islam for today
a rather refreshing read,

Monireh Ghorji is a grandmother of six and great-grandmother of two with an appropriately wholesome face and gentle demeanor. She's also a mojtahedeh--the female equivalent of an ayatollah--and a feisty advocate of women's rights.

"God has talked to all human beings, not to a special gender," she said with a trace of disdain for anyone who might say otherwise. "So there's no question that women are equal to men. In fact, the Koran says in several places that women are actually more important because they have character and qualifications that men don't have."

For a country long deemed repressive to females, the most unexpected side of the Islamic Reformation is a spirited, even audacious, women's movement. A whole new breed of Muslim feminists has emerged over the past three years to challenge revolutionary dictates that stripped women of rights in the family, segregated classrooms, imposed strict dress codes and endangered their lives. During the revolution's early wave of retribution, the shah's female education minister was executed for "promoting prostitution" among girls.

A generation later, record numbers of women have joined society and politics, become engineers, doctors and lawyers, and even entered seminaries.

Iran now has a female vice president, Masoumeh Ebtekar. About 500 women ran for parliament this year, and more than 5,000 ran in municipal elections last year. Almost half the university student body and a third of the faculty are female.

Revolutionaries once invoked religion to justify their clampdown on society; today reformers cite Islam to justify new activism and participation. For women, Islam has offered a sort of security blanket. Tra ditional families trusted an Islamic system to protect their daughters, so millions of families sent their girls to schools and universities for the first time after the revolution. And once educated, tens of thousands of women have joined the work force as professionals.

islamfortoday has a lot of other interesting material, check it out.

posted by ubaid at 11:14 AM - 0 comments - post anonymously

the american sentimentalist
if you haven't been reading the american sentimentalist, you've been missing out on some remarkably perceptive essays on the state of the american nation, its people and its leaders. from a recent post,

Down the darkened and noiseless suburban streets and the trafficked and trod city arteries; across the moonlit stretches of open fields that make up the back counties of Midwestern states and Great Plains ranch lands alike; around the front doors of bars dumping their evening's sustenance onto the sidewalks like last night's lover ready to forget all by morning's light; in the fluorescent humming of the convenience store brightness that shines when no other is open; walk those who no longer understand who runs their world.

Laying in the cold sweat of life's worries in the worn beds of second homes with yesterday's mortgages too dear for today's means; on farms that no longer give up the secrets of the earth to those who greet their daily suns; on commuter trains standing packed toe to toe for a chance to beat the new kid in accounting for one more pay period; and in the hand around the office phone pressed to the mouth to sell and sell and sell some more and maybe keep away that one dreaded call coming to the house at any cost; work those who no longer know exactly why or for whom.

And beating in the heart of all but the most knowledgeable, most well-off, and most well-placed, lie the questions few seem willing to answer or even ask out loud for fear that the very questioning might well crumble whatever remaining hope may flutter in the depths of their hearts. The kind of hope that tells us that maybe the America we wanted to live in was still out there somewhere: that the nightly television images and naked power grabs and outright lies aren't what we signed up for and wouldn't take if they came knocking on our doors. And aren't what we try to teach our children and are no longer how we see ourselves when we look in the mirror and sign on the dotted lines of our futures.

mark anderson's articles are as much literature as political commentary, a must read for me, as it should be for you too :)

posted by ubaid at 9:47 AM - 0 comments - post anonymously

cheerleading
came across this on buzzflash, (my emphasis)

BBC Director General Greg Dyke said many U.S. television networks had lacked impartiality during the conflict and risked losing credibility if they persisted with their stance.

"Personally I was shocked while in the United States by how unquestioning the broadcast news media was during this war," Dyke said in a speech at a University of London conference.

"If Iraq proved anything, it was that the BBC cannot afford to mix patriotism and journalism. This is happening in the United States and if it continues, will undermine the credibility of the U.S. electronic news media."

undermine the credibility? i'm not sure how much of credibility is left to undermine.

posted by ubaid at 10:02 PM - 0 comments - post anonymously

discussing the crisis - 2
the first chapter in the crisis of islam, entitled defining islam, juxtaposes islam, as a religion and as a group of people following that faith, a pseudo nation if you will, against christianity and christendom encompassing the protestant, catholic and other related groups. considering the book is aimed at an american/western audience, its reach and appeal definitely is restricted in other areas, this is a good comparison, allowing the reader to compare islamic social and political structure with that of the modern western democracy.

religion, for different people, is different things. for the practicing muslim it is a complete set of rules and regulations which define how he does everything. there are recommendations on things like facial hair, the manner in which you drink water, the kind of food that is legal and the proper way to dress. with proscribed ways for such minor details, minor in the western context and not the islamic though, it is not surprising that muslims find it far more difficult to assimiliate with other cultures. they remain together as a cohesive group within larger communities, and stick to their own ways of doing things, speaking a subset of languages and practicing islam according to their perceptions, education and ability. a muslim tries to follow as much of this codified system as is possible, taking liberties based on his immediate social environment.

as far as mixing religion and politics, something if tried in the west immediately becomes a topic of derision and debate, is not an issue for a country like say pakistan or bangladesh, essentially because islam is not something you practice in your spare time, it governs the most basic of your everyday activities. a very simple example is the requirement to pray five times a day, at specific times and in a congregation. consider a muslim working on a regular 9 to 5 job, technically he would be required to take two breaks, each of atleast fifteen minutes, to fulfill this religious obligation. though most muslims would compromise in the interests of a career, there are people i know who would much rather not take up a position if it did not offer sufficient flexibility in this regard.

