In a message dated 3/12/1999 7:23:04 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< How about liberating all these women from the yoke of shariat while you are
there Nicole? Please be mindful of ending the sunna once and for all. No more
circumcision! >>
Uhm,
"ending the sunna"? Let me share a "little" bit with you:
Sunnah are the words or acts that Prophet Muhamad (SAW) did or agreed to and
it is optional for muslims to follow, and it is only said that those who do
will receive extra rewards from Allah. In some cases they are legally binding
precedent however - there are many recorded sunnah, some are valid and some
have been made up to advance ideologies or simply as confusions. I suggest
before you comment on the Sunnah, or cut and paste comments, you gain a fuller
awareness of what is actually in the sunnah, what is valid, what is not valid.
Have you ever read the Koran in full? In translation? In Arabic? If you did,
you would be aware of a chapter loosely translated as "she who argues" in
which a woman felt that she was not receiving a fair judgement on an issue,
and she directly challenged the Prophet and was proven correct - and the
Prophet Muhammad changed his decision and noted that it was she who proved his
enlightenment. This reflects a significant sensibility that is as much part
of Islam as any. The Koran contains numerous statements which clearly state
that not only is a woman a muslim in her own stead, but a creation of Allah in
her own right - not a creation from the rib of a man.
You certainly need to be aware that there is no islamic "command" to
circumcise women.
Circumcision is NOT done only by muslims - in fact, it was also done in some
capacity by the ancient egyptians, and is cultural to SOME ethnicities among
Africans, Arabs, Indians, Asians.
Your comment about the shariat is a very malinformed and "sweeping" superhero
type statement. You also wrote of Afghan women " They have this to say about
Shariat: "Today, with shameless backing of their foreign masters, Taliban
consider it their first duty to deny our women their most basic rights and
keep them in medieval fetters. Cynically exploiting popular beliefs they
justify their ever increasing pressure on women in the name of Islam and
Sharia. "
Even in your quote, please note that it was said "in the name of Islam and
Sharia". People who have more than a cursory understanding of Islam know that
what the Taliban have instituted is NOT in line with Islam. If you do further
reading on the topic, you will learn that most of the Taliban are illiterate
and among their first tasks were to attack, murder, exile the educated and
literate - those able to read the koran and who held far different views. This
is strange given the definition of the word Taliban - and that discrepency
indicates a lot about the situation. They are acting on their demented view of
islamic texts that most of them cannot read, have never read directly. They no
more act in the spirit and text of Islam than do neo-nazi christians act in
the spirit and text of Christianity
Sharia is Islamic Law, based upon the Qur'an and the Hadeeth. The hadeeth are
traditions, commonly referred to as the traditions of the Prophet (swt). They
are in two forms; orally, stories of the Prophet, what he said, did, or gave
appoval to, passed down from one generation to another - and of course the
question of validity and interpretation exist.
People study years to obtain an understanding of islamic law, as they do with
the law within other countries - and for you to decide that you know enough to
make a judge on what it is, what it says about women, is ridiculous if you
have never read any aspect of the sharia, most certainly if you have not read
the actual arabic text.
It is fine to read an article or even several articles about the Taliban, or
other islamic issues, and form an opinion, even be outraged or disturbed by
what you read, but unless you have a substantive knowledge of such issues,
texts, as well as of the cultures within Islam (as each country has its own
interpretation, application and traditional non-islamic culture that it brings
to it) then when you go beyond just commenting , your opinions don't carry
sufficient credibility to address the situations in a meaningful way. Your
lack of knowledge renders you incapable of solid analysis of articles on the
topic - which can be biased or incomplete, or even when it is a direct quote,
(as I noted above) instead you can easily make statements that are severly
lacking in coherence and accuracy. This does not help the issue, as you say
you want to do. You are also in no position to advise anyone beyond the
superficial.
You commented on reproductive freedom - I note to you that both christianity
and judaism have severe flaws in their interpretation of such. However, it is
worthy to note that in Islam, even abortion is allowed when it is to be done
for the health of the mother - because her preservation is considered
foremost. Invitro fertilization is allowed, when it is the egg and sperm of
the married couple - because a marriage contract is between two people. On a
brief note, the Koran does not promote polygamy - it actually identifies a
marriage of two people as ideal and since Islam entered into a culture that
already had polygamy, it actually regulates the terms of polygamy and applies
numerous strict conditions on it - most of which were meant to protect women,
and meant to encourage the ending of the practice. The koran outlines
protections for the money of women from men - even their husbands, their
ownership of land, and their right to spousal/child support in the event of a
divorce. Yes, divorce is actually allowed in Islam. A tiny, but worthy,
example of a sensibility within Islam is that even with the prohibition
against eating pork and drinking alcohol, if you are starving or thirsty with
risk of severe discomfort, illness, death, then Islam requires you to break
those prohibitions. This tiny example reflects a fundamental perspective on
the spirit of Islam, as oppose to what is simply what is in the text and what
divided into Fard, Halal, Haram and Makruh and Mandub.
