Reply to terrorist attack in Paris

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "terrorist attack in Paris "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Muslima][quote=Anonymous][quote=Muslima][quote=Anonymous][quote=Muslima][quote=Anonymous][quote=jsteele][quote=Anonymous]

There are two issues here. First, Muslima is speaking on behalf of all muslim women who ever donned a niqab, and saying that they all do it only for spiritual reasons. She even punctuates her claim by calling PP "ridiculous" for thinking that non-spiritual reasons might be involved. As PP points out, history and tradition make Muslima's claim about other Muslim women's motives not a little suspect. At the very least, since we shouldn't be saying that "all Muslims are terrorists," then Muslima shouldn't be speaking for all niqab-wearing women.

The second issue is that one could go further, and argue that Muslima is out of sync with Islam itself. Yes, it's true there's no central Islamic hierarchy. But there is a holy book that purports to be the literal words of God. It's a very rare Muslim who thinks the Quran isn't the literal word of God, as transmitted to the prophet by the angel. Therefore, I'd argue that the Quran itself can legitimately be taken as representing "all Islam." (Note I would never argue that you can do the same with sharia or the hadith, which do vary widely across the Muslim world, although Muslima has often claimed that a given hadith speaks for "Islam" when it suits her own purposes.) Here's what the Koran says about veiling: "Oh Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should case their outer garmets over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested." (Yusufali) In other words, it's to announce that you're a modest Muslim woman and to avoid sexual harassment - the latter I think we can agree involves arousal. So Muslima is out of sync with the Quran itself.

Anway. That's what bugs me about Muslima. That's also why I don't buy the distinctions Jeff draws about why you can criticize the Catholic Church but not Muslims/Islam. [/quote]

I agree with you that Muslima cannot speak on behalf of all Muslims. Any statement that discusses "Islam", "Muslims", etc. must be heavily qualified to specify which type of Islam or group of Muslims you are discussing unless you are making an extremely general statement.

I disagree that the Quran represents "all Islam" in the sense that you are portraying it. The reality is that the Quran, like the Bible and even the US Constitution, is subject to interpretation and groups and individuals emphasize some parts over others (may not even know about some parts). Even the verse that you quote -- which is not in its original language -- can be interpreted a number of ways.

Again, the distinction I make between the Catholic Church and Islam is that you can point to a specific ruling or doctrine of the Catholic Church -- the official institution of Catholicism -- and criticize or disagree with that. Islam doesn't have a similar institution. Similarly, I would object to criticism of "Catholics", which like Muslims, come in many varieties (for instance, apparently in the US, the Catholic Church's birth control rules are almost universally ignored).
[/quote]

We'll have to disagree. Yes, the verse I quoted can be interpreted different ways, to mean that a woman should cover her chest, neck, hair, or all of the above. Similarly, you can interpret jihad as a struggle of the soul, and I wish the attackers had done so.[b] But there are many parts of the Quran that have never been subject to wide-ranging interpretation. As just one tiny example, in the quote above, several translators agree that women should veil to avoid what they call "molestation" or "trouble."

And so I maintain that large parts of the Quran DO represent a non-negotiable dogma or orthodoxy (if you will). And that on this question Muslima is out of step with Islam[/b].[/quote]

That's a lie[/quote]

Really? If it's a lie, you must be saying that the translation above, which contradicts your "spiritual journey" rationale for wearing a full body veil (also not in the Quran) doesn't exist in the Quran? Are you saying that YusufAli's translation of the word "molest" is a lie? Pickthall is similar. What word would you use instead?

You can't possibly be saying the entire Quran is totally ambiguous and every word is subject to interpretation and reinterpretation. That would be very un-Muslim of you.[/quote]

Oh boy,  I really don't have time for this. Arabic is one of the richest and most complex languages in the world. Every word in Arabic has different meanings, multiple meanings, and this is why every translation of the Quran will be somewhat different. Plus the Quran was written in a unique literary style and in Parables, so every person will interpret any verse the way they understand and this is why Some Muslims believe the Quran can only truly be understood only in Arabic. And this is probably why all Muslims techie their prayers in Arabic to capture the true sense behind the words.

The Quran itself states that: Allah says in Chapter 3 Surah Al Imran verse 7:

"It is Allah,  Who sent down this Quran to you.  (There are two kinds of verses in the Book.)   In it are verses Basic or Fundamental (of established meanings which can be easily understood),  and they are the essence or foundation of the Book.   And the other verses are Allegorical or Ambiguous.  Those in whose hearts is perversity will always go  for the Allegorical or Ambiguous verses,  seeking discord and trying to search for their hidden meanings.   None,  except Allah,  knows their real meanings(Ta’aweel)!  In contrast to them,  those who are firmly grounded in knowledge,  say: “We believe in them all, because all of them are from our Lord."

The verse you quoted with the interpretation of Yusuf Ali, his interpretation of the word was "molested". Every other translation I've seen used the word 'annoyed', 'abused", "not hurt" ect  or some other variant . But that is besides the point.  [b]All scholars  who support hijab are unanimous and I mean ALL that the main reason for a muslim woman to wear a hijab is because it is  prescribed by God. Not because of your husband,  your father,  your mother, fear of being molested.  If you wear the hijab, you should wear it because Allah  said so, period. [/b]Just like we pray 5 times a day because Allah said so,  no if and but about it. [/quote]

Just curious. Are all these scholars men?

So I suppose the girls who take off the veil away from their parents have a long long way to go on their spiritual journey?[/quote]

There are male and female scholars in Islam. I don't judge people by how they dress, a Hijabi can be way less spiritual , less religious and further from Allah than a non-hijabi. We are taught not to judge people because we know not,  only Allah knows what's in their heart. Hijab is not a sign of piety. There are hijabi prostitutes after all. .....
 [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics