Indigo Jo Blogs

I think the knee-jerk reaction to reject calls for reformation is precisely the problem Rushdie is talking about. Islam must become a religion that appreciates debate. Reasserting "fundamental" beliefs is not the answer. "Deviating" from the truth is a presumptuous statement in and of itself. It presumes to know what the truth is! And thats precisely the problem of any fundamentalist religious person - they presume to have the exact truth. Religion should give people the tools to find that truth for themselves, not indoctrinate them.

I really hate how everything is placed at the feet of the Saudi and "Wahhabism." Yusuf you and I both know that the problems with Muslims, not to be confused with Islam, is deviance and not a "strict" adherence to the Quran and the Sunnah.

What exactly is there to debate about? The only thing the kafiroon wants is for us to do what the Jews have been forced to do which is abandon our religion. Make no mistake about it, they want us to ijtihad Islam out of existence.

Saudis or no Saudis the same problems that face Muslims today are the same problems that faced Muslims 1,000 years ago and there was no oil wealth to spread that problem around it was our own arrogance and deviance.

Rushdie is writing for a Western audience. If he said ijtihad, very few would understand him. If he says 'reformation' then people do. It's as simple as that.

Islam certainly needs one or the other, or both. It's in a terrible state at the moment.

do you agree with this part of the letter "before it was trampled by the puritanical and oil-funded Wahhabi movement. "

do you think Wahhabism is or has been a big problem within Islam?

But Islam is what Muslims practice. Saying it should be reformed and saying it should be re-interpreted are just different ways of saying the same thing.

Sorry, Steven, but Islam does not recommend debate for the sake of debate. But when there is discussion to find an answer, it should be done by qualified people.

And yes, we believe that there is a truth; the Quran says that truth stands clear from error.

Kafir, Islam doesn't need to be changed - but Muslims need to change themselves for the better, by acquiring Islamic kowledge and then applying it to their lives.

salaams sister bikhair;

could you please admit that your 'salafi' (Wahabbi, whether you like it or not - as I'm always told when they shout about 'Hanafiyya' or 'Shafiyya' in the masjid, 'the kasriyya just indicates belonging to a group, in this case people who follow Imam abu Hanifa') brethren don't consider us (the Traditinoal Sunni muslims who regard Tassawuf as a legitimate science and follow the four madhahib) as muslims... I've been told that directly over the last year (I've spent more than a year here in Saudi, please don't tell me they're respectful of others, both of us know better)...

kafir and others who read Islam as hate-filled need only to quote your teachers, TROID for instance had a quote on it's frontpage 'Gems from the Salaf: Imam Dhahabi said "if you see one from amongst the people of the Suluk [Sufis, TROID's insertion here ] who says 'leave alone teaching the Quran and Sunnah, I want Divine ecstasy' then, if you're not afraid of him, get on his chest and choke him'... wonderful, charming stuff, bikhair - these are your teachers?

Actually, to be clear, there are 'salafis' who detest these people, and one story was told to me about the Jamaican brother [I'll leave out his name, but I've met him personally] who runs TROID - he was a student at Jami'a Madinah before, and a fanatic adherent to Al-Bani and bin Baz - someone who questioned him after he refused to accept Imam Shafi's ruling on some matter in Salaah until someone pointed out that al-Bani and bin Baz had both approved of it as being 'from the Sunnah' - whereupon the 'salafi' brother asked him: "So you tell your brother that he's 'blindly following' a madhab, but when I show you the hadith, you don't accept it, but if I show you al-Bani and bin Baz, you do? Why are you 'blindly following' al-Bani and bin Baz?"

Good question.

may Allah guide all of us.

ma' Salaamah, Dawud

I think theres a need for another western reformation. I dont think we need lecturing from the same group of criminals who launch crusades, wars of aggression based on "wmds" and such. Its their actions which have brought the instability the world suffers from today. Suicide bombing, no. Depleted uranium, shock and awe, client regimes, yes. No thanks.

Well, Anonymous, if you really think that science, to take just one example, is not important, you'd better turn off your West-invented computer right now. And turn off the light. And woe betide you if you get ill.

All the things that you Muslims take for granted - medicines, mobile phones, the internet (which you use to post your reactionary 7th century nonsense) - come from the West.

I keep getting told by lefties that only extremists believe that the Koran is the literal, unchanging word of God, that most Muslims in the UK are not like this and are progressive. Yet when I visit this site I see really reactionary views.

So who are the true Muslims? The ones who want a humane Islam for the 21st century that is compatible with liberal democracy, freedom of conscience and human rights? Or the ones that want to stay in 7th century Arabia, parasitical, of course, on the West for all useful scientific inventions?

If Islam is so perfect, how come the West is better at everything? Science, music, art, literature, sport - you name it.

Kafir, You have a very progressive view of history - both in form and substance. You know what, people have lived in the past without science, music, art, sport, literatur, etc, you name it, and they were a lot more happier than most people today. Not everything that glitters is gold, or you will be duped. It is nice to have some modesty about this science, music, and art business. This is all I hear from people like you.

Science, music, art, literature, sport, technology, etc... hooray. We are advanced. Pathetic. Really pathetic. Is that all you see to this existence. Your horizons must be pretty dim.

Brother Yusuf, you've got a hoppin' blog now don't ya?!

:::YAWN!::: Reform, reform, reform. Well, I can understand Westerners calling for reform. It's from our own history as religious people and from the Judeo-Christian experience in Europe and America. Martin Luther, the staunch Biblical literalist, hated the excesses of the Catholic Church so he sought reform. But unfortunately, because of the liberal strains of Judeo-Christian thought, reform now means to not give heed to the religious text or to conform somehow to the changing needs and desires of society. Or "if you don't like it, just change it or throw it out."

So Islam, like Judaism, Hinduism, Christianity, Buddhism and other traditional faiths looks down on greed, lose sexual mores, Godlessness, selfishness and so on, then Islam, like the others must be discharged or "reformed" until it is an empty version of itself.

Now, what people like Salman Rushdie and others know deep down inside is that no matter how many books they write or articles they publish, they don't make a dent of difference in the Islamic world. If any such reform happens, or any ijtihad, only educated Muslim scholars will bring it about. We're not going to listen to the self-righteous tripe of someone who can't even understand Arabic, doesn't has the slightest idea what impact colonialization and imperialism has had on Islam or doesn't have a basic understanding of Islamic principles or Islamic history. I remember when Irshad Manji came out. I wasn't even a Muslim and I was tearing apart her arguments. Think of what a seasoned, knowlegble Islamic scholar can do.

We Muslims, we Western born Muslims are very powerful though we don't realize it because we have the power to make things better for Muslims and the world in general if we fight for the things that God tells us to fight for such as the elimination of poverty, the fight against illiterary and the end of racism--the residue of a very Western and unIslamic disease that has corrupted much of the world.

As far as for "Kafir" and others crying for reform...sorry, guys, it's just not your decision to make and it's not in your hands. These verses appropiately addresses such folks who cry for reform when they weren't even thinking about Islam before 9/11.

"And those who believe, what has been sent down to you and what was sent down before you, and are certain of Hereafter. They follow guidance from their Lord, and they are the happy ones. As for the ungrateful who refuse, it is the same to them whether you warn them or not; they do not believe. God has sealed their hearts and their hearing, and covered their eyes; for them is a great torment." Qur'an 2: 4-7 (Thomas Cleary translation)

Nothing requires reform more that our own atrophied minds and souls - deceived by a compulsive "epistemological overconfidence".

So why do you live here, Dr M?

Listen, regardless of where you stand on the "Western World" you cant look at whats happening in the Middle East and not say that it doesn't need to adapt to changing times.

The simple fact of the matter is that Islam HAS changed a lot in the last 1400 years, its not ahistorical or static. The problem is that the west came in during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and really distorted the natural development of Middle Eastern identity.

