Corrupt Clergy serving their 'human' Masters: A safer bet as God forgives, Mubarak does not.

Al-Tayyeb: Al-Azhar Senior sheikh

The most senior Al-Azhar clergy, Ahmad Al-Tayyeb criticizes Iran's clergy for making [political] statements, using their 'religious authority'; statements which, in his opinions, contradicts the explicit statements of Quran and Prophetic teachings as well as the 'consensus' of the Muslim nation.
That usually means that Iranians made statements along the lines: "Demonstrators good - Mubarak bad"!
Of course, when Al-Tayyeb makes statements along the line of "Mubarak good - demonstrators bad", that is a totally different thing.
The pot calling the kettle ........

Moreover, if one knows 'the explicit statements of the Quran' they would knows that Al-Tayyeb either lies with out shame, or he is not fully aware of the content of the Quran.

And, one more thing: What consensus??? If Iran Clergy had a different opinion (be it right or wrong), that means there is no 'Islamic' consensus on the issue. If their opinion does not count, they are not an authority.  So, I am not sure what his point is.

I guess, Al-Tayyeb expertise is more in 'how to serve one's masters till the last breath, and not in Quranic studies or logic.

Egypt's Grand Mufti: Ali Jum'a

And, not to be outdone, Egypt's Mufti, Ali Jum'a issues an opinion that democracy and protests are OK 'as long as they do not interrupt peoples lives, and not add to unemployment!'.  But when it comes to his master's ruling Egypt for 30 years while the country went downhill, with rampant poverty, vanishing infrastructure, and unemployment (direct and indirect) estimated to be aver 40%; the 'grand' Mufti had no opinion on that.

There are many Egyptian sayings to describe people like those clergy, some are beneath my standards, even when I am as angry as I am, but a milder one would be: "Feed the mouth, and their eyes would not dare look critically at you أطعم الفم , تستحي العين ".  I guess Mubarak feeds them well.

Saudi Mufti

Saudi Arabia Mufti, of course, had to have some input as well, but I generally would not care to comments on Saudi Arabia religious edicts, unless they are comical, which happens a lot.  This one unfortunately, is plain stupid, and not funny.  So, just take my words for it: it is as stupid as the opinions of his Egyptian counter parts.  Additionally, it makes sure that the word 'Fitna' (popular word for the conservative Muslim demagogues) is thrown in, associated with the word 'demonstrations', which he describes as  Haram, i.e., religiously forbidden by divine commandments!!!! (See links below in Arabic).

Some men of God these ones are!

Khaled

Links:

• ملفات الاهرام - الازهر يدين السياسات الإيرانية والتصريحات الاوروبية والأمريكية التى تتدخل فى الشأن المصرى
•  الأخبار - عربي - الأزهر ينتقد فتاوى تدعم الاحتجاجات 
• الأخبار - تقارير وحوارات - انتقاد لموقف مفتي السعودية من مصر

Past relevant blog posts:

• Khaled Hamid Forum: Egyptian Christians: some voice of the People on the BBC
• Khaled Hamid Forum: Organised Religion: Never fails to disappoint (at least in Egypt)

• Coptic Pope is still embracing Mubark warmly. Thank God many Copts don't.

Coptic Pope is still embracing Mubark warmly. Thank God many Copts don't.

Even at a time when the will of the people of Egypt (Muslims and Christians, religious and secular, men and women) is heard loud and clear allover the world, The Coptic Orthodox Pope Shnouda III is sending greeting and his 'people's' support to the criminal dictator.
The story on the street, on the internet and on TV is telling us that Egyptians Christians are as determined as Egyptian Muslims not to let go until the dictator leave.  Thank God for real Egyptians: all of them.

Here is some of the text of the report:

أعلن بابا الإسكندرية وبطريرك الكرازة المرقسية شنودة الثالث أمس الأحد تأييده للرئيس المصري حسني مبارك، الذي يواجه انتفاضة شعبية تتصاعد وتيرتها يوما بعد يوم.

وقال شنودة الثالث في تصريح للتلفزيون المصري الرسمي "اتصلنا بالرئيس وقلنا له كلنا معك والشعب معك. فليحفظه الله لمصر".

 And in English:

"The Pope of Alexandria Shnouda III announces yesterday [Sunday] his support for the Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak who faces a popular uprising that is escalating on daily basis.

