Tagged: #jan25 Egypt Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • abunoor 3:53 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: #jan25 Egypt, , ,   

    Imam Suhaib Webb’s message from Cairo:

    As you all know, the brave people of Egypt are standing and asking for one thing: their basic freedom and right to live under the shade of justice. Sadly, there are those in the Middle East, as well as Washington, who are irresponsible enough to question such a right. How can we be satisfied with exporting everything from iPhones to MTV, but fail to share in exporting the foundations of our own country? Foundations we claim to hold as dear?

    As a global community, we can all relate to the cry of the Egyptian people. It is a cry for justice. A cry for fairness. A cry for democracy, and a just system of rule. This call rings even louder since it has corresponded with Black History Month. I witnessed the two Million Man March yesterday. I have not felt such love for humanity captured in the mass movement of people, save for the day Martin Luther King Jr. gave his important “I Have a Dream” speech.

    Imam Suhaib is encouraging American Muslims to fast tomorrow and make du’a for the people of Egypt.

     

  • abunoor 12:05 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: #jan25 Egypt, , ,   

    A developing aspect of the events in Egypt is the contrast between the strong words against Mubarak and in support of the revolt from Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi vs. the sad statement against the demonstrations issued by Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa. The damage to Gomaa’s credibility with many will be long lasting. He should have resigned his post.

    Shaykh Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti of Egypt, tells all Egyptians to go home: “I greet President Mubarak who offered dialogue and responded to the demands of the people. Going against legitimacy is forbidden (Haram). This is an invitation for chaos. We support stability. What we have now is a blind chaos leading to a civil war. I call on all parents to ask their children to stay home.”

    Al Qaradawi: “The tears of these orphaned children by your security forces will be a curse upon you, it will never leave you Mubarak”

     

    • bk 12:52 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Sad? It is the height of wisdom.
      And Qaradawi invites death on his people while asking them to play pawn to the west.

      What is it about death in the streets that excites you?
      Is this Islam?

    • Arwi 1:18 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      • abunoor 1:41 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        It is the position that rebelling against a legitimate ruler, even one who is either personally corrupt and sinful, or even in some ways oppressive is not advised, because of the need to support legitimate authority and avoid anarchy.

        But all this does is make the focus of discussion, who is a legitimate ruler? Many of the giants of orthodox scholarship have supported uprisings against rulers they deemed illegitimate.

        In addition, the people of Egypt are not engaging in violent rebellion, they are engaged in peaceful calls for the removal of an oppressive tyrant

        • Arwi 2:19 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          But all this does is make the focus of discussion, who is a legitimate ruler?

          My understanding is that this is a Muslim ruler who inhibits the practice of Islam. But even if Mubarak has committed “open kufr”, the protestors are not afaik iasking for his removal on kufr grounds, so do they have Islamic standing to eject him?

          The peacefulness of the protests is a separate issue.

          • Arwi 1:22 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            IIRC orthodox clerics in South Africa opposed participation in the anti-apartheid struggle on the grounds that the practice of Islam was not being inhibited, so it was not OK to oppose the (not even Muslim) rulers.

            • Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 1:39 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink

              All of these questions are debated among scholars, in terms of theory and especially in terms of application.

          • Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 4:57 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            It is important to note the peacefulness of the protests is not a separate issue, it is the issue. You want to refer to a debate about the permissibility of armed uprising against a ruler — but that is not at issue here.

            • Arwi 5:36 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink

              Well, my understanding is that the orthodox position disapproves of not-acquiescing to (legitimate) authority, not just about the means that that not-acqueiscing takes (violent or civil). The opinion I quoted above says, “The above evidences are clear in establishing the fact that one must obey the ruler even if he is corrupt or a sinner (fasiq). ”

              In South Africa, IIRC the dominant position of ulema was against even civil disobedience for a long time on the grounds that the practice of Islam was not being inhibited by the government.

              Perhaps I shall write to Sunni Path and ask for clarification. :-)

      • bk 1:49 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Gomaa said: ““I greet President Mubarak who offered dialogue and responded to the demands of the people.”

        This is not supporting a tyrant. It is advocating peaceful change. I am not sure but I imagine his position is to support peaceful protest (as he always has) but forbid violence and terror (as he always has).

        Terrorism is not a solution. It has made Islam a subject of widespread ridicule. It is more “sad” that muslims refuse to learn that lesson.

        • abunoor 1:56 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          No one is advocating terrorism bk except for Mubarak and his thugs…and if you stand with him you are standing with terrorism. And Mubarak has shown exactly what his idea of dialogue is…Mubarak must go immediately..this is not negotiable

        • bk 2:03 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          I don’t see it that way. I think the anti-mubarak crowd lost moral highground when they reacted to pro mubarak thuggery. Thuggery planned by all the “usual suspects” behind the curtains.