Now, if its true that only Muslims can critisize Islamic affairs, and only Americans can critisize American affairs, how are we too understand the global importance of either of these issues?

Moreover, dont act like there's a consensus about how Islamic society's should be run as is. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Egypt all run their society's very differently. As such the role of women, nationalism, and other issues are still not strictly defined. A reformation might bring some of the more extreme interpretations of Islam out from the cold.

Kafir,

Often I hear people say that when they criticize Islam they arent being racist because after all Islam isnt a race. I am far more cynical than that. I believe when people criticize Islam, for the most part, they are being racist because you generally hav the most ignorant people, who say they have read Quran, but have no knowledge of the arabic language, who say they have read hadith, but have no knowledge of Quran, the ijma, fiqh, sunnah, etc. Yet they speak with such arrogance qand authority becuase they consider Islam to be the religion of the Arabs and have, for the most part, contempt for the Arab, his language, history, culture, and religion. Could you imagine someone who has read the five books of the bible which is the Torah speaking with such authority about Judaism? I doubt it! You do have, on the other hand, jackasses speaking so authoritytatively about Islam because after all, we know the natives better than they know themselves.

"But Islam is what Muslims practice."

As for you Kafir, please dont get yourself embarrassed on this forum. I understand that you have "read" the Quran, and read some books, and "read" some hadith and now you are some Western expert telling the Arab and the Muslim about himself and his religion. Perhaps you skipped that hadith when even Prophet Muhammed said that most Muslims, after a certain generation, would not be upon what him and his companions were upon in regards to religion, and that this deviation from the Prophets way appeared even when his companions, the very people who knew him on a day to day basis for decades, were still alive.

"Saying it should be reformed and saying it should be re-interpreted are just different ways of saying the same thing."

None which can apply to Islam. Now if you had acrually studied hadith you would have known that Prophet Muhammed said himself that anything that was introduced into Islam, any newly invented matter that was introduced into Islam would be rejected. No success would come of it. Now had you actually studied hadith you would know that Prophet Muhammed said that the solutions that helped to solve the problems of the earliest Muslim community would be the same solutions that will help solve the problems of the last communities.

Kafir do youself a favor and log onto Amazon and try to find more books on Islam.

Dawud,

Wa alaikum salam...

I resent what you say about the Salafis. I dont know about the quote you had from TROID and choking and stepping on someones neck but it doesnt sound right at all.

Kafir,

"If Islam is so perfect, how come the West is better at everything? Science, music, art, literature, sport - you name it."

Islam is perfect not because it promises to deliver computers, vaccines, and the female condom. It is perfect because it was in fact delivered by the One who created the heavens, the universe, and planet Earth. Let see the West top that. I do have a question however, why is it that the phenomena of the West, Science, music, art, literature, sport, etc, is so top heavy, meaning why is it so Western European, North American centered? It seems to me like to takes far more than being a liberal democracy to produce the goods.

Dawud,

( Sorry guys this is in response to something Dawud said on another topic, dont mind my comments)

"I think it’s takfir and the extremist rhetoric “lanaat Allah ala Nasara wa Yahud!” that I hear shouted from mosques here (and at me, even though I’m a muslim who happens to be white and from the West, I can’t get my salaams answered and have to endure people asking me “are you a muslim?” when I salaam them (sometimes after prayer!), as well as interrogating me with “Where are you from? Baladi, Agenci?”)… those attitudes, bought for with Saudi oil money and reinforced by Wahabi/”Salafi purification of the deen & manhaj” theology, as well as ignorance, bigotry, and idiocy are precisely what is destroying us."

The irony of your situation Dawud is that Muslims love white converts. LOL... But seriously, I have never heard any of the Salafi brothers make takfir against anyone except people who are clearly commiting unrepentant acts of kufr. Wa Allahu Alim. I've heard criticism of Hizbut Tahrir, Abu Hamza, "Snake Faisal" Al Qaida, etc, but never have I ever heard any of them say they were kafir. My husband is British, and knows the brothers in Birmingham, and he doesnt even refer to these guys as kafir, just hizbis or deviants. Wa Allahu Alim.

I am not from England and dont know the politics with the Muslims out there but it sounds like so much fitna. SubhanAllah...

Bikhair, The psychology of muslims who ask you if you are an agent is worrying. Perhaps that is due to the American hysteria? Skin colour, racism, tribalism, etc have never been and will never be part of Islam. Whoever has caught these illnesses from western societies need to go for urgent checkup. They need to find a Teacher who will help them cure it before it becomes cancerous. There are lot of muslims in Britain who are white, and I haven't noticed any surprises from ethnic muslims. Of course there are white muslims all over Eastern Europe and I don't understand why white muslims from western Europe should provoke hysteria. And for that matter when some of the top scholars in the UK are white muslims, like Sheikh T. J Winter of Cambridge. Of course the media don't know about the traditional Islamic scholars, they only know "scholars" (like Bakri) of a similar mindset to them and or perhaps with a similar to the current government.

Anyway.... this is a rotten topic.

Reading from Kafir, I never knew there was so much ignorance and resentment towards "Islam" out there. Kafir, I have done my part to explain the basic understanding of Islam to you, you are now on your own. May God guide you!

BTW Dawaud,

When I said that Salafis only regard someone as kufr unless they show clear signs of unrepentant kufr, this is usually after the ulema have determined their state considering the usual sources.

Bikhair: Often I hear people say that when they criticize Islam they arent being racist because after all Islam isnt a race.

Has any Muslim population ever abandoned Islam en masse? The Central Asians didn't abandon Islam under Russian and Soviet rule, the Algerians didn't abandon Islam under French rule, and the Andalusi and Balkan Muslims (except those in Albania and Bosnia) were ethnically cleansed IIRC. The only possible exception seems to be Sicily.

To sum up, Islam isn't a race, but Muslims are so resistant to conversion (or long-term secularization) that it might as well be. (Though its worse than that from an anti-Islam perspective - Muslim domination often resulted in plenty of conversions TO Islam - its just the other way that's very difficult).

Kafir aka cat, is that all you could come up with ? My place of residence? I understand your silence all too well. Its the inability of a toothless bigot to come up with a remotely rational thought or statement. Steven, I think you in the west are going to have to adapt with the changing times. Meaning, no more crusades of terror, no more colonial adventures and no more lies about WMD and casting yourselves as innocent darlings unaware of the war crimes your governments committ. The history of the 20th century alone should be enough to demand a western reformation. The nihilism you have spread across the globe is now haunting you, a simple of the chickens coming home to roost. Its high time you quit blaming others for your own shortcomings and take responcibility for your actions.

Has any Muslim population ever abandoned Islam en masse? The Central Asians didn’t abandon Islam under Russian and Soviet rule, the Algerians didn’t abandon Islam under French rule, and the Andalusi and Balkan Muslims (except those in Albania and Bosnia) were ethnically cleansed IIRC. The only possible exception seems to be Sicily.

It's very rare indeed for large groups to renounce Islam en masse. I'm not even sure if this happened in Sicily - they are more likely to have just left, or been prevented from maintaining their Islam. The only group I've ever heard of who renounced Islam were the Gagauz of Moldova, who did so in order to settle as refugees in Russian territory.

• There is certainly a consensus in Islam that the Quran is the literal and unchanging word of God, and there is no question about that. That's a core belief of Muslims, and if you're taking information about Islam from someone who calls that idea "extremist", then you're talking to the wrong person.

• Some of the people commenting here seem to be unaware that much of the important scientific, mathematical and medical knowledge came from Muslims. See muslimheritage.com for one. Yes, I know that this was centuries ago, but it is significant when people are saying that Muslims shouldn't have medicine or hospitals, for example, as if they came from the West.

• Nothing in Islam says that we shouldn't accept new inventions. What Islam does say is that we should consider whether they benefit us, and not just worship anything that's new. just because something is technically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.

• "So Islam can’t change, everything was decided 1,000 years ago."

You're not understanding what we're saying. The Quran will never change, true. And Islam gives scholars a framework for determining their on new issues; this is a huge subject, but briefly, they use the Quran, the sayings and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), rulings of other scholars, etc. So it's not as if we're frozen in the 7th century and can't figure out where to go from there. Islam (the Quran, the example of the Prophet, our core beliefs) doesn't change, but it gives us the tools to live in modern society, or any society. When scholars come up with an opinion, they do take into account the time and place.

But this doesn't mean that we change for the sake of change. For example, we have rules for dressing modestly, for both women and men, and there is no reason that these should be thrown out because it's the 21st century. And there's no reason that we should accept drinking or gambling or homosexual marriage just because it's the 21st century.

So Islam can't change, everything was decided 1,000 years ago. Yet you Muslims hypocritically post on the internet, an 'innovation' (bidd'ha?), invented by non-Muslims, of course, like everything else.

Why should the non-Muslims carry you, while you keep your medieval mindset?

A fundamental problem with discussing the 'reform' of Islam is the refusal by ideologues, whether 'Western', 'Muslim', or other, to place Islam in an historical and anthropological context. What do I mean by this? There's a lot of talk about the Muslim world, the Ummah, etc as though it was the defining characteristic of those people who demographically make up the said Muslim world. Unfortunately the reality is a little different. This is not to say Muslims the world over don't feel a common bond. Many do. Only to say that one's religion is but one 'feature' of any community or individual. Now that's a truism, not an argument. Only an ideologue would refuse to accept that (cf Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan). Go into any expatriate mosque. Most of these mosques are divided on ethnic/national lines. Separate mosques for Turks, Indonesians, South Asians, and so on. Yes there are 'common' mosques too. Remember, I am not saying Islam does not provide any links, only that it is not the only thread that binds people.

Historically, Islam hasn't provided the type of cohesion between different ethnic groups that other social phenomena, like nationalism, tribalism, communalism or necessity, have. The reasons for this are complex, but far from sinister. To understand this, I think you have to look at Islam in an historical and anthropological context. The movement founded by Muhammed established itself politically well before it established itself theology. In fact, the historical record quite clearly indicates that theologically Islam as we presently know it* developed several years after Muhammed's death. Even the Koran, which is considered static and immutable had many different versions and source 'documents'.** Remember also that Islam began as an oral tradition. Ask any anthropology major and they will tell you how dynamic and variable oral traditions are as a source of objective truth. Anthroplogically, Islam has been very dynamic, having been transformed and adapted into the local traditions of myriad different peoples. In parts of Indonesia and Malaysia, animist beliefs have been adopted into Islam. In South Asia, sufi Islam undeniably encorporated very Hindu concepts. Sadly these strands of Islam are in decline. With it is lost a great deal of wisdom and understanding of our ancestors.

Of course a lot of what I've said above would be considered blasphemy. There are several Muslim countries where I could be punished quite severely for stating what I have. Many will think that my aim is to discredit Islam. Nothing could be further from the truth. But, like everything, if you really want to appreciate something, you must immerse yourself in it warts and all. That doesn't automatically mean, however, that you accept or rationalise everything attributed to Islam. I think people have the capacity and even duty to use their common sense, rational capacity to appreciate the world. That means questioning those aspects of Islam, its theology or practices which are antithetical to what our rational faculties tells us ought to be or not to be so.

People who often lament the failings of Islam (referred to variously as Islamofascism on one extreme, to an inability to follow the 'real' Islam on the more sympathetic side) expect of the religion something it cannot deliver. It cannot of itself deliver sociopolitical reform because the religion, any religion, isn't 'designed' for this purpose. There's a very good, simple reason for this. Matters of this world usually require responses 'from this world'. Matters of religion and spiritually are relatively ineffective in this regard. To put it crudely, to build a car you don't require an understanding of the Bhagavat Gita.

Yes, there has been a growth in 'political Islam' over the past century or so. But I would argue in every instance it has degraded into something quite different from the original derivative. So take the use of Sharia in some tribal regions of Pakistan. Once you investigate its administration you very quickly notice that the theological link is quite tenuous, but the tribal one is quite strong. Islam may be invoked, but authority in these societies is dervied from tribal 'social contracts' (cf the infamous Zina Law).

One of the more troubling byproducts of this situation is an inability amongst many Muslims to confront Islam's limitations or defficiencies. Now I should stress this is not a uniquely Muslim phenomana. Every community, howsoever defined, suffers from the same problem. But that mere fact doesn't justify us Muslims exhibiting this failing, even if we are under particularly harsh pressure to 'prove' to the world that we are civilised and civil and nice. Something needs to be done to address this issue, something in the way of honest, tolerant and pluralist debate. Ok, I'll shut up now.

• Hear I speak principally of Islam's dominant streams - Sunni and Shia Islam. No doubt this is an exclusionist take. But I suppose many Muslims would consider members of one of the smaller sects Kaffirs, so for present purposes the exclusion can suffice, albeit uncomfortably. ** The 'documents' were often bones and skins. Remember this was before the internet or the printing press.

Haha I like that, Prof Iqbal of Iqbalistan perhaps? Well even if you invoke spirituality, and of course you can do that, the point I was making is that you will have to deal with issues outside that spirituality. I mean you can view that as merely a matter of practicality, but it's pretty important.

It's also worth bearing in mind that our planet has a lot of non Muslims in it who don't share our, your spirituality. Save all of us becoming anthropologists, if humanity is to get along we will have to embrace a secular approach to social issues.

Hi Professor Iqbal Khaldun,

You wrote:

Matters of this world usually require responses ‘from this world’. Matters of religion and spiritually are relatively ineffective in this regard. To put it crudely, to build a car you don’t require an understanding of the Bhagavat Gita

Well, I can tell you that this world exists through the spiritual world. Hence, matters of this world are in urgent need of responses from the spiritual world. So, now you go off and reconstruct the foundations of your study (epistemology) ....erm ...of anthropology.

Professor,

When I say spirituality, I mean something quite comprehensive.

However, let's approach it on your terms...

There is no problem embracing a secular approach for those who want to embrace it. But what about those who don't want to embrace it, how should we perceive them? Backward?

You said: if humanity is to get along we will have to embrace a secular approach to social issues

How did you work that out? You just don't see (through your anthropology) how a secular approach to social issues may perhaps be hell for some people (or those people don't count?).

Why do so many Muslims want Sharia law, when the State of Israel does not use Halacha law (Jewish analogue of Sharia)?

Professor Iqbal, You said: "Really all I am saying is that the public sphere, the area of a society common to all ought to be as inclusive and pluralist as possible"

How can you be inclusive and pluralist where you have, for example, the conventional approach of multi-parties formed along different ideological lines? At the end of the hoo-haa - by virtue of majority support, only one party will preside over the society, will mostly help shape its norms and values. In consequence, and naturally this will marginalise other ideological adherents...cryptically moving on to brew "social misfits". Alas, (social) classes will emerge, whence some people are foremost and others are disadvantaged (note: a direct outcome of the secular socio-political approach).
I hope you don't begin to see me as an anarchist. But I think there is some very important philosophical as well as practical point here for the secularist to address, or at least to admit.

When all is said and done, where does the inspiration to re-dress the underpriviledged and disadvantaged comes from within the secular thought. Marx? The church is obviously gone, from whence come its inspiration to be inclusive and pluralist in the face of an exclusive and marginalising secular socio-political movement of thought?

Granted that we are able to brush these questions under the carpet?

The next progression is to promote the secular approach and spread it far and wide by virtue of the benefits and enjoyment it has afforded those who are practising it.

