Ok, so maybe I don’t have anything to say about picnics, but there’s plenty to talk about with respect to some Muslims in the West living in their usual pseudo-megalomanic state – you know, that condition that makes us Muslims living in the non-Muslim lands of ignorance as Defenders of the Faith and the Marja‘ of Islam for the other 1.5 billion Muslims who live in the…err…Muslim lands.
My criticism is not for us in Europe or the Americas etc to have a Shar‘i opinion on something; nay, my contempt is for Muslims in our non-Muslim countries passing judgement on the rest of the world on what Islam should be or how other people should run their countries and cultures according to our “Western pristine standards”. The really shocking thing is that for a nation like ours that has been commanded by God to verify everything we hear, we still make assumptions and rulings based on the absence of real facts and details behind what happens in cases reported to us by those agencies that have a vested interest in telling us what they want us to believe.
Whether it’s a court in Saudi Arabia, a decision in Afghanistan, a ruling in Malaysia or political jousting in the Sudan, the West didn’t reach the heights it has by supporting countries to rule according to their Islamic or pseudo-Islamic systems. Today, they have a problem with the naming of a teddy bear, later tonight it’s the prescribed punishments (Hudūd) and then tomorrow it’s whether there really is any need to have some resemblance of formal religious practice and devotion in our “daily, busy, 21st Century” lives.
Indeed the real problem, whilst growing up as Muslims in the Western liberal democracies that we form part of, is that we’ve lost the stomach for a society to be ruled by Islamic Law. No-one likes to admit it, but the signs are all there for everyone to see. In recent times, even moreso since 9/11, the inferiority complex that we have fallen into with respect to our Hudūd laws for example or indeed any form of punishment that a Muslim state might want to confer to its citizens, is galling to say the least. It’s as if we’ve turned into born-again Christians over night and the mantra of “love, love, love” has permeated our belief process – thus, everyone else in the world other than the Muslims must have the right to have a penal code and a criminal justice system. Just not the Muslims of course. What’s worse is that after being fed this belief ever so slowly and patiently in our democracies, we then proceed to establish it ourselves in our writings, speeches and ideas on the rest of the Ummah. The whole approach would be utterly laughable if it wasn’t so blatantly true and damaging.
Part of our delusion in the West as Muslims is believing that we’re more special than we actually are. In fact, I find it interesting that some of us blame the Americans for not showing equal concern for an American casualty and a Muslim casualty during their neo-fascist advances into Muslim land. Yet, it is our very own Muslims here in the West who patronise and hold in contempt the rest of the Muslims in the “developing” world, and far from showing equal respect to our brothers and sisters abroad, we hold them to be backward, ignorant, stubborn, cruel and everything else that our Western masters feed us. Are we then any better then those who value their own peoples’ lives more than the foreign lives when we indeed value our own understanding of Islam so much more than those in the rest of the Muslim world? People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
For the record, the Fuqahā’ have agreed that the intentional istihzā’ (insulting) of the Prophets (upon whom be peace) is an act which leads to the death penalty, whether the perpetrator is a Muslim or non-Muslim. There is a scholarly discussion whether it is a prescribed punishment (hadd) or a discretionary punishment (ta‘zīr).
Likewise, it is also agreed that the basic principle in human beings is their innocence from wanting to insult people intentionally. In the Sudanese case, one would have to prove without doubt that the British lady in question intentionally set out to insult the Prophet (upon whom be peace). Naturally, this is very difficult and one is not tasked to look into detail for that which is not clear and obvious.
Likewise, there are some narrations which show the Muslims naming animals and other things by human names that are shared in principle with the Prophets, without any intention of course to belittle the namesake. Moreover, when a person comes from a culture where the naming of animals and objects is commonplace, that cultural understanding can be a decisive defence in a court of law for ones unintentional actions.
Thus the most correct opinion would be that no charges be pressed against such an action. That is the Shar‘i conclusion remember and not what various governments decide to do for their own interests.
Of course, if intent has been proved then it is a different story. In recent international cases involving Muslim countries, we just haven’t had access to the facts. Yet the issue still remains why there is a need for British Muslims to involve themselves in something which they have nothing to do with? We don’t know the details from either side, and there is clearly a game of politics being played over other sensitive issues. Muslims trying to be seen to uphold “good citizenship” by condemnation of places like Sudan, or by sending delegations etc, although not wrong in itself, only adds to the well-held belief that Western Muslims are just puppets of their masters in those issues that we can be used beneficially.
One wonders what is the greater case of istihzā’ here: the supposed actions of a teacher in naming a teddy bear or the response of the “Not Guilty M’Lud” Muslims we’re often forced to be today every time a newspaper can’t find something more sensational to write about.
We don’t have to defend the ruling kingship of Saudia Arabia any more than the political chess moves of the Sudanese government. Neither do we need to explain and feel guilty about the dictatorships of Pakistan or the terrorist Khawārij of Iraq. The West is well acquainted with all that it has helped create, and it wasn’t in our name. We should be happy to defend Islam but let’s not humiliate ourselves in the process and take on burdens that are not ours to bear, based upon principles that are alien to our tradition – yes, standing for justice and defending the innocent is excellent but there’s plenty of that to be done here in the UK and other places, and we shouldn’t just react to what is made front page news according to the whims and desires of the powerful few. It might be seen as good PR to send token Muslims abroad to help cut a woman’s stay in a house from four days more to only three days more, but how one wishes that we Muslims would put in the same effort for others of our very own citizens who are being treated unjustly in our countries here in the West. But then, it’s not the same photo-shoot or front page headline is it?
And Allah knows best.
December 2, 2007 at 2:32 pm
Cageprisoners – How to Help
http://www.cageprisoners.com/page.php?id=3
December 2, 2007 at 5:07 pm
Salaamualaykum,
I absolutely agree with your viewpoint. It’s so frustrating to see some western Muslims criticizing their eastern brethren without first verifying the facts.
Tell me brother, is it permissible for someone to criticize a qaadhi’s decision without themselves being of equal or greater caliber?
December 2, 2007 at 5:49 pm
Asalamualykum
I prefer the article from Islamtoaday by Sheikh Salim,
Abu Esa, you taking anger management sessions? lol, only messing (dont throw ur laptop)
Keep teaching others, as our problem is due to ignorance. Only with knowledge shall it be removed.
December 2, 2007 at 10:46 pm
[...] “Teddy Bears, Picnics, and Other Delusions of Grandeur” at Alternative Entertainment [...]
December 2, 2007 at 10:57 pm
I have not read the above article in detail..
But, here’s my take on the whole thing.
FIRST OF ALL, the Sudanese government had an opportunity to show compassion, because we’re always being labelled as savage fanatics.
For example, you know the story of a Bedouin entering a Mosque with our Prophet (saw) and urinating on the ground…right ?? Our Prophet (saw) did not allow His Companions to attack him; but instead forgave him.
So, tell me, which was the greater evil? The act committed in the above mentioned story, or naming a teddy bear.
Secondly, if a Muslim government is so concerned about protecting Islamic values and Shariah… Why on Earth would they allow a non-Muslim secularist to teach Muslim children?
We can’t expect non-Muslims to behave like Muslims; because they’re non-Muslims – duh! What did they expect? They should have at least briefed her on the do’s and don’ts.
Also, what is a teddy bear doing in a country governed by Shariah… Surely if an idol of a bear or a person is allowed, it WILL be named something. Do they expect that it would just be referred to as ‘bear’ etc..
Another thing… they should have just deported her; what’s the point of a 15 day sentence?
Lastly, preserving the Ummah is not straight forward. The Sudanese government should have thought about the implications of throwing a non-Muslim in prison for naming a teddy bear.
Because of that, it created a ripple effect across the World. And once again we’re in the firing line… If committing this sentence would devastate the Muslim Ummah (abuse, name calling; deprived of jobs etc) what is the best option. What would our Prophet (saw) do? Remember, she hasn’t tortured or killed someone, or insulted the Prophet (saw) like in those cartoons; or the Rushdie affair. They named something that they loved in class, Mohammed.
