The Qur'an

[poului]

Some. It only reached touched on it lightly though, really.

I don't find that surprising.

 

[Fictionist]

Given some of the comments I thought that some people might find this interesting:


The Middle East Research Institute (MEMRI) has published excerpts of transcripts of an Al-Azhar debate among scholars regarding FGC/FC. From Memri: "[The debate is] between Egyptian Al-Azhar University scholars Sheikh Muhammad Al-Mussayar and Sheikh Mahmoud Ashur, who is a member of Al-Azhar's Islamic ResearchAcademy (or Islamic Research Council) on the issue of female circumcision. The debate aired on Al-Arabiya TV on February 12, 2007."

TO VIEW CLIP: http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1392

Mahmoud Ashur: "Female circumcision is a traditional custom, and not a religious act. All the hadiths dealing with female circumcision are unreliable. Moreover, the hadith cited by those who support circumcision calls to refrain from it more than it calls to perform it.

[...]

"Female circumcision is not part of Islam. Rather, it is a traditional custom. Under no circumstances should we follow this custom, because it leaves a deep wound in the souls of these girls, which has a psychological, emotional, and social impact on their lives. Female circumcision does a lot of damage. This damage is harmful, and it shatters the girl's soul. Therefore, it is absolutely forbidden to perform this custom. No person should do this, because it is harmful and causes damage.

[...]

"This is a despicable, ugly, and evil custom. It is performed by a woman who uses inappropriate and non-sterile instruments. She may be passing on to the girl a terrible disease, or causing her a wound that never heals, because the person who performs this custom lacks expertise and experience, and does not know how to sterilize the instruments, and therefore she inflicts terrible diseases upon the girls."

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "All the jurisprudents, since the advent of Islam and for 14 centuries or more, are in consensus that female circumcision is permitted by Islam. But they were divided with regard to its status in shari'a. Some said that female circumcision is required by shari'a, just like male circumcision. Some said this is the mainstream practice, while others said it is a noble act. But throughout the history of Islam, nobody has ever said that performing female circumcision is a crime. There has been a religious ruling on this for 14 centuries."

[...]

Mahmoud Ashur: "In the days of Jahiliya [i.e. the pre-Islamic period] and in the early days of Islam, a man whose mother carried out this custom was scorned by people who called him 'you son of a clitoris cutter.' This proves that it was never part of the religion of Islam. As for male circumcision, it is the approved mainstream practice, as determined by Islam and as instructed by the Prophet Muhammad."

[...]

"There is no doubt that we must reach agreement on this issue. There must be a decisive view and a resolute decision on this custom especially, because it is evil. When people perform it, they do so out of extreme ignorance, and it has a severe impact on marital life."

[...]

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "First of all, there are reliable hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim which support female circumcision. The Prophet Muhammad said: 'If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.' Unreliable hadiths do not cancel out the reliable ones. We have unreliable hadiths regarding prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Should we abolish prayer and charity just because some hadiths are unreliable? According to some hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, 'If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.' People would curse one another by saying: 'You son of a clit woman' - the son of a non-circumcised woman. The objections to circumcision are illogical and unnatural.

Interviewer: What is the justification for doing this?"

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "First of all, allow me... Regarding the claim that the instruments are not sterile - this is the reality and is not part of religious law. If there are dentists who do not sterilize their instruments, should we abolish medical faculties and dental clinics, or should we demand that they rectify the situation? Flawed reality cannot serve as a religious argument. The claim that female circumcision leads to barrenness is not true. The Muslim woman bears more children than any other woman. It is the Western woman who is barren, even though she is not circumcised. Moreover, when talking about nervous breakdowns... This is considered a day of celebration for the family."

Interviewer: "A day of celebration for the family?! Let me begin with the psychological effects. According to some studies, when there is a celebration, and sweets are given to the girl, and then an act is performed in which the girl's flesh is cut off... this makes her lose trust in her family, first of all. This generates an inner problem. As for the medical, physical problem, there is a problem in childbirth. There are lacerations, microbes, deformities - this is what the doctors say."

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "Sterilization is necessary in such cases. Cutting off a part of the human body does not mean a violation of its sanctity. How many human body parts are cut off in plastic surgery, and so on, yet we do not consider this offensive to the woman?"

Interviewer: "What is the reason for circumcising girls?"

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "First of all, the claim that this is a Pharaonic or Jahili practice..."

Interviewer: "Let's assume that this is a religious requirement..."

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "It isn't..."

Interviewer: "Nevertheless, hypothetically speaking, what is the main reason for this?"

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "Some sources said: 'Reduce, but do not remove.' In other words, it is neither about removing the organ, nor about leaving it. It is a trustworthy Muslim doctor who makes the decision. She decides whether the girl needs it or not. We do not obligate every girl to undergo circumcision. We say it should be left up to the doctor, and she can evaluate the case and determine whether the girl needs circumcision or not."

Interviewer: "Why would she need it? Sheikh Mahmoud Ashur, would you like to comment? What are the reasons that one could say... Go ahead..."

Mahmoud Ashur: "If it is left up to the doctor, then it is a custom and not part of the religion."

[...]

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "Female circumcision is no less valid just because it was practiced in Pharaonic times and in the Jahiliya. Islam accepted some customs, which were harmonious with human nature, and rejected others, which contradicted human nature."

[...]

Interviewer: "Some studies show that the upbringing at home is the main thing, and that 95% of all prostitutes [in Egypt] are circumcised."

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "And 100% of the prostitutes in the West are not circumcised, so what is the problem?"

SOURCE: Memri.com
URL: http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP148307
Date: 2/27/2007

 

[goldenecitrone]

Any focus on the Hadith in this prog?

It basically said that some people considered the Hadith to go hand in hand with the Qur'an, whilst others thought that the Qur'an was by far the most important and the Hadith was of far lesser importance.

 

[Fictionist]

Any focus on the Hadith in this prog?

The merest mention, with no attempt to explain what the ahadeeth are and how they function, how they 'came about', how they were 'recorded', the process of transmission, the questions of authenticity and authority.

Indeed this programme really didn't look at or examine the text of the Qur'an, except for the last 20 minutes when it took a very brief look at the recent scholarship regarding the re-interpretation of words with reference to Syriac.

Another programme which didn't do what it said on the tin.

 

[kyser_soze]

Re post#62

Well, that makes it as clear as fucking mud.

 

[Aldebaran]

So if its so clearly not a part of the Qur'an why do these Scholars openly defend it as being Islamic ? Is it in one of the suras (probably spelt that wrong so apologies ) ?

No it is not (I already said that). It is not anywhere Al Qur'an and it is not mentioned in any hadith but the most dubious (just like the matter of women's dress code requiring that they should be walking around completely covered, let alone in a burqa).

salaam.

 

[kyser_soze]

No it is not (I already said that). It is not anywhere Al Qur'an and it is not mentioned in any hadith but the most dubious (just like the matter of women's dress code requiring that they should be walking around completely covered, let alone in a burqa).

salaam.

Well quite clearly Mr Al-Mussayar in that interview does think it's Islamic, no?

Muhammad Al-Mussayar: "First of all, there are reliable hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim which support female circumcision. The Prophet Muhammad said: 'If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.' Unreliable hadiths do not cancel out the reliable ones. We have unreliable hadiths regarding prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Should we abolish prayer and charity just because some hadiths are unreliable? According to some hadiths in Al-Bukhari and Al-Muslim, 'If a circumcised woman and man have intercourse, they must undergo ablution.' People would curse one another by saying: 'You son of a clit woman' - the son of a non-circumcised woman. The objections to circumcision are illogical and unnatural.

 

[Aldebaran]

Re post#62

Well, that makes it as clear as fucking mud.

He is totally wrong, the vicious woman hating idiot.
He should go back to school and learn how to study the Hadith.
It is even more simple than that: He should train his thick vicious brain in the simple logic that any hadith from which the text presents a violation of the Message of Al Qur'an is not genuine and is a devil's invention written down by humans. Even if there is only a doubt wether yes or no the text is in accordance with the Message of Al Qur'an, such doubt, how little it may be, indicates the hadith in question should be discarded as fabricated.

Would it be in my power to get rid of him he wouldn't be at Al Azhar one single moment longer. It's vicious retarded hateful individuals like that one who add to the poisoning of Islam from the inside.
I heard a lot of retarded nonsense from him. He needs to be locked up. He is a danger to humanity. This idiot and the likes of him make my blood boil.

salaam.

 

[Idaho]

Aldabaran - what do you think has been the reason for the big increase in veiling and covering women? Why was it not considered significant in slamic circles 30 years ago and now is accepted as standard?

Genuine question

Also the programme showed a big printing press in Saudi Arabia which printed and distributed Korans in various countries, but had added wahabbist interpretations in the footnotes and guidance notes. Isn't this kind of interpretation forbidden?

 

[Aldebaran]

Aldabaran - what do you think has been the reason for the big increase in veiling and covering women? Why was it not considered significant in slamic circles 30 years ago and now is accepted as standard?

It depends which geographic location you refer to.
It was always defended as being prescribed by Al Qur'an (it is not, but that is an other discussion) and besides that always recommended. What has changed is that with adaptation of Western style of clothing, the discrepancy between women and male dresscode has become so apparent and visible that of course the women who cover themselves stick more out than they did before. Many men forget that the rule of modest applies to both genders and that walking around half naked is just a much a transgression of that rule as if a woman would do it. I seldom wear Western style clothing when I'm not in the West (or otherwise outside the ME).

If you talk about Muslim women in a Western country: In my experience it's most of the time young women who start to wear hidjab, a mix of expressing religiousity and self-identifying with their original roots and also in my opinion a form of protest against the pressure to "integrate" while they were born there, but still are considered as (and called) "immigrants". You see that even more among third generation.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Also the programme showed a big printing press in Saudi Arabia which printed and distributed Korans in various countries, but had added wahabbist interpretations in the footnotes and guidance notes. Isn't this kind of interpretation forbidden?

No, footnotes are not necessarily prohibited but I always warn people who want to get a copy of Al Qur'an not to buy anything printed in or endorsed by Saudi Arabia. You can find some who even mess with the text itself to get their sectarian distortions reach a wider public.

salaam.

 

[kyser_soze]

He is totally wrong, the vicious woman hating idiot.
He should go back to school and learn how to study the Hadith.
It is even more simple than that: He should train his thick vicious brain in the simple logic that any hadith from which the text presents a violation of the Message of Al Qur'an is not genuine and is a devil's invention written down by humans. Even if there is only a doubt wether yes or no the text is in accordance with the Message of Al Qur'an, such doubt how, little it may be, indicates the hadith in question should be discarded as fabricated.

Would it be in my power to get rid of him he wouldn't be at Al Azhar one single moment longer. It's vicious retarded hateful individuals like that one who add to the poisoning of Islam from the inside.
I heard a lot of retarded nonsense from him. He needs to be locked up. He is a danger to humanity.

salaam.

But dude, he's a part of your faith as much as the Phelps and Gerry Falwell are a part of Xtianity - that you find his practice of Islam repugnent and theologically, intellectually and morally wrong doesnt' alter the fact that he believes he's a Muslim, and he's doing the right thing by his faith.

The same thing is happening in the CofE at the moment over women bishops and homosexuality - there's no direct imprecation against it (even the Leviticus thing comes down to the translation in the St James and the subtle difference in the meaning between 5000 years ago and now...admittedly I find that argument a little specious but hey, religious texts are documents to be interpreted, non?) but that doesn't stop xtians being homophobic.

Hell, I say the same about Dawkins and his ilk with their firm anti-theist stance - the real sin is intolerance in any of it's forms, surely?

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Aldabaran - what do you think has been the reason for the big increase in veiling and covering women? Why was it not considered significant in slamic circles 30 years ago and now is accepted as standard?

