Are you a Wahabbi, Arabman?

[Grant]

Guys,

I read and react to what I can find. Much of what is available in English on the web on these topics IS anti-Islamic.

My Islamic education is increasing, but I wasn't aware of most of this stuff two weeks ago.

[RIIGHAYE]

Grant explore and you will discover the good and the truth.

[Grant]

[quote="*Arabman

Your understanding now is, the hudood laws weren't based on the Quran and Hadith. Yet, you have previously alleged it were based on a religious obligation ordained by God. Is it possible that most of your understanding of Islam is based on allegations? You wonder if it bothers us that the hudood laws were implemented in the name of Shariica, eventhough it weren't based on Shariica; why should it bother us? quote]

Arabman,

I will check out Abdul Wahab's book. Please read the Amnesty International article in the link I quoted above.

The Hudood laws were promulgated by the government of Zia Ul-Hac in 1979 as part of an Islamization process that was described as Shariica. The laws were on the books until 2006 or a period of 27 years. During that period the laws supported the practice of karo-kari, which was seen as a religious obligation. The finding that the practice is unIslamic, at least in terms of state recognition, is quite recent.

It is clear this whole mess is cultural rather than religious, but I don't recall any great Muslim outrage. There are still apparently a large number of clerics in Pakistan who believe the Hudood laws were proper, and it remains to be seen how the Pakistanis at large will respond to this change in law.

My surprise is that Muslims did not act sooner to denounce such unIslamic practices specifically stated to represent Islam and Shariica. It is the misrepresentation, and the length of time that misrepresentation remained in place, that troubles me.

I still do not understand the illogic in Pragmatic Gal's question.

[michael_ital]

"I still do not understand the illogic in Pragmatic Gal's question."

That's because there was none.

[*Arabman]

[The Hudood laws were promulgated by the government of Zia Ul-Hac in 1979 as part of an Islamization process that was described as Shariica. The laws were on the books until 2006 or a period of 27 years. During that period the laws supported the practice of karo-kari, which was seen as a religious obligation. The finding that the practice is unIslamic, at least in terms of state recognition, is quite recent.

It is clear this whole mess is cultural rather than religious, but I don't recall any great Muslim outrage. There are still apparently a large number of clerics in Pakistan who believe the Hudood laws were proper, and it remains to be seen how the Pakistanis at large will respond to this change in law.

My surprise is that Muslims did not act sooner to denounce such unIslamic practices specifically stated to represent Islam and Shariica. It is the misrepresentation, and the length of time that misrepresentation remained in place, that troubles me.]

Are you saying, for 27 years, you knew about the hudood ordinance, and was monitoring for a great Muslim outrage or denouncement? For example, how do you know a liberal like former prime minister Benazir Bhutto didn't denounce it? Grant, are you looking for apologists? Previously, you were looking for apologists who would oppose or denounce a religious obligation ordained by God, but now you're looking for apologists opposing or denouncing a cultural practice that's unIslamic? And, are you implying Islam is like a corporation such as Enron or a religious institution such as the Catholicism hit by a major scandal, and thus could use a great outrage or denouncement? Your concern about unIslamic practices is commendable, however, why are you troubled by it? I mean, you're a non-Muslim whose knowledge of Islam is based on anti-Islam coverage, reports, literature, etc.

[I still do not understand the illogic in Pragmatic Gal's question.]

Using your own words, explain what Pragmatic Gal asked.

[michael_ital]

quote Pragmatic Gal "The four madhabs are considered to be equal in their interpretations, yet there is no evidence from the Qur'an or Sunnah to support this. Where does this idea come from anyway?"

I BELIVE she's asking, " with no evidence form the Qu'raan or Sunnah to support it, where does the idea that the four madhabs are considered equal in their interpretations", come from ? In other words, who promulgated it ?

[Grant]

Whoooooops....

Spoke too soon and with too little information. Apparently the change became law in December of 2006. This article was published in November and questions whether Musharraf would be able to pull it off because of Islamist political opposition.

So I don't really know what the ultimate religious analysis of the hudood laws is.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/16/world ... yt&emc=rss

--------------------------------

Arabman,

My understanding of Pragmatic Gal's question is the same as Mike's. Where does this evaluation come from?

If I were a True Believer in whatever faith, I would be darned interested in whatever was done in the name of that faith and it's legal establishment. I also think I would be a little more open to non-believers looking for answers.

Personally? I still don't understand how honour killings fit into (or don't fit into) Islam, and the practice bothers me. Was I right in saying it is cultural ? Any help will be appreciated.

[*Arabman]

[My understanding of Pragmatic Gal's question is the same as Mike's. Where does this evaluation come from?]

