Collounsbury
[Moderator Hat ON]
Do NOT call your fellow posters “twits” in this forum. If your are in doubt whether a poster is current, don’t call them names.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Ahem, if I may:
In my own defence, I was not in doubt at the time, I thought AOB was gone, although very incorrectly so.
Very quickly confessed my sin when I saw otherwise, which I might add probably would have passed unnoticed had I not drawn attention to it given the highly oblique nature.
Very well on the clarifications
The Burqa is not actually mandatory in Iran, wearing a hijab is - that is vieling the hair, as well as ‘modest’ clothing. Face vieling, either via burqa, the head to toe draping, or by the addition of the niqab, is not mandatory in Iran, as you can see from simple news photos.
Rather different issues in the end. While I personally don’t like the idea of mandatory hijab, it’s a world of difference from the burqa, which I think is a genuine denial of the woman. Hijab isn’t in the same league, and I think not inherently objectionable.
Again, restrictions vary. Iran actually has more female participation than many so called liberal, secular governments elsewhere.
It is clearly not a paradise for women’s rights by say late 20th century Euro standards, but it is building up a set of natively understood rights in its own idiom. Imperfect but in my opinion more real than imported social codes.
The Taleban, on the other hand, like the Saudis in commonly applied “moral laws” were retrograde idiots. Indeed Iran criticized them for that.
Sure, lots of Salafiste preachers go for that. Is Salafi thought popular? In a lot of circles it is, largely as a political reaction to the geriatric immobility of the “secular regimes.” Speaking of “the mullahs” as a single body is not only inaccurate, it gets in the way of understanding. There are many strains in Islam, the “mullahs” or Imams who preach Salafi thinking do that, many others do not.
Your question is best addressed through reading. Try Roy’s works, also Lewis’ Political Langauge of Islam (rather too classical IMO but a good grounder) and Lewis generally for a historical background. He’s a mediavalist and I do not find his commentary on modern politics to be very good. Espisito is a good source as well, for an American academic. Also see Gilles Keple (*sp) recent work. Tamerlane can share further.
Of course, it’s the majority of the population. The Sheikh of al-Azhar, probably the most visible single Muslim Dr. of religion, condemns terror and abuse all the time. But he’s not the sexy ranting and raving type. The fairly Salafi but reasonable Qardaouie, Egyptian in quasi exile in the Gulf, condemns much terror - although he sometimes allows weasel room for what he and others consider legit resistance, e.g. bombing against military targets very broadly defined as I recall - and openly supported the Afghan war. Was a clear condemer of the Taleban. I personally don’t care for the fellow, very conservative, but he’s popular and has TV shows.
Too entirely different entities, and note well, REform Judiasm is a very European-American movement. You don’t find a huge following in the non-Euro/non-American Jews.
"
Given the work cited there and the content, it’s really a front for anti-Islamic movements.
Well, I don’t care if you do not agree. Unless the “debate” is some to be some cheap means of getting a lecture for free, you have to bring something to the table. If nothing more than reading some past relevant threads. E.g. the thread(s) by Muslim Guy, a reasonable and moderate fellow, would give you a launching point.
I’m not a professor, I am not teaching. Want me to teach, send me a check.
Truly provocative questions come from a base of knowledge. Insofar as the Board has some background to present, rather than simply demanding the same old, same old be regurgitated for your presonal enlightenment, why not review, reformulate and come back with observations off of the new body of information. Your questions etc. are so broad and begin with so little knowledge we’d need to conduct a seminar to fill the gaps. I don’t see that as a useful use of my time. Specific issues, that’s fun to engage, that amuses me. Simply lecturing on about Islam when someone can pick up some basic book and get up to speed is not.
Many people confuse the middle eastern culture with the religion. While they are entertwined to a greater degree than in the west, they remain separate things. Is the culture patriarchal? Yes indeedy. So are most others in the world. This one (in Saudi at least) is just more obviously so.
The warped and occasionally downright evil things that Muslims do usually cannot be blamed on the religion but are more likely associated with politics, poverty, customs, or simply some asshole wanting power.