          Now the Army HAS to act against the terrorism in the streets. Exactly what they were trying to avoid and what Mubarak and his string pullers want.,

          Any message about Mubarak having to go is muddled in violence. This is exactly what wise Shaykh Gomaa is saying.

          • aziz 7:15 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            I dont understand your game here, bk. Yes, some protesors reacted to proviocation. Not all, just some – so now you think the army must start shooting? it makes no sense.

            you seem to have an agenda here but i can’t figure out what. Are you just being contrarian?

            • bk 8:40 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink

              Why do I have to have a “game” to state my opinion? Maybe you are the one with the game. I was stating my support for Grand Mufti Gomaa.

              I support him and his strong antiviolence message . My input is only about opinion like you. Maybe I have not made myself clear.

              I think a statement like: “Shk Gomaa has abdicated moral leadership here.” is confounding and very hasty.

              I suppose the question hinges on whether he is asking people not to demonstrate at all or whether he opposes violent anti-government demonstration.

              Perhaps Willow would have some insight, but I think condemning the Mufti just because he opposes violence is in front of the facts. I don’t see him as an automatic pawn of the current government.

            • aziz 9:20 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink

              I dont think he’s a pawn, but supporting Mubarak is nonsensical. Your excuses for Gomaa are pretty weak, as well. The simple fact is that Gomaa is wrong.

              Gomaa wants everyone to go home. If he was just making an anti-violence statement that woudl be understandable. But he’s not.

              Yes, my game is simple, I am pro-democracy and anti-autocracy. I also dont think there’s any danger of the MB taking over, and wouldn’t be all that worried even if they did. I don’t really give a crap about teh peace treaty with ISrael, so which is really the only valid reason to be worried abou Mubarak’s ouster.

            • bk 10:18 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink

              I don’t think the Mufti supports Mubarak. And I don’t think he has expressed concern about who will follow him.

              What I read from his statement is someone who is concerned about the cost of civil war.

              What we have now is a blind chaos leading to a civil war. I call on all parents to ask their children to stay home.”

              This is different from protests and peaceful assembly.

            • Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 4:58 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink

              bk, the ones engaging in violence are Mubarak’s thugs — Gomaa should call on them to go home and he should call on his boss Mubarak to resign.

            • bk 6:22 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink

              Mubarak can speak to Mubaraks people, the concern of the Grand Mufti is the general population and his message is wise and well-conceived as events have borne out and continue to develop.

              Nor should he allow hot heads to replace the current dictator with their own emotional dictates.

    • aziz 1:25 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      wow. I agree, Shk Gomaa has abdicated moral leadership here.

      • Maitham 9:31 pm on February 2, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Well, I think that the concern is, that no matter how angry the protesters are, or how big a portion of the Egyptian population they may speak for, they do not represent a legitimate, constitutional authority. So what if Mubarak was not democratically elected?? Neither were the protesters! The great mass of the people has veto power over any political arrangement, and when their will is so forcefully expressed it cannot be ignored. But allowing this arbitrary and irrational body to call the shots on the details of any transition is very dangerous and is not supported by any true democratic principle.

        Street protests can be an important part of the democratic process, and in this case they are the only outlet for those with no other way to be heard– but they are not a legitimate expression of the people’s will in the same way as elections, and their calls for action cannot be given the same authority as the decisions made by incumbent officials. A precipitous change of leadership in response to street protests will only undermine the legitimacy of the successor government and invite its opponents to use the same tactics to overthrow it. Look at what happened in Georgia!

        The Army and the others who are working to maintain some semblance of constitutionality in Egypt are very much in the right, and are doing Mubarak’s eventual successors (whoever they may be) an enormous favor.

      • Maitham 9:30 pm on February 3, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        An article posted today on Reuters which is pertinent to this discussion:

        Egypt online users debate merit of more protests

    • hakim 3:39 am on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      ASAWRWB

      From Mufti Gomaa:
      http://seekersguidance.org/blog/2011/02/change-is-necessary-if-egypt-is-to-fulfill-its-historic-potential-mufti-ali-gomaa/

      From Shaykh Hamza Yusuf:
      “The need for resolute positions of solidarity with the Egyptian people in their pleas for political change is undeniable. I personally feel that the scholars, inside and outside of Egypt, have a responsibility to stand with the Egyptian people in their pleas for reform in Egypt. While scholars have a right to their own opinions on this and other matters, my personal opinion is that in order to stop further conflict and prevent more blood from being spilt, the scholars of Egypt should call for an immediate change in the government of Hosni Mubarak.

