Since the passing away of the two major sheikhs of Sunni Islam in Saudi Arabia, Shiekh Bin Othaimeen and Sheikh Bin Baz, no one has been able to take their place. Their extremely conservative interpretation of Islam has gone unquestioned throughout the 1990s and until now. They were the ones that issued the religious decree that women should be banned from driving cars. They also prohibited women from several things; showing their faces in public, wearing pants, prioritizing education and even the inane issue of shaping their eyebrows.
The vacuum that was left by their passing has never felt so empty until recently. With the numerous sheikh fatwa shows and the everyday emergence of new news websites and forums, all these sheikhs have come out of the woodwork scrambling for fame. In the beginning everyone was following the old worn extremist track that Shiekh Bin Othaimeen had set down long before. It almost seemed like a new Islamic sect under Bin Othaimeen’s teachings was emerging, especially in the Central region. His word was last and no one dared to refute a fatwa of his.
Then Ahmed Al Ghamdi came out with a fatwa stating that it was alright for men and women to mix together. and it was like a wall has broken down and every sheikh suddenly got the guts to say what they really think. We have all heard about Shiekh Al Obeikan’s breastfeeding fatwa and then Shiekh Al Kalabani came out with a fatwa stating that music is allowed. The traditional stance on music is that it is prohibited and that if you listen to it melted iron will forever be poured into your ears come judgment day. So when Al Kalabani revoked that, he too drew major criticism and even accusations of intentional decadence. With Al Kalbani, he seemed to have “I’ve nothing to lose” attitude, after being fired from his prestigious position as the Imam of the Makkah grand mosque. Why he was fired, there are no factual reports but the strongest rumor is that it’s due to him openly opposing King Abdullah’s plan to include Shia shiekhs in the Council Assembly of Senior Ulema. And now it’s rumored that he not only became less of a conservative but that he had also changed his position on the inclusion of Shia Shiekhs.
This trio, Al Obiekan, Al Ghamdi, and Al Kalbani are being attacked by the same people that made them. Members from the Council Assembly of Senior Ulema and other conservative sheikhs are doing everything in their power, short of a death fatwa, to shut these three up. I know it’s crazy but breastfeeding an adult man is on par with gender desegregation and listening to music.
And then of course, you have our charming Shiekh Al Arefe making a fool of himself when he couldn’t keep his promise that his next show will be filmed at the Jerusalem mosque, and the Al Najaimi scandal when he was caught on camera mingling with women at the Women’s day conference in Kuwait, despite his support for an extreme gender segregation fatwa by sheikh Al Barack.
All this squabbling and desperate thirst for fame from sheikhs has led more and more Saudis to the conclusion that yes, sheikhs do make mistakes and you can disregard them. And this has never been so evident as it was last Friday, after a member from the Council, sheikh Saleh Al Fowzan, issued a fatwa that it is prohibited to be led in prayer by sheikh Al Kalabani and yet five thousand men showed up to Al Kalabani’s mosque here in Riyadh. The people of Saudi Arabia are finally starting to make up their own minds!
64 responses to “Saudi disillusionment with the religious establishment”
Your last sentence says it all:
“The people of Saudi Arabia are finally starting to make up their own minds!”
What a welcome relief!
Obviously you havent, hence you still wear face covering… wakey wakey.. rise and shine…
I hope you are well Suzie.. have a great day.. and Lead from the front.. You have immense power… and you know it… use it wisely..
Don’t you feel that the world today needs the divine guidance more than ever before? Is it not the time when servants of God are being drawn away from God, by the glamour of material world, more than ever before? If your conscience replies in the affirmative then please give due importance to the call of one who claimed to be sent by Allah (God) in order to re-establish the real and certain contact and relation of humans with Him.
O ye who believe! fear Allah as He should be feared; and let not death overtake you except when you are in a state of submission.
And hold fast, all together, by the rope of Allah and be not divided; and remember the favour of Allah which He bestowed upon you when you were enemies and He united your hearts in love, so that by His grace you became as brothers; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah explain to you His commandments that you may be guided.
And let there be among you a body of men who should invite to goodness, and enjoin equity and forbid evil. And it is they who shall prosper. (3:103-105)
[3:104] وَاعْتَصِمُوْا بِحَبْلِ اللّٰهِ جَمِيْعًا وَّلَا تَفَرَّقُوْا وَاذْكُرُوْا نِعْمَتَ اللّٰهِ عَلَيْكُمْ اِذْ كُنْتُمْ اَعْدَآءً فَاَلَّفَ بَيْنَ قُلُوْبِكُمْ فَاَصْبَحْتُمْ بِنِعْمَتِهٖۤ اِخْوَانًاۚ وَكُنْتُمْ عَلٰى شَفَا حُفْرَةٍ مِّنَ النَّارِ فَاَنْقَذَكُمْ مِّنْهَاؕ كَذٰلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ اللّٰهُ لَـكُمْ اٰيٰتِهٖ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُوْنَ
[3:104] And hold fast, all together, by the rope of Allah and be not divided;
and remember the favour of Allah which He bestowed upon you when you were enemies and He united your hearts in love, so that by His grace you became as brothers; and you were on the brink of a pit of fire and He saved you from it. Thus does Allah explain to you His commandments that you may be guided.
[3:104] اور اللہ کی رسّی کو سب کے سب مضبوطی سے پکڑ لو اور تفرقہ نہ کرو اور اپنے اوپر اللہ کی نعمت کو یاد کرو کہ جب تم ایک دوسرے کے دشمن تھے تو اس نے تمہارے دلوں کو آپس میں باندھ دیا اور پھر اس کی نعمت سے تم بھائی بھائی ہو گئے۔ اور تم آگ کے گڑھے کے کنارے پر (کھڑے) تھے تو اس نے تمہیں اس سے بچا لیا۔ اسی طرح اللہ تمہارے لئے اپنی آیات کھول کھول کر بیان کرتا ہے تاکہ شاید تم ہدایت پا جاؤ۔
[3:105] وَلْتَكُنْ مِّنْكُمْ اُمَّةٌ يَّدْعُوْنَ اِلَى الْخَيْرِ وَيَاْمُرُوْنَ بِالْمَعْرُوْفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِؕ وَاُولٰٓٮِٕكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُوْنَ
[3:105] And let there be among you a body of men who should invite to goodness,
and enjoin equity and forbid evil. And it is they who shall prosper.
[3:105] اور چاہئے کہ تم میں سے ایک جماعت ہو۔ وہ بھلائی کی طرف بلاتے رہیں اور اچھی باتوں کی تعلیم دیں اور بری باتوں سے روکیں۔ اور یہی ہیں وہ جو کامیاب ہونے والے ہیں۔
Guidance is good, if it is correct. After the Prophet died pbuh, false prophets arose en masse. They created false qurans. They saw the power islam had and wanted to co-opt it for their own purpose. What makes us believe we our times are any different? The fact that someone calls himself a Sheik does not mean he is one. On the day of judgement each of us will be called to account for our actions and to say I thought I was right because Sheik so-and-so said so will not be sufficient to save us. We are commanded to read the Quran and ponder and strive and search out the answers to the best of our ability. When we die, Allah will tell us who was right.
this is so true!
Osama Bin Laden and Bin Jehaman both were infulanced by Bin Othameen and Bin Baz!!
and those 2 shaikhs were infulanced by Mohammad Bin Abdulwahab!!
many generations of WTF Fatwas.. that kept us backward!!
I always hated Fatwas and Sheikhes ever since I was a kid because all they do is brainwash people and tell them what to do as if they are too stupid to know whats the best for them!!!
but now after all those controversial fatwas finally people are speaking their mind
رب ضــــــارة نافعة””
”Every cloud has a silver lining ”
Sheikh Saleh al Bidar was praying in Makkah a few years ago, when he didn’t pray the next Ramadan, does that mean he has been fired too? Please don’t mix up fact with fiction. Al Kalbani has never been officially imam in Makkah letalone to be fired. The same as Al jihani, Al Bidar and others, he has been asked to pray Tarawih in Makkah and that’s it. He, himself, Al Kalbani in an interview said I’ve been pointed to be in Makkah during Ramadan and pray Al tarawih. So himself never said I was pointed as imam in Makkah.
If you don’t already know, it is not uncommon for sheikhs to move around mosques during Ramadan to pray Tarawih and Tahjod. They even move through countries – You will find Saudi sheikhs in mosques in the UAE etc. Once we had here in California a well known Kuwaiti sheikh praying tarawih. No one fired him even though he didn’t show up after Eid!
It was a big deal when he was made Imam of the Grand Mosque so I think you might want to rethink your comment. All the news sources I’ve read called him Imam Al Haram and he himself when appointed likened it to Obama’s presidency on account of them being the first black men in their posts. Also all the news sources stated that he was fired. Click on those I’ve linked to his name and rumors to see for yourself.
It’s just making hullabaloo of nothing when you or anyone else links the US presidential election with pointing someone for leading tarawih prayers in Makkah. In those link, they also said he is not najdi. Why they didn’t mention this about Al Jihani who is not najdi too? (Al Jihani pray tarawih and tahajod in Makkah too). Is Al Ghazawi (who is officially imam in Makkah) Najdi? No he is not as you know, yet it’s not mentioned. Someone like you with a critical mind should look to the big picture overall without just being picky in picking! BTW if you forgot, Bilal (mo’athen the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and upon all the prophets) was black!
No did not forget. What I meant is the first Saudi black Imam of the Grand Mosque and I could not care less what color anyone is, but sheikh Al Kalbani himself made a big deal and I thought it was fun how an ultra-conservative (at the time) would look to and compare himself with a USA president.
lets hope there is at the very least a diversity of opinions from the Sheik’s. rather then everyone being cowed and forced to follow the most extreme one…
Saudi Arabia needs to open up before it’s too late.
I can only imagine Saudi trying to do what Dubai is doing. tripping over itself worrying about the most mundane social issues…
For Allah’s sake a Woman can’t drive…
not to mention the only two places i can think that have/had mutawa was Afghanistan and Gaza… really great places eh?….
LOL! Well Said Abdullah!
HI there Khalid, I hope everyone is well..
I was interested to read the subject of Bilal and acceptance Mohammed took slaves. The life of Mohammed is nothing to be admired as far as this is concerned. Some would say not unlike the rest or even the whole of his life.. sigh… But folk are welcome to their opinion I suppose…
However, if Mohammed actually conducted himself and led fighters in raids on caravans, robbing, stealing, looting, killing all the men, taking captive all the women… We know of killings, rape, slaughter into the hundreds and thousands… Innocent men and women… Is this really a good path to follow? It seems not.. hence this blog.. hence the fight against the suppression.. The veil, The Niqab, driving, mobile phones, travel permissions, employment, the list is endless… and it derives from a male dominated society which suppresses… Isolates… segregates… Gender inequalities..
The changes are coming and coming fast… And it will be the good women of Islam who benefit… without doubt…
Have a good day…
I just wonder saudiwoman, what I see of the reaction of 5,000 people (men only?) praying with him is perhaps their way of supporting his disapproval of Shia sheikhs? Call me skeptical…and where are the sisters praying?
It’s not common for women to perform Friday prayer. No I think you got it wrong because sheikh Al Kalbani hasn’t spoken publicly about Shia since he was fired, while at the same time he has been making statements about music almost on a weekly basis.
saudiwomen allowing blasphemy and calling herself Muslim……………..indeed living in dajjalic times and indeed majority of followers of dajjal will be women and jews
@UN “will be women and jews?” Huh? You are reading another post it seems; speaking in tongues perhaps!
Hi Marcus, thanks for asking, yeah, it’s jolly good over here. I hope you’re having a wonderful time too. Actually Bilal wasn’t a slave at this time. Abu Bakor bought him to set him free. It was common at that time among the rich Muslims (who were few) to pay money to set slaves free.
It seems to me you didn’t read that much about the historical background of this particular period –including the Roman and Persian empires in the 5-6 AD. I’ve read over 20 books (in both English and Arabic) about this particular period; I’ll be happy to share the little I know about it with you. It’s off the scope of this post, so let’s exchange it offline! If you’d be interested, please feel free to ask Eman for my email.
Have a good one, and I look forward to hearing from you!
Many thanks for the response.
I am well also..
However.. He was a slave non the less, I am sure you will agree via the facts we clearly find within Islamic scripture.
I understand the times.. I may not be as qualified as some folk on the subject, I must admit, but, I understand some of the customs and ways of life for the people who lived in and around the whole Middle Eastern region, it does not take Einstein 😉
I am not insulting anyone, and I sort of think someone thinks there has been blasphemy… Not sure from whom… But anyway.. I dont see how anything I could have said would be classed as Blasphemy, everything I was mentioned is found within Islamic scripture.. Not anywhere else…
You Mention Abu Bakr, I do hope I have the same chap as you.. Lets not confuse matters any more than they are already hahaha.. 😉
So, Abu was the first convert if I am not mistaken… The side kick to Mohammed.. ??
Is this the same guy, that after Muhammad died, and when some tribes rebelled.. (they did not want any of it).. , and in return, Mr Bakr fought the “Ridda wars” against these Arab tribes to establish Islamic rule over all of Arabia. . . . Nice.. Then, Invading Sassanid Persian and Byzantine Empire conquering the lands of Syria and Iraq by the sword, .Abu Bakr collected the verses of the Quran final book read by Muslims today. Phew… He was a busy chap..