Many nominal Muslims will play the religious card to get what they want. This is comparable to numerous politicians in the West who suck up to fundamentalist religious leaders and constantly declare that God is on their side.
The bottom line is that Islam doesn’t automatically make someone a demon terrorist. Of course, it doesn’t keep him from becoming one either. Like all religions, if you want to do something you can find a passage that will allow it.
As an oh-by-the-way and just as a private rant of mine, why is everyone so appalled by women wearing an abbaya? This is usually the first thing out of everyone’s mouth/keyboard when decrying the evils of Islamic societies.
Christ, it’s simply a gender-based dress code and women growing up in these societies aren’t “forced” to wear them. They grow up doing so and consider it natural and normal. The thing really isn’t a hair-shirt of some sort.
All the best
Testy
Actually, since there are severe, indeed draconian, penalties upon women who do not wear such things in at least some of these societies, I’d say there is some amount of force. Or is subject to execution by ones own family merely another social quirk we should laugh off?
Just like most said: There are the moderate and tolerant ones and there are extremists as well.
Just a note on Indonesia: The current president is a woman. And although the majority is muslims and people are very religious there, it is not an Islamic country. Islamic liberalism is on the rise there too, however the few extremists seem to be the loudest and they always get the headlines.
Which ones? REally, I like context. I don’t feel we can adequately address this w/o knowing which societies to which you refer.
Honor killing?
Not just a Muslim thing, no.1 and No.2, more of Medit. thing. Not very known in North Africa, for example, but disturbingly prevalent among all communities here in the Eastern Med. Basin.
I frankly haven’t heard of this happening outside Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. Obviously that doesn’t mean it never happens but I do live in Saudi which is about the worst area for this and I have NEVER heard of women being executed for not wearing some kind of black covering.
The women who kick up the fuss about this are mostly westerners who are here accompanying their husbands. I’ve never spoken to an Arab woman who had much of a problem with it. They seem to slap on a headscarf/abbaya about the same way I do my pants before going out in public.
Do you have some kind of cite or is this just something you’ve heard?
Regards.
Testy
No woman should have to be forced to wear a head covering by law. If they want to, fine, I don’t have a problem with that. In some ways I could see it being nice in not having to fix my hair each morning, but when a goup of woman are forced to stay in a burning building because they don’t have a head covering and die as a result as happened in Saudi Arabia I believe in 2000 I have major problems with that. I don’t know enough of that country to know why it happenned, but it did happen.
A thread on SDMB is kinda like a TV show on an old, old Philco… slowly, slowly the thing gets tuned in.
Collounsbury, when I think I’m complimenting you, you take offense and get testy about it. Far as I’m concerned, there is no greater honor on the SDMB than to be credited with “teaching.” It’s the whole fighting-ignorance deal. And then you say you don’t care whther I agree, which fairly begs me to respond that I don’t care whether you care… and off we go. But let’s not.
So let’s keep tuning, tuning, tuning…
Elewyn,
The OP is about “where are the Reform Muslims?”
Scott wanted to find out of something that parallels Reform Judaism. It is not about the repressive govt of SA (and the Taleban). As Coll pointed out that SA govt are retrogade idiots. Again as others pointed out muslims, including the mullahs are not a monolith.
Scott,
I remember a while back reading a Post article of liberal movement in Islamic world that actually has been around forever, just like in Christianity and Judaism (I tried to search for it on WP site but it’s older than 14 days and couldn’t find it). IICRC from the article, Liberal Islam is thriving in countries like Pakistan, India and Indonesia, among others. And of course, this sort of thing isn’t something that’s sexy enough to be on the news here.
A couple of links re. Liberal Islam that I found might interest you:
LIBERAL ISLAM: PROSPECTS AND CHALLENGES
The second link is an Indonesian site (a country where about 180 million muslims live). Please note that the founder, Nurcholish Madjid, is a well known western-educated moderate who may run for president next year. The former Indonesian president, Abdurrahman Wahid, who was also the head of the largest muslim organization (probably in the world) was also a well known moderate who championed religious tolerance in the country. Too bad he was ill and a very bad administrator.