The Taliban enforce strict codes a woman's covering and being "hidden" In
Islam, in regards to covering up and being isolated - the text specifies hijab
- the word coming from the arabic word "hajaba" which means modesty - in
behavior and dress, applies to both men and women, and can refer to a curtain
to an article of clothing to way of speaking. Haya is a term which covers a
large number of concepts which are to be taken together among them are self-
respect, honesty, modesty, bashfulness, scruples, etc.
According to the Koran, Allah does not say "wear hijab," or "cover your head."
What allah does say is:
Tell the believing women to lower their gaze, protect their gentials, and
display only that which is ordinarily visible of their beauty, and to cover
their chests with their coverings (24:31)
Oh Prophet, tell your wives and daughters, and the women of the believers to
lengthen their outer garments so that they will be recognized and not molested
(33:59).
I have translated the above from the clear Arabic in the Koran. It is not
unlike the view of many women in the west who don't reveal all of their bodies
and take caution about how they dress when they go different places, formal,
informal, and judging by the audience and type of people around - especially
in male environments (say military bases). The koran also specifies the
responsibility of men not to molest women, regardless of how they dress. Allah
does say to guard the private parts, and specifies the "furuj" or gentials,
and to cover the (women's) chests. Aren't there some women who wear shirts and
who don't like to wear low cut clothing or have "nipple sightings"?
In addition, Allah is attribute with saying to make our outer garments
(jalabib) lower to the ground (yudnina). Allah does not mention 'hijab' as
some specific piece of clothing as the chador or covering the head. This is
just one brief example of the way in which the Taliban are not following
Islam, either in text or spirit, when it urges different and restrictive
practices against women.
There is a strong understanding among most Muslims that Islam puts forth
values such as justice and equality, gives us goals, targets that are to be
achieved for positive behavior - that despite areas where the koran (like
other religious texts) is not just to women, that the path is shown to follow
the spirit and intent as our goal, not as a derogation from the koran but to
follow the text more faithfully.
The word Ijtihad means "interpretation from religious source texts" - a
mujtahid is a person skilled in the practice of interpretating from religious
source texts (hadeeth, sunna, koran) - and can be either male or female.
Ijtihad is a method of using the same methodological rules to interact with
the text in a different way to reach a different fatwa (formed legal opinion
by a qualified specialist), to teach a different opinion or islamic
interpretation. To change the methodology itself is another area. However, it
is useful to understand that the ability in Islam to use ijithad this way is
fundamental islam, and something that most people - especially non-muslims and
those who do not study Islam, are unaware exists in Islam.
There is a massive question about Itjtihad and about changing the
methodological rules of Usul al-fiqh (codifed principles of textual exegesis,
or rather simply the science of jurisprudence, foundation of jurisprudence)
and usul al-tafsir (principles for expounding explanatory commentary on the
koran).
Some important points:
1) the Qur'an was recorded within a few year after the Prophet's death under
'Uthman
2) the Hadeeth was recorded two or three hundred years after the Prophet's
death, so the Hadeeth, all of Sunnah, was an oral history for between
two/three hundred years before it was written/recorded.
3) all of the founding jurists of Islamic jurisprudence, notably Al-Shafe'i,
who is the founder of usul al-fiqh, did their work 150 years to 250 years
after the Prophet died. Muslims lived as a muslim community without the term
usul al fiqh, being known or used anywhere - shari'a was not known or used at
all.
The thrust of such an analysis is that there are some who want to work within
the Usul al fiqh and some who want to change it - and to change usul al-fiqh
is not against Allah, because it is clearly a manmade science, not divine, not
in the Quran, not in the Sunnah. There are numerous scholars, include many
muslim women from africa, arab countries, india and asian cultures such as
malaysia who are doing strong work to go beyond whatever paradigms that are
anti-women set down within usul al-fiqh, not just evaluating what can be done
within the boundaries.
There isn't even a problem that there are not ijtihad about the strong rights
of women in islamic societies. The problem is the acceptance in some
countries, among some leaders, of this ijtihad. Within a society where the
state is trying to monopolize power, has it own institutions which claim to
know best what Islamic Law is - or has its own illiterate Taliban. This can
apply to any country in the world, regardless of religion where the leaders,
or virulent members of society, religious groups, political groups, abuse
power, malign human rights, even women's human rights - Australia, England,
the United States, Russia, China, Japan and so on. It is even an issue within
many religions and branches of religions, many political systems, cultures.
I find that I am more coherent when discussing this topic because I study
Sharia, the Koran, etc. with a concentration on women and governance, and can
make informed commentary on both the existing text as well as situations
regarding islam. It must seem a bit strange to you and joe dees, but I kind of
like, really need for comfort, to have some substantive knowledge of what I am
ranting about, whenever I chose to rant, rave, argue, debate, correct, comment
- open my mouth.
Even without challenging usul al-fiqh, I can analyze and present a new ijtihad
or present one of the many from a variety of powerful women scholars on the
topic. There are quite a few ijtihad of note which have been created by women
to advance their rights (without the liberation of non-muslims or chris).
Because I do care, personally and professionally, I work as part of Islamic
women's groups, African women's groups, contribute to discussions on the
topics between males, females, scholars, government officials, in the
Organization of Arab States, the Organization of African Unity, the Economic
Commission for Africa, etc. As part of the African caucus, which includes
women of African descent from around the world - much of the "arab" world is
in Africa and especially the gulf states where we have many black women - born
and raised - that is a consistent part of our agenda to analyze, address and
lobby governments, regional organizations on such topics. We also recognize
that such issues, violence is found all over the world, against women, against
men, done by not just Islam, but westerners, environmentalists, ecofeminists,
etc. - and we address those issues as well - actively, not via superhero
challenges, but on through grass roots, ngos, governmental/national, regional
and international.
I would assuredly be foolish if I felt that I could swoop in for a brief
period and liberate the women. When I hear or read people speaking like that,
it makes me believe that they don't take the issues seriously and certainly
aren't engaged in serious efforts to make changes. Such statements you have
presented are not the kind of statements people have when they are actually
working directly on and within such issues. It is like a vet being presented
with a dog with a broken leg and being told to "heal" the dog. The vet will
understand that there is a bit more intricate and detailed analysis and work
involved, than that stated "mission" implies.
If I possessed that power, I would have done it long ago - being raised around
and among such issues - and would not need you to advise me, however
passionately to do so.
I don't know why you feel you need to direct me to have such an awareness?
I asked about environmental issues, where I do not have a full background,
especially not for that region and wanted those who did to advise me. You
respond by giving me a lecture on the Taliban and even more strangely you
write
" Having stated your mission so succinctly, you owe us a duty to report
backto us all on your return, how well you have carried the liberation
forward! If you need help, you know I am here to oblige to the full. "
There is a chance that this is an area where I have more knowledge, personal
experience, activism, contacts and focus than you do - yet you feel qualified
to state my "mission".
You also feel qualified for me to seek help from you, and think that if I
needed help I would go to you - assuming that I don't already have "help" far
and away more qualified than you will most likely ever be.
I have heard tell of situations in which a man feels automatically that he is
more qualified, more knowledgeable than a woman, without any qualifications to
truly be more, but I can't quite remember what the word is for that is,
perhaps you can help me on that point? You may have more experience in that
area. Or is it not my gender, but my ethnicity which makes you feel more
qualified, without knowing my knowledge on this topic and while clearly
outlining your lack of knowledge.
I also need to let you know that I don't owe you, or that collective "us" of
this list, anything as you have phrased it. I do however, feel I owe it to
those women, to be substantively informed on the issue and to assist in ways
that are somewhat deeper than an emailed statement about going to liberate the
women while on vacation. That is why I chose my area of studies, work and
activism long long years ago. I think such comments as you have presented
trivilalize the situations so severely that it taxes my heart to even touch
upon how depraved and indifferent it sounds. It seems to be a joke, which is
also horrific because the situation is not a joke. Joe Dees, on the other
hand, goes far beyond triviliazing into the area of venomous commentary which
represents the very worst of the so-called liberals and "concerned westerners"
and people like him do not care what tremendous damage those attitdues inflict
on the lives of people they claim to advocate. Yet he howls in protest,
curses and threatens when I tell him that he is wrong. Yet some so called
feminists on this list feel that if I disagree with him, then I am thinking
only concerned with my opinions - as if they would not disagree strongly with
men who seek to oppress and insult all areas of the women's movement.
Yesterday afternoon, I met with a woman, a mentor of mine, who was
representing both the government of Yemen (yes a woman) and a Yemeni woman's
organization as part of the current Commission on the status of women at the
United Nations. I talked to her about my upcoming visit to Yemen, as well as
some other things we are working on collectively - one of which is the Taliban
issue upon which we directly focus on several fronts, with a variety of
activities - which support the efforts and goals of afghani women, many of
whom in the diaspora and even in the country are active in this fight. We all
tend to address it a bit more realistically than just saying "let's liberate
the women".
Chris, you wouldn't survive very long with the type of stuff you write without
being banished out of the groups of women with whom I work. The woman who are
the grassroots of such issues - they are also the scholars, the doctors,
lawyers, academics, government representatives, the women whom you think are
sitting around waiting for you to liberate them.
The issues of women in islamic society, of Sharia, Fitnah, etc. are far too
massive and detailed to be broken down into one book, much less one email.
However, I have sought to present a bit of a response to what you have written
to me.
I want you to understand, as this is not the first time you have mentioned
circumcision or islam or the taliban to me, that while I respect your
interests, please stop addressing me as if I am a child, unaware of the
situations, histories and issues, and simply wait on your command to take
action, wait on your insight and advisement to care, to be active. This does
not at all reflect reality.
Contrary to what Hayley has written about me, I think that when I disagree
with someone on a topic, and I am able to present an opinion based on fact and
experience then it is fully appropriate for me to express myself and even to
say that someone is wrong. I urge her to think more about being objective and
putting the burden on those who so very quickly give opinions on such issues,
topics without a basis of fact and experience.
Nicole
