The Simpleton's Guide to Islamic Opinion
(for lack of a better word
(opinion, not Simpleton)):

Hmm. It is interesting to me to read "about the muslims" you know. I am particularly fascinated to read about what a non muslim thinks about a muslim philosophy which is, necessarily still "about the religion" as opposed to being what Islam necessarily is to the individual believer and that would be "their own close reading" of the text (or in the case of the illiterate, their own close "hearing" of the text). In other words, a first hand opinion of the requisite "unbiased reader" (if there is such a thing) and we must all insist that we all are "unbiased" except for that one tiny little part which makes or breaks an opinion (be it that of a scholar or our own) and that would be the orientation of the first bias: Does one actually believe in the possibility of a Creator?

A non muslim who hasn't read the Quran and instead picks up the various ideologies that have been presented along the way by the fallible experts i.e. "muslim philosophers" is not only doomed to never understanding a thing but doomed to extinction. And if there is one thing a person ought to believe in regardless of their other mixed up notions, it is extinction. Evolution cannot be demonstrated (causally or objectively) by anyone: EVER. Extinction on the other hand (a major theme in all sacred texts) is known, demonstrable and inevitable (death of the individual to the race and/or the species).

Allah talks about extinction all the time. He always has but the Simpletons are too "smart" for all of that Jonah in the Belly of a Whale type of thing!

Now there is an interesting and parochial idea: the philosophers who compounded sectarian ideology post sectarianism. The person puts the cart before the horse it seems and cannot extrapolate an independent view when one attempts to "understand" Islam not by reading the Quran itself but by reading "about the Quran" instead from any given opinionator (including yours truly).

So how does one extrapolate an independent view?

By reading the Quran for themself. It is the only way you know. There aren't really any shortcuts.

How does a person know that they've "then" reached an objective conclusion?

They don't.

Good enough for the usual circular arguments surrounding a tale that is as convoluted as it is misrepresented. How is it convoluted?

Well. I guess an analogy might be best to explain this conundrum to the avid "guest" who isn't a guest at all but a nuisance.

A little boy cries wolf. Over and over and over (the convolution of the Armageddonists) and then one day, the wolf actually shows up and eats him.

At what point should a "boy" attempt to equate himself with the parable and try to realize that yes, that really is a wolf and it does have teeth? We know that most of the boys who are told the fable of the Boy Who Cried Wolf do not really believe it is about a wolf nor is it about a boy.

Could the parable then be about the ransom a boy might offer to the wolf should the wolf actually offer a plea bargain at the moment of "no more deals"?

Certainly but you know, the wolf in this case is only a parable until the moment of "no more deals" and at that moment, it would necessarily be, no ransom and no more parables. And the first bias was always known to Allah.

It was We Who created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein. (Qaf, The Glorious Quran).

How close is that then? Pretty damn close. I'd say that the pressure valve which is connected to the Reptilian part of the anatomy is pretty much, CLOSE enough to detect any sort of bias resulting from insanity, global retardation to a simple case of ataxia related to cerebellar degeneration secondary to alcohol abuse. I'd say that just a little pressure on that area of the body is enough to cause syncopy or the "worst case scenario": bradycardia and death. I'm not really sure where the barorecpetor for pride is located but I do believe it is somewhere near the "lying sinning forelock" also known as the Frontal Lobe:

Knoweth he not that Allah doth see?
Let him beware! If he desist not,

We will drag him by the forelock,-
A lying, sinful forelock! (The Clot, The Glorious Quran)

It's all so ipsilateral you know!

http://www.cvphysiology.com/Blood%20Pressure/BP012.htm


***Extry! Extry!***

Read All About It!

Stunning discovery! In the last "fifty" years, modern scientists have discovered that the frontal lying forelock is actually the frontal lying forelock! Big Bad Wolf To Blame! Read more:

http://etori.tripod.com/forebrain1.html

"However, in the last fifty years it has been learned that the frontal lobes are concerned with some of the highest mental functions of animals and human beings. "

Yer pulling me leg, right? (And to be fair to Jonah's people (Yunus, pbuh), they would have taken the advice right away but he was a bit of a doubting Thomas type of guy and he ran away from his duty, got tossed overboard by a boatload of "superstitious" types who knew that having a doubting prophet aboard was just really bad juju, swallowed by a rather large species of whale, spit out on the shores of Gicheegoomee, recanted then disseminated and they all lived quite happily ever after as practicing Monotheists in the times of Sodom and Gommorrha).

Absolutely not. I don't pull legs when it comes to ijtihad. I'm as serious as a heart attack. Can't let those experts at Islam for Dummies have all the fun can I?

**I truly feel for some people who are realizing just about now that it is incumbent on them to try to understand this potboiler called "organized religion" and have ended up studying sectarianism prior to studying the Quran itself. In the end however, even if there wasn't such a thing as this "Iraq debacle"...those people wouldn't have picked up a Quran and read it for themselves "then" either because they don't believe in an actual "Creator". Those are they who are following Islam now but unwillingly. Their case was never dependent on any given historical or philosophical external circumstance. It was always dependent on their very own natures as it has always been the case of "faith" throughout time.