      Having said that, I believe we should maintain a good opinion of the scholars who either take a position or choose to remain silent-a valid option during fitnah. We must recognize that personal ijtihad in difficult times is to be respected. The Mufti of Egypt is an honorable and pious man; he understands the complexity of the situation, the dangers of instability, and the tragedies that can quickly arise when conflagrations take a life of their own. Moreover, his position is certainly consonant with a traditional approach that was taken by many of the great scholars of the past. While some may not agree with his opinion, Muslims should respect religious authority, acknowledge a scholar’s right to it, and not assume we know anyone’s intentions. God alone is the Judge of men’s hearts.”

      http://seekersguidance.org/blog/2011/02/when-the-social-contract-is-breached-on-one-side-its-breached-on-both-sides-shaykh-hamza-yusuf/

      N.B.: Formatting controls seem to have disappeared. Is it just my browser? JZK

      • Arwi 9:39 am on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

        Moreover, his position is certainly consonant with a traditional approach that was taken by many of the great scholars of the past.

        This was my point above.

        • abunoor 10:50 am on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

          and contradicted by others (which was my point above). And many of those scholars had government patronage, while all had to be constantly aware of how government/rulers would react to any statements they made regarding politics.

          Regardless of our respect for scholars, past or present, we cannot ignore this dynamic (which is my point below.)

          • Arwi 8:54 pm on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            My comment was that Gomaa’s view seemed to me to be well within the tradition of orthodox scholarship.

            If you want to retort that tradition itself is corrupt/biased, then that is a separate issue. (I did wonder how you square John Brown with the hadith about the prayers of a runaway slave not reaching divine ears).

            • Abu Noor Al-Irlandee 11:30 pm on February 9, 2011 Permalink

              Arwi, I have never argued whether Gomaa’s view was within the tradition of orthodox scholarship, I have simply attempted to say that contrary views were well within that same tradition as well. Since we have not really been disagreeing, I am not entirely sure as to why we have gone back and forth so much in this thread. I must admit on my part to some curiousity as to what your “point” was, as I sensed there was one beyond the question of whether political quietism as been part of Islamic orthodoxy.

            • Arwi 7:46 pm on February 10, 2011 Permalink

              as I sensed there was one beyond the question of whether political quietism has been part of Islamic orthodoxy.

              That was it, more or less. I don’t think political quietism is just a manifestation of patronage/fear (though I’m not denying patronage/fear matters), I think it is a manifestation of certain understandings of authority, rights, obedience, justice etc. that expresses itself not just in constricting people’s right to rebellion against rulers but slaves’ right to flee owners, wives’ right to divorce husbands etc.

              My understanding is that the orthodox position on “human” rights is that the one right every person has is the right to Islam. If the ruler exhibits kufr or inhibits the practice of Islam, that is the one injustice that people can rebel against; similarly if the husband exhibits kufr, the wife can obtain a divorce or is implicitly divorced. “Worldy cruelty” — for lack of a better term — is perhaps a divine punishment or perhaps regrettable but not so terrible a thing that it permits the upturning of divinely sanctioned hierarchies. Hence my question to you about your John Brown icon and the hadith.

          • bk 9:06 pm on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

            Hopefully, this will put to rest any question about who is a puppet of Mubarak and who is a simple government employee (which is not sufficient grounds alone for condemnation).

            “Times: The people of Egypt are out on the streets against President Hosni Mubarak’s regime. What is your advice to both of them?

            Shaykh Gomaa: I’ve been watching the developments with a heavy heart, in particular the attacks on demonstrators. The perpetrators of violence must be brought to book. While Egypt has seen difficult times before, this crisis is truly unprecedented. There is, however, always reason for hope. As the Quran teaches us, “With every difficulty, there comes ease.” I appeal to all Egyptians to abjure violence and aggression and return to peace. Until then, the lives and welfare of the people must be our first priority. Security must be ensured, the rule of law must be respected, and people’s basic needs must be met.
            It’s time for introspection and soul-searching. There’s no denying that we are on the edge of a new political and social order. The people have organised themselves to make their voices heard and are seeking fundamental reforms. I have long called for comprehensive reforms in the economy, healthcare, and social solidarity. It is imperative to have dialogue. Egypt is more than its presidential figure. It has a rich cultural heritage, built by genuine and dedicated people. Moreover, Egypt serves a critical geo-political role in the region. We need to come together to ensure its stability and prosperity. ”

            http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/spirituality/faith-and-ritual/Call-for-peace/articleshow/7443016.cms

    • abunoor 8:28 am on February 9, 2011 Permalink | Log in to Reply

      Jazzak Allah for posting this.

      While I appreciate Shaykh Hamza’s caution to remain respectful of different scholarly opinions, I think, whether one is talking about Ali Gomaa or the Mufti in Saudi Arabia, one cannot simply ignore the issue of being a government appointed scholar. To be officially connected with such oppressive regimes is hard to understand and respect, especially at times like this. So, to simply speak about difference of opinion is to sidestep the real issue.

      Again, if Mufti Gomaa expressed his cautions after resigning from his official position, they would carry more weight and people would respect him more even if they still disagreed with him. Of course, he sees benefit in remaining in that position, and I assume he is sincere in that.

  • aziz 6:50 am on January 28, 2011 Permalink
    Tags: #jan25 Egypt   

    Al Jazeera English is streaming live from Egypt.

     

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel