Questions For DWM (2015)

In your essay Understanding And Countering Muslim Extremism [1] you wrote about the role of
the Qadi, the need for Western governments to support classically trained Muslim scholars and
promote "the opinions of learned Muslims" and that, in your opinion, the roots of Muslim
extremism lie in particular interpretations of the Koran and the Sunnah. Can you expand on this
since - after 9/11 - Muslim extremism is something which is of great concern to all western
governments.

If one compares the Sunni tradition with the Shia tradition then the genesis of
modern Muslim extremism - evident in movements such as Daesh and al-Qaida -
is quite understandable. For one of the distinguishing features of the Shia
tradition is taqlid: the requirement for every Muslim to become muqalid of a
mujtahid, of an exceptionally learned, respected, Muslim scholar. Thus when I
studied the Shia tradition, in the months following my conversion to the Muslim
way of life, I became muqalid of Ayatullah al-Sayyid Ali al-Hussani al-Sistani,
which meant that I was honour bound to follow his understanding and rulings in
respect of the Shia way of life, that is in relation to Shariah [2]. For the essence
of taqlid is the necessary acceptance that one is less learned than a mujtahid.
This has led to there being no such thing as modern independent extremist Shia
groups who indiscriminately target and kill the kuffar ('infidels') in Western
lands or elsewhere, or who fly aeroplanes into buildings or who blow
themselves up in order to kill 'infidels'. For Shia mujtahidun have given rulings
in respect of such things - such as the Advice and Guidance to the Fighters on
the Battlefields issued by Ayatullah al-Sayyid Ali al-Hussani al-Sistani - which
Shia Muslims are duty bound to follow.

Since there is no taqlid in the Sunni tradition what has occurred in the last fifty
or so years is quite understandable, with those who lack the learning of a
mujtahid making some particular interpretations of Ahadith and ayat from the
Quran the basis for their group or for their deeds and gaining as recruits and
followers those who, discontented or disenfranchised or idealistic or otherwise,
also lack the learning of a mujtahid. Thus such groups or individuals often quote
various Ayat or Ahadith in justification for their actions but lack the scholarly
knowledge, acquired over decades of learning, to understand those Ayat or
Ahadith in context, with many Muslim youths simply being inspired by the
actions or by the propaganda of such groups or individuals.

Hence why some young Muslims in a land such as Britain take the dehortations
of the likes of Anjem Choudary and Omar Bakri Muhammad seriously even
though neither of them has acquired the necessary, decades long, learning
under the guidance of classically trained Muslim scholars [3], and thus are not
qualified to make pronouncements about the Muslim way of life; and hence why
some Muslims agreed with, and disseminated, the propaganda I produced in
support of the Taliban, bin Laden, and al-Qaida even though I also lacked the
necessary, decades long, learning.

Those Sunni scholars and Imaams who, having been classically trained, do have
the necessary learning have, with only a few exceptions, stated that the
interpretations given by Muslim extremists to justify their deeds are wrong. But
even though there is an emerging consensus among those of learning, many
Sunni Muslims choose to ignore it even though, according to Sunni tradition,
such a learned consensus (ijma) should be followed.

Hence why, based on my own decade-long experience as a Muslim, I suggested

that the solution to modern Muslim extremism is to undermine and ultimately
remove the pretexts on which such extremism is based: their particular
interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah which they use to justify their deeds
and their theoretical or practical implementation of Sharia. And removing the
pretext by supporting classically trained Muslim scholars and promoting the
opinions of learned Muslims. For, in my admittedly fallible opinion, the
long-term solution does not lie in killing certain Muslims - by bombs or missiles
- or in invasions or in training and supporting armed groups of Muslims deemed
to be moderate. For such things do not - cannot by themselves - prevent the
emergence of new extremist groups in the near or distant future and may often
(as was the case in Iraq) even contribute to their emergence, provoking as such
killings, invasions, and support for other armed groups often do resentment
among Muslims and providing as they sometimes do material for extremist
propaganda.

All of which raises interesting questions in relation to Shia and Sunni Islam,
Iran, and the mainly Western-manufactured (post-WWI) modern countries and
States such as Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Questions which few analysts, in the
West, are asking with even fewer proposing answers based both on practical
experience and a scholarly historical study of the many problems which beset
such countries and States.

°°°

I was curious how your path led to becoming a Muslim. Does this spiritual path somehow
coincide with your past as a National Socialist or with National Socialism in general?

My journey towards becoming a Muslim in 1998 began ten or so years

previously, and culminated in reflecting on my experiences as founder and
leader of the National-Socialist Movement (1997-1998), on my thirty years of
National-Socialist activism (1968-1998), on my arrest by Detectives from S012
Scotland Yard early in 1998, on further travels in Egypt during which I talked to
several Egyptians about the Muslim way of life; and reflecting on almost a
dozen such travels between 1988 and 1998, one of which travels involved
cycling through the Western Desert. There was also a leisurely two week cruise
(with my then partner) down the Nile from Aswan to Cairo which included
numerous excursions to ancient sites (including El Amarnah), with some of
those excursions - mainly the ones in parts of Middle Egypt - involving being
escorted by armed guards because of certain threats and recent incidents, and
with me during such excursions affecting the persona of an eccentric English
gentleman abroad: a linen suit, a Panama hat, a bamboo walking stick topped
with a silver handle.

But back to my thirty years as an active National-Socialist: I was often involved

in violent confrontations, was imprisoned for violence, often gave vitriolic
speeches, often wrote propaganda, and became regarded as something of a
'neo-nazi' ideologue creating as I did what the anti-fascist Searchlight
organization described as a 'revisionist' version of National-Socialism via
pamphlets such as Vindex: Destiny of The West, The Religion of National-
Socialism, and The Meaning of National-Socialism; many of which pamphlets
were republished by George Dietz in the 1990's in his Liberty Bell magazine. I
also had occasion to meet with a few individuals who had personally known
Adolf Hitler, who still admired him, and were loyal to his memory.

As a result of my decades of involvement with National-Socialism - which

included being a 'theoretician of terror', trying to organize an underground
subversive group, personally knowing and respecting people such as Colin
Jordan and John Tyndall - I came, in early 1998, to certain conclusions following
the aforementioned period of reflection. The first conclusion concerned the
treatment I received during and following my arrest by S012 and the
conversations - interviews/interrogations - I had with SO12 officers for over a
year when as a condition of my bail I regularly reported to Charing Cross Police
station in London (and on one occasion at the main Police station in Oxford).
The second conclusion concerned post-WWII National-Socialism, while the third
related to my experiences in Egypt.

The first conclusion was that I had, for decades, been mistaken about the Police.
They were not 'the enemy' or even 'an enemy'. To paraphrase what I wrote some
years ago, I came to appreciate that many of them were indeed honourable
individuals who were motivated by the best of intentions and trying to do their
best to help victims of dishonourable deeds and catch those responsible for
such deeds. Thus I consciously understood that I had stereotyped them,
dehumanized them, as a result of fanatically adhering to an uncompromising
ideology; allowing as I did - and had done for some thirty years - some idealized
goal and the violent struggle for that goal to overpower my empathy; to take
away my own judgement based only on a direct and personal knowing of
individuals. I also realized that - believing as I had that the Cause was more
important than the individual, than the family, than one's loved ones - I had
personally and selfishly put my duty to the Cause before the happiness of my
wife and family, thus causing them to suffer.

The second conclusion I arrived at was that post-WWII National-Socialism - for

the most part - attracted the wrong type of person and that in this respect Colin
Jordan had been right all along. For my thirty years of experience revealed that
there was not, and never had been, a noble and charismatic leader and that
lacking such a leader the constant feuds, the betrayals, the lack of honour, the
lack of loyalty, the splits, the spreading of rumours about individuals, the poor
quality of some of the people recruited, were all inevitable. For German
National-Socialism was Adolf Hitler, an embodiment of his will. One could be
loyal to a genuine leader, and do one's honourable duty even unto to death - and
remain personally loyal even after a military defeat, as Rudolf Hess, Leon
Degrelle, Otto Ernest Remer, and others, had done - but one could not be loyal
to, not dutiful to, some ideological Cause, for such ideological Causes were
always open to interpretation and misinterpretation. In effect, unless and until
someone like Vindex or another Adolf Hitler arose, little of any significance
would or could be achieved. For honour was a personal code: how one behaved,
in public and in private, and why one was loyal to, and remained loyal to, a
person or persons known personally.

Thus, my thirty years of involvement - as with the involvement of so many

others, post-1945 - can be usefully summarized: acribus, ut ferme talia, initiis,
incurioso fine. [4]

Pondering on all these conclusions during a trip to Egypt, I began to feel -

following conversations with some Muslims - that the Muslim way of life might
be an answer to some of the problems that I still at that time felt beset the
world. To wit, ZOG; materialism - greed, egoism - before honour; and a turning
away from the inspiring, numinous, dream, of Space exploration and the
colonization of the star-systems of our Galaxy.

Thus I did indeed, at that time, find some affinity between the essence of
National-Socialism - its spiritual core, such as Savitri Devi tried to explain - with
what I then began to appreciate was the spirituality of, the sense of honour
behind, the Muslim way of life. Hence why post-1998 - after spending a few
years studying Arabic and Islam - I as a Muslim tried to bring National-
Socialists and Muslims together in order to fight what I still then perceived was
'our common enemy'.

In particular, I concluded in 1998 that the Muslim way of life could - and did -
inspire thousands of people to fight and die for a cause, while modern NS - with
a few notable exceptions - did not and could not.

Thus, regarding becoming Muslim, there was not - as I mentioned in Part Six of
my 2012 essay The Ethos of Extremism: Some Reflexions on Politics and A
Fanatical Life - no sudden decision to convert, but rather a slow process, lasting
ten years, begun by travels in the Sahara Desert in the 1980's, continued by
many other visits to Egypt and another Muslim land, and involving reflecting on
my thirty years of activism as a National-Socialist.

°°°
In your Extremism, Terrorism, Culture, And Physis you made the interesting observation that,
and I quote,

"a harsh modern interpretation of a particular religion hallowed what is masculous

to the detriment of what is muliebral, making such a basal, such an unbalanced,
masculous physis an ideal to be imitated and strived for, and which masculous ideal
included the notion of a personal immolation, via kampf and a dishonourable
disregard for the innocency of others, as a means to some posited goal. An
unbalanced masculous physis also evident in - and idealized by - the ideologies of
communism, nazism, and fascism, and in and by the 'puritanical' and inquisitorial
interpretations of Christianity centuries before."

My questions are by "a harsh modern interpretation of a particular religion" did you as I assume
you did mean Islamic extremists, and can you expand on your answer to the rhetorical question
you posed which was "How can the masculous be balanced with the muliebral thus avoiding
such unbalance, such bias toward the masculous, as has brought so much suffering recent and
otherwise?"

Yes, I did mean Muslim extremism which is founded on, and relies upon, a harsh
(unbalanced, often out of context) interpretation of ayat from the Quran, a
harsh (unbalanced, often out of context) interpretation of Ahadith, and a harsh
(inflexible) interpretation of Shariah which is contrary - as I mentioned in
Understanding And Countering Muslim Extremism - to fiqh.

