"On Faith" panelist Pamela K. Taylor is co-founder of Muslims for Progressive Values and director of the Islamic Writers Alliance. She is a member of the national board of advisors to the Network of Spiritual Progressives, and served as co-chair of the Progressive Muslim Union for two years. Taylor is a strong supporter of the woman imam movement, which seeks the full participation of Muslim women in every aspect of life, including the pulpit. In July 2005, she became the first woman in centuries to officiate Friday prayers in a mosque when the United Muslim Association of Toronto and the Muslim Canadian Congress invited her to serve as guest imam. (This event followed a number of services, sermons and prayer sessions led by women held in private venues because no mosque agreed to host them.) In February 2006, when the former Grand Mufti of Marseilles visited Toronto, he requested that Taylor lead him in congregational prayer as an unequivocal demonstration of his support for female imams. Taylor has also been active in interfaith dialogue for 20 years, both in local initiatives and speaking at numerous conferences, universities, and churches. She received her MTS from Harvard Divinity School, and writes regularly on spiritual matters and the Islamic faith. She has essays in Nurturing Child and Adolescent Spirituality: Perspectives from the World's Religious Traditions (2006) and the forthcoming The Veil: Women Writers on Its History, Lore, and Politics (2007). She has written hundreds of articles and opinion pieces for newspapers, magazines, and journals, and is an award winning poet.
Close.
Pamela K. Taylor
co-founder, Muslims for Progressive Values
"On Faith" panelist Pamela K. Taylor is co-founder of Muslims for Progressive Values and director of the Islamic Writers Alliance. She is a member of the national board of advisors to the Network of Spiritual Progressives, and served as co-chair of the Progressive Muslim Union for two years. Taylor is a strong supporter of the woman imam movement, which seeks the full participation of Muslim women in every aspect of life, including the pulpit.
more »
pam - why does you mission statement for your fake moderate islamic post - fail to guarantee freedom of religion as one of the social matters you allegedly stand for?
Why is it that so many people turn to a self-confessed paedophile for moral guidance in their lives?
Why is it that people who ask such questions are called bigots, when all they are doing is asking "Why do you think that a paedophile can teach you anything about morality?"
The world is a highly dangerous place when people defend paedophiles, defend murderers, defend warmongers & defend cult psychology.
Pam, you need to wake up to the fact that you are following the teachings of one of the most violent, dangerous and hateful men in history. He was a cult leader, Pam. He used standard cult psychology to achieve power in the world. It is very silly, and dangerous, to put your trust in this.
Why do you need this in your life? The very concept of belief without evidence (faith) is a con, because anyone who can convince you to trust in this concept can control you. Study cult psychology and manipulation psychology, then you'll understand that it's all a con.
Asim
I hope you've not included me in your ad hominem as I think I have much to contribute to the understanding of (real) Islam by the good readers of the Washington Post.
Pamela and other Muslims,
Am amazed that you still pay the least attention to empty distractors/polmicts on this form with ready cut/paste lies and half-truths-and the later is more dangerous.
Clearly, these people have such a big log in their eyes that blocks the light-any light.
Objectively speaking and realistically, they are unworthy of our attention. Let us just ignore them-that simple. Any response to them will encourage them to waste our time and the space provided by this form for decent discussion
To Pamela - You said: "The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses. I've said this about 15 times already in the past few months, but it bears repeating. The verses concerning warfare were supplanted by verses making intermarriage and the breaking of bread the standard of intercommunal behavior."
I have read just the opposite on these threads. That the later verses that supercede the earlier verses are the more violent verses, because at that point Muhammed had more power and was not afraid to say and do what he really wanted. And since I am no scholar of Islam, Imam Omar is going to have to get on here and help clarify the issue, because frankly Pamela, I do not trust what you say. Because unlike a true scientist who starts with a hypothesis, and then tests the hypothesis to see if it is true, you put the cart before the horse, and you start with your hypothesis being true, that is, that Muhammed was a great prophet, and everything in the quran and hadith gets explained in that light and from that point of view. Yes, you have said that you made a genuine inquiry before you converted to see if this was a path that you could accept. But I too made a genuine inquiry about this path of Islam, while younger I was involved with a Sufi community, and just accepted on faith that Muhammed was a great prophet. But when I got older and read an actual biography of him, I was shocked to discover what he had done. So I came at the issue of Muhammed thinking that he was on a par with Jesus and Buddha, but had to change my mind and based on what I have read so far, I have to agree with Mullah Omar and Ross, that Muhammed was both cruel and violent, and hardly a role model for humanity.
In another thread about whether Islam was a violent religion, you quoted that famous passage from the sayings of Jesus about "I have come not to bring peace but the sword" or something to that effect. But that is just about the only saying of Jesus like that, and based on the rest of his life, I interpret it metaphorically. Jesus himself did not try to start a movement to gain any sort of political power, he was talking about that when people understood what he was saying they would realize that so many things in their life that had been important would now become trivial and they would have no peace. And as for the other fire and brimstone passages in the NT, it is clear that those were added at a later date, and wwere not the sayings of Jesus. So to compare violent verses in the quran with those in the OT is simply fallacious.
But in the Quran and hadith there are SO MANY statements and events that, to someone coming to those texts without any presuppositions about the nature of their author, just appear to be abusive and cruel. There is too much smoke here, and where there is smoke there is fire. And you can spend the rest of your life trying to explain away and justifying and providing context for these events and statements, and maybe you believe in your heart that people who question your interpretation are just ignorant and biased, but from my point of view there is a heck of a lot of smoke here, a heck of a lot more than I have seen in any other religious text except for maybe the OT, and I have read parts of all the texts of all the religions. And as for the OT, only a very small percentage of Jews, who already are only a small percentage of the world population, even take the OT as a sacred revelation. So there is no comparison at this point in history when you compare 1.5 billion Muslims who believe everything in the Quran is the word of God, including all the nasty passages, and the Jews and the OT.
And the poll votes continue to be counted. With over 50% of the poll completed, "Mohammed the Great Hallucinator of Pretty Wingie Talking Thingies" continues to be the choice description of Islam's founder.
Other descriptions are welcomed from On Faith contributors. Thinking and contributing are great ways to add satisfaction to your life.
Recommended descriptions are:
1. Mohammed the Great Hallucinator Of Mythical Wingie Thingies?
2. Mohammed the Great Prophet?
3. Mohammed the Great Profiteer?
4. Mohammed the Lover of Many Women Young and Not So Young?
5. Mohammed the Man of Many Myths?
6. Too much Time in the Sun, Mohammed?
7. Mohammed, Man Made by Many Militant Scribes
The poll will remain open for another week. Enter today to win a chance for a free trip to Pamela's Islamic Fairy Land, a once in a lifetime treat.
Fatwas or not, OBL is an inspiration and role model for millions of Muslims. So whether his fatwas are "real" fatwas or not, has not the slightest bearing on his influence.
Finally, some attempts and stabs at humour by both Concerned and Qasim here and there.
I'll have to take you both off my list of fanatical maniacs like OBL (he has no sense of humour too) and get you into my list of obsessive obsessives:)
Have been fun irreverently thrashing back and forth with you fellows, but of course, to the dismay of all sane posters in On Faith.
Dear Jihadist,
Please lighten up. I'm obviously not the one who's stressed here - you are. Deny OBL's right to issue fatwas or the validity of his fatwas is not doing a jot in stopping his followers in obeying his fatwas.
Oh... of course I'm not a supporter of OBL - I'm not Muslim after all. Heheh.
The poll numbers continue to build. "Mohammed, the Great Hallucinator of Pretty Wingie Talking Thingies" continues in first place followed closely by "Mohammed the Profiteer" in second place.
Hmmm, I do see some movie potential here!!!! Would you like to direct movies as a means to get more satisfaction from your life??
Mental, physical or verbal stress you are undergoing now?
The verbal stress in insisting all follow OBL and what he said as "fatwa?" is already over-extended.
Muslims decides on what is or is not a fatwa, and who has the right to issue it, and whose fatwa is valid or not.
But or course, you can hold on to your opinion as to what is fatwa, who can issue fatwas, and which fatwas is valid or otherwise.
OBL has such an impact and effect on you eh? OBL must be giving you a lot of mental stress. He has power over you because you let him obsessed you and in listening to what he said
You are not an OBL supporter in disguise are you? Insisting Muslims regard OBL's rants as fatwas and we all must comply. I have never met anyone, Muslim or otherwise, who insisted on that as you.
Dear Jihadist,
Please calm down. Life is too short to be so stressed. You know and I know that I'm right but let's not quibble about little things like fatwas. You can say whatever you like about OBL's right to issue fatwas, but you have no impact whatsoever on the thousands, if not millions, of Muslims who say he does. So long as there are Muslims who deem OBL's fatwas to be authoritative how you argue that his fatwas are valid or invalid is irrelevant.
The fact is: OBL has issued fatwas. His followers accept the validity of his fatwas. What you or I say will never change their minds. Ergo, OBL's fatwas are as legitimate as the fatwas of your local imam.
Obviously, Frank, Ross, Qasim et al gets their "satisfaction" in life like this.
You should read Frank Collins' rampage against pagans/wiccans, atheists, gays in Starhawk's thread. He is finding his "satisfaction" in life so to speak.
Poetry was used to drum up the troops back in the days of Muhammad. It seems to me likely that this is referring to the poets who whipped up the Qur'aish against the young Muslim community, perhaps stating lies about Muhammad and so on.
Obviously, there is a hugely rich poetic tradition in Islamic countries. Most famous are perhaps Rumi, Hafiz and the huge poetic enterprise in Persia. India and Pakistan also have a strong tradition of poetry, and you will find Muslims from this region quoting poetry left and right.
