Muslim scholar issued a Fatwa (religous order) permitting women to blow themselves up

[Am Yisrael]

I dont usually debate about Islam the way some do here... but shouldnt there be outrage among Islamic communities worldwide?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1053759829935

May. 24, 2003
Muslim scholar declares women allowed to carry out terror suicide bombings
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

One of the leading global Muslim scholars has issued a Fatwa (religous order) permitting women to carry out suicide attacks.

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, an Egyptian who serves as the dean of Islamic Studies at the University of Qatar, issued his ruling in response to last week's bombing in Afula, which was carried out by 19-year-old Hiba Daraghmeh, a female student from Tubas in the northern West Bank.

"Women's participation in the martyrdom [suicide] operations carried out in Palestine given the status of the land as an occupied territory, in addition to a lot of sacrilegious acts perpetrated by the Jews against the sanctuaries is one of the most praised acts of worship," Qaradawi explained.

"Also, the act is a form of martyrdom for the cause of Allah, and it entitles them, inshallah, to the same reward earned by their male counterparts who also die in the cause of Allah."

He said Muslim jurists have unanimously agreed that when the enemy attacks part of the Muslim territories, jihad (holy war) becomes an individual duty of all.

"This obligation reaches a certain extent that a woman should go out for jihad even without the permission of her husband, and the son without the consent of his parents," he added.

"When Jihad becomes an individual duty, as when the enemy seizes Muslim territory, a woman becomes entitled to take part in it alongside men. Jurists maintained that: When the enemy assaults a given Muslim territory, it becomes incumbent upon all its residents to fight against them to the extent that a woman should go out even without the consent of her husband, a son can go too without the permission of his parent, a slave without the approval of his master, and the employee without the leave of his employer."

Qaradawi said that that a woman can participate in "this form of jihad according to her own means and condition."

According to the shiekh's fatwa, the organizers of the suicide attacks "could benefit from some believing women as they may do what is impossible for men to do."

He said Muslim women are allowed to violate Islamic teachings by traveling unaccompanied by a close male relative and without having to cover their heads for the sake of carrying out an attack.

"Concerning the issue of the hijab (veil), a woman can put on a hat or anything else to cover her hair," Qaradawi ruled.

"Even when necessary, she may take off her hijab in order to carry out the operation, for she is going to die in the cause of Allah and not to show off her beauty or uncover her hair. I don't see any problem in her taking off the hijab in this case. I think the committed Muslim women in Palestine have the right to participate and have their own role in jihad and to attain martyrdom."

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by Am Yisrael
I dont usually debate about Islam the way some do here... but shouldnt there be outrage among Islamic communities worldwide?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1053759829935

May. 24, 2003
Muslim scholar declares women allowed to carry out terror suicide bombings

Good segway for that wolf cry about bad Moslems smearing good name of Islam, the most peacefull and tolerant religion. Note, those are Moslem leaders and scholars. I guess the "good" Muslims are just sitting still, "peacefully and tolerantly" waiting for bad ones to prevail by way of atrocities and mass murder.

Nah, I take it back. Meanwhile, the "good" ones create demographic explosion and do the PR. So, any new bright-colored publication against it in English yet? Nobody sure is going challenge him in Arabic!

[andak01]

It seems this is the same Dr. Qaradawi of Doha is also credited with this quote, urging Arabs to give blood to the victims of civilian attacks in America. However, his opinion of the martyrdom operations of the Intifada and my own are in direct contrast. Let me remind you, though you may find it reprehensible, that holding such an opinion is still not a crime.

I publish this excerpt because it agrees with my own opinions. You can assume that anything he has to say about Israel or Palestine does not.

http://www.icna.org/Qarad.Fatwa1Eng.pdf
http://www.jimas.org/defence.htm

Some of them say that Islam was spread by the sword. Our Shaykh al-Ghazali - may Allah have mercy on him - used to say, "On the contrary, the Islam was not victorious by the sword, it was victorious over the sword, because the sword was raised to it, and it countered the sword with the sword, for force can only be defeated with force." And Shawqi - may Allah have mercy on him - has a few beautiful lines of poetry in Nahj al-Burdah in which he says,

They said the battles, and the Messengers of Allah were not sent
To kill a person, nor did they come with bloodshed,
Lies and misguidance, dreams and sophistry,
Conquests with the sword came after conquests with the pen.
If you meet evil with good, it cannot bear it,
And if you meet it with evil, it will be erased

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by andak01
Conquests with the sword came after conquests with the pen.


Is that why Arab/Moslem countries have the lowest literacy rates? See more details at the UN Arab Human Development Report.

"The whole Arab world translates about 330 books annually, one-fifth the number that Greece translates," the report noted. Even more astonishing, the survey found that the Arab world has translated as many books into Arabic during the past 1,000 years as Spain translates in just one year.

[cerulean]

Originally posted by andak01
It seems this is the same Dr. Qaradawi of Doha is also credited with this quote, urging Arabs to give blood to the victims of civilian attacks in America. However, his opinion of the martyrdom operations of the Intifada and my own are in direct contrast. Let me remind you, though you may find it reprehensible, that holding such an opinion is still not a crime.


So what if it's not a crime? According to you, Qaradawi is within his legal rights to encourage and promote murder-suicides committed by women. Have you checked the Qatar law to know for sure?

I presume that Qatar law would apply. But given he's encouraging murder-suicides to occur in Israel, I'm not sure Qatar law should be the one to consider. It would be nice if he could be named as a party to a lawsuit by one of the victims' families, since he fully deserves to be.

In any event, just because he won't be punished in Qatar has nothing to do with the morality of his statements. By any non-apologist standard, he is totally repugnant. Legal loopholes do not change that.

[andak01]

Originally posted by humus_sapiens
Is that why Arab/Moslem countries have the lowest literacy rates? See more details at the UN Arab Human Development Report.

"The whole Arab world translates about 330 books annually, one-fifth the number that Greece translates," the report noted. Even more astonishing, the survey found that the Arab world has translated as many books into Arabic during the past 1,000 years as Spain translates in just one year.

Wow. 330 books out of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Niger, Sudan, Qatar, UAE, Yemen, Oman and others. Difficult to believe. Is it that major translation houses elsewhere take on this job?

Here's a link to the report.
http://www.undp.org/rbas/ahdr/bychapter.html

[humus_sapiens]

Originally posted by andak01
Wow. 330 books out of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, Chad, Nigeria, Mali, Niger, Sudan, Qatar, UAE, Yemen, Oman and others. Difficult to believe. Is it that major translation houses elsewhere take on this job?

Here's a link to the report.
http://www.undp.org/rbas/ahdr/bychapter.html


In the report search for literal "330". The quote you "cannot believe" is at the end of pg. 78 (USING HUMAN CAPABILITIES: TOWARDS A KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY).

In the Andak's post #3 here in this thread he went way offtopic, then furhter offtopic still. This is typical tactics to hide an inconvenient subject behind another one, by giving an answer to the question different from the one that has been asked. Fooled me more than once.

[ibrodsky]

Originally posted by andak01
It seems this is the same Dr. Qaradawi of Doha is also credited with this quote, urging Arabs to give blood to the victims of civilian attacks in America. However, his opinion of the martyrdom operations of the Intifada and my own are in direct contrast. Let me remind you, though you may find it reprehensible, that holding such an opinion is still not a crime.

Whether it is a "crime" is not the point.

The point is the one I made the other day: mass murdering innocent civilians is perfectly acceptable to many Muslims, including their "leaders" and "scholars." The claim that terrorists are a tiny, isolated, band of outlaws in the peace-loving Muslim world simply isn't true.

Imagine if a widely respected rabbi, or a Bishop in the Catholic Church, supported suicide mass murder.

But it's good to know that you disagree with him about what you both call "martyrdom operations." Democracy sure is wonderful.

[andak01]

Originally posted by humus_sapiens
In the report search for literal "330". The quote you "cannot believe" is at the end of pg. 78 (USING HUMAN CAPABILITIES: TOWARDS A KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY).

In the Andak's post #3 here in this thread he went way offtopic, then furhter offtopic still. This is typical tactics to hide an inconvenient subject behind another one, by giving an answer to the question different from the one that has been asked. Fooled me more than once.

You could say thank you for providing a link that you neglected to. I guess that would be an interuption of the non-stop ad homs I've been getting of late. Yes. I read the quote and I have no other source to counter it with. According to you, being a Muslim, it's lucky that I can read at all. I would be very interested to know of the source of this illiteracy. The early Muslims were very keen on teaching everyone to read. The first word revealed in the Qur'an is "READ!". It's a strange state for a religion that is centered around a book to have illiterate followers. Perhaps that explains why some have strayed from the message.

It is very fortunate for the rewriters of history that the libraries of Baghdad have burnt down. Perhaps someday they will be able to prove that Arabs never existed at all.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by andak01
According to you, being a Muslim, it's lucky that I can read at all.
" A man reads what he wants to read and disregards the rest."

[Mediocrates]

I have seen that ~300 number in UN reports before. The real taxomony is 'creative works', non technical translations from some language into Arabic. I don't think it says anything about indigenous works in Arabic. It really says more about cross cultural fertilization than it does about literacy. According to the UNDP report literacy is not that high in the Arab world but it's above the rates of subsaharan Africa. Similarly internet penetration is lower in the Arab world than it is anywhere else in the world. It speaks to the exposure the Arab world has of anything outside of itself.

It's what I say about Arab antisemitism - that it's a rather pure form since virtually every Arab in the Arab world has never met, spoken with, listened to or read anything by any Jew any Israeli any American. And they've never met anyone who's met anyone who has. I have no doubt that many muslims can read and regularly read Torah. I also have doubt that like in the history of this country and the Puritans they also believe that the "bible" is the only book anyone has to know.

[andak01]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
It's what I say about Arab antisemitism - that it's a rather pure form since virtually every Arab in the Arab world has never met, spoken with, listened to or read anything by any Jew any Israeli any American. And they've never met anyone who's met anyone who has. I have no doubt that many muslims can read and regularly read Torah. I also have doubt that like in the history of this country and the Puritans they also believe that the "bible" is the only book anyone has to know.

You make some good points. That's why I wonder when I here people in America and Israel and India calling for segregation. The rest of the world is reaping the horror of segregation, the segregation that has gathered great momentum in the past century. This segregation is both a cause and an effect. The natural check and balance of political systems is warfare. When people go to war and attempt to destroy each other, they always end up taking up some of their customs. It was the Crusaders that brought back the Orient to Europe.

I am really sad over some of the things I saw in Morocco. In Fez is a University founded in 827 AD, now become a museum in a country with a 50% illiteracy rate. In Marakesh, the Koutoubia Mosque is named after the outdoor book market it replaced in the 10th century.

[Canajew]

Originally posted by andak01
According to you, being a Muslim, it's lucky that I can read at all. I would be very interested to know of the source of this illiteracy.
The early Muslims were very keen on teaching everyone to read.


The early muslims are not the same as today's. The muslims entered into their own dark ages around the 16th century and haven't loked back (or, more accurately, forward) since. The source of the illeteracy is likely a combination of factors, including the prevalence of dictatorships and religious authorities, the lack of education among women, and a history of disfunctional state management under the Ottomans. And yes, it is lucky you can read. Were you born a woman in taliban Afghanistan, such thing would not be tollerated.



The first word revealed in the Qur'an is "READ!". It's a strange state for a religion that is centered around a book to have illiterate followers. Perhaps that explains why some have strayed from the message.


Perhaps it does, but it is not really strange. the Christians in the middle ages behaved the exact same way, and their literacy rates were similarly low. But they got enlightened and adopted secularism and, over time, pluralism, and now Europe is fully literate. A similar enlightenmnet is what is necessary.

Plus, all religion is made up, and so you can't really blame others for "manipulating" the message. There is no real message anyways, at least other than that which is professed by the religion's adherents.

[andak01]

Originally posted by Canajew
The early muslims are not the same as today's. The muslims entered into their own dark ages around the 16th century and haven't loked back (or, more accurately, forward) since.

