Waiting For Fatwa

SameerJB… good post…what direction this search leads is not clear…and even the time frame is not known…20,30, 200 years…what i agree with is that it has to come from within to succeed…it cannot be imposedd...

tahmed32
…no…i disagree…12head was the epitome of a certain disease while echoboom is diseased…he has every right to froth and spread his hatred here…and i would fight for that right…my post was just to inform others…where he comes from…and because i passionately abhor his kind of tunnel visiosioned hatred, divisiveness, and exclusivity i continue to highlight it for the unsuspecting chowkies...yeah you may call it my `public service` attempts...

echoboom
…what no diabolical mile long cut n paste?…
…your praise and appreciation...bin LaDeen forbid!...means nothing…as for whys...you know it very well...

...t

re: tahmed

...rant all you want, but hindus, or even the much-hated jews, are not flying planes into buildings and getting chased out from one country to the next on fears of terrorism....nor are they getting free flights and lodging to sunny guantanamo bay...


``vast scale murder of unborn female children by parents seeking boys``

....wake up retard, this is happening all over south asia, including pakistan...

mohar11 #175 So you say that it is Islam that causes violence, and not the mullah. You are entitled to your views, irrational and half-assed though they may be.

Let me now ask you something: What causes violence among hindus? Is it that hinduism is an evil philosophy (which is basically what one would think if one went by your line of thinking) or is because hindu extremists are evil?

btw: dont try that holier than thou as a response as well. We are all well aware of the mess that exists in hindu society: the burning of the children of christian missionaries, the burning of entire families in Gujrat, the mass burning of brides by greedy grooms seeking more dowry money, the vast scale murder of unborn female children by parents seeking boys - this last being estimated at 35 million in number, based on the ``bride deficit`` now facing large areas in India. There have been no such large scale murders of brides or of unborn girls in Pakistan. Maybe it is time people like you woke up and smelt the coffee.

154:temporal

Bina & PM

…bewarned of flattery…echoboom in his earlier incarnations of farangi kush, ghalib zaman and hamzad afaqui et all has a history of ‘setting’ up interactors before frothing off his tunnel-visioned hateful diatribes…he has already started to froth…just a matter of time before he becomes paranoid, delusional and utterly despicable yet again..

…t

---

No fatwa coming?

How about one from your neo-mullah/ Peeyo mullah buddies--but you have`nt even started ijtehading yet by taking up drinking .

So why do you froth. What is it that was said that got your goat? Hungry for praise yourself--for your 2-takka poems or being wage-less CHOWK chowkidaar, Shurta`aa, Muttawwa or security-guard ?

An overgrown school-kid you still are and quite loveable and huggable. No one ever said nicer stuff than that to you. So there!

The `practical` quran at work -

http://jang.com.pk/thenews/sep2003-daily/22-09-2003/oped/newspost.htm

Staring men

Ahmad Khan

This refers to letter of Shahzia Said in The News of September 17, 2003. I fully agree with the writer that majority of the men stare at women as if it is a rare commodity. But let us analyse few facts due to which this abnormal behaviour of the male is exhibited. All males have this tendency towards females because Allah created the females as a source of attraction for males. This is not only true for human beings only but for all species of birds, animals, plants, sea creatures etc. It is because of this fact that Qur’aan very clearly tells us the dress code for Muslim women and who all could be her mahram. Qur’aan says ``All Muslim women must cover their face and front whenever they move out of their houses.`` So what do we see in our modern society today? the most colorful and objectionable dresses worn by majority of our women. And who will be punished for all this, of course the men because at one stage the Qur’aan again specifies ``Men are the masters of their women, husbands are the chiefs of their wives.`` So Miss Shahzia and other women, don’t worry as men will be punished twice by Allah on this issue. Once, for staring at women and second for not being able to exercise control on their dress code.

Peshawar

nadpes21@hotmail.com

Temporal,

Came to your thread very late. And the discussion seems to have
moved ahead a great deal. But, I could not resist myself....

I`ve tried to fathom this undying love for Islam and
Quran amongst its followers, by putting myself in their shoes.
Even Christians and jews do not profess a love they can die for,
in this age as muslims do. A comparison of two schools of thought
or ways of living is neccessary here.