As we make this next step, surprise, surprise, the secularist approach began to receive a challenge from the Religious approach? What should be the "inclusive" response of the secular approach?

(Why always anonymous posts, he asks himself)

I think you raise a lot of important issues there. Ultimately people have to make decisions for themselves. You can't impose social mores on people, with some exceptions perhaps. So for eg I would oppose the French laws banning, inter alia, head scarves.

Really all I am saying is that the public sphere, the area of a society common to all ought to be as inclusive and pluralist as possible. The Islamic State of Pakistan, or the Jewish State of Israel fails this requirement because neither are secular.

This is not to say that people within their communities should be prevented to practice their own faiths. Of course not.

Frankly I'm struggling to understand this concept of secular approach being a hell for some people. Do you mean the type of 'secularism' you see in Turkey or, at times, in Algiers (where Islam has been overtly suppressed)? If so, I would say that is only a superficial, shadow of secularism. Or, to put it another way, a poor expression of secularism that is antithetical to other valued concepts such as democracy which something like secularism cannot 'live' without.

much of the important scientific, mathematical and medical knowledge came from Muslims. See muslimheritage.com for one. Yes, I know that this was centuries ago, but it is significant when people are saying that Muslims shouldn’t have medicine or hospitals, for example, as if they came from the West.

Don't you think, even for one moment that Islam needs reform? Muslims haven't, on your own admission, invented anything for centuries. Why not? Could it be that this totalitarian religion inhibits free inquiry, suppresses half the population and, where it can, severely punishes those who question it?

But no, you Muslims are content to be parasitical on the progress of the West, taking from the West all your modern inventions while continuing to stick rigidly to a centuries old dogma that was pretty reactionary even when it first came in. You won't listen to the Rushdies, the Manjis, the Taheris who want to inject a bit of common sense into your bigoted and benighted religion.

Kafir, Go ahead, invent it (i.e. good things (not bombs!)). I'll buy them off you and will go spend time with my family enjoying your invention. Use the money to do some more research on other things to invent. Let me know when you have the next invention. I am going to pray.

"Muslims haven’t, on your own admission, invented anything for centuries."

I didn't say that at all.

"Could it be that this totalitarian religion inhibits free inquiry, suppresses half the population and, where it can, severely punishes those who question it?"

Actually, the Quran frequently encourages people to seek knowledge and to investigate the natural world - which is why Muslims did make so many advances in scientific fields, and why Arabic was the lingua franca, while Europe was in the "Dark Ages". There are various reasons why Muslim countries aren't in the forefront of academia today, but it's not because the religion inhibits free inquiry. Through the course of history, some civilizations are more advanced than others in specific fields, but it's cyclic.The "superpowers" of yesterday are weak today, and the "superpower" of today won't hold that position forever.

As for that "suppression of half the population", I'm part of that half. I'm fine, thank you, and I don't need anyone like you speaking for me.

"Don’t you think, even for one moment that Islam needs reform?"

Let me try to write this as clearly as I can... MUSLIMS need reform (as do a lot of other people). Muslim COUNTRIES need reform (as do a lot of other countries). ISLAM, being the religion given us by our Creator, doesn't need reform. (Especially by the kinds of people who are talking about Islam needing reform.)

"...you Muslims are content to be parasitical on the progress of the West, taking from the West all your modern inventions..."

C'mon... Do you use any technology that you yourself didn't invent? Or that wasn't invented by someone in your country? Is the West is parasitical because it can't live without our oil?

George Carty,

I'm not an expert on Israeli law, but I know that about 3/4 of Israelis are "secular Jews". I think that Jewish law does apply at least in cases of marriage and divorce, the question of who is a Jew and who can be buried in Jewish cemetery, etc. And from time to time, there is quite a lot of tension between religious and secular Jews in Israel.

Like I say, I don't know that much about it, but maybe it's like many Muslim countries, where Islamic law is only applied in "personal status" cases - e.g., marriage and divorce, child custody, and inheritance.

Assalaamu alaikum,

Iqbal, you make some interesting points, not that I agree with your conclusion that a secular socety is the ideal. But these are just a couple of thoughts I had while reading your posts.

You mentioned that expatriates have different mosques, although there are common ones. Obviously, I've had different experiences, but the first thing I thought of was about churches in the U.S. I was living in NY state and knew this couple who had just moved down from Canada. They were very, kind, religious Christians, and they were eager to find a church where they would feel comfortable, so they just tried a different church every Sunday. They were amazed to find that churches were either for blacks or for whites, and there was almost no overlap. They were white, so if they walked into a "black" church, they felt very strange. And if they walked into a "white" church, they also felt uncomfortable because it was so segregated. (It's been said that the most segregrated time in the U.S. is Sunday morning church-service time.)

So for me, this was one of the remarkable things about Islam - that people from all over the world came together and lined up next to each other to pray. (I became Muslim in the Middle East, though, so your observations may be true of the U.S., too.) I remember one day I was waiting in the car while my husband went to pray in a mosque in Dubai, and I just watched as people streamed in from all directions. There were people from all different areas of the world, wearing their traditional dress, and I always find it very moving. Of course, this is nothing compared to hajj.

I happen to be reading about the travels of ibn Battuta, and the author makes the point that Islam is the bond that allowed him to travel all over the Muslim world - from Africa to the Middle East to India to China, etc. - and to fit in with the people he met, even though they had different languages and different habits. But five times a day, they all made ablutions and prayed together...

I'm not naive; I realize that although Islam teaches us not to discriminate against people because of their color or national origin, the reality doesn't live up to the ideal. And I also realize that in certain societies, being in the same tribe is a strong bond. It's kind of like a huge extended family, and maybe there's nothing wrong with that, as long as it doesn't result in injustice.

If the West is so technologically sophisticated, why arent they self-sufficient, why the need to steal the resources of others ? What bottom feeders like cat aka kafir insist on is that they would have it all figured out, yet that doesnt stop these western parasites from bleeding the world dry. Theft and terror are not progress. Such a backward mindset is really nothing but the continuation of the "manifest destiny" many believe their trithiest diety has charged them with. Either way, unless they reform themselves and learn to live in peace with the rest of the world, their extinction is assured.

So, Dr M why the hell do you live here, use the Internet etc if the West is so bad. Muslim countries have oil. But that would be no use to them without Western know how, to invent machines that need it, and to extract it.

Without the West, Muslims would still be riding camels. Why not take a good look at yourself and your backward religion and try to improve it. Or get the hell out of Britain.

Oh and do get out of Iraq. Preferably on your power before your crimes catch up with you.

Kafir,

You are such an idiot. You said you read the Quran, Not!, YOu have read soem books, Not! You ahve read some hadith, Not! Do you know what bidah is? Can you give me a definition of what bidah is from the Quran and the Sunnah or are you the one to decide what Islam is?

"So Islam can’t change, everything was decided 1,000 years ago. Yet you Muslims hypocritically post on the internet, an ‘innovation’ (bidd’ha?), invented by non-Muslims, of course, like everything else."

Please kafir, since you are here to teach us about our religion, what is bidah? Give me the root word, what the Quran says about it, what Prophet Muhammed said about it, what his companions understood it to mean, and what the scholars of the past said about it.

You wont, nor can you do such a thing so please dont reduce it down to the very few things you do actually know and understand.

Kafir,

"Without the West, Muslims would still be riding camels."

Muslims still ride camels, and horses.

"Why not take a good look at yourself and your backward religion and try to improve it. Or get the hell out of Britain."

Kafir you are the only backward person here. Do you listen to yourself? You dont even feel embarassed about the things you say? Your such an underachiever and you know it. Dont try to use us to make yourself feel like your like actually has meaning.

Kafir,

"But no, you Muslims are content to be parasitical on the progress of the West, taking from the West all your modern inventions while continuing to stick rigidly to a centuries old dogma that was pretty reactionary even when it first came in."

