Do I Question Myself?

I am not an arrogant person. I was bullied by my siblings as a kid, so I know what bullying feels like.
But even the meanest people, mean in spirit as well as intellect, can teach us something. I don't mind if people think I'm not the brightest person, but to accuse me of ridiculous things like refusing knowledge or going against Islamic teachings to the extreme that I am accused of extremism is truly unjust. When did I refuse to study or learn, or at least ask? I do ask.

No but some people don't even have the manners or patience to hear someone out, without making personal attacks or ugly comments. They are not willing to listen either, Others are eager to show how intelligent they are, or how much they know. But they have zero tolerance for others opinions.

The following is a series of comments that I had back and forth with someone on G+

The topic was a video but the discussion spiraled into other areas, related or unrelated.

Sensitive people, who don't like to talk about religion in the first place, are cautioned not to go beyond this point, unless they are sure they don't mind reading things they may not agree with or like.

***

Jan 15, 2016

+waleed mukhtar because I was busy?

Why are you so rude all the time?

Read back over your comments to me; when I asked you to refrain from bad language, you replied back with more of the same. Stop escalating.

I've been working.

Why don't you tell me what your proofs are, then? All I've seen is your ranting about nothing.

You assume that you are smart, that your 'opponent' is ignorant, though I don't know why. I have been in normal conversation with many ppl, and I never assume off the bat that they don't know anything. Below see the three points about which I think you were particularly abnoxious [sp]. What do you have against "houris" or "sunnah" or anything I've said, I just don't know.

I hope you keep studying, and learn some manners.

By the way, I had already given you something to read earlier today. Did you see the link I left you? Okay, that's all I had to comment. I'm done, brother.

Peace.

Chat Transcript

info: Please wait for a site adviser to respond.

info: You are now chatting with 'Faruq'.

Faruq: Hello. Welcome to our live chat. How can I assist you today?

Jane: alsalaamu alaikum. I want to know the proof for the statement by some that there are no 72 houris for the believers who are martyred. Is there a sahih hadith or any athaar that states this unequivocally? I get this a lot on the net, and am wondering where it is coming from.

Faruq: wa alaikum salam

Faruq: one moment please

Jane: Did the prophet, pbuh, also (in any hadith, or esp. sahih hadiths) permit men to listen to the deff at weddings?

Faruq: yes

Jane: Yes, men can listen to the deff?

Faruq: “The martyr (shaheed) has seven blessings from Allaah: he is forgiven from the moment his blood is first shed; he will be shown his place in Paradise; he will be spared the trial of the grave; and he will be secure on the Day of the Greatest Terror (the Day of Judgement); there will be placed on his head a crown of dignity, one ruby of which is better than this world and all that is in it; he will be married to seventy-two of al-hoor al-‘iyn; and he will be permitted to intercede for seventy of his relatives.”

Faruq: According to another report, the martyr has six blessings from Allaah. According to other reports (the number is) six, or nine, or ten.  

Faruq: (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, who said it is a hasan hadeeth. Also narrated by Ibn Maajah in al-Sunan, by Ahmad, by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf, by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer, and by Sa’eed ibn Mansoor in al-Sunan).  

Jane: Finally, is it wrong to say that if the prophet spoke about an issue, and said it was either halaal or haram or permitted that that is more strong, as a proof, than if he had kept silent about something?? For example, anger would show on the Prophet, pbuh, 's face. But if he didn't tell someone something is wrong, it meant he approved of it. or it was permissible, is correct? But if he spoke out about something, that is a better 'daleel'. Or the hadith about that has more weight if he actually spoke, and not just did something, like in the past, and then didn't do it, later.

Jane: thank you for that I will save it.

Jane: Also, I had the other two, I hope that's ok. I will wait, insha Allah.

Jane: Can men listen to deff at weddings?

Faruq: men listen to deff?

Faruq: are you asking?

Faruq: yes it is wrong speak on what was not spoken about

Jane: yes, can they listen to the deff played at weddings by the women

Faruq: listen in what sense?

Faruq: men hear it yes, but to sit and listen I am not familiar with this at weddings

Jane: I mean purposefully, like they are sitting nearby, not in a separate hall, farther away. Someone told me it's not haram but gave no proofs.

Faruq: The deff is permissible

Faruq: but in the narrations I am familiar it is used by women

Faruq: not men

Faruq: men heard it

Jane: meaning that their intention, is to listen, it is okay, that's what I wanted to know. Okay.

Faruq: but am not familiar with men making an effort to try and listen

Jane: Okay. Thank you.

Jane: Also, did you see the final question. It is difficult to put into words..

Faruq: Hadith are based on all of the actions you mentioned

Jane: If the prophet, pbuh, said something about a certain something, e.g. a food, for example. He would say if it was haram to prevent Muslims from it, or anything else that is considered haram or bad, e.g. smoking as an example. If he merely allowed someone before, to do something, but later it was revealed that was haram and then he stopped, if he tells the Muslims now to stop, that hadith is stronger as a proof, than one in which he permitted it by only letting people do it?

Faruq: most times we can tell by the reaction of the sahaba

Faruq: If something was specifically spoken about

Faruq: yes

Faruq: this has more weight than silence

Jane: Okay.I need proof that if he told them, it is more 'strong' than if he merely permitted it. For example, he put off eating honey and then it was revealed that he shouldn't do that. So he told them, the verse. The hadith in which he spoke against not eating honey is then considered stronger than if he had merely not eaten the honey. Okay, It has more weight than silence, that was it, exactly.

Jane: Do you know of a good example, so I can use it as a proof,or a narration?

Faruq: sorry for the delay

Jane: Alhamdulillah. that's fine.

Faruq: proof that speaking out wieghs silence?

Jane: Yes.

Faruq: https://islamqa.info/en/138742

Jane: thankyou for the help. Jazaumallahu khairun. Asalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullah.

info: Your chat transcript will be sent to diamondraw4real@gmail.com at the end of your chat.

Faruq: my pleasure

Faruq: waiyakum fa jazakumAllahu Khairan?

LATER...

+waleed mukhtar I don't believe that we go to Paradise because of our deeds, so don't say that I said that. Plz show where I said that, I would immediately correct it! 

I have studied some, I have read and pondered, but you want to prove that you are very knowledgeable. Prove that you are an honest person in a conversation first! I don't 

respect liars, no matter what you claim to be studying and how sincere you claim to be. I don't need your 'sincere' advice bro.

More + Later...

Dec. 17th, 2016

It's been a long time since I read comments on this post, in fact I'm writing a blog post, which I'll post later (one of my post which incorporates emails or comments), to celebrate, in a way, the end of the year.

Everyone can read the 'convo' here. Wow, I'm "trying to hide something"! lolz. It's a long 'convo' though, so ppl should take time to read. They can take note of how you lie and put words in my mouth. I am actually 

revisiting this post, so I can blog about people who like to argue on the internet, who have no clear (or good) objective and benefit no one. 

For anyone who is reading this, I am not an extremist, never have been. I know that I have learned a lot over the years. I also encourage others to learn with scholars. And I never said that I was only studying on my own. 

I said I don't want to get a phd in fiqh - I didnt say I have stopped studying or reading. 

My level of knowledge about different areas of Islamic study isn't something I get into specific details. I don't think it matters because here, we are just regular people having a conversation with other regular people. 

Some questions that came up here, I answered sufficiently, or with the help of a chatroom. People can do their own honest research. I am not the Islamic Encyclopedia and never claimed I know everything or even know more than most Muslims.

I do believe that I try to understand things a lot more than many people. Does Islam teach mercy? Does it insist we kill Christians, etc? and similar questions are easily answered and there are proofs for why we believe Islam teaches mercy 

and why we don't have to kill non-Muslims. 

Just because someone whose name I didn't include, because it's been so long (that I don't think it would add anything to my comment) claims that there are no 72 virgins and laughs about my beliefs doesn't make him right. Lying and giving no proofs for what you believe makes you the obvious loser in this debate (or conversation if you prefer). 

I will make sure in the post to directly quote anyone who is included, not to say that they said this or that when they didn't. 

Peace, everyone.

Back In Time...

waleed mukhtarJan 15, 2016

+Jane Dughatir  you keep believing there is such a thing as 72 virgins chuckles


Jane DughatirJan 16, 2016

+waleed mukhtar So, do you believe in Paradise, or is that a 'fantasy' in your opinion?  I gave you the proof, from Islamic sources; you say you are studying Islam? Where are you studying, in Oxford? In UK, or America?