Islam,starts with an implicit assumption, that
God exists. Further, Quran claims to contain the answers to the
biggest questions in life. Guarantees by none other but God himself
exists to every individual. These gurantees apply to anyone, who is
willing to become part of the system. Whether, its the guarantee of
heaven, justice or happiness its all there. No more middlemen, between
the most powerful and the most powerless. All of life`s most difficult
questions have been answered in the book. So why fret? God has already
taken pains to answer so many questions for you to avoid huge mental
agitation.Now just follow this set of instructions/commands and get your reward.
If such a complete system does exist, we`d all be its slaves. .
And frankly, such a complete system does lend a wonderful peace of
mind to its followers. Aftre all for every issue in life, there is
an instruction in the book. The followers have been spared the agony
of even thinking on their own.

Anyone who`s a threat to this system is also a threat to the guarantees
given to its followers. This immutable, absolute system must be protected
at any cost. Its not the faith that becomes endangered by any attack on it.
Its the weakness in human beings which uses the crutch of such guarantees
to make its life worthwhile. Without this crutch, a man would have to
think on his own, figure out life on his own. A lazy mind would rather
kill its own body than think or do ``Ijtehaad``.

I come from a system, which prefers an individiual to be a skeptic.
To seek the answers to life is left to himself. Various techniques and
theories like vedanta, yoga etc are considred mere tools in that search.
There are no guarantees to anyone for being loyal to any path. The choices
to be made and its responsiblities are left to an individual. Even the
results of such choices (painful or pleasurable) are to be borne by that
individual. It does leave an individual out there in the cold, to think for
himself, fend for his own actions(karma). The mental agony of facing
life`s questions on your own does have a possibility of a higher
understanding albeit without guarantees. The only alternative to this is
accpeting second hand guarantee.

Gone are the days, when eastern thought was taken as a mere thought.
RSS/VHP are trying to lay the foundations of very strcuture, that was destroyed
in europe in thousand years. Foundations of a similar islamic structure are
creaking too. Irshad manji and her likes are attempting to buttress this
structure by Ijtehad.

Adios

PM #172 to saminasha ``But thanks for the insight anyway. ``

I have terrible news for you. That ``insight`` was a quote from my earlier post that saminasha had pasted as part of her response. You listen to uncle tahmed and you`ll become a wise man with lots of insights. But did you ever listen? No-o-o-o. You always thought you were too smart to listen to tahmed. And now you get my pearls of wisdom second hand and you are on your knees with thanks. I hope you have learnt your lesson, and in future will read my posts with proper respect.

PM,

Dont worry about the mix ups...you`ve been greatly helped by ``saminshah`` sahib himself...

I find some ideas in Christianity profoundly moving as I do in Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, Joni Mitchellism... :)

Samina Shah<
Missed your #132 earlier (what wit hteh scanning & skimming i`m having to do with nonsense posts from every Tom, Dick and Ahm... I mean Harry strewn about here.
Fantastic questions. I hope I am wrong here, but I think that ``Islam`` (or, more correctly, Islamia) is just not ready for the approach you suggest, and won`t be for some time. Still, it takes merely two generations...
Also appreciated very much your post touching on the company that Jesus chose to keep. Read it on your profile page.

tahmed
//You need to distinguish between Islam vs. the man who exploits Islam. Its the same thing as ``guns dont kill people, people do``. ..//

NRA says - ``guns dont kill people, people do``.
Ahmed Mian says - ``Islam is no problem, only Islamists are``.

The parallel is uncanny. NRA rednecks donot see the inherent evil in the gun culture and come up with pathetic excuses like given above. Similarly - Ahmed mian ( others of his ilk ) donot see the inherent evil (like call to kill kufrs ) built into Islam. They blame it all on mullahs.

Hamid Bhai Jan,

I deem your response to be worthy of the most sidesteppingist tango :)...and reward you with a Dylan lyric:
``God got the power, man has got his vanity,
Man gotta choose before God can set him free.
Don`t you know there`s nothing new that`s under the sun?
Well, there ain`t no man righteous, no not one``

Ah Bob...how quickly we forget :)

PM,

The post which you are referring to is ``saminshah`s``...(grrr....)

A question for you as you have id`ed yourself as Catholic. My husband has commented that the scripture that the Christian far right often references in anti gay statements are often text not attributed to Christ himself. He maintains that Christ`s ideas tended to be very inclusive. The far right avoids this reality by quoting other Christian interpretations and thus subverts the ``authentic`` meaning of Christianity. Any comment?

`The Islam I follow certainly doesn`t say, ``Get up and kill someone because they`re different.`` I dont` believe Christianity says, ``Go and kill doctors who perform abortions.`` And Judaism doesn`t say, ``Go and murder Palestinian children and take over their land``.