Kafir, I believe you are the only parasite here. WHen was the last time you invented anything? Its only under achievers like you who make asinine statments like that. Your only contribution is that you parasitically take credit for things that you bought as opposed to things that you actually invented. Besides, I believe that the share holders, and R&D at Sony or Glaxo Smith, Kline, are for happier that Muslims pay for thier products legally, they are a business when all is said and done. You are the only demoguge here not them. Stop wasting your time here and go and re-invent the wheel.

So you Muslims are resorting to abuse, without actually addressing my arguments. I queried 'bidha' because I'm not sure if that is the right word/spelling, but as I understand it it means innovation - forbidden in Islam.

No Muslims, none at all, not just ordinary Muslims, have invented anything at all for centuries. Of course not all non-Muslims, myself included are original thinkers or artists or great scientists. But no Muslims whatsoever, have made any orgininal contributions to mankind whatsoever, for centuries. Nix. Nada. Bugger all.

Now answer that. What a useless bunch you are.

You have no arguments kafir aka cat. Your backward breed is most definetly in need of reformation. One where you can learn to be self-sufficient and learn clean up after yourselves. You're no better than a rabig canine urinating over itself the way you are now. As stated theft and terrorism is not progress, whether in your backyard or mine. Unless you give up your innate criminality and rejoin the human race as peacemakers, your kinds extinction is assured.

Doctors in Iraq are saving Iraqis using Western medicine, because Muslims have invented bugger all. You are posting on the internet, a Western invention - Muslims have invented bugger all.

I know full well that biddah means change in Islam, not technology - you're missing the point. It is by freeing the human mind from the constraints imposed by religion, especially a totalitarian, restrictive one, like Islam, that you release the human capacity for inventiveness. And, of course, you free half the population, women from the constrainst of the most misogynist force on the planet so they can think for themselves.

Technology doesn't come out of nowhere. It comes from a liberated brain. It is this liberation that Islam does not allow, and that is why Muslims have produced nothing original, nada, nix, zilch, bugger all, for centuries.

Kafir,

No dear you just translated bidah but you obviously dont know what it means. Do you know any arabic? You speak so authoritatively about Islam but get upset when you dont understand such concepts as bidah and when corrected you accuse me of being abusive. A computer is not a bidah, because bidah must be in innovation in the religion of Islam. Technology doesnt have anything to do with Islam, save some medical technology which might be haram like abortion but that isnt a bidah in and of itself. A bidah must take away from or be an addition to Islam. Duh!

As regards to the productiveness of Muslim how would you know what Muslims do and dont do? Are you in Iraq right now saving lives, delivery badies, curing the sick? So many Muslims who live in the most barren of all places on earth, the most underdeveloped places on the earth still manage to survive and it isnt because some Westerner graced them with the protestant work ethic. Our sense of worth isnt dependant upon how productive we are, if that were the case you would be the first to be hauled off into a cattle car.

Now you are here being lazy because you dont have the motivation or the will to do anything besides blog all dam day. Kafir get a life, really.

"What a useless bunch you are." "So you Muslims are resorting to abuse, without actually addressing my arguments."

Practice what you preach, or do your values not teach you that. I feel sorry for you kafir, you are crumbing under your own hubris.

Flanstein - a voice of sanity at last. Expect a lot of abuse.

Are people posting here moderate? Not by our standards, certainly, but perhaps by the standards of Islam.

I've got a lot of admiration for Manji, Taheri and the handful of other Muslim reformers, but if this lot are in any way representative, reform of Islam will never happen.

They don't seem to be able to grasp the really basic point that it is the very freedom of the West - something that they despise - that allows them to spout their 7th century nonsense here with imputinity. If ever Christianity became muscular again, Muslims living in the West would really have something to complain about instead of the 'Islamophobia' (= legitimite criticism) that they whine about at the moment.

Kafir,

Much to your chagrin, the biggest challenge to Muslims will never be Christianity. The pagan Arabs gave us a btter run for our money. If the only thing muscular Christianity can offer us is death or incarneration, as you can already see "We Are Not Afraid." Even in death we are victorious. This is another difference between Muslims and disbelievers, after this world, thats it for you people. You have absolutely nothing to look forward to. No wonder you computers and cell phones mean so much to you.

Didnt Bible Jesus say that he "wasnt of this world?" Didnt he also say that it would be easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than it would be for a wealthy man to do the same? Its nice how your liberated minds have allowed you to change your beleifs to accomdate your lusts and arrogance. I hope it serves you will in the long run.

DOnt bother responding, I know what your response will be... thanks kafir for my computer, even though my mother bought it for me, thanks for my cell phone, even though my husband pays my bill, thanks for my vaccination, because in the end modern conviniences are far more important than religious values.

Flanstein,

"The underlying problem with Islam, observes Manji, is that far from spiritualising Arabia, it has been infected with the reactionary prejudices of the Middle East: “Colonialism is not the preserve of people with pink skin. What about Islamic imperialism? Eighty per cent of Muslims live outside the Arab world yet all Muslims must bow to Mecca.”

Can you please explain the above statment. Isnt it wonderful how we are patted on the head for adopting the ways of the West, including thier clothes, ways of government, language, and culture, to get ahead is this worldly life, but when we learn a few surah in Arabic simply to worship we become slaves to the Arabs. Charming!!!

Kafir,

Do you really think you can come to a "moderate" islamic blog and change their minds with facts and logic? [snip - Yusuf]. If it is to survive in the modern world, islam MUST reform - yet it should be clear to you now that there is no chance of that happenning.

The question we come to is what next? Put up with the unending violence, terror and bigotry perpetrated by the "religion of peace" and its adherants. or do we publicly face the problem head on? As soon as more leaders start to Get It (like Blair) the sooner we can sleep in our beds without fear.

As Irshad Manji says: "muslims have a supremacy complex — and that’s dangerous”. This, she contends, is true even among moderates. “Literalists” who consider the Koran the “perfect manifesto of God” have taken over the mainstream.

The underlying problem with Islam, observes Manji, is that far from spiritualising Arabia, it has been infected with the reactionary prejudices of the Middle East: “Colonialism is not the preserve of people with pink skin. What about Islamic imperialism? Eighty per cent of Muslims live outside the Arab world yet all Muslims must bow to Mecca."

Christians and Jews have managed to keep their religion and adapt and innovate. Islam falls behind in just about every way. It is a failure.

Your prophet said that Muslims are the 'best of peoples'. Yet the non-oil economy - and it is Western technology that makes the oil valuable - of the entire Arab world is equivalent to that of Finland. Books translated into Arabic over the last 1000 years - same number as translated into Spanish in one year.

Muslims are not the best of peoples. So what went wrong? The truly humble, and Jesus was humble, acknowledge their own fault and put it right. Islam is a triumphalist religion, arrogant and programmed for victory. It doesn't know how to handle failure.

But failure is staring you in the face.

Flanstien,

"These people revere a “prophet” who had sex with a NINE YEAR OLD for crying out loud, nothing is going to change their minds."

And another thing, only kafirs have sex with nine year olds for crying out loud. Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) married a six year old Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr (radiyallahu anhu), and consumated their marriage when she was nine. Umm-Muminoon as she was called, stayed married to the Prophet until his death. She was the Prophets favorite wife though she often felt jealously of Khadijah bint Khuwalid (radiyallahu anhu) because of Prophet Muhammed fondness for her even after her death. SHe was renouned for her intelligence, literate, schooled in Quran and poerty, expert on the Sunnah of her husband, noted for her knowledge of the history of the Arabs, and was an authority of Islamic law.

So please dont portray my personal role model and the role model of all Muslim women, as some hapless victim because she was far from being anyones' victim. If you knew even a little bit about who she was, her life, her role as the wife of the Prophet and leader of the Muslims, you wouldnt be speaking so contemptuously about her life with her husband and her people.