Shnouda III announce in a talk for the government-controlled Egyptian TV that: ... We contacted the President and told him that  we all are with you, the people are with you.  May God keep him for Egypt"

I have one word for the Coptic Pope that places large photo of Mubarak next to his Crucifix:

Shame on you.

Out of respect for my fellow Christian Egyptians who are on the streets risking their lives to save Egypt from the hands of a dictator that their Pope endorses, I would have no further comments, for now.

Khaled

Links:

• الأخبار - عربي - البابا شنودة يعلن تأييده لمبارك

Previous Posts

• Khaled Hamid Forum: Organised Religion: Never fails to disappoint (at least in Egypt)

Do not worship that man's god

The clown of a clergy that goes by the name of Pat Robertson has uttered a lot of nonsense before. Idiocy comes naturally to him, and stupidity seems to be his hall mark. I have commented several time on some of that senile nonsense before (check these).

Yet, millions that falsely think they are really Christians follow the idiot and his nonsensical ramblings. Ramblings that if not about gay, it is about Presbyterians, Muslims, or poor black New Orleans Hurricane victims or whatever he wishes to hallucinate about.

He added another huge dirty feather to his hat made of piles of dirt that he uttered over the years.

With tens of thousands (if not over a hundred thousand) feared dead in Haiti earthquake, the little man, who has with no soul, found nothing today to say about the disaster other than to spew that it is a result of a 200-year-old pact Haiti made with the devil!

"And so the devil said, 'OK, it's a deal,'" Robertson said. "And they kicked the French out, the Haitians revolted and got themselves free.

"But ever since they have been cursed by one thing after the other, desperately poor."

Whatever that man believes in is not God. It is a vengeful idol that that seems thirsty for the blood of those that Pat the idiot personally hates, and the blood of their children and their children's children all the way for over 2 centuries.

Who would want to worship a god like that!

Whatever he believes in, is no different from the mythological gods (lowercase g) that Romans and ancient Greeks have invented for theatrical and story telling purposes - gods that fought over women, got drunk and messed up humans' life just for fun or to spite each other. These 'gods' had nothing divine or respectable about them.

Yet, what Pat the idiot believes in seems to me a lot worse that those mythical gods. It is just the personal idol of that senile idiot and his stupid followers - all millions of them.

And what a shame that a super idiot becomes a super-clergy for some; with hundreds of millions of dollars under his control, and millions of votes at his disposal.

No matter what you think Jesus is, peace be upon him, he would be ashamed that a monster like Pat Robertson, claims to belong to him.

And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him. ( John 4:16)

Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' (Matthew 22:37-39)

Khaled

Please support Muslim campaign for Relief effort in Haiti

Islamic Relief USA: Haiti Emergency Compaign

Does Religion have a Stupefying Effect of People?

Religion is a mean for God to open the eyes of its creatures, and enlighten them to what is right and what is wrong. He thus teaches us how to handle injustice and oppression, in the hope that this may lead to more equitable, human and just society. In a nutshell, religion teaches us to be smarter human beings, by learning the rule on how to build good societies.

Every time I approach the Quran it feels that a new window is open for me. Reading about the Prophet and his teachings lead me to one feeling: how great his message was, not in a metaphysical sense, but in a very concrete intellectual sense.

And as I am reading about the history of the early great teachers of Islam and the great scholars that established the different schools of thought, iit is striking how liberal, progressive, intellectual and human these teachers and intellectuals were.

How come then when you look at the outcome of many ultra-religious people these days one cannot help but wonder: why would the same message that lead to the lightning-speed evolution of an enlightened culture and civilization, seem to be a gigantic stupefying factor for so many so-called religious people?

In my previous post I talked about a 'joke of a scholar' in Saudi Arabia who denounced demonstrations supporting Gaza citizens at a time of their ongoing slaughter that claimed 450 Palestinian lives so far (Out of one and a half million people of Gaza, that is equivalent to 90000 in a population the size of Europe or the US).

Now, it is touching closer to home. A friend and a Muslim activist in St. Louis received a stupid email that is more upsetting, and decided to share with me that shameful piece of nonsense:

My respected Muslim brothers and sisters, may Allaah shower you with His mercy. We advise all of you to avoid any form of street demonstrations taking place anywhere. They are not from the means of rectification of the hardships that befall the Ummah. Rather, as Shaikh Muhammad ibn Umar al-Bazmool stated, demonstrations are not from the means of rectification, not from the Sunnah of the Messenger (sallallaahu alaihi wassallam) and nor from the sunnah of the righteous predecessors.

