I'm a Muslim. Ask me anything!

[Anonymous]

Sorry to tell you but I’m one in the same person – the Muslim you disagree with and the one calling you intolerant. 
 
And here’s the thing.  We are probably much more alike than you think (given some of your off-the-wall personal questions of me).    I too want non-Muslims to understand Islam.   Where we differ is that while I respect your right to practice Islam the way you want, you don’t seem to respect mine.   Just because you disagree me with me doesn’t mean I’m part of the ignorant masses you seem to despise.  Or that “my” Islam is not the “real” Islam.   Islam is Islam.
 
But the reality is that Islam is divided in sects (Sunni and Shia) and further divided in doctrine by major schools of jurisprudence.  This is very similar to Christianity and the schism between Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, and then the divide among various Christian denominations. 
 
You have decided to practice Islam solely from the Qur’an and this is FINE.  I have no objection to this (not that my opinion matters, but I wonder if you think I’m attacking you somehow, and I’m not).  My concern is that for non-Muslims, this is not a representational view of mainstream Islam.   It would be like a Christian stating she does not belong to any particular denomination – isn’t Catholic or Baptist, etc. – but only follows the Bible.   Again, which is FINE.   But it’s not representative of mainstream Christianity.   That is my only point here.  
 
And finally, the schools of jurisprudence are not inherently evil or wrong.  The way many Muslims deal with them is.   But the answer here is not to throw out the schools of jurisprudence.  Take away fiqh, and you will still have people stoning adulterers to death.   Don’t be fooled.  The enemy isn’t religion.  It’s the gross imbalance of power that makes people’s lust for supremacy so strong, they will trample whomever they need to in order to achieve what they want.  And in many countries, the tool used to oppress is Islam.  In many families, the tool used to oppress is Islam.  The answer, in my opinion, is to make all societies more equal and just.  When this occurs, the power of domination and manipulation falls away.  There is no need to step on people to get what you want, when you already have it. 

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to tell you but I’m one in the same person – the Muslim you disagree with and the one calling you intolerant. 
 
And here’s the thing.  We are probably much more alike than you think (given some of your off-the-wall personal questions of me).    I too want non-Muslims to understand Islam.   Where we differ is that while I respect your right to practice Islam the way you want, you don’t seem to respect mine.   Just because you disagree me with me doesn’t mean I’m part of the ignorant masses you seem to despise.  Or that “my” Islam is not the “real” Islam.   Islam is Islam.

Yes, and why would I support anyone's right to extrapolate from the Quran rules that are not actually IN the Quran and rules which unduly oppress people, particularly women? If handshaking between opposite sexes is forbidden, then that means you probably support punishment for it in Muslim countries also. Can you imagine that - punishing people for shaking hands? It's the height of ignorance. In Iran, policemen will use their batons to hit the ankles of women if their ankles are inadvertently exposed. In Saudi Arabia, women are punished if they drive a car alone or run errands alone. There is NOTHING in the Quran that supports such beliefs. But you are asking me to support you while you support such similar oppressive rules, none of which are supported in the Quran? How can I? And it honestly does not matter if millions of Muslims follow these or not because it is possible that millions may still be wrong. And if Muslims feel such behavior is ideal then they naturally have contempt and disgust for those who they feel are on the other extreme, those who date, who who shake hands even, those who have premarital sex. They may not express their contempt openly, but Muslims feel disgust and contempt for those who engage in such behaviors. It just makes for an intolerance that results in oppression for everyone.
 
But the reality is that Islam is divided in sects (Sunni and Shia) and further divided in doctrine by major schools of jurisprudence.  This is very similar to Christianity and the schism between Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, and then the divide among various Christian denominations. 
 

There are many realities that probably should not be acceptable realities to Muslims. The Quran did not recommend or suggest that such divisions be created among Muslims. Mankind created such divisions. So we need to go back to what the Quran recommended, not what we as men recommend.