Now the next time you bring up Aisha, please come with some hadith and Quran because the sirah doesnt depend on your assumptions or mine.

only kafirs have sex with nine year olds for crying out loud. Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) married a six year old Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr (radiyallahu anhu), and consumated their marriage when she was nine.

Hang on? What, pray, is the difference between having sex with a nine year old and 'consummating a marriage' with her. Mohammed had sex with a nine year old and that's that. The 'marriage' is neither here nor there, nor is Aisha's subsequent actions. Having sex with a nine year old is something for which a 50 plus man would these days get locked up, and rightly so.

So come on then, out with it. You revere a prophet who had sex with a child.

WA Ann. Thanks for your comments. I agree with you on those points re the inclusivity of the diaspora. It reminds me of what Malcolm X said when he returned from Mecca. How he ate and slept with Muslims from around the world. It opened his eyes to a more inclusive, pasifist approach to the civil rights struggle.

I don't think secularism is as much an ideal as it is the most practical compromise. Especially in complex, populated societies, where even within religions there are a multitude of differences. I should also note that secularism isn't a panacea for all the world's ills. It's but one ingredient, albeit a very important one.

Now, oe point of clarification. It's not the case that a secular society precludes religiousity. At the very least it ought not to. As mentioned before, what I advocate is a secular approach to the public domain - to the courts and law, the state craft, etc.

Re Anon: your comments string some rather large bows. Let's take one example. You say that a secular society would lead to minorities being marginalised by the 'tyranny of the majority'. So are you advocating something other than democracy?

In Sudan and Pakistan, countries which are under the Sharia, minorities experience some of the worst forms of abuse, even extermination in the case of Darfur. So even if you were correct, I don't see how what you are saying provides any solutions. As I have repeated before, this is not to say that only Sudan and Pakistan should be condemned (say, as opposed to the US, Israel or Colombia). Not at all. But as Muslims we have a duty to address these issues.

Actually Iqbal, Pakistan and Sudan's human rights records have never particularly good, with or without Sharia. It seems to me that modern day nation states are not particularly concerned about human rights, given the widespread violation of these protocols. Just a look at the actions of "liberators" in Iraq should be enough to call for a totally new convention to be signed by all. Trouble is, who keeps an eye on who, how and when. As for the kitty litter aka kafir and her boytoy fecalstein, its always amazing at how much nazis and their filthy zionist cousins have in common.

It’s always been that way, so let sleeping dogs lie? That’s a terrible argument. Once you have a religious state you necessarily exclude those who don’t belong to that religion, and impose a specific interpretation on those within it (‘you’ here being those who dictate the terms of the community’s social contract). Islam has and is being used to exclude and even punish the ‘kafirs’. In both the Sudan and Pakistan Islam has been used as political tool by elites to oppress non-Muslim minorities. These are complex situations. It is too simplistic to just say ‘Islam is to blame’. But it is equally simplistic to say ‘Islam plays not part’.

Once faith, the most intimate and personal of experiences, becomes part of state craft it is pliable to abuse. To repeat myself yet again, no, Islam or religion per se is not the only source of such abuse. But as I argued before that is no argument to avoid dealing with the role our religion plays in that abuse. For example, we have to honestly ask ourselves whether Islam adequately addresses women’s rights, homosexuals, etc. If it doesn’t then we need to consider reforms. I agree human rights are being violated all around. But it really is no solution to merely say ‘everyone’s doing it so why beat up on us, leave us alone’. Yet a lot of Muslims are happy to say just that.

Can I just say one more thing. There’s so much reactive commentary in forums like this. There’s this denial complex amongst some (ie not all, or many, but some) that provides no solutions at all.

We’ve been brought up to cherish our faith. So when anyone criticizes anything even vaguely related to it, it is quite natural to feel offence, or rush to defend it. We need to guard against such a reaction, because we risk losing a great opportunity to learn and develop as human beings and as a people. So back to Rushdie, as mentioned before, it is important to consider his comments seriously. Not just dismiss them and bury our heads in the sand.

Iqbal,

Do you really believe that everything that happens in Muslims countries are inspired by the Quran and the Sunnah? I mean come on now, there is power, money, politics, everything. Lets be real here are the Pakistanis known for having the most ilm? Come, you know what Pakistanis are like.

In regards to the Sudan, there are killing enough Muslims for me to know that there is something else at stake. After all arent we Muslims only about Darul Harb vs. Darul Islam? Lol... Our jahil kills me.

Kafir,

"Christians and Jews have managed to keep their religion and adapt and innovate. Islam falls behind in just about every way. It is a failure."

No they havent.

"Your prophet said that Muslims are the ‘best of peoples’. "

I need you to provide the hadith for that one. Assuming that it actually exist does best mean the wealthiest or the most technologically advanced? Do all those things eqaul goodness and peity?

"The truly humble, and Jesus was humble, acknowledge their own fault and put it right. Islam is a triumphalist religion, arrogant and programmed for victory. It doesn’t know how to handle failure."

Please dont talk about humility because all you value is material wealth and accumulation. DOnt mix the two and drag bible Jesus into this. He was always a poor man and lived off the advances of the Roman occupiers.

"You revere a prophet who had sex with a child."

I revere a Prophet who had sex with his wife, who in fact, according to Sharia was above the age of discernment. Depending on the woman or man, it will be at 9, 14, or which ever age puberty sets in.

In zealously seeking to 'defend' their faith, the individuals on this forum are closing their eyes to the reality that there are challenges to be dealt with in terms of their own understanding of their faith community. They are also, sadly, lowering themselves to the level of those they seek to rebut and doing disservice to the very notion of civil discourse. I've seen this tendency often on this blog, and it's very disheartening.

I hope that doesn't include me. But if it does all I can say is I'm keen to discuss these issues seriously. Not just get involved in personal attacks. Although I don’t mind having an honorary Professorship, so long as it’s not from Harvard Law School ;-).

No of course not Bikhair. And what is this supposed to mean: "Come, you know what Pakistanis are like."? As I've taken pains to note more than once now, one cannot simplistically just blame Islam. Yes, there is more to the situation in Sudan and Pakistan than just Islam. A lot more in fact. But I think 'Islam' does play a role, and we're having a forum about Islam. Why this refusal to self-reflect on matters of faith?

As for Muslims being killed in Sudan, yes Muslims have died in Sudan. There are non-Muslim militant groups in Sudan who have committed atrocities, but there is more to their militancy than just these acts. Much the same thing could be said about Hamas or Hezbollah. It is too simplistic to label these groups terrorists. All of this reminds me of some of my family's friends, notably the middle-aged men folk. Specifically, their refusal to accept the suffering of peoples other than Muslims. I've met more than a few of this type who assure me that the killing of Christians or gang rape of women in Pakistan is a Zionist conspiracy. Now I should note these people are exceptions not the norm. But they also happen to be well educated, middle class professionals. Many of them are fathers. There's something troubling about a soul that cannot even accept the blemishes of their belief system, let alone stand criticism of it.

I'm sorry to ramble on about this issue. I must surely read like someone on a mission to debunk mainstream Islam. What I am trying to do (of course whether I do is for others to decide) is promote critical and skeptical thinking about our religious tradition. Now, more than ever, we need to do that. Why? Because, inter alia, when a minority such as ours is challenged the way it is, and many of us understandably feel insecure, it is very easy for otherwise absurd or anathematic traditions to be swept under the carpet. Sometimes I think we do this as a knee jerk reaction to pre-empt Western criticism of our faith, criticism which is more often than not disingenuous and does not seek to assist our understanding of ourselves. Nevertheless, amongst ourselves, we must begin the long road of self assessment and improvement.

I revere a Prophet who had sex with his wife, who in fact, according to Sharia was above the age of discernment. Depending on the woman or man, it will be at 9, 14, or which ever age puberty sets in.