In common with many people I regard our modern societies - both in the West
and elsewhere in the world - as still dominated by a masculous ethos, manifest
as that ethos is in such things as competitiveness, aggression, misogyny, a
desire for adventure and/or for conflict/war/violence/competition over and
above personal love, compassion, and culture. While political and religious
extremism - with extremism defined according to my understanding of
extremism [5] - take that ethos to extremes, a masculous ethos still pervades our
societies, even those in the West which, in certain areas, have strived and are
striving for more equality between men and women. But introducing laws,
having guidelines and training programmes, and other similar things, has not -
at least in my fallible opinion - fundamentally changed that lack of honour
which, for example, leads to or can lead to women being denied advancement,
to women being dominated and manipulated, to women being raped, physically
abused, and killed. Those involved in law enforcement - in countries such as
Britain and America - know the number of reported violent crimes against
women week after week, and that many perpetrators are never caught, or are
never charged, or are found 'not guilty' (sometimes because the woman is not
believed and/or her reputation is dishonourably called into question).

My fallible solution, in the essay you refer to was, in respect of individuals,

cultivating empathy and the virtue of personal honour, for such cultivation
would balance the masculous with the muliebral and thus forestall that which
leads and had led so many men for three millennia to cause such suffering as
still blights and has blighted this world. For as I mentioned in some essays a few
years ago [6], it is men - unbalanced in physis [7] - who have caused and are
responsible for wars, invasions, and the deaths and destruction and suffering
that results, just as most violent crime and murders are caused by men. And it
is they, of course, who have - also for millennia - dominated and manipulated
women (or tried to), who have raped women, who have physically abused them,
and killed so many of them, and all because some men cannot control
themselves lacking as they do the virtue of honour.

But how - or even can - societies in the West and around the world promote the
virtue of empathy and personal honour, and if they could, would they want to
given how most such societies (especially those in the West) are based on law
and justice being the prerogative of the State? In respect of empathy at least,
there is - as I suggested - the solution of Studia Humanitatis; that is, the
solution of educating citizens in what I have termed the culture of pathei-
mathos [8]. But since personal honour means that individuals should have the
right to bear and carry weapons, and be lawfully able - in the immediacy of the
personal moment - to use such weapons in self-defence and in valorous defence
of others dishonourably attacked, it is most unlikely the governments or
politicians of modern Western societies would even consider such an
honourable solution to the problem of suffering. Indeed, they seem to be moving
toward even more restrictions on individuals bearing and carrying weapons;
moving toward severely punishing those who use weapons in self-defence or
even in valorous defence of others dishonourably attacked. That is, that there is
in many Western societies a desire, by governments and politicians, for more
control over their citizens, for more interventions, at home and abroad, in the
name of 'security', and for the use of force to be lawfully restricted to those -
such as the Police or the armed forces - who are appointed and who serve on
the basis of a chain of command which stops with some government
representative or some politician or some military leader responsible to one of
the foregoing. Thus, while I personally strive to uphold what honour demands in
the immediacy of the moment, most people - even if they agreed with the
principle - would be wary of doing so, given current laws in a country such as
Britain. Or, more probably, they would consider it an unnecessary and possibly a
retrograde thing to do. And they might well be correct. For our societies do
provide hope, an intimation, a reassurance.

I have, since I was a teenager domiciled in the Far East, always felt (initially of
course in a wordless not consciously understood way) that women embodied,
could presence, and so connect us to - remind us of - τὸ καλόν, ἀρετή, and
divinity. That certain women were, or could be, a conduit to the numinous.
Which is why, for example, so many Catholics (including me) have or had an
affinity for, a love of, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and why such artisements as the
Mona Lisa, and the life of Cleopatra, continue to intrigue us. In our modern
world, as so often in the past, this wordless appreciation of the feminine has so
often been subsumed by the masculous, even though some men - and of course
many women - are so enticed by, and have an empathy with, such a film as Carol
(starring Cate Blanchett), with Alison Balsom performing music by JS Bach and
Haydn, and with Corina Belcea (with her Quartet) performing the String
Quartets of Beethoven as recorded in the Vienna Konzerthaus in 2012. For
there, in such manifestations, are not only a presencing of the numinous, of
culture, but also - and importantly - of what so many of our Western societies
(and other societies, such as Japan) have enabled and achieved in the decades
since the Second World War.

Furthermore, those on the 'outside' of Western governments - especially those

with some supra-personal agenda, political or ideological or social - often fail to
appreciate the efforts of those 'inside' who, motivated by the best of intentions,
often have to balance conflicting interests in order to move, quite often ever so
slowly, toward implementing what perhaps a majority would consider good.

Thus despite what has occurred and is occurring - in respect of, for example,
modern Western States vis-a-vis laws restricting personal honour and the
continuing misogyny in society - there has indeed been much progress and
which progress should and must remind us of the reality: that there are, in
government, in law enforcement, in politics, and among ordinary citizens, so
many people of good intentions who, instinctively or otherwise, know what is
right, honourable, and just, and who by working within the system have indeed
made their countries, and the world, a better place. So much better, and so
many people, that I, for one, acknowledge - given my past propensity toward
hubris and error - that we do seem to have acquired or at least seem to be
moving toward, by means of the process of modern democracy, a certain and
necessary balance, and thus are progressing, albeit slowly, in the right
direction. That therefore we may well be evolving toward what is required; and
that my own preoccupation in respect of personal honour may be somewhat
misplaced; and that such democratic governments and societies and laws as we
in the West have (imperfect as they and such laws are) are, in truth, much
better than any alternatives as well as the answer required so that it is
incumbent upon us to support them and thus the democracy they represent. In
other words, that I - with my metaphysical protestations about honour - may
well be wrong and that those who, by working within the democratic system,
have actually made a difference and are correct. That, for example, people such
as Cate Blanchett, Alison Balsom, and Corina Belcea, have made far more of
positive difference in respect of balancing the masculous with the muliebral
than I with all my philosophical musings - past, present, and future - could ever
dream of doing.

