Islam: An Introduction

Rating:
Summary: So simple and brief, yet so complete
Review: I am a Muslim and consider myself reasonably educated about Islam, but I hadnt realized the true diversity in Islam until I read this book. Truly magnificent snapshot of Islam, its Founder the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), its beliefs and practices and the history of Islam, its various movements, its flavors....

The book is very easy reading, and in my oppinion, to a westerner, this book is perhaps as good an introduction to Islam as can be.

Professor Schimmel is most well versed and experienced in the topic that she address in this book. Her credentials regarding the subject are very high indeed.

Rating:
Summary: Clear, Concise, to the Point
Review: In a field where textbooks are often beyond the comprehension of the general reading public, where the by-word of academic rigor often results in books that even undergraduates cannot fathom, often the only alternative is the "pulp journalism" characteristic of "international" correspondents who base their credibility on a few trips to the Near and Middle East. They generally do not know the languages of the areas in question, and come to conclusions that tell us more about their ignorance than they do about the religion and society they are supposedly so well informed about. Schimmel, however, is not characterized by any of these shortcomings. She is an established academic, the doyenne of Islamic studies (especially Islamic mysticism); yet she writes with a clarity and purposefulness which virtually anyone can understand. She brings a sympathetic and yet not uncritical eye to her subject matter. The only seeming difficulty she displays is the understandable desire to include as much as possible in her "Introduction". This gives her work something of the feel of a "Review" as well as being introductory. No matter; this can only serve to enhance the ultimate value of the book.

Rating:
Summary: Looks good from a distance
Review: Islam, as is the case with many other religions, looks good from a distance until you get to know it intimately and look at close-up. A respected Moslem lecturer in my home country Egypt once gave a lecture on the fall of communism and he argued, rather well I must say, that the fall of communism and Marxism was history's stamp of failure on these ideologies. After lecture I asked him if one can apply the same argument to religions in general and Islam in particular, obviously he did not like my question. My argument was that Islam also had failed in its promise of helping mankind reach salvation, and I use salvation in its broad meaning such as spiritual, economical, social, political aspect of human life.

Quran claims, and indeed insists on the point that it HAS all the answers needed for human guidance in all aspect of human life and not just spiritual or simple matters of how to wash yourself after using a restroom. Judging Islam's past 1400 years of track record one must conclude that either Islam has failed miserably in fulfilling its promise or it has a very low standard of what " salvation" means. If the failure of communism is an indication of its false origin, then shouldn't the same be concluded about Islam? The lecturer's answer, and a few people around him whom by now were getting very upset with me for asking these kind of questions, were that the "True" Islam was never implemented or understood. My answer was, what is "True" Islam and how does one arrive at a "True" understanding of Islam and Quran? There has been many opposing trends in Islamic history by its very best intellectuals i.e. Sufis, Philosophers, Jurisprudents, commentators, etc who disagreed on just about everything from the simple things such as if "Music" is forever forbidden to important things such as the meaning of God's unity, Man's free will, God's nature etc, and many lost their lives because of their beliefs. All these people were very well versed in Quran and Islam and yet they were just as lost and confused as anyone else on what God's "TRUE" intentions were in often-contradictory verses of Quran. Funny that Quran itself attacks many of these intelectuals and their teachings as a case of blind leading blind, or as one verse puts it " many of so called scholars are like donkeys who carry a load of books not having a clue what the books are all about". What standards do we have for distinguishing between the "Donkey" like scholars and those who have "True" understanding of Quran in all its depth and significance? and who is to judge?

The only true judge was Prophet himself but he died 1400 years ago and in fact, as history tells us, right after his death even his trained companions began dispute over all aspect of Quran and its meaning and even the role and significance of Prophet himslef. From all these centuries of proven "data" can we honestly claim that Islam has done better than any other failed idealogies/religions?