Standing Alone in Mecca by Asra Q. Nomani

What can be said about Miss Nomani except that she`s not only thoroughly confused but trying to justify it with her unfounded claims as pointed out in this critique.

Her confusion is very clear here in her own words (and the link only takes us to the preview of the first chapter). In her book `Tantrika` she`s proud of her whoring. Apparently when the book didn`t do so well, she took on Islam to modify it without conducting even a fraction of the due diligence as she did for `Tantrika`. Of course, who could blame a whore for such a bias.

I wonder why she felt the need for Hajj (pilgrimage) - an ultimate demonstration of devotion to Allah comprising of all the primary tenets of Islam and to be observed in the tradition of none other than the Prophets Ibrahim, Ismael, and Mohammad (PBUT) - when clearly she had no religious inclinations whatsoever? Surely Allah Knows the intentions of the individuals, but Miss Nomani`s behavior is a clear indication of why non-Muslims are forbidden to enter the ENTIRE Hijaz (not just the Ka`aba). Their intention is nothing but to create mischief. In her case, the trip was a stepping stone towards becoming a militant Feminazi. I`ve checked the ahadith her accomplice Amina Wadood lists at WMU site, and ALL are either very weak or unauthentic ahadith, or this group has twisted them to their ends like one Ahmedi here was trying to stretch the Sura-e-Fatiha and Durood Sharif to justify Mirza Ahmed`s blasphemous prophethood.

Anyway, she`s been afforded more attention than she deserves.

The question I have is for the people who claim to believe in Allah and the veracity of Quran but refuse to obey and follow the Prophet (pbuh). As mentioned on the ISNA Thugs board, there are 50+ verses in the Quran where Allah has ordered the believers to obey and follow the Prophet (pbuh). One of the reasons for this Command is because (in the Quran Allah Himself verifies that) EVERYTHING the Prophet (pbuh) did or enunciated regarding the Shar`iah was by Instructions from Allah, and that the Prophet (pbuh) did not add/delete/modify even a fraction of those instructions.

So, whether it is stoning of fornicators or prohibition on non-Muslims to enter the Hijaz, such decrees are only uttered by the Prophet (pbuh) as per Allah’s command to him.

Then how could these `highly educated, professional, bright, and enlightened` ladies and gentlemen claim to ``believe in Allah and His Quran`` while flouting this MOST FUNDAMENTAL tenet?

But this would only make sense to the ones who sincerely wish to understand and/or practice Islam. For these folks, a sincere study of the Quran and sunnah is in order. Otherwise, there have been outlaws, apostates, unbelievers, disbelievers since as far back in history as one can dig through.

The latter are nothing more than `ultimately confused` creatures. They claim they cannot bring themselves to obey the rules of Allah without realizing they’re obeying many of His rules as they utter their defiance.

For example, Allah made the rule for one to make use of his/her eyes is to have them open in the presence of light. Can any one of these ungrateful idiots violate this rule? Similarly, according to the rule Allah made, the method to gain energy is to eat, drink, and/or inject the food medicine into the body. Can they gain energy by violating this rule? The primary rule (designed and programmed in us by Allah) for procreation is the amalgamation of male & female reproductive cells. Can they bypass this rule to propagate their species? Can these women flout this rule and have babies through their mouths or other cavities? Can their men have babies to prove Allah didn`t make the rules on pregrnancy and they can defy it at will?

The list goes on. They can put forth all their futile arguments that they do not obey Allah or His messengers (pbut) for XYZ reasons; upon sincere reflection it turns out that their `selective obedience` is nothing but ungratefulness due to laziness and lack of imagination. They don`t study the Quran or sunnah or any other relevant books on Islam, let alone ponder on what they read, yet question the `theological basis` of Quranic instructions. In the end they’ve been duped by their own conscience, materialism, and their animalistic desires. That’s why Allah refers to them as “Ignorants”, for they keep deceiving none but themselves.

I have one simple question for the self-proclaimed atheists, too:

I`ve read and heard a lot about how, from where, and when humans evolved, but nothing on the WHY part. So please tell me WHY did humans evolve?