For their practical contribution to the culture of pathei-mathos - and the

contribution of so many others since 1945 in so many lands - so far outweigh my
'philosophy of pathei-mathos' in so many ways that I reminded yet again of the
need for me to be reclusive.

°°°
I've read your book The Numinous Way of Pathei-Mathos and wondered how practical your
philosophy is in today's world. I'm thinking here of empathy and honour which you apparently
made its basic principles. Is that honour any different from the honour you wrote about when
you were a neo-nazi?

Since my philosophy, such as it is, is essentially metaphysical - perhaps even

mystical - then it not very practical according to how practicality is understood
in most Western societies (functional; doing what is considered a recognized
productive activity; being effective in a social or material or political way) just
as the life of a Carthusian monk is considered by perhaps the majority of people
in the West as rather impractical, and a 'retreat' from the modern world.

As a metaphysical theory my philosophy suggests an ontology and thus a

particular understanding of physis [7] as well as a particular ethics, and which
ethics are predicated on empathy and personal honour. In terms of
epistemology it suggests the acausal knowing - of the numinous, of physis, and
so on - that pathei-mathos and empathy reveal compliments the causal knowing
attainable through such methodologies as experimental science. As to whether
this particular metaphysical theory can form the basis for a way of life - a
particular mystic way, for example - I do not know. In terms of my own life, it is
just my pathei-mathos, which a few may find of interest, and which pathei-
mathos reminds me to try to be compassionate, honourable, aware of and
receptive to the numinous, and aware of my multitude of past mistakes and
hubris engendering as that particular awareness does a certain (and for me a
necessary) personal humility.

In respect of honour, I consider it a practical and living and personal

manifestation of the acausal knowing and understanding, and respect for the
numinous, that empathy and pathei-mathos make us aware of. A means,
therefore, for an individual to be well-mannered (for good manners presence
the numinous), to manifest what is (do what is) fair, and a means to - in the
immediacy of the personal moment - restore the natural balance, the harmony,
that an unfair person or persons disrupt(s) in a practical manner through some
ignoble deed or deeds causing as such deeds do personal suffering and harm to
others interiorly and/or physically.

To me, this understanding of honour is different from the 'honour' that I often
pontificated about as a neo-nazi. One is personal and applicable only in the
immediacy of the moment; the other is ideological, dogmatic. Thus, in many of
my neo-nazi writings - while appreciating that honour implied manners and
treating others fairly - it was tied to an impersonal idealism and which idealism
was based on the supra-personal importance attributed to such concepts as
one's folk and one's perceived duty to that folk.
 °°°

Since you announced in a post on your blog dated April 2015 that "there must be no further
effusions" from you then why have you written an article published in November 2015 titled
Understanding And Countering Muslim Extremism and why are you publicly now answering
questions such as this?

An excellent question. Following the events in Tunisia, the in-flight bombing of a

Russian airliner, and the attacks in Paris in November of this year, I - as a
former Muslim extremist who supported al-Qaida - was directly approached by
certain people who saught my opinion on Muslim extremism in general.
Although I initially refused to provide such a written opinion, I finally and
reluctantly agreed to do so since one person reminded me not only that honour
required me to be honest about what I thought about such events but also that
by not so commenting I was perhaps being somewhat self-indulgent if not
prideful, placing my need for silence and solitude - my reclusiveness - before
the suffering of others. Would my silence really aid a few individuals to
understand such matters as expiation for hubris? Or could my observations -
derived from personal experience - really help some to understand, even given
my past propensity for pride, selfishness, for causing suffering, and for making
mistakes? There were, and are, no definitive or easy answers to this dilemma of
mine. But: because some had saught me out and asked, I finally felt it was
churlish, conceited, selfish, and dishonourable of me, to refuse. Expiation, or
pride?

For I am so well aware that my decision to so comment might be the result of

pride. Here, as so often in the past five years, I do so wish I had the guidance of
some faith: some guidelines other than my own conscience, my sorrow, my
solitude, my remorse at having caused such suffering as I did during my
extremist decades. But, lacking such faith, all I could do was seek to read again
such words as these:

Although I do not hope to turn again

Although I do not hope
Although I do not hope to turn
Wavering between the profit and the loss
In this brief transit where the dreams cross
The dreamcrossed twilight between birth and dying
(Bless me father) though I do not wish to wish these things
From the wide window towards the granite shore
The white sails still fly seaward, seaward flying
Unbroken wings

And the lost heart stiffens and rejoices

In the lost lilac and the lost sea voices
And the weak spirit quickens to rebel
There were thus and again so many sleepless nights when the ageing body
breaks slowly out into November darkness hoping against hope that sea spray
and gusting wind will bring such a remembrance of the numinous that, at last,
one mortal will be irretrievably either stilled or find that final answer. That I am
still here and even now have no definitive, final, answer perhaps answers the
questions asked.

