Top Muslim Clerics in Canada Issue Fatwa Denouncing Terrorism

[Sahar]

That is only part of the picture, of course the western element might stretch to the technical sphere, like traffic system, but that is not what I was aiming at. Oxford scholars wisely point in the discourse of Sharia implementation, that even the most 'hardcore' regimes of the Muslim world, do not implement full Sharia and compromise with western elements, even within their parliament structure, out of sheer realism.

There is no compromise because what is rejected are the ideologies that contradict the Islamic one. Forming a parliament or elections in its modern form for example doesn't contradict any of the Islamic values as basically Islam didn't mention the details, such details are left for us and they change from time to another and from place to another, but the Islamic values are the same.

That is an optimistic look. but what changes in specific are you referring to?

I mean the different circumstances. The map of the world is completely different now, the foreign relations between nations are different...from how things were 700 years ago etc. That's why ijtihad is needed in the different times and ages as the scholars of Islam said.

 

[Sahar]

!400 years ago to a Goat herder no,to me yes,and to Mr Abdul who i see regulary who likes secularism,Mr Abdul is a Muslim who votes in Britains elections and to him adopting Islamic Government is radical Islam which he rejects and objects to.

So the so called "Mr Abdul" is your criterion, interesting.

 

[Caladan]

There is no compromise because what is rejected are the ideologies that contradict the Islamic one. Forming a parliament or elections in its modern form for example doesn't contradict any of the Islamic values as basically Islam didn't mention the details, such details are left for us and they change from time to another and from place to another, but the Islamic values are the same.

What im talking about are the many critics of fundamentalism who point that throughout history, even in the days when Islamic civilization flourished, there was no Muslim society that was managed solely by the laws of Islam. there was always a gap between the theoretical wording of the Muslim scholars, and the way in which the political power was actually manifested. also, in light of the great geographical and social differences between Muslim societies, there were always laws which emerged out of local custom on the side of the Islamic law. many say that in historical, and judicial terms, Sharia was never a reality.
another criticism of those who politicize Islam is that their ideologies are far from being purely Islamic. but that they are a hybrid used by them, a mixture of terms from Islam and liberal and totalitarian ideas of the 20th century.
the 'Islamic' constitution of Iran, that was led by Khomeini in 1979, is a mixture of western and Islamic patterns, and it cant be said to be 'Islamic'. Khomeini has showed that an Islamic state has an authority to ignore the rules of Islam even in central religious themes, like prayer, fasting and pilgrimage.
From Wiki: "Disputes within the Islamic Government compelled Khomeini himself to proclaim in January 1988 that the interests of the Islamic state outranked "all secondary ordinances" of Islam, even "prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokumat-e_Islami_:_Velayat-e_faqih_(book_by_Khomeini)

 

[Sahar]

Caladan, you made similar points in the past specifically in response to me. We had a similar argument before.
I read what Al Khomeni wrote about the walaytu-l-faiqih. What are the Western patterns that you are talking about?

I said this thousand of times, applying Islamic Shari'a was in its purest form during the Prophet's time and the rightly guided khulafa' times. Who are "critics of fundamentalism" exactly? I learn about Islamic history from its main Islamic sources and it is well established that there were times when Muslim rulers were away from Islamic Shari'a and there were times when they were closer. It varied from Khilafa to another. This is well-known. But it's absolutely meaningless to say Shari'a was never a reality. Because basically Islamic Shari'a is the teachings manifested in the Qur'an, the Sunnah of the prophet and the companions . To say Islamic Shari'a was never a reality, would mean that all that was never a reality and it would mean the Shari'a that I am actually practicing in my life and lives of many other Muslims are "never a reality" which is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Harshtotem]

Fatwa- is this a joke- are we really in this age discussing the consequences of a Canadian fatwa- on what- Terrorism- is that fear I smell- Its like Some people are to cozy in their 500000 cars they dont want what is happening in Irag and Afghanistan to happen there- so they trump up this weakling response-

What a bunch of hypocrits

 

[England my lionheart]

Fatwa- is this a joke- are we really in this age discussing the consequences of a Canadian fatwa- on what- Terrorism- is that fear I smell- Its like Some people are to cozy in their 500000 cars they dont want what is happening in Irag and Afghanistan to happen there- so they trump up this weakling response-

What a bunch of hypocrits

You are correct,who in their right mind would want whats happening in Iraq and Afghanistan,as for the weakling response,what in your opinion should be their response.

 

[Harshtotem]

live by the lofty ideologies they profess- this is the surest way of fighting Islamic Violence- but if your human rights record matches China's and Iran's and you still have a two types of citizens- you treat differently what the hell you expect more than this foolish fatwa

 

[England my lionheart]

live by the lofty ideologies they profess- this is the surest way of fighting Islamic Violence- but if your human rights record matches China's and Iran's and you still have a two types of citizens- you treat differently what the hell you expect more than this foolish fatwa

Two types of citizens? Human rights record? what is your source?,i think this Fatwa is great

 

[Harshtotem]

Look at canadas human rights records- talk about denying holocaust lets talk about denying slavery

 

[England my lionheart]

Look at canadas human rights records- talk about denying holocaust lets talk about denying slavery

Slavery was abolished in Canada in 1834 so whats your point?

 

[Harshtotem]

good it was abolished there so i guess it existed there in al the raw inhumane, demonic ways it was in the South- dont act like it was some sort of "soppY' slavery it was just as bloody and sickening

 

[England my lionheart]

good it was abolished there so i guess it existed there in al the raw inhumane, demonic ways it was in the South- dont act like it was some sort of "soppY' slavery it was just as bloody and sickening

Absolutely,it was a sad time in all of our history but that was prior 1834 ,interesting fact is though the Arab part of Slavery,well Slavery still goes on in that part of the world does it not.
Still i am mystified as to what this has to do with Muslim Clerics issuing a Fatwa denouncing Terrorism

 

[England my lionheart]

So the so called "Mr Abdul" is your criterion, interesting.

No Mr Abdul isn't my anything but he is an example of a lot of Muslims in the UK

 

[kai]

Islam is intrinsically political, Islam and politics are one and the same its a complete way of life. no?

 

[England my lionheart]

Islam is intrinsically political, Islam and politics are one and the same its a complete way of life. no?

I agree ,Islam is intrinsically political and the A-Z of a Muslims life but i think Qutbism is different,Qutb was an admirer of Dr Alexis Carrel a Darwinist eugenisist,Carrels book L'Homme,cet innconu (The Man,the unknown),what Qutb took from this book was not eugenics but Carrels assertion that Humans would be better suited by being guided by an elite group of intellectuals.

Iran springs to mind of a Country that employs this ,ie the Council of experts and this is how Qutb saw the cure for Mankind was the revival of Islam where there was no seperation between faith and Government,there should only be Sharia and that this should be achieved by any means possible.

Here Qutb shows a simmilarity to a certain Adolf Hitler and Ahmadinejad.

The Jews are behind materialism, animal sexuality, the destruction of the family and the dissolution of society. Principal among them are Marx, Freud, Durkheim and the Jew Jean-Paul Sartre. [18]

 

[England my lionheart]

The Muslim Brotherhood has a new leader Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Egypt's Brotherhood gets new leader interesting that an organisation that spawned many Islamists and Terrorists are still alive and kicking in Egypt,obviously the Muslim Brotherhood and Badie are Political and Radical and like Qutb and Al Banna an ex jaibird.

 

[dust1n]

I agree ,Islam is intrinsically political and the A-Z of a Muslims life but i think Qutbism is different,Qutb was an admirer of Dr Alexis Carrel a Darwinist eugenisist,Carrels book L'Homme,cet innconu (The Man,the unknown),what Qutb took from this book was not eugenics but Carrels assertion that Humans would be better suited by being guided by an elite group of intellectuals.

Iran springs to mind of a Country that employs this ,ie the Council of experts and this is how Qutb saw the cure for Mankind was the revival of Islam where there was no seperation between faith and Government,there should only be Sharia and that this should be achieved by any means possible.

Here Qutb shows a simmilarity to a certain Adolf Hitler and Ahmadinejad.

The Jews are behind materialism, animal sexuality, the destruction of the family and the dissolution of society. Principal among them are Marx, Freud, Durkheim and the Jew Jean-Paul Sartre. [18]

Marx, Freud, and Durkheim, sure.. bad people. But Sartre? Why would you hate Sartre?

 

[England my lionheart]

Because he was a big bad Philosopher

 

[TashaN]

Life is good!

 

[Mr Spinkles]

The Muslim Brotherhood has a new leader Al Jazeera English - Middle East - Egypt's Brotherhood gets new leader interesting that an organisation that spawned many Islamists and Terrorists are still alive and kicking in Egypt,obviously the Muslim Brotherhood and Badie are Political and Radical and like Qutb and Al Banna an ex jaibird.

A friend of mine learned Arabic and spent his undergraduate years studying in the Middle East, especially in Egypt. He didn't say the Muslim Brotherhood was the best thing in the world but he also said it is misunderstood in the West. Lots of people over there are part of it. He had a friend who basically told him he was part of the Brotherhood, without saying it explicitly, because if I remember correctly it is illegal. You can be arrested for trying to field candidates in elections and for possessing "anti-government literature". That is not democracy, and the Muslim Brotherhood is not the reason Egypt and other countries are not the cause of this. Egypt is a country whose president essentially has not been elected by the people for 50 years. The Brotherhood OTOH is one of a very few popular movements that opposes the undemocratic regimes in Egypt and elsewhere and virtually all of their activities are nonviolent political activism.

It seems to me it is the Egyptian president, the Saudi royal family, and the like, who have been standing in the way of liberty and democracy in the Middle East. And the West has supported them while worrying so much about groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, I don't imagine the Brotherhood is perfect but I suspect it's very easy for Westerners to not give them a chance, and the more I learn on this topic, the more it confirms my suspicion.