Also, Ross, I thought I might add that I tend to look on hadith which reinforce traditional power structures with a great deal of suspicion. We know that hundreds of thousands of hadith were made up. That is why some 200 years after Muhammad's death Bukhari, Muslim and others decided they had to start taking steps to qualify which hadith were most likely to be authentic, by charting the chains of narration, and determining their authenticity and the quality of the narrators in those chains. Hadiths such as the ones which the women imam movement cite to show that the Prophet not only condoned but commanded women to lead prayers for men and women alike, are less suspect to me because the challenge those very power structures. I mean, it seems highly unlikely there were groups of proto-feminists out there fabricating hadith so they could lead prayers. On the other hand, it is pretty well documented that various kings maintained and supported whole houses of religious "scholars" whose job it was to give them the rulings they wanted. So when I see a hadith which reinforces hierarchy, patriarchy, the financial and social elite, I tend to be very skeptical about it.
I don't go as far as some people, to say that we should just throw out the hadith, as I believe they can give us information (such as the details of the ritual worship) that is not in the Qur'an, and some of them are truly beautiful. But, I do think we have to approach them, 1) very skeptically, 2) as a secondary source to the Qur'an, not equal to it, 3) in a non-literal manner, 4) as a general guide rather than as a explanation of law.
Obviously, there are many Muslims who would agree with me, and just as many who would not.
shrink - BECAUSE PAM BROUGHT IT UP!
and if a nazi or kkk member said they were happy in their lives and looking for like minded people would their membership if organizations of hate be relevant?
yes it would.
How did the discussion on this post change from personal satisfaction et al to Islam and its evil and/or good side? Stop with the vitriol already. Those crazy people who are indulging in these meaningless fights, I think it is time to see your shrink or get a new prescription filled. Please...
The Qur'an is a document revealed over time because communities and individuals take time to develop. I don't believe God was learning in the process, but dealing with human realities. So, yes, as the people around Muhammad grew and changed, and as their neighbors changed in their attitudes toward the Muslim community, you find different prescriptions within the Qur'an. Thus the first quotes on, say, alcohol says not to come to prayer drunk, and the latter ones say don't have anything to do with it at all. The latter one takes precedence, and the former cannot be used as a license for drinking alcohol; it has been superceded. So too other verses. The history of the community is, in fact, essential to a sound implementation of the Qur'an.
As for hadith, if the hadith clearly contradicts the Qur'an, which the hadith on this issue do, then the Qur'an MUST take precedence.
Hadith in general are a terribly problematical group of literature. The classical scholars did nothing on the basis of content, judging only the possibility and the quality of the chain of narrators, although from time to time they would say this appears to be sound but it's content is strange.
Personally, when I approach a hadith this is only the first step in deciding what role it may or may not play in my life. Whether it tallies with the Qur'an is the second. Whether it makes sense logically or ethically is the third. Whether it is something that pertained to the culture Muhammad lived in or is something universal is a fourth consideration.
A lot of people take things very literally. If the Prophet brushed his teeth with a twig from a fibrous tree, then we should. Personally, I look at the intention -- the intention was to keep his teeth clean; I do so by using a modern toothbrush and toothpaste. This methodology can be applied in dozens and dozens of instances, and seems to make a lot more sense, to me, than a very literal following.
Halozcel,
let's quote the whole passage:
26:224 And the Poets,- It is those straying in Evil, who follow them:
26:225 Seest thou not that they wander distracted in every valley?
26:226 And that they say what they practice not?
26:227 Except those who believe, work righteousness, engage much in the remembrance of Allah, and defend themselves only after they are unjustly attacked. And soon will the unjust assailants know what vicissitudes their affairs will take!
I count myself in the latter part -- those who believe, work righteousnes and so on.
Pamela wrote:
The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses.
Why must the latter verses supercede the earlier ones ? Was Allah learning by experience ? and did he not have knowledge of the future. Sounds like Allah was more human and less God !!!
Pamela wrote:
Unfortunately, for most of the Muslim world traditional ways (whether they have any basis in the Qur'an or not) and classical scholarship are sacrosanct, not to be challenged. This is a huge problem, and I believe that changing that attitude, putting classical scholarship and classical hadith collections on trial is the first step in promoting change in the Muslim world.
So you accept the muslim world has a serious problem. If you consider death for apostasy to be a huge problem then are you doing anything about it ? I'm afraid your interpretation does not help much. What make you so sure that you are right and the classical scholars are wrong ? The classical interpretation was how Mohammed wanted Islam to look like.
Soar over the covered hairs
The covered minds
Into uncharted
lands of amity
from Detente.
Ray Charles sings 'unchain my heart'
yes,unchain their minds.
shall not they soar over 'two women equals one man' and 'man can scourge woman' ??
Dear Poet,
Holy Quran says,and the poets,those who go astray follow them. 26.224
In that case,if they(muslims) follow you,shall they go astray?
How can we interpret this situation?
It's Mr Qasim Omar to you, whoever you are. Or if you like, you can call me Imam Omar, not Mullah Omar please. :) :)
Like I said, just about anyone can issue a fatwa. Whether it is binding or not depends on the stature of the person issuing it.
Of course every Muslim country has at least one Mufti, but it is erroneous to think that only the fatwas of a Mufti is binding.
OBL has many supporters - it is up to them to decide whether he has the religious authority to issue fatwas. If you disagree, you disagree, but so long as there are followers who decide that OBL's fatwas are binding on them, who are you or anyone else to tell them otherwise?
One religious scholar's fatwa is another scholar's rubbish. Fatwas are often conflicting and over-riding since they are nothing more than 'opinions' or 'rulings' of the scholars issuing them.
That is what I'm trying to convey. Does a Syrian imam's fatwa have any binding on an Indonesian Muslim? Probably not. Does an Afghan imam's fatwa have any binding on a Muslim from New Delhi? Probably not.
If you go to your local mosque and ask your imam a theological question - what he tells you is also a 'fatwa'. It can be as mundane as that.
Of course rulings on the sharia are fatwas. Death incitements are fatwas. Answers to religious questions are also fatwas.
Everything is a fat wa, if it is not a thin wa. :) :) :)
Thus proving Imam Qasim Omar is correct once again.
- A formal legal opinion or religious decree issued by an Islamic leader. aftā "decide a point of law"
- An Islamic religious decree issued by the ʿulama ( recognized religious authority)
- A ruling on a point of Islamic law that is given by a recognized authority.
- From Arabic fatwa "a decision given by a mufti," related to fata "to instruct by a legal decision."
- Legal opinion concerning Islamic Law.
Just about every country in the Middle East has a Mufti, a government appointed position dealing with the religious affairs of the country and its citizens. The Mufti is basically a jurist expert in the religious laws who delivers a judgment on religious matters. The Mufti should have extensive knowledge of the Quran, the Hadith, and the different schools of thought and their rulings concerning different religious matters.
The weight and influence of a fatwa has always depended on the stature of the cleric who issued it, and clerics often rule differently on the same matter. In theory, only the mufti and a group of certified religious scholars have the right to issue religious rulings.
But in recent years, I guess a sign of the times, there's been an explosion of fatwa-giving, with many Muslims getting answers to their religious quandaries from phone-in TV shows, 800 numbers, and websites; sometimes with contradicting rulings. In practice, unpopular or impractical fatwas are often not observed.
Muslims are not the only ones having problems with fatwa issuing. Just recently, the pope in an interview issued a statement saying that anyone in Mexico who votes for legalizing abortion should excommunicated. The next day he had to rescind his decree due to widespread dissatisfaction with his comments and his staffers had to remove the comments the pope made from the interview transcript.
Based on the true definition of a Mufti, OBL is no body when it comes to releasing religious decrees (fatwas.) His political views might appeal to some Arabs and to a lesser degree to some Muslims; but his opinions are not rooted in Islamic law. Some people might agree with his opinions concerning Middle East political affairs but don’t necessarily like the way he is going about achieving his goals. Killing innocent civilians for one is against the spirit of the Quran and the moral code it teaches. And from what I understand he has no extensive religious education and he is not recognized as an Islamic scholar. He can issue all the political fatwas he wants but they are his personal opinions which are based on emotions and frustrations and not on sound religious understanding based on firmly established religious doctrine.
O. Q. argues that since he lived at one time in a Muslim country he therefore knows all about fatwa and its meaning, and implies if anyone who disagrees with his views and understanding “have got a strange understanding of Islam.” Well, O. Q., I guess you are now the resident Mufti of the WaPo; Why not, I think you are qualified enough to claim such a post since you “lived in a Muslim country.” Congratulations OQ. From now on, anyone with questions regarding Islam please submit them to Mr. OQ, thank you.
I thought you won't let up even when some of your statements in your posts are a bit off.
I'm in the office now, but I'll indulge you some more. Good to to know you don't actually rely on Wiki for knowledge.
As per your obsession on OBL, he becomes somebody because he is made so beyond his true strenght and influence. Power had is power given. He is either really sick or dead already.
Perhaps you have not been reading surveys done in the Muslim world where OBL is held in low esteem. Of course you are not aware of these surveys.
So, where did you come across stats that say OBL has millions of supporters throughout the Islamic world and his word is law among them? Even alleged Al Qaeda linked groups are indenpendent of him, including in Iraq.
So, you think what I said that only 'fatwas' gazetted into the sharia is binding on Muslims is "utterly false" eh:). Islamic Family Law is such. Fatwas by a committee of Islamic jurisprudence experts made into enforceble Shariah laws.
You are the student, show me your scholarship mettle and intellectual capabality. I've been to college. I've no papers to write for grades anymore.
And you also stated all Muslim country has their own sharia laws? Wrong. Remember Turkey?
And you stated even countries that don't have sharias are also subject to fatwas. Of course, and Muslims comply or otherwise. They do if they respect the person issuing the fatwas and the rationale for the fatwas makes sense and is in line with Islamic principles.
Yes, I certainly have a "strange understanding of Islam" for those who don't know Islam and the Muslim world. Or for those who want to fit all Muslims into their preconceived assumptions no?
All the same, I am impressed by your tireless hair-splitting. God is in the details, the devil is in the details for you. I don't engage in that unfortunately.
