Academics involved with Australia’s National Centre of Excellence for Islamic Studies have had “sleepless nights” tackling the work facing them as the community continues to discuss Saturday’s violent clashes between police and a group of young Muslim youth.
Speaking after James Cook University academic and terrorism specialist Mervyn Bendle accused academia of being “lazy and too lethargic to come to grips with understanding a complex religion like Islam”, Griffith University’s Mohamad Abdalla has defended the work being done by academics.
Associate Professor Abdalla heads the Queensland division of the Centre of Excellence for Islamic Studies. He said Dr Bendle’s comments indicate a total unawareness of what’s happening.
“Contrary to the accusation of being lazy, we have been involved at the grassroots level with Imams and young people,” Professor Abdalla said.
Speaking on ABC radio this morning, Dr Bendle suggested the riots in Sydney on the weekend indicated a failure on the part of universities to address the problem of Islamic extremism.
Pointing specifically to the study centre that Professor Abdalla works in, Dr Bendle asked: “Where have they been?
“They’ve had millions of dollars, not just Saudi money, but a lot of government money over the last five years or so to achieve excellence in the study of Islam … Now where is the output? Where are they? Why aren’t they in the media offering a really analytical objective analysis of how we got to the situation where we’re having riots like we did in Sydney.”
Professor Abdalla said he had been interviewed in the media about the Sydney riots, the centre had been involved in many research projects that sought to examine the risk factors behind the radicalisation of young Muslim youth, and he had spent time speaking with young Muslims at mosques about the importance of operating within the rule of law.
“I could cite hundreds of examples where I have been working day and night with the community to build bridges of understanding,” he said.
“By and large we have been extremely successful in Queensland in keeping tensions down and working with the community.”
Professor Abdalla added that Griffith University had not received “millions from the Saudis”, but rather a cheque for $100,000 that was given publicly.
He said in the past the Saudis had funded individual mosques and community groups, but that as part of improving its image the Saudi Arabian government decided to fund a transparent group with no intention of promoting radical ideology.
“They saw the work we were doing in terms of promotion of understanding, promotion of peace – they thought that was good work,” Professor Abdalla said.
Dr Bendle told ABC Radio there was currently a “battle going on within Islam itself”, an issue that was missing from the discussion.
Professor Abdalla said he had been self-critical of the community in media interviews, rather than following the “9/11 rhetoric” assumed by Dr Bendle.
“We need to look inwards at how Islam is being taught in schools or mosques, we need to teach Islam in a way that allows people to live in this context.”
Dr Bendle has not yet responded to a request for comment.
Comments on this article are now closed.
Craig Minns
Self-employed
Being "active in the community" is nt the same as "doing research", which was Bendle's point in the interview this morning.
Failure to grasp the difference is not unique to the Muslim religious, it's a big problem for adherents of the other great religion that divides 21st century Western societies: feminism.
Forth Sadler
logged in via Facebook
Was "...the centre had been involved in many research projects that sought to examine the risk factors behind the radicalisation of young Muslim youth" and “We need to look inwards at how Islam is being taught in schools or mosques" a bit too subtle for you? I bet you haven't actually looked into either activism or research done in feminist circles or with regards to the issues that impinge on any other minority group that doesn't directly impinge upon yourself. If you had, you've have discovered that there's an awful lot of both.
Craig Minns
Self-employed
You lose the bet, Forth. I have an active interest in the ways that such quasi-religious fundamentalism impacts on us all. Unlike the religionists however, I don't come to the subject with a mind that only allows the possibility of things that support my own preferred viewpoint.
I'd like to see the research that Assoc. Prof Abdalla has produced and what it does to inform the discussion. The very fact that we are talking about whether it even exists is a fair clue that it isn't likely to be terribly useful as a tool for understanding. I'm happy to be shown to be wrong, of course.
Mat Hardy
Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University
Well here is the research he has produced. Took me about 30 seconds to locate it.
http://www.griffith.edu.au/humanities-languages/griffith-islamic-research-unit/staff/dr-mohamad-abdalla
Seems like he has made quite a contribution to the debate of Islam in Australia.
Craig Minns
Self-employed
I saw that list too, but I couldn't find any articles linked to. Not much point in producing research that nobody can read if your purpose is to inform the debate...
I had a Pakistani Muslim man living with me as a flatmate for over 2 yearsAs . In that time I tried very hard to understand the basic principles of Islam through talking with Jawed about it. We had lots of interesting talks; although Jawed's knowledge of Islamic theology is not deep, it is wide and he was quite happy to discuss things if asked the right questions. He tended not to deal well with jocularity on the topic though.
I'd be very pleased to read some of Ass.Prof Abdalla's work if it was accessible. I don't find lists of titles particularly useful, no matter how little time they take to find.
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
One of the saddest things about Islamic "education" in Pakistan and elsewhere - as funded by Wahhabi Saudis - is that it is a sin to translate the word of god from the original Arabic. Translating the Quran can get you killed.
So Pakistanis who by and large speak Urdu learn the Quran by sound...by rote - like a lyrebird.
I've watched kids with a slate sitting on the floor hammering in the sound, copying it, learning by rote - but they have no idea of the meaning of the words other than what is "explained" by the Imam. They are examined each morning on yesterday's verses and if they cannot regurgitate it verbatim, they cop a thrashing.
This might help explain why your mate's theology was a bit light on.
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
I am gladdened that there is work being done to develop and sustain the great intellectual traditions of Islam and to encourage liberalism and tolerance in the community. This is extremely important work and deserves our support.
It would be even more comforting to see similar work being done amongst folks of other faiths with a few Christian cleric locking horns with the likes of the Q Society and others who seem intent on launching a new crusade in defence of "our" traditions and culture, wrapped up in a shroud of religious fervour.
However I do not share the sanguine approach to the Saudis and their influence on Islam. A brief survey of the explosive growth of fundamentalist madrassas and extremist ideology in Pakistan and elsewhere shows that this money is not at all benign. I wouldn't be taking that money again myself.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Religious people do not approach Religion as if its a philosiphy that they can interpret, they understand it as divine revelation for the most part. I'm not sure that investing in academic's is the way to go - cant we jst call people on their junk idea's? Islam is not this overly complicated religion like people pretend, its no more complicated than any other religion and the problem is that the fundamentalists are actually following whats written in the books
how can an academic come along and tell people "No, no, no, what this passage means is we love the infidel, not we mistrust the infidel" - even in the christian religion they teach you to distrust non believers, the problem is not that the fundamentalist mis-understand the religion, the problem is that they do and I have more respect for them than the wishy washy moderates who somehow think islam or christianity is compatible with enlightenment values - because they arent
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Gee - not much history there to back your views Michael. Charles Darwin was a god-botherer, as was Newton .... We actually owe a lot of our "enlightenment" - such hubris - to those Muslims who kept alive the works of the infidel greeks while we were busy burning them, not to mention the Islamic contributions to mathematics, medicine, astronomy and the like. They gave us nothing of course - zero anyway. And try doing a bit of simple multiplication in Roman numerals.
"We" didn't just produce this "enlightenment" - we did it together.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Im sorry, Charles Darwin was a believer in God? where did you get this information mate? me thinks your talking rubbish - jst provide the link and all is good
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Geezus - you software wallahs should really read a bit more - and not just about fortrans and binary code....
This might help:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/what_darwin_said_about_god.html
Or if that's not enough how about some extracts from his autobiography:
http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/library/cd_relig.htm
Or you could do yourself a real favour and read the Origin itself - wonderful powerful stirring bit of gear. And very very carefully written so as not to demolish the support he had developed from within the Church of England.... you know dotty vicars with geology picks fossicking about.
Darwin did not want to pick a fight with god or his earthly representatives and was most careful to couch his theory in a manner designed to demonstrate it as the mechanism by which the creator operated, rather than an attack on the notion of creation.
And christian to his bootstraps.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Alright Doctor Arroganto, what did he say in his late Auto-biography?
Sure he grew up Christian - as did nearly everyone in England at the time
"I cannot pretend to throw the least light on such abstruse problems. The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic" - Is this the writings of a convinced theist?
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
"And christian to his bootstraps." - Yeah he was sooo christian he was Agnostic?
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Arrogant? It's not me accusing folks of talking "rubbish" Mick.
Do some reading. Just because you don't know doesn't mean it's rubbish.
"In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.” CD.
The important aspect of this "discussion" is that at the time of writing his most influential work he was most careful to couch it in terms that would not antagonise true believers. He was also probably undecided about the whole business.
In later life he became more strident in his criticisms of christianity and the concepts of god - particularly after a series of personal tragedies, but it takes a very selective reading of his life and writings to see him as an atheist or not springing from the Christian tradition. He was training to become a minister for god's sake!
I I say that as an atheist and a dedicated reader of history. Stop making it up.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Chill out mate, you claimed Darwing was Christian to his Bootstraps and now you claim that he wasnt.....which is it?
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
Read - then we'll discuss.
As to bootstraps - I'd be calling anyone - from Tony Abbott to Charlie Darwin - who entered a seminary or was training for a life as a cleric comes from, is a product of, a Christian world view. No matter how they ended up in life.
But Darwin spent many many years trying to reconcile his christianity with his science. Being a sensible chap he worked out it was impossible. But that didn't stop him believing in a "Creator" - and I'll bet he had a white beard.
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
This is why I called you doctor Arroganto, your insistence that I didnt read rather than jst didnt agree with you.
I mean what your saying is that he was christian at the start of his life....therefor christian to his bootstraps
I dont understand why you would ignore half of his life? is it because it doesnt fit your description and what you wrote earlier?
Michael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
"As to bootstraps - I'd be calling anyone - from Tony Abbott to Charlie Darwin - who entered a seminary or was training for a life as a cleric comes from, is a product of, a Christian world view. No matter how they ended up in life" - So you would describe Dan Barker as Christian? and Matt Dilahunty as a christian? thats a stranger definition of christian
Peter Ormonde
Peter Ormonde is a Friend of The Conversation.
Farmer
No Michael, this is what you wrote: "Im sorry, Charles Darwin was a believer in God? where did you get this information mate? me thinks your talking rubbish - jst provide the link and all is good.."
I did but it's not good is it ... you want him to be a believer from cradle to grave.
I very much doubt he died a believer - he was too clever and too much a scientist - but he was a theist and he was most certainly an Anglican and a Christian for the greater part of his life... as anyone who'd…
Read moreMichael Shand
Michael Shand is a Friend of The Conversation.
Software Tester
Yeah thanks for lesson, your condesending tone throughout this whole thing is disgusting
Thanks for skirting around for several paragraphs and contradicting yourself whilst telling me things I already know....where can I sign up for more of your obvious insights