It’s a Man’s World, We Women Just live in it:The Koran

In keeping with my updates on my Koran reading, I will report that I soldiered on to the next two surahs, Al-Imran and al-Nisa (The Woman), in order to read the Koran authentically as it was introduced to the world. Per some wise advice, I plan on now reading from the last surah’s first, although in all honesty the two surahs that I just read would be just as hard for me to personally digest later as they were now.

Al-Imran continued with the previous ideas of punishing the wicked and the non-believers. I must admit, a (no doubt blasphemous) thought crossed my mind: God is highly authoritarian, almost like a dictator! Basically, “do as I say or feel my wrath.” Of course, unlike a real dictator, God is “merciful,” as the Koran keeps telling me, and so one can reason with him and be forgiven, but passages like “3:83″ where it constantly goes on and on about punishment is somewhat unnerving.

A good line:

“Indeed, you have argued aboutthingsof which you have some knowledge. Must you now argue about that which you know nothing at all?(3:66)

“Al-Nisa” or “The Woman” was a much more interesting (if outraging) chapter, as one can infer simply by it’s title. Again, the Koran proves to me that all those crazy fanatics out there might be following a partial truth about Islam: witness line 4:34:

“Men have superiority over women because god has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. good women are obedient.”

Again, I will repeat: I’m not sure how any self-respecting woman can read these words and agree with the Koran and Islam. A book that denounces human rights should certainly not be used as the basis of any law (see: Shariah). It then goes on to say that a man can beat a disobedient wife! Now we’re promoting domestic abuse? Absolutely not! I know that one “virtue” of the Koran that Muslims extoll is that it, unlike the Bible or Torah, has not been changed in format or content, in part due to the fact that the original was written in Arabic and thus can still be read by modern people today. However, I think that (like slavery and concubinage before it) it would be great justice and no great sin if people would expunge these words of “superiority over women” and “beat them” out of the Koran. Do you think the millions of Africans or Asians would follow Islam if the book said “White males are superior over Black males or Asian males?” I don’t think so! Thus, women are again swept under the doormat. Stick up for yourselves!

“God wishes to lighten your burdens, for man was created weak.” (Line 4:27)

I can’t help but assume that a book such as the Koran only adds to a persons burdens, as the religious try so hard to be good Muslims!

On a more cheerful, peaceful note: all this talk about gardens with running streams sounds highly delightful (if not out of date with what a modern person might dream of Paradise). I suppose the thought of a stream and lush vegetation while one was living in a dry, stony desert was quite the mirage! Garden of Eden, anyone?

Gardens in Cairo: paradise? (Excuse the poor quality)

Woe to Foes: The Koran

“Ya Rab ah deeny” I was told to repeat twice each time before I started reading the Koran.

“What does it mean?” I asked, doubtfully. It sounded like something that an actual Muslim would say, not somebody who is simply curious about the religion which is playing such a crucial role in world events.

“Just say it, you must.” Was all the answer I was given.

Thus I began my reading of the Koran. I find that one cannot accurately critique something if one does not have accurate knowledge of that very thing. I find that you should know what others are thinking, believing, following, in order to understand them better. Knowledge, as I have been stressing, eliminates prejudices, opens the heart and mind and can prevent catastrophe. After reading so much about the Middle East, and 2 months this past spring living in a Muslim country, I realized the glaring error that stared me in the face every time I enter the library: I had not yet read the Koran, the centerpiece of Islam, the very foundation of the Middle East.

Penguin Classic's "The Koran", translated by N. J. Dawood (c) 1999 (the version I am reading)

So far, I have read the first two chapters, or surahs: Al-Fatihah (The Exordium) and Al-Baqarah (The Cow), which is not saying much as Al-Fatihah is simply a one-page prayer of sorts. For a girl who had only ever read a children’s bible stories collection, the Koran is a strange read. I expect it, like those bible stories, to be laced with an air of fantasy, of fairy tales, but Al-Baqarah is more of a warning, a punishing death sentence than any fairy tale. Like a fairy tale, however, the purpose of the Koran is to teach age-old lessons of life, and the moral of “Al-Baqarah” appears to me to be :

Non-believers are condemned to eternal hell fire and shall not be forgiven, while believers, even though they may stray, will be forgiven. In even simpler terms: believe or burn!

