Fatherly Preaching of Religion in Kosovo Society

In a society that has a high degree of classical and functional illiteracy, manipulation opportunities are great. Especially when it has been only two decades apart from war, which has inevitably produced consequences that will remain in human awareness, perspective, and orientation. Add to this the fact that changes occur in the system of values and the great influence, especially cultural, that modern media have.

Here I'm going to address the fundamentals of dominant distribution to public communications about Islam in our society, in particular the approach of religious preachers, hojaries.

The problem begins with their formation of theologicals, in lands where there is no freedom to design critical programs, where scientific debate and social sciences are lacking.

To prove this, I am referring to one of the sociologists who knows the Arab world and sociologist, currently professor at the American University of Beirut and newly elected president of the International Sociology Association ISA (2018-2022) at Canada's Toronto Congress, Sarri Hanaf, who in a special interview for” Global Dialogue”, translated into 17 languages, Vol. 6.2, explained the reality with the following words: The Arab <x0). In the Arab region, we rarely hear of a <x1-letter written by social scientists at the request of public authorities and then debated in the public sphere. Scientific meetings are handled like any other public meeting and held under police supervision. At the same time, sociologists have not helped themselves: they have failed to create a scientific community that can develop an influential voice or protect those who are critical of power. There are only three active sociological associations (Leban, Tunisia, Morocco), and interestingly, there are far less state pressure in these three countries than in other Arab countries. The scientific community must be organised to confront not only the depressed states but also the forces seeking to delegate social science. Religious authorities have often felt threatened by social scientists, since the two groups compete in public discourse. I've seen a tense television debate involving a religious leader and an activist: Sheikh Mohammed Said Ramadan al-Bouti (who has argued that Islam opposes any form of family planning) and an anti-clyric activist from the General Union of Syrian Women, a state-sponsored organisation. Even though family planning falls fairly within the realm of sociology and demographics, no social scientist has ever been brought into these public debates. Another example comes from Qatar. Qatar authorities have asked the branches of Qatar's foreign universities to teach with the same program used at their university headquarters. So everyone tries to prevent debate, in a problematic context where freedom of expression is very limited. ”

A society that eventually made the greatest progress when allowing women to drive the car shows how late they are in the emancipation process. A world that has sustained problems which I have managed to solve, and as a result, dominated culture of tribes, sects, and various groups, in the inability of unification, in the inability of overcoming outstanding differences, through rivalry has produced aggressiveness and wars between themselves, which, apart from violent extremism, do not promote Islam as a monotheistic religion.

In the sociologists of culture and migration, we know some forms of integration, such as adoption, agriculture, and assimilation. Agriculture is a concept studied since 1918, meaning the interiorization of cultural elements through which people are absorbed and changed in terms of value patterns during the report with different cultures, which is shown in several hojaries.

Many of the decisions and judgments of Arab scholars, called”fetva”, on specific religious matters, are transmitted and preached equally to us, without making any effort to see if they adapt to our circumstances and specificities, the geopolitical and geo-cultural context, our national culture, and above all respond to the needs and expectations of Albanian believers.

The main problem is the superficial reading and literial reading of sacred texts and the failure to allow for critical awareness for fear of a violation of religion. In fact, critical consciousness prevents any kind of interpretation through which religion is politicised, through which isolation and social frustration is promoted, through which the language of hatred and intolerance is produced, through which religion is explained outside the cultural, political and social context, and as such is preached with arrogance.

We as a society have high rates of functional illiteracy, high rates of internet consumption and social networks, high suicide rates, high unemployment rates and poverty, high levels of frustration coming from isolation, high rates of drug abusers, high rates of violence and hate speech, so specific approaches are required.

There are several Kurdish axiomas (are paraphrasing) that one man's salvation is a work of worth as the salvation of all mankind and killing one man is a crime as if killing all mankind (5/32). Or on another occasion it is said that news that comes with uncertainty from irresponsible and uncompetent people should be verified and confirmed, a value and standard this one in crisis, even in modern journalism involved in the trend of sensationality and commerciality because of false news and market logic (49/6). Or how we should be fair and witness justice whether it is against us or against our family (4:136). These are some consistent and positive social values derived from divine proclamation that would have to be dominated on public subjects.

As we find a number of hoes that take up some of the Koranic arguments about war, about some battles of prophetic time, in historical contexts, and they affirm it today as religious values, which promote misunderstandings and give material to those who want to present Islam with violent extremism. Or we see that a few hojalls deal with a number of pointless, imaginary and misleading themes, details that produce no cultural advancement, including in private matters, with the reasoning that Islam is the system of life. In fact, combs cannot explain the complexity of life.

How much less understood are some of the faithful ' questions about intimate, family matters, and how much more so. How can they never self - determination with their consciousness and conscience, their educational and cultural makeup, their market and society circumstances, their time needs and modern trends, recognizing the effects and effects of a phenomenon by the experiences of others? At times, the answers of the more combs create confusion because they ask for a matter a variety of hoes that give different versions, and then the unprepared believers get confused and argue uselessly about which is closer or further from the truth.

This recalls the renowned survey of over 50,000 surveys around the world for the concentration of citizens' trust, which produced such results, in the question of who do people most trust: people in developed countries were told to trust institutions, while in underdeveloped countries they were declared to trust the media and intellectuals (including preachers). Why? Because success depends on institutions, therefore people in developed countries invest and trust more untapped institutions and the state identify it as an institution, the state is associated with institutions, not in leaders, because in institutions, decisions are made, the standards of citizens are set, and the standards depend on well-being. So they create institutional awareness.

The civilized world contemplates how to facilitate and make life more interesting by challenging many of the laws of nature. Hoxharies deal with dramatic themes, for example, for the end of the world (the signs of the Hour), for a mysterious and challenging creature of mankind, called”Dejall”. Who today is interested in this”Dexhall”, and people face social and economic crisis, with a struggle for existence, with uncertainty about the future, where only migration is seen as a solution, where many illusions are breaking down and life is setting up other demands, in a rivalry and tough competition for jobs, where people want to create professional careers, to be assessed, to be rewarded, to be rewarded, to be recognised, integrated?

It's social networks that give the most functional illiterate opportunities to express their thoughts, emotions, and uncontrolled feelings. Umberto Eko said social networks have also offered fools an opportunity to express their opinions, as some do in the name of religion.

We face many speeches on YouTube coming from non-releciable people who would have to be subjected to institutional assessment and control. Those speeches containing hate languages and lingu language, representing an extreme form of Islam that is inadequate with the needs of time, should not be loaded on the Internet, even some of them should be hidden. The functional analphabets are victims of the kind of laws they find on the Internet, of the kind of book of religious libraries, and of the kind of religious television shows.

This should be understood, not as a tendency for censorship, nor as Islamophobia, but as an effort for sermons to meet rational, professional and intellectual standards.

With the conclusion of the divine proclamation, the chapter of consolidation, interpretation, pragmatism, law school, and political guidance from which various versions originate, according to various political and cultural contexts deserving of access and critical scientific assessment, so that dogmatics do not allow sociological and historical criticism because, according to Sari Hanafi, they have a lack of equity for debate. According to treatment, the conflict or criticism of all that complexity and heritage violates man's faith. The biggest mistake that is made is to condition faith in God and to religion with faith in their Hours and their interpretations, conditioning the human report with God with the ratio of the believer to the clergy. In fact, hojaries are just dogmatic scholars of the Islamic religion and do not deserve to be treated unattended, unreachable or highly important in the report with God.

Among their wrong approaches is the use of myths, legends, legends, horrors, dreams without sense and taste, without logic and without authenticity, irrational, past, in the context of an event, ritual or practice, and attempting to impose it as a historical fact that proves a religious value or that legitimises a certain religious act today.

How can modern dilemmas, problems and issues for technology -- for example, for the <x0-man medial” of the digital era that has produced modernity or newer global trends, using medieval categories of explanation? We use narrations for events of 500 or 1,000 years, which are sometimes totally individual, imaginary, primitive, inconsistent? Or are the judgments of the ancient scholars of the Middle Ages used, whose knowledge has actually been adequate for the needs of the day but not necessarily for today except for some particular matter?

