, especially about "Jihad". The author compared Islam with other religions in very positive way, especially Christianity saying "like Christendom like Dar Islam (Abode Of Peace)." In another point said "the religious worldviews have basic principles in common that they do not share with views that deny the Transcendent and the Sacred. When it comes to the question of the human state, Christians speak of people being the children of God, Muslims of their being His vicegerents on earth, and both of humans being made in the “image” or “form” of God, although with different meanings of the term “image” or “form.” Hindus speak of the sacrifice of the Primordial Man to create the world and Neo-Confucianism of the human being as an anthropocosmic being and bridge between Heaven and earth. "
Dr Seyyed believes that "The heart of Islam is also the Islam of the heart, which is that spiritual virtue that enables us “to see God everywhere” and to be His “eyes, ears, and hands” in this world." Within the Islam, he never said this sect is the Heart Of Islam, he brings the best out of Shi'ties , Sunnis, And Sufis. Is only when talking about the relationship between Islam and other religions, then he said "In Islam itself, Sufism has been over the centuries the hidden heart that has renewed the religion intellectually, spiritually, and ethically and has played the greatest role in its spread and in its relation with other religions." He never criticize other religions but he said "The heart of any religion is none other than that single, universal Truth that resides at the heart of all authentic religions and that is itself the foundation of the religion of the heart."
To rate the book, I give it 5/6
The flags of misconception, misunderstanding, and disinformation were hoisted in every angle of this world with "Islam" at the centre, even in the Muslims majority societies. Many questions are roaming in the minds of people seeking for an answers. In his philosophical approach, Seyyed Nasr began with telling the readers the purpose of human existence through Islamic points of view. God said “I was a hidden treasure. I loved to be known. Therefore, I created the creation so that I would be known.” As the Qur'an states "God created man in the best of stature” Q95:4) with an intelligence capable of knowing the One. The message of Islam is addressed to that primordial nature. It is a call for recollection, for the remembrance of a knowledge kneaded into the very substance of our being even before our coming into this world. In a famous verse that defines the relationship between human beings and God, the Quran, in referring to the precosmic existence of man, states, “‘Am I not your Lord?’ They said: ‘Yes, we bear witness’” Q7:172. The “they” refers to all the children of Adam, male and female, and the “yes” confirms the affirmation of God’s Oneness by us in our pre-eternal ontological reality. Then God gave human free will, this is why people divided into different religions and other identities. The author argued that "In light of what has been said of the Islamic conception of revelation and religious diversity, it is important to mention that before modern times Islam was the only revealed religion to have had direct contact with nearly all the major religions of the world." Even within the Islamic cycle, there's another division due to the free will that God created humans with, such division the author called "spectrum of Islam".
Dr Seyyed talked much about women, the east and the western civilization and human rights which he argued that human responsibility is what people should look to but "Before speaking of human responsibilities or rights, one must answer the basic religious and philosophical question, “What does it mean to be human?” In reality, each civilization, whether in East or West, has decayed and deviated in its own way and must pose the question to itself about what went wrong, rather than exclaiming with hubris and self-righteousness about what went wrong somewhere else because the people in that “somewhere else” have not followed its way of thinking and acting." He still argued that western women will say, eastern (Muslims) women lack freedom, while eastern women will say western children didn't get their right in term of parenthood.
To unify all these he added that "to understand both this unity and this diversity within unity is to grasp the way in which Islam has been able to encompass so many human collectivities, to respect God-given differences and yet create a vast civilization unified and dominated by the principle of unity. "Beyond the din of political and military confrontations going on today, Muslim thinkers must address themselves to the questions of human responsibilities and human rights, joining hands with both Western and other thinkers engaged in such matters globally, bringing to the table without apology the Islamic contribution to these vital subjects and especially the emphasis upon the theocentric worldview and sacred conception of creation, which are not only Islamic but are shared in one form or another by all the historical religions."
The book looks similar to "Islam The Misunderstood Religion" By Muhammad Qutb And Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes" By Tamim Ansary. One thing that catch my fancy about the book is, it answered some questions that the above books didn't, especially about "Jihad". The author compared Islam with other religions in very positive way, especially Christianity saying "like Christendom like Dar Islam (Abode Of Peace)." In another point said "the religious worldviews have basic principles in common that they do not share with views that deny the Transcendent and the Sacred. When it comes to the question of the human state, Christians speak of people being the children of God, Muslims of their being His vicegerents on earth, and both of humans being made in the “image” or “form” of God, although with different meanings of the term “image” or “form.” Hindus speak of the sacrifice of the Primordial Man to create the world and Neo-Confucianism of the human being as an anthropocosmic being and bridge between Heaven and earth. "
Dr Seyyed believes that "The heart of Islam is also the Islam of the heart, which is that spiritual virtue that enables us “to see God everywhere” and to be His “eyes, ears, and hands” in this world." Within the Islam, he never said this sect is the Heart Of Islam, he brings the best out of Shi'ties , Sunnis, And Sufis. Is only when talking about the relationship between Islam and other religions, then he said "In Islam itself, Sufism has been over the centuries the hidden heart that has renewed the religion intellectually, spiritually, and ethically and has played the greatest role in its spread and in its relation with other religions." He never criticize other religions but he said "The heart of any religion is none other than that single, universal Truth that resides at the heart of all authentic religions and that is itself the foundation of the religion of the heart."
To rate the book, I give it 5/6
August 25, 2012
Time and again I have found this to be one of the best books for introducing people to Islam in a way that will help them actually understand it. Although it is not as systematic as his "Ideals and Realities of Islam," it nonetheless has a far more approachable tone and deals more directly with issues that are of immediate concern to the modern reader.
March 22, 2015
It keeps every type of reader(converts, born-muslims and non-muslims) engaged with some unbelievably beautiful commentaries on the inner and universal dimensions of Islam. 'The Heart of Islam' is an eruption from the heart of a realized sage. If you want to know what Islam means for a Sufi, give this book a try.
December 13, 2016
"A ray of sunshine in the chaotic world of Islamophobia "...Brilliant masterpiece on the core spiritual and social value of Islam and what it offers to humanity in the present modern world who seeks absolute truth.God.
April 19, 2007
i heart dr. nasr...love this book...an excellent read for both muslims and nonmuslims alike...
January 21, 2010
An apologist book on Islam. Will most likely not need to reference it for anything, nor am I interested in rereading it.
February 18, 2013
While I believe Nasr is highly idealistic, this is a beautiful introduction to what I believe Islam is *supposed* to be, even if it is does not always manifest this way.
July 14, 2015
4 stars. Enlightening, illuminating, and a great review.
March 25, 2017
Great introduction to Islam for reverts or those who are researching the religion. Easy to read, very informative and thought-provoking.
November 12, 2018
Another book to read and reread and consult. It is dense, at times overwhelming in the depth of its content, but well worth if one truly wants to understand Islam and its true goals.
February 21, 2025
This book is a luminous exploration into the spiritual and philosophical depths of one of the world’s great traditions. Nasr peels back layers of misconception to reveal a faith rooted in compassion, wisdom, and a profound reverence for the sacred.
In this work, Nasr artfully explains how the enduring values of Islam transcend time and culture, offering guidance that is both timeless and urgently relevant. He illuminates the inner life of Islam—its emphasis on unity, humility, and the pursuit of truth—in a manner that is both scholarly and deeply poetic. His narrative invites readers to view Islam not merely as a set of rituals, but as a living tradition that nurtures the human spirit and fosters a sense of global interconnectedness.
What truly sets this book apart is its universal appeal. While firmly grounded in the rich heritage of Islamic thought, Nasr’s insights resonate with anyone seeking to understand the broader quest for meaning in life. His eloquent prose transforms complex theological concepts into a gentle meditation on the nature of existence, urging us to see beyond surface differences to the shared values that bind humanity together.
Overall, The Heart of Islam is a beautifully crafted testament to the enduring power of faith and the possibility of spiritual renewal. Nasr’s work is both a celebration and a call to reflection—a reminder that true wisdom lies at the heart of our shared human experience.
In this work, Nasr artfully explains how the enduring values of Islam transcend time and culture, offering guidance that is both timeless and urgently relevant. He illuminates the inner life of Islam—its emphasis on unity, humility, and the pursuit of truth—in a manner that is both scholarly and deeply poetic. His narrative invites readers to view Islam not merely as a set of rituals, but as a living tradition that nurtures the human spirit and fosters a sense of global interconnectedness.
What truly sets this book apart is its universal appeal. While firmly grounded in the rich heritage of Islamic thought, Nasr’s insights resonate with anyone seeking to understand the broader quest for meaning in life. His eloquent prose transforms complex theological concepts into a gentle meditation on the nature of existence, urging us to see beyond surface differences to the shared values that bind humanity together.
Overall, The Heart of Islam is a beautifully crafted testament to the enduring power of faith and the possibility of spiritual renewal. Nasr’s work is both a celebration and a call to reflection—a reminder that true wisdom lies at the heart of our shared human experience.
Currently reading
July 5, 2018I need to let it sit for a few years and then come back to it, but I was not impressed with the first read.
His scholarship was disappointing. He misunderstands Judaism and Christianity (though he has some intriguing critiques), and he gives sparse references—I’m sorry, zero references—to where he gets some of these ideas.
Before starting the book, I knew I carried the biases of my upbringing into the study, so I tried to be objective as possible. I had to put the book down for other reasons, so I did not finish it. However, I also am not especially inclined to pick it up again. Surely there are better books about Islam written by other Muslims.
I will probably try again sometime, at least to say I have finished it.
His scholarship was disappointing. He misunderstands Judaism and Christianity (though he has some intriguing critiques), and he gives sparse references—I’m sorry, zero references—to where he gets some of these ideas.
Before starting the book, I knew I carried the biases of my upbringing into the study, so I tried to be objective as possible. I had to put the book down for other reasons, so I did not finish it. However, I also am not especially inclined to pick it up again. Surely there are better books about Islam written by other Muslims.
I will probably try again sometime, at least to say I have finished it.
August 14, 2025
"The Heart of Islam" by Seyyed Hossein Nasr addresses various aspects of Islam in direct response to the challenges and misconceptions that arose after the tragedy of September 11, 2001. Written partly with a Western audience in mind, it seeks to clarify the principles and spirit of the faith at a time when it was widely misunderstood.
If you are not a Muslim and have had little or no exposure to the religion, this is an excellent book to start with. If you are Muslim or already familiar with Islam, it may not present much new information, but it can still be valuable for its clarity, depth, and perspective.
This was one of the first books I read after reverting to Islam, and I found it both helpful and insightful in deepening my understanding of the faith.
If you are not a Muslim and have had little or no exposure to the religion, this is an excellent book to start with. If you are Muslim or already familiar with Islam, it may not present much new information, but it can still be valuable for its clarity, depth, and perspective.
This was one of the first books I read after reverting to Islam, and I found it both helpful and insightful in deepening my understanding of the faith.
January 15, 2019
I'm being a bit generous by giving it 2 stars, which according to this rating system means that "it was ok"....which some parts were, but overall the author is very misleading in much of what he says.
I didn't give it 1 star however since there were a few interesting parts and it presented an understanding of Islam which isn't presented very often. But again, there is much to criticize in the book. A lot of double standards, understating, overstating, un-argued assumptions and claims lacking supporting examples. Too bad because Nasr is a fine read when it comes to critique of modern scientistic philosophy.
I didn't give it 1 star however since there were a few interesting parts and it presented an understanding of Islam which isn't presented very often. But again, there is much to criticize in the book. A lot of double standards, understating, overstating, un-argued assumptions and claims lacking supporting examples. Too bad because Nasr is a fine read when it comes to critique of modern scientistic philosophy.
July 8, 2020
حاول الكاتب أن يجلي عن الاسلام بعض ما التصق به من سوء فهم سواء متعمد من قبل البعض أم غير متعمد ممن لم يعرفوا الاسلام الا من خلال بعض المغرضين من غير المسلمين أو من المسلمين الذين لم يفهموا دينهم وأظهروه بالشكل الذي يدعو الآخر لإساءة فهمه.
ومن الأمور التي أعجبتني في الكتاب هي محاولة تقريب الأديان من بعضها من خلال جوهر كل دين وهو (توحيد الله) بغض النظر عن رؤية كل دين لذلك الإله
فالكاتب يحرص في عرضه لكل مفهوم اسلامي الى ربطه بمفهوم التوحيد لله ومحورية الله في كل شؤون الانسان ومن ثم ايجاد شبه لذلك المفهوم او الغاية منه بمفهوم موجود في أهم الديانات وبالأخص الابراهيمية منها.
فقلب الاسلام هو قلب الانسان الذي هو عرش الرحمن كما جاء في الحديث النبوي الشريف
ومن الأمور التي أعجبتني في الكتاب هي محاولة تقريب الأديان من بعضها من خلال جوهر كل دين وهو (توحيد الله) بغض النظر عن رؤية كل دين لذلك الإله
فالكاتب يحرص في عرضه لكل مفهوم اسلامي الى ربطه بمفهوم التوحيد لله ومحورية الله في كل شؤون الانسان ومن ثم ايجاد شبه لذلك المفهوم او الغاية منه بمفهوم موجود في أهم الديانات وبالأخص الابراهيمية منها.
فقلب الاسلام هو قلب الانسان الذي هو عرش الرحمن كما جاء في الحديث النبوي الشريف
June 16, 2021
In this book there lies comparison as well as the basics. Not that with every point I agreed with the conclusion and it should not be the goal either. A sort of history, the distinctions between the subgroups, the tapestry that congregates us all, responsibilities as a Muslim, role of different genders have been mentioned in short. You will not obviously find answer of deeper questions but the book is able to put a blurry image in front of you, if you want to see every pixel sharpened you must have to go beyond this book. But the title is about "The Heart of Islam" and it's what the book portrays.
December 8, 2017
The books aims to present Islam to the general public; and it surely does a great job, as noted by others on this forum too, by maintaining a balance between the tenets of Islam and Practical Islam as it is followed today in the world.
My only problem with the book was when the author used comparisons to bring out a point. These comparisons, while with the best of intentions, were not well explained or too short. Hence many a times it was hard to see if they delivered the point or just ended up being apologetic.
My only problem with the book was when the author used comparisons to bring out a point. These comparisons, while with the best of intentions, were not well explained or too short. Hence many a times it was hard to see if they delivered the point or just ended up being apologetic.
May 25, 2023
This is a fantastic "Islam 101" from a Western point of view. If you're a Muslim or a Non-Muslim who's really interested in knowing the basic tenants of Islam then this book is for you. If you have a certain level of knowledge of Islam, you'll find that this book doesn't provide much knowledge in terms of intellectual enrichment.
The Author points out in the introduction of the book that this is directed towards Non-Muslims and written post 9/11, so you'll see that it is a fantastic read if you want to know what Islam is. Will I recommend it? Yes.
The Author points out in the introduction of the book that this is directed towards Non-Muslims and written post 9/11, so you'll see that it is a fantastic read if you want to know what Islam is. Will I recommend it? Yes.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 60 reviews