I am a bit confused (and would love for someone to clarify this for me) as to if “non-believers” includes Jews and Christians. It may be an atrociously stupid question, but already this first surah mentions several times Jesus, Abraham, Moses and Adam and exalts them, even though in the Christian faith these men also exist and are seen as symbols of Christianity. Are these men non-believers?And why, if Christians, Jews and Muslims believe in the very same people, words and books as Muslims would they be punished with fire after death? Wouldn’t that be like sacrificing your own brother? If Allah is so merciful and compassionate, than how could he let mankind–even if they are unbelievers–have such a woeful fate?

As with most readings, there were both things that I agreed, as well as disagreed, with. For example: “He who suspects an error or an injustice on the part of a testator and brings about a settlement among the parties incurs no guilt” (in regarding people’s wills after death). I certainly wish that several people who I love  had held such a belief, before they were allowed to be trampled.

Or: “Fight for the sake of God those who fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love aggressors.” (line 2:195) I certainly wish the terrorists of 9/11 had followed the true Koran and not been aggressors before they committed such atrocities.

Or: “But you may hate a thing although it is good for you, and love a  thing although it is bad for you.” (2:216) I have stressed this argument many a time, and recently, too.

As for that which I disagreed with, it was a single line which will forever be the thorn in the side of the Koran: “Women shall with justice have rights similar to those exercised against them, although men have a status above women.” (2:217) I would not agree that God is mighty and wise for proposing such a statement. After reading this line, which clear as day can bear no other translation, I fear that the Koran might forever be tarnished in my mind and judgment. I do not understand how it could be the will of such a omniscient and caring God that women should be considered unequal to men. The feminist in me burns at the fact that millions of women believe in this very book, this very book that puts them down. Perhaps they agree with this line? How could they?

I know that the Koran stresses dignity for women; it stresses right here in the very same line that women should have rights “similar” to those of men. But “similar” is not the same as “equal,” is it? After all: “women are your fields: go, then, into your fields whence you please.” (2:222) And what if the women, this object, this property, doesn’t want? I fear, then, that despite the rights of women that the Koran suggests, that this one line cancels them all out and supports the ill-treatment of women that I have read about throughout the Muslim world. I hope against hope that there is a better translation to be inferred from such a line, but this one small little line looms grand against all the justice and poetry that this book must hold.

Which is why I will question it, will even enjoy it and agree with it at times, but cannot bring my self to follow it.

S-L-M

The End of Gaddafi, the Start of a New Libya

Being away from the computer for a mere 24 hours shows that a lot can happen! I returned home from NYC to find out that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi had been killed, thus punctuating the end of over-long era.

The fate of Gaddafi–the first of the Arab Spring dictators to be killed- is one that all dictators who rule with an iron fist (are there any who don’t??) must know is always a possibility down the line. True, Ben Ali of Tunisia managed to escape whatever fate the Tunisians had in store for him by fleeing to Saudi Arabia. Hosny Mubarak of Egypt was arrested, stripped of his millions and his dignity as he was wheeled into court. Will he be punished by death, like Gaddafi? Gaddafi’s fate might seem like the worst punishment, but in a sense it isn’t. Mubarak certainly has it worse as he is forced to sit chained in the grille box that criminals sit in in court: that level of humility is high. Ben Ali, although “free,” is exiled from the country of his birth and everything that implies–certainly not a light sentence. It makes one wonder: how does it feel to be a former leader removed from power by the citizens you once ruled who came to loathe you?

Alas, little sympathy can be spared for such figures, as they have run their countries into the ground economically, had dissenters silenced and/or murdered and basically used their power for corruption. These are people who appear to have little empathy. Wasn’t Saddam Hussein still cursing the Americans just before he was hanged, saying we’d all go to hell? You would think that he might have felt a bit of remorse for what he had done, seeing that if he hadn’t been so greedy in the first place he wouldn’t have become reviled, captured and executed. I don’t suppose there’s ever been a dictator who actually did good for their country.

The downfall of a dictator does not automatically mean that a country is “saved” and liberated. Egypt is struggling with it’s military rule. Iraq is a country still engaged in war, and torn apart. Did Libya “win it’s revolution,” as President Obama said? Yes, they might have gotten rid of their eccentric dictator  but the battle has really only begun. Now is their chance to create the Libya that they have been waiting for.