Idaho the answer to the question was in the programme which you say you watched. It talked about the politics of Saudi Arabia in the context of being a massive oil supplier and the rulers wanting to control the population so using an interpretation of Islam for this purpose.

In the context of Egypt it recalled the death of Nasser and with it the loss of hope of those who thought he would become a major leader in a 'socialist' Arab world. These people it said turned to religion as compensation and comfort and adopted a stricter Islamic tradition.

That is what I got from the programme about your question in brief summary. Aldebaran doubtless will be able to answer it from his own knowledge.

EDITED TO ADD: I see that Aldebaran has already done that while I was writing.

 

[Fictionist]

No, footnotes are not necessarily prohibited but I always warn people who want to get a copy of Al Qur'an not to buy anything printed in or endorsed by Saudi Arabia. You can find some who even mess with the text itself to get their sectarian distortions reach a wider public.

salaam.

So, accepting that the majority of people reading this thread are not able to read Arabic (and more obviously Qur'anic Arabic), which edition of the Qur'an would you be prepared to recommend?

 

[Aldebaran]

But dude, he's a part of your faith as much as the Phelps and Gerry Falwell are a part of Xtianity - that you find his practice of Islam repugnent and theologically, intellectually and morally wrong doesnt' alter the fact that he believes he's a Muslim, and he's doing the right thing by his faith.

Of course.
But the fact he is linked to an institution that has almost since it was founded the reputation of being THE centre of study and guidance in (now) Sunni Islam, is enough to make me want to kill myself (virtually). I know Al Azhar from the inside. Inevitably you have all sort of opinions represented and some aren't what I would call flexible, but this one surpasses them all. Such a clear implant of poisoning Saudi influence. That vicious little sect is responsible for all what goes bad today in Islam. Really, it is. Directly and indirectly.
We have to thank the UK first and the USA next for that, don't we.

the real sin is intolerance in any of it's forms, surely?

Yes it is. Nevertheless I can't show tolerance for a man who is as vicious as that raging fool. I think God shall forgive me.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

So, accepting that the majority of people reading this thread are not able to read Arabic (and more obviously Qur'anic Arabic), which edition of the Qur'an would you be prepared to recommend?

I don't have any English translation. I heard good things about Pickthal but most probably there are more recently done that are good.
It is always recommended to have one with the original Arabic alongside the translation and some tafsir (exegeses) added to more difficult texts.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

Since the Muslim contingent of 1 on this board didn't ask me to, no.

I think there are a few more Muslims around though.
And yes, you are right, circumcision is a mutilation and in reality only recommended for Muslims, all while most believe and defend it is a prescription and hence act as such. It is also often (still) done in rather primitive circumstances.

salaam.

 

[rapattaque]

But dude, he's a part of your faith as much as the Phelps and Gerry Falwell are a part of Xtianity - that you find his practice of Islam repugnent and theologically, intellectually and morally wrong doesnt' alter the fact that he believes he's a Muslim, and he's doing the right thing by his faith.

The same thing is happening in the CofE at the moment over women bishops and homosexuality - there's no direct imprecation against it (even the Leviticus thing comes down to the translation in the St James and the subtle difference in the meaning between 5000 years ago and now...admittedly I find that argument a little specious but hey, religious texts are documents to be interpreted, non?) but that doesn't stop xtians being homophobic.

Hell, I say the same about Dawkins and his ilk with their firm anti-theist stance - the real sin is intolerance in any of it's forms, surely?

Bit tricky ennit? What are you saying?

Does this mean we have to judge all Muslims/Christians/Dicky Dawkins by the behaviour of the worst, most fanataical Islamist/Christian/Dickette?

Saying the worst sin is intollerance in any of it's forms is empty rhetoric, it is undeniable and no-one is going to disagree with you. But since no one is apologising for the intolerant here, what do you mean?

 

[kyser_soze]

Bit tricky ennit? What are you saying?

Does this mean we have to judge all Muslims/Christians/Dicky Dawkins by the behaviour of the worst, most fanataical Islamist/Christian/Dickette?