Bina Shah

How Muslim an argument, empty, illogical.

The Bible indeed does not say ``Go and kill doctors who perform abortions.`` And Judaism indeed doesn`t say, ``Go and murder Palestinian children and take over their land``.

But quran says, in so many words, clearly for anyone who is not trying to shut his eyes, either make non Muslims your dhimmis, subordinates who will live under your protection, or kill them.

Romair, Godot, Bina_Shah.....three different personalities, but all Muslim, so inherently dishonest or blind whenever a quran is placed before them. All with a deeply fundamentalist, intolerant core behind the facade of modernism.

saminshah #159 You are incorrect in assuming that religion and humanism are mutually exclusive. And also in assuming that atheism implies humanism: Stalin was an Atheist s.o.b. Most muslim kings in history have been God-fearing s.o.bs. Religion had nothing to do with their being normal people or s.o.b.s.

I rest my case.

(and note also that according to the Great God Temporal, ``pehlay insaan, phir musulmaan`` or any other religion or atheist or whatever.).

On the name confusion with saminasha: I see the problem (you lack an ``a``, she lacks an ``h``).

BinaShah,
I don`t understand why the link (in #101) doesn`t work with you. Which internet are you using anyway? ;-) Maybe you computer doesn`t link to URLS that you mistake for gay Christian sites?
re. ``What I do think is that they (gay believers) have to accept the possibility that their behavior is not acceptable under the religion they wish to follow.``
Oh, I agree with you. I personally think it silly to try and reconcile homosexuality with Christianity, though Leviticus, with it`s many admonisments (in the very chapter from which you quote) can hardly be called a Christian source. It wouldn`t please bible-thumpers much to learn that among other `abominable acts` worthy of the same punishment as homosexuality, that passage also lists the rounding the corners of your head, or marring the corners of your beard, or eating animal fat, or the fruit of a tree you’ve owned for less than five years.
And to satisfy TAhmed: ``Thou shalt not touch a woman, or anything she’s sat on, until seven days after her menstruation begins. Thou shalt not put a stumbling block before the blind (which does for anyone parking on the pavement).``
(For more, there is this really good article by George Monbiot, who, I hasten to add, is not gay by any strerch, even of TAhmed`s imagination.)
So, really, throwing Levitcus at gay believers is really bound to backfire.
Still, I agree, Christianity seems generally disapproving of homosexuality, and I often ask my online Christian friends why they even bother to find theological acceptance.
That said, I must also state that the exegetical exercises that they provide have definitely helped my understanding of the scriptures. For one, the denuciation seems nowhere near the ``abomination`` that believers generally deem homosexuality to be. I have already given my view on Islam`s pragmatism in this regard.
But I did not intend to provide a theological defence of homosexuality in the first place. I was simply responding to your characterization of the alternative reading of the S&G myth as far-fetched. As point in fact, this reading has been more mainstream for decades now. The exegesis provided in this article leaves little room for doubt. Again, this is not a ``gay site.``
Btw, I would be debating these issue even if I were not bi. It certainly has proven an eye-opening and prejudice-challenging experience.

---

re.: ``The ideological nature of sectarianism: I do believe strongly in the current theory that separates Islam from Islamism, the political movement, which takes things out of context and uses them to justify actions that are politically motivated, not religious.``
As long as Islam is an `ideal` which, by definition, cannot be in the wrong (I am reminded here of echo`s recent remark that (in effect) ``all that is good is Islam``), then of course, there is no need for reform. However, what we come across every day, not only in the heinous acts of murder in mosques, but in everyday, simple religious observances and attitudes, is ``practical Islam``, the same as your Islamism. ``Politcal``? Isn`t EVERYTHING political, including the personal/private? I think, ``no compulsion in religion`` notwithstanding, Islam makes it clearer than any other religion (except maybe Hasaidic Judaism) that it IS-- religion IS-- necessarily, political.
It seems that only when the ``political`` takes forms to which we are generally not accustomed, we screech out the `P` word and suffix an ``ism`` to the phenomenon.
But it`s really same wine; new bottle. Fortunately, there are other flavours, and that is what we need to be pushing.
rgds,
PM

temp #154: ``…bewarned of flattery…"
okay abbaji :)

TAhmed #161: Oh, please don`t stop... you`re actually easier to take seriously when you`re being `funny`.

RSux #153: Can you promise to not stop getting on my case if I concede that I er... I ... well... u see... dammit! ok, I laughed reading your post. It was good!
Ok, now remember, no Mister Nice-Guy with me, ok!?