Good luck!

S-L-M

Terrorism: Synonymous with Islam?

  A recent CNN article lists the names of American citizens who have tried to take America down via terrorism and atrocious acts. Focusing on recent times, every single person listed on that article was a devotee of Islam. As I read the article, I began to question: were there other notable acts of homecountry sabotage that had occured in recent years that were NOT perpetrated by a Muslim? If so, was there a reason why they were not included in the article? Or perhaps the author just wanted to be biased?

    However, it is not just one CNN author who seems to agree that to be a terrorist means also to be a Muslim: the two words are nearly synonymous, it seems, in many people’s opinion. Ask anyone what a terrorist is, and they will probably throw in the word “Islam” or “Muslim” somewhere at some point. This is disturbing. I know that here, in America, many (even most) terroists have been Muslims hell-bent on teaching our country a lesson as they decry our lack of morality (a tad ironic, a mon avis) but the two words should not be synonymous.

     I made a google search by typing in the word “terrorist.” What did I find?

• Wikipedia listed “Definitions of terrorism”-History of Terrorism-Islamic Terrorism and Jewish (!) on it’s link blurb
• Merriam-Webster’s definition of terrorism: “the systematic use of terror especially as a means for coercion” (Islam is not mentioned!)
• Many images for terrorism mostly showing Osama bin Laden and the Twin towers
• A link to an article from Boston.com about two young men of Middle Eastern descent, who were falsely accused of terrorism and accosted by the FBI why? Because they drove a car with alternative fuel tanks inside.

This last find (along with the many images) only enhanced the CNN article’s take that “all terrorists are Muslims.” Perhaps the police were right to investigate, but if these men had not been Arab they would most likely not have bothered. The same goes for the Muslim woman who is suing Southwest Airlines for being removed from her flight for allegedly saying the words “It’s a go.” If a stewardess had heard me, a white American, say those words, they would not have blinked twice.

    Unfortunately, it takes just a few people to give a bad name to any group, organization, religion, etc. However, we must combat this. If we teach the younger generation that “All terrorists are Muslims” what will that do for our world? It will spread prejudice as these children believe that anyone believing in Allah also hates the USA and wants to bring it down. It will spread fear–just what the terrorists want.

Cartoon from India Talkies.com website

        The photo above, taken from the India Talkies website (link below), sums it up best. A terrorist can be anybody from any religion. As is the case with many countries in Europe (look at the people who tried to blow up the embassies in Greece) a terrorist can be someone fighting against their very nation, their very neighbors. Thus, it is time to stop associating the word “Islam” with “terrorism”!

S-L-M

Links:

1. http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/15/world/americans-us-plots/index.html?hpt=hp_c2 : “US Citizens who’ve plotted Terror in “America” by Ashley Fantz
2. http://www.indiatalkies.com/2010/12/pm-warns-terror-modules-internal-terrorism.html : “PM Warns of Terrorism Modules, internal terrorism” by Shipla
3. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2011/10/17/alternative_fuel_experiment_by_college_students_triggers_terrorism_response_in_tewksbury/
4. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism : “Vans fuel sparks Terrorism Response” by John M. Guilfoil

Salam alaykoum

In the Arabic language, words with similiar meanings are formed by the same root consonants. The words ‘Islam’ and ‘Salam’ both have the same 3 consonants:

S-L-M.

These 3 letters mean “peace” in Arabic.

Unfortunately, there is not a lot of peace in the world today. A lot of people, including radical Islamists, do not believe in peace or equality and thus there is a lot of fighting in the world. Similiarly, those who are suppressed are forced to struggle for their rights.

The Middle East today is quite far from the peace and “surrender” that Islam suggests. As Muslims themselves misinterpret the Koran for their own power and political gain and the West focuses on solely these negative people, misunderstanding occurs.

My goal, therefore, is to spread two messages: one, that Islam is a peaceful and righteous religion and thus the mistreatment that occurs in it’s name should be stopped, and two, that the Western world must educate itself about the real, and good Islam that exists.

I myself am not a Muslim, nor a Christian: my beliefs are that everyone is equal, everyone has the right to freedom, and that education is al-noor, or the light, to guide the world!

S-L-M