It’s no good saying, why should we have to answer the actions of Muslims in other countries. The fact is we do. Think about it; they carry out actions in the name of Islam… so naturally, the non-Muslims are going to ask… is this what your religion teaches you ??? It is our duty to educate them. Otherwise our existence in a non-Muslim country is Haraam; i.e. what are we here for, if not to educate. I don’t like lame, vague reasons such as… Allah (swt) has put us here for a reason, and only Allah (swt) knows what that is… Our purpose has been laid out by Allah (swt) and his Messenger (saw). It is very clear cut.
The story that I mentioned above, shows that a proportionate response is more appropriate. We can demonstrate compassion you know; it was one the most beautiful and ‘inviting’ attributes of our Prophet (saw). More significantly, Mercy is one of The many Attributes of Allah (swt). This the quality of Mercy and Compassion won over the hearts of many non-Muslims that were arch enemies of Islam.
December 2, 2007 at 11:49 pm
salaams
brother khalid I agree with you in many ways that our deen is universal and what may be happening to Muslims or by Muslims on the other side of the world is part of us.
I think its very important to practice mercy, compassion and forgiveness which are truly great attributes and were well practiced throughout the ages and totally agree that these are the greatest heart softeners.
The only point I would like to also add is the point where brother Abu Eesa has mentioned “Muslims trying to be seen to uphold “good citizenship” by condemnation of places like Sudan, or by sending delegations etc”
This does really upset me so much. Please I ask you this… where are these delegations and these people protesting against ill treatment and abuse of our Muslims brothers sat here in british prisons? where are these people when our brothers are being humiliated day after day, and are being stripped of thier basic human rights?
I just cannot understand…big words and great speeches are all good but actions seems to be very few amongst us…
December 3, 2007 at 1:39 am
My reference was to the fact that we need to respond to allegations against Islam by educating the non-Muslims that naming teddy bears is not punishable by death or to be imprisoned for.
If we imprison people for naming lifeless bears, why wouldn’t the non-Muslims continue to imprison us for ’supposedly suspicious’ activity. It just gives them more justification and public support swings their way.
After all, the Sudanese government did accuse the school teacher of trying to subvert Islam. Her naming, or allowing the naming of the bear aroused ’suspicion’.
We complain and are angered at them sentencing our Muslims for suspicious activity, then we go ahead and do the same thing.
No matter how they treat us, we must be better than them. They also used to persecute our Prophet (saw) and Sahaabah; yet our Prophet (saw) always showed them that the Muslims were still compassionate, even in the face of Jahilyah.
I have never, in my life, agreed with sending delegations. We shouldn’t go that far; genuine condemnation is sufficient. Foreign governments aren’t going to listen to British Muslims.
But yes, I agree, delegations comprising ‘influential’ members of the Muslim community should become involved in representing Muslims that are imprisoned; in order to ensure that they are given fair treatment.
But we need the correct kind of leadership for that. We need Lords and Councilors working with Human Rights organisations in order to have any effect at all, otherwise delegations will just be bullied in a similar manner.
December 3, 2007 at 6:21 am
The situation would be just as you describe Niamat, but when the ideologues of western Islam continue to insist on a “one world” Islam in which all of the ummah is connected, responsible and liable for all the same things then many Muslims in the west have no choice but to condemn insanity such as this.
!)
You make very astute points and for the most part I agree with your analysis, there is something much deeper here that needs to be researched. What are the ideological roots of such rage in the Muslim world? It cannot be just all politics and international pressure. It can’t be sectarian strife and partisanship (I mean you guys cleared that up in the Love, Peace, and hair grease bakwas right
Why do we see such violent outbursts of “love and defense” of the Prophet in certain countries and places (surely Sudan and Pakistan are not indicative of the entire world), yet in most others we do not?
As Muslims we tend to over politicize our reasoning and dwell on the evil “other” while refusing to ask ourselves what is it that encourages us to respond in this way time and time again.
December 3, 2007 at 6:39 pm
It’s all about Misbah…….
December 3, 2007 at 6:45 pm
true say khalid.
the whole fiasco doesnt make sense does it? how much time effort and money has been wasted on this that could have been used elsewhere. im just glad its over.
December 3, 2007 at 7:39 pm
Wa alaykum salam wa rahmatullah
Cageprisoners – How to Help
http://www.cageprisoners.com/page.php?id=3
Indeed. Now we could all help out a little bit more in this effort. We could even write articles of condemnation and make expressions of disgust. That should be easy because we’re Muslims remember?