Then that person goes on to claim that:

Demonstrations are not considered as being from the means of da’wah nor jihaad as the scholars have explained. So beware and warn the muslims from participating in this futile act that is not from the Islamic religion.

He then quotes the 'authority' sheik literally (and many other hyper-conservative sheiks in passing):

Answer: There is no benefit in demonstrations – it is just commotion. It is from the types of disorder. How will it cause harm to the enemy if the people go out and demonstrate in one of the streets, raising their voices? Rather, this is from the things that will only make the enemy pleased and happy. Thus he will say: “This has harmed and hurt them.” So the enemy will rejoice.

Does that sound stupid to you as it sounds to me? would you trust such a brain to make decisions that influences your life?

If you think religion has enlighten or educated these people, you are mistaken. They are lacking the common sense and any understanding of modern culture. They may have memorized a lot of text. But carrying the books (on your back or in your memory) is one thing, and using knowledge in those books is another (See what God said as a parable for such people in Chapter 62:5)

Unfortunately, this is what happens in a culture where how much you memorize sets your stature amongst your peers. The culture of copying and memorizing dominates many hyper-religious individuals and institutions, where the goal is to retain and regurgitate bits of information, not to process knowledge.

I would not even call these people Salafi's or conservatives. Linking any of them to intellectual schools of thought is an insult to those schools, even though I disagree with many of the conclusions of those schools of thought. These fake authorities have no thought process to talk about, therefore they are not part of a 'school of thought'.

And let me give you these examples on how our enlightened teachers and early coreligionists handled communicating messages to leaders:

• When the prophet wanted to communicate to heads of states and other societies leaders during his years in Medina he sent them letters with messengers.
• When Muslims disagreed with the prophet on an issue that did not seem like part of Islamic theology, they talked directly to him as it was the case with the military advise he received during the battle of Badr given by a companion who felt the Prophet's plan was not the best. The great Prophet thought about it, and yielded to the man's opinion.
• When a woman heard an opinion from the Prophet that she did not agree with, she told him that, and gave her opinion. He did not agree with her, so she came the following day arguing her case again, and again. The Quran documented this interesting interaction in the chapter named "The Arguing Woman" (Al-Mujadilah, Chapter 58:1 ), not to reprimand her, but to reveal that actually God agreed with her opinion, the opinion she made publicly and repetitively with the Prophet, peace me upon him.
• When a woman did not like what Omar, the second great civil leader, said during a Friday sermon, she did not keep her mouth shut. She stood up immediately, confronted him and proved her point by using a reference from the Quran. Omar, the great leader of an extensive Muslim empire, conceded with his famous statement: The woman is right, Omar is wrong, reversing his opinion on the spot.
• The great scholars of early Islamic centuries never stopped communicating to their heads of state, as well as the provincial and local appointees in charge. That was a time when they could simply go to the king, or province governor, and meet with them. If that was not feasible, they delivered written messages,that the leaders were obliges to receive, read and act upon, sometimes agreeing with the scholars, sometimes rejecting their advice.

That was then.

Today, the common sense and the prevalent culture teaches us that a message written to a leader will not reach them (especially in our 'lucky' Muslim countries). It also teaches us that requesting a meeting with the king, the president, or the head of a foreign state to express an opposing opinion will at best get people to laugh at you. At worst, it may get you midnight visitors to teach you a lesson on how to behave properly as a citizen.

And contrary to the women that publicly argued and opposed the Prophet and his second successor Omar, opposing you modern day Muslim leader face to face, or arguing with them in public using evidence from the Quran will not fare well for your survival or your future welfare.

The modern and prevalent culture teaches us that demonstrations in the street (without violence) are one effective way to deliver our messages to rulers - locally and abroad - and to fellow citizens as well as the whole world. Different times need different communication tools.

Why would that simple fact of life appear so difficult to grasp for those fancy 'scholarly' Sheiks, also commonly known in Arab cultures as 'the government scholars'?

One answer would be that they are integral parts of ruling regimes that do not like protests by citizen. Protests and 'noisy and messy', where people 'raise their voices' (to quote the email sheik literally), and call for change. And why would sheiks want to change anything when their patron leaders, and their highly paid scholars are happy with the way things are for them?

