The Crisis Of Islam: Holy War And Unholy Terror (2004) - Plot & Excerpts
I read Bernard Lewis' The Crisis of Islam as part of a seasonal challenge at the College Students group on Goodreads. I have never embraced Lewis' approach to the Middle East—or more specifically, the Arab World—or Islam, thinking that he often takes a reductionist point-of-view that serves to reify Westerners' beliefs about Arabs and Muslims. I would not recommend this book to anyone who does not already know some basics about Islam or the Middle East. Lewis confirms American suspicions of the region and the religion instead of breaking down barriers to understanding.Lewis starts out by stating that former President Bush was involved in a fight against terror, but not Arabs or Muslims, yet Osama bin Laden was in a fight against the United States. While this is true to an extent, it ignores the historical and political realities. Bin Laden utilized religious rhetoric to create an "us" versus "them" dynamic, but ultimately he is concerned with geopolitical issues like invasion and occupation, which one could read in his writings, Messages to the World.Moreover, Lewis spends a good portion of his book relating Christianity and Islam before stating that there are, despite these similarities, profound differences. I start first by saying that Christianity is a faith-based religion (not practice-oriented, with the exception of Orthodoxy and Catholicism, to some extent). Islam is both orthodox and orthoprax, meaning that there's emphasis on both "right faith" and "right practice." Judaism tends more toward orthopraxy. Given the elements that Lewis focuses on—religious authorities' perspectives on justice and morality, apostasy, etc.—it would probably have made more sense to compare and contrast Judaism and Islam.Lewis also spends an enormous amount of time talking about jihad. Jihad is a word that loosely means "struggle," and for religious Arabic speakers, it usually refers to a personal struggle (sinfulness, indulgence—the same sorts of things that plague "us normal Christians"). However, Lewis discounts this, saying that progressive Muslims like to say that jihad means a personal struggle, but that throughout Muslim history it refers to holy war. But what, you might ask, does he think about the Crusades? He argues that while jihad is embedded in early Muslim history, the Crusades are a departure from good Christian society and behavior. I am flummoxed by this conclusion. Additionally, Lewis discusses apostasy; he cites that the penalty for apostasy in Islam is death, which is harsher than any other religion. I cannot be sure that this is in the Qur'an or not, but my guess is that some Muslim leader or scholar once said this. However, these pronouncements need more evidence to be compelling, at least for me. I think that the uneducated reader or one looking to reaffirm his beliefs in the evil of Islam will take this at face value, which is quite unfortunate.To be fair, Lewis is well-read in the area of Middle East and world history, and employs this knowledge in his argument. He even recognizes the importance of jizyah (a tax installed for recognized non-Muslim communities in Muhammad's time and in the early years of Islam) for the dhimmi (recognized non-Muslim communities).
Lewis is among the foremost scholars of the Middle East in the world. In recent years it has become fashionable to cast doubt on him because of his supposed support for the Iraq War or his advising the Bush administration. Such doubt is nonsense. Read his work and judge it for yourself. He knows his stuff. This book is his attempt to explain, in brief, what cultural and historical factors could lead to 9/11. The amount of learning he brings to bear is massive, but his thesis is relatively straightforward. He explained it in "The Roots of Muslim Rage" more than 20 years ago. In his view, the problem stems from the Islamic world's failure to confront the challenges of modernity. The UN's Arab Human Development Report more than corroborates his thesis.Along the way, he shares his own views on many controversial things, as he is entitled to do, and his views are not always those of the enlightened intelligentsia who spend their lives in the Ivory Cubicle. Lewis was an intelligence officer in the British Army in World War II. When someone of his learning and experience challenges conventional wisdom, especially when it comes to the topic of democracy in the Muslim world, it might be worthwhile to listen.
What do You think about The Crisis Of Islam: Holy War And Unholy Terror (2004)?
This one book is the best I've read so far on the topic. Only Bernard Lewis' other book, "What Went Wrong" comes close. This subject book is a concise, clearly written summary of the history of Islam and linked to todays' events. Now, this book was published just after 9/11, but it is completely relevant to recent events. From this book, I get the distinction between Islamic teachings and the justification that the terrorists use in their actions. From this book I get the connection claimed by these terrorists to the US and Western Europe role in the history of the Middle East, with special emphasis on recent times. From this book I get the challenge that moderate or mainstream Muslims have with the teachings of their religion, the oppression from their own country's rulers, and their, typically, but not all, desperate economic and social conditions. I will look for other books on the topic, but all will be compared to Lewis' writings. His reputation as a Middle Eastern scholar is well deserved.
—Mike Porter
Amazing review of muslim history as it relates to the western world. Lewis is one of, if not the best Western scholars on the muslim world. Middle eastern college kids get sent by their parents to his classes to learn their history. Anyhow, this is a concise, well written book on a very difficult topic. It really gives you a much better understanding of the origins of the conflict between Arabs and the West and Muslims and the West. I'd say this is a must read for anyone in the armed forces. Really everyone in america needs to better understand this conflict. Our battle shouldn't be with bombs and guns, but with better understanding and adaptation on both sides.
—Kahilidoc
I am trying to gain a better understanding of why some Islamic nations and people of those nations have an intense hatred of American ideals, culture, and foreign policy. I think this book did an excellent job better informing me about the complex hisotry of Islam,the role the Soviet Union played in the Middle East, the Jewish/Arab conflict, the priciples of jihad, and explained about the various sects of Islam and their extremest teachings.I now better understanding about how Islamic fundamentalists think and their rationale for the tactics that they use. I also have a clear understanding about their short term and long term goals are. One of the major issues is the distain for many moderate leaders of Islamist countries, such as Saddat in Egypt and the leaders in Saudi Arabia. These rulers are seen as disloyal to Islam for signing treaties with Israel, allowing "infidels" onto their soil, and working with Americans.I also found it interesting to learn how the discovery of oil and the wealth it created in Saudi Arabia acted as the finiancial backbone of the islamic movements. Currently, the official type of Islam in Saudi Arabia is Wahhabism (a conservative 18th century reform movement of Sunni Islam) and as Saudi Arabia became more rich it began establishing Wahhabist centers around the Middle East and in western nations preaching the more conservative and pure form of Islam.At one point the author gives a series of statistics comparing specific Islamic countries and then all Islamic countries in general to the rest of the world in terms of economic growth, income/capita, living standards...etc. Every time western nations with 1/5th or fewer the populations of muslim nations were as or more productive.One of the most surprising statistics was that Islamic countries translate a very very small percentage of the book other westernized nations translate. This indicates that Islamic governments are much more restrictive of what their people may read or that there is internal pressure from religious figures condemning outside knowledge that may allow people to have independent thoughts. I think books allow a person to learn and think for themeselves and not rely on spoon-fed information from its leaders.
—Anthony