Love is the key.
It is best to ignore a pest like you
thanks for the response though… really is greatly appreciated..
It is so appreciated I ask you, directly, please, go on, be a devil, do it again..
Wrong approach there brother. It was these pests who embraced Islam. It was people who shared the same hate who started the religion. They need to be told. Tell them.
Marcus, the info you have on The Prophet is wrong, if what you are saying is that he conducted raids on caravans et al. The only documented incident of raids on the commercial caravans of the tribes of Makkah, were conducted by Abu Jandal. The history of which is that his brothers were torturing him because of he embraced Islam. He then managed to escape from there and came to Madinah to seek refuge and lead the life he wanted to. Only to have the Makkah people follow him to negotiate his going back with them as was finalised in a deal between the Muslims in Madinah and the then non-believers living in Makkah. This was done at the time of the Hudaibiah agreement.
Abu Jandal was tied up with chains and beaten regularly and burnt with coal. He managed to escape once again and sought to resort to this method only to secure his release from the people of Makkah. This was entirely his own deed. But the method was so effective that others joined him and it eventually became a force of 72 strong. The tribes in Makkah got the message and arranged for them to seek their own path, letting go of the damage caused. So legally, whatever they had done, was written off. A pardon of sorts.
Abu Bakar, the person you mention in your below post with contempt, to which I could not reply there, was not a side kick. He was a companion. And served the Prophet (PBUH) with all sincerety the example of which is not to be found since. The reason why during the caliphate of Abu Bakar, there were wars, is also perhaps not known to you in detail. The reason he fought the tribes were very genuine. One is that the tribes had refused to contribute the Zakat. Zakat, has been mentioned as one of the most important deeds, next only to saying prayers regularly. Both the Zakat and prayers have been mentioned as non-negotiables 240 times in the Quran. Abu Bakar, was just upholding the instructions. The second reason was the mushrooming of false claims of Prophethood, which is not only direct negation to the Quran, but also caused confusion to those who had recently embraced Islam. The Prophet (PBUH) in his address at the time of the only Hajj he performed, had clearly mentioned to the Muslims to adhere to the Quran and the Sunnah and not deviate. And also on claimants to the Prophethood, which ended at Muhammad (PBUH). As the first Caliph, Abu Bakar did what was necessary to save the religion as was his duty.
Islam was spread by the Prophet (PBUH) because of his teachings and practicing his teachings by leading from the front. His character is mentioned in all the books of history and can be referred to there. You are most welcome for any further discussions. Just please try to exercice your right to common sense in tandem to the right of expression and be respectful. That you live in denial or do not believe or do not want to believe in something, is no ticket for hurting someone else’s feelings especially when it comes to the people dearest to our hearts for as long as we are alive.
I am so pleased we can debate openly and honestly.. Lets go for it…
After his eviction by the Meccans, Muhammad and his Muslims found refuge many miles away in Medina where they were not being bothered by their former adversaries. Despite this, Muhammad sent his men on seven unsuccessful raids against Meccan caravans before finally finding one, whereupon they murdered the driver and plundered the contents.
Why the misleading comment about Al Arifi, clearly that whole ‘he made a fool of himself’ was bogus and it was clarified?
Interesting article. Do you really think that things will change—soon, Chiara?
One has to wonder when Saudis and other Muslims will free themselves from the terror of religion? Recently, there was an article in Arab News entitled: “Don’t be afraid of Islam.”
Here is what Winston Churchill wrote as a soldier and war correspondent from that part of India that is today’s Pakistan and Sudan:
””Besides the fanatical frenzy, …, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy,”
“The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist where the followers of the Prophet rule or live. … The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to a sole man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. … Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities – but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.”
Churchill concluded: “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”
Apathy is right. “Inshallah” is the constant cry. Their god controls the universe, so what’s the point of doing anything?
Why is it that these religious extremists are so proud of their backwardness? Why do they not see that in keeping their women back, they impede progress for the whole of the nation? It appears that when one is nothing and have accomplished little, then lording it over powerless women and children make such men feel better about themselves.
My prediction is always that with the media, the internet and other modern forms of communication Muslims will quickly note the true state of their existence in comparison to other lands. Perhaps that truth will be an incentive to get moving, to finally organize against the radicals and cast off the yoke of Islam that keeps them down and imprisoned?
unless you mean extreme Islam or politicized Islam – we – generally – agree. if not. if you met Islam as the entire umbrella of the religion. then no. You lose practically everyone’s agreement with you.
Muslims – including myself – who are calling for change in our countries are doing so, just as Christians did with the enlightenment era of Europe, founding of America etc.
Someone who is a fundamentalist does not make them the automatic image or correct way to follow a religion.
if you aim was to bring us an anti-religion, atheist point of view. Again you lose practically anyone here saying in agreement that we ought to “cast off the yoke of Islam”.
It doesn’t help our cause, and only adds credence to the fundamentalists that were aiding and abetting foreign countries to ‘defile’ our home countries.
We seem to be confused about each other’s identities. Just as I mistook you for Arianne on the previous post, you seem to have confused me both there and here with Saudiwoman, whose About on this, her, blog states her name as Eman.
I hope that clarifies things for you.
There’s no such thing as Saudi Arabia. First redeem your country back and then discuss Human rights issues and stuff.
Saudi=member of the Saudi family, if you’re not a member of said family then it means you’re a slave of servant to the Saudis… basically you;re their property.
“Saudi=member of the Saudi family, if you’re not a member of said family then it means you’re a slave of servant to the Saudis…” Nope, downright wrong..
really.. please do elaborate
FACT: ‘Saudi Arabia’ is the only country in the entire world to be named after its ruling family. That simply means that whatever lies within their borders is theirs. The property of the ‘Saudi’ Family.. whatever ‘rights’ they are granting you, like buying property is only to appease you, they can easily take it away if the want because they have every right and YOU have no rights whatsoever except to be grateful to whatever they give you.
Keep living in your delusions mate..
Nope, I’m not hallucinating, I’m from Saudi Arabia, and no one can take my Saudiness from me. I have all my right as a Saudi citizen my dear ma’e!
You seem to be confused about what Saudi Means!
A Saudi by definition is a person that has promised ALLEGIANCE and ACCEPTANCE of the Rule of AL SAUD over this land. It is an oath. That is why they are given Ta3biyyah. Which means the same.
So what if it is named after a ruling family?? What is wrong with that? And who is anyone to ridicule that?
Don’t you take the oath when you take any citizenship?
Please do not try and mess with the bases of this country!
Congratulations on a very nice comment I’m glad I know you and best regards
unless you mean extreme Islam or politicized Islam – we – generally – agree.
Islam does not recognise the separation between state and mosque, so how you want to define politicized Islam?
islam was always, from the very second of its conception, politicised.
The strange thing is not that non-Muslims are displaying ignorance but the fact that Muslims are about their own faith, culture and identity.
Whereas Islamophobes like Arianna and Marcus (who btw probably would not have cared one iota about Islam until 9/11) are just peddling their own prejudices. Muslim’s should know better, especially Saudi Woman who lives in the birthplace of Islam and is a native speaker of the Arabic language.
Today the majority of the Islamic world is back in a phase of Jahiliyyah, the exact thing that the prophet spent his lifetime tackling, educating those within his proximity.
All Muslims are supposed to know the intricacies of their faith, rather than defer to a Sheik on all issues – since nobody is infallible…. but she presents Ibn Baz and co, as being revered beyond the point of being fallible and wrong, which of course they were sometimes, they are human after all…. and now the unwashed masses of Saudi Arabia have woken up and question the establishment?
Seriously, shame on you Saudi Woman for writing such a poorly thought out post, and peddling flat out lies.
Maybe you should check first.. I grew up in the Midlde east since 1978… ;0 shock horror..
I can’t verify that nor do I care for it anyway, I’m only going by what you post here.
Clearly you have a major problem with Islam and display some breathtaking levels of hypocrisy to boot. You attribute and conflate the byproducts of un-Islamic regimes, despots funded and supported by Washington i.e. oppression, injustices to Islam.
“Clearly you have a major problem with Islam and display some breathtaking levels of hypocrisy to boot.”
wow. classical case of moslem denial – if you say things that moslems do not like, even if they are true, you are “islamophobe” or “hypocrite”…
It is hypocritical to highlight what you perceive to be the negatives from the history of Islam and downplay any of the positives from that period (as if it never happened.)
This isn’t even a “Muslim position”…. speak to a Ghanaian, a Venezuelan, a Vietnamese etc, they all know the self-delusion European cultures and its offshoots suffers from, since they’ve paid the price for that delusion and continue to do so today.
Islam was an “expansionist empire”… sure, about 1100 years ago! Whilst the European ones (in it’s complete barbarity is fresh in the memories, South Africa to name one example *cough*) and the American one is expanding presently and so forth.
Islam is not the aggressor, it’s not even in a position to be an aggressive force, it’s being swamped culturally, physically with military bases and occupations in every sense of the word, not only that, but being lectured to boot by hypocrites. You gotta love it!
There are enough troubles wherever you are I’m sure, reclaim your countries back from the banksters, get a proper democracy going instead of the plutocracy you have in place, cease from exploiting and looting the world and then, we’ll see.
Take your campaigning vigour and energy where it’s needed and appreciated.
Your posts are a broken record, I’ve come across the EXACT responses, word for word, so many times on the net that I’ve ceased to get that Déjà vu feeling.
When Muslims learn the Quran, they are taught the distinction between the verses that are relevant until the end of time, and the one’s that were sent for a specific situation in a particular time for the Prophet and his companions. I bet you can’t even read Arabic, so pray tell, how you’ve made those distinctions you so love to post about?
That’s for your fascination with the word ‘Inshallah’… much like Churchil whom you love to quote (a proud supremacist if I ever saw one) you have little to no understanding of the issues you rant about.
“It is hypocritical to highlight what you perceive to be the negatives from the history of Islam and downplay any of the positives from that period (as if it never happened.)”
oh, some positive sides.. hmm.. hmm.. jizyiah? devshirme? slave markets (I mean moslem slave wholesalers) ? pirate raids? occupations? islam as the occupant – I think we can see plenty examples even today – Morocco annexing West Sahara.. for example.
surely I wait the apology from the moslem those acts, committed in the perfect harmony in sunnah, because enslaving and killing is sunnah.
hmm, what about apology for moslem colonisation of Balkan peninsula? or India?
so when islam will wash the blood from its hands, and the moslems will be really sorry, at least 2 -3 generations, so we can say that islam may bring something positive… after 2OO years of humble hard work.
Sheesh, so Morocco now is a Muslim state?
… and while we’re at it, we’re digging up history from 500 years plus ago to make a case?
What a juvenile argument and posting style, he said, she said business.
Göttingen / Berlin , Germany (HNN) – The Society for Threatened Peoples International (GfBV) reported on Monday, Jan. 22, 2007 on a considerable increase in the violations of human rights in the areas of the West Sahara controlled by Morocco.
The human rights organization showed in a report the arrest of 685 Saharauis in 2006 — individuals who had protested peacefully against the occupation, which went against international law.
Sippenhaft (i.e. the arrest of relatives), torture and the arrest of persons under age have been taking place regularly, states the The Society for Threatened Peoples International in its 23-page report. In May 2005 a national uprising started in the West Sahara against Morocco’s rule.
Three quarters of those arrested were set free within 48 hours, reports the human rights organization. Before being released most of them were tortured and massively threatened. The detainees were often driven into the desert, beaten and thrown into ditches beside the road.
this is quite latest event.. so no 500 years old dusty case.
so you are not very aware what is happening in Moslem community – ah, pardon, opressors are moslems, so we will look another side
and islamic state – if islam is so easy and great, why it is not possible to implement shariah? if islam would be “natural” state of every born human being, why it is necesary to find quibla? why your Allah did not put the compass in the head.. and why our limbs do not fold naturally to your prayer gymnastics?
so nowhere on the world we can find real islam? so why to bother with conversion? KSA was never under colonial rule, so it may be considered as untouched by Western rule.. but even here you will say that it is not enough “islamic”.. Taliban is not islamic.. so where we can find this mythical unicornical creature called real muslim? nobody seems to fit the pattern… maybe it is simply not possible …
The people of the Western Sahara are not Muslims I assume? Morocco was not given the green light by the International community to invade, assisted with Spanish hardware I suppose and so forth?
To indulge you any further would be a complete waste of time…….
What about my earlier suggestion? To take your crusading vigour and focus it on issues closer to home which you can impact?
The people of the Western Sahara are not Muslims I assume?
of course they are, but who cares, if the oppressors are moslems.
“Morocco was not given the green light by the International community to invade, assisted with Spanish hardware I suppose and so forth?”
aha, so if the International Community says nothing, moslems are not provided by internal instinct what is good and what is bad? wow. it is like saying to person, who was robbed – you should make a fence.. or to close doors…if you have something of value. now you are trying to say that if International community would not agree, would it change something?
Of course, because the Moroccan king poured through the Quran and the Sunnah spending hours in late night prayers, waiting for a sign from God before making the decision to invade, right?