°°°

Several years ago you wrote that "based on experience and much reflexion, my personal view of
diverse Muslim societies (Sunni and Shia, and from North Africa, to Egypt, the Sudan, the
Middle East, to Asia), is that – on balance – they are also a force for good, full of people of good
will, of humanity, of fairness, who strive to do what is good and avoid what is dishonourable –
Amr bil Maroof wa Nahi anil Munkar." Is that still your view or has it changed in the light of the
murder of hundreds of people by Muslims in the past year alone. I'm thinking of attacks like the
one in Paris and the bomb that brought down that Russian passenger plane, Flight 9268, over
Egypt killing all 224 people on board.

The quotation is from my 2012 essay Toward A Balanced View Of Islam and The
West. I also said in that essay not only that:

"my personal view now of Western societies – based on experience, a

life of extremisms and subversions, and deriving from much reflexion,
an acknowledgement of my own mistakes, and much pathei-mathos –
is that they are a force for good."

but also that:

"both ways of living, that of West and that of the Muslims, can
profitably learn from the other, because reasoned dialogue, an
acceptance, celebration, and tolerance, of diversity, is the moral, the
virtuous, thing to do."

My view regarding Muslim societies, and the Muslim way of life, and whether
Sunni or Shia, has not changed because the incidents you refer to - and dozens
of similar ones over more than a decade, and the barbarism of a group such as
Daesh (ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyah fil 'Iraq wa ash-Sham), are the work of Muslim
extremists - a small minority - who are not in my experience representative of
the Muslim way of life. One has only to have practical personal experience of
families who follow the Muslim way of life - a personal experience over a period
of a year or even for just some months - in places as diverse as Morocco, Egypt,
Tanzania, Iran, the Philippines, Pakistan, Dubai, and Birmingham (England), to
appreciate what the Muslim way of life means and implies, and what - in terms
of family, and daily life - it does not mean nor imply.

Societies where the majority of people are Muslim certainly have problems and
flaws, just as our societies in the West have problems and flaws. But to
fundamentally change things for the better - in terms of decades and centuries,
and have that change sustainable - requires individuals to change, internally, in
physis, and - as I have attempted to explain in several essays - this (at least in
my fallible opinion) involves the muliebral virtues, for "it is the muliebral virtues
which evolve us as conscious beings, which presence sustainable millennial
change. Virtues such as empathy, compassion, humility, and [a] loyal shared
personal love." [9] I would also add Art, literature, music, and other art-forms
such as film [10] and poetry; for such artisements, being as they are part of the
foundations of our shared human culture of pathei-mathos, can be instrumental
in that personal change which does not involve violence, which does not cause
suffering to others, which is not traumatic, and which can connect us to, or
remind us of, the numinous, of what we as human beings, en masse, have the
potential to be: honourable, decent, tolerant, rational, human beings. And it is
my considered - albeit fallible - opinion that one of the most important
sustainable things that has changed us for the better, in last hundred and more
years - and which has the potential to change us as human beings, en masse,
even more - is that system of modern government termed democracy. For it is
that system of governance which is tolerant, which has allowed Art, literature,
music, and other art-forms to flourish, and which, via eduction, has preserved
for us and presented to us the treasures of our human culture of pathei-mathos.

°°°

David Myatt
2015

[1] The essay is included below as an Appendix.

[2] A little known aspect of my strange, experiential, life is that some months
after my conversion to Sunni Islam in 1998, I came to know a Shia Muslim and
his family, who became my friends. Mentioning him and his family to some
Sunni brothers, I was rather surprised by their extreme hostility toward the
Shia. I thus saught, in a practical way, to discover more about Shia Islam and
so, with my Shia friend, I frequented a Shia mosque, read works such as Nahj
al-Balagha, and talked to Shia scholars. I even arranged a trip to Iran, took part
in the Day of Ashura tradition which I found very moving, and came to
understand the meaning of the phrase 'every day is Ashura and every land is
Karbala'. Thus, for around a year I lived as a Shia (Ithna Ashari) and
contemplated moving to permanently live in Iran given that at the time I was
still on bail following my arrest in 1998 by Detectives from S012 with a criminal
trial, a conviction, and a long prison sentence, seemingly inevitable.

But, still then and stupidly being an extremist, hubriatic, and an idealist, I
desired to do something practical against 'the new world order' (the old enemy,
from National-Socialist days) and - following several meetings with some Sunni
brothers who had saught me out - I returned to Sunni Islam in order to support
al-Qaida and (encouraged by those brothers) began to write extremist Muslim
propaganda and also post diatribes and engage in sophistry on Usenet and
elsewhere. My life would probably have been somewhat different had I decided,
as a Shia, to live in Iran.

ِ ‫ﻮﻥ ِﺑ ُﺤ ْﺴ ِﻦ ْﺍﻟ َﻘ ْﻮ ِﻝ ﻓ‬
But, as a wise person was once reported to have said: ‫ِﻴﻪ‬ ٍ ‫ُﺭ ﱠﺏ َﻣ ْﻔُﺘ‬
[3] By classically trained in the context of Sunni Islam I am referring to centres
of learning such as Al-Azhar in Cairo.

[4] Tacitus, Annales, Book VI, 17.

[5] qv. Understanding And Countering Muslim Extremism, where I wrote: "A
useful definition of extremism - based on practical experience - is that it is the
principles, the causes, the characteristics, that promote, incite, or describe the
harsh action of extremists, and/or what results from such harsh actions by such
extremists. For an extremist is a person who tends toward harshness, or who is
harsh, or who supports/incites harshness, in pursuit of some supra-personal
objective, usually of a political or a religious nature; where by harsh is meant
rough, severe, a tendency to be unfeeling, unempathic, uncompassionate,
dishonourable."