Do something really useful: please make du’a for Babar Ahmed who has his decision pending with the European Court of Human Rights on his extradition. Likewise please remember our brother Ali al-Timimi in his fight, as well as all of those innocent brothers and sisters in incarceration around the world, may Allah hasten their release and give them patience, ameen.
It’s so frustrating to see some western Muslims criticizing their eastern brethren without first verifying the facts.
Frustrating? Try makruh tahrimi at the very least, and haram according to some.
Tell me brother, is it permissible for someone to criticize a qaadhi’s decision without themselves being of equal or greater caliber?
Yes it is permissible, as long as one has the evidences. Also, of course, one cannot criticise the Judge because it would be a matter of his ijtihad if a matter came to court; the only time he can be criticised himself is if you have additional evidences that affect his person.
I prefer the article from Islamtoaday by Sheikh Salim
So do I. He was my teacher after all.
Abu Esa, you taking anger management sessions? lol, only messing (dont throw ur laptop)
Actually, it was a bit ranty wasn’t it? Apologies.
I have not read the above article in detail..
But, here’s my take on the whole thing.
And isn’t that, my dear brother Khalid, the root of half the problems and fitnah we see in Muslim discourse today?
Not to single you out here (sorry, you commented at the wrong place!), but one only wishes that people would re-read a piece that the reader wants to digest, learn from or comment on, at least 3-4 times. Likewise at a speech or a khutbah. But that’s just wishful thinking I guess…
FIRST OF ALL, the Sudanese government had an opportunity to show compassion, because we’re always being labelled as savage fanatics.
You’re right of course. But the Sudani govt. also has the right politically (from a secular point of view) to do nothing of the sort and thus follow every other government in the world in their daily behaviour.
Also, seperate from simple international politics, the Shari’ah isn’t always just about compassion, love and forgiveness, despite their supreme importance in the Deen and priority status. At its right time, it’s also about warning people and striking fear into the hearts of criminals that would wish to try the resolve of the Muslims and wage war against God and His religion. The texts on that are just too many to mention and of course I know that you don’t dispute that.
As for “savage fanatics” then who cares? I get called that for having a wife that wears a hijab. Let them say what they want, we’ll clarify when we need to and support when we need to, and prove correct when we need to. And we’ll do it when we want and not when the media wants.
Because of that, it created a ripple effect across the World. And once again we’re in the firing line… If committing this sentence would devastate the Muslim Ummah (abuse, name calling; deprived of jobs etc) what is the best option. What would our Prophet (saw) do? Remember, she hasn’t tortured or killed someone, or insulted the Prophet (saw) like in those cartoons; or the Rushdie affair.
A question for you brother Khalid – what if it was proven (even though this is apparently not the case), that she insulted the Prophet (s) intentionally by this? Do you have the stomach for her to be killed by the Sudanese, whether through their secular approach, or killed through Shari’ah via an Islamic court?
Or, as the case is fast becoming, Muslims (mainly in the West but increasingly in other countries too), are only interested in the nice parts of Islam and don’t want to deal with the rest of society’s problems. Just a thought my brother.
so naturally, the non-Muslims are going to ask… is this what your religion teaches you ??? It is our duty to educate them.
Brother Khalid, stick to what you know, this is all I’m saying. Clarify to all your friends and colleagues what the Islamic ruling is (as explained excellently by Shaykh Muhammad Salim in the previous post and as I’ve alluded to above) and also explain something nice about Islam.
This is what we should all be doing all the time when something is troubling our fellow people. This doesn’t mean that we go out of the Islamic boundaries and say things about other people/systems/courts/countries/cultures/governments/whatever without clear proof and evidence.
If we imprison people for naming lifeless bears, why wouldn’t the non-Muslims continue to imprison us for ’supposedly suspicious’ activity.
