Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asra Nomani's name is continually brought up because her decisions and her actions make it clear her judgment is lacking. First, you have a baby out of wedlock and then you drag your three-month old baby to hajj, despite very obvious physical and infectious dangers of doing so? Risking your infant being squashed to death or infected with god knows what? Who does that? Like she has extra babies?

The woman's deranged.

MLK plagiarized. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Nelson Mandela wasn't faithful. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Face it, PP; you have no point.

MLK did not advocate for truth in penmanship, and Mandela didn't chair a Faithful Spouse Club. Their good deeds were unrelated to their sins and are thus not overshadowed by them. Should you be able to push for reforms in Judaism while snacking on a bacon sandwich?

damn straight I would as not all Jews keep kosher

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Is Asra Nomani's name continually brought up because her lifestyle is considered unsavory? What about her co-author Hala Arafa?

It's odd that you invoke Leila Ahmed as an authority for your view when the article cites her as one of the Muslim scholars supporting the interpretation they set forth of the particular Quranic verse in question.

Leila Ahmed is a serious academic on Islam and its history. That is way more than can be said for any of the various so-called scholars whose views on Islam are disseminated on the internet telling women they must wear the hijab or face damnation.

There are hundreds of Islamic scholars out there who can match Leila Ahmed degree for degree, and view covering as necessary. Plus, I really don't think you are qualified to sort the serious from the un-serious. You are armed with nothing but your ardent wish of "how things ought to be" and it just isn't a good yardstick for measuring pedigrees in Islamic scholarship. Just because someone says things you don't like doesn't make them unqualified.

But it was you, or a PP of your views, who trotted out Leila Ahmed as supporting the view that the Quran requires the hijab. That is not her view based on her reading of the texts, and she is far from alone. But the PP somehow felt her credentials were impressive enough to cite her in defense of the view that the hijab is required.

Most of what passes for Islamic scholarship is a joke and is mired in mind boggling literal mindedness that has never experienced critical thinking. This is particularly true in the Middle East where the very bottom of matriculants to universities enter the school of religion because their grades are so low none of the other schools can accept them. They best and brightest go into medicine and engineering; the worst and dimmest go into religion. If it weren't so pathetic, it would be laughable that people look to these so-called scholars for a deeper understanding of their religion.

The situation is different in the West, where there is a long tradition of some of the brightest going into the liberal arts, including theology, and bringing rigorous critical analysis to bear on their disciplines. And this tradition comes to us by way of the Renaissance, which in turn was heavily influenced by the great Muslim thinkers who preceded it. Unfortunately, Islamic scholarship has been in serious decline since.

Anonymous wrote:
There are not billions of Muslims. More like 1.5 billion.

Yes, many Muslims read the Quran--more like memorize it--without the slightest idea of what it means. But if you Arab and literate, as Ms. Arafa is, it is not so different from an English speaker reading Shakespeare because written Arabic has changed very slowly relative to written English. With a few aids, you certainly can understand it.

I gather you are not a native Arabic speaker as you seem so in awe of what you present as a document accessible only to those with special knowledge. This is a form of gnosticism, and is totally contrary to the spirit of the Quran.

Interpretation is a different matter altogether. There are many, many interpretations possible. I repeat that true Islamic theologians find the matter of women covering of no consequence as it is such a peripheral issue and so non-central to Islam.

History of fashion is an altogether different matter. The relevant historical fact here is that the hijab is very recent in origin and generations of women did not cover their hair without anyone suggesting they were in violation of Islamic dictates.

You prefer Mr. Yusuf's version. So much so that you linked him twice--no link to Leila Ahmed, who herself does not wear hijab, so--just guessing here--I am pretty sure she does not think it's necessary to enter heaven. (I can't believe you really said that. Really? No hijab, no heaven?)

This, a million times. The whole point of the Quran was that, supposedly, Christians and Jews had got it wrong, so God was finally going to send something so clear that the average person would be able to read and understand immediately. There was supposed to be no need for a hierarchy of theologians to interpret things, at least among the Sunnis.

