I agree that all religious leaders should have a working understanding of society, but I disagree that it should be compulsory. Mandatory ideological cleansing has been tried (notably by the central committee of the chinese communist party in 1966. The cultural revolution.

But also locally, A decade of compulsory or near compulsory gender and race and cultural training has created an Australia where people display the opposite sentiments, often with glee.

The other issue is of course what religions one teaches, do we teach scientology, or the moonies or what about the exclusive brethren. Do we want to teach people to appreciate these faiths?

Your second point is very strong. The best way to counter extremism is to debate it, an expose the contradictions and the hypocrisy.

b. I’m pretty sure the “right wing fundamentalists” from all faiths would fail every essay at first-year-level the demanded a solid understanding of their own scriptures. Think about the theologically contradiction of “prosperity gospellers” and the Sermon on the Mount, or the Islamist bombers versus Mohammed’s requirement to avoid battle wherever possible especially on holy days, and if you must make way, take extreme care to protect non-combatants.

Dezhen,

Your post was a reply to my original post.

You’re applying my very general comment about Arabic and scholarship to Arabic studies at an Australian University and a proposed Islamic studies program.

Please read over my original post. I’m sure all will make sense if you do.

I agree with your sentiments that Islamic scholarship must be offered locally at a high level, but I disagree that government funding is innocuous and does not come with strings attached,

do you think that that the government is going to fund something that it fundamentally disagrees with or indeed it is at war with ? That is wrong to think so. It has clearly and repeatedly stated that this is part of a raft of measures aimed to foster Muslim integration into Australia, if it has to be at the expense of our religious authenticity, they are not going to shed tears about that.

As for your point about ‘this is why we pay taxes”

This is precisely why tax dollars must not be spent funding religion, if the govt is paying for religious teachers, they clearly have overtaxed the country. I would be just as incensed if the govt used the 50 cents in a dollar it takes from me (as well as GST), to fund worship of the yellow bellied parrot, or to fund an expedition to look for the hidden shia imam or to send a probe out into space to see if it could reach the outer limit of budda’s hand.

This is simply not the business of government to waste taxpayers dollars funding what it deems acceptable forms of religion. It is exactly what a secular state does not do.

As I posted multiple times before, the person being marked as the organiser of this project is a Medina graduate, as well as having strong connections with the likes of Malaysia and Indonesia. If you have even taken a cursory look at his published works, you will clearly see that he is a scholar of some talent. Not only that, but you would see that the curriculum of the University, as well as recent graduates are versed in at least some “traditional” based knowledge, as well as historical/politcal and more modern issues.

As I have said repeatedly, “Islamic Studies” has moved on a lot from the times of Schacht and Goldziher. Check out those I mentioned above and you should clearly see that.

So, is it the fact that he and the others are published in English that is your problem? Or that they are getting a start-up grant from the government that is the problem?

The more you think the government are boogey-men, the more they become so. Why not take a start-up grant from them in order to get things moving? Every other faith based and ethnic community also gets this if they apply; it is one of the perks of living in a secular state – regardless of what we think of the current political climate. We are Australians, so have every right to ask our government to help us pursue our goal. This is what we pay taxes for!

From the link I posted days ago, it is clear that the funding would not even cover what needs to be done, but just provides some capital to get started. It is more like a token gesture than anything serious.

I for one would like to see a detailed proposal before making any judgement on this. They may even be utilising those already working within the community – who knows? The press had a little blurb, but there have been no major announcements from those involved, nor a detailed proposal made available for viewing.

It does not however make scholars, rather it educates Muslims in the basics of their religion, something that would have occurred in a classical Islamic schooling. Therefore it makes its students appreciative of and responsive to scholarship.

Dezhen is correct to desire an Australian Islamic institute to train ulema here, but this government proposal will not be it.

It almost makes me wish I lived in Britain/Australia just so I can take those seminars!

I said you cannot be considered a proper scholar without having a good knowledge of the Arabic knowledge. You can study all you like, but you aren’t a scholar if you only work with translated material.

I think you need to read my post properly and with an open mind before you post. It’s quite a simple concept really. Think then post.

Cheers