Church vs Mosque

Not all churches are the same. Go to a baptist church, and you`ll hear enough fire and brimstone (and the need to see the state of Israel to exist no matter the cost as a precondition for the reappearance of man-God) to put a Mullah to shame.

I`ve been to a catholic church once. Nice folks. They let me sooth my soul (by draining my bladder), and for that I was rather greatful. The place was a bit alien...pews and semi-morbid pictures of Christ...I still prefer the immigrant mullah and his broken english to the drone of a priest, or the spaztic-ah ramblings of the more `spirited` preechers-ah.

Fotuneatly, I haven`t seen mullah`s smakin people on the head goin ``Heal-ah!`` yet...so there is still hope.

I`ve also been to a Buddhist temple for a school project once. Came in middle of some kind of ceremony everyone was heavily into it...didn`t want to interrupt so I left.

---

I have been to mosque`s here and there. Never to one in the author`s imagination though. Some were nice, some were rickity. Some had political sermons, some had sermons for self-improvment and coping in a new environment ( the immigrant sermon or sermons for immigrants tends to dominate...which shouldn`t be a surprise since the vast majority of Mullahs are still immigrants).

I remember as a child, I would always pray beside my father...interesting sect this chap Shiraz comes from. What`s funny is that the people who find this article funny are most likely people who have never been to a mosque before...and that`s quite funny. Heheh. And no, it didn`t (and never) stink of urine...Arthur needs to learn to distinguish between the smell of his environment and his upper lip.

MQM

One more question. How prevalent is muta`a in the Shias of Pakistan.

MQM

Thanks for the info, but I am already aware of these websites. Unfortunately they dont answer my specific question. As a matter of principle, for every internet resource on a certain topic I doublecheck information from two printed resources as well - one `for` and one `against` - to form an opinion. The audio resource from al-islam.org was new, I gotta check that.

Thanks.

I have another question though. I have noted it at almost every forum available on the internet and also with my discussions with Shias that they vehmently oppose the establishment of an Islamic democracy in Pakistan while in the same breath they support such a government in Iran. Why is this duplicity. For example, while currently, when Shariat courts are being established in Canada, the most vehment opposition to such courts is from Shia immigrants of Iranian and African origin despite the fact that such courts will remain volunatry. In the context of Pakistan Shia usually promote a secular democracy, which means they prefer an atheist political ideology over that of a rule of canon. In spite of the fact that if you look at the constitution, (that was prior to Mushsraf`s rape) it designates not even an advisory position to clergy of any sort - in its make-up the Islamic Ideological Council is hardly a body of clergy, whereas in Iran clergy holds a constitutional power in the polity. Why is such duplicity in case of Pakistan.

For a discussion of the Fiqkh I can point you to the following online information sources:

Questions on Jurisprudence (Masa`il Fiqhiyya) By al-Imam `Abd al-Husayn Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi http://al-islam.org/masail/

Temporary Marriage in Islamic Law Al-Serat By

http://al-islam.org/al-serat/muta/

There are other sources and books available free of charge on www.al-islam.org

But, I am not a jurist on this topic by all means.

A few more points.

1. Muta cannot be between a muslim female and nonmuslim male, ie same rules as applied to permanent marriage.

2. In the hadith it states that the criteria for spousal selection should be based on quality of character, islamic practice, etc.

3. If a man is married from before, he needs his first wife`s permission.

4. Perhaps most importantly, if a couple is capable of Permanent marriage, then the Jurist will question the necessity of muta. In essence, muta is only permissible where permanent marriage is not possible, ie financial hardshipes, etc. Therefore, abuse of any institution is possible. Therefore, for instance back in the days of the prophet, when two would get married, there would not have to go to the local governmental office to register themselves and get a marriage certificate. However, in today`s world, with the emergence of governmental orders, this institution is regulated by the government as in Iran you need to have it registered with the governemnt. Therefore, the 3 mins phenomenon is theoretically correct, but practically not possible, unless the governement clerk has fast penmenship :)

I hope this answers the question.

An interesting lecture on the limits of muta is available in audio format at www.al-islam.org by Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi, Ja`fari Islamic Centre, Toronto, Canada, 5th Feb. 1999

Thanks

Shabber

Well-written stuff, Shiraz. I myself have had some pleasant experiences of attending Christian and Hindu services, reinforcing my appreciation of religion in general. But if I had to write about my experiences, I wouldn`t emphasize my appreciation of one religion by trashing the other. I understand that you didn`t intend your article to go into the annals of theological debate, but I am sure you’ll agree that there are many ways of looking at things. Imagine going close to the wall and focusing on just a small area of a large and beautiful painting. It is bound to look ugly. You have to step back, and look at the whole thing to appreciate it fully.

Do you realize that you could have taken a whole new angle by fanning the disturbingly numerous child abuse scandals that the Catholic Church has faced in the recent years? Imagine how you would have generated some laughs by relating the overall “recognition” and prominence of the “effeminate young boy” at the church to the lust of the “old man in the suit.” But no, you cannot trash a religion that is hundreds of years old based on the some recent scandals, can you? You would prefer to conduct an objective assessment instead of just slicing one piece of a beautiful picture, and showing to the world how ugly it looks. And besides, just between you and me, it wouldn’t really sell in the market. Better stick to what sells, and continue to trash Islam, right? If nothing else, it would at least make you feel intellectually superior. But anyway, going back to the deviant thought, while appreciating the elderly gentleman and his suit, did you look around and wonder how many of the service attendees had been a target of his physical abuse during their younger years? How many of them took piano lessons and a lot more in his lap? There is nothing wrong in questioning, Shiraz, but it is hard to sound intellectual when you take on the task to ridicule millions of people whose beliefs have survived for hundreds of years, whether they are Muslims, Christians, Hindus, or Jews. But yes, it is a lot easier to sound funny by taking that approach though.

While you have your own take on the stink that you sensed in the mosques that you have been to, that “stink” is exactly what has attracted many people towards Islam. From what I have heard, it is referred to as the stink of equality. These silly people, they stratify masses based on their actions instead of simply classifying them based on the brand of the clothes they wear. Can you believe that the congregation at the mosque is not based on paid membership or on any form of social or status-based stratification? Amazing! And hey, there may not be any hot chics sitting next to you in a mosque, but guess what? You could be sitting next to the sweat-ridden guy who was digging that ditch beside the road just outside the mosque. Disgusting, isn’t it? So much for the expensive cologne that you just put on! May be they should put a bouncer at the entrance, impose a cover charge at the door, and put up a “dress to impress” sign. They could even have a VIP Room, Gold Room, and a guest list membership for those who are blessed with online access. These Muslims just suck when it comes to marketing and self-projection. Anyway, may be we should forgive that stinky guy in the mosque. Being the hourly-rate kind of a guy that he is, chances are that he didn’t have the time and resources to “drive” home and take a shower for the three prayer times that fell during his long and hard work-day digging the ditch. May be if he had to visit the mosque once a week on a holiday, he would have been better prepared (and dressed) to gain acceptance from God, and most importantly, his fellow worshippers like you and me. You have to admit that he does deck himself up for the Eid prayers. I am sure he would do the same if his ``social obligations`` were reduced from 35 times a week to once a week. I am sure even Beckham would show up in crap and smell funny if he had to make an appearance on the camera 5 days a week for all his life at times that are not set to his schedule.

There is no doubt that many mosques are suffering from imams who are not well-qualified for the responsibility that is put on their shoulders. And why shouldn`t they be? The imams are not selected based on qualifications, are they? And even if they are, do you really think that scholars from the School of Divinity apply for the position? Besides, what does this unqualified imam get from the society anyway? How about comparing his selection process and benefits with that of the “old man in the suit”? You’ll be surprised at the fixed annual income and the healthcare benefits that he gets for himself and his family from the church. Don’t you think that the responsibility for the fact that an imam may be unqualified for his position lies on people like you and me? It pretty much follows the ``It is not what your country can do for you. It is what YOU can do for your country`` argument. Do you really think it is the fault of the imam? Or the fault of his religion that has survived hundreds of years, and like all other religions, has seen its highs and lows? I don’t necessarily support this claim, but I have heard the argument that the quality and selection criteria of imams suffered greatly after the institute of caliphate was destroyed by some dude in Turkey who got really pissed when he didn`t see any hot chics and booze at the mosques. Correct me if I am wrong, but aren’t there enough bars, clubs, and restaurants where you could do that? Besides, something tells me that if you can’t hook up with a hot chic outside a mosque, chances are that you won’t hook-up with one inside a mosque.