Which is why it's so annoying to read on DCUM, quite frequently, that "if you disagree, it's because you haven't spent years learning Quranic Arabic and history."

In Islam's early days and for centuries thereafter, many women didn't veil because they worked in the fields or at manual tasks, and a veil would have been impossible to manage. The veil was actually a symbol of class status.

Anonymous wrote:Muslim men are encouraged to have beard. Clothing wise, as long as it covered between the navel and knee, loose clothing.

The beard is for emulating Mohammed. Who was modest, it goes without saying, but modesty isn't the first reason for the beard.

Anonymous wrote:
Is Asra Nomani's name continually brought up because her lifestyle is considered unsavory? What about her co-author Hala Arafa?

It's odd that you invoke Leila Ahmed as an authority for your view when the article cites her as one of the Muslim scholars supporting the interpretation they set forth of the particular Quranic verse in question.

Leila Ahmed is a serious academic on Islam and its history. That is way more than can be said for any of the various so-called scholars whose views on Islam are disseminated on the internet telling women they must wear the hijab or face damnation.

There are hundreds of Islamic scholars out there who can match Leila Ahmed degree for degree, and view covering as necessary. Plus, I really don't think you are qualified to sort the serious from the un-serious. You are armed with nothing but your ardent wish of "how things ought to be" and it just isn't a good yardstick for measuring pedigrees in Islamic scholarship. Just because someone says things you don't like doesn't make them unqualified.

Anonymous wrote:
A scholar - religious or not - should view texts w/in their context. Let's look at Jewish law, for example. Do you know why camels aren't kosher? b/c the were more important in another role - carrying items

God didn't step in and say - "Hey! The camel is unclean! Don't eat it, or you'll suffer the consequences!"

In fact, if you strip away "God's word," you'll be able to find historical or cultural evidence (sometimes conflicting) to support these outdated rules that were created to keep the masses under control.

Furthermore, if I'm a religious scholar, my lens is already skewed, as I'll always look for ways to DEFEND my religion - no matter how outdated these "laws" are.

We laugh at the thought of the world being flat, yet we embrace head coverings for women! We once believed in sea monsters. The earth was the center of the universe. Remember when women were diagnosed with hysteria? lol!

And yet in some synagogues men and women are still separated b/c women are a distraction. And according to one Islamic "scholar," women stay behind men during prayer b/c it's not appropriate for a woman to bow down in front of a man - sharing a nice view of her ass.

all man-made rules

How can we move forward in society if we're anchored down by these rules written AGES ago? It's frightening to follow such ignorant practices!

YOU aren't anchored down these rules so why don't you move forward already? Is someone holding a gun to your head to follow these "ignorant practices"? Who died and made you vice president in charge of deciding what other people should do?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Asra Nomani's name is continually brought up because her decisions and her actions make it clear her judgment is lacking. First, you have a baby out of wedlock and then you drag your three-month old baby to hajj, despite very obvious physical and infectious dangers of doing so? Risking your infant being squashed to death or infected with god knows what? Who does that? Like she has extra babies?

The woman's deranged.

MLK plagiarized. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Nelson Mandela wasn't faithful. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Face it, PP; you have no point.

MLK did not advocate for truth in penmanship, and Mandela didn't chair a Faithful Spouse Club. Their good deeds were unrelated to their sins and are thus not overshadowed by them. Should you be able to push for reforms in Judaism while snacking on a bacon sandwich?

Anonymous wrote:Asra Nomani's name is continually brought up because her decisions and her actions make it clear her judgment is lacking. First, you have a baby out of wedlock and then you drag your three-month old baby to hajj, despite very obvious physical and infectious dangers of doing so? Risking your infant being squashed to death or infected with god knows what? Who does that? Like she has extra babies?

The woman's deranged.

MLK plagiarized. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Nelson Mandela wasn't faithful. Should that overshadow the good he did?