At your Bible College? I wonder...

By the way, I had meant to send you a message, so now is just as good a time as any; I had used the word "humiliated" when what I wanted to say was "learn humility" and for that I apologize. It was not done on purpose.

As for our difference of opinions on 'theology' let's just say we are beating a dead horse here, I am not about to accept other than credible proofs, and you haven't shown me any. Sorry for the other thing, anyway. Thanks for the opportunity to improve upon my writing skills, sometimes I made mistakes which obviously everyone does and later regrets. But no ill will was ever intended.

Just one more thing. You mentioned that we shouldn't judge others; and the young woman in the video, obviously whether I judge her or don't is something which only Allah knows.

Islam teaches that the life, honor, property, sanity of a Muslim are inviolable, that others should not trespass on these rights; so I wouldn't want to slander anyone. We don't judge but we advise and that's all this has really been about as far as I'm concerned.

Yes, new Muslims have an excuse of sorts; they need time, I know that as well; when I first converted I didn't wear the hijab for three months and tried to prepare myself mentally for that; it was not so hard for me, but others are not me and they might have an easier or more difficult transition into Islam; I knew a young woman from Grenada, she was actually a girl of 14 then, and she used to wear the hijab even though she was only studying Islam and didn't convert for another two years!

The link I provided proves [sp,grammar] that the specific out rules the general, meaning that there are cases where a different ruling applies; such as with new Muslims. I was only expressing my opinion based on past reading about what is the correct ruling for proper hijab (and clothes) for Muslims in general. Even men should dress modestly. I didn't talk specifically about men or about new Muslims; this was a general question and I gave general answers.

Also, I don't like the video on two other counts, mainly the music and the lyrics. The message is wrong; happiness is not the truth, I don't know what Farrell Williams means by that; but he knows that much better than I. And I try not to listen to music. Some videos have music, even the Islamic ones. I have to move on now.

Go in peace. Alsalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullah.

12:53 AM

+Jane Dughatir still believing in 72 virgins woow... some people are gopping. just because a hadeeth is recorded doesn't mean it is authentic. there were those hadeeth recorded which were authentic yes. but there were hadeeth that were also fabricated(saqim) and these were also compiled and recorded for the purpose of not getting them mixed up with the authentic ones. ibn masud of kuffah did this and one of the hadeeths are very weak he recorded was the one about 72 virgins. 

which according to ijmah can not be used in theology as weak hadeeths can not be used in core theology!

i genuine feel sorry for you the fact that you believe in 72 virgins means you haven't got a bloody clue about the classification of hadeeth like- hasan, sahih, da'if, saqim,muttasil,mursal or musnad which are all different types of hadeeth oweing to your evident faults.... and you blog trying to teach others? smh.

Jane Dughatir 12:26 PM

There are the virgins in the Holy Book, that are the Houris I am talking about; as to their number, I believe it is 72, according to the hadiths. Even if it is a weak hadith, it is okay to use it for evidence, for lack of any other evidence. The prophet, pbuh, didn't say there aren't 'companions' in heaven for the martyrs, and the hadith says the number is 72, it is no problem for me to use a weak hadith, if it is weak, as long as it doesn't contradict the Quran. That is how 

even scholars approach such questions. 

But does it matter to me or does my faith hang in the balance if by ijma some scholars agree that the hadith is weak, so we don't have to use it as proof of something? No. It doesn't bother me in the least. 

Faith doesn't rest on such little things as whether it is true that there are 72 virgins or more or less for the martyrs. But there are virgins in heaven for the martyrs. Thanx.

This is where the brother "lies" or "twists my words"; I said this:

"The people of paradise will be sitting facing each other on couches and they will hear no vain speech and they will be wearing long robes. Allah knows best what the robes will be like.

The Houris will not be there they have transparent legs, they will be in rooms where they wait for their husbands; they are the 'virgins in paradise' some men will get as a reward, some two, some more than that; martyrs will have 72 houris, 

according to many ppl's understanding of the hadiths.

The women and men, when they retire to their upstairs rooms or "private rooms" will then be alone with their spouses, to enjoy their marriage in heaven.

Do you think that people who don't follow the dress code, no tight clothing in public, (and I only used that woman as an example, and I'm sorry she is in the video exposing herself, but there's nothing I can do about that; if she wasn't ashamed 

to do so, I guess the people who know her won't judge her too harshly; she will live it down, I guess.) 

that sinful people in general, as I was saying, will deserve the Paradise (without any punishment before hand, in Hell, or in the grave) where there is no vain speech, no intoxicants, no evil, etc. (nothing ["prohibited"] [or bad] in their gatherings)? 

The ones who enter Paradise will be dipped in water, so that they can enter it, after they have been in Hell, for their sins; Others who didn't commit grave sins and also were serious about their faith in general, but this doesn't mean Allah cannot 

or will not forgive [whomever] He pleases, and that's another side discussion. 

I am not judging her, Allah is the judge, and I hope [He] will forgive anyone who was in the video supporting an unworthy cause, and also forgive all of us, who comment on the video.

This isn't a personal attack on anyone. I don't know her, and I don't know you."

But the brother said:

1. I don't know what I'm talking about when I say that there are 72 Houris for martyrs. 

I already showed proof that many people believe that because of the hadiths (or one "weak" hadith, as he says), and the person I asked in the chatroom for evidence provided it. Another 

opposing opinion doesn't mean I have to believe that opinion, and even if I change my mind later about it, either way there is nothing wrong with believing either way. I still say there are 72 virgins in Paradise for martyrs. So what of it? 

It is something of the Unseen which there is no benefit in arguing about - it is sufficient to say we have different opinions about it; why laugh at someone else's legitimate opinion supported by scholars (just because you believe something else)? It seems you can't accept that there are people who believe things that you don't believe. We all know that there is room for differnet [sp] opinions, so stop belittling [others'] beliefs or knowledge because they disagree with you. 

Another good example, better proof that it is okay to use a "weak" hadith for lack of other evidence (than what I said above), the one "hadith" (or saying) that scholars use as proof that women can wear their clothing which has "the trace" of menstrual blood, even after being washed properly, to perform their prayers (and there is no sin on them for doing so). There is no other hadith which mentions "the trace" of menstrual blood on clothing or if women can pray in such clothing. The fact that scholars use this "weak" (daif) hadith to make fatawas for women or girls who ask about this problem (purifying the clothing, and if it is okay to pray with clothing or items on which the trace of menstrual blood is still visible, even after proper washing) is proof that what I said is correct. 

I learned this in a 'fiqh' class (very basic, as you say "a 5 year old" can learn basic fiqh).

 Why do some people (like this brother) always want to assume the worst about me? You don't know me, so stop assuming this or that, especially stop lying about what I've said, when it 

is there for you/all to read in black and white. What's wrong with you/people? (Did I hurt his/your feelings, wound his/your ego? (Well, the brother should've apologized when he had the chance, and he should've not called me on things that he hasn't a shred of evidence about. Or he believes he is so much more superior to me in knowledge, education, family background, or maybe because I'm a woman he believes himself a superior intellect? Why doesn't he know the basics then? He is studying and says he learned the basics, presumably, since he tells me to keep studying so that 

I can know as much as he does (at least!)).

2. That I said we go to Paradise because of our deeds. 

I said God can forgive anyone whom He wants to forgive. I don't understand why someone is arguing this point, unless it is to make me look bad? I have no animosity towards other people I don't know (without a reason). 

The only reason I commented on this video, like some others, was to add to the "debate" and share my knowledge on this issue (whether music or dancing in public (a video isn't a family gathering) is permissible according to Islamic opinion). I always say that others can (and freely do)

 disagree with me. I have also read the many opinions (some by non-Muslims saying it is okay for Muslims to be in the video, which don't hold any weight as far as what is islamically correct) and already knew there would be a polarizing effect even among Muslims. This doesn't mean people have to throw insults at each other or belittle each other.

I sometimes poke fun at others, like I did yesterday when I spoke about Lindsay Lohan, when someone asked why  her English is so bad. I hope most people who know me on the internet will understand that I was joking. There is a grain of truth in what I said (that Americans 

don't know how to speak English) but it was just poking fun. I would apologize if someone asked me for an apology. And I have nothing against Americans in general and know that there are also very intelligent Americans just as there are some 'less than bright' ones.

That's my final word on why I said the things I said concerning the video. I also hope this clears up any misunderstanding or clears the air about what the brother said about my opinions.This discussion isn't about us, or our/anyone's inflated egos/ego, but about what is proven or can be supported with evidence.

One Final Comment from both  sides:

waleed mukhtar1:49 AM

+Jane Dughatir it's not even a weak hadeeth it's baseless! ibn mas'ud (the recorder) and hadeeth scholars after him said the hadeeth of 72 virgin has defects both in its transmission (either the name of the narrations is unclear or one or more of them has some unsatisfactory qualities) and it is weak in met'ten meaning the actual content of the hadeeth is compromised! again this is ijmah. and it is ijmah that baseless hadeeth which have defects in its content can not be used in beliefs especial [oh, a small grammatical or spelling error that should be overlooked!] that of heaven, hell, obligatory duties, Allah and his attributes etc.

jane jane jane please don't make reference to the quran now as if you would be right in your understanding in tafsir ul quran when you couldn't distinguished between sahih hasan or da'if and baseless hadeeths...like hell you know the difference between specific ayah and general ayah, law barring ayah to muthashaabihaa to abrogated and abrogating ayah not to mention depending on the mathaab(hanafi, maliki, shafi'i or hanbali) or and the theology( ashari, mathurreed, athari) you follow your understanding of the quran will vary... but of course I assume you have no knowledge of that because you bonehead of a teacher is scamming you, and he/she is scamming you good!

why are we even having this conversation? a [small error] old dog could learn new tricks quicker than you could learn that your being either lied to or misguided by some moron on the bare flimsiest of points in religion, [Exactly, it is a small point, but also not impacting on anyone's basic beliefs].

" But does it matter to me" 

of course it doesn't matter to you because if it did you wouldn't be committing religious suicide and going against ijmah set out by major scholars including that of the salaf such as imams ahmed and imams shafi'i (and if you're going against them then your just another innovator with serious defects in your religious beliefs)

could you imagine the doctor saying "you have cancer trust me I'm a doctor!" and you respond to it 

doesn't concern me I mean I don't see what the problem is I feel fine" 

absurd.

[The block letters (above) are mine, his words, which I am glad I don't have to take any credit for!]

Jane Dughatir10:31 AM

 1

Edit

+waleed mukhtar how am I going against anything? I asked for a right opinion from Islamic sources and provided you with that. 

The unseen isn't something we have to prove. And you said it was a "weak" hadith, now you say it is worse than that. It doesn't matter to me at this moment. I am not making a fatawa here. There isn't anything about this specific hadith (whatever it is, daif or otherwise) which contradicts the Quran. That is the bottom line. 

I as a Muslim, to practise Islam, don't have to know if that specific hadith is weak or not. That is the other thing you are obviously not even thinking about. What does this have to do with knowing fiqh so that I can pray or fast, or perform the fard duties (obligations)? It is a belief that doesn't impact anything. (You mention that I have to know at least as much as a five year old about fiqh matters, well thanks for the advice, lolz)

I know for a fact, which I learned in an Islamic studies class at an approved college, that a weak hadith can be used (by scholars) to make 'fatawas' in case there is no other source available. 

You say that the 'hadith' about the 72 virgins is false, whatever. This is not a problem for anyone. If it is false, I can accept that, it doesn't matter to me either way. 

Your problem is that you think just because a 'hadith' is weak (what you said first, now you are saying something else, which you like to do a lot) that it has no worth at all. 

Why are the weak hadiths included in books then? Because they are still relevant to studying. I have no problem with hadiths studies. I am not interested in being a hadiths scholar either. But again, it doesn't impact on my daily life or worship, my basic beliefs, and hence I don't know why you are urging me so intently to study (whatever). What's it to you, really, I can't imagine? 

If I prefer to be a simple woman who spends part of her day taking care of her household duties, part of her day working and part of her day on the internet making comments, what's it to you? 

But back to the topic at hand; I think you probably will not believe this, but weak/daif 'hadiths' can be used to make 'fatawas' in the absence of any other hadiths, if they don't contradict the Qur'an. The only hadith that scholars use to make the 'fatawa' [(for women and girls)] that they can pray in their clothing or any item of clothing or prayer cloths, etc even if the "trace of blood" is still visible (menstrual blood), is a 'weak' hadith. 

So I don't see a problem with a weak hadith that doesn't contradict the Qur'an. That is even okay when we are talking about the most important and foremost duty, the prayers, and about the acceptance of prayers e.g. how to achieve that! An act is not acceptable unless the steps to perform the act and the intention are correct. The clothes must be purified, just as the body must be purified, and yet the only hadith for a judgement regarding women's salah/prayers in clothing with a "stain" of menstrual blood, is a 'weak' hadith. The Qur'an doesn't mention this, but it does say that sexual intercourse isn't permitted during women's menstruation and that touching the Quran or verses is forbidden for them during the menses.

My intention in discussing this with you has been only to show where I didn't say anything wrong, when you accused me.

You keep accusing again and then laughing and then changing what you say.

I can easily ask someone about the hadiths, whether or not they are sahih, or what grade, and which book they are in, etc. But you seem to suggest that I refuse knowledge, just because I said I believed what someone else (who isn't you) taught me. 

Now. If you are wrong, or my teacher is wrong, or in fact neither is correct, is not something I know. 

But I know you change your argument when I call you on your errors. 

I'll be posting a blog post soon, which I will share the link with people here. So they can decide for themselves, whether or not you have been honest in your comments or not.

Peace.

[The last comment and the one above have some slight changes which are in square brackets].

According to him "[I] haven't got a bloody clue" about lots of things, or almost everything I need to know about Islam! Wow. But maybe he doesn't think that little of me. 

I have to ask,  does every Muslim know every hadith or what the chain is or what it is graded (daif, munkar, etc) No.

 I don't even know what the classifications are, or maybe I do! But what is it your [or anyone else's] business, if I haven't a clue about most hadiths, there are "bloody"  millions (including the different versions), I am sure, that I am supposed to know by heart??? Really??? 

So I can't comment on a video about women and men dancing in public, women in tight pants, some of them, and I need to go study just to do that? 

Every time [this brother] asked me something I replied back with proofs! Yet he refuses to discuss matters with politeness and continually abuses me. 

Please leave comments. Thank you. 

Is the 'Happy Muslim' video halal or haram?

Sheikh Murad distances himself from the video. He is the man holding a sign, that reads "I'm Happy".This video examines what the debate means about Muslims and society today.

Maybe some of the Muslims in the video were behaving as they always do, others might have acted out of character to some degree. I don't normally skip down the street mouthing the words to a song or sing out loud in public, and probably most Muslims don't do it all the time.

The video doesn't show Muslims as they are day to day, just as the rest of the 24 hrs of video by Pharrell don't probably accurately depict most people as they are normally either. It is an event. It isn't daily life in video.

Are Muslims generally happy? God knows.

They probably are.

But many Muslims are suffering, and they probably have days when it is not possible to smile, even weeks or months when things are unbearably difficult. The reality is that many Muslims, and others too, are not happy. Many peoples' daily lives are filled with anxiety about the future, or about their children, etc. It isn't easy to sing and dance even in Britain if you are standing in the unemployment line, in America, if you just lost your home, or in Pakistan if your family was just killed in a drone attack.

So, the video isn't "real", it is mostly "a show" done for an event. The video shows some people, not all people or even a statistically accurate  group. It isn't about stats or accuracy. It is about people dancing and singing in public. Most Muslims, even those who dress less modestly, don't sing in the street and dance down the sidewalk. Am I right?

I find [someone] is very angry while also defending an extreme view, that it is okay for men and women (speaking about Muslims) dancing and singing in public; then, where do we draw the line about public displays by Muslims? If dancing with your husband in public is okay, then holding hands should be okay too, presumably. Then do we say that a simple kiss is also "permissible"? [Revised, April 28th]

Sheikh Murad also has to give some kind of proof that what he says is correct, doesn't he?

[The person criticizing those Muslims or scholars who believe dancing in public or music are forbidden, is not Abdal-Hakim Murad, but a Muslim, Adam Deen (not a scholar, I'm assuming) who also appeared in the video. I apologize for the mistake - revised]

[Sheikh Murad] is known to have a bias against Saudi Arabians, from what I have read [of] some of his statements before. Adam Deen, then acknowledges in this video, that it might be considered "inappropriate" which is a backsliding statement. Not being a sheikh, he can't give a fatawa about this, but who can? 

Then [someone] asks "is it so [extremely] harram?" This is "judging" the Sheikh [Hassan], because he doesn't agree with his point of view; to be fair to him, Imam Hassan says it is wrong to verbally attack others in the video. That doesn't sound extreme, but is a correct attitude. E.g. we don't hate the person, but the action.

We can answer if it is "clearcut harram", if there is a verse in the Quran. But if such a verse doesn't exist, doesn't prohibit Islamic scholars from making their own "fatawas" about the issue. If Sheikh Murad is a qualified sheikh, he can also make his own fatawa.



+Abdal-HakimMurad

+AdamDeen



Lessons from Horton Hears a Who, Music in Islam and more.

I had a very skillful dentist, who claimed she couldn’t work without playing the music in her office.

I believe she was telling the truth or that she thought that.

 But her long nails didn’t help her to operate on my teeth any better during a root canal, yet she didn’t go and clip them just for my sake; she poked me once (only) really hard in the cheek with one of her long nails, and that didn’t make her a better dentist in my eyes. She had the luxury of course of ignoring whatever her patients might have complained about, because she was an expensive and well-booked alternative to other less experienced and possibly less cultured dentists. And, I have had doctors who couldn’t care less if I was comfortable or even in as little pain as possible. I won’t tell about any particular experiences with my obstetricians, but I will say that dentists have been some of my favorite people in the medical field and also some of my least favorite.

The dentist I mentioned, with the manicured nails, who wouldn’t sacrifice fashion or beauty for either dentistry or her religion, told me that I was (at the time being in my mid-30s) grown up and should take care of my teeth; I wish I had done that. Certainly I couldn’t accuse her of not being a half-decent human being or a half-decent professional (at least); I just didn’t agree with her lifestyle or fashion choices, but she didn’t agree with mine either. There are things that don’t have to be agreed on but that we can work around; this is called compromise. I won’t say her name, but she is from a famous lineage, I'm guessing, a Sheikh who probably has a Chechen bloodline.

While I don’t listen to music anymore, I understand why people do, having been a big rock music fan as a teenager. But I appreciate now, because I don’t listen to music (much) for religious reasons, how it is something that can be bad.

It can be a big waste of time, for one thing.

I do admit that I like some of the very good children’s movies out of Hollywood because of the scores; Horton Hears a Who (200?), The Lorax (20??). But it isn’t just the catchy music (melody) but the lyrics that are important.

I have heard and listened to some poorly written lyrics and even the music isn’t awesome; these are songs, like “How I Wonder”, which probably not many Americans have heard or know of its artist; his name is ?, Similar to him is Zain Bika. He (both men are) is a Muslim who sings (and composes/writes) nasheed (Islamic-religious songs).

I have liked Native Deen, and their lyrics sometimes are truly inspiring; kind of Islamic-rap, for lack of a better name; but a good majority of nasheed is less “Islamic” and more (heavy on the) rap or Arabic music. Many artists won’t compromise on the music, and they won’t stop making music for the sake of religion; in fact they might believe they are serving Islam by making music.

Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens) didn’t make music for a long time, but then he received a fatwa, that it is okay to make music. Sufis don’t appear to compromise on their values, but then most Sufis don’t practice a mainstream (I mean more “orthodox”) Islam. I don’t know if Yusuf Islam is Sufi, but he certainly could be mistaken for one. It doesn’t matter to me either way. I only mention this because I want to point out the good and the bad connected with music in general, which I’m not quite finished doing.

So, what’s so bad about music?

Yusuf Islam (Full documentary)

I think it stops many young people from realizing their true potential; it stopped me from concentrating on my studies in high school, it stopped me from realizing some of my other passions, which I could have perhaps ventured to work harder at, such as studying art in a real classroom or setting, instead of just dabbling; I also don’t think one can write or concentrate with music on, generally.

I wonder if journalists or novelists generally can’t concentrate when there is music in the background. I certainly never have anything else “going on” when I write, or even when I’m thinking about a problem; it is very distracting and even more than annoying sometimes, to hear any background noise, or chatter, or normal conversations when trying to write something that will be (hopefully) better than usual; I have to lock myself away to really get my creative juices flowing. I think most people (if they are not actually writing music) can’t work with any distractions, even music; there are some very obvious cases where music helps, or that’s what the perception is (and I know why, it’s the “beat” and the inspiring lyrics in some songs, like Flash Dance  (long time ago) that are so uplifting or make us want to dance. I’m actually thinking of it, which was probably called “What a Feeling”, but I can’t remember the name of the artist).

But, for example, painting (but not studying, which I think needs more quiet effort), and sports, like long-distance running or exercising are easier and not hard to do with a playlist of songs; but I truly wish I had not been so “addicted” to music for much of my youth. I believe I sacrificed some things for the sake of “just listening” to music by wasting countless irretrievable hours on it. Those hours (and years!) could have been better spent on something else.

Here are some links, for ‘good’ music, and one for the song, “How I Wonder” (which I will remind everyone I don’t like). I don’t listen to music often, on purpose anyway, but I will admit I’d be embarrassed if I said I am a fan of just any nasheed artist who calls him/herself Muslim.

Ahmed Bukhatir; his words are “touching”, not as good as (English/Arabic) nasheed done by many others.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn3a3xejgfM

Sami Yusuf is a nasheed artist. He wrote a long blog about why music isn’t forbidden, in response to Yvonne Ridley; probably one of the better liked artists, well-known among Arabs and English speakers alike.

http://www.diretube.com/sami-yusuf/islamic-songs-nasheeds-video_570e3c13c.html#.UxaqwLk4rcc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L-GOHa5-YQ&list=RDCuxgq7yzfrE

Yusuf Islam (formerly Cat Stevens) above; doing an ’Arabic alphabet’ song - It was one of my favorite songs for my family, too. (What NO “T” for Taqqiya? Lolls,  Taqqiya is something Arab Christians (and others) say Muslims do, “lying for the religion”, which is a word I didn’t know for twenty three years, and have only heard after I began blogging and watching YouTube videos.

Zain Bhika is another nasheed artist (not one of my favorites for nasheed)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpjIsSdsT6A&list=PLDFC08E171B0525B2

Native Deen is an ‘Islamic-rap’ group (English and Arabic lyrics appear in their songs, they also do a lot of live performances, which you can see on YouTube), American English, and very popular among Muslims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5Uzc_G542E&list=PLDFC08E171B0525B2;

Another, with no music (vocals only), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGYtzYckTVQ&list=PL436D40ED22AB2372

with a message about “different points of view” , “justice” and the “value of a life”.

Finally, “How I Wonder”, by Ahmed Bukhatir;

 

“Open Your Eyes”, by Maher Zain. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY5LZopqyio&list=PL16ECED39B8FED42B

 Also, the non-music version, as it’s called, of “Open Your Eyes” by Maher Zain,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXsKgDXI3ZU&list=PL3B2DF08200820CFA

The soundtrack (seven minutes of;) from Horton Hears a Who (The Movie, 2006)
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACD_wsNxbNA

The Song, “How Bad Can I Be” from the Lorax, with a great environmental/moral message, still looking for the song.

 

ARABIC NASHEED:

The following is a song, which dates back to the first century of Islam, its roots are the words for the song sung by the early Muslims at Medina, upon the arrival of Prophet Muhammad, SAWS, the first time he entered on his immigration  (when he set up the first Islamic state in Arabia since Prophet Abraham)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6D2-f-twbo

One of the most loved (I would say) Arabic songs of all time; “Junduallah”; I personally love it and it is a message for all Muslims who love Jihad (defensive Jihad to protect the lives of innocent Muslims).