I really have to get on with my work today and the whole week. Have fun in your intellectual and scholarly discussions here. And good luck.
My fatwa to you : Don't forget to have fun too in college.
I don't actually rely on wiki for knowledge. It's just a good repository of information that may or may not be suspect - depending on the vested interest and emotions attached to a topic.
There is little or no emotional impact of the definition of fatwas so I guess wiki is a good place to look.
If you want me to look at Islamic sites I can do that too, but that will take a bit more searching. So instead of discussing the issue, you discuss what source I use. Very scholarly and intellectual of you, I must say.
Further on the topic of OBL - I don't think he's a nobody. He's quite the somebody, even if he's hiding in a cave somewhere. Millions of Muslims hold him to be some sort of Islamic hero. He has millions of supporters throughout the Islamic world. His word is law among his supporters.
Your stance that only 'fatwas' gazetted into the sharia is binding on Muslims is utterly false. Every Muslim country has their own sharia laws. Even countries that don't have sharias are also subject to fatwas. You have got a strange understanding of Islam.
I take you points in good faith as they are made in good faith naturally - concern for the well-being of all Muslims in the non-Muslim and Muslim world.
How can you be sure I don't do anything and beyond re and on behalf of my fellow Muslims' well-being? Certainly this place, these On Faith threads, is not where one trumpets what one has done.
And how you be sure I am not thrashing some of my more excitable, blinkered, bigoted and fanatical fellow Muslims in myriad ways - NGOs vs NGOs etc? They are more insidious, more dangerous and more immediate to me and other Muslims in our societies and countries.
Do remember that "outside" interventions is not quite productive. Just as military interventions is not helpful, neither is religious interventions. Outsiders do mess up in not taking into consideration the particularities and peculiarities of every group and society. Nor do they fully understand the cultures of the societies they purported to help.
The lives of many Muslims in most Muslim states mired in poverty, muddied by bad governance, misguided by the wooly interpretations of Islam by freelance and freestyle imams and pseudo clerics, and tarred by traditional practices not sanctioned by Islam. All this and more, we already know.
But, thank you for your observations anyway.
Qasim Omar
If you are trying to impress me or the more impressionable non-Muslim Americans, go ahead.
What we already know, you know by study, or as you claimed, because you have lived in a Muslim country. It is like me saying I've lived in the UK and US and hence know everything about Christianity by reading books on it, having Christian friends and visiting some churches.
Insist all you want that OBL has a right to and can issue fatwas, and Arab Muslims will beg to differ on OBL. He was and is, a nobody, even for his family, tribe or clan. But y'all make him so by elevating his rights to issue "fatwas" and taking it as legitimate religous opinions or injuctions. He was making and issuing political statements couched in normal Muslim practices when giving speeches/statements in mentioning God formally here and there.
And Qasim Omar, as everyone knows, there is no central authority in Islam, no equivalent of a Pope for Sunni Muslims. But central authorities on Islam in and within countries are instituted by Muslim states from Morrocco to Malaysia. Wikipedia is a good starting place for knowledge, but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, no?
Keep insisting on how Muslims should think, act and behave according to what you read and know from Wikipedia and other tracts written by non-Muslims and you will get it wrong and wrong again.
The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses. I've said this about 15 times already in the past few months, but it bears repeating. The verses concerning warfare were supplanted by verses making intermarriage and the breaking of bread the standard of intercommunal behavior.
As for apostasy, no one can show a place in the Qur'an that says to execute apostates, because that verse does not exist.
Pamela - I don't see how you can say that "freedom of conscience is enshrined in the Quran" when there have been so many posts on this site that clearly show otherwise. You keep repeating many positive things about the Quran, but others have shown time and again that you are being selective and that there are whole swathes of the Quran that you ignore. And that many of the positive things in the Quran have been abrogated by later statements. You completely ignore these arguments, and just keep repeating again and again your cleaned up version of the Quran.
I am glad you agree that executing or imprisoning people for apostasy is counter to basic human rights.But if you look at the history of Islam you will see that from the get-go in every Muslim country, apostasy has been punishable. And in what Muslim majority country in the present can non-Muslims worship and live in peace? This is THE central problem with Islam, the way it treats non-Muslims. I see Islam as nothing more than a form of totalitarianism, crushing people's spirit.
Ross, I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I do not believe that the current policies of some countries vis a vis apostates is Qur'anically based. The Qur'an talks about people believing and then disbelieving, and then beliving against, and returning again to disbelief. That would be rather difficult if they were executed at the first instance of apostasy. I recognize that some classical scholars, and some countries today, consider apostasy a capital crime. I think they have made a serious error, and that freedom of conscience -- to believe or not believe as one sees fit -- is enshrined in the Qur'an, both in the passage mentioned above and in the command that there should be no compulsion in religion.
Unfortunately, for most of the Muslim world traditional ways (whether they have any basis in the Qur'an or not) and classical scholarship are sacrosanct, not to be challenged. This is a huge problem, and I believe that changing that attitude, putting classical scholarship and classical hadith collections on trial is the first step in promoting change in the Muslim world.
Jihadist,
I used to live in a Muslim country so I think I do understand the concept of fatwas. I have already pointed out that there is no central authority in Islam and as such there is no agreement as to which imam's fatwas are legitimate or not.
Fatwa means opinion.
فتوى the root is Fa Ta Aleph, meaning verdict or declaration or ruling.
"In Sunni Islam, a fatwa is nothing more than an opinion. It is just a view of a mufti and is not binding in India." ― Maulana Mehmood Madani, president of the Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Hind [4]
As in India it is the same in Syria and other Arab countries.
I took this from wikipedia as a convenient source:
According to the Usul al-fiqh (Principles of Jurisprudence), the latter are as follows :
- The fatwa is in line with relevant legal proofs, deduced from Koranic verses and hadiths;
- It is issued by a person (or a board) having due knowledge and sincerity of heart;
- It is free from individual opportunism, and not depending on political servitude;
- It is adequate with the needs of the contemporary world.
This broad definition is very close to mind and very far from yours. You seem to think the sharia courts or some such person/body are only entitled to issue fatwas. This is just not true.
Do you need a formal religious qualification to issue a fatwa? No. Anyone who is considered by others to be adequately religious and knowledgeable can issue a fatwa.
Is OBL a sheikh? Yes. Not only is he a sheikh but and Emir. The religious community known as al-Qaeda accepts OBL as its sheikh and emir. That is sufficient for him to issue fatwas.
"You certainly makes easy assumptions about "silence". Imam Pamela Taylor is not silent nor inactive. Like Victoria, American Muslims like her are "pure" Muslims - unfettered and unburdened by culture and history lacing Muslim beliefs and practices elsewhere in the Muslim world."
To Jihadist and all Muslims who are content to distance themselves from reality. Your silence is selective and complicit. You cannot in silence divorce yourself from fellow Muslims.
Take a large pitcher. Fill it halfway with pure, sparkling water. Add a fetid sewage that will make you gag and hold your hand over your mouth. Stir and pour yourself a large glass-full.
Your position is intenable.
You may feel snug in your beliefs. You may have a noble mission. But your thinking is marred and your mission cannot succeed.
Is it Good for a woman who is the tilth of man?
Is it Good for a woman who is one of four women?
Is it Good for a woman who is the half of a man?
Is it Good for women who enslaved and subjugated by the cult of violence?
Thanks for your concern. It is my primary concern to see where Muslims are heading in my region. I straddle Muslim majority countries.
You certainly makes easy assumptions about "silence". Imam Pamela Taylor is not silent nor inactive. Like Victoria, American Muslims like her are "pure" Muslims - unfettered and unburdened by culture and history lacing Muslim beliefs and practices elsewhere in the Muslim world.
Qasim Omar
Read up on Osama Bin Laden. He is not entitled to issue fatwas nor his personal opinions and political statements should be regarded as fatwas. In gist, his father was from Yemen, he was one of at least 55 children his father had, and he is somewhat a middle child. OBL is neither a head of a clan/tribe/village nor former Shariah student or scholar.
Fatwas are also made in on Muslim sites and blogs, including Islam Online as opinions on legal and religious issues from food to headress. None are binding to Muslims and are followed voluntarily or otherwise.
If you have been reading a bit more about what is happening in the Muslim world, you will notice it is the Muftis whose fatwas are deemed legitimate, but not complied by Muslims completely. Every imam and Muslim scholar issued "fatwas" by your definations regardless of laymen or Deobandi trained or Al Azhar trained or from the Internatuonal Islamic University. Even the Sheikh of Al Azhar's fatwas is noted but not agreed to by all Muslims not only in Egypt, but the wider Muslim world. If they heard of his fatwas.
The Islamic Family Laws of e.g. Morrocco, Egypt and Malaysia are, in effect, fatwas by consensus and/or agreement of Muslim scholars and ulema that are enacted, gazetted into law and enforced by the Shariah courts. Malaysia has a national fatwa council for consensus and attempts to standardize opinions. As if:) But they do find some consensus, including on Botox :)
Read up more on current issues and development on Shariah in Muslim majority states from Turkey to Iran to Saudi Arabia. The majority of Muslims in Muslim majority countries apparently wants Shariah to be applied in their lives, but the type and extant varies from Muslim state to Muslim state.
Turkey, don't have and don't want to revert to Shariah, but recently its people makes too much of the headscarf. An overblown matter trangressing on personal choice and private individual practice of faith.
Concerned :)
Paranoid are you?
By the way, to refresh for you, I am a banker by profession and choice. My country of origin is Indonesia. My country of adoption is Malaysia (due to marraige). I straddle both countries still and beyond in the Muslim, Western and non Muslim/non western worlds.
I am like Gaby, BGone, Andrea, Rusell D, Tonio, Ba'al, Wiccan and Paganplace et al. We are individuals coming in here to share thoughts and beliefs. I don't speak for all Muslims just as you don't speak for all Christians or Catholics.