Face it, PP; you have no point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a Muslim woman who doesn't wear hijab, I found her article refreshing. I think it's good to hear different persoectives and for outsiders to see that Muslims are not some monolothic group that think the same. There is a diversity of views in th Islamic world. I have no issue with women who CHOOSE the hijab. But to me, a hijab is not representative of the Islamic world. In fact, no one in my very large extended family or among my Muslim friends and aquaintances covers. This may no be representative of others but this is my experience.

My dear, do you know her qualifications? I do. I also know her. She can not understand Quranic arabic so how is she any authority on its interpretation? Her opinion is as valuable as my housekeeper's on anything to do with interpreting Quranic arabic and islamic principles.

How stupid can you be?

A journalist is trained in research. They SEEK OUT credible sources to support a news angle. While she may not be a hijab-wearing expert, she certainly knows folks who DO understand the views in the quran.

once stupid, always stupid

How do you people live through the day?

oh - and nice way to put down "the help"

But it's not like there are NO scholarly views supporting the covering of women. In fact, the last few centuries of Muslim theological thought is replete with writings on the subject, many coming to the very same conclusion that some form of covering is required. Are all of them wrong and Nomani right? Really? What are her theological credentials, other than really, really wanting something to be what she wants?

A scholar - religious or not - should view texts w/in their context. Let's look at Jewish law, for example. Do you know why camels aren't kosher? b/c the were more important in another role - carrying items

God didn't step in and say - "Hey! The camel is unclean! Don't eat it, or you'll suffer the consequences!"

In fact, if you strip away "God's word," you'll be able to find historical or cultural evidence (sometimes conflicting) to support these outdated rules that were created to keep the masses under control.

Furthermore, if I'm a religious scholar, my lens is already skewed, as I'll always look for ways to DEFEND my religion - no matter how outdated these "laws" are.

We laugh at the thought of the world being flat, yet we embrace head coverings for women! We once believed in sea monsters. The earth was the center of the universe. Remember when women were diagnosed with hysteria? lol!

And yet in some synagogues men and women are still separated b/c women are a distraction. And according to one Islamic "scholar," women stay behind men during prayer b/c it's not appropriate for a woman to bow down in front of a man - sharing a nice view of her ass.

all man-made rules

How can we move forward in society if we're anchored down by these rules written AGES ago? It's frightening to follow such ignorant practices!

Asra Nomani's name is continually brought up because her decisions and her actions make it clear her judgment is lacking. First, you have a baby out of wedlock and then you drag your three-month old baby to hajj, despite very obvious physical and infectious dangers of doing so? Risking your infant being squashed to death or infected with god knows what? Who does that? Like she has extra babies?

The woman's deranged.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most important point is why Asra Nomani's opinion as a common journalist matters on a matter that requires a deep scholarly understanding of the Quran. Her co-author is also simply a journalist, not a theologian or islamic scholar by any stretch of the imagination. Billions of Muslims read Quranic arabic but don't understand it so whether her co-author has read the Quran is not quite as relevant as whether she understands it and can interpret it accurately.

The hijab is not one of the five pillars of Islam. Not wearing hijab may not prevent a woman or man from admittance into Heaven, I just do not know the answer to this question.

However, you will be hard pressed to find scholars who say it's not required and not important.

See Hamza Yusuf's discussion on it. Here he states that it is required:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__kEmi43USM

Asra can't get over her view that the hijab is a symbol of oppression. She needs to read another scholar Leila Ahmed's book:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__kEmi43USM
Rather than opining on topics she clearly lacks sophistication with, she should defer such interpretations to true scholars.

There are not billions of Muslims. More like 1.5 billion.

Yes, many Muslims read the Quran--more like memorize it--without the slightest idea of what it means. But if you Arab and literate, as Ms. Arafa is, it is not so different from an English speaker reading Shakespeare because written Arabic has changed very slowly relative to written English. With a few aids, you certainly can understand it.

I gather you are not a native Arabic speaker as you seem so in awe of what you present as a document accessible only to those with special knowledge. This is a form of gnosticism, and is totally contrary to the spirit of the Quran.