Considering everything that has ``evolved`` in this universe serves a positive purpose whether we understand it or not, what purpose do humans serve? All we`ve done is destroy this planet and are now looking at others; killed our own species and others, etc etc etc.? If we evolved to destroy this planet, then why bother with all these efforts to ‘save’ the planet? Why put in so much money and time to obtain longevity?

On a side note,
…some well intentioned participant of this board suggested that hijab is `almost` mandatory. I think he/she is a bit off on that. Hijab, as in jilbab and khimar, is “mandatory” – not almost mandatory. Otherwise, the women of the Prophet’s (pbuh) house and that of his companions (ra) would not have observed it as strictly as they did, even though with their level of piety there was an infinitesimal chance, if any at all, of them having ill thoughts.

I think the confusion lies in the last part of the verse when Allah Offers His ``Fogiveness`` to those who for genuine human weaknesses could not do so despite their sincere wish and/or effort to veil themselves. Verily, He knows our hearts better than we do. Most people confuse this part as the instruction not being mandatory.

Logic dictates that `forgiveness` could only be offered to a violator who sincerely repents out of the fear of Allah`s punishment. It can neither be offered to an innocent person, nor to the one who denies the violation. Then a punishable/forgivable violation could only be that of a mandatory rule. In Islam, one will not be punished for not observing the non-mandatory instructions and suggestions, but will be rewarded for observing them. So, if hijab was not mandatory, then there wouldn`t be a need for forgiveness. May Allah Forgive me if I`m wrong or lead anyone astray.

:-)~~

``as well as text by Naqshbandi’s sheikh on how to stimulate a woman’s yoni (I’m not making this up!!!)``

How the hell did I miss that one? does he accept mureeds via the net? and i thought i knew sufism.

dost mittar
you forgot the Kashmiri Pandits of delhi and UP and the Kapoors of UP, all these and many more including the Thakurs and kayasts of UP like Premchand and VP Singh constituted the Ganga Jamuni tehzeeb. My fondest memory of childhood is meting Kapoor Sahib a child hood friend of my grandfathers. A gentler and finer soul i have not known.

sattar/hamdim mian #39: ``Such books getting published is not so bad. After all, look at the nonsense from the other side of aisle … heaps of useless books``

Yes, this is the true tragedy of the Islamic discourse. It is dominated by Fazl ur Rahmans on one side, and Irshad Manjis on the other side. Both out to use religion to make bucks and gain prominence.

I have no problem with such books, as long as the author`s heart is in the right place, and she is not doing it for personal aggrandization and wealth. And, most importantly, if she relies on facts and does not play, selfishly, to the gora peanut gallery. Much of Manji`s etc. stuff has no factual basis. Fiction sold as fact. But, she is on every second TV show on Islam!!

Believe me, there are quite a few Muslim women, genuinely, writing all kinds of, ``revolutionary`` stuff on Islam and women. My wife has a list of books, likes that, from Muslim women authors, that she keeps shoving down my throat. And they scare the hell out of me, because, despite my best efforts, I cannot locate any factual holes in them; much like I can in most of the Manji-type stuff.

Unfortunately, no one knows of those Muslim female authors, since all the press is hogged by the lesbian, out of wedlock child, angry against society, desparately-hoping-for-a-fatwa- against-their-book money making group. I am not judging their personal character. I am sure they are better humans than I. But why put one`s own personal life on public display, based on false information? It`s like the actresses who give long interviews to Vanity Fair on their divorces. It seems to me like they are just doing it for publicity..........

I cannot comment on this author, since I haven`t read her book. But, in the long term, there seems to be a trend of authors creating controversy around religion to make big bucks. That will never create change. It will just create more problems for Muslim women, because such authors will drown out the voice of the Muslim women who are really trying to make a difference (and who do not hate all Muslim men, nor the society they live in)..........

I have been following Dr. Riffat Hassan, recently. She is a Ph.D in religious studies and a professor in Univ of Kentucky, and heads some women`s rights group(s) in Pakistan. Interestingly, her daughter is a movie actress.......No one knows who Riffat is, but everyone knows who Irshad Manji is. Such is the power of creating controversy through media........

khamkhwa (#42):

To answer your question, yes, Quran at most specifies lashes for adultery.

