A few days after Halloween, but perhaps with all the clamour over the US election, a little humour is warranted.
Via Mr. Moo: MUGS calls for rebranding of Halloween: Now to Be Called ‘Jinn Awareness Day’
Many Muslim children are taking part in the time honoured ritual of demanding sweets in lieu of socially sanctioned petty vandalism. However, these same Muslim children, along with their non-Muslim ghoulish friends, are unaware of Jinn.
Thanks, Minaretmuse!
Imam Suhaib Webb published an article on the Credit Crunch, and the possibility of Islamic finance as an alternative by Andrew Booso.
Now I do not doubt that a Galbraithian approach to capitalism – as argued by Stephen Dunn in the Guardian comment pages on 15 October 2008 – would have largely averted the current disaster, by God’s will. However, I would contend that the nature of the beast dictates that the values of Galbraith will, on most occasions, be overthrown by the greed factor inherent in the essential make-up. Thus when Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister of Britain, wants to invoke for the markets the ‘values’ that it cannot generate itself, but which are values of ‘fairness, stewardship [and] cooperation’ derived from those ‘learned in families, neighbourhoods and communities and developed in the relationships we enjoy as a society’ (Telegraph online, 18 October 2008) – then we must question whether our knowledge of these factors supports the notion of capitalism now being refined for the better. Or is this just another of the endless cycles – as outlined by Dunn – that capitalism thrusts upon us from time to time, and we are simply required to bear?
Unsurprisingly, some Islamic-minded economists have set out a more just and stable method of banking within the current system. Nevertheless, the conventional banking system has largely ignored such proposals for numerous reasons, unless it means a piecemeal development of a limited number of products that allow the main actors to gain the wealth of Muslims. The nature of such a scenario means that the tail is truly only ever wagged by the dog, as dictated by the dog.
Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoon controversies and other similar episodes raise questions on Muslim attitudes towards free speech. Should Muslims be more open and accepting of provocative material like the cartoons or is the outrage totally warranted? Many insiders and outsiders alike agree that Muslims should adapt to the concept of free speech, which would mean everything is open to be derided, mocked or satirized, while others are quick to disagree. Hamza Andreas Tzortzis examines Muslim reactions towards these controversies and offers a critique of the very notion of free speech, which, according to Hamza, is not without its own controversies.
Read the entire piece here.
Topi tip to CookieMonster.
City of Brass has posted Obama’s 3 million $ add campaign. If that is not buying the election, I don’t know what else you’d call it. How would the Obama-Mania bloggers react if John McCain was buying the presidency? And they complain about Sarah Palin’s 150K $ wardrobe? That does not make sense folks.
Watching the US election coverage in mainstream media, you might have thought that there are only two candidates. That is not true. You do have other candidates to choose. And you are actually promoting the ‘greater evil’ if you think you are just supporting the ‘lesser evil’.
Brother Naeem, back from his Ramadan hiatus-
My problem with the jihad being waged by the Taliban is illustrated in this passage of the article:
“Ibrahim’s recent injury, it turns out, was the result of a clash between his forces and a group of foreign fighters under the command of Dr. Khalil. The foreigners wanted to close down a girls’ school, sparking a battle. Two Arabs and 11 Pakistanis commanded by Dr. Khalil had been killed by Ibrahim’s men.”
These fighters may spend most of their time praying in the masjid (as mentioned in the article), but they have no problem turning around and killing each other over differences in religious interpretation.
Another event that has got the bloggers blogging is Dr. Amina Wadud’s attempt to lead Friday prayers again, this time in England.
UmmahPulse has an investigative piece on the people organizing it and the actual event.
Despite attempts by the organisers to whip up controversy with the help of the local (Oxford Mail) and national media (The Times), the event was a total flop – hardly anyone attended. An evening news report broadcast on the ITV Thames Valley programme (17.10.08) commented on “the media far outnumbering the congregation” and “the historic moment being underwhelmed by the turnout from both sides of the debate, with the majority of Muslims in Oxford having simply decided to ignore the event”.
Indigo Jo of Blogistan criticizes it and provides textual basis for mainstream scholars’ opposition.
As for the proof of the invalidity of the prayer of anyone who “prayed” behind Wadud, here is a collection of opinions by some modern scholars of Islam who are not ranting extremists (PDF, I’m afraid); I also wrote a few articles tackling not only the “prayer” itself but the media response to it and some of Wadud’s other antics ([1], [2], [3]). I wonder if she is aware (or if she cares) about Hargey’s well-documented deviations, such as believing that the hadeeth contain so many forgeries and fabrications that they should not be used to derive legal rulings, but rather that Muslims should use the Qur’an alone?
Shahrzaad asks a question on her blog and set off a response by Achelois.
So if muslim women can be the jurisprudent, i’d like to know why not the prayer leading then?
-
We need to hear from another woman and not a man what lies for us in religion. Blogosphere is not our khutbah place. We need to connect with women in the real world. At least I need that. I want to hear what a Muslim woman like me thinks about politics, religion, feminism, marriage, child-bearing and child-raising. I want to know what God says about women. I want to know what lies in Heaven for women. I want to know how God feels about lesbians. I want to know what should be done to men who rape their wives. Sorry but the khutbahs don’t tell me all that. I want to do more than swap recipes and talk about fashion with women.
But I wish I could look forward to it as a day when the entire family can go out and meet like minded people; where we can spend a good hour or so praying and talking about what is important to both men and women in Islam.
Therefore, I feel that it is important for women to be included in Friday sermons.
In a similar vein, Progressive Muslima wonders why something supposedly as relatively inane as this excites traditional conservative Muslims while more serious social issues don’t rally them.
Also, I find interesting that some Muslims who had intended to attend the prayers in Oxford were told they would no longer be welcome in their own mosques if they did so. I wonder if adulterers, wife beaters, child abusers, “honor” killers and folks who force their children to marry receive the same intimidating visits from these “concerned” Muslims.
So, Colin Powell seems to have excited a section of the Muslim blogosphere with his comments:
“Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is?”
…
I’m also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, “Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim.” Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he’s a Christian. He’s always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer’s no, that’s not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, “He’s a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists.” This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
Cookie Monster, currently blogless, has the following to say:
I believe what he said can actually – over time – marginalize anti-Muslim sentiment and make it very hard for people like Ann Coulter and Daniel Pipes to spread their ideas. These statements can cut into the base of anti-Muslim sentiment by challenging the assumptions of Muslim-basher sympathetics and winning them over to a more accepting worldview. But this can only happen if establishment politicians, people with a similar place in society like Powell, unequivocally echo his statement, and it would really help if non-liberals were at the forefront. Lay liberals are more tolerant than their lay Republican counterparts, and it is the latter who make up the majority of Muslim bashers. If Republicans, or individuals with deep ties to the Republican base can echo Powell, then- over time, again- we may see anti-Muslim rhetoric pushed further away from the mainstream in much the same way we’ve seen racist sentiment fade over time.
I don’t believe anti-Muslim sentiment will ever die out, but I do believe it can be marginalized. The more mainstream figures like Powell make these statements, the more tougher the job of the typical, loser Muslim-basher gets.
Of course we don’t depend on Powell or anyone for that matter to give us honor or anything like that, I don’t think anyone would say that. What Powell and others would do ‘mainstream’ our existence here as practicing Muslims and debilitate the ability of the Muslim-bashers to undermine our da’wah and impugn our very presence here in America.
The fantastic Rageh Omar tours US of A. From Al Jazeera (counting all four about an hour long)-
Part II
Part III
Part IV