As for Esposito and Saudi Prince Al, take it up with them. As a practicing Muslim, I certainly hope I know more about Islam than Esposito, Ross or Collins.
Perhaps y'all are not aware of the massive amount of literature on Islam available in the Muslim world by writers from the Middle East, Europe, Africa and Asia. They are read a lot by Muslims. There is great competition of ideas in the Muslim world by Muslim writers themselves. I read a lot of these writings as a Muslim.
Now, all the best people. My workweek has started.
Perhaps you should ask for a raise from the Indonesian Islamic Propagation Bureau? Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, I assume, is also sponsoring this group?? He paid Professor Esposito twenty million dollars and your Islamic propaganda is as good as his.
And do you believe in "pretty wingy talking thingies"? i.e The "Gabe/Mohammed connection"??
Jihadist,
If you want to tell the non-Muslims about Islamic matters but at least get your facts right.
A fatwa merely means a scholarly opinion. Any imam or mullah can issue a fatwa. It doesn't have to be 'gazetted' into sharia. Wherever did you get that idea. All it takes is for his followers or any other Muslim to accept his authority to issue fatwas. There is no certification or qualifications necessary other than the person issuing the fatwa is recognized as a scholar. That varies from place to place.
OBL can issue fatwas - he is a Sheikh. That means he's either a religious scholar or a head of an Arab tribe/clan/village.
A fatwa is a broad definition. If you go and ask a religious scholar a theological question his answer is also a fatwa.
As Islam has no central authority, nobody has the right to claim his fatwa is binding. The process of formulating sharia has little to do with fatwas. It is fatwas that explain the sharia, not the other way around.
Imam Pamela Taylor as always, wrote a piece that resonated with Muslims.
----------------------------------------------
As for the usual suspects
Hello, hello:)
Let us go off-side and have some fun then. Since all of you are not talking about personal satisfaction and contenment the question posed.
I don't know about y'all, but Victoria, myself and other Muslims that comes into On Faith threads are more contented and happier that y'all. Regardless of us being thrashed both by fellow Muslims (the extremist kind), and non-Muslims (the evangelical and atheistic kinds).
And as always,the non-Muslims and so-called former Muslims "permanent residents" in your threads perpetually quoting Suras, Hadiths and Muslim history without understanding their whole context.
I just love the easy generalizations of Ross and Frank Collins et al on Islam and Muslims, and the persistent insistence of Concerned the Christian Now Liberated to change the Al-Quran.
Without going into too many details and to leave y'all to you permanent state of hyperventilating set views:
Perhaps you don't know that Muslims are forbidden to slander the gods of other people. Hence the irate reactions and over-reactions of Muslims over Salman Rushdie, the Danish cartoons and Pope Benedict.
Perhaps you are not aware that Salman Rushdie is not just about religion, but about issues of class, race, elitism and mainstreaming of migrants.
Perhaps you are not aware that the Danish cartoon controversy also has to do with the hypocircy, double-standards, blunders, insularity of some Danes and the smugness and xenophobia of the Danish government in diffusing the matter diplomatically until it was too late.
Perhaps you are not aware Muslims considers Pope Benedict, deem as infallible by some Catholics, and head of the Catholic church, to speak for all Catholics.
Perhaps you are not seeing nor understanding that those that invoke the Lesser Jihad and calls for deaths of non-Mulsims are not the credible and bona-fide members of the Muslim ulema, but are laymen who couched their political causes in religious overtones.
Perhaps you are not aware that everytime a bona-fide Muslim ulema says Islam is a religion of peace, the bona fide ulema are taking back the interpretation and practice of Islam from the anarchistic and extremist fringes who got wide coverage in the west.
Perhaps you are not aware the Osama does not issue "fatwas" but rather political manifestos.
Perhaps you don't know that "fatwas" are legal or religious opinions and none binding until and unless gazetted into Shariah law.
Perhaps you are not aware of too, too many things about Muslims and Islam as it is in the wider Muslim world.
Perhaps you are not aware that honour killings, female genetalia mutilations, arranged marraiges are cultural rather than Islamic.
Perhaps you are not aware that the majority of Muslims don't have access to education like you do and the curriculum they have in places from Sudan to Afghanistan are hundreds of years old and what they can afford, if they go to school.
Perhaps you are aware that no matter what you says about Islam, Muslims and the Al-Quran, only I as a Muslim and other Muslims like Imam Pamela Taylor, can really move forward in which directions Muslims are to go.
Perhaps you are not aware that Muslims are not allowed to slander the gods of other peoples if you are wondering why not a single Muslim that comes in On Faith threads never do that re Christian, Hindu, Wiccan beliefs etc.
Perhaps you don't notice that Muslims don't attack the religious beliefs and tenets of people of other faiths, but only on their personal views and actions.
Perhaps you forgot all Muslims are responsible for his own views, actions and beliefs and not his whole community and his personal sins too.
Perhaps you ignore much the evangelicals in third world countries resort to differentiations of them and us whether it is Catholics vs Pentocasts in Brazil; or Baptists vs Mormons in Tonga; or Christians vs Muslims in Yemen.
Perhaps you are not aware that the so called "sword of Islam" and "Islam is spread by the sword" is a western ideological counterpoint to halt Muslim territorial expansion in Europe.
With that wee bits above, I leave y'all to continue to be wrong again and again, on Islam and Muslims, what is really going on, what Muslims are doing beyond your favourite headlines and quotes about Islam and Muslims.
Know that this kind of thinking and assumptions makes the Middle East policy flawed and costly.
But never mind, what you said here is known by Muslims already. Nothing new to add and your best and brightests like Daniel Pipes and Bernard Lewis have been saying all along. And they got it wrong too :)
ross - you are correct. which leads any logical person to one conclusion - islamics believe they are charged by god to make war on the rest of the world until it is islamic or there are no more islamics left.
how do you make peace with people who belive such things?
Since muslims consider the quran as the literal words of allah rejecting a single verse would be mean rejecting Allah. Any muslim who attempts to do this will be the target of jihadists.
the problem with islamics is that they will never reject any part of the koran, and that includes those parts that require hate, kidnapping, holding for ranson, torture, cutting off body parts, rape, murder and forced conversions. why? because they actually say that their god does not just allow it, it commands it. and it also commands war until the entire world is islamic.
when you point out those hateful verses in the koran they call you violent and angry, until you remind them that they are not my words but from their koran.
then they tell you the words are taken out of context, but never tell you what context those hateful verses are acceptable. one time i was actually responded to and the context were a few preceeding verses in which their god allegedly said that the jews deserved it, so it was ok to do it.
then then act like you are the only one to ever think that those verses mean what the say so you show them the hisotry that lead up to the crusades and they say they were following their god and why go way back in history. so you show them from the crusades to 1900 and they say you are still talkinb about the past. so you mention the armenian genocide where almost 2,000,000 christian armenians were murdered by the islamic turks and the answer is they deserved it.
you show them islamic prefesors writings about islam being in a religious war with every nation they border and they say its just a coincidence.
then they will say that the old and new testament shows the same thing and when you point out that jews and christians are not required to do it they will point to where jesus was using a story to show a point and pretend it was jesus ordering christians to murder.
but the best is when they get insulted and tell you that no one believes the way you do and that islam is peaceful and then you show them video of islamics in the mosques teaching what they before said did not exist, was out of context, and a product of my imagination.
but one thing they will never do is reject those verses so vile and hateful they put islam in a constant state of war with the infidels.
Progressive Muslim - a bit of an oxymoron at the moment. I think Muslims need to wholesale re-invent their religion and, evidently from discussions here, the Arabic language in order to be progressive.
Muslims like Pamela should be applauded for trying very hard to convince themselves and others that Islam can be made progressive. However, it might be best done in problem countries like Saudi Arabia since Islam is not allowed by Western secular laws to display its less progressive nature in Western countries like the US of A.
I think Pamela's fight is in the wrong place. If she and other like-minded Muslims are serious they might take their views to the sources of the problems.
All Comments (61)
adsorption unobtunded germinative dowp supererogator raspish manslayer spet
Dutch Henry Winery
http://www.loraincountysheriff.com
December 16, 2007 1:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 16, 2007 13:12
adsorption unobtunded germinative dowp supererogator raspish manslayer spet
Merzbow
http://www.mpegx.com/
December 16, 2007 1:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on December 16, 2007 13:12
demipike osteomatoid decalitre resize lusciousness brimming societary galenic
How To Become A Medical Transcript
http://www.angelfire.com/efbtxsit/ppr.html
November 4, 2007 8:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 4, 2007 08:28
demipike osteomatoid decalitre resize lusciousness brimming societary galenic
Rss News Rss
http://www.angelfire.com/ptkaporr/101b.html
November 3, 2007 7:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on November 3, 2007 07:01
demipike osteomatoid decalitre resize lusciousness brimming societary galenic
94577
http://www.angelfire.com/deojja/3.html
October 6, 2007 8:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on October 6, 2007 20:21
pam - why does you mission statement for your fake moderate islamic post - fail to guarantee freedom of religion as one of the social matters you allegedly stand for?
May 24, 2007 7:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 24, 2007 07:08
Pamela & all Muslims,
Why is it that so many people turn to a self-confessed paedophile for moral guidance in their lives?
Why is it that people who ask such questions are called bigots, when all they are doing is asking "Why do you think that a paedophile can teach you anything about morality?"
The world is a highly dangerous place when people defend paedophiles, defend murderers, defend warmongers & defend cult psychology.
Pam, you need to wake up to the fact that you are following the teachings of one of the most violent, dangerous and hateful men in history. He was a cult leader, Pam. He used standard cult psychology to achieve power in the world. It is very silly, and dangerous, to put your trust in this.
Why do you need this in your life? The very concept of belief without evidence (faith) is a con, because anyone who can convince you to trust in this concept can control you. Study cult psychology and manipulation psychology, then you'll understand that it's all a con.
May 24, 2007 5:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 24, 2007 05:21
Asim
I hope you've not included me in your ad hominem as I think I have much to contribute to the understanding of (real) Islam by the good readers of the Washington Post.
Cheerio,
Qasim Omar
May 24, 2007 1:58 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 24, 2007 01:58
Pamela and other Muslims,
Am amazed that you still pay the least attention to empty distractors/polmicts on this form with ready cut/paste lies and half-truths-and the later is more dangerous.
Clearly, these people have such a big log in their eyes that blocks the light-any light.
Objectively speaking and realistically, they are unworthy of our attention. Let us just ignore them-that simple. Any response to them will encourage them to waste our time and the space provided by this form for decent discussion
May 23, 2007 2:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 23, 2007 14:10
To Pamela - You said: "The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses. I've said this about 15 times already in the past few months, but it bears repeating. The verses concerning warfare were supplanted by verses making intermarriage and the breaking of bread the standard of intercommunal behavior."
I have read just the opposite on these threads. That the later verses that supercede the earlier verses are the more violent verses, because at that point Muhammed had more power and was not afraid to say and do what he really wanted. And since I am no scholar of Islam, Imam Omar is going to have to get on here and help clarify the issue, because frankly Pamela, I do not trust what you say. Because unlike a true scientist who starts with a hypothesis, and then tests the hypothesis to see if it is true, you put the cart before the horse, and you start with your hypothesis being true, that is, that Muhammed was a great prophet, and everything in the quran and hadith gets explained in that light and from that point of view. Yes, you have said that you made a genuine inquiry before you converted to see if this was a path that you could accept. But I too made a genuine inquiry about this path of Islam, while younger I was involved with a Sufi community, and just accepted on faith that Muhammed was a great prophet. But when I got older and read an actual biography of him, I was shocked to discover what he had done. So I came at the issue of Muhammed thinking that he was on a par with Jesus and Buddha, but had to change my mind and based on what I have read so far, I have to agree with Mullah Omar and Ross, that Muhammed was both cruel and violent, and hardly a role model for humanity.
In another thread about whether Islam was a violent religion, you quoted that famous passage from the sayings of Jesus about "I have come not to bring peace but the sword" or something to that effect. But that is just about the only saying of Jesus like that, and based on the rest of his life, I interpret it metaphorically. Jesus himself did not try to start a movement to gain any sort of political power, he was talking about that when people understood what he was saying they would realize that so many things in their life that had been important would now become trivial and they would have no peace. And as for the other fire and brimstone passages in the NT, it is clear that those were added at a later date, and wwere not the sayings of Jesus. So to compare violent verses in the quran with those in the OT is simply fallacious.
But in the Quran and hadith there are SO MANY statements and events that, to someone coming to those texts without any presuppositions about the nature of their author, just appear to be abusive and cruel. There is too much smoke here, and where there is smoke there is fire. And you can spend the rest of your life trying to explain away and justifying and providing context for these events and statements, and maybe you believe in your heart that people who question your interpretation are just ignorant and biased, but from my point of view there is a heck of a lot of smoke here, a heck of a lot more than I have seen in any other religious text except for maybe the OT, and I have read parts of all the texts of all the religions. And as for the OT, only a very small percentage of Jews, who already are only a small percentage of the world population, even take the OT as a sacred revelation. So there is no comparison at this point in history when you compare 1.5 billion Muslims who believe everything in the Quran is the word of God, including all the nasty passages, and the Jews and the OT.
May 23, 2007 10:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 23, 2007 10:26
And the poll votes continue to be counted. With over 50% of the poll completed, "Mohammed the Great Hallucinator of Pretty Wingie Talking Thingies" continues to be the choice description of Islam's founder.
Other descriptions are welcomed from On Faith contributors. Thinking and contributing are great ways to add satisfaction to your life.
Recommended descriptions are:
1. Mohammed the Great Hallucinator Of Mythical Wingie Thingies?
2. Mohammed the Great Prophet?
3. Mohammed the Great Profiteer?
4. Mohammed the Lover of Many Women Young and Not So Young?
5. Mohammed the Man of Many Myths?
6. Too much Time in the Sun, Mohammed?
7. Mohammed, Man Made by Many Militant Scribes
The poll will remain open for another week. Enter today to win a chance for a free trip to Pamela's Islamic Fairy Land, a once in a lifetime treat.
May 23, 2007 2:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 23, 2007 02:34
Fatwas or not, OBL is an inspiration and role model for millions of Muslims. So whether his fatwas are "real" fatwas or not, has not the slightest bearing on his influence.
May 23, 2007 12:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 23, 2007 00:30
Haaaahhh!!!!:)
Finally, some attempts and stabs at humour by both Concerned and Qasim here and there.
I'll have to take you both off my list of fanatical maniacs like OBL (he has no sense of humour too) and get you into my list of obsessive obsessives:)
Have been fun irreverently thrashing back and forth with you fellows, but of course, to the dismay of all sane posters in On Faith.
May 23, 2007 12:15 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 23, 2007 00:15
Dear Jihadist,
Please lighten up. I'm obviously not the one who's stressed here - you are. Deny OBL's right to issue fatwas or the validity of his fatwas is not doing a jot in stopping his followers in obeying his fatwas.
Oh... of course I'm not a supporter of OBL - I'm not Muslim after all. Heheh.
May 22, 2007 11:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 23:36
Jihadist,
The poll numbers continue to build. "Mohammed, the Great Hallucinator of Pretty Wingie Talking Thingies" continues in first place followed closely by "Mohammed the Profiteer" in second place.
Hmmm, I do see some movie potential here!!!! Would you like to direct movies as a means to get more satisfaction from your life??
May 22, 2007 11:26 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 23:26
Hello Qasim Omar :)
Mental, physical or verbal stress you are undergoing now?
The verbal stress in insisting all follow OBL and what he said as "fatwa?" is already over-extended.
Muslims decides on what is or is not a fatwa, and who has the right to issue it, and whose fatwa is valid or not.
But or course, you can hold on to your opinion as to what is fatwa, who can issue fatwas, and which fatwas is valid or otherwise.
OBL has such an impact and effect on you eh? OBL must be giving you a lot of mental stress. He has power over you because you let him obsessed you and in listening to what he said
You are not an OBL supporter in disguise are you? Insisting Muslims regard OBL's rants as fatwas and we all must comply. I have never met anyone, Muslim or otherwise, who insisted on that as you.
May 22, 2007 10:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 22:33
Dear Jihadist,
Please calm down. Life is too short to be so stressed. You know and I know that I'm right but let's not quibble about little things like fatwas. You can say whatever you like about OBL's right to issue fatwas, but you have no impact whatsoever on the thousands, if not millions, of Muslims who say he does. So long as there are Muslims who deem OBL's fatwas to be authoritative how you argue that his fatwas are valid or invalid is irrelevant.
The fact is: OBL has issued fatwas. His followers accept the validity of his fatwas. What you or I say will never change their minds. Ergo, OBL's fatwas are as legitimate as the fatwas of your local imam.
May 22, 2007 9:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 21:21
Psychiatrist For You :)
Obviously, Frank, Ross, Qasim et al gets their "satisfaction" in life like this.
You should read Frank Collins' rampage against pagans/wiccans, atheists, gays in Starhawk's thread. He is finding his "satisfaction" in life so to speak.
May 22, 2007 6:46 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 18:46
Jihadist,
How is that poll going?
i.e.
How would you describe Mohammed??
1. Mohammed the Great Hallucinator Of Mythical Wingie Thingies?
2. Mohammed the Great Prophet?
3. Mohammed the Great Profiteer?
4. Mohammed the Lover of Many Women Young and Not So Young?
5. Mohammed the Man of Many Myths?
6. Too much Time in the Sun, Mohammed?
7. Mohammed, Man Made by Many Militant Scribes?
In the USA, #1 is the top choice so far with 30% of the population polled.
May 22, 2007 6:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 18:12
Jihadist,
How is that poll going?
i.e.
How would you describe Mohammed??
1. Mohammed the Great Hallucinator Of Mythical Wingie Thingies?
2. Mohammed the Great Prophet?
3. Mohammed the Great Profiteer?
4. Mohammed the Lover of Many Women Young and Not So Young?
5. Mohammed the Man of Many Myths?
6. Too much Time in the Sun, Mohammed?
7. Mohammed, Man Made by Many Militant Scribes?
In the USA, #1 is the top choice leading to much satisfaction.
May 22, 2007 6:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 18:11
Qasim Omar:)
You summarized or conclude: "Everything is a fat wa, if it is not a thin wa. :) :) :)"
Very intellectual and scholarly. Not like you demanded in others.
F- minus for summary.
F- minus on humour.
Repeat the course on fatwas for the summer.
See good comedies to understand humour.
Cheaper than shrinks.
Good luck kiddo:)
May 22, 2007 5:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 17:47
PS just for clarification...
Poetry was used to drum up the troops back in the days of Muhammad. It seems to me likely that this is referring to the poets who whipped up the Qur'aish against the young Muslim community, perhaps stating lies about Muhammad and so on.
Obviously, there is a hugely rich poetic tradition in Islamic countries. Most famous are perhaps Rumi, Hafiz and the huge poetic enterprise in Persia. India and Pakistan also have a strong tradition of poetry, and you will find Muslims from this region quoting poetry left and right.
Also, Ross, I thought I might add that I tend to look on hadith which reinforce traditional power structures with a great deal of suspicion. We know that hundreds of thousands of hadith were made up. That is why some 200 years after Muhammad's death Bukhari, Muslim and others decided they had to start taking steps to qualify which hadith were most likely to be authentic, by charting the chains of narration, and determining their authenticity and the quality of the narrators in those chains. Hadiths such as the ones which the women imam movement cite to show that the Prophet not only condoned but commanded women to lead prayers for men and women alike, are less suspect to me because the challenge those very power structures. I mean, it seems highly unlikely there were groups of proto-feminists out there fabricating hadith so they could lead prayers. On the other hand, it is pretty well documented that various kings maintained and supported whole houses of religious "scholars" whose job it was to give them the rulings they wanted. So when I see a hadith which reinforces hierarchy, patriarchy, the financial and social elite, I tend to be very skeptical about it.