Many songs came out of the Jihad done by Muslims, especially Arabic and Afghani songs, which I will try to find for the listeners/readers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8GDLy9K2Fk

Songs on stage performance, in 2013, in various languages;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLX2aM8KTIo;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLQ_zY3KTg0

 

Other Arabic links;

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRpYoRSzAjI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7phLxLIzG0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJa6wrOJFa4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_tjxz4yS_U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KTG3xpOCVI&list=RDCuxgq7yzfrE

The song “My Wife” (in English) (‘zawjati uhabuki’ means, “my wife, I love you”)

Similar to My Wife, is the next song;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgTdjM2tfZE&list=RDCuxgq7yzfrE

it’s about his “mother” (‘ummi’ means ‘my mother’)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cuxgq7yzfrE;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOVQkpR3rDs&list=RDCuxgq7yzfrE

This is a famous nasheed, probably connected to Islamic history, the song is about the moon (badr) appearing, which was actually a description of the prophet’s face. I hope I didn’t mix this up with “ya Taiba” (whether ya Taiba or Tala badru Alaina, is from the time of the migration). People sometimes sing or play these (some women sing) at celebrations like Eid day.

The final one is by a famous Qari, reciter of Quran, but this is a song;

He is Mishary Rashed Al-Afasy (Saudi Arabia?)

 

 

Fatawas about music:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UweexiK_GQ

Yusuf Islam (Full Documentary):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekiAhrlh5FE

The post before the post

I revised this Q/A and will link to an older post on the same kind of discussion; enjoy :)

Abe Lincoln's legacy will be in the next post, insha allah.

Q./A.

Good day Jane, thanks for the reply again. I hope you are well.

<<<

although I am an atheist, I was a Christian for 25 years. This is what Christians believe as well. They believe that God created human beings with the ability to know and love him. If God did do this, then it is expected that he would reveal himself adequately to all human beings, particularly if heaven or hell is on the line. But I don't think that we can say that God has done this. There are billions of people today who believe other things than you do about God/Allah. There are billions of people who have lived previously who have believed in the spirits and polytheism. What humans believe about the gods is complex and not totally understood, but it can certainly be said that the most important determinant in this is culture; when and where a person was born.

I also have some experience with the Mormons. One day after they gave me their book, I decided to read. After finishing, I found nothing to make me believe that this was the prophetic word of God. When I told them this in a follow-up appointment, they asked me if I had prayed to God while reading to reveal to me if it was true. I came to understand that these people had had a religious experience where they were confident that this book was inspired by God. I have had my own religious experiences as a Christian that convinced me that Christianity was the true religion. These types of experiences are common to all human beings and I am sure that some pagans had the same experience regarding Zeus, Thor, and Shiva.

It’s also quite bizarre to think that everything that happens is according to God's will. There are 9 million children that die every year before the age of five, before they had ever had a chance to formulate any solid beliefs about a deity. And millions of human beings have died before birth as a result of spontaneous miscarriage. Hundreds of millions of other humans are born with congenital brain defects, so hardly can be expected to formulate correct beliefs about God.

to my mind, these facts are inconsistent with a God that wants to have a relationship with human beings, but quite consistent with religion being a human phenomenon. It is unreasonable to believe that human beings who follow other religions are deliberately being wicked. There certainly are some frauds out there, but the majority of regular people are earnest in their belief. They are not deliberately rejecting Allah and the Prophet; they have just come to believe other things.

it seems quite clear to me, that this world is not governed by any divine will, but by cold impersonal mindless physical forces. This beautifully explains all phenomena in the world from tsunamis, floods, drought, the plague, malaria, birth defects, a world governed by survival of the fittest and dominated by survival of the strongest, the diversity of life. And suffering. IMHO, a loving deity who wants a relationship with human individuals does not.

. <<

my point about the four witnesses is that we have better ways to determine whether adultery occurred. It is not a very practical requirement for adultery because it's almost never going to happen. It is more likely that a rich spouse hired 4 witnesses. In addition three reliable witnesses could be enough. Why not five witnesses?

Finally stoning to death is a horrific punishment for adultery. There are many people who have committed adultery who have reformed themselves to become valuable citizens in the world. My best friend was one of them. If he had been stoned to death his two children and wife would've missed out on a great provider, husband and father. He was suffering his psychological issues at the time when he was in his early 20s.

My point about rape was that Islam has difficulty deciding what rape is. There are many people claiming to know Islamic jurisprudence on this who feel that sometimes the woman is responsible, at least partly, if she is inadequately accompanied or dressed. Apparently Islam feels that men are barbarians and cannot resist women.

Reply – many non-Muslims also say things like this, it doesn’t mean it is okay for a man to commit rape, and most Muslims know that rape isn’t justified because the woman is not properly dressed; many rapists are non-Muslims, I’d say more than likely most are non-Muslims. India at the moment has a big problem with gang rape; the question is obvious – why is it happening? Are all men "barbarians" after all?It seems men there regard women as objects, and many men may well be affected by drugs, alcohol, pornography, and so on. If they are not able to marry or have sex with women, they resort to rape, because it is a gang activity, I doubt it is a group psychosis, but a group activity which has gained acceptance among youth or men there. Obviously, the society has many ills if this is the case.)

in my country, rape is not very common. The vast majority of women live their lives never experiencing it. I think it is far more prevalent in poor countries, like India and Pakistan. Not sure how much rape is reported in some countries and as I said before, we can always make rape very unlikely by chaining women to their homes, but that would[not] increase the quality of lives for women. The vast majority of Western women value their freedom and the ability to make their own decisions.

Reply – Stu, you said you are from America or the west? Where do you actually live and call home, then, because rape happens every five minutes or even more than that in America. I think you are not telling me the whole truth…? I believe it was also, Stu, but I could be mistaken who said his wife was at the Boston Marathon or nearby, when the explosion happened!) Allah knows better than I.

<<

<<

Actually, when you read the saying, it illustrates that the Prophet was telling men, if they beat their wives they shouldn't sleep with them, which is like a deterrent.<<<<< I

These two above statements reveal to me that you believe that the man has authority over the woman. Do you think men have some sort of special knowledge and moral authority to dictate to women how they should dress? Are women so inferior that they need a man to tell her, with authority to beat her if she doesn't comply?

1) Yes, man has a responsibility to care for and protect his woman, or wife or daughters. 2) I was obviously speaking about the past (that men should beat their wives; is something not done by regular Muslim men anymore, which I speak about elsewhere, probably I mentioned this to him , so I'll check the details of other emails), which is 1400 years ago, if you would pay closer attention when reading, you wouldn’t be asking this question; I am a self-respecting and good woman, therefore, I do take care to dress modestly and believe many women would do so, if they believed it was for their own good; problem is many women believe it is beneficial to dress provocatively, though it is 2013, so they can find a companion who will love them; this is the wrong approach, but they think it will work. Women are raised from childhood to believe that their looks are the most important thing when it comes to finding love. Society also encourages women by the magazines, advertising, fashion shows, etc. to like to dress in the latest fashions and spend their earnings on clothing and makeup, and accessories, so they can be trendy and this will compensate for their feelings of ugliness, shortcomings in appearance or skills, etc. Many women are not following the crowd and are brainy enough to shun at least some of the unnecessary and frivolous spending on new clothing and instead care about more important matters. They also would seem to have more self-respect and dignity than someone who needs to seek approval from others. There are Western women who boycott products or companies they believe exploit women in sexually suggestive ways, or abuse workers (e.g. Calvin Klein becasue of its ads, is sometimes boycotted by individual women, others which employ girls in sweat shops). 3) “No” men don’t have “some sort of special knowledge” and I can’t imagine what you think that I or anyone would think that would be?? Women and men both have their duties to family, society and God. They will also be equally rewarded for their good deeds. There isn’t a huge movement among Muslim women to have the Quran changed, because they understand that Islam says they are equal in the sight of God and before the law. Women wear hijab (the Islamic clothing, a long outer garment or hijab and cover their hair with a veil, not out of fear of the husband, but in obedience to God, who demands it; if they don’t, no one should force them, or abuse them in any case. There are many uncovered women in GCC and also many covered women. Many women have grandmothers who didn’t cover in their youth, but their mothers began to cover and now they also may or may not cover; it is their choice. In Saudi Arabia and Iran women cover as per their government’s laws. In France women don’t wear niqaab as it is banned. Therefore, it is also governments which dictate the type of hijab. Even non-Muslims now can tell women how they should dress, which is definitely not a sign of absolute freedom of choice, either. Whether the government is Islamic or applies some of the sharia, or is a secular or democratic government, women are finding that they are being forced to demand their freedom of choice and conscience. All the power and God’s help to them, I say. Note that in Saudi Arabia, actually, not all women are forced to keep on the face veil, though it is something the government prefers (and it is the law - which is sometimes ignored) women do, as they are asked to abide by sharia law (almost but not quite in every area of life). No non-Muslims are permitted to enter Mecca, but other than that, they are free to travel the Kingdom, with visas. It is as other countries concerned with security so people are required to have jobs and place of employment or a valid reason for being in the Kingdom, or they can be expelled. One might see Americans as well as Indonesians or Chinese living and working in Saudi Arabia, and they do so with respect for the law in most cases.

[A famous female who works in television in Riyadh does not cover, this shows that she is not being abused because she is not covering though she knows it is the law. She also says she is intelligent and understands Islam, therefore the reason for her lack of face veil and the reason for her makeup and hair (she partly covers her hair only) is that she prefers to dress and behave in a manner against the Sharia. Yet she accuses the Sheikh of being extremist and against the rights of women. She should not defend her tendency to exaggerate the govt's crimes against her, when she is able to do so on national television and was not in any way abused (prior to her statements; in the video on YouTub). Whether or not she is still alive is for the audience to answer, I have no interest in the question or her campaign against sharia.]

<<

well indeed, some of the topics might be irrelevant. I'm not sure that slavery today is irrelevant in the Muslim world. There are some countries in the world that claim to be based on sharia who have not outlawed slavery. It is strange to me that God would condone slavery by giving rules for its management if he knew that ultimately these rules would be irrelevant. Slavery has become irrelevant in most of the world because all humans have come to understand that slavery is abhorrent. Concubinage and, for the most part polygamy, have also become irrelevant for the same reasons.

********

Allah permitted slavery in His wisdom, but He revealed to the prophet on many occasions the great reward for freeing slaves. It was also forbidden to make a free person a slave as per the prophet Muhammad’s saying (revise – find direct quote). Yes, it is absolutely the case that all people have come to see that it is a practice of past ages, and most communities, who are modern don’t even think about slavery anymore, because it is so far from our idea of equality and human brotherhood. Islam definitely had something to do with the almost complete eradication of slavery; as I mention, people in the more modern Islamic countries still today express interest to free the remaining slaves in such countries as Sudan or Nigeria, where people often live in desert tribes, away from modern life. It is likely some slave owners are Christians.There are hardly slaves in the cities or towns anymore, though one might be able to find some (How many? I can’t honestly say I know, nor do I think anyone knows, but maybe there is someone who can study this; it would be a worthwhile endeavor for some Islamic nations to do so, maybe one day, they will allot resources to this question). We realize that even Saudi Arabia is not a perfect model of an Islamic nation, and while some people claim that leaders such as Ghaddafi promoted women’s rights in their own country, it isn’t the case, but a false understanding of what he was actually promoting, which was the disrespect and enslavement of women (and men) to his ideology (a kind of socialism). He imprisoned many innocent men and even women and boys, therefore how could it be claimed that he was “elevating” women or promoting “women’s rights”? Nonetheless, Islam encourages freeing of slaves, people free slaves voluntarily or others pay to have the slaves released (pay the price of the slave to the Sayyid (master). There was never a racist attitude in Islam however, and slaves were not only black people. Therefore, it was an economic and societal norm (which was slowly changing) and freedom for slaves necessitated understanding of Islamic teachings; this knowledge spread very far and in the epicenter there were fewer slaves than at any time in history when the Prophet died and the love for his Sunnah meant that people continued to free slaves all the time. Perhaps in some countries this didn’t progress as fast and with the fall of the Islamic Empire, though there was slave trading by Christians (which continued even to the last century in a Westward movement, to America, which was also “necessity” because the slaves helped build the country and were used as cheap labor, etc. their humanity was questioned, and only until very recently in the West the law stated that black person is only 3/5 of a white person. The government (not the Bible) probably along with some encouragement from religious leaders taught that because the bible says that God put a mark on the son of Adam who killed his brother, eg. Cane killed Abel, which was taught in some circles or churches as the origin of black people. Muslims were forbidden from racism, racist remarks or racist attitudes and hatred of people based on race (xenophobia, etc.). No doubt this is in part why Muslims had no animosity or thoughts of enslavement because of race. In Arabia race wasn’t a factor in enslavement, but wars and the capture and necessary development of a system (long ago) necessitated that tribes and societies find a way to deal with their war captives without necessitating killing all the men and boys. People in communities must have thought of the need to use bonds such as chains, and if necessary beating with whips to discipline incompliant or disobedient slaves. Women were easier to control than men because they are weak, and obviously men liked to use women for sex, so that was also part of the social order in many societies long ago. One wonders how people in societies without slavery managed to defeat their enemies and avoid enslaving them. Did they kill almost all their enemies? Did they prefer to let them go after paying money? Or did they have to kill them because there was no other option, and their enemies would sooner or later come back to fight them again, with stronger more determined forces? Or did they make peace with their enemies so that there was no need for retaliation on either side, and how did they accomplish this? I can try to imagine what people long ago would have considered before either agreeing to enslave their enemies or to make peace with them. Even the environmental conditions, whether there was food enough for different tribes or nations (as in American Indian and Canadian native societies long ago, different “nations” or “clans” and “tribes” often differed or competed for food and grazing land, etc) It was probably a matter of survival that they didn’t take slaves but probably killed most of their enemies; maybe they also killed most of the women and children, which is the popular idea we have of turmoil in the “old west” between Indians and white people, and what occurred between many different native Indian groups (tribes or nations).

I definitely have no arguments (which justify) (for) slavery today (in most places) though, it is just that from a purely historical and anthropological perspective I can understand it much better than if I were to merely judge people - whether ancient or modern (modern in the sense that they exist today).

We don’t equate slavery of women with polygamy. It isn’t true that all people agree that polygamy is “abhorrent”, that is your own feeling and belief. Many women today accept polygamy, and I know some. They are happy as co-wives and I have even sat and visited with them, and gone camping with women who were co-wives. Something “abhorrent” would be unnatural, and polygamy isn’t unnatural, despite your dislike of it. You come from a Western or Christian background, so it seems strange and even a hateful practice, but that is your personal feeling and belief, others do not and shouldn’t have to live life exactly as you do, nor accept your personal likes and dislikes as their own; where is the freedom of choice which Westerners and Europeans always speak about? Where is the sincerity and humility? You say your best friend committed adultery and you forgive that, but you cannot understand why some societies and people prefer marriage (which is often a religious covenant and very serious and entered with necessary forethought and care.) There are also times when women prefer their husband to have another wife, whether you can find this even remotely possible or not. The Prophet taught that women and men should take care of their bodies’ cleanliness, to shower after sexual intercourse and to respect lovemaking as a God-given right for both spouses to enjoy, to fulfill their natural desires. Polygamy, like all marriage isn’t something dirty which brings to mind images of sexual perversion or abuse. Many in the west will shake their heads at Muslims or other polygamous groups, but easily fall into adultery, fornication, homosexuality, prostitution, orgies, wife swapping and other sinful, hateful, dangerous or perverted acts. Please don’t talk down to me, it is very annoying. You are not “forceful” you are a very biased individual, as you say “biased”. At times, you contradict yourself.

When you say Muslims have "progressed" do you mean that they have become morally superior to the Quran?

“No” they are not superior in their faith, general ideas, beliefs or actions to the early Muslims nor do they have any other teaching or belief system which is superior to the Qur’an; their “progress” is the same progress which most nations and tribes have gone through, e.g. they have learned to give others their due rights, to respect individuality, to be patient in adversity, to live side by side with others in peace, they follow the laws of the land whether founded on religious or secular laws (e.g. in the GCC there are Islamic family courts, and also secular courts, because not all residents use the Islamic courts and also, secular laws don’t necessarily contradict most of the sharia(Islamic law) such as laws against stealing, drugs, trafficking, rape, physical assault, littering, disrupting the peace, violent protest, etc.) There has been scientific progress, much of it long ago, in the Muslim lands, and now the Ummah (community) is in a state of limbo, with little developments (in science or humanities) for a long time, but there is some signs of small (and also bigger) movements to “environmental protection” as you asked, and other areas of development, social welfare, women’s rights, health and education, which is an ongoing concern, since schools opened in most GCC countries in the 1920’s or so. Christian communities also spread to the GCC from neighboring countries (their homes) and have grown and have their own community and activities. I mention also the support of community groups, such as the Indian groups or the Irish expatriates for their support of the King’s handling of the crisis during the “Arab spring” and protests which turned violent in Bahrain due to the extremism of some of the local people.