Those were just two examples. I am sure others who know much more than me can contribute more. Again, I got the feeling that this sort of things, which is considered normal in some Islamic countries (not necessarily in countries based on Islam but where the majority are muslims), isn’t something that is reported by the news media here.
There seems to be a great difficulty in separating law and rules due to the Islamic faith, from the laws and rules of Islamic states. I believe many here in the west are making an error which would be analogous to viewing Apartheid South Africa as a Christian country, and from this concluding that the laws of Apartheid are somehow Christian laws.
The Al Qur’an is a book written in such a way that many interpretations are possible. As it is purportedly the literal word of God as transmitted to Mohamed it would seem to me that this openness to interpretation is God’s own will. Is there any Islamic group which recognises that no particular interpretation should be taken as outweighing any others? One with an attitude towards the Qur’an similar to an Anglican’s attitude towards the Christian bible?
Well, a first post I believe, I suppose someone should welcome you.
Super, I believe no woman should be forced to wear a top by law, let the breasts be free as meant by nature, except for push up bras of course. With lace.
However, that’s not the case.
So did the Saudis, it was a scandal. 2002. It was girls, by the way, a girl’s school fire. The facts are unclear - initial stories may have exagerated the actions of the “Morality Police” - fine Saudi institution, carry round sticks to beat morality into. But they’re not real police, closer to vigilantes.
In any case, the facts were something along the lines that in some manner the morality police interfered with the proper evac. of the school (stories vary as to the degree, a sign of how hated these guys are even in conservative, hell retrograde SA, most people seem to believe the worst) causing directly or indirectly some girls to die.
Horrible, and it caused a shit storm in the Kingdom. Abnormal behaviour, even by their standards.
Indeed, but it says nothing about being required by social convention to wear a hijab, although it says a lot about irrational application of the rules.
Your example is a good one but this is not normal and as Collounsbury says, it caused a huge shitstorm in the Kingdom. That one incident shocked and horrified everyone, western and Saudi alike and finally allowed people to start speaking up about the evils of the mutawwa and demand that they be reigned in.
The government here is (FINALLY!) trying to “squash” the mutawwa and have rounded up many of them and shipped them home to Qassim. The remainder seem to be thoroughly cowed and no longer cruise the streets with their black Suburbans.
“Abdullah Average Saudi” despises the mutawwa. An interesting example: During the Gulf war, (the first one) an American female MP in a shopping mall thoroughly embarassed a mutawwa by throwing him onto his back and giving him a stern lecture about not hitting others. The crowd was Saudi and cheered her. The mutawwa slunk off muttering in his beard.
The problem is that there is a passage in the Quran that encourages, or at least allows, people to correct the behaviour of others. Most people ignore this but the religious fanatics use that passage to justify their actions. Just like any other religious nutcase, with any other religious book. There is always something a person can find to justify his actions if he looks hard enough and tortures the logic sufficiently.
Regards.
Testy
For the best, a colleague of mine here (another financial type like me) tells an amusing story, in retrospect, of being hazed by the morality police once in Saudi when he accidentally split open his suit pants. Boxers showed.
Long story, very amusing, involved being forcibly taken to a tailor to avoid the scandal of his boxers showing, as well as being taken to mosque when prayer time came, dressed inapprop, because prayer must be done you know.
Indeed. I also note Testy and I had a conversation about this a few months ago. You might search on the usernames.
Right, there’s something in there along the lines of encouraging correcting bad behaviour. It’s not normal to concieve of this, however, as including beating people and obsessing about minute detials. Indeed being a prig about that is considered fairly rude - tension between each person having their own Islam and the idea of community.
Moderate Saudis I have spoken to about the “mutawwa passage” tell me that the Quran says the correction should be done verbally, not with a stick. Nevertheless, the passage gets interpreted into encouragement for the mutawwa.
Despite their reputation, the mutawwa aren’t really that intimidating. I personally know a woman who was involved with the Viet Cong during that war. Despite being petite, elderly, and Asian, she has absolutely terrified several mutawwa in the Al-Khobar area. She doesn’t push the matter but they leave her strictly alone.