“WE” don’t imprison people for mistakes and unintentional acts. Why do you have to become defensive? You should focus on clarifying the Islamic position, according to the evidences of your reliable and politically unaffected teachers, and not get rid of some collective guilt. True, we have to answer for a lot of stuff out there, but there have to be some limits – “it was a Sudani political decision, but in an Islamic court according to the scholars, so and so would have happened” is all we need to say. Indeed, I must have explained this issue to nearly a hundred non-Muslims and not once did I need to go further than that.
but when the ideologues of western Islam continue to insist on a “one world” Islam in which all of the ummah is connected, responsible and liable for all the same things then many Muslims in the west have no choice but to condemn insanity such as this.
Hood, there’s no doubt about that but we have to remember two things: one, we have to be sure that it really is insanity, and two, most commentators on such situations, who are on the whole entirely ignorant of fiqh and qadha, go beyond the bounds in their cheap talk and condemnation and will only bring a burden upon themself on the Day that counts.
(I mean you guys cleared that up in the Love, Peace, and hair grease bakwas right
!)
Hahaha! You just couldn’t resist could you…
Why do we see such violent outbursts of “love and defense” of the Prophet in certain countries and places (surely Sudan and Pakistan are not indicative of the entire world), yet in most others we do not?
Barakallahu feek, this is a good point but I wish to put forward to you a serious question: as you suggest, these protests (although they may seem violent, there is no real violence or at least, there shouldn’t be any violence of course) etc of “love and defence” of all things Islamic is a certain way of thinking, a certain form of social programming, a manhaj, an ideology. The opposing manhaj/ideology is the one that we are witnessing all the time around us in the West: a cautious, secular, liberal ideology which is able to write off every attack against Islam (under the mantra of free speech), able to be comfortable with a religion without any political, financial or any other governmental dimension. It is a manhaj of Islam that has a heart that has turned black with sin, and even worse, is now no longer affected by ma’siyah and fahshah – it doesn’t hurt at the sight of nudity or pornography, doesn’t feel guilty at missing the prayer in the Masajid, doesn’t feel the priority of a pure Islamic up-bringing for their children.
So my question is then, which manhaj would I feel safer in? The Islamic one that gets uncontrollably angry (even to an extreme) at those things which could be perceived as anti-Islamic (whether rightly or wrongly), or the brand of Secular Islam which has now captured the hearts of the masses and is turning them more and more into secular humanists before our very eyes.
I take your point well but I’d rather be in the first group. Why then do I live in the West you may ask? Because the 2nd type of Islam isn’t geographically restricted, rather it has spread like a cancer to every where in the world. I also believe that with the right control, I can create a middle path between the two, whilst living in the West as I do.
What a fool I am…
And Allah knows best.
It’s all about Misbah…
Indeed. In fact, when has Pak cricket in recent times been anything but about Misbah (hafidhahullah)?
December 3, 2007 at 9:12 pm
AE,
I’ve read your article and seen your points on the comments that you’ve made.
Yes, I concede that her intentions are unknown to us and therefore we need to leave the application of law to the relevant Muslim countries.
Though, I still see Mercy as an important tool that can change people. Not as potent as punishment, but sometimes has a better effect if it’s applied in the correct situation.
Also, in reference to your article, I’m pleased to say that I’m not one of those Muslims that are all love, love, love like a re-born Christian. Anyways just to digress a little, for your information, re-born Christians that I’ve personally met here, are very hard lined and fundamentalist beyond belief. Some of them will make HT and Al-Muhajioroon look like a teddy bear’s picnic – if you’ll pardon the pun.
AE, you have been slightly selective in your reading of my comments.
Sharaih is designed to protect society; I understand that fully; alcohol is banned for its obvious effects; promiscuity is prohibited because it destroys society morally; in terms of structure and education (i.e. fatherless and/or feral children) and destroys society biologically and so on and so forth; and I could go on forever with other Prohibitions.
Therefore, given the protective nature of Shariah of removing causes of corruption, I am disappointed in such governments failure to apply it fully.
For example, why is a Muslim country allowing secular teachers, to teach Muslim children? What do they expect? Surely they didn’t expect kaafirs to behave like Muslims did they?
And to even allow a teddy bear is against Islamic practice. We are not permitted to keep dolls, portraits etc, in order to prevent idolatry.
If a country is going to apply Shariah, it must do so thoroughly, otherwise it will invite hypocrisy. Some things will be permitted by compromising certain laws, yet other things won’t be permitted.