I don't go as far as some people, to say that we should just throw out the hadith, as I believe they can give us information (such as the details of the ritual worship) that is not in the Qur'an, and some of them are truly beautiful. But, I do think we have to approach them, 1) very skeptically, 2) as a secondary source to the Qur'an, not equal to it, 3) in a non-literal manner, 4) as a general guide rather than as a explanation of law.
Obviously, there are many Muslims who would agree with me, and just as many who would not.
May 22, 2007 11:02 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 11:02
shrink - BECAUSE PAM BROUGHT IT UP!
and if a nazi or kkk member said they were happy in their lives and looking for like minded people would their membership if organizations of hate be relevant?
yes it would.
May 22, 2007 11:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 11:01
How did the discussion on this post change from personal satisfaction et al to Islam and its evil and/or good side? Stop with the vitriol already. Those crazy people who are indulging in these meaningless fights, I think it is time to see your shrink or get a new prescription filled. Please...
May 22, 2007 10:52 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 10:52
Ross,
The Qur'an is a document revealed over time because communities and individuals take time to develop. I don't believe God was learning in the process, but dealing with human realities. So, yes, as the people around Muhammad grew and changed, and as their neighbors changed in their attitudes toward the Muslim community, you find different prescriptions within the Qur'an. Thus the first quotes on, say, alcohol says not to come to prayer drunk, and the latter ones say don't have anything to do with it at all. The latter one takes precedence, and the former cannot be used as a license for drinking alcohol; it has been superceded. So too other verses. The history of the community is, in fact, essential to a sound implementation of the Qur'an.
As for hadith, if the hadith clearly contradicts the Qur'an, which the hadith on this issue do, then the Qur'an MUST take precedence.
Hadith in general are a terribly problematical group of literature. The classical scholars did nothing on the basis of content, judging only the possibility and the quality of the chain of narrators, although from time to time they would say this appears to be sound but it's content is strange.
Personally, when I approach a hadith this is only the first step in deciding what role it may or may not play in my life. Whether it tallies with the Qur'an is the second. Whether it makes sense logically or ethically is the third. Whether it is something that pertained to the culture Muhammad lived in or is something universal is a fourth consideration.
A lot of people take things very literally. If the Prophet brushed his teeth with a twig from a fibrous tree, then we should. Personally, I look at the intention -- the intention was to keep his teeth clean; I do so by using a modern toothbrush and toothpaste. This methodology can be applied in dozens and dozens of instances, and seems to make a lot more sense, to me, than a very literal following.
Halozcel,
let's quote the whole passage:
26:224 And the Poets,- It is those straying in Evil, who follow them:
26:225 Seest thou not that they wander distracted in every valley?
26:226 And that they say what they practice not?
26:227 Except those who believe, work righteousness, engage much in the remembrance of Allah, and defend themselves only after they are unjustly attacked. And soon will the unjust assailants know what vicissitudes their affairs will take!
I count myself in the latter part -- those who believe, work righteousnes and so on.
May 22, 2007 10:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 10:50
Pamela wrote:
The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses.
Why must the latter verses supercede the earlier ones ? Was Allah learning by experience ? and did he not have knowledge of the future. Sounds like Allah was more human and less God !!!
May 22, 2007 9:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 09:37
Pamela wrote:
Unfortunately, for most of the Muslim world traditional ways (whether they have any basis in the Qur'an or not) and classical scholarship are sacrosanct, not to be challenged. This is a huge problem, and I believe that changing that attitude, putting classical scholarship and classical hadith collections on trial is the first step in promoting change in the Muslim world.
So you accept the muslim world has a serious problem. If you consider death for apostasy to be a huge problem then are you doing anything about it ? I'm afraid your interpretation does not help much. What make you so sure that you are right and the classical scholars are wrong ? The classical interpretation was how Mohammed wanted Islam to look like.
May 22, 2007 3:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 03:40
Dear Pamela Taylor,
Fiction Writer and Poet.
Soar over the covered hairs
The covered minds
Into uncharted
lands of amity
from Detente.
Ray Charles sings 'unchain my heart'
yes,unchain their minds.
shall not they soar over 'two women equals one man' and 'man can scourge woman' ??
Dear Poet,
Holy Quran says,and the poets,those who go astray follow them. 26.224
In that case,if they(muslims) follow you,shall they go astray?
How can we interpret this situation?
May 22, 2007 3:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 03:01
It's Mr Qasim Omar to you, whoever you are. Or if you like, you can call me Imam Omar, not Mullah Omar please. :) :)
Like I said, just about anyone can issue a fatwa. Whether it is binding or not depends on the stature of the person issuing it.
Of course every Muslim country has at least one Mufti, but it is erroneous to think that only the fatwas of a Mufti is binding.
OBL has many supporters - it is up to them to decide whether he has the religious authority to issue fatwas. If you disagree, you disagree, but so long as there are followers who decide that OBL's fatwas are binding on them, who are you or anyone else to tell them otherwise?
One religious scholar's fatwa is another scholar's rubbish. Fatwas are often conflicting and over-riding since they are nothing more than 'opinions' or 'rulings' of the scholars issuing them.
That is what I'm trying to convey. Does a Syrian imam's fatwa have any binding on an Indonesian Muslim? Probably not. Does an Afghan imam's fatwa have any binding on a Muslim from New Delhi? Probably not.
If you go to your local mosque and ask your imam a theological question - what he tells you is also a 'fatwa'. It can be as mundane as that.
Of course rulings on the sharia are fatwas. Death incitements are fatwas. Answers to religious questions are also fatwas.
Everything is a fat wa, if it is not a thin wa. :) :) :)
Thus proving Imam Qasim Omar is correct once again.
May 22, 2007 2:02 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 02:02
The traditional definition of Fatwa:
- A formal legal opinion or religious decree issued by an Islamic leader. aftā "decide a point of law"
- An Islamic religious decree issued by the ʿulama ( recognized religious authority)
- A ruling on a point of Islamic law that is given by a recognized authority.
- From Arabic fatwa "a decision given by a mufti," related to fata "to instruct by a legal decision."
- Legal opinion concerning Islamic Law.
Just about every country in the Middle East has a Mufti, a government appointed position dealing with the religious affairs of the country and its citizens. The Mufti is basically a jurist expert in the religious laws who delivers a judgment on religious matters. The Mufti should have extensive knowledge of the Quran, the Hadith, and the different schools of thought and their rulings concerning different religious matters.
The weight and influence of a fatwa has always depended on the stature of the cleric who issued it, and clerics often rule differently on the same matter. In theory, only the mufti and a group of certified religious scholars have the right to issue religious rulings.
But in recent years, I guess a sign of the times, there's been an explosion of fatwa-giving, with many Muslims getting answers to their religious quandaries from phone-in TV shows, 800 numbers, and websites; sometimes with contradicting rulings. In practice, unpopular or impractical fatwas are often not observed.
Muslims are not the only ones having problems with fatwa issuing. Just recently, the pope in an interview issued a statement saying that anyone in Mexico who votes for legalizing abortion should excommunicated. The next day he had to rescind his decree due to widespread dissatisfaction with his comments and his staffers had to remove the comments the pope made from the interview transcript.
Based on the true definition of a Mufti, OBL is no body when it comes to releasing religious decrees (fatwas.) His political views might appeal to some Arabs and to a lesser degree to some Muslims; but his opinions are not rooted in Islamic law. Some people might agree with his opinions concerning Middle East political affairs but don’t necessarily like the way he is going about achieving his goals. Killing innocent civilians for one is against the spirit of the Quran and the moral code it teaches. And from what I understand he has no extensive religious education and he is not recognized as an Islamic scholar. He can issue all the political fatwas he wants but they are his personal opinions which are based on emotions and frustrations and not on sound religious understanding based on firmly established religious doctrine.
O. Q. argues that since he lived at one time in a Muslim country he therefore knows all about fatwa and its meaning, and implies if anyone who disagrees with his views and understanding “have got a strange understanding of Islam.” Well, O. Q., I guess you are now the resident Mufti of the WaPo; Why not, I think you are qualified enough to claim such a post since you “lived in a Muslim country.” Congratulations OQ. From now on, anyone with questions regarding Islam please submit them to Mr. OQ, thank you.
May 22, 2007 12:34 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 22, 2007 00:34
Qasim Omar :)
I thought you won't let up even when some of your statements in your posts are a bit off.
I'm in the office now, but I'll indulge you some more. Good to to know you don't actually rely on Wiki for knowledge.
As per your obsession on OBL, he becomes somebody because he is made so beyond his true strenght and influence. Power had is power given. He is either really sick or dead already.
Perhaps you have not been reading surveys done in the Muslim world where OBL is held in low esteem. Of course you are not aware of these surveys.
So, where did you come across stats that say OBL has millions of supporters throughout the Islamic world and his word is law among them? Even alleged Al Qaeda linked groups are indenpendent of him, including in Iraq.
So, you think what I said that only 'fatwas' gazetted into the sharia is binding on Muslims is "utterly false" eh:). Islamic Family Law is such. Fatwas by a committee of Islamic jurisprudence experts made into enforceble Shariah laws.
You are the student, show me your scholarship mettle and intellectual capabality. I've been to college. I've no papers to write for grades anymore.
And you also stated all Muslim country has their own sharia laws? Wrong. Remember Turkey?
And you stated even countries that don't have sharias are also subject to fatwas. Of course, and Muslims comply or otherwise. They do if they respect the person issuing the fatwas and the rationale for the fatwas makes sense and is in line with Islamic principles.
Yes, I certainly have a "strange understanding of Islam" for those who don't know Islam and the Muslim world. Or for those who want to fit all Muslims into their preconceived assumptions no?
