Originally posted by ElPunto: quote:Originally posted by NGONGE: ^^ It all boils down to an "Islamic identity and personality"? War adigu iska hayso your identity and personality. I am a Muslim, it's a fact, and it's not an identity, personality or reer hebel thing. I do not treat my faith like a football team that I support when they score and condemn when they miss or appoint a rubbish manager. Al-Azhar indeed caries a lot of weight and it is not for me to judge them or decide on their fatwas. If I like/agree with it, I take it. If I disagree or feel uncomfortable with it (because other scholars dismissed it) I let it go. I do not try to tell people who are more knowledgeable than me how to do their jobs, saaxib. AND I do not badmouth them just because qabqablayaasha said it's the done thing. P.S. The child is my responsibility, Islam is NOT. I don't think there is anything remiss about saying that Al-Azhar should be an independant institution free(or rather freer) from political meddling by a repressive dictatorship. Given it's weight in the Muslim world - there is nothing wrong, in my opinion, with saying that this ruling or that ruling was not an objective one but is one that came as a result of political interference. If that is judging - then so be it. Given all the problems in the Muslim world - Al-Azhar needs to step upto the challenges faced as the pre-eminent Islamic institution. Where it fails - criticism, complaints and even lamentations are not necessarily out of order. It's not for me or you to say. You (with respect) are a mere layman who will only recycle the opinions of other scholars to bash the Azhar with. Why bother? What's in it for you? As for Al Azhar being independent from the state; that is never likely to happen, saaxib. Egypt is an Islamic country (secular government or not). It is not a liberal democracy.

^^ It can't be the truth if his uncle is president and he is happy with that. At any rate, the first article there is pure spin that is clearly directed at America. Good on Goth.

I would have called Space: cirka shishe

^^ So she works 50 hours, she manages the finances, she pays the bills and she buys the shopping? She might as well cook you know.

^^ No bif-baaf would work on Khayr. Only Sheikh Nuune's quran sar.

^^ See what I meant about being irritated by you? Actually, forget that. You wouldn't see.

^^ It all boils down to an "Islamic identity and personality"? War adigu iska hayso your identity and personality. I am a Muslim, it's a fact, and it's not an identity, personality or reer hebel thing. I do not treat my faith like a football team that I support when they score and condemn when they miss or appoint a rubbish manager. Al-Azhar indeed caries a lot of weight and it is not for me to judge them or decide on their fatwas. If I like/agree with it, I take it. If I disagree or feel uncomfortable with it (because other scholars dismissed it) I let it go. I do not try to tell people who are more knowledgeable than me how to do their jobs, saaxib. AND I do not badmouth them just because qabqablayaasha said it's the done thing. P.S. The child is my responsibility, Islam is NOT.

All this thread needs is a clever man who can manipulate things and get the women here competing to show that they are great cooks (even though they work), their houses have the best decorations (and they chose them all) and that their fitter than a butcher's dog (with hardly any keep fit work). Where is A&T?

^^

What if there is nothing really wrong with these women (and men) other than a spanking fetish?

Che, horta the chances of me befrinding the wadaad are much higher than yours. It's even wife-friendly (wadaadkaan raacay, wadaadkan la socda).

I have one living in my fridge but I'm not sure if he makes out with the microwave when we go to sleep. I saw him run past me a couple of times but the deal so far seems to be 'you leave me alone and I'll leave you alone'.

That's what I thought too, Malika.

What does horrible dreams mean horta?

Malika, only animals can hear it (I think).

^^ What don't you get a cat alarm? You can buy it from garden shops.

^^ I love cats. Morning.

^^ The same thing is being said about some Somali scholars. The same thing is being said about the Saudi scholars. Hadaad yara sugtid waxad maqli doonta "Al qaacida/Al Shabab is not a religious group any more. it has been politicised and manipulated by the desires of revenge and hawa". Get to the bottom of this, saaxib. The whole faith has been politicised. Anigu miskeen ba i hor taagan, ibnu el sabeel ba igu dhul warigaya, du el qorba ban khatyaan ka jooga, yateem ba i ag oyaaya, salaad ba la iga sugaya, quraan aanaan kor ka wada hayn ban isleeyahay xafid, uuf ban aabo ku edhi, bax ayaan hoyo o raaciyaay, markan socdo wan is ilaawa oo anigu mokhtaalan fakhooran ba meelaha la igu arka, dadkaan marmar xanta, qaarna naaneesyo xun ban ogo yeedha, dumarka markay i ag maraan wan khaawisa, ragga wan la murma, zakkada markan bixiyo ayaan haddana ilaawa oo is waydiiya 'talow ma bixisay?', kaa-di-moon al ghayd markaan ku biiray ayaa calool xanuun igu dheceen markasaan maskiin ku ceel baxay. Sigaarkan cabba. Barrigan qurbaha ku cusba Burger King ban wax ka cunay. Marks & Spencer ban nigisyada ka iibsada. Gaalada ban kubbad la ciyaari jiray. Jaarkaygo wa Yehoodi, homosexual ba xafiiska yaga ka shaqiiya. Been ban marmar sheega, caadifad ba iga buuxda, fad-daan ghaleeda al qalbi na marmarna wan noqda. Marka maxa iga galay politicised Azhar ama manipulated Islam? So Allah ma odhan 'inna laho la xaafidoon'? Dee Allah o daya oo tiina ka adkaada, jaahilkaad tihiin cuna.

^^ Are you sure about the locals knowing what's best for them? Why are we talking about this then? Some locals (those running the show today) think SL is best for them. Some think PL is best for them and a couple of others are lost in the middle. You, Che, since you don't belong to any of the sides in this dispute are nothing but a trouble maker who calls for Somaliweyne when poor Aaliyah is lamenting the lack of villas in LA.

^^ There is precaution and then there is Abu Salman precaution. I don't think I understood any of that, saaxib. What exactly are you saying?

I said it on another thread and I'll say it again. ^^ Exactly a year ago, in Boosaaso too he said this: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the press conference in Bosaso Mr Farole had a chance to address issues raised by Amin Amir's cartoon in an unemotional manner. Mr" Farole described Amin Amir's cartoon as a political message aimed to undermine political change in Puntland," reported Garowe Online. If this quote is accurate, Mr Farole will come across as a politician keen on seeing press and cartoonists sing his praise rather than commenting on or caricaturing the foibles of politicians. Amin Amir is not a national saboteur. Why could not president Farole question Amin Amir's artistic integrity on the basis of a cartoon that alleges resumption of money printing business in Puntland? Such an attitude would not be interpreted as weakness but as a discussion from a seasoned politician who is in favour of free speech and against irresponsible journalism. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like I said when this report came out, I blame Amin Amir (and Farole probably thinks Brydon and the UN both work for Amin Amir).