You revere a Prophet who had sex with a nine year old. No civilised person would give a stuff whether they were 'married' or not, like poor little Aisha had any choice. Your paedophile prophet will have permanently damaged this little girl - she could never have children, not to mention the psychological damage. Yet your religion has brainwashed you such that you think this is OK.

Really this 'marriage' is all you need to know about Islam to reject it. Imagine Jesus violating a child.

The likes of Kafir are testament to the great akhlaq of the Prophet Muhammad (sallalahu 'alei wa salam), and it is no secret that, we all fall short on this forum. Can you imagine how this lady (Kafir cat) can be so incapable of thought (not because she dislikes Islam, I have met and have many non-muslim friends who dislike Islam - yet are thoughtful and discerning in their analysis) ....however, can you imagine how thick Kafir is, there were even worse desert Arabs at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), and the Prophet (peace be upon him) was able to reach into their psyche and restore sanity - doing so with the best of akhlaq at all times.

The biographers of the prophet (peace be upon him) all mentioned that he (peace be upon him) never directed an abusive word to anyone, he never interrupted anyone. And once the Jews came to his house and started playing with words of the salams (i.e. peace be upon you) in order to insult the Prophet (peace be upon him), ...on seeing this, Aisha, the mother of believers, got very angry and gave them some good rounding - firing back words at them. The Prophet (peace be upon him) turned to Aisha and said, "Gently, gently, Oh Aisha. Verily Allah loves gentleness in all matters, The Prophet (peace be upon him) returned their "greeting" by saying "wa alaykum" i.e. "and upon you be (peace or whatever you intend)". This hadith is reported in Bukhari by Aisha herself (May God be pleased with her).

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Mulaika:

'Aisha said that the Jews came to the Prophet and said, "As-Samu 'Alaikum" (death be on you). 'Aisha said (to them), "(Death) be on you, and may Allah curse you and shower His wrath upon you!" The Prophet said, "Be calm, O 'Aisha ! You should be kind and lenient, and beware of harshness and Fuhsh (i.e. bad words)." She said (to the Prophet), "Haven't you heard what they (Jews) have said?" He said, "Haven't you heard what I have said (to them)? I said the same to them, and my invocation against them will be accepted while theirs against me will be rejected (by Allah). "

I think we need a bit of that with this pathetic lady. Her dislike of Islam is NOT a problem, and can never be.... however, it her far reaching idiocy, incoherence, superiority complex, confused psychology and unintelligence that we need to manage. And we need to do so without degenerating to reactionary mode of behaviour and without using abusive language :). I know it is difficult, but these are our Islamic standards. So, please me have the last reaction as contained here. Astaghfirulah.

However, I think general seemingly abusive comments such as those from DrM are correct, because they portray facts and not personal abuse. The truth must be spoken.

Allah knows best.

And here are some of the way of our exemplar, how the Prophet (peace be upon him) handled ignorance/arrogance (to say the least), and those in need. So, we can give Kafir and her likes a break.

Narrated 'Aisha:

A man asked permission to enter upon the Prophet. When the Prophet saw him, he said, "What an evil brother of his tribe! And what an evil son of his tribe!" When that man sat down, the Prophet behaved with him in a nice and polite manner and was completely at ease with him. When that person had left, 'Aisha said (to the Prophet). "O Allah's Apostle! When you saw that man, you said so-and-so about him, then you showed him a kind and polite behavior, and you enjoyed his company?" Allah's Apostle said, "O 'Aisha! Have you ever seen me speaking a bad and dirty language? (Remember that) the worst people in Allah's sight on the Day of Resurrection will be those whom the people leave (undisturbed) to be away from their evil (deeds)."

Narrated Anas:

I served the Prophet for ten years, and he never said to me, "Uf" (a minor harsh word denoting impatience) and never blamed me by saying, "Why did you do so or why didn't you do so?"

Narrated Anas bin Malik:

A bedouin urinated in the mosque and the people ran to (beat) him. Allah's Apostle said, "Do not interrupt his urination (i.e. let him finish)." Then the Prophet asked for a tumbler of water and poured the water over the place of urine.

Narrated Abu Musa:

Whenever a beggar or a person in need came to the Prophet, the Prophet would say "Help and recommend him and you will receive the reward for it, and Allah will bring about what he will through His Prophet's tongue

Narrated Masruq:

Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned Allah's Apostle saying that he was neither a Fahish nor a Mutafahish. Abdullah bin 'Amr added, Allah's Apostle said, 'The best among you are those who have the best manners and character.'

Narrated Jabir:

Never was the Prophet asked for a thing to be given for which his answer was 'no'.

Narrated Abu Hazim:

Sahl bin Sa'd said that a woman brought a Burda (sheet) to the Prophet. Sahl asked the people, "Do you know what is a Burda?" The people replied, "It is a 'Shamla', a sheet with a fringe." That woman said, "O Allah's Apostle! I have brought it so that you may wear it." So the Prophet took it because he was in need of it and wore it. A man among his companions, seeing him wearing it, said, "O Allah's Apostle! Please give it to me to wear." The Prophet said, "Yes." (and gave him that sheet). When the Prophet left, the man was blamed by his companions who said, "It was not nice on your part to ask the Prophet for it while you know that he took it because he was in need of it, and you also know that he (the Prophet) never turns down anybody's request that he might be asked for." That man said, "I just wanted to have its blessings as the Prophet had put it on, so l hoped that I might be shrouded in it."

Narrated 'Abdullah bin Zam'a:

The Prophet forbade laughing at a person who passes wind, and said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then he may embrace (sleep with) her?" And Hisham said, "As he beats his slave"

Narrated Abu Dhar:

That he heard the Prophet saying, "If somebody accuses another of Fusuq (by calling him 'Fasiq' i.e. a wicked person) or accuses him of Kufr, such an accusation will revert to him (i.e. the accuser) if his companion (the accused) is innocent."

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "Whoever does not give up false statements (i.e. telling lies), and evil deeds, and speaking bad words to others, Allah is not in need of his (fasting) leaving his food and drink."

Narrated Al-Laith:

'Aisha said "The Prophet entered upon me one day and said, 'O 'Aisha! I do not think that so-and-so and so-and-so know anything of our religion which we follow."'

correction:

However there could be exceptions where there factors that mitigate “puberty and sanity”, (like disability, social issues,etc).. such factors may prevent a marriage contract to go ahead.

"[T]he Prophet (Muhammed) married her (Aisha) when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death)." (Hadith, Sahih Bukhari 7:62:64)

And no, she wasn't exceptionally mature for her age:

Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet (Muhammed), and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me." (Hadith: Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151)

If anything, because of better nutrition, girls in modern times reach puberty earlier.

I can remember being a nine year old girl, and the idea of a 50 year old man having sex with me at that age would have been utterly repulsive and perverted.

Hi Kafir,

Please quote your sources that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had sex with Aisha at the age of nine. I have actually never heard this before, it will be something for me to go check out.

At the same time, it worth bearing in mind that maturity in Islam and other religions is generally determined by "puberty and sanity", not age... As you can see, this is different from a secular order. However there could be exceptions where there factors that mitigate "puberty and age", such factors may prevent a marriage contract to go ahead.

However, if you give me your sources, I will go check it out with a scholar and give you a reply.

Peace.

A Woman For All Seasons: Aisha bint Abu Bakr

By Denise Halel

In the land of Arabia, a child was born, and this child grew into a remarkable and great Muslim—and her name was Aisha.

Through the centuries, there have been numerous accusations and theories to discredit Islam and its last Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh). Currently, one of the accusations against the noble character of the Prophet is about his marriage to young Aisha. The prophet’s marriage to Aisha at her young age was an exception and not a norm of his other marriages, although it was a norm in Biblical and Qur’anic times. Based on the culture at that time, no one saw anything wrong with the union between Muhammad (pbuh) and Aisha. The point is: Muhammad and Aisha lived in a society and culture that existed 1400 years ago, and we must not judge what he or others did based on the standards we have set today.