All the same, I am impressed by your tireless hair-splitting. God is in the details, the devil is in the details for you. I don't engage in that unfortunately.
I really have to get on with my work today and the whole week. Have fun in your intellectual and scholarly discussions here. And good luck.
My fatwa to you : Don't forget to have fun too in college.
May 21, 2007 10:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 22:48
I don't actually rely on wiki for knowledge. It's just a good repository of information that may or may not be suspect - depending on the vested interest and emotions attached to a topic.
There is little or no emotional impact of the definition of fatwas so I guess wiki is a good place to look.
If you want me to look at Islamic sites I can do that too, but that will take a bit more searching. So instead of discussing the issue, you discuss what source I use. Very scholarly and intellectual of you, I must say.
Further on the topic of OBL - I don't think he's a nobody. He's quite the somebody, even if he's hiding in a cave somewhere. Millions of Muslims hold him to be some sort of Islamic hero. He has millions of supporters throughout the Islamic world. His word is law among his supporters.
Your stance that only 'fatwas' gazetted into the sharia is binding on Muslims is utterly false. Every Muslim country has their own sharia laws. Even countries that don't have sharias are also subject to fatwas. You have got a strange understanding of Islam.
May 21, 2007 8:57 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 20:57
"To Jihadist":)
I take you points in good faith as they are made in good faith naturally - concern for the well-being of all Muslims in the non-Muslim and Muslim world.
How can you be sure I don't do anything and beyond re and on behalf of my fellow Muslims' well-being? Certainly this place, these On Faith threads, is not where one trumpets what one has done.
And how you be sure I am not thrashing some of my more excitable, blinkered, bigoted and fanatical fellow Muslims in myriad ways - NGOs vs NGOs etc? They are more insidious, more dangerous and more immediate to me and other Muslims in our societies and countries.
Do remember that "outside" interventions is not quite productive. Just as military interventions is not helpful, neither is religious interventions. Outsiders do mess up in not taking into consideration the particularities and peculiarities of every group and society. Nor do they fully understand the cultures of the societies they purported to help.
The lives of many Muslims in most Muslim states mired in poverty, muddied by bad governance, misguided by the wooly interpretations of Islam by freelance and freestyle imams and pseudo clerics, and tarred by traditional practices not sanctioned by Islam. All this and more, we already know.
But, thank you for your observations anyway.
Qasim Omar
If you are trying to impress me or the more impressionable non-Muslim Americans, go ahead.
What we already know, you know by study, or as you claimed, because you have lived in a Muslim country. It is like me saying I've lived in the UK and US and hence know everything about Christianity by reading books on it, having Christian friends and visiting some churches.
Insist all you want that OBL has a right to and can issue fatwas, and Arab Muslims will beg to differ on OBL. He was and is, a nobody, even for his family, tribe or clan. But y'all make him so by elevating his rights to issue "fatwas" and taking it as legitimate religous opinions or injuctions. He was making and issuing political statements couched in normal Muslim practices when giving speeches/statements in mentioning God formally here and there.
And Qasim Omar, as everyone knows, there is no central authority in Islam, no equivalent of a Pope for Sunni Muslims. But central authorities on Islam in and within countries are instituted by Muslim states from Morrocco to Malaysia. Wikipedia is a good starting place for knowledge, but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, no?
Keep insisting on how Muslims should think, act and behave according to what you read and know from Wikipedia and other tracts written by non-Muslims and you will get it wrong and wrong again.
I have to get ready to go to work now.
All the best in your quest for knowledge.
May 21, 2007 6:15 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 18:15
The problem is that those people who post those verses have no understanding of how the Qur'an was revealed over time, such that later verses supercede earlier verses. I've said this about 15 times already in the past few months, but it bears repeating. The verses concerning warfare were supplanted by verses making intermarriage and the breaking of bread the standard of intercommunal behavior.
As for apostasy, no one can show a place in the Qur'an that says to execute apostates, because that verse does not exist.
May 21, 2007 3:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 15:37
Pamela - I don't see how you can say that "freedom of conscience is enshrined in the Quran" when there have been so many posts on this site that clearly show otherwise. You keep repeating many positive things about the Quran, but others have shown time and again that you are being selective and that there are whole swathes of the Quran that you ignore. And that many of the positive things in the Quran have been abrogated by later statements. You completely ignore these arguments, and just keep repeating again and again your cleaned up version of the Quran.
I am glad you agree that executing or imprisoning people for apostasy is counter to basic human rights.But if you look at the history of Islam you will see that from the get-go in every Muslim country, apostasy has been punishable. And in what Muslim majority country in the present can non-Muslims worship and live in peace? This is THE central problem with Islam, the way it treats non-Muslims. I see Islam as nothing more than a form of totalitarianism, crushing people's spirit.
May 21, 2007 11:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 11:23
Ross, I've said it before, but I'll say it again. I do not believe that the current policies of some countries vis a vis apostates is Qur'anically based. The Qur'an talks about people believing and then disbelieving, and then beliving against, and returning again to disbelief. That would be rather difficult if they were executed at the first instance of apostasy. I recognize that some classical scholars, and some countries today, consider apostasy a capital crime. I think they have made a serious error, and that freedom of conscience -- to believe or not believe as one sees fit -- is enshrined in the Qur'an, both in the passage mentioned above and in the command that there should be no compulsion in religion.
Unfortunately, for most of the Muslim world traditional ways (whether they have any basis in the Qur'an or not) and classical scholarship are sacrosanct, not to be challenged. This is a huge problem, and I believe that changing that attitude, putting classical scholarship and classical hadith collections on trial is the first step in promoting change in the Muslim world.
May 21, 2007 9:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 09:27
Jihadist,
I used to live in a Muslim country so I think I do understand the concept of fatwas. I have already pointed out that there is no central authority in Islam and as such there is no agreement as to which imam's fatwas are legitimate or not.
Fatwa means opinion.
فتوى the root is Fa Ta Aleph, meaning verdict or declaration or ruling.
"In Sunni Islam, a fatwa is nothing more than an opinion. It is just a view of a mufti and is not binding in India." ― Maulana Mehmood Madani, president of the Jamaat-e-Ulema-e-Hind [4]
As in India it is the same in Syria and other Arab countries.
I took this from wikipedia as a convenient source:
According to the Usul al-fiqh (Principles of Jurisprudence), the latter are as follows :
- The fatwa is in line with relevant legal proofs, deduced from Koranic verses and hadiths;
- It is issued by a person (or a board) having due knowledge and sincerity of heart;
- It is free from individual opportunism, and not depending on political servitude;
- It is adequate with the needs of the contemporary world.
This broad definition is very close to mind and very far from yours. You seem to think the sharia courts or some such person/body are only entitled to issue fatwas. This is just not true.
Do you need a formal religious qualification to issue a fatwa? No. Anyone who is considered by others to be adequately religious and knowledgeable can issue a fatwa.
Is OBL a sheikh? Yes. Not only is he a sheikh but and Emir. The religious community known as al-Qaeda accepts OBL as its sheikh and emir. That is sufficient for him to issue fatwas.
May 21, 2007 9:12 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 09:12
"Imam Pamela Taylor is not silent nor inactive."
BTW, I already knew this to be true. Her homepage says she is an avid reader and novice writer of Fantasy and Science Fiction.
May 21, 2007 8:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 08:22
"You certainly makes easy assumptions about "silence". Imam Pamela Taylor is not silent nor inactive. Like Victoria, American Muslims like her are "pure" Muslims - unfettered and unburdened by culture and history lacing Muslim beliefs and practices elsewhere in the Muslim world."
To Jihadist and all Muslims who are content to distance themselves from reality. Your silence is selective and complicit. You cannot in silence divorce yourself from fellow Muslims.
Take a large pitcher. Fill it halfway with pure, sparkling water. Add a fetid sewage that will make you gag and hold your hand over your mouth. Stir and pour yourself a large glass-full.
Your position is intenable.
You may feel snug in your beliefs. You may have a noble mission. But your thinking is marred and your mission cannot succeed.
Best wishes.
May 21, 2007 8:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 08:03
Life is Good.
Yes,correct.Life is Good for Who?
Is it Good for a woman who is the tilth of man?
Is it Good for a woman who is one of four women?
Is it Good for a woman who is the half of a man?
Is it Good for women who enslaved and subjugated by the cult of violence?
May 21, 2007 6:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 06:00
...and I find it breathtaking that some posters in On Faith threads assume Muslims not have any opinions and views:)
May 21, 2007 2:45 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 02:45
Crusader
Thanks for your concern. It is my primary concern to see where Muslims are heading in my region. I straddle Muslim majority countries.
You certainly makes easy assumptions about "silence". Imam Pamela Taylor is not silent nor inactive. Like Victoria, American Muslims like her are "pure" Muslims - unfettered and unburdened by culture and history lacing Muslim beliefs and practices elsewhere in the Muslim world.
Qasim Omar
Read up on Osama Bin Laden. He is not entitled to issue fatwas nor his personal opinions and political statements should be regarded as fatwas. In gist, his father was from Yemen, he was one of at least 55 children his father had, and he is somewhat a middle child. OBL is neither a head of a clan/tribe/village nor former Shariah student or scholar.
Fatwas are also made in on Muslim sites and blogs, including Islam Online as opinions on legal and religious issues from food to headress. None are binding to Muslims and are followed voluntarily or otherwise.
If you have been reading a bit more about what is happening in the Muslim world, you will notice it is the Muftis whose fatwas are deemed legitimate, but not complied by Muslims completely. Every imam and Muslim scholar issued "fatwas" by your definations regardless of laymen or Deobandi trained or Al Azhar trained or from the Internatuonal Islamic University. Even the Sheikh of Al Azhar's fatwas is noted but not agreed to by all Muslims not only in Egypt, but the wider Muslim world. If they heard of his fatwas.