I am looking at cause and effect here… If a secular teacher wasn’t allowed to teach there in the first place, this incident wouldn’t have taken place. Also, if objects with eyes are not permitted, they will not be named, and so on…
December 3, 2007 at 11:34 pm
I am sure Brother Khalid is aware that there is a genuine difference of opinion among scholars on the permissibility of dolls, based on the hadith of sayyidina Aysha (radhiyallahu anha).
Also didnt the disbelieving Quraysh prisoners of war teach the Muslim children as ransom fee after the battle of badr?
December 4, 2007 at 12:22 am
RE: Anonymous
“Also didnt the disbelieving Quraysh prisoners of war teach the Muslim children as ransom fee after the battle of badr?”
This is not the case for Sudan. Where there are many Muslim teachers in abundance throughout the World, there is no need to employ non-Muslims to teach Muslims.
As far as idols are concerned. At one point, it was okey to create statues of Saints. However, people began to make dua towards the Saints, asking them to pray on behalf of the living…and eventually people began to idolise the statues themselves… hence, the representation of a living creature is not permissable.
Here’s some Hadith as proof:
“Assuredly the angels do not enter a house in which there are statues (or figures).” (Reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim; the wording is from Muslim.)
‘Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The people who will be most severely punished by Allaah on the Day of Resurrection are the picture-makers.” (Reported by al-Bukhaari, see al-Fath, 10/382).
On the Day of Resurrection, the maker of a figure will be asked to breathe a spirit into it, and he will never be able to do so, (Reported by al-Bukhari and others.)
Lastly…
In the Sahih (i.e. AI-Bukhari and Muslim), ‘Aishah (May Allah be pleased with her) reported:
“Umm Salamah mentioned to Allah’s Messenger (May the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) that in Abyssinia she saw a church full of pictures and statues. He (May the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him) said: “When a righteous man or pious worshipper among them dies they build a place of worship over his grave and set up all kinds of pictures and statues. They are the worst of all creatures before Allah. They combine the two evils; worshipping at the graves and-making graven images and statues.”
So you see…
Firstly we have learned that angels will not enter the house with portraits in them (regardless of whether it is in the form of objects or paintings etc).
Secondly, if the creators of these pictures or objects are punished for it, then how can it benefit those that buy and/or keep them?
December 4, 2007 at 12:34 am
This site needs a forum
anyway, http://www.muslimlinkpaper.com/mybo2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1258&Itemid=1
December 4, 2007 at 3:02 am
Khalid you have only represented one view on dolls and not given an explanation to why Aysha (May Allah be pleased with her) had a doll. My point was to point out that there is a clear difference of opinion on the issue.
December 4, 2007 at 4:14 pm
As Salaam Alaikum,
This article and many of the comments point out the very real difficulty and problems within the Ummah.
Back and forth with the Hadith and Arabic lectures and scholarly grandstanding, that we all ignore the very real realities.
Yes, we should be concerned with what is going on in our home nations. However, we are one Ummah if one part hurts, it all hurts.
If we shouldn’t be quick to combat, confront, or explain controversial issues and continue to be apathetic to whats going on around us, then we should be prepared to be arrested for suspicion.
Br. Khalid, I find it amazing that on one hand you say we should utilize the same zeal in condemning the Sudanese government toward our governments in their treatment of us, however you forget to mention it’s all connected.
Our inaction and perception of agreement with these actions in the “East” only fuel the flames of that which we have to combat here.
Our silence is a major part of the problem. Those of us who have never been to the East are still affected. My family for instance doesn’t get stares or whispers because of anything we did, but because of something on the news. Because of articles seemingly supporting this Sudan ruling, etc.
In order to deal with this problem in the West, we have to be multi-faceted, multi-issue, and multi-directional.
The truth of the matter is the Sudan ruling was foolish, no matter how we try to spin it. 20 out of 23 of the kids named the Teddy Bear not the teacher. Mohammad is the most popular name in the world, let alone in the region, and the actual Prophet (saw) most likely would have felt it honorable that children when naming something thought of the best name they could and it was his.
This issue speaks to a larger problem in so-called application of Sharia. The lack of reason, compassion, and mercy. The truth is all they saw was an infidel and blinded by their zeal was hasty and excessive.