Regards
Testey
Aldebaran,
Sorry for my somewhat tardy response to your thoughtful and stimulating response to my comments. Time zone and work deadline problems can play hell on one’s spare time.
I regard you as a friend and colleague in our mutual quest for the truth, particularly on the question of why there seem to be so few living reform Muslims.
You have stated that:
“Taking words, lines, and excerpts of a sura out of context is an old tactic used by those who are out on nothing else then making pointless remarks.”
Aldebaran, my good friend, this is all very delightful and good stuff, but a quote is out of context, by definition, is it not?
You further elaborate:
“By the way: I wrote my thesis on Al Qur’an as text with focus on the Uthmanian redaction and the parallel editions. So yes, I think I know what I’m talking about.”
So you have studied the Koran and fully mastered the Uthmanian redaction and the parallel editions. I am exceedingly impressed.
On the Koranic verses which I quoted to you and prescribe how to treat women under Islam you state:
“Yes, that is what that verse is about, not about ‘how to treat women in general’ (and of course you come up with some cutted sentences, which is part of the common tactic.)”
You then continue:
"And then comes the text which is all to eagerly translated as “and beat her”, as ultimate remedy if nothing you do helps to brings her to reason.
Now that is my problem. Because the verb daraba used there has a variety of connotations among which
“ to shoot” (and I heard once a boy in Pakistan who shot his widowed mother on the command of the village elderly, - who’s patriarchal thinking was shocked because she left her home to go to work - declare that this was a command of Al Qur’an)
“to strike”,
“hit”,
"separate”,
“part”,
“to impose”
and when adding “an”: to turn away from, leave, forsake, abandon, avoid, or shun some one/something.
To name some.
To take this verb in this particular context as if was meant “ to beat” is shocking because this is in contradiction with the whole message of Al Qur’an, turns it upside down and in addition is in contradiction with the lifelong struggle of Muhammed himself to educate the men of his and the other tribes about the rights of women.
I have a dilemma with this since I first learned the verse and had it explained this way and I feel a kind of helpless anger every time this particular verb is in this context interpreted as “to beat”. I don’t believe a word of it that this is a possible meaning. Of course there are hadieth describing that Muhammed himself had much difficulties with it and so on… Which serve in fact for the defenders of the “and beat her” connotation as proof that it was indeed part of the original message."
Thank you Aldebaran.
It is so much clearer to me now.
If my understanding of what you say is accurate, then what we might need here, is a complete Revamp or, if you prefer, a top to bottom “Reform” of the Koran and the Hadiths to ensure that all words like “beat”, which actually mean something else, as you have managed to convince me, should be replaced by a more likely word.
Perhaps you, as a qualified Uthmanian redactionist and the parallel editions, would be best qualified to produce a fully corrected, revised or “Reform” edition of the Koran and the Hadiths, with words having the correct meaning inserted into the text of these most holy books and words having the obviously incorrect meaning discarded? It should be a best seller.
Do you feel up to the challenge?
Is your life insurance policy up to date?
Alan O B
-
Your sarcasm doesn’t work with me.
-
As for a re-redaction of Al Qur’an: the fact that you come up with such a “proposal” gives only more proof that you have no idea about Al Qur’an, about Islam and about Muslims in general.
The fact that you name me a “qualified Uthmanian redactionist” only add to that impression of complete ignorance.
Studying on and writing about the history of a text is completely the contrary of “redacting” it. -
When I come to conclusions about the subject I study on and write them down as such, doesn’t mean that my opinions and conclusions are the right ones and the only ones. It only means that I came while studying on the issue to these opinions and conclusions. Like other researchers came to theirs.
Reading research done by others is part of the profession, if you agree with their opinions and/or conclusions or not.
Respect for the work of others is a necessity and not only that: reflecting on their work an trying to find out how they formed their opinions and conclusions is part of the proces of your own intellectual development.
Salaam. A.
From historical perspective, “such a thing as Reform Islam, along the same lines as Reform Judaism” is not “even conceivable”. Also, Reform Judaism has absolutely nothing in common with Reform Christianity.
Christian reformation started as a dogmatic purification movement inside a domineering religion, directed against the “Roman whore”, i.e. corrupt and discredited Catholic Church. It was extremely bloody and narrow-minded: positive fruits were borne much later.
I think Reform Judaism started as an attempt by the adherents of oppressed religion (European Jews) to reconcile with and partake of the alluring quality of life of their oppressors (European Christians). Whatever internal violence it produced within Jewish community is insignificant in comparison with 30-year war.
Thus Christian and Jewish reformations have nothing in common.
Geographically, both of those reform movements were confined to Europe and, by extension, US and Australia. Orthodox Christianity was never reformed in European sense; Jews living in Middle East and Africa were never reformed either.
Islam is a domineering religion and will never reform on Judaic model; Islamic reformation will be more like Christian: bloody and dogmatic internal affair at the beginning. Some historians argue that is exactly what we see taking place nowadays. ‘Dogface’ mentioned above that Wahabism might be called the true Islamic reformation. If so, it is certainly not the first reform movement within Islam. There were few internal wars before, up to the point of bombardment of Mecca and subsequent destruction of Kaaba by some Islamic reformists many hundred years ago. Nonetheless, Islam remains as a whole so far…
First off, I want to thank everyone for helping me to learn a little more about a subject I know too little about. I hope I can bring some contributions to the table too at some point. I’ve actually been lurking here for a while after a friend told me about the site, and have just been too busy to actually participate. Now onto specifics.
bbart4,
I guess I was responding to testy saying harsh penalties for not wearing a head covering did not occur outside of Afghanistan. I do recognize that this does not reflect all of muslim thought, and perhaps should’ve clarified that in my post. It was an extremist action, as there are extremists all over the world, in pretty much all lines of thought. It just made me so angry when I heard about it that I let my emotions get the best of me when talking about it at times.
Testy,
It’s so interesting to hear from someone who is actually living there. That is a major reason why I joined sites like this, to expand my world beyond my own little backyard.
I am glad to hear that it outraged people in Saudi Arabia too. Ever since I heard about the incident I have wondered what reaction people had there. Maybe it woke some peope up to the danger of extremism. It sounds like it made the mutawwa lose some of their power, which sounds great.
I know how twisted a phrase can get. It happens with the bible such as when people would actually try to use the bible to justify slavery, which just thinking about gets me upset because it seems so antithetical to Jesus talking about loving one’s neighbor, and the verse about there being no slave or free, man or woman in God’s eyes. It’s like how can one just choose to pretty much ignore the whole new testament and instead to concentrate on some obscure verse about Cane and Abel ( I think that was the one used). It just makes me want to shake someone. Okay, breathe, better now.
Anyway, good points. Thanks again for the education on some of what is happening in SA.
Collounsbury,
Thanks for the welcome. I hope I didn’t make an enemy out of you or anyone else with my first post. You have a point about there being laws of indecencent exposure, and so forth in western culture too, although the fashion seems to be to wear next to nothing set by examples like Brittany Spears. which isn’t necccesarily great for women either. Western culture has diseases like Anexoria because such an emphasis is placed on being the perfect body type. In either case the woman seems to get the short end of the stick. Either cover up from head to toe or look perfect, with the reasonable middle goal of being comfortable often too little emphasized. A woman should not feel that she should have to cover up her beauty, or that her beauty is solely dependent on outward appearence, on beng a certain, often unrealistic, ideal. I think true freedom lies somewhere in society not judging someone’s value on outward appearence, wether that is with a head covering or not, weather one is a size six or not, ect… I do feel a fault of our culture right now is that dressing for sex appeal is becoming more emphasized at a younger age as people like Britany Spears are looked up to by younger people. Young girls may start to think that is where their value lies. I can see where the modesty encouraged by muslim thought is healthier than this. Other religious thought encourages modesty too, which could then lead into discussion of degrees and differences in interaction of secular culture and religous culture, ect… Sometimes I think living out in the woods would be best just to get away from societies twisted pressures.
To end on a positive note, I haven’t read the Quaran, but one positive verse I have heard from it that I really like is along the lines of “By saving one life one saves the world.”