[6]

"As I know from my outré experience of life - especially my forty years of extremism,
hubris, and selfishness; my terms of imprisonment, my experience with gangs, with
people of bad intentions and with those of good intentions - it really is as if we
terran men have, en masse, learnt nothing from the past four or five thousand years.
For the uncomfortable truth is that we, we men, are and have been the ones
causing, needing, participating in, those wars and conflicts. We - not women - are
the cause of most of the suffering, death, destruction, hate, violence, brutality, and
killing, that has occurred and which is still occurring, thousand year upon thousand
year; just as we are the ones who seek to be - or who often need to be - prideful and
'in control'; and the ones who through greed or alleged need or because of some
ideation have saught to exploit not only other human beings but the Earth itself. We
are also masters of deception; of the lie. Cunning with our excuses, cunning in
persuasion, and skilled at inciting hatred and violence. And yet we men have also
shown ourselves to be, over thousands of years, valourous; capable of noble,
selfless, deeds. Capable of doing what is fair and restraining ourselves from doing
what is unethical. Capable of a great and a gentle love." Blue Reflected Starlight,
2012.

"Perhaps the stark truth is that it is we men who are flawed or incomplete and who
thus need to change. As if we, we men, have not yet evolved enough to be able to
temper, to balance, our harsh masculous nature with the muliebral; a balance which
would see us become almost a new species; one which has, having finally sloughed
off the suffering-causing hubriatic patriarchal attitudes of the past, learnt from the
pathei-mathos of our ancestors, from the pathei-mathos of our human culture, born
and grown and nurtured as our human culture was, has been, and is by over four
thousand years of human-caused suffering. A learning from and of the muliebral, for
the wyrdful thread which runs through, which binds, our human pathei-mathos is a
 muliebral one: the thread of kindness, of gentleness, of love, of compassion; of
empathy; of the personal over and above the supra-personal." A Slowful Learning,
Perhaps, 2012

[7] In respect of physis, qv my Towards Understanding Physis, included in

Sarigthersa: Some Recent Essays. 2015, ISBN 978-1512137149.

[8] qv. my Education And The Culture Of Pathei-Mathos, included in One

Vagabond In Exile From The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musing s.
2014, ISBN 978-1502396105.

[9] Some Questions For DWM. 2014. Included in One Vagabond In Exile From
The Gods: Some Personal and Metaphysical Musings.

[10] That is, film as an art-form, not as entertainment. For such a modern
art-form can reveal something about our physis as human beings. Among the
hundreds of examples are films such as Carol, Monsieur Lazhar, and Etz Limon.

Appendix

Understanding And Countering Muslim Extremism

Preface

This article - commissioned after the events in Paris on the evening of Friday the 13 th, 2015 -
will explain what Muslim extremism is, and what might be done to counter such extremism.

Based as my analysis and conclusions are on forty years of practical experience of extremism
and extremists - which experience includes ten years as a radical Muslim - it presents 'an
insider view' of the problem and thus provides a somewhat different perspective to that
presented by many contemporary writings on the subject.

I have provided a glossary of some of the Islamic terms used, and have preferred the term
Muslim extremism - the extremism manifested by those Muslims and groups, belonging to the
Sunni tradition, who adhere to a particular interpretation of Quran and Sunnah - to the more
common term Islamic extremism, since technically Islam is neither an -ism nor an ideology but
rather submission by individuals to the will of Allah as manifest in the Quran and Sunnah.

Defining Extremism

A useful definition of extremism - based on practical experience - is that it is the

principles, the causes, the characteristics, that promote, incite, or describe the
harsh action of extremists, and/or what results from such harsh actions by such
extremists. For an extremist is a person who tends toward harshness, or who is
harsh, or who supports/incites harshness, in pursuit of some supra-personal
objective, usually of a political or a religious nature; where by harsh is meant
rough, severe, a tendency to be unfeeling, unempathic, uncompassionate,
dishonourable.

An extremist, therefore, lacks an understanding of, or a feeling for, innocency:

of treating individuals as individuals and of judging them only on the basis of a
personal knowing of them extending over a period of time. Instead, the
extremist uses some abstract criteria deriving from whatever ideology, or cause,
or interpretation of some religion, or authoritative figure or leader, that they
believe in or follow, for whatever reason or from whatever personal motive.
Which abstract criteria almost always involves a division of people into an 'us'
and a 'them': we, the true believers, the defenders of our cause/movement
/leader/ideology/faith, and our enemies who are either intent on
destroying/undermining 'us' and/or who are wrong/bad/evil and whom 'we'
come to hate and despise, en masse.

Thus the extremist dehumanizes their perceived enemy or enemies,

viewing them not as individual human beings but rather as a commodity, as a
means to a supra-personal end. Hence why, for example, the statement
attributed to ad-Dawlah al-Islamiyah fil 'Iraq wa ash-Sham (Isil, 'Islamic State',
Daesh) after the Friday 13 attacks mentioned 'crusaders' and called those
massacred in the Bataclan theatre profane 'idolaters', with the statement
beginning and ending with Quranic ayat (Al-Hashr 2 and Al-Munafiqun 8). For
they were following a strategy outlined, among others, by the pseudonymous
Abu Bakr Naji in the 2004 text ‫ ﺃﺧﻄﺮ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ ﺳﺘﻤﺮ ﺑﻬﺎ ﺍﻷﻣﺔ‬:‫[ ﺇﺩﺍﺭﺓ ﺍﻟﺘﻮﺣﺶ‬Administering
The Chaos: The Critical Transition The Ummah Will Experience] 1 and which
strategy is of using violence and killing (including massacres) to provoke a
response, to reveal the practical (rather than the theoretical) nature of Jihad
(part of which Jihad is to deter the enemy), to wear down enemies, and to
polarize and inspire both Muslim youth and 'the Crusader enemy', all of which
tactics are explained in the context of the Quran and Sunnah, and thus by
reference to Shariah.