Interpretation is a different matter altogether. There are many, many interpretations possible. I repeat that true Islamic theologians find the matter of women covering of no consequence as it is such a peripheral issue and so non-central to Islam.

History of fashion is an altogether different matter. The relevant historical fact here is that the hijab is very recent in origin and generations of women did not cover their hair without anyone suggesting they were in violation of Islamic dictates.

You prefer Mr. Yusuf's version. So much so that you linked him twice--no link to Leila Ahmed, who herself does not wear hijab, so--just guessing here--I am pretty sure she does not think it's necessary to enter heaven. (I can't believe you really said that. Really? No hijab, no heaven?)

Leila Ahmed is an academic religious scholar. One need not be a practicing Muslim to be a religious scholar. How can I say this in a way you will understand? The bottom line is that the Quran is considered by Muslims to be the word of God. As such, it's understanding and interpretation for others is a crucial matter and can not be left to individuals like Asra Nomani. Nomani should continue to write about the number of men she has bed, how proud she is to have her child out of wedlock, and perhaps how proud her father and mother are of her. But for the love of God, she should stop trying to interpret the word of God to the many millions (so very sorry, not billions) of Muslims who are actually trying to live an islamic lifestyle.

Is Asra Nomani's name continually brought up because her lifestyle is considered unsavory? What about her co-author Hala Arafa?

It's odd that you invoke Leila Ahmed as an authority for your view when the article cites her as one of the Muslim scholars supporting the interpretation they set forth of the particular Quranic verse in question.

Leila Ahmed is a serious academic on Islam and its history. That is way more than can be said for any of the various so-called scholars whose views on Islam are disseminated on the internet telling women they must wear the hijab or face damnation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most important point is why Asra Nomani's opinion as a common journalist matters on a matter that requires a deep scholarly understanding of the Quran. Her co-author is also simply a journalist, not a theologian or islamic scholar by any stretch of the imagination. Billions of Muslims read Quranic arabic but don't understand it so whether her co-author has read the Quran is not quite as relevant as whether she understands it and can interpret it accurately.

The hijab is not one of the five pillars of Islam. Not wearing hijab may not prevent a woman or man from admittance into Heaven, I just do not know the answer to this question.

However, you will be hard pressed to find scholars who say it's not required and not important.

See Hamza Yusuf's discussion on it. Here he states that it is required:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__kEmi43USM

Asra can't get over her view that the hijab is a symbol of oppression. She needs to read another scholar Leila Ahmed's book:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__kEmi43USM
Rather than opining on topics she clearly lacks sophistication with, she should defer such interpretations to true scholars.

There are not billions of Muslims. More like 1.5 billion.

Yes, many Muslims read the Quran--more like memorize it--without the slightest idea of what it means. But if you Arab and literate, as Ms. Arafa is, it is not so different from an English speaker reading Shakespeare because written Arabic has changed very slowly relative to written English. With a few aids, you certainly can understand it.

I gather you are not a native Arabic speaker as you seem so in awe of what you present as a document accessible only to those with special knowledge. This is a form of gnosticism, and is totally contrary to the spirit of the Quran.

Interpretation is a different matter altogether. There are many, many interpretations possible. I repeat that true Islamic theologians find the matter of women covering of no consequence as it is such a peripheral issue and so non-central to Islam.

History of fashion is an altogether different matter. The relevant historical fact here is that the hijab is very recent in origin and generations of women did not cover their hair without anyone suggesting they were in violation of Islamic dictates.

You prefer Mr. Yusuf's version. So much so that you linked him twice--no link to Leila Ahmed, who herself does not wear hijab, so--just guessing here--I am pretty sure she does not think it's necessary to enter heaven. (I can't believe you really said that. Really? No hijab, no heaven?)