It is interesting to note that Aisha was already engaged to a man named Jubair Ibn al Mut’am inb ‘Adi before she become engaged to Muhammad (pbuh). Back then, society did not object to Aisha's engagement to Jubair. Jubair's parents broke the engagement because they feared that their son might convert to Islam.

In order to better understand the marriage between Aisha and prophet Muhammad (pbuh), in the light of Islam and life in the “modern” world, we will look at the life, character, and appeal of Aisha.

According to the historical records, Aisha was born in 614 C. E., after her parents had embraced Islam. She was the daughter of Umm Ruman and Abu Bakr (the first khalifa in Islamic history), a close friend, constant companion, and strong follower of the Prophet. Abu Bakr, who was well liked and respected for his vast knowledge and pleasant demeanor raised her. Muhammad (pbuh) was a frequent caller to their home from the early days of his mission.

The Prophet’s marriage to Aisha was an exceedingly happy one for both of them, and that this union was Divinely revealed: Hadith narrated by Aisha: Allah’s Apostle said (to me), “You were shown to me in a dream. An angel brought you to me, wrapped in a piece of silken cloth, and said to me, ‘This is your wife,’ I removed the piece of cloth from your face, and there you were. I said to myself. ‘If it is from Allah, then it will surely be.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 57)

Numerous sources disagree about the actual age of her marriage, but the fact remains that Aisha was quite young when she was wed to Muhammad (pbuh). The ceremony was simple, with Aisha clad in a wedding-dress made of fine red striped cloth. She did not seem restrained by the thought of being wed to the Messenger of God; in fact, Aisha maintained her natural cheerfulness and gaiety before and after her marriage.

It is difficult to imagine what life must have been like for young Aisha; suffice it to say, she was a generous soul and a patient one. She lived in poverty and hunger that often lasted for long periods of time. For days no fire would be lit in her sparsely furnished room for cooking or baking bread and they would live on dates and water.

Muhammad (pbuh) married a number of other women, not due to reasons of sexuality, but rather due to several other reasons including: furthering the cause of Islam, strengthening the ties of kinship, and helping a woman in need. During the early years of Islam many battles were fought and many men died. The Prophet married widows or women that had been abandoned and were in need of a home, to give them a place of respectability in the community and to assure that they were cared for. In the pre-Islamic days widows were not allowed to remarry freely, they were treated as possessions by the family and not as respected community members. The Prophet, by example, taught us that women are to be respected, are individual beings, and have the right to live their lives freely.

Gifted with tremendous intelligence, extraordinary wisdom, and formidable memory, Aisha was one of the Prophet’s most devoted pupils and followed his every action and example. She was skilled in medicine, poetry, mathematics, and speaking. Aisha was never too reserved or shy to ask questions; this in itself teaches us the importance of questioning that which we do not understand. As Muhammad’s (pbuh) wife and close companion, she gained insight and knowledge such as no woman has ever acquired, and during her ten years of marriage as the loving wife of Muhammad (pbuh), Aisha’s moral fiber was built in an ideal and exceptional manner. She was an eyewitness to a number of revelations and had a clear idea of the circumstances in which they were revealed.

Aisha did not study in any school, college, or university, yet professors and students of literature, law, and Muslim history study her eloquent words. She not only possessed great knowledge but also was active in education and social reform. Under her care and guidance, Aisha took boys and girls (some of them orphans) into her custody and educated them. She was a pioneer in promoting education and in particular the education of women.

Aisha, the wife of Muhammad (pbuh) was also a brave young politically active woman who was present on a number of battlefields, including the battles of Badr, Uhud, and Al-Khandaq, three major battles that shifted the balance of power into the hands of the Muslims. Aisha participated by bringing water to the Muslim warriors and tending to the wounded.

She also taught many things related to women, but many learned men, companions, and followers of the Prophet also benefited from her wisdom. Abu Musa al-Ashari once said, “If we companions of the Messenger of God had any difficulty on a matter, we asked Aisha about it.” It is the claim of Islamic scholars that without Aisha, half of the Ilm-I-Hadith (understanding and knowledge of the Hadith and Islam) would have perished. Because of the strength of her personality, she was a leader in every field in knowledge, in society, in politics, and in war. Aisha helped to preserve and protect the ways and behavior of Muhammad (pbhu), not only by embodying it herself, but also by teaching it to others.

As a teacher, Aisha had a clear and persuasive manner of speech and her power of oratory has been described in superlative terms by al-Ahnaf who said, “I have heard speeches of Abu Bakr and Umar, Uthman and Ali and the Khulafa up to this day, but I have not heard a speech more persuasive and more beautiful from the mouth of any person than from the mouth of Aisha.” Arwa Bin Zubair said,

“I did not find anyone more proficient than Aisha in the knowledge of the Qur’an, the Commandments of Halal (lawful) and Haram (prohibited). That is why even senior companions of the Prophet used to consult Aisha in resolving intricate issues.” Her significant example of being highly regarded especially among the men plays an important role in removing beyond a shadow of a doubt and uncertainties regarding women to be inferior to men in aspects of faith or false notions condemning women to be hindered from earning a high status in society, especially in terms of spiritual growth and morality.

Aisha lived in honor for almost fifty years following the death of the Prophet, most of this time was spent learning and acquiring knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Furthermore, she memorized the Revelation, understood it, and had her own script of the Qur’an written after the Prophet died. Aisha is deemed to be an authority for the interpretation of the Qur’an and as a transmitter of hadith (sayings of the Prophet). Her narration of at least 2,000 hadith (many of these pertaining to some of the most intimate aspects of personal behavior) gave Muslims valuable insights into the Prophet’s daily life and behavior, thus preserving the Sunnah of Muhammad (phuh). Aisha died in 678 C. E. and was buried beside other companions of the Prophet.

Aisha is proof positive that women can be more learned than men and can be the teacher of scholars; she can exert influence over men and women and, at the same time, be a loving source of joy and pleasure to her husband.

Although Aisha was a childless widow at a young age, she is known among Muslims as Mother of the Believers. Aisha was the most knowledgeable and pious Muslim woman of her time and continues to be a role model and source of inspiration for Muslims and non-Muslims around the world.

Sources: Ahmed, Sabeel, “Why Did Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) Marry Young Aisha, 1998. Asad, Khadija J., “The Role of Women in the History of Islam” Hameed, Shahul, “Aisha bint Abu Bakr” Kathir, Ibn, “Aisha bint Abi Bakr” Sirat-I-Aisha, on the authority of Tirmidhi.

Hi Kafir,

I see no sex in what you quoted above. But you claim the Prophet (Allah's peace and blessing be upon him) was having sex with Aisha when she was nine? This hadith doesn't mention sex. Is marriage consummationg the same as sex? Excuse my understanding, if I am misunderstanding the language. And if there were to be any authentic source that shows this, I would like to go and check it out with a scholar with a view to bringing you a reply or an explanation.

However, this subject of the Prophet's married to Aisha is not a new one, it has baffled "modern" minds for a long time. If I remember correctly Mary (Peace be upon here) was also "married" to Joseph at the age of 12 or so... as contained in the apocryphal writings of the Catholic church.

To the muslim mind, these social arrangments are not immoral. The criterion for immorality is not sentiments and changing times, rather we have to look into what the creator Himself considers immoral. To re-iterate, the barometer that Islam and other religion uses to measure marriage qualification is "puberty and sanity" along with other general social factors.

And in the case of Aisha, she was a fine and bright girl when the marriage was consummated. Inspite of the hadith you quoted, scholars disagree about her exact age at the time, but they ALL agreed based on historical accounts that she was FIT for marriage.

Peace.