Pragmatic Gal alleged there's no evidence from the Quran or Sunnah supporting the notion that the four madhabs are equal in their interpretations. How could Pragmatic Gal, a self-proclaimed atheist, know there's no evidence? An atheist knows more about Islam than a Muslim? Her question wasn't logical, because it didn't ask if there's evidence; it alleged there's none. You, a self-proclaimed deist, previously alleged there's a religious obligation ordained by God allowing the execution of a victim of rape. After many comments, you changed your allegation to unIslamic practice, and admitted what you most read on the web is anti-Islam. Do I want to waste time with many comments rebutting baseless allegations made by every anti-Islam atheist or deist? Hell no! However, I wouldn't mind answering a genuine or logical question.

[If I were a True Believer in whatever faith, I would be darned interested in whatever was done in the name of that faith and it's legal establishment. I also think I would be a little more open to non-believers looking for answers.Personally? I still don't understand how honour killings fit into (or don't fit into) Islam, and the practice bothers me. Was I right in saying it is cultural ? Any help will be appreciated.]

Of course, a Muslim would be concerned about whatever was done in the name of his faith and its legal establishment. However, does that mean he has to become an apologist?You make it sound honor killing is widely practiced by Muslims. The UNPF, estimates that the annual worldwide total of honor-killing victims may be as high as 5,000 women. The practice occurs throughout the world and isn't exclusive to Muslims. Non-Muslims from different races and various ethnicities practice it. I can simply argue domestic violence (intimate violence partner) in which a husband/boyfriend kills his partner out of jealousy (or similar reasons) is a form of honor killing. Annually, how many such incidence occurs in the West? At least 5,000 would be fair. Of course, honor killing doesn't fit into Islam; it's not from Islam. Just as there are Muslims who drink alcohol, honor killing is a crime, committed by both Muslims and non-Muslims.

[Sadaam_Mariixmaan]

Sheikh CarabMan

[*Arabman]

^Sadaam, you sound familiar.

[Padishah]

They are not equal in their interpretations; otherwise there is no need for the other three Madh-habs.

Many of their interpretations are the same because they rely on exactly the same material to derive judgements, but where they differ comes to their methadology of Hadith verification, and the weight they give to the different grades of Hadith, the location of the Madh-hab founder when they compiled the Madh-hab initially, and other factors.

[Grant]

Padishah and Sallahudiin,

Thank you for elucidating the issues surrounding Abdul Wahhaab.

I went back and re-read Arabman's link:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story ... 14,00.html

"Bin Laden was not inspired by Wahhabism but by the writings of the Egyptian ideologue Sayyid Qutb, who was executed by President Nasser in 1966. Almost every fundamentalist movement in Sunni Islam has been strongly influenced by Qutb, so there is a good case for calling the violence that some of his followers commit "Qutbian terrorism." Qutb urged his followers to withdraw from the moral and spiritual barbarism of modern society and fight it to the death.

Western people should learn more about such thinkers as Qutb, and become aware of the many dramatically different shades of opinion in the Muslim world. There are too many lazy, unexamined assumptions about Islam, which tends to be regarded as an amorphous, monolithic entity. Remarks such as "They hate our freedom" may give some a righteous glow, but they are not useful, because they are rarely accompanied by a rigorous analysis of who exactly "they" are.

The story of Qutb is also instructive as a reminder that militant religiosity is often the product of social, economic and political factors. Qutb was imprisoned for 15 years in one of Nasser's vile concentration camps, where he and thousands of other members of the Muslim Brotherhood were subjected to physical and mental torture. He entered the camp as a moderate, but the prison made him a fundamentalist. Modern secularism, as he had experienced it under Nasser, seemed a great evil and a lethal assault on faith. "

-------------------------------------------

The upshot of the article is that individuals such as Wahhaab and Qutb are better seen as nationalists ( ) than as religious leaders. I am not that familiar with Qutb, but this approach fits in well with Wahhaab's removal of Arabia from the control of the Ottoman Caliph, and his support for the kingship in what became Saudi Arabia.

Arabman left Snet as something of a mystery man, which was also his reputation at Simply Somali. He has returned able to turn questions into allegations resulting in ....poof...nothing. He is definitely the Magical Mystery Man.

[*Arabman]

[I am not that familiar with Qutb, but this approach fits in well with Wahhaab's removal of Arabia from the control of the Ottoman Caliph, and his support for the kingship in what became Saudi Arabia.]

Are you insinuating the removal of Arabia from the control of the Ottoman Caliph and support for the kingship in what became Saudi Arabia is against the teachings of the Quran and Sunnah?

[Arabman left Snet as something of a mystery man, which was also his reputation at Simply Somali. He has returned able to turn questions into allegations resulting in ....poof...nothing. He is definitely the Magical Mystery Man.]

If your questions were genuine, you would ask if what is alleged or falsely accused of Islam is true or valid, not allege it. You didn't only allege; you solicited apologists who would oppose or condemn a religious obligation ordained by God, with the goal of distancing them from Islam. It took you many comments to reverse your allegations. If I am interested in learning about Mormonism, and I read somewhere Mosiah was a false prophet, I wouldn't go to a Mormon forum and charge or allege Mosiah was a false prophet; I would ask if it's true or if there's basis.

Thanks for the compliment about Magical Mystery Man.