Leila Ahmed is an academic religious scholar. One need not be a practicing Muslim to be a religious scholar. How can I say this in a way you will understand? The bottom line is that the Quran is considered by Muslims to be the word of God. As such, it's understanding and interpretation for others is a crucial matter and can not be left to individuals like Asra Nomani. Nomani should continue to write about the number of men she has bed, how proud she is to have her child out of wedlock, and perhaps how proud her father and mother are of her. But for the love of God, she should stop trying to interpret the word of God to the many millions (so very sorry, not billions) of Muslims who are actually trying to live an islamic lifestyle.

Anonymous wrote:Nomani is someone who broke pretty much every single Islamic rule. And that's fine, it's a free country. She doesn't really have to be a Muslim. What's not fine is insisting that a religion - a completely voluntary club, as it were - HAS to approve of everything you want just because you really, really want to have freedom to do these things and still think of yourself as an observant Muslim. Pick one. Own it.

Nomani has had numerous boyfriends she slept with, publicized this, and then went on to have a child out of wedlock and is proud of it. She is shunned by the vast majority of the Muslim communities. Not necessarily because she slept around and had a child out of wedlock, but because she insists that Islam is the way she sees it through the foggy, cracked lenses of her eyeglasses. She was born into a Muslim family but simply wants to live a non Islamic lifestyle. Hence her dilemma. Nomani should life her lifestyle but she should at least stop trying to validate it under Islam.

Given her lifestyle and misunderstanding about Islamic principles, I doubt any practicing Muslim pays attention to her articles, other than to be annoyed with them.

Modesty is a requirement in Islam. In Islam, anything that can be perceived attractive and appealing to someone of the opposite sex should be hidden or played down, and that applies to men and women equally. Hair is commonly perceived as an adornment. Women beautify their hair, spend thousands of dollars on their hair every year, use it to attract people of the opposite sex. Thus, it is better to cover it or down play its beauty. This is not a petty issue in Islam. Modesty is important in Islam. The absence of modesty may lead to sin.

Is hair covering required in Islam? Well if modesty is required, and hair is seen as an adornment, then yes, hair covering is required in Islam. At minimum it is better to cover one's hair or at least down play its beauty. In other words, don't color your hair, straighten it, leave it cascading down your back to show it off or intentionally try to look pretty. We all know this is commonly done by women to their hair to look pretty and this is what Islam asks you not to do.

Does the Quran mention that hair must be covered? No, it doesn't. It refers to the head veil but it doesn't ask women to cover their hair. It simply asks women to dress modestly and cover adnornments. But lets not for one minute think the Quran doesn't require modesty in dress.

Nomani is someone who broke pretty much every single Islamic rule. And that's fine, it's a free country. She doesn't really have to be a Muslim. What's not fine is insisting that a religion - a completely voluntary club, as it were - HAS to approve of everything you want just because you really, really want to have freedom to do these things and still think of yourself as an observant Muslim. Pick one. Own it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a Muslim woman who doesn't wear hijab, I found her article refreshing. I think it's good to hear different persoectives and for outsiders to see that Muslims are not some monolothic group that think the same. There is a diversity of views in th Islamic world. I have no issue with women who CHOOSE the hijab. But to me, a hijab is not representative of the Islamic world. In fact, no one in my very large extended family or among my Muslim friends and aquaintances covers. This may no be representative of others but this is my experience.

My dear, do you know her qualifications? I do. I also know her. She can not understand Quranic arabic so how is she any authority on its interpretation? Her opinion is as valuable as my housekeeper's on anything to do with interpreting Quranic arabic and islamic principles.

How stupid can you be?

A journalist is trained in research. They SEEK OUT credible sources to support a news angle. While she may not be a hijab-wearing expert, she certainly knows folks who DO understand the views in the quran.

once stupid, always stupid

How do you people live through the day?

oh - and nice way to put down "the help"

But it's not like there are NO scholarly views supporting the covering of women. In fact, the last few centuries of Muslim theological thought is replete with writings on the subject, many coming to the very same conclusion that some form of covering is required. Are all of them wrong and Nomani right? Really? What are her theological credentials, other than really, really wanting something to be what she wants?