Islam

Abd Al-Hamid Al-Ansari is one of my favorite liberal Arab intellectuals. Believe it or not, he’s also the former Dean of Islamic Law at Qatar University.

Next time you hear people asking you “where are the moderates,” show them this video.

Don’t say they don’t exist. We’re everywhere, but we need to start “shouting” louder.

Enjoy and yaaay to liberalism.

The last bit about Germany is interesting too.

I know this is old news, but still. When I first read about it, my initial reaction was anger at what I saw - and still see - as a travesty. I thought to myself “what the hell is wrong with you Brits?”

Seriously, what is wrong with you Brits? It doesn’t look to me like you’re doing enough.

ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Here’s what stood out to me.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

It’s good to see that the process is voluntary, but I don’t feel comforted nonetheless. Something tells me, many Muslim women will be coerced into giving such an agreement.

… There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men.

Gee, ya think so? Oh my!

I don’t see this as a good development, mainly because I suspect too many Muslim women won’t step into these sharia courts voluntarily. Plus, it doesn’t set a good precedence. Who knows, soon you might have other religious groups demanding their own religious courts. I’m sure having different legal systems should be fun.

Yaaay to Britain where multi-culturalism is taken to an extreme sometimes.

Here’s a simple and decent summary about a group of early Muslims I’m increasingly fascinated by.

The Mutazilites belonged to very early school of thought (9th century CE) in Islam which stressed human free will and the justice of God. They attempted to find a “middle path” between the heretical Kharijites and more orothodox beliefs by asserting a “rationalist” method of interpretation.

This rationalist method was, in turn, derived from the philosophical writings inherited from ancient Greece. The Mutazilites urged Muslims to turn away from a strict, legalistic faith and instead transform Islam into a more humanistic religion. The Mutazilites were supported and encouraged by the leaders of the Abbasid Caliphate, but they also threatened the position and traditions of many religious leaders. These in turn eventually succeeding in suppressing the Mutazilite ideas, leaving Greek humanistic philosophy to European Christians to later develop and learn from - leading first to the Renaissance and later to the Enlightenment.

I believe we desperately need more Muslim Neo-Mu’tazilites. Personally, many of their ideas resonate well with me as do those of Muslim philosophers like Ibn Rushd, affectionately known as Averroes in the West, where he actually ended up having more influence than in the Islamic world.

So why do we need more Neo-Mu’tazilites you ask? Well, one of the main problems I see with Islamic theology today is the dominance of dogmatic literalism and the inadequate emphasis placed on reason. For that you can go ahead and thank the Traditionalists. As for the crazed, puritanical Wahhabis, give them a big hug for their role in all of this. They so deserve it.

Meanwhile, allow me to end this post with a favorite and very pertinent quote.

“If I don’t have the freedom to disbelieve, I cannot believe” — An-Na’im

Related:

• Kant on Reality and Empericism.

The following excerpt from this article suffices:

The discrimination or defamation of Muslims, or of any other group for that matter, is of course reprehensible. But “Islamophobia,” as defined by Libya, Iran and the other Durban II organizers, covers any criticism of Islam, Muslims or their actions.

Indeed. It comes down to how you define “criticism” and “Islam” and we all know the kind of definitions Islamists like.

Hmmm… let’s see, Islamic law is not infallible, and in numerous cases, the horrendous way it’s practiced is outright disgusting.

Oh my, I just insulted Islam!

Most - but not all - terrorist attacks nowadays are unfortunately carried out by Muslims. Oh and beware of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists. They have a nasty agenda.

Everybody scream “Islamophobiaaaaaaa!”

Do you see where I’m getting at?

Now of course, I’m against things like the Danish cartoons or super genius films like Fitna but that doesn’t mean I’m for criminalizing them. In fact, even European laws against Holocaust denial should be eradicated. I do realize my position puts me amongst a minority of Muslims but it is my position nonetheless. Let’s just say I like the American model of free speech.

The kind of laws being proposed by lovely regimes like Iran’s and Libya’s aren’t just meant to silence what includes a lot of legitimate concerns and criticism but also Muslim voices of reform. Seriously, do I even need to elaborate? The names “Iran” and “Libya” should be enough to convince any sane politically-aware person.

What, you didn’t know it was… erm… sort of mentioned? Well, here is the Quranic verse in question, in three different recognized English translations:

YUSUFALI: And We said thereafter to the Children of Israel, “Dwell securely in the land (of promise)”: but when the second of the warnings came to pass, We gathered you together in a mingled crowd.

PICKTHAL: And We said unto the Children of Israel after him: Dwell in the land; but when the promise of the Hereafter cometh to pass We shall bring you as a crowd gathered out of various nations.

SHAKIR: And We said to the Israelites after him: Dwell in the land: and when the promise of the next life shall come to pass, we will bring you both together in judgment.

Oh my, Islam supports Zionism? Find out here at this nice discussion and make up your own mind. As for me, this is my position:

FACT: Moses is a Prophet recognized and respected in Islam.

FACT: The story of how Moses led his people away from the Pharaoh’s oppression and into the “promised land” is one that is recognized and told in Islam.

FACT: Before the Kabba was cleansed of idols, Muslims prayed towards Jerusalem.

FACT: Based on the facts above, there is evidence that clearly indicates the inherent ties between the promised land and the Jewish people. However, there is no evidence indicating that the land is exclusively Jewish or exclusively meant for Jews.

Admittedly, the definition of “Jews” or “Jewish” in this context is still up for debate. Eat up the details here. Good stuff.

Beautiful, absolutely beautiful. Lovely read. Soroush articulates many similar thoughts I have on Islam in a nice, poetic way. He lays it down wonderfully.

[click to continue...]

Ops, I meant superb, you know… like this one. The aftermath of conferences like these is consumed cakes and more brainfarts (as if there aren’t enough as it is already).

She’s been blogging for a while now over at GV and I’m totally digging her writing which focuses on many of the retarded things and blatant double standards in our patriarchal culture. Check out what she has to say here and here. Oh and don’t miss this post about her revealing, unpleasant “encounter” with a popular Muslim televangelist.

Good response to an absolutely disgusting statement. I hope this idiot is paying attention.

(hat-tip: Muslimah Media Watch)

The other day I came across a disturbing article on the Huffington Post about John Hagee’s loony statements. I swear these American evangelical “leaders” really sound just like some of the crazy nuts we have here. I suggest we throw them both together for a nice little episode of… The Holy Room.

So, God sent Hitler to massacre the Jews because that’s His will? Nice Hagee! Very nice!

The first thing that popped into my mind was “hah! I bet McCain will have to get rid of Hagee’s endorsement now. He can’t afford to associate himself with a guy saying this kind of crazy stuff. He can’t risk pissing off Jewish voters. But Rod Parsely and his hateful remarks against Muslims? Naaa, he’ll probably keep quiet. After all, it seems like he enjoys pandering to the evangelical right, and too many of them support that sort of inflammatory talk. Why risk being a Muslim-lover?”

So yes, those were my cynical thoughts, and that’s why I was very surprised yesterday when I came across this at Little Green Footballs:

McCain rejected the months-old endorsement of Texas preacher John Hagee after an audio recording surfaced in which the preacher said God sent Adolf Hitler to help Jews reach the promised land. McCain called the comment “crazy and unacceptable.”

He later repudiated the support of Rod Parsley, an Ohio preacher who has sharply criticized Islam and called the religion inherently violent.

… in an interview with The Associated Press, McCain said he rejected Parsley’s support, too.

“I believe there is no place for that kind of dialogue in America, and I believe that even though he endorsed me, and I didn’t endorse him, the fact is that I repudiate such talk, and I reject his endorsement,” McCain told the AP.

Thank you McCain. You did the right thing. You’re starting to look better now. Although I would really appreciate it more if you could explain to me why you suddenly switched your stance on torture after ranting against it for so long.

But for now, good decision dude.

On a related note, given the religious views involved, I’ve always found the close political relationship between evangelicals and Jews when it comes to supporting Israel very odd.

Related:

• How Would a Sudanese Vote in the 2008 US Elections?

Dear hijabi/conservative Muslim sisters in da house, I have a little present for you. It’s called ‘We Love Hijab‘ and I’m finding it quite amusing. Maybe you will too.

Speaking of hijab, Ali has another amusing post about it.

Yeah, and it’s entitled “Islamic Unity Conference.” I think it was held in Iran, and it was clearly awesome. I’m actually so jealous, I wish I could have attended it.

Seriously, with hard-working scholars/”scholars” like these I must say I’m pretty damn optimistic that Muslim unity is just around the corner.

Like totally!

Looks like they’re having a lot of fun, don’t you think?

Now this is something you don’t come across everyday. Although they do seem to be secular Jews which still doesn’t change the aforementioned fact.

Irshad Manji was recently in Indonesia and brought up an idea I found amusing and interesting:

During the Question and Answer session, a woman from the local Islamic political party disputed our call to democratize ijtihad. When she needs her teeth fixed, she said, she goes to a certified dentist, not some shmo (or Mo) spreading the gospel of indie thinking.

I must tell you that I hear the dentist analogy all the time. While it’s unoriginal, it’s also effective among Muslims who equate creativity with scientific formulas. Effective, that is, until now.

One of the professors on my panel responded to the woman this way:

When dentists and doctors harm people with their decisions, they can be sued for malpractise. Sister, if you’re going to liken religious authorities to medical professionals, then Muslims should have the right to sue mullahs when their conclusions harm people. And, in effect, that’s what Irshad Manji is doing by exposing their damage in the court of international public opinion.

Right on. Let’s keep ’suing’ them!