Saying the worst sin is intollerance in any of it's forms is empty rhetoric, it is undeniable and no-one is going to disagree with you. But since no one is apologising for the intolerant here, what do you mean?

You see, I don't understand where the fuck you got that middle section from. I was talking directly at Aldy about his wanting to make the dude apostate, that he doesn't reflect the 'true faith' etc., and pointing out that this dude is still a Muslim, even tho he's a cunt. Pretty easy to work out, and nothing to do with your misspelling of intolerance.

 

[Aldebaran]

You see, I don't understand where the fuck you got that middle section from. I was talking directly at Aldy about his wanting to make the dude apostate, that he doesn't reflect the 'true faith' etc., and pointing out that this dude is still a Muslim, even tho he's a cunt. Pretty easy to work out, and nothing to do with your misspelling of intolerance.

?
I never said he is an apostate. Don't know where you get that.

salaam.

 

[rapattaque]

Ok. I still don't understand.

I spelt fundamental incorrectly too.

 

[kyser_soze]

?
I never said he is an apostate. Don't know where you get that.

salaam.

Sorry, yeah you'd kick him out of AL-Azhar, soz.

 

[rapattaque]

But dude, he's a part of your faith as much as the Phelps and Gerry Falwell are a part of Xtianity - that you find his practice of Islam repugnent and theologically, intellectually and morally wrong doesnt' alter the fact that he believes he's a Muslim, and he's doing the right thing by his faith.

What are you saying other than that these nasty pieces of work consider themselves to be Muslims and Christians?

 

[kyser_soze]

That saying someone isn't a 'real' muslim, or that their statements don't have 'anything to do with the real faith' is irrelevant if someone believes that's what they are, then they are - this being the nature of religious faith.

I was going to make some wider point but I've forgotten it now in the excitement of a 9/11 thread...

Besides, Aldy got what I was saying and that's whom I was talking to. Not the rest of ya. Fuck off, y'hear me?

 

[Aldebaran]

Sorry, yeah you'd kick him out of AL-Azhar, soz.

Of course. That doesn't mean he is not a Muslim. He might very well genuinely believe he is a better Muslim than I am. Only God can decide and judge.

salaam.

 

[Aldebaran]

That saying someone isn't a 'real' muslim, or that their statements don't have 'anything to do with the real faith' is irrelevant if someone believes that's what they are, then they are - this being the nature of religious faith.

No, it is not irrelevant. It is an Islamic command that you should point out to brothers and sisters in Islam if they deviate from the path and - if you can - explain to them where and why.

salaam.

 

[rapattaque]

That saying someone isn't a 'real' muslim, or that their statements don't have 'anything to do with the real faith' is irrelevant if someone believes that's what they are, then they are - this being the nature of religious faith.

I was going to make some wider point but I've forgotten it now in the excitement of a 9/11 thread...

Besides, Aldy got what I was saying and that's whom I was talking to. Not the rest of ya. Fuck off, y'hear me?

Can of worms - sealed.

 

[maximilian ping]

brilliant doc. love the way it dealt with the most interesting and debated issues in chunks. i liked the conclusion. also some very interesting stuff i didnt know. some stuff that made me angry (boy did i want to job the bollocks off that fat fuck saying female genitial mutilation is good).

my girlfriend is muslim and she thought it was great, and you should have seen her smug face when they were going about the Koran being one of the cradles of civilisation etc

brilliant

 

[Fictionist]

Max, I am really surprised that the programme ellicited such a positive reaction. Just goes to show how subjective reactions can be.

 

[QueenOfGoths]

Fascinating programme. The range of opinions wasn't really shocking.

Tariq Ramadam's comments right at the end were very poignant, I thought – and something we might all do well to think about (about going out, learning, studying, and continuing to try to change things for the better).

Just finished watching the programme and that is much the same as I felt bout it

I went through so many emotions watching it - sadness, anger, sympathy, understanding and even hate (the views on genital mutilation) - but really glad i did. Very interesting, very thought provoking