Apart from a few laughs, the one thing that I got from your article is that we should get our act straight and do a lot more to ensure that we have qualified imams serving our mosques, who are taken care of themselves so that they could take good care of our spiritual well being. In a nutshell, your criticism of some of the things that go on in mosque is constructive (congrats on a job well done

---

there should be more people like you to point us towards bringing more structure to the way most of our mosques operate). But don`t forget that on the whole, if you paint the picture with such a broad brush, you can pretty much ridicule any religion or belief, or pretty much anything else for that matter. Believe it or not, but I recently read a hilarious piece making fun of the kind of duffer that Einstein was.

Before I end, I must say that if I totally missed the boat, and that your idea was only to bring laughter to a few people, then stick to the theme. I am sure if Islam was the guy (or gal or kid) next door, he would have no problems in becoming target of a few jokes as long as it brings joy to the people he cares about.

MQMPower

You seem to have some knowledge of Fiqh-e-Jaafaria (FJ), so I have a couple of questions regarding Muta`a. I know this for fact that FJ juresprudence does recognize Zina (fornication) as a Hadd crime and with a slight difference, on account of standard of witnesses with Sunni Fiqah, it also prescribes a hadd of stonning to death or 100 lashes for the perps. So my question is, how does a qazi/judge differentiate between a case of zina and muta`a. While it is true that he may decide on the basis of presence or absence of a muta`a contract but then again how difficult it is to draft and sign a muta`a contract for a three minute duration.

I am only asking this question in the interest of knowledge because Islamic Juresprudence is one of my field of interest. Unfortunately, there are no books available in the market on FJ juresprudence in English or urdu despite the fact that a lot has been done in this regard in past 3 decades in Iran.

In case you do not wish to start a debate on this thread, you can contact me at:

naalaique@netscape.net

regards

Salamz bina_shah

That news item you printed appears to be alarming, however there is one fundamentally fact that you have not mentioned, on purpose or out of ignorance, I`m not sure, lets hope the latter ;)

You see first of all, Islamic rules and regulations regarding marriage are based on human physiological development, the onset of puberty and reproductive capability. One must keep in mind that such laws might be passed for rural agricultural areas that are often remote to access, continuing in traditional fashion, where education is limited, and the economic system does not require you to be in your 20s before you marry (ie, for completing your education). A lot of these areas don`t even have access to television and thus one must be carefull in making these rural to urban comparisons especially in that part of the world.

Number 2 and more importantly, in Iran under shia fiqh there is something called `mutah` which is temporary marriage. This under the shia school of thought is sanctioned by the Quran and is practiced primarily to facilitate the meeting of boys and girls prior to marriage in a legal way, which in our words is called dating. Therefore, this law might be aimed at this institution.

Some points about muta to be clarified:

1. Muta unlike permanent marriage does not have permanent fixtures. There is often a time limit which can be abrogated by either side at any time, the husband is not bound to fullfull the wife`s financial obligations, the wife does not have to provide children if the husband demands, etc. Basically, the rules are flexible and customizable to a certain degree (ie, be it only talking, touching, sexual relations, etc) and the muta contract can be pronounced verbally without the presence of a witness. These days there are government clerks who do notirize them.

2. If the muta is to include sexual relations, and if the girl is a virgin, her vali`s permission is necessary. If it is not to include sexual relations, then it is highly preferable to have a vali`s permission.

3. A dowry is required to be paid as in permanent marriage.

4. If there were sexual relations, at the conclusion of the term, the girl must observe the obligatory iddah period.

In defence of muta, let me add that those who often portray it as legalized prostitution would not be able to show me one prostitute who observes the period of iddah after she provides her services :)

And again in the quran allah says to the effect that the believers (males) are for the believers (females) and the fornicators are for the fornicatoress, so in essence the command is to be wise in selecting your partner.