That's because they haven't even done empirical research as they do today with scientific methodology that are bringing new evidence that is advancing people's views. With the fragmentation of knowledge, society is not explained.

Indicators of the time when the swastika has existed, Functionalism, Empiricism, Epistemology, social theories, and modern humane, cannot have provided consistent answers to the century. 21, especially in some problems that are specific.

The world is not explained only by Abu Hanaffe, Ibn Kayim, Imam Gazaliu, and scholars of this type. No hodge today uses references from scholars to the sociologisty of religion or modern social theories, and this makes their themes poor and dogmatic. They don't use multidimensional and multidisciplinary approaches. You don't hear the name Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, Emmanuel Kant, Jügen Habermas, Marshall McLuhan, Charles Taylor, Peter Berger, Zygmunt Baumann, Anthony Giddens, etc., in their speeches. It's like they have an obsession with the prospects they represent.

Not by chance and not rarely by some secularists have come to address absurd questions: ” This is because thinking that such science is contrary to Islamic doctrine and fear of religious integrity being violated by their study. It means by the dogmatic influence they have had the horizon of knowledge and other science.

Sociology as one of the most exciting sciences in contemporary times is a very good perspective for religion. Paradigma and social science theories can reflect on the explanation of religion in social dynamics, in the political, cultural, historical context. The religion has the potential to play a positive role in organizing and explaining social life, but not in the way some preachers and extremists use it.

Since social life is becoming more and more complex, actions, phenomena, and phenomena would have to be explained from different perspectives because nothing happens by chance and nothing happens by just one factor.

Some hojaries, not only deglore themselves by claiming to be” Saudis of knowledge”, that they are able to answer every question and address every subject, but often by quoting only curative verses or prophetic sayings along with some comments, rhetorically, full of cliche, a very old, not appealing style, with popular approaches and untrainedly. Some of them encourage imitation, imitation of every action, word, or thought from the past, in some way to act on Islam and to practice in a dogmatic way, which speaks of the apic logic of preaching.

If the structure of certain speeches is analyzed, we note primitive logic, sextic logic, moralistic logic, derogatory logic, which may pass to racism.

A few weeks ago, I heard a bridge on YouTube explaining to people in the mosque about the blessings of a rewarded believer in Paradise. When he came to witness status, before he showed up, he said I'm not dare to tell you how many women (hyrija) will have testified in Paradise because half of you have now gone from speech to Syria! The guy in question, speaking Albanian, thinks that going and getting killed in Syria wins witness status and 70 women in Paradise! To consider people sexually inclined to sacrifice their lives for sex with many women, to give up their lives and families for the plurality of women in Paradise, is the greatest humiliation and absurdity.

Like the offensive tongue of certain hoes toward women going into the sea, saying unto them, You're turning your body into an object where men can exploit their” desires! In fact, men are offended here, as if they're sexually inclined and sexually frustrated, with unex0-bedy <x0...

One of the effects of certain speeches is the feeling of guilt, fear, uncertainty, using and provoking public emotion. Some firehouses under the influence of emotions terrorize believers by talking only about error, sin, death, punishment, grave, hell, weeping, and screaming, sometimes even cursing and calling for family boycotts. Don't go to sea! ”, Don't go to the wedding! ”, ” Don't celebrate New Year's Eve!”, lectures that have produced isolation and family distance, disruptions of traditional harmony. Thus they have produced the desperate, inferior, isolated believer, losing him little self - confidence, making him feel insecure in every action or word, and this is seen when many questions are addressed to the hojaries for their every action or word: ” Is this sin?”, ” Is this sin?”

People are free to decide, judge with their own knowledge and consciousness, accept or reject a religious value, so I find it meaningless to preach publicly on the street, for example, of a group that calls themselves” Jehovah's Witnesses”, who stop people on the street or go knock on their homes and try to indot in the spirit of a sect they represent.