The rights of others are an ongoing question, which unlike slavery is always in some state of flux, while slavery has diminished in numbers for centuries. Human rights continues to be an area of concern or interest in general; most countries have some laws which some of the people are in contest with e.g. they want changes to them. It is natural to have conflicts within society as well as with other nations. The important thing to keep in mind is to respect others right to self-determination, that some societies will develop more slowly, and the world has a restricted right to intervene, especially considering that there is a lot of power in the hands of a few. Good should be clear from evil, if nations overstep the clear limits, as defined by modern laws in respect to human rights, then something has to be done; what is done depends on factors (all of which I’m not completely familiar with as a non-expert); the ability for the nation to comply, the situation on the ground, and any number of other considerations. Is it right to immediately invade a country because there is a suspicion that it has nuclear weapons? Is it okay to bomb civilian populations to root out terrorists in another country, considering that the terrorists are far away and no immediate danger? If there are signs or suspicious movements, when and where do you attack the enemy? Etc.

Besides international terrorism, what other significant problems are there, and why does terrorism get the most attention? There is child labor, can we tackle that question as nations and how do we get nations or companies which break the law, to comply with the modern and acceptable ideas of what is permissible, as far as children and work? What about the minimum wage? Do we dictate to other countries what the minimum wage should be, or is that a completely internal matter? How can nations do better to eradicate drugs trafficking and human trafficking? Why did the USA’s “war on drugs” fail? These are just a few of the very important issues nations need to think harder about and come up with solutions. If in an age when slavery was common, yet people began to see it as an evil, especially if racism or sexism was involved, why blame Muhammad, pbuh, for the timing? It is the way the world is; some people, merely due to the environment and their geographical position, e.g. the Sahara or Antarctica might have different ideas of what is right and wrong - maybe it is too hot and dry or too cold and wet to think about anything but how one will find food for the day or mend his house? Modern nations have a much greater responsibility to the rest of the world than did the earlier peoples and nations.(This is the answer to why God left in place a system which later on (much later, in America, they adopted slavery when there wasn't any on the entire continent; there was war and massacres, but no slavery)would be "irrelevant"; slavery hardly exists today, in practise and numbers; of seven billion ppl how many are slaves?  It is amazing that modern men or women who sit for hours in front of their entertainment centers can lob twenty questions about why a man 14 centuries ago didn’t eradicate slavery or amend marriage laws (actually, in some respects, he did both) and completely forbid it forever (because he was doing what God told him to) and yet, they have no qualms about buying coffee from Starbucks and equipment from Caterpillar. You’ve had since world war II to do something about Israel’s’ racism in the Middle East, but what have you done and how long will it take before you realize something has to be done? You want a deity who wants a relationship with you, will come down? God dictates the relationship; He sent a book, which you refuse to examine open-mindedly despite the proofs it contains, then you also reject God even though you once believed, merely because people changed the contents of the book you had e.g. the Bible, or because people are not living up to the dictates of their religion? You are like a child who doesn’t know how to think for himself and ask why about everything; try to formulate some theories of your own that can explain why slavery was or wasn’t abolished forever, 1400 years ago, or something logical (not emotional) about why men are or are not permitted to marry more than one wife. If people have anything new or original to bring to the table, I’ll gladly examine it, as for old prejudices and racist rants, I’m not going to entertain such questions. People can see my videos, comments and read the blog. If you have a question, be considerate of the wording and tone of your question/message or I will ignore it. – I admit sometimes I’m tempted not to ignore such questions, but it is better if I do.

I realize quite well and often vividly (my imagination is good) how people react to Islam’s set of laws, Quranic statement, historical events, and present day Muslims, including the extremism, but I don’t think people who believe differently from Muslims have to change. They have the right and free will, which Allah gave them, to do as they like and believe as they believe. But that doesn’t change my belief that everyone on this earth has the ability to know God/Allah, and that they just have to use their minds and listen to their hearts. That can be qualified; if their minds are closed and their hearts are full of enmity towards Muslims, so that they don’t want to listen, and refuse knowledge, then it is their own fault. I don’t call that Allah’s will - that is their own determination to reject Islam and the Quran. They “will themselves” to reject God, He is always open to their belief in Him. If they just pray for guidance He will definitely guide them, but they shouldn’t pray asking Him to guide them to something which they will only agree with for a little while, because in the future, they will likely figure out (if that isn’t what Allah sent - the guidance He expects all people to follow, not something that claims to be from Him, but is falsehood), and then they won’t find what Allah has destined for them not to find (because they asked for something and prayed for something which He didn’t send). Pray only to be guided to the truth, not a specific religion (other than Islam, which is the truth; though you don’t have to call it by name, you can if you want to) People often are certain that what they believe is the truth, but “there is only one truth” – for certain, one is truly astray when one believes in a falsehood, only a claim to truth.

Nonmuslims complain about immigration today, but there was a time, we vividly imagine it in books like Roots, when the west with Europe and the Arabs earned wealth by transporting and selling black people as slaves to the Americas; literally forcing them to go there, out of complete disregard for their wishes, or even families. They were, before that, free and made slaves. This is one of the practices of old which Islam prohibited – Muhammad, pbuh, said, “………………[editing] ….”

(I must apologize here for not providing a proper quote, it is just that I have many books, but don't know where the hadith/saying I am looking for can be found, if any Muslims (or even non-Muslim) reader can help I would really appreciate it, until I find it I am searching. [I had previously asked for help from an Islamic website, but they turned me down, becasue they only help people (non-Muslims) with dawa; I thought, I'm kind of qualified for their help, but they denied me, oh well...] I will take a break after the next Post, then I will have time to fix some of the missing references or indirect quotes, which need to be direct quotes, etc.(despite the previous setback, I have now found a female scholar willing to help me with islamic knowledge, and references, etc.)   Unfortunately too, I can't do much better as far as the look of the blog, no expertise there!)

DD

Wrong Assumptions Based on Imperfect Knowledge - Part One

Islamic ruling by an incompetent:

When Osama Bin Laden was killed, the Americans buried him at sea: they claimed that it is permissible to bury Muslims at sea, so they did that without the consent of Bin Laden’s family, although they also had his wives in custody.

Frequently we hear about some Fatwa issued, not by Islamic scholars, but by non-Muslims. The fact is, they are not capable of issuing a correct Islamic opinion on any subject, nor are they qualified to do so, because that requires a known Islamic Studies degree, or some proper and accepted form of Islamic education. Also, Muslims necessarily rely on Muslims for reliable Islamic rulings; they cannot rely on non-Muslims for this (Isn’t that so?). It is well known that even regular Muslims are not allowed to make “fatawa”, but are only allowed to repeat the Islamic legal opinion of a scholar, if they are certain it is as he had said. Someone might make an incorrect statement, based on their knowledge, but which they had forgotten, or mixed up. They are not be punishable for making a mistake, but this can lead to some problems for others.

A woman told me that the Prophet, SAWS, had been affected by “the evil eye”, or ‘hassad’ as it is known in Arabic. I thought that maybe she was just trying to prove her point, that a woman who didn’t read qur’an on herself, but her husband reads qur’an on her, could still get ‘hassad’ (even if she had read the verses on herself). I told her, the Prophet, SAWS, used to read the three final chapters of the qur’an and was protected from ‘the evil eye’ by it; he, SAWS, also used to read ‘ayat al Kursi’, in english called, “the verse of the throne”, the Fatihah, or opening chapter (often read seven times when indicated) and other verses of the qur’an at different times.

Not only was this Islamic studies student wrong in her judgment about the protection afforded by reading verses of the qur’an against the evil eye, but she also stated incorrect information about the Prophet, SAWS; that he had been affected by ‘the evil eye’ when in fact, we read in the traditions that once, a Jew performed a magic spell on the Prophet, SAWS, without his knowledge, and a while later the angel Gabriel informed the Prophet, SAWS, about the location of the magic , a charm, which he must undo to break the magic spell. Magic can be very powerful or dangerous, and is something which is completely forbidden in Islam. If one does magic, it takes that person out of Islam. As for the Prophet being afflicted by the ‘evil eye’, it never happened. He also taught others how to protect against it, so it is possible to be safe from the ‘evil eye’s’ effects.

The one who possesses an ‘evil eye’ might be a good Muslim, but should protect others from his ‘evil eye’ when he sees something which he envies, by saying “ma’esha allah tabarak allah” or “what Allah has willed, may it be blessed by Him”. It is known that some people naturally have a more envious disposition than others; therefore they should always repeat the formula when they see something beautiful or which could make them envious. That will also protect their souls from the envy, and make them more God fearing. Also, people would not hate them.

Other examples of ‘fatawas’ by ignorant people involve the important aspects of the prayer. Praying with the face veil is permissible; the prayer will be acceptable. Similar to covering the feet with socks; the feet still touch the ground. There is a hadith which mentions that for the prayer to be acceptable seven bones have to touch the ground. Based on this saying, one woman who claimed that she has an Islamic Studies degree told another that she cannot pray with the niqaab on. We can see that this is not correct because there are times when women must cover their face while praying, such as in a public place, where others (specifically, men) might see them. IN any case, I asked a scholar, and he informed me that it is not an incorrect prayer. Although it is preferable to pray without the face veil, it is acceptable to occasionally pray with it on, whether it accidentally falls over the face, or if the woman prayed with it on intentionally.

Renditions are unIslamic:

In Islam, torture is forbidden; suicide bombing is also forbidden. To fight terrorism, the Saudi Arabian government sentenced some people to prison. Some of these men had already served prison in Guantanamo, or Bahrain, and then were sent to Saudi Arabia. It is a well known ‘secret’ that the Saudis employ other nationals to torture prisoners. Therefore, Egyptians, for example are brought to perform this ‘duty’.

But the Saudis also have found other ways to deal with people involved in terrorist plots; for example, one young Muslim Saudi, who explained that he had been used as a suicide bomber by a group; men who wore masks to hide their identity had strapped a bomb to this young man, who was fortunately able to live because the bomb he was wearing didn’t go off. He ran for his life, was caught and sent to rehabilitation. So, the Saudi government spared this person, mainly because he claimed he didn’t know what his mission was; he had volunteered for Jihad, according to Islamic principles, not to volunteer for a suicide mission, in Iraq.

No one knows who the group or men were who did this to him. It is believed based on his statements, (which I saw in a television broadcast) that they may not have been Arabs, or Iraqis but actually ‘foreigners’, another way of saying that they were probably Westerners/Americans.

If prisoners are sent to Saudi Arabia, or any Muslim government, then one would hope that they would be dealt with according to Islamic principles. While many governments in the west, and elsewhere abhor capital punishment, it is the opinion of Muslim jurists that this is far more humane, and a better way to deal with hard core criminals; highway robbers, murderers, terrorists, rapists, or drug dealers, etc. and dangerous repeat offenders, than life in prison.

It is therefore perturbing that the Saudis have come up with this idea of ‘rendition’ the way that the Americans do. It is similar to what the Stalinist regime used to do to prisoners, in effect, making them disappear. During renditions, prisoners are sent away and not heard from, nor allowed any legal counsel. Then they are tortured, and possibly killed while in detention; sometimes the torture continues for years. This is totally unconscionable and surely is un-Islamic. So, why does the Islamic government allow it? It seems, they do not ask their Islamic scholars what is the proper view of torture, and they assume that if a non-Muslim or other person does the torture, then, it is not their sin. They believe they absolve themselves of responsibility for the crime. Torture is a crime against humanity. Not only is it unIslamic but it is against all international conventions.

It is strange to sometimes hear people defend torture.

IN all cases, when ignorant people, or unqualified people make ‘fatawas’, especially as no one has asked their opinion, it seems arrogance is a motivating factor. Such people are too eager to express their opinions, and likewise their manner of doing so is insincere. When an opinion is sought, the scholars are always friendly, and seem to want to help, not hurt the questioner. They do not speak of their own free will, but say what they have learned according to the strongest opinions available. They are free of willful arrogance or a bullying attitude.

The one common character flaw which many people have who offer their opinion when not asked, is arrogance. It is not a characteristic of a good believer’s, therefore sincere Muslims should try to purge this tendency from their personality and character, or the people will not appreciate them and will in fact suspect their motives, or their sincerity.

Non-Muslims cannot make juristic or other decisions for Muslims or believers.

The Americans were of course wrong to bury Osama Bin Ladin at sea, based on several obvious things, which I can see, and a true scholar would come up with more evidence than I can.

1) Bin Laden died in his home, or thereabouts after the Navy Seals attacked him and the family or people with him at the time.

2) He was nowhere near the sea, so why should he be buried at sea?

3) A Muslim must clean the body, ghusl, and perform wudhu for the body (both are essentially forms of ritual purification of the body) before the dead person is to be buried. The family or close relatives have the right to perform the ghusl.

4) There is no reason to assume that bin Laden did not die a Muslim, despite his ‘fatawa’ about fighting the Americans and his belief that Americans should be killed in suicide bombing attacks.

5) A Muslim should be prayed on by his fellows, meaning his relatives and male Muslims in the community.

6) As far as we know, none of these things did take place, because Osama was buried at sea by the Americans. (A muslim clergy for the Americans did the required ghusl, prayer, and burial, according to the American authorities).

7) Is an American Muslim, who works for the non-Muslims army, while they are hostile to Muslims and kill innocent Muslims worldwide, permitted to do this sacred duty?

 Therefore, it seems on several counts the Americans did wrong by burying him at sea.

Part Two

Ritual Purification vs. Mental Illness Cure:

One non-Muslim told me that Islam will cure the mental disorder Obsessive Compulsive Disorder because the rituals in Islam, such as purification before the prayer, are such that the person suffering from OCD will be somehow satisfied with purifying himself and stop the obsessive washing, or other forms of compulsion which he does. This was baseless, of course, with no scientific research behind it.

The fact is that there are Muslims today who have this disorder; they continue to wash their body parts even after they have already done so. The purification for prayer known as ‘wudhu’ is done once by washing parts of the body or wiping with water in a specific order a specific number of times (yet it is flexible). Then s/he can pray.

Some Muslims, like the general population, suffer from ‘waswisah’, or ‘whisperings’, such as thoughts that they did not do something, such as perform the wudhu properly. They sometimes continue repeating wudhu, which is not correct. The point is, the ritual washing is not meant as a cure for OCD, but to purify one’s body. One should say ‘Bismillah’ or a short formula which is said before or during purification (inaudibly) or also before entering the toilet. Then one can perform wudhu and pray with it.

Only passing of gas, natural discharge, or using the toilet renders the wudhu invalid. In case of sexual discharge or sexual relations and penetration, a complete bath (ghusl) is in order before one can pray. Release of prostatic fluid also requires wudhu, as above. Menstruation and post partum bleeding (nafees) require a full bath (ghusl). One could therefore, remain in a purified state all day long, as long as none of the above things occurred, which would render the ‘wudhu’ invalid. Of course, sleep in another nullifier of the ‘wudhu’, which requires a new wudhu, if one wants to pray, or also according to some scholars, before one can hold or read the Qur’an (definitely after sexual relations, as there is a specific hadith about this).

Some Muslims, repeat the prayer many times. Again, this is due to their urge to repeat the prayer, and doubts about their prayer’s validity. Some people repeat the units of the prayer, thinking they have forgotten one or more. Again, if this happens often, the correct opinion, which was given by a scholar on the subject, is that s/he should not continue to add an/other unit/s to the prayer, but end her/his prayer, without making the prostrations for forgetfulness (sujud sahw) either, and leave it at that, because it is a recurring habit; another cannot be sure if s/he is just very forgetful, or perhaps s/he is suffering from ‘whisperings’. If the person is just forgetful, maybe the solution is for her to try to concentrate better during the prayer, or have ‘khushu’, which is intentional, and can be improved by performing the prayer in an environment where there are minimal distractions, and getting in the habit of prolonging the prostrations, and other movements, concentrating on what one is reading during the prayer or saying in the up and down movements, and the bowing, and so on. Also, looking at the place in front of you during the bowings and at your nose during the prostrations, or at your folded hands during the standing and at the finger during pointing while sitting, making the ‘tashahud’.

Scholars tell the Muslims who suffer from doubts or ‘whisperings’, that they should expel these by reading the Qur’an and seeking cure and Allah’s guidance. It is possible to be freed from the burden of such doubts and often self-destructive behavior. If the problem is not waswisah, but an actual mental disorder; the person should first be diagnosed by seeking a professional opinion, and then perhaps a cure or improvement of the symptoms would be achieved with medication, or some other form(s) of treatment.