The Islamic Family Laws of e.g. Morrocco, Egypt and Malaysia are, in effect, fatwas by consensus and/or agreement of Muslim scholars and ulema that are enacted, gazetted into law and enforced by the Shariah courts. Malaysia has a national fatwa council for consensus and attempts to standardize opinions. As if:) But they do find some consensus, including on Botox :)
Read up more on current issues and development on Shariah in Muslim majority states from Turkey to Iran to Saudi Arabia. The majority of Muslims in Muslim majority countries apparently wants Shariah to be applied in their lives, but the type and extant varies from Muslim state to Muslim state.
Turkey, don't have and don't want to revert to Shariah, but recently its people makes too much of the headscarf. An overblown matter trangressing on personal choice and private individual practice of faith.
Concerned :)
Paranoid are you?
By the way, to refresh for you, I am a banker by profession and choice. My country of origin is Indonesia. My country of adoption is Malaysia (due to marraige). I straddle both countries still and beyond in the Muslim, Western and non Muslim/non western worlds.
I am like Gaby, BGone, Andrea, Rusell D, Tonio, Ba'al, Wiccan and Paganplace et al. We are individuals coming in here to share thoughts and beliefs. I don't speak for all Muslims just as you don't speak for all Christians or Catholics.
As for Esposito and Saudi Prince Al, take it up with them. As a practicing Muslim, I certainly hope I know more about Islam than Esposito, Ross or Collins.
Perhaps y'all are not aware of the massive amount of literature on Islam available in the Muslim world by writers from the Middle East, Europe, Africa and Asia. They are read a lot by Muslims. There is great competition of ideas in the Muslim world by Muslim writers themselves. I read a lot of these writings as a Muslim.
Now, all the best people. My workweek has started.
May 21, 2007 2:36 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 21, 2007 02:36
Jihadist,
Perhaps you should ask for a raise from the Indonesian Islamic Propagation Bureau? Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, I assume, is also sponsoring this group?? He paid Professor Esposito twenty million dollars and your Islamic propaganda is as good as his.
And do you believe in "pretty wingy talking thingies"? i.e The "Gabe/Mohammed connection"??
May 20, 2007 11:28 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 23:28
Jihadist,
If you want to tell the non-Muslims about Islamic matters but at least get your facts right.
A fatwa merely means a scholarly opinion. Any imam or mullah can issue a fatwa. It doesn't have to be 'gazetted' into sharia. Wherever did you get that idea. All it takes is for his followers or any other Muslim to accept his authority to issue fatwas. There is no certification or qualifications necessary other than the person issuing the fatwa is recognized as a scholar. That varies from place to place.
OBL can issue fatwas - he is a Sheikh. That means he's either a religious scholar or a head of an Arab tribe/clan/village.
A fatwa is a broad definition. If you go and ask a religious scholar a theological question his answer is also a fatwa.
As Islam has no central authority, nobody has the right to claim his fatwa is binding. The process of formulating sharia has little to do with fatwas. It is fatwas that explain the sharia, not the other way around.
May 20, 2007 9:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 21:34
Jihadist:
Perhaps you didn't read my post to Pamela (May 19, 12:11 PM). "Concerned" isn't the only one concerned...
Perhaps like Pamela you prefer to remain silent.
If you are indeed invested in personal Jihad, weigh your words,y'all.
May 20, 2007 9:25 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 21:25
Assamlamu alaikum
Imam Pamela Taylor as always, wrote a piece that resonated with Muslims.
----------------------------------------------
As for the usual suspects
Hello, hello:)
Let us go off-side and have some fun then. Since all of you are not talking about personal satisfaction and contenment the question posed.
I don't know about y'all, but Victoria, myself and other Muslims that comes into On Faith threads are more contented and happier that y'all. Regardless of us being thrashed both by fellow Muslims (the extremist kind), and non-Muslims (the evangelical and atheistic kinds).
And as always,the non-Muslims and so-called former Muslims "permanent residents" in your threads perpetually quoting Suras, Hadiths and Muslim history without understanding their whole context.
I just love the easy generalizations of Ross and Frank Collins et al on Islam and Muslims, and the persistent insistence of Concerned the Christian Now Liberated to change the Al-Quran.
Without going into too many details and to leave y'all to you permanent state of hyperventilating set views:
Perhaps you don't know that Muslims are forbidden to slander the gods of other people. Hence the irate reactions and over-reactions of Muslims over Salman Rushdie, the Danish cartoons and Pope Benedict.
Perhaps you are not aware that Salman Rushdie is not just about religion, but about issues of class, race, elitism and mainstreaming of migrants.
Perhaps you are not aware that the Danish cartoon controversy also has to do with the hypocircy, double-standards, blunders, insularity of some Danes and the smugness and xenophobia of the Danish government in diffusing the matter diplomatically until it was too late.
Perhaps you are not aware Muslims considers Pope Benedict, deem as infallible by some Catholics, and head of the Catholic church, to speak for all Catholics.
Perhaps you are not seeing nor understanding that those that invoke the Lesser Jihad and calls for deaths of non-Mulsims are not the credible and bona-fide members of the Muslim ulema, but are laymen who couched their political causes in religious overtones.
Perhaps you are not aware that everytime a bona-fide Muslim ulema says Islam is a religion of peace, the bona fide ulema are taking back the interpretation and practice of Islam from the anarchistic and extremist fringes who got wide coverage in the west.
Perhaps you are not aware the Osama does not issue "fatwas" but rather political manifestos.
Perhaps you don't know that "fatwas" are legal or religious opinions and none binding until and unless gazetted into Shariah law.
Perhaps you are not aware of too, too many things about Muslims and Islam as it is in the wider Muslim world.
Perhaps you are not aware that honour killings, female genetalia mutilations, arranged marraiges are cultural rather than Islamic.
Perhaps you are not aware that the majority of Muslims don't have access to education like you do and the curriculum they have in places from Sudan to Afghanistan are hundreds of years old and what they can afford, if they go to school.
Perhaps you are aware that no matter what you says about Islam, Muslims and the Al-Quran, only I as a Muslim and other Muslims like Imam Pamela Taylor, can really move forward in which directions Muslims are to go.
Perhaps you are not aware that Muslims are not allowed to slander the gods of other peoples if you are wondering why not a single Muslim that comes in On Faith threads never do that re Christian, Hindu, Wiccan beliefs etc.
Perhaps you don't notice that Muslims don't attack the religious beliefs and tenets of people of other faiths, but only on their personal views and actions.
Perhaps you forgot all Muslims are responsible for his own views, actions and beliefs and not his whole community and his personal sins too.
Perhaps you ignore much the evangelicals in third world countries resort to differentiations of them and us whether it is Catholics vs Pentocasts in Brazil; or Baptists vs Mormons in Tonga; or Christians vs Muslims in Yemen.
Perhaps you are not aware that the so called "sword of Islam" and "Islam is spread by the sword" is a western ideological counterpoint to halt Muslim territorial expansion in Europe.
With that wee bits above, I leave y'all to continue to be wrong again and again, on Islam and Muslims, what is really going on, what Muslims are doing beyond your favourite headlines and quotes about Islam and Muslims.
Know that this kind of thinking and assumptions makes the Middle East policy flawed and costly.
But never mind, what you said here is known by Muslims already. Nothing new to add and your best and brightests like Daniel Pipes and Bernard Lewis have been saying all along. And they got it wrong too :)
Now, anyone wants to cry foul or off-side? :)
May 20, 2007 8:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 20:36
ross - you are correct. which leads any logical person to one conclusion - islamics believe they are charged by god to make war on the rest of the world until it is islamic or there are no more islamics left.
how do you make peace with people who belive such things?
May 20, 2007 1:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 13:56
Frank,
Since muslims consider the quran as the literal words of allah rejecting a single verse would be mean rejecting Allah. Any muslim who attempts to do this will be the target of jihadists.
May 20, 2007 11:22 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 11:22
the problem with islamics is that they will never reject any part of the koran, and that includes those parts that require hate, kidnapping, holding for ranson, torture, cutting off body parts, rape, murder and forced conversions. why? because they actually say that their god does not just allow it, it commands it. and it also commands war until the entire world is islamic.
when you point out those hateful verses in the koran they call you violent and angry, until you remind them that they are not my words but from their koran.
then they tell you the words are taken out of context, but never tell you what context those hateful verses are acceptable. one time i was actually responded to and the context were a few preceeding verses in which their god allegedly said that the jews deserved it, so it was ok to do it.
then then act like you are the only one to ever think that those verses mean what the say so you show them the hisotry that lead up to the crusades and they say they were following their god and why go way back in history. so you show them from the crusades to 1900 and they say you are still talkinb about the past. so you mention the armenian genocide where almost 2,000,000 christian armenians were murdered by the islamic turks and the answer is they deserved it.
you show them islamic prefesors writings about islam being in a religious war with every nation they border and they say its just a coincidence.
then they will say that the old and new testament shows the same thing and when you point out that jews and christians are not required to do it they will point to where jesus was using a story to show a point and pretend it was jesus ordering christians to murder.
but the best is when they get insulted and tell you that no one believes the way you do and that islam is peaceful and then you show them video of islamics in the mosques teaching what they before said did not exist, was out of context, and a product of my imagination.
but one thing they will never do is reject those verses so vile and hateful they put islam in a constant state of war with the infidels.
May 20, 2007 10:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on May 20, 2007 10:06
Progressive Muslim - a bit of an oxymoron at the moment. I think Muslims need to wholesale re-invent their religion and, evidently from discussions here, the Arabic language in order to be progressive.
Muslims like Pamela should be applauded for trying very hard to convince themselves and others that Islam can be made progressive. However, it might be best done in problem countries like Saudi Arabia since Islam is not allowed by Western secular laws to display its less progressive nature in Western countries like the US of A.
I think Pamela's fight is in the wrong place. If she and other like-minded Muslims are serious they might take their views to the sources of the problems.
May 20, 2007 9:41 AM | Report Offensive Comments