This practice is observed in the shia school of thought and is not allowed in the sunni schools of thought.

Therefore, once again that news item should be read with this knowledge in mind about the practice in that part of the world.

Shabber

An excellent example of How Stereo types work and are Justified....

Solitude:

Perhaps the black churches of the South are more ‘accepting’? I’d always arrive a little late with my friends and because our group had an array of skin tones, the churchgoers would be thrilled to see us enter. The ushers would go overboard by making room for us in the front seats in the jam-packed place of God. The churchgoers were extremely happy seeing non-blacks and foreigners join them on Sundays.

As for the argument about the Bedouin life-style cherished by many Muslims. From an Islamic point-of-view, I can only say that because Muslims gave up on ijtihad, age old concepts and thinking were bound to determine life-styles. On the other hand, one can argue, that even if ijtihad had been accepted, who would implement it? In human history, until only recently, it was the clerics who were the educated class. And Sunni Islam got rid of the clerical class. That may have had many benefits, but it’s side-effects were also visible as there was no institutional mechanism in place to substitute for the lack of a clerical class who could keep the spirit of ijtihad going (when only a fraction of a percent of the population is educated, there probably isn’t going be ijtihad - and most those who are educated, are religious folks, but they don’t have any institutional role). So Sunni Islam at least, it seems, ended up with the worst of all sides. That in short, is one shot-in-the-dark historical analysis of why the Bedouin life-style was aped : )

Anyhow, today, common sense is enough to determine what is and what is not right.


Malik99 and _digit:

I’m glad to hear that my experience was probably an exception. As for the questions on how one should not give up just cause one is scolded – I agree with you. But since I myself was not a big fan of going to mosques in America, I didn’t feel wronged for too long. It was no big deal. The incident happened in my freshman year summer and I only recounted it after six years when the friend asked why I don’t take any of my friends to the mosque. Anyhow, the Friday khutbaaz are highly boring with their ‘Brother, beware of innovation!’ themes.

Cheers!

``Ali G Goes to Church``

-

Legal age for brides lifted to 13
24jun02
IRAN`S arbitrating body has approved a reformist law increasing the minimum marriage age from 9 to 13 for girls and from 14 to 15 for boys.
The new law stipulates that marriage of girls under 13 and boys under 15 will require court permission, the government-run daily Iran has reported. It gave no further details.
The law`s approval is seen as a victory for Iran`s reformists, who have sought to promote women`s rights.
The elected legislature passed a similar Bill in August 2000, but the hard-line Guardian Council rejected it as contradicting Islamic sharia law.
Now, the Expediency Council, which arbitrates between parliament and the Guardian Council, has passed the measure into law. Officials were unavailable for comment.
``This is yet another fulfillment of promises of reformists, especially female lawmakers, who had promised to protect women`s rights,`` said lawmaker Fatemah Khatami. ``Still, we have a long way to go to provide adequate legal protection for women.``
Source: http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,4568230%5E13762,00.html

Oh boy, this is the best stuff I`ve read on chowk in ages.

Good work Shiraz. When you feel up to visting a temple, please let us know :)))

??? This WASN`T supposed to be funny ??????

This was pretty funny...

So, Mr. Shiraz, when are you and your mom, converting?
I do not know if it would be Christianity`s gain, if you do, but it certainly won`t be Islam`s loss.
So, feel free.

Malik,
Good posts, both of them. You have a talent to present your case well. Studying law by any chance?

and the grass is green on the other side :) as a Christian i can assure u there`s plenty to whine about church. And lets not forget the Catholic church sex scandals. Hey there`s pros n cons to every faith`s practises. May sound a lil secular to most, but its your personal faith thats more important than physical rituals (not the biggest church, mosque or watever goin person :P).

rozaiba,

What kind of immigrant-hicks do you live among if you get scolded for taking a non-Muslim to a mosque?!?! Where I come from, that kind of objection is simply unheard of...considering da`wah usually centers around the mosque....strange.