the essential presence of islam in a muslim's everyday life now evident, consider a democracy, say malaysia and what was once described to me as a benevolent dictatorship, saudi arabia. which country would i prefer living in? malaysia, because, from what i understand the government does not try and meddle with the everyday life of its citizens. by imposing its own interpretation of the sharia the countries in the gulf have tried to act as the agents of god. from my limited knowledge, islam is least about imposing your own understanding upon others. the quran is the ultimate reference for a practicing muslim and if he or she chooses to practice the religion in a certain way, it is not the government's responsibility to stop them, what else is the expected day of judgement for? the fairly large muslim population in india has remained comparitively immune to the effects of islamic radicalism because india allows the muslims genuine freedom of religion. there are other, deeper problems involving indian muslims, but those do not really concern this discussion.

in conclusion, instead of adapting islam to democracy, what truly is required is to try and adapt democracy to islam, something that has successfully, and with little compromise to the its ideals, been tried in countries like malaysia, indonesia and turkey. the push to try and force the islamic way of life into a democratic mold is erroneous and insensitive, and those ready to wage war for that alleged purpose, need to realize that.

posted by ubaid at 2:59 AM - 0 comments - post anonymously

discussing the crisis - 1
i've managed to get my hands on bernard lewis' the crisis of islam, a concise commentary on eastern islamic practices, western perceptions of islamic radicalism and perceived solutions to the problem of religious fundamentalism in the islamic context. in this post, and the ones to follow, i'll try and discuss my own take on lewis' work.

less a book and more an exteded essay, the crisis of islam, begins promisingly with the introduction establishing the author's scholarlship. there are however assertions inconsistent with my own education and experience as a muslim, more specifically, as an educated indian muslim. when lewis refers to the muslims for example, it is evident he's talking about the muslims around the world, indians, pakistanis, indonesians, malaysians and every other ethnic group that follows islam as a system of belief and practice. in the introduction he talks about a videotape made pubic in october 2001, in which Osama bin Laden refers to some event that occured eighty years ago, and which was purportedly a cornerstone in islamic political history. the event referred to was the breaking up of the Ottoman empire and according to Lewis, though Western observers had some time figuring out the allusion, it was something plainly evident to most muslims. i cannot speak for muslims of other nationalities, but i can speak as an indian, and i'm very positive about this, mr.lewis would be hard pressed to find too many indians of the islamic faith who would know off hand of bin Laden's reference. it is uncertain if this can be explained as evidence of ignorance or of an identity independent from that of the larger islamic body, a more likely reason for me is my belief that radical islam is intrinsically a geographical and political, rather than an islamic problem per se. an integral component of islamic identity however, is the kabah, and by association, mecca and saudi arabia. current events and alleged aggression therefore, in the wider gulf region, have been used very successfully by radical elements in all muslim communities to incite a hatred and distrust for the west in general and america in particular.

it is also instructive to note that western mores seem to be in direct conflict with islamic and in many cases asian principles and cultural practices. consider for example hinduism, which places a great deal of restrictions on sexual freedom as compared to current western attitudes. hinduism however, does not seem to be as much at war with the west as islam, why? perhaps because most other cultures have chosen to evolve and adapt to western influences or simply modern practices. islam on the other hand, the 'perfect religion', refuses to consider the idea that it has any flaws whatsoever. muslims believe the quran is the word of god, it is immutable, unchangeable, and, above all, absolute. to even entertain the idea that islam needs to adapt to any external forms of behavior or thought, be it western or anything else, is sacrilege for any practicing muslim.

lewis' introduction further talks about a letter in a london based arabic newspaper, printed in february 1998, allegedly faxed in by Osama bin Laden and other radical leaders. the letter talks about how america and not iraq was the aggressor in the 1991 gulf war, along with other rhetoric about the plight of the iraqi people under continued sanctions and of america's oft alleged cabal with israel. those arguments have been used consistenty and very successfully by radical forces in shaping public opinion on the 'arab street'. by going to war with iraq and committing one blunder after another in its conduct, for example the lack of a proper administrative plan post war and the inane handling of international media criticism, america has played into the hands of radical elements, giving even greater credence to their conspiracy theories. it is unlikely the war in iraq will lead to the democratizaion of arabia in the near future, if anything it only seems to be another bloody chapter in an ongoing struggle between islam and the west, with no quick or peaceful resolution immediately apparent.

posted by ubaid at 9:10 PM - 0 comments - post anonymously

leave!
isn't it a little early for frustration? from the washintonpost,

Mohammed is incensed that U.S. troops, during their first few days in Baghdad, did little to stop the wave of looting that eviscerated nearly every government building in the city, including the national library and a museum housing 5,000-year-old antiquities. He also is livid that the U.S. military has not yet restarted power, water and trash-collection service across the city.

"We were promised a better life," he said. "We have no security. We have no services. Is this better?"

After three weeks of intense airstrikes, a ground invasion and the bedlam that accompanies a war, some of Mohammed's expectations for a speedy recovery may be unreasonable. But they are not uncommon. More than two dozen Baghdad residents interviewed over the past few days voiced a similar sense of frustration and resentment, with many saying they are no longer eager to give the United States a chance to rebuild their country.

i just hope this is not a sign of a growing anti-american sentiment in iraq, eventually leading to far more unfortunate and horrifying results. also, this should not used as a tool in 'how ingrate can those iraqis be, we saved them after all!' arguments.



posted by ubaid at 4:39 AM - 0 comments - post anonymously