Karl, On the niqab issue, have you even listened to the man speak about it? Maybe you should. It's in Arabic According to him (and you already agreed to his knowledge), all four Sunni schools of thought agree that the palms of the hands and the face are not considered awra. But further still, on the issue of the niqab itself and the ban; the man was very clear and said that he only banned it in places where the colleges/schools were all women. He clearly said that he has no problem with a woman wearing her niqab in the street, at home or the school playgrounds. However, he objected to school girls (who have not reached puberty) to wear it in the classroom. He said that such rigidness was not part of Islam. He used quotes from the scholars (Shafici, Hanafi and Maliki) to support his argument. Incidentally, I asked a similar question a while back (before the niqab problem) about young girls and hijab. On shaking the hand of the Israeli Prime Minster, he again said there is nothing in the faith that forbids him from shaking the hands of the enemy. Even on the story of the Egyptian iron wall, he gave logical reasons of why he supported it (again from the Islamic sources). Now, I could go on about each point and keep on pushing you until you agree that you can never be certain about the man’s motivation and that though extremely unlikely he might have been acting in good faith. You may wonder why I would go through all this trouble if all I’ll achieve is to only get a very tentative agreement from you on a very remote possibility! But surely it is the remote possibility that makes or breaks this entire discussion? If there is even an iota of doubt that the man might have been misunderstood then you would be doing him a great disservice and gaining nothing but sins for your haste. Are you prepared to take the risk on such disputable issues? Still, this really is not what got my goat. Lately, I have been growing tired with testosterone Islam and this thread is merely a vehicle for me to air my frustration and share my thoughts on it. The following my take a while, so hold on to your cumaamad and pay attention, saaxib. Fifty years ago, my grandfather and yours did not have any internet, satellite TV or the plethora of books that you and I can get hold off now. In religious terms, what they had to go by were the words of their local mullah and their trust in his knowledge. Some mullahs made their followers visit graves, some got them to follow Sufi practices, some got them to believe in all sorts of innovations and others told their followers to follow the way of the Salaf (with certain variations even there). Some sprinkled touches of local culture on the faith itself, some banished local culture and others adopted new alien cultures. This took place from Mecca all the way to Merca. The Arabs of Mecca fought alongside the British against their fellow Muslims (after the Abdulwahab revival). The Somalis fought their fellow Somalis for or against the colonisers. Every group issued its own fatwas and division was rife. Today, we have internet, we have satellite TV, we have books and we have mullahs by the ton. Fatwas are being made left, right and centre. People ask about all manner of things and they all want to know if wearing pink socks is halal if you’re a man (considering that, culturally, pink is associated with females) or if driving a car is haram for a woman (going from the idea that motorcars are a manly pursuit). Some ask if eating a chicken that occasionally ventures into a pigsty is halal or slaughtering a goat that used to be owned by a Jew is haram! The mullahs in their turn have to answer these questions and make sense of events, situations and foolishness that some of their predecessors did not have to deal with. They use their logic, knowledge and quiyas to reach acceptable fatwas. Some (probably) get it right and some (probably) don’t. But regardless of the rightness or wrongness of these fatwas, they still remain the opinions of these mullahs and no person is obliged to take them. I, for instance, refuse to take Al Shabab’s fatwa as to the ridda of Sheikh Sharif’s government (though I do not support Sheikh Sharif). However, I am still puzzled and still have doubts (what if I am wrong?). Yet, I go back to my early Islamic education and remember all the sweet words of my religious teachers. I remember the proud stories of Islamic fotooxat. I remember the stories of early Islam and how the prophet used to send his companions with some Bedouins to teach them about the faith. Yet, in those stories, I am sure I’ve read that some of the companions only knew a couple of chapters of the quran. What in the world did they do when the Bedouins (and for that read: geel jires’) started asking them about the permissibility of eating the earlier chicken that had a penchant for frolicking in pigsties? When Ali Bin Abi Talib fought against the Nabi’s wife, did they call each other murtads? Why not? If yes, which side was? How about Bani Ommaya and their Khilafa? Are they like Hosni Mubarak today and will future generations sing the laughing cow’s praises and talk about how he helped spread Islam (albeit unintentionally)? These are only few questions that cross my mind every time I try to judge current events (I suppose, technically, you would say I am trying to refer to the Salaf and what they did in their time before making a decision). But let us leave the salaf alone for now and talk about the khalaf instead. Why is it I get irritated when I listen to Nur, Kashafa or Khayer but I am more than happy to listen to Maaddeey? Even though I know that Maaddeey more or less follows the same line of thought as the others? Why do I feel comfortable discussing Islam with anyone but a Pakistani (or those from the Indian sub continent)? Why do I admire Sheikh Shacraawi even though I heard he once said bribery is ok yet I can not stand all the Jihadi sheikhs? Why do I find myself sympathising with the people of Gaza and opposing the wall but at the same time I also find myself agreeing with Egypt and understanding their reason for the wall? Now do not go thinking that I am confused and have no idea what I am talking about, brother. There are things I am certain off. I, for example, believe there is only one god and no other god than Allah. I believe in xisaab and ciqaab. I am confident that I am going to die one day. I know if I do good I’ll get ajar and if I do bad my sins will increase. I know what my duties are and (though I may not always follow them to the letter) I try to fulfil them all. I know that good manners will triumph over bad manners most times. I know all these things and I hope (with very little confidence) that they will be enough to see me through (just like those Bedouins were depending on a Sahaabi who knew only few chapters of the quran). What I do not know is the consequences of condemning men that already carry big responsibilities. Don’t get me wrong, I know I have a choice here. I can condemn them, I can support them or I can give them the benefit of the doubt and choose not to comment on their faith. This brings me to the main thing that I know and believe in, which is that I will one day be asked about all of this. I really do not think I would be fair to myself if in addition to the day I looked at a short skirt with temptation or spoiled a poor man’s day or lost my temper on an blameless person, I also get questioned and punished for being quick to label someone a kaffir, evil, murtad, turncoat or religious innovator. I suppose I am being a tad selfish here and only looking out for number one. But it is number one who will get questioned alone on that daunting day, no mother, no father, no wife and no children. Just me. War not even all of me; my hands and legs and heart will sell me out and snitch on me. Could I really then expect support from this Islamic group or that Islamic gathering that (today) I may claim I belong to? I think I’ll stop now. How are you doing about condemning Sheikh Tantawi? Are you still ready to judge him or will you leave it to the ultimate judge, saaxib?

The word 'armaajo' always makes me laugh. I always forget what it means and start picturing some sort of fighter jet only to remember later that it's only a cupboard.

^^ Don't call me a ni99a.

^^ Step by step it is then? Fine. At least we dealt with the point about him not calling for a public ban (despite what your pious-sunnah-following-self would claim to think he believed). Next point, you say the scholars were divided on the niqab being oligatory or not. Am I reading you correctly here? Not ALL scholars believe it to be an obligation, right? Pardon me for this obtuse way of doing things but I'm trying to talk some sense into this thick head of yours and think this is the only way I am going to do it.