Are modern Muslim Fatwas fueling extremism?

The topic of this debate has been recurring to me for all these days. Consciously or unconsciously I have been thinking about it in my working and free hours. The last evening when I was about to leave my office I clicked opened the helium.com and found it still there. All through the way home I remained thinking about it. In the beginning I was quite confused. I didn't know what should I say: yes or no? At last a dialogue started in my inner self and I tried to reach at some definite conclusion. If the readers find their mind and heart matching to the following they should also try to reach at some once-and-for all conclusion. What is extremism? Is it possible without an other extremism? Yes. If the Muslims are extremists the non muslims are also extremists. Why do they do the things the Muslims get rash at? In the name of freedom of thought and freedom of expression they are hurting the feelings of thousands of people. If they have some points they should tell them in an utmost polite way. To publish the cartoons and write disparaging things are in themselves extreme ways of handling certain issues. If there is any such thing as freedom of thought and freedom of expression they should have a courage to give them to the opponents too. Don't you remember the people who expelled you from their forums for writing certain things you had a great belief in? Should there only be a freedom of thinking modern and new things? Why a person shouldn't think about any thing belonging to past ethics or morals.

Ok. It's all right. The others should also be moderate. Extremisms are born out of extremisms. Its use as Muslim extremism is utterly prejudiced. The modernists are the real extremists but they are termed as modernists. The muslim extremists, though justified as reactionary extremists, should try to be moderate on their part. They should remain firm to their beliefs and should not try to form things according to any other form. What are these leaders of Islam? Who has made them leaders? They are not leaders of islam in any sense. Like all other politicians they are politicians. The personality of prophet was completely a spiritual personality. He did every thing under the direct command of Allah. To be a leader of muslims means to be a vicegerent of Prophet. If a person is not a spiritual in inner, he has no right to be a vicegerent of prophet. The very substance of prophet's personality was the spiritual force and spiritual knowledge. If a person has no spirit, I mean the particle of the spirit of prophet descending down through follower to follower, he will definitely have no knowledge of spirit. How this type of person shall handle the things at spiritual level. How will he find out what Allah wills. The things that harm the spiritual progress do matter. But the things that don't harm it, don't matter at all. Only a spiritual person can judge the value of things at spiritual level. Ok. I think I have got it. The leaders of muslims are mere politicians. They are using islam as a slogan. All muslims should be aware of their inner intentions. The religion of politicians is politics. They have nothing to do with any thing else. To get the people around for their political success they can use any thing they think suitable in the given situation.
What the non muslim politicians are doing? Are they justified? No. They are not justified. They are preparing people for a great war in the name of religion. The politicians in past have been instigating people in the name of land, language and race. The modern politicians are raising people against one an in name of religion. The people have always been fools. They have been killing others and sacrificing their own lives for their insincere politicians. I have never seen a politician with efforts to join people with one another in an utter peaceful and harmonious relation. They have always been trying to separate people from one another in this name or that. When I see America killing Iraqis and Afghanis, robbing them of all happiness, reducing them to destitute and desperation for centuries to come, and for what, just to make its own people rich and prosperous, I start feeling dizzy in my head. But this is what the politicians have always been doing. The prophets on the other hand have always been thinking about the whole human race. They have never been concerning with any particular group of people. If they have been waging wars against certain other people, they have been doing it first under the command of Allah and second to make them harmonious. Once a person leaves his old ways of worships and joins a prophet in a single truthful way, he becomes a person of prophet's or of Allah's group and is not discriminated as an enemy of Allah. In case of politicians the person always remains as the other'. He has to become servant to the people of his own race, language or land. He is always treated as a third class citizen. Suppose the Iraqis and Afghanis accept President Bush as their leader, will he give them the equal rights? Will the people of American treat them as their brothers? No. Of course not. And this the point where lies a difference in the religious and political leader. Though I am still confused about certain things I think it shall be good if I take it as it is. The leaders on both sides are insincere, as they have always been, and that they will not do any good for all the people. The people should however be very clear in their opinion. What are these fatwas? To what do they concern, and in what way? The fatwas make no sense. They are all a kind of justifications to wage war. However, the people who issue these fatwas are of two types: religious and political. The religious ones are ignorant and the political ones are insincere. There is no need to follow any of them.
The fatwas of religious people are mostly about the things related to modern inventions and professions and that too because they are invented and created by non muslims. If the inventors and creators had been muslims they would have declared them all very well. Even now, if the whole population of the world, especially the Americans, is converted into muslims, they will not mind the use of all these inventions and professions. Leaving this aside, however, if we quit all modern inventions and professions, we shall go to what position they don't know. Above they don't want to know. They think Allah will make some way out. But they are not ready to think that for the huge population of 21st century Allah has made the way out in the form of inventions and professions. Instead of advising people how they should behave in the given circumstance, how they should take this all as a trial in the way to Allah, they opt for rather a less difficult way: the act of regarding all modern inventions and professions as non Islamic and therefore unworthy of any importance in the eyes of a so called true muslim, and of course Allah. Simple mindedly they are all dreaming of a state where laws and regulations should be according to their islam. The image of prophet in their eyes is that of a ruler. They think it shall be easier for people to be true muslims (and that too in their own personal sense) if islam is practiced as state religion. They don't realize the very important fact of history that islam has never been a state religion. They quote the example of the first four caliphs but they don't understand that shias, the half of islam don't accept them as caliphs. The things are quite clear. After the demise of the prophet islam has never been a state religion. Nor even in the life of prophet, if we think prophet as a prophet not a ruler. In fact islam is preaching religion. It is not the religion of any particular race or group of people. Any person who feels good in Islamic principles can embrace it and become a muslim. If islam is the religion of state or can be a religion of state what about the people who embrace islam in the countries where majority of people is non muslims. How will they act on the principles of islam. It means islam is to practiced individually. If the modern religious people had been a bit spiritual they would have faced this all as a trial for their spirit. But sorry they are not. They are merely religious. The religion for them is a branch of knowledge, a branch of knowledge progressing nowhere further, not a way of life. If they had been spiritually religious, they would have tried to fight against the unwanted things as a trial, they would not have gone out with logs of wood to break the windows of video centers. If they would have been spiritually religious they would have trusted more in the power and will of Allah than to have trusted in their own powers and wills.
On the other hand the fatwas of political people are a bit more untoward. Their sole aim is to make people fight one another. Generally they try to blackmail emotionally the people whose aim is to live this life to earn hereafter. Killing others and earning hereafter seems comparatively and short cut. But the people should be aware of their intentions. To kill others may take them to hell also. I remember a scene in the movie I watched some months ago on Jesus Christ. When the Jews were to stone a sinful woman to death, Jesus happened to be there or so. He didn't forbid the Jews. He simply said the person who thinks he is not sinful should stone her to death first. Go and ask your people if they are not sinful, if they are utterly innocent. The people of those times were better people. When Jesus said so all of them left the place, no body stayed to stone her to death. It means they all thought themselves sinners and they all left they place. At least they were true to their inner. I don't think your people are so truthful. They will go on killing others, even though they know the others are better people. Simply because they are not killing others in the name of Allah, Prophet or religion. They are killing others in the name of politics. Only the prophets could have been ordered to kill the people and, that too the people who didn't like to accept the religion of Allah. Though the inner dialogue or monologue went on for a long time, I thought I should concentrate on the main points and leave the others for some other topic. I felt the things were quite clear. I should have reached at some decision even the very first time I came across this topic.
May Allah forgive me if I am wrong in my views. But according to knowledge I possess so far I am word to word true.