You have decided to practice Islam solely from the Qur’an and this is FINE.  I have no objection to this (not that my opinion matters, but I wonder if you think I’m attacking you somehow, and I’m not).  My concern is that for non-Muslims, this is not a representational view of mainstream Islam.   It would be like a Christian stating she does not belong to any particular denomination – isn’t Catholic or Baptist, etc. – but only follows the Bible.   Again, which is FINE.   But it’s not representative of mainstream Christianity.   That is my only point here.  

If you wish to preach mainstream Islam then why don't you create your own thread inviting questions and answering from from a strict, conservative standpoint? Most Muslims in THIS country are not against handshaking, however. So you represent an even more strict group of Muslims than the ones living here. I represent the group that still prays, fasts, abstains completely from alcohol and pork. I dress fairly conservatively. I performed Hajj also. I was raised Sunni. But I absolutely do not embrace the Sharia, the divisions that we men created after the Quran was revealed to us. I do not embrace all the hadith either. I spoke to the famed scholar Ahmad Sakr in California who told me that the Sahih Al-Bukhari hadith if not accurate in its current form. There is too much hearsay in it. But look at how many unduly harsh rules are born out of these man made rules and look at how oppressive they are to people, particularly women.
This thread was created by me as a liberal Muslim to let nonMuslims know that there is a growing population of Muslims that resent that our religion has been misinterpreted. We loathe the fact that terrorism and oppression is committed in the name of our religion. We resent that more people did not stand up against the perpetrators of 9/11. As you know many, many Muslims refuse to even believe that Muslims committed 9/11, they are in such gross denial about their own people. You represent a whole different highly conservative and fairly strict thinking. It is not what I intended in this thread but somehow you seem to think that your view belongs here too. Again, I suggest you create your own thread representing your own strict, conservative interpretation of Islam.
 


And finally, the schools of jurisprudence are not inherently evil or wrong.  The way many Muslims deal with them is.   But the answer here is not to throw out the schools of jurisprudence.  Take away fiqh, and you will still have people stoning adulterers to death.   Don’t be fooled.  The enemy isn’t religion.  It’s the gross imbalance of power that makes people’s lust for supremacy so strong, they will trample whomever they need to in order to achieve what they want.  And in many countries, the tool used to oppress is Islam.  In many families, the tool used to oppress is Islam.  The answer, in my opinion, is to make all societies more equal and just.  When this occurs, the power of domination and manipulation falls away.  There is no need to step on people to get what you want, when you already have it. 

[Anonymous]

Why do Muslims keep marrying and breeding with their first cousins? Then this happens again in the next generation. The gene pool gets pretty small after that. Doesn't this do something to the mentality and brains of the offspring?

[Anonymous]

OP here: cousin marrying is not forbidden in our holy book. But science has proven that it may create genetic mutations (Ashkenazi Jews often married cousins and research showed it resulted in mutations causing an increased risk of breast cancer). New research shows however that the increased Risk is only equivalent to that of women having children when they are over 40. But who really can say for sure? It is clear that it's best to avoid concentrating the gene pool and dilute it. But Muslim counties place greater importance on their holy book than scientific revelations and feel that if the Quran doesn't forbid it, it can never cause harm.

[Anonymous]

Back to a lighter topic -- I’m Muslim and wanted others’ views -- have you ever been to a (south asian) Muslim wedding, which was practically a pre-prom picture taking party? I went to one last summer, where the ceremony had already happened, so the reception literally consisted of the bride/groom and their families doing the entrance into the reception following by a 5 minute slideshow showing pics of each of them. After that the only activity consisted of the bride/groom sitting up on the stage for 2-3 hours having a 1000+ pictures taken, including various combinations of guests going up to the stage to have their pics taken with the couple. Thus the rest of us spent the night watching them take pics.

This is a conservative family so of course there was no alcohol and they also went with no music and no open dance floor. Yet they did 3 separate wedding related events, all of which were like this; the first one wasn’t bad because it at least consisted of talking over dinner with the people you were seated with who I hadn’t seen in years. Events #2-3, I was bored to tears -- what else is there to talk to the same people about 3 nights in a row, but I couldn’t not attend as I’m fairly close family. Has “picture taking” become the activity at these types of wedding since there is nothing else going on?