… or, he’s a secular dictator that made a political decision about the best option going forward with regards to a regional conflict? How does Islam or being Muslim play any part in this, except through your rose tinted glasses?
In that regard, how’s that situation any different from say Medvedev with regards to Georgia or any other country that makes a political decision for that matter?
Sure, all Muslims are supposed to support the oppressed, and we do, however, we live in the real world, and in the real world you can only impact what’s in your vicinity, internet campaigning and awareness emails do little or nothing for the people on the ground suffering. For the record, I personally oppose what’s taking place in Western Sahara.
Have a nice day.
Well, yes I do in fact… And why cannot anyone have objection to certain issues with Islam, Life of Mohammed, Hadith etc?
Please show where…..
Laymans terms please… ignore my ignorance of your grammar..
Hope you are well and enjoying a wonderful day.
You see.. To me.. what anyone says on a blog of this nature helps everybody… Unless we have open honest, considerate, respectful and transparent debate with each other, then no… it all falls down…
The moderates… If they are the new face of Islam, then hey, a new modernised Islam is here… With… No Sharia Law… fantastic news..
There sorted it out… I knew we would put the world to right one way or another… 😉
Do good… always with love as your driving forces..
Pingback: ExtremeCentre.org » Mes héros et héroïnes et en terre d’islam : « écoutez la sagesse qui sort de la bouche des fous ? » par Saudiwoman: Blog Politique Francophone pour les Libertés Fondamentales et Contre Tous les
Hasan ibn Ali relates that he learnt the following from the Holy Prophet (sa): Leave alone that which involves thee in doubt and adhere to that which is free from doubt, for truth is comforting and falsehood is disturbing. (Tirmidhi)
O my people, this life of the world is but a temporary provision, and the Hereafter is certainly the home for the permanent abode. (40:40)
Abdullah ibn Umar relates that the Holy Prophet (sa) said: Allah, the Lord of honour and glory, will accept the repentance of His servent till his death-rattle begins . (Tirmidhi)
And the life of this world is only a pleasure and a sport but surely the abode of the Hereafter is better
for those who are pious. Will you not then understand? (6:33)
Abu Hurairah has related that the Holy Prophet (sa) said: Allah does not regard your bodies and looks, but looks at your hearts. (Muslim)
Abu Hurairah (r.a.) relates that the Holy Prophet (sa) said: When Ramadhan arrives, the gates of Paradise are opened and the gates of hell are locked up and satans are put in chains.
(Bokhari & Muslim)
“The people of Saudi Arabia are finally starting to make up their own minds!”
Perhaps when it comes to fun rights, Saudis can discuss freely. Wait, no they don’t discuss. They insult , attack, and label each other for their different opinions on trivial matters. But when it comes to our basic human rights , we remain silent because if we don’t , we are imprisoned or like some Muslim Sheikhs who have lost their position for simply stating their opinions that go against the government’s.
We are still enslaved. We don’t have freedom nor justice in Arabia yet you say we’re making up our own minds. But yes attacking Muslim sheikhs won’t get us imprisoned. It’s easy to point the finger at them!
THE HOLY SINNER.
July 30, 2010 at 1:25 am
Wrong approach there brother. It was these pests who embraced Islam. It was people who shared the same hate who started the religion. They need to be told. Tell them.::””
Pests who embraced Islam??? Pests? You mean people going about their own way, minding their own business and then they are attacked, their goods stolen, their menfolk murdered and the women taken as sex slave?
So it was people like me with the same hate which started Islam… ?? Duh…
I said so much and you picked up just this. Well I used “pests” to drive home a point that such comments should not be made. Yes, it was people who did not understand Islam who opposed it initially and the rest is history, some of which is distorted purposely. The people who were going about their own way used to approach the Prophet (PBUH) to settle matters where an adjudicator was required because of the honest and just approach of the Prophet (PBUH). This is exacytly how he started the message, when it was revealed to him, by asking the Makkah people of different tribes, “if I say there is an army coming to attack you from behind the mountains, will you believe in me?” to which the reply in chorus was “yes”. And that is only because the Prophet (PBUH) was always very straight forward in his speech. At no point in time, the people were stopped from doing what was their wont. It was only a verbal invitation. Infact, Islam was spread so peacefully, that the Prophet (PBUH) was asked to migrate to avoid unnecessary bloodshed and give the tribes of Makkah some time. It was migration and not EVICTION. Not only is your info wrong, so is your choice of words. The Prophet (PBUH) spent 3 years in a place close to but out of Makkah from where he migrated to Madinah. Even at the time of his migration, the enemies in Makkah followed him and came close to him in the cave of Soor.
It was in these 3 years that the message went 480kms away to Madinah from where a delegation came and met the Prophet (PBUH) to swear allegiance and welcome him to live with them. From this place, the migration started to Madinah.
The Prophet (PBUH) was welcomed in Madinah with alot of exicitement and the people there started accepting Islam. This was a thron in the side of the neck for those who knew what was right and rejected it. And that is why they came at Badar.
Now coming back to the women taken as slaves? Yes, women taken as slaves, were not treated as you must have seen the movies of the wild west in which only Clint Eastwood is kind to them the rest of the cast misuses them. The women taken were given rights. One, they were not to be bartered or further sold. The children borne by them were given their father’s name and accpeted in the family. They were to be looked after and nurtured. You can read about it in the Surah Al Nisa, the 4th Chapter of The Quran. Any act outside of it by any Muslim is his own deed and not the practice instructed by Islam.
The Prophet (PBUH) was so honest in his dealings, that at the time of the Hudaibiah agreement, even though it was verbally agreed and not written, some people came to join the Prophet (PBUH) but were politely told to return back.
When the Muslim army of more than 10,000 finally marched into Makkah as the victors, they had specific instructions of not harming anyone who meant no harm, no matter how great an emeny he was from the past. Only 13 people lost their lives and they were the ones who came with swords drawn to resist. Even Henda, the woman who had cut up the dearest Uncle of the Prophet (PBUH) and had bit his liver, came to the Prophet (PBUH) and asked if the general amensty was for her as well. To which the reply was a yes.
The reason Islam was strengthened was the character of the Prophet (PBUH). Going back a few paras and answering your insistence on raiding the caranvas, when the Prophet (PBUH) lived outside of Makkah for three years and the delegation from Madinah came to see him, the latter asked how to start living the life according to the teaching. The Prophet (PBUH) forbade 5 things…The first was to worship any other but Allah, the second was lying, the third was womanising, the fourth drinking and the fifth, stealing (in any manner). And it is a documented fact that the Prophet (PBUH) always practiced what he preached and the enemies in Makkah agreed to it. So whoever or whatever is your source guiding you to the raids on caravans, is not correct. And you can search the web for it.
THE HOLY SINNER.
The folk going about their own business were the ones who when refusing to follow Mohammed and call him a prophet…. and they were subsequently killed.. and their good stolen and their women raped and taken into slavery..
How you ignore the truth….
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 747:
Narrated Abu Ishaq:
I asked Zaid bin Al-Arqam, “In how many Ghazawat did you take part in the company of Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “Seventeen.” I
further asked, “How many Ghazawat did the Prophet fight?” He replied, “Nineteen.”
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 748:
I fought fifteen Ghazawat in the company of the Prophet.
Volume 5, Book 59, Number 749:
That he fought sixteen Ghazawat with Allah’s Apostle.
Pingback: Welcome to the Middle Ages « Saudiwoman’s Weblog
O J DEEN says: Don’t you feel that the world today needs the divine guidance more than ever before?
“Divine guidance” from a draconian, 7th century god who tells the believers that they are superior and must fight and conquer until (their) religion “reigns supreme,”treat women as lesser beings, imprison and beat these if they do not obey, persecute non believers — got humanity into this anti human rights mess.
People, in particular true believers, should learn to think for themselves instead of using the rules of a 7th century “complete way of life” for every waking and sleeping moment. Religion promotes indolism and nihilism. Everything is preordained by Allah, so why bother? Believers do very little in this life, consume from the hated infidel world, while waiting for the Islamic pleasure palace where everything that is haram in the world becomes halal including: Rivers of wine, 72 houris, servant boys like pearls—all to be consumed on gold and jewel encrusted couches.
Ya gotta hand it to the decadent imagination of the indolent messenger, his like minded companions and followers. First they make war, rob and enslave people on earth, then, they get rewarded in Paradise with even more decadence for their crimes—for eternity.
As salam alaikum any muslim who says (especially a sheikh) its ok to freemix has be decieve by iblees and his shayateen or his own foolishness. I am a tiny talib ul ilm. And only in specific circumstances can we free mix. Here are just a few examples: At time of a emergency like accident, as in helping the person who is hurt male/female basic commonsense to be honest. If I saw a sister who was in a car accident. I aint going to wait to get her out of the vehicle if able to do so. At air ports,Buses etc.