I agree. That's why it is important to note that Islam itself, as practiced in its original form has all of the elements necessary to operate in a technologically and economically changing world. There is no conflict with science or progress.


The source of the illeteracy is likely a combination of factors, including the prevalence of dictatorships and religious authorities, the lack of education among women, and a history of disfunctional state management under the Ottomans.

All of that is true, but you should also factor in the changes in education at the onset of colonialism. There was a segregation between secular and religious schools that contributed to radicalization and polarization. This is far from the only cause, but it should be factored in.


Perhaps it does, but it is not really strange. the Christians in the middle ages behaved the exact same way, and their literacy rates were similarly low. But they got enlightened and adopted secularism and, over time, pluralism, and now Europe is fully literate. A similar enlightenmnet is what is necessary.

Not all Christians or all Jews adopted secularization. Yet we live hand and hand with those people and don't have any problem with them. Orthodox Christians and Jews are seen for their positive contributions to the community, not as a bunch of pariahs. Muslims can be too, but it is going to take effort on both sides.


Plus, all religion is made up, and so you can't really blame others for "manipulating" the message.

This is your opinion, which you are entitled to. Not all of our other posters would agree that "all religion is made up".

[Canajew]

Originally posted by andak01
I agree. That's why it is important to note that Islam itself, as practiced in its original form has all of the elements necessary to operate in a technologically and economically changing world. There is no conflict with science or progress.


I don't know if you can go this far. The original Muslim religion did not contemplate a separation of church 9for lack of a better word) and state. As far as I know, it didn't allow interest to be paid on capital either. It was undoubtedly a great organizational tool at the time, but whether it could have changed with the times appropriately or not is moot. it has plainly not.



All of that is true, but you should also factor in the changes in education at the onset of colonialism. There was a segregation between secular and religious schools that contributed to radicalization and polarization. This is far from the only cause, but it should be factored in.


I agree with you. But on the flip side, part of the reason the Arab world moved even a little out of the middle ages is because of European presence. With the Europeans after WWI came a huge influx of capital, raw materials and expertise. Much of the institutional and educational infrastructure came from Europe at this time as well as the physical capital, like the railroads, sea ports etc...

But it is somewhat ironic that a big part of the reason we have problems today is that the Europeans were so tolerant of the locals' religion and allowed them independent schooling and organizations. Were they have discouraged religious education and favoured secularist education, the region may have come a long way. but that point is moot as well.



Not all Christians or all Jews adopted secularization. Yet we live hand and hand with those people and don't have any problem with them. Orthodox Christians and Jews are seen for their positive contributions to the community, not as a bunch of pariahs. Muslims can be too, but it is going to take effort on both sides.


I agree with you. And religious people were at the fore of secularizing the United States and much of Europe. But these are still secular, non-religious countries. And this, I think, is key.

And muslims seem to do a fair job of it here and in the US. They are generally positive contributors to the social fabric. But whether they could replicate this in an intollerant third world region rife with corruption and a lack of political accountability is another question entirely. Especially with the Suadi govenrment prostyltising (sic) as it is.



This is your opinion, which you are entitled to. Not all of our other posters would agree that "all religion is made up". [/B]

I assume they would not. But the burden should be on those who wish to demonstrate the existence of something, rather than on me who asserts that it does not exist. One can see how religion has evolved over the years, what has caused it to splinter and fragment, and what it tries to do to both alleviate fears and control populations.

And I stand by my position that it is made up. Not to say there is not a god, I have no idea. But the chances of any one particular religion being "right" is virtually nil, as they were all developed by people living in (relative degrees of) dark ages without any sort of undertsanding of what makes a rainbow, or what the stars are, or why people get leporasy and the like. Simply an effort by primative people to understand why things around them happen as they do. And used as a tool to unify, make cohesive and control populations for millenia. And it is still being used as such today.

Why is it that if I believe I am being watched by invisible aliens I am a wack-job, while if I believe I am being watched by an invisible omnipotent force who is looking after me, I am not? Seems to make little sense to me. And I went to Hebrew School.