[Anonymous]

OP here: others can answer with their own experiences but this is typical for southeast asian weddings that are conservative. Without dancing and music, what else is there to do but socialize and take pictures?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here: cousin marrying is not forbidden in our holy book. But science has proven that it may create genetic mutations (Ashkenazi Jews often married cousins and research showed it resulted in mutations causing an increased risk of breast cancer). New research shows however that the increased Risk is only equivalent to that of women having children when they are over 40. But who really can say for sure? It is clear that it's best to avoid concentrating the gene pool and dilute it. But Muslim counties place greater importance on their holy book than scientific revelations and feel that if the Quran doesn't forbid it, it can never cause harm.

That doesn't answer my question. I should have added, "Why would you marry such a close family member by blood?" It sounds like 200-300 years ago, when the royals married their own siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: cousin marrying is not forbidden in our holy book. But science has proven that it may create genetic mutations (Ashkenazi Jews often married cousins and research showed it resulted in mutations causing an increased risk of breast cancer). New research shows however that the increased Risk is only equivalent to that of women having children when they are over 40. But who really can say for sure? It is clear that it's best to avoid concentrating the gene pool and dilute it. But Muslim counties place greater importance on their holy book than scientific revelations and feel that if the Quran doesn't forbid it, it can never cause harm.

That doesn't answer my question. I should have added, "Why would you marry such a close family member by blood?" It sounds like 200-300 years ago, when the royals married their own siblings.

Back in the early days of Islam, marrying your cousin was a good way to solidify tribal and other alliances. So yes, a lot in common with European royalty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: cousin marrying is not forbidden in our holy book. But science has proven that it may create genetic mutations (Ashkenazi Jews often married cousins and research showed it resulted in mutations causing an increased risk of breast cancer). New research shows however that the increased Risk is only equivalent to that of women having children when they are over 40. But who really can say for sure? It is clear that it's best to avoid concentrating the gene pool and dilute it. But Muslim counties place greater importance on their holy book than scientific revelations and feel that if the Quran doesn't forbid it, it can never cause harm.

That doesn't answer my question. I should have added, "Why would you marry such a close family member by blood?" It sounds like 200-300 years ago, when the royals married their own siblings.

Back in the early days of Islam, marrying your cousin was a good way to solidify tribal and other alliances. So yes, a lot in common with European royalty.

Yes, but it is no longer the good old days. It's been more than 800 years since Islam began! The problem is that it is still too tribal - among other religions.

[Anonymous]

Along those lines, I am very tired of hearing, "Islamic rules for women are so much more progressive than in pre-Islamic, tribal Arabia of 600 CE."

I like OP, and I think she's trying hard to put forward a progressive, open face of Islam. I like the idea of getting away from the often paternalistic interpretations in the various legal schools. I do happen to know a lot about the issue, and I think she may be glossing over some very difficult issues that appear as the word of God in the Quran, as opposed to problems of interpretation among the various schools of jurisprudence. I suppose this would offend some, but I'm interested in signs of a movement towards an Islamic "Reformation" along the lines of what happened in Europe several centuries ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Back to a lighter topic -- I’m Muslim and wanted others’ views -- have you ever been to a (south asian) Muslim wedding, which was practically a pre-prom picture taking party? I went to one last summer, where the ceremony had already happened, so the reception literally consisted of the bride/groom and their families doing the entrance into the reception following by a 5 minute slideshow showing pics of each of them. After that the only activity consisted of the bride/groom sitting up on the stage for 2-3 hours having a 1000+ pictures taken, including various combinations of guests going up to the stage to have their pics taken with the couple. Thus the rest of us spent the night watching them take pics.

This is a conservative family so of course there was no alcohol and they also went with no music and no open dance floor. Yet they did 3 separate wedding related events, all of which were like this; the first one wasn’t bad because it at least consisted of talking over dinner with the people you were seated with who I hadn’t seen in years. Events #2-3, I was bored to tears -- what else is there to talk to the same people about 3 nights in a row, but I couldn’t not attend as I’m fairly close family. Has “picture taking” become the activity at these types of wedding since there is nothing else going on?

I'm a South Asian Muslim, and this is very typical of the wedding functions I attend. There is usually dancing in one of the events. Sorry you were bored, but I always have a good time

[Anonymous]

I've recently connected with my birthfamily, and it turns out that I have a number of Muslim relatives (I am Methodist). From what I am gathering they are fairly secular. Are there any topics/actions that I should avoid when I finally meet them in person? TIA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here: cousin marrying is not forbidden in our holy book. But science has proven that it may create genetic mutations (Ashkenazi Jews often married cousins and research showed it resulted in mutations causing an increased risk of breast cancer). New research shows however that the increased Risk is only equivalent to that of women having children when they are over 40. But who really can say for sure? It is clear that it's best to avoid concentrating the gene pool and dilute it. But Muslim counties place greater importance on their holy book than scientific revelations and feel that if the Quran doesn't forbid it, it can never cause harm.

That doesn't answer my question. I should have added, "Why would you marry such a close family member by blood?" It sounds like 200-300 years ago, when the royals married their own siblings.

Back in the early days of Islam, marrying your cousin was a good way to solidify tribal and other alliances. So yes, a lot in common with European royalty.

Yes, but it is no longer the good old days. It's been more than 800 years since Islam began! The problem is that it is still too tribal - among other religions.

OP here: The holy book, the Quran, is considered timeless. So what was permissible or even recommended under circumstances back in the time the Quran was revealed is still permissible or possibly recommended today. I don't think marrying cousins is not the same as marrying siblings. This is a 2002 article but recent research also shows puts the risk into perspective: http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2002-04-04-cousins.htm
And this wikipedia article shows a map that indicates at least a dozen states still permit cousin marriages even in the U.S. In the time when the Quran was revealed and even today among Muslims, marrying cousins is often done for economic reasons - to keep wealth in the family.

I don't think cousin marriages are a good idea but these are the reasons why they occur.

Muslim countries are not as progressive and forward thinking in some ways as western countries so it should be understandable why Muslims still marry close family members. Muslims, especially those living in Muslim countries, place great importance on the Quran and deem it to be the literal word of God. So their thinking is - why should we avoid that which the Quran has clearly made permissible?
I hope that answers your question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Along those lines, I am very tired of hearing, "Islamic rules for women are so much more progressive than in pre-Islamic, tribal Arabia of 600 CE."

I like OP, and I think she's trying hard to put forward a progressive, open face of Islam. I like the idea of getting away from the often paternalistic interpretations in the various legal schools. I do happen to know a lot about the issue, and I think she may be glossing over some very difficult issues that appear as the word of God in the Quran, as opposed to problems of interpretation among the various schools of jurisprudence. I suppose this would offend some, but I'm interested in signs of a movement towards an Islamic "Reformation" along the lines of what happened in Europe several centuries ago.

PP, its hard to get into a deep discussion on DCUM. But please ask me anything and give me a chance to answer your questions, even some of the difficult issues you speak of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Along those lines, I am very tired of hearing, "Islamic rules for women are so much more progressive than in pre-Islamic, tribal Arabia of 600 CE."

I like OP, and I think she's trying hard to put forward a progressive, open face of Islam. I like the idea of getting away from the often paternalistic interpretations in the various legal schools. I do happen to know a lot about the issue, and I think she may be glossing over some very difficult issues that appear as the word of God in the Quran, as opposed to problems of interpretation among the various schools of jurisprudence. I suppose this would offend some, but I'm interested in signs of a movement towards an Islamic "Reformation" along the lines of what happened in Europe several centuries ago.

PP, its hard to get into a deep discussion on DCUM. But please ask me anything and give me a chance to answer your questions, even some of the difficult issues you speak of.

Hi OP. I guess the problem is, I don't really want to go there, because when you put the verses out there in black and white on the screen, the perceptions for somebody who isn't really familiar with the religion could be difficult. I suppose we could start with the Quranic verses on apostates (possibly less controversial), which would be a simple google, but again I don't want to put them out there raw.

And feel free not to respond and we'll assume you're at work instead! And I'll probably stop with the apostates anyway, and not get into women or other religions.