This harsh perception of individual human beings as (i) 'a means to an end', and
(ii) in terms of abstract categories to which they are assigned, en masse, by
extremists on the basis of whatever ideology/cause/faith the extremist believes
in or professes, is the raison d'etre of all extremism. Only the categories, and
the aim(s), differ.

Muslim Extremism

The abstract categories of Muslim extremism are those of the kuffar (the
unbelievers, infidels, idolaters), the believers (Muslims, the Ummah), apostates
(murtads), heretics, and those fighting 'fi sabilillah' (Jihadists).

The aims for which certain categories are used are essentially two-fold: the
supra-personal one of the establishment of a khilafah through Jihad, and the
personal one of a place in Jannah through either martyrdom or by strictly
adhering to what is believed to be the correct interpretation of Quran and
Sunnah and thus living according to Shariah.

These two aims - the supra-personal, idealistic, one, and the personal one - are
inextricably entwined, and explain why for instance seven of the attackers in
Paris immolated themselves by detonating explosives attached to their bodies.
For not only could they massacre infidels - and thus support the strategy of
'creating and managing the chaos' - but they would, being Shuhadaah, attain
the goal of Jannah.

These aims and categories are defined by particular interpretations of Quranic

Ayat and Ahadith, and it is these particular interpretations which distinguish
the harsh interpretation of Islam - the extremism of certain Muslims - from that
of the majority of Muslims who reside in the countries of the West.

Countering Muslim Extremism

Some examples may suffice for such a harsh interpretation to be perceived in

context and thus understood for what it is, an extremist deviation. For there
seems to be a distinct lack of knowledge about Islam both among Muslim
extremists and those who (mostly associated with far-right political groups)
react with hatred against Muslims in general as a result of the atrocities
committed by some Muslim extremists. Both of which sides - with their 'us' and
'them' attitudes and divisions - just inflame and increase the conflict that groups
such as Daesh and al-Qaida need and encourage.

Thus, neither side seems to know nor appreciate such clearly expressed
sentiments, in the Quran, as the following:

"Remember that Allah is The Most Merciful, He Who Often Forgives."

5:34 Interpretation of Meaning

"You who believe, be firm in being fair - as a witness for Allah - even
though it is not to your own advantage, nor to the advantage of your
kin, and whether the matter concerns the rich or the poor. For Allah is
the best protector (of all). Do not just follow your own desires, for you
may deviate, and turn away, and Allah is always knowing of all that
you do." 4:135 Interpretation of Meaning

"Be loyal and do your duty to Allah; fear Him and always speak with
honour. He will direct you to do honourable deeds and will forgive
your mis-deeds. And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger will
achieve the greatest achievement of all." 33:70-71 Interpretation of
Meaning
 "Observe the limits which Allah has set." 9:112

"Be forgiving and generous, for would you not seek Allah's
forgiveness for yourself? For Allah is indeed The Most Merciful: He
Who Often Forgives." 24:22 Interpretation of Meaning

Truths evident in the hadith regarding Mu'adh ibn Jaba as narrated by Abu
Musa:

When Allah's Messenger (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) sent him and
Mu'adh bin Jabal to Yemen, he said to them: "Make things easy for the
people rather than difficult; provide them with reports of good, and do
not let them turn away [from what is honourable]. You should both
work together, with mutual respect, understanding and loyalty."
Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73, Number 145

and in the hadith narrated by Abdullah bin 'Amr:

"The Prophet (salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) never used insulting

words and neither did he ever speak maliciously. He used to say that
"the closest to me from among you is the person who has good
manners and a noble character." Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 57, Number
104

and in ahadith such as:

"Those who believes in Allah and the Last Day should either speak
honourably or be silent." Muslim Book 1, 75

For what these examples illustrate - and many more could be adduced - is that
one effective way to counter Muslim extremism is for Muslims themselves to,
using Quran and Sunnah, counter the harsh interpretation of Islam by the
extremists. To thus express the humanity that is at the heart of Islam; a
humanity so evident in the millions of Muslims, world-wide, who know or who
intuitively feel that

"The 'Ibaad of Ar-Rahman are those who walk on earth in humility."

25:63 Interpretation of Meaning

and that

"We have made you [Muslims] a Wasat [just and noble] people, that
you be examples for all other peoples as the Messenger [Muhammad]
is an example for you." 2: 143 Interpretation of Meaning

There is therefore no need - as individuals such as Cheryl Benard suggested in

her 2003 text Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies - for
the West to support and "encourage a moderate, democratic interpretation and
presentation of Islam", since Islam as understood and practised by the majority
of Muslims world-wide enshrines the same values that make, and have made,
the societies of the West what they are, as those who are familiar with Studia
Humanitatis - ancient and modern - will assuredly appreciate, 2 with such a
strident promotion and sponsorship of a Western-made "moderate, democratic
interpretation" of Islam only confirming what Muslim extremists already believe
- that the modern West is their enemy, and at war with Islam - and thus not only
aiding resentment, disaffection, among many young Muslims but also
contributing to the spread of Muslim extremism.

Beyond Missiles, Drones, And Invasions

Have Western programmes of 'de-radicalization' and of 'tackling extremism' - of

engaging with and encouraging 'moderate' Muslims and a 'moderate' Islam, of
promoting a 'modernist Islam' - worked? Apparently not, given the attacks in
Mumbai, Tunisia, France, and the numerous planned attacks that have been
prevented in Britain and elsewhere, thanks to the security services.