Let's draw a parallel: Among the most barbarous and unhuman societies in human history was the pre - Roman Arab society. There the newborn girl was buried alive! It was suspended alive by the feeling of inferiority that Arabs had for their daughters and the desire to give birth only to the men they were proud of. The approach of the prophet Muhammad was human, which ended events like the burial of young girls alive. Islamic history shows that the prophet Muhammad has not cursed people despite the total dehumanism that characterized his idolatrous society, as some hoars curse.

The meaning and interpretation of the Koran is not exclusive and monopoly solely on chimneys, some of which claim that the Koran cannot be understood well without referring to their interpretations. In fact, in this way they present the inability of people who, with knowledge and awareness of religion. Even researchers of the sciences of sociologist, of communication, psychology, philosophy, law, history, education, can understand and interpret religion from their perspective.

The most misused religious subject is the subject of the headscarf. The wrong approach of the State, the religious preachers, the media, and the civil society through which they have fed many other extremes, thus showing gullibility and immatureness. The state on behalf of preserving secularism has expelled some young girls from school just because they have followed up with headscarves. Viewing this as a violation of institutional secularism, with exclusive and prejudiced approaches, has provided religious material and space for religious demagogues to produce public hysteria through religious political movements that remained in the margin for good fortune, which mobilised people, sparked protest and willowous reactions in the sign of revolt.

This approach has then produced the extreme of Islamophobia, religious prejudices, aggressive intolerance to the feelings and beliefs of innocent Muslims.

If the disk and futile debates on the past of Albanians in the Ottoman Empire are analysed, how they insult each other for and against the Sultan, for and against Ottoman values, notes a absurd obsession where criticism has no place. We see that people on this subject are discussing people who are dentists or military professionals, playing <x0-expert and the enquiry of encyclopedia”, self-declared” representative and Muslim defender”, fortunately politically failed.

So has the debate on historical figures, with degrading actions and words, with their historic contribution accepted in today's context. A historian faces a dentist and debates about Skenderbe! This happens only in Kosovo televisions, the atomic debate, not on oral health of the archmen who passed into Albanians, but on geopolitical and geo-strategic aspects!

If we are based on Franz Nouman's theory of racism, we observe some dangerous steps. The first point of this theory is the point of the differences”, you”, so” the faithful, you sinners, you”, giving yourself the competence which belongs exclusively to God. The second point is the assessment of the differences” we believers are on the right and the right path, you sinners are on the wrong path and wrong, so we have different claims and in the other world” (some combustors at this point have given themselves competence, citing the bad fate that awaits some historical personalities in the Hereafter). The third point is taking measures against those who are different, where intolerance reaches extreme levels where revenge methods can be used. Racist languages also find in some Albanian priests who attribute to themselves the pure” Albanianism” are allegedly the first” Albanians, while Muslims are <x10...rengues and traitors of the fathers' religion”.

These racist elements and predispositions that lead to them must be fought and prevented by preachers and religion themselves, not allowing religious interpretation to be considered a major problem for society.

The creation of a culture of sociological criticism does not deny the social credit and positive contribution, which have certain combs, however few, in the reconciliation of blood, in humanitarian aid, in affirming the value of family respect, etc.

One of the most impressive words I've read recently are these of historian Noel Malcolm: ”The only solution to the problem of radical Islam will come from ordinary Muslims who do not want to radicalise because this process would eliminate aspects that are Islam itself. There is only one answer: is what ordinary Muslims think is. It's like when you ask what voice out what good violin is? ”

Just as sociologist Sari Hanafie said that sociologist reminds us that youth has not joined I SIS simply because they have read specific books or followed certain ways of interpreting the Koran, but because they have lived in a context of political and social exclusion. Which means that political and social exclusion can isolate people, frustrated people, lost their social and cultural balance, and introduced the ways of violent extremism, which are inadequacy with Islam and modern society based on human values, and that conflict problems do not solve with intolerance, violence, and anarchy, but with dialogue, procedures, and laws.

The Author Is a sociologist