No one considered patience and balance as the Prophet (saw) and thought about the greater good. Of all the 99 names/attributes of Allah (swt) the ones at the forefront of the Surah’s is what? If Allah (swt) wanted us to always remember something else, I’m certain Mercy wouldn’t be there.
In this age of the Ummah, it would have been better to forgive the teacher for allowing her students to name the Teddy and explain to the actual children that they shouldn’t do the naming and why.
If we are to be the best of mankind and the vicegerents of Allah (swt) then we too have to be oft turning to Mercy.
Our religion is not meant to be a burden to us. Our religion is as the Prophet (saw) was, a mercy to mankind. Yet, we continue to act and continue to defend things that are the complete opposite. Then we wonder why we are viewed with lack of trust and are harassed in our non-Muslim countries.
I’m sorry but if something kept telling me they are peaceful, but every time I saw them they hit me, I would be a little suspicious of the one who hits, as well as the witnesses who watched and said nothing.
But then again, I’m just a biased Western convert…..I don’t know what I’m talking about…..
December 5, 2007 at 1:23 am
anyone hear about the one about the guy who peed in the masjid?
December 5, 2007 at 2:48 pm
now now Robert just hold your corner you said what you said’ Salaam what do I know I’m just a biased western convert……..? Chin up Robert! You have an opinion that’s important although you may not be a scholar’ you are bringing your view and experience to the discussion that, s what learning is’ a student of knowledge once told me that although knowledge is key to the success over much of what we do’ don’t under estimate or disregard your years that Allah has given you’ years that brought you to the truth of Islam and your faculty of reason and understanding in the spheres of events in and around your life’ I don’t know what I am talking about ? maybe what you meant was I don’t know everything.. And that’s ok you’re not supposed too! I listened to a Jew scolding a Muslim on five live saying to him “why are you trying to pretend that your religion Islam is liberal you’re not liberal’ we are not liberal’ so you look pretty stupid in defending the actions of Muslims abroad’ since when have people of faith’s practiced liberalism? It’s not a requirement in the sharia or the torah but I thought his argument was correct’ I mean defending the honour of the prophet is praise worthy thing unless of course teddy bears are involved then sensitivities come into play……
December 7, 2007 at 1:25 am
Bro Khalid said: It’s no good saying, why should we have to answer the actions of Muslims in other countries. The fact is we do.
I feel i can relate to this on a personal level.
There is at least 2 media related documentaries or programs mentioned a week (in UK TV) and several more in newspapers related to muslims/islam, and 99% of the time often showing us in a very bad, negative light. And the non-muslims of UK are watching these programs and reading these papers again and again every week.
Its come to a point that at work they (staff openly) start asking me how comes those muslims believing in killing that person or hanging that person, or how comes saudi arabia did let that rape case.. and so on. I try my best to give good answers back and show the deen in a positive light, but as one non-muslim worker said ‘all of those programs showing muslim people doing those (bad) things are creating a very negative mental image in english people (white) minds.’
Its a no win situation because no matter what good we do or say, the media is just going to keep on doing such 24/7 coverage. The positive light i try to think thats come out of this recent teddy bear issue is that at least many non-muslims have heard of the prophet’s name, Muhammad, i hope it might encourage some people to do some research on who this man eg reading the quran.
December 7, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Salaam, I am a Muslim from a Muslim majority country and in my chats with Muslims from the west I sensed the same unsympathetic attitude toward Muslims in countries like mine. I am glad that you point out that common mistake.
December 8, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Anonymous Says:
December 4, 2007 at 3:02 am
Khalid you have only represented one view on dolls and not given an explanation to why Aysha (May Allah be pleased with her) had a doll. My point was to point out that there is a clear difference of opinion on the issue.
——–
With regards to the doll of Aysha (May Allah be pleased with her). I have asked Ulema and she actually possessed a cloth rag that was bound. And she used to refer to it as a doll. Although it had no distinct shape that resembled a human, nor did it have any eyes.
Given that she was a child, that’s what her imagination told her. Children tend to have an active imagination. That’s why many kids, throw the toy aside and play with the packaging instead… ask child psychologists and they’ll clarify how children perceive objects.