But another answer may be more important, especially with the large number of self-proclaimed scholars who do not have strong association with ruling hierarchy in their countries, yet they come up with equally stupid edicts .

A hall mark of our early true scholars that I mentioned above is that they lived as an integrated part of their societies. Their knowledge was more useful and durable because it was a result of the 'textbook knowledge' interacting with common sense and proper knowledge of the world around them.

Of special note in this respect is the high esteem for Abu Hanifa's jurisprudence on contracts and market transactions which is attributed to his profound knowledge of market operations of his time, being a tradesman himself. Another great scholar like Ibn Hazm showed comprehensive and creative way of approaching religious analysis that is at least attributed to the diverse and eclectic nature of the prevalent culture of Spain in his lifetime.

These examples contrast with the way many 'hyper-pious' individuals and scholars handle life today. They live in shells, isolated from everyday life, with little or no cultural or intellectual interactions with anyone even slightly different from themselves. These so-called scholars know little about modern day life, society, culture, communication skills, politics or modern physical and social sciences. Yet, they feel comfortable telling us what to do with our everyday life.

How arrogant!!

As for the fact the 'email scholar' mentioned that the Prophet and his honorable companions did not demonstrate on the streets: that is not much of an argument. According to widely accepted jurisprudence rules, the original ruling for all things is that they are permitted. So, unless they prove that street demonstrations are religiously forbidden by the Holy Quran or the authenticated Prophetic narrations, those fake scholars better keep their mouths shut.

And, if they need an explicit permission from the The Prophet's teachings or the Quran for everything they do, then please ask them stop using running water, indoor bathrooms, computers, air conditioning, TV and eyeglasses.

And while we are at it, let us all pray they stop using emails, internet, cars, cellular phones and airplanes.

That way they may vanish from our view and from our life while they continue to live in the caves that they are intellectually living in.

An that would be a blessing for the rest of us.

Khaled

How stupid can a senior clergy be?

We are all familiar with the 'absent minded scientist' stereotype. And we all may have an example or two of brilliant scientists that left a legacy of funny stories about them, and rumors of weird obsessions and habits.

Some scientists may even be known for being mean and even evil people. We can live with an odd genius, when we see that their brilliance in their own science makes it all worthwhile.
But how would you put up with a 'scholar' whose weirdness is in his own science and knowledge.

I came across an example of the latter. An ugly example at a time when ugliness is coming in abundance from the poor land of Gaza, may God help its people.

For the Arabic speakers among you, please take a deep breath and calm down. Throwing your shoe at his image on the screen will only ruin your fancy LCD monitor.

For the non-Arabic speakers, here is the translation:

President of the Saudi Judiciary Council [states]: Demonstrations [in support] of Gaza is demagogic denouncement that prevents people from remembering God

London - President of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary in Saudi Arabia, sheik Saleh Al-Luhaidan, described the demonstrations by the Arab public in many Arabic countries to denounce the Israeli aggression in Gasa strip as "corruption on earth", explaining his interpretation by the fact that demonstrations 'stop people from remembering God, even if there was no rioting".

What on earth is this guy inhaling?

What is worse is that the position that guy occupies is not a secular position - it is a religious position as all judiciary activities are controlled by clergy in Saudi Arabia. That is to say this person is a religious authority!!!


And like a 'scientist', he uses evidence. In summary, his evidence was that the earliest recorded political demonstration in Islamic history (in his belief anyway), led to "evil and major trial of the Muslim nation".

He was in reality referring to a riot by angry mob over 1400 years ago, protesting the third Political leader in Islam, Uthman, nearly 20 years after Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, dies.

So, that Sheikh thinks a mob riot 1400 years ago is a valid argument against demonstrations supporting our brothers and sisters being bombarded by tons of high-powered explosives while their hands are tied.

Does the Prophetic saying that "Believers are like one body, when part of it is sick, the rest of the body responds with restlessness and fever" has some hidden exclusion for the people of Gaza?

And I guest this "scholar's" appointment and employment by the Saudi Royal Family - whose rules prohibit political demonstrations, and protests of any kind - is just a coincidence.

But as the saying goes: the worst of religious scholars are those fed of the Sultans money.

Some scholar he is. And with scholars like that, who needs enemies.

Khaled

Links (Sorry, Arabic only):

رئيس مجلس القضاء السعودي: مظاهرات غزة استنكار غوغائي يصد الناس عن ذكر الله