When I asked Urstruly the same question, I got a muddled response … something like … ``the Prophet understood Quran best, so if he had adulterers stoned, then that’s what Quran means when it specifies lashes …`` (I give up … you go figure). … And that … ``we are nothing in front of His divine mercy … so why bother trying to think and all … it is a tool for satan to corrupt humans … allah u akbar …pass the haleem …``

Heck, if urstruly can make things up, why stop ms. naomi from doing the same. After all having a few haramis is much better than making up excuses to kill non-believers, republicans, and one`s niece who refuses to marry him ...

I personally think isra naomi should head the ISNA and hold their next annual convention in the red light district in nevada. Next stop: amsterdam. All in favor say aye.
Aye.

Re: # 25
[Holy Prophet (pbuh) has imposed a hadd of stonning to death.]

...since when holy prophet takes precedence over allah...check out surah 24 verse 2 which clearly stipulates punishment for zina...

stuka#23:

No, I do not know of any Allahabadi Tandons. But I know that Tandons, Sriviastavas, Rustogis, Saxenas, etc. from Allahabad, Kanpur and Lukhnow were considered half-muslims because of their tastes.

Re: # 39

sattar mian,

.......... i agree - it is simply wonderful that such books are being printed and discussed (even if they lack literary value) ......... it is time islam, its prophet, its god and its male followers were put in their proper place .......... nothing is sacred about religion - it should be treated just as you would treat any other cult or group of deviants ..........

Romair,

Such books getting published is not so bad. After all, look at the nonsense from the other side of aisle … heaps of useless books on fiqah and ijtehad, as well as text by Naqshbandi’s sheikh on how to stimulate a woman’s yoni (I’m not making this up!!!). It is a circus of sorts. And if someone is foolish enough to pay for it, surely someone will print, package, and deliver it.

And it can’t be all that bad if it can get Urstruly to ramble philosophically ….

Urstruly, once again you’ve dazzled us. Perhaps you can also explain hadith about return of Jesus. He better show up before ummah’s lesbians take to streets and start demanding equal rights. And if this lesbianism thing catches on, where will I find my second wife??? Or would muttah with one in hopes of turning her bi still be an option…? And if so, what if I fail? Do I still have to pay her meher before I kick her out?

Re: # 34

...okay, so it is not the same as the ``tand da gawa dadoo``............. tand - pool/puddle of water ...........

........... urstruly, if i believed in prayers being answered i` d pray for a woman like this to descend on your masjid so that you can pull out your remaining hair ........... what the heck, i will go ahead and pray anyway - it can`t hurt anything !

#30 by Romair on September 14, 2005 11:17am PT


Though, even Rushdie wouldn’t be half as well known, had it not been for the controversies he created around Islam.


Rushdie didn`t create a controversy around Islam...the people who put a fatwa on his head and the people who were screaming for his blood did...

go asra , go !

http://www.asranomani.com/freedom/archives/2005/02/the_morgantown.php

......... can you imagine all those bearded mullahs in morgantown running around in their nightgowns trying to figure out what to do with this woman ! ............ just love it ! ........ i call it divine retribution .........

dullahbhatti

The word Tattoo used in the proverb means an ass or a donkey and not a ``Daddu`` as in punjabi meaning a `frog`.

The proverb is spoken when a simpleton (Khawaja in this case) has only one witness to prove his innocence or case, and that person is nothing more than a dolt, a bonehead, a twit, a numbskull or simply an ass himself.

Re: # 31

the bigger question is what was the khwaja doing in the water ?

romair #30:

with caveats...certain types of book being published have very little to do with talent or content...

..otoh there is always a demand for a one-legged, black, female, immigrant, single, lesbian author writing on the latest whipping boys...it is variously called nurturing talent, affirmative in-action, encouraging minorities, and eating the cake while.........

#14 by Urstruly on September 14, 2005 5:20am PT

There is an Urdu proverb to describe the writer of the book and the reviewer:

Khawaja ka guwaah, tattoo.

---

baadshao tuhade wale paasay TaTToo paani ch rehnday ne?:)