Fourteen years after 9/11 - and almost five years after the death of bin Laden -
and despite the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and military interventions in
places such as Syria and Yemen, there are more Muslim extremists in more
countries than ever. As recent police raids in France have revealed, such
extremists have no difficulty in acquiring arms, from hand-guns to
semi-automatic rifles, to rocket launchers.

The issue of Muslim extremism is not complex; it is simple. For the issue is one
of interpretation of texts such as the Quran and Sunnah, and of a particular
interpretation, or interpretations, being used by various groups and individuals
to inflame passions and provide individuals - such as the disadvantaged, the
disaffected, and those inclined toward idealism - with a sense of identity and a
purpose which is vivifying. 3

To counter such extremism there has to be, and of necessity from within
Muslim communities and by individual Muslims, a promotion of classical Islamic
jurisprudence and thus of the independence, the authority, the learning, of the
Qadi. For a problem that was classically understood in Islam - and which is
important and relevant today - was the distinction made by Muslim scholars
between fiqh (classical Islamic jurisprudence) and Shariah, with fiqh
understood as our fallible understanding and attempts at interpretation, and
with Shariah being the divine and perfect guidance given by Allah. For fiqh was
based on the principles of acceptance of diversity of scholarly opinion, on
custom 4, and on logical deductions by individuals that are stated to be fallible
and thus not immutable. 5 Such a distinction allows for reasoned change,
accepts the necessity of diverse opinions, the necessity of individual
independent scholarly judgement in trials, in arbitrations, and in determining
penalties.
However, in modern times, this classical distinction between fiqh and Shariah -
with its allowance for reasoned change based on diverse scholarly opinion, its
acceptance of local custom, and the necessity of individual independent
scholarly judgement in trials, arbitrations, and determining penalties - is not
made by extremist groups such as Daesh when they implement their
interpretation of 'Shariah law' and which interpretation invariably has an
inflexible penal code and immutable penalties with those judging individuals
using such an interpretation invariably lacking the learning and the
independence of a classically trained Qadi. For it is the practical
implementation of 'Shariah' law that is the raison d'etre of groups such as
Daesh and al-Qaida, and it is that implementation, and their interpretations of
texts, that needs to be exposed, from within Muslim communities, thus
destroying the credibility and the allure that such groups have for a minority of
Muslims.

Hence, and in addition to current strategies and tactics, it is (i) the scholarly,
years-long, learning required for a correct interpretation of the Quran and
Sunnah, and (ii) the roles and importance of classically trained Muslim scholars
and of the Qadi, and (iii) the opinions of such learned Muslims, that should be
encouraged, supported, and promoted, by Western governments.

David Myatt
2015

[1] The title is generally translated as Management of Savagery, although

Administering The Chaos is more appropriate since what is referred to are not
savage deeds per se but rather the violent chaos of the period of transition
which, caused by Jihad, will precede the establishment of the Khilafah, with
'administering' capturing both of the implied meanings: that of 'managing' the
chaos and that of administering 'the cure', of provoking the chaos as a means to
an end.

[2] For thousands of years – from the classical world to the Renaissance to fairly
recent times – Studia Humanitatis (an appreciation and understanding of our
being, our nature, as humans) was considered to be the basis of a good
education. Thus, for Cicero, Studia Humanitatis implied forming and shaping
the manners, the character, and the knowledge, of young people through them
acquiring an understanding of subjects such as philosophy, geometry, rhetoric,
music, and litterarum cognitio (literary culture) with Cicero noting the
importance of the Greek virtue of εὐταξία (self-restraint) manifest as that virtue
is in manners: in what Muslims term Adab.

[3] What often seems to be forgotten is that extremist groups (Muslim and
otherwise) have within their ranks many idealists who - initially at least - have
good intentions and believe they are doing what is right and necessary.
[4] ‫ﻟﻌﺎﺩﺓ ﻣﺤﻜﻤﺔ‬

[5] One has only to read the chapter on evidence in al-Majalla al Ahkam al
Adaliyyah (an Ottoman book of Hanafi jurisprudence published in the late 19 th
century) to appreciate how a Qadi was guided by logic.

°°°

Glossary

Ayah: a quranic verse. Plural: Ayat.

Ahadith: plural of Hadith (qv).

Fi sabilillah: 'in the cause of Allah'.

Hadith: a recorded saying, or deed, of the Prophet Muhammad.

Islam: literally means submission to the Will of Allah, as manifest in the Quran and Sunnah.

Jannah: Paradise. As recounted, for example, in the following Ayah:

" [Allah] will forgive your transgressions [ ْ‫ ] ُ ﻡ ﻙ ُ َُﻧﻮﺏ ﺫ‬and guide you to Jannah
wherein are rivers, cascading down, and those beautiful dwellings set within
perpetually-flowering gardens. And this is the success that matters." 61:12
[Interpretation of Meaning]

Khilafah: Caliphate. A Muslim community (or nation/Empire) founded upon Shariah, led by a
Khalifah ('Caliph').

Kuffar: those who do not believe in the Way of Islam. Often translated as infidels. Singular:
Kaffir.

Qadi: A learned Muslim judge.

Shariah: the Muslim way of living, as manifest in the Muslim legal system, and which system
includes the laws governing interactions between Muslims.

Shuhadaah: Martyrs. Muslims who die Fi Sabilillah. Singular: Shaheed. A Shaheed is often
called a "witness to the truth (of Islam)".

Sunnah: The example of the life and deeds and sayings of the Prophet Muhammed as recorded
in Ahadith.
 cc David Myatt 2015

This work is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.
It can therefore be freely copied and distributed under the terms of that license