A Fatwa on both your Houses

A report in the Middle East section of the NY Times contains the sort of stuff that you cannot make up. It is about fatwas.

A Compass That Can Clash With Modern Life

CAIRO, June 11 — First came the breast-feeding fatwa. It declared that the Islamic restriction on unmarried men and women being together could be lifted at work if the woman breast-fed her male colleagues five times, to establish family ties. Then came the urine fatwa. It said that drinking the urine of the Prophet Muhammad was deemed a blessing.

For the past few weeks, the breast-feeding and urine fatwas have proved a source of national embarrassment in Egypt, not least because they were issued by representatives of the highest religious authorities in the land.

Ah the joys of monotheism!

Author: Atanu Dey

Economist.

9 thoughts on “A Fatwa on both your Houses”

  1. I think monotheism has no monopoly on aaaaaakkkhhhhhh thhhoooooo kind of idiotics … check out the ingredients of “Charanamrit” and you would know
    🙂

    Like

  2. Atanu:

    I am a silent reader of your blog and appreciate your insights on economic issues. Here is an unsolicited suggestion: remain focused on economics.

    Your imagination on religious issues amazes me. Seriously. What is the connection between ‘monotheism’ and breast feeding/ urine drinking fatwa in Cairo? It is like arguing that ‘polytheism’ is the cause of dalit burnings in Bihar.

    I would have ignored your hate campaign against monotheism as just another piece born out of superficial understanding if it would not have been dishonest too. Let me explain why I say it has been ‘dishonest.’ Sometime back, you did an article on Richard Dawkins and demonstrated how he denounced monotheism. So far, so good. Richard Dawkins is one of my favourite authors and despite my disagreements I enjoy reading him. However, what you conveniently omitted was that he denounces all forms of theism (including polytheism) with equal fervour. Dawkins does not accept any idea of God – monotheistic or polytheistic. Either you have not read him properly or you are trying to deliberately mislead your readers into thinking that Dawkins is against “monotheism” only.

    Then you did not article on Hitchens, which again tries to give an impression that Hitchens is only against monotheism. Nothing could be far from truth. Hitchens devotes an entire chapter in “God is not great” on “why there is no eastern solution?”

    I have used the word “hate campaign” for your articles after some deliberation. Quite often, the person who starts the hate campaign doesn’t even know that he is doing it. Trust me, the bluff of jihadi politics would be called in five minutes if they were supported only by rabble rousing rascals. However they are sustained because at their roots, the philosophical justification is provided by intellectually sophisticated people who talk in words of reasonableness and moderation and are quite often not associated with violent agenda. Their thoughts are however picked by the next rung of active leaders then another rung and so on till it reaches a form where there is no solution without elimination of the “enemy”.

    I can see right here on your blog how such ideas work. There is some talk of fanaticism in some article; someone points out pogroms in Gujarat and others jump on him calling him a “dhimmi”; yet others justify it a reaction. I fail to understand how any sane person – hindu or muslim – can rationalize a riot where 2000 people were killed. However since people do rationalize such things, I am forced to conclude that hate campaigns do work.

    It is your blog and I cannot help you from spewing venom. I can only pray that the seed of hatred that you are sowing through your blog doesn’t flower. It is not helping anyone’s cause.

    Like

  3. Well who started spewing venom by declaring the world into darul harb darul islam, between kafirs and believers?
    PS how was mohammad able to rationalize his well documented killings?

    Like

  4. Oh hitchens, He does say that there is not an eastern solution with which I agree But the thrust of his arguement has been including the title ( a take on allah hu akbar) has been with controling islam.
    Islam is the vilest force threating free speech, democracy, secularism(allways has been) and liberty.
    And I personaly see it as a long running civilizational conflict particularly in indias context.

    Like

  5. Dear Mr. Khatri:

    I have answers to each of your question but they will make sense to only those who have a stake in the future of strong and united India. There are always some others who will actually benefit more by stoking the passions of communal hatred and then participating in subsequent loot. I do not expect them to go against their own interest and listen to anything sane.

    Regards,

    Like

  6. Well as some one who has an interest in a strong India You tell me why shouldnt I be able to criticize any topic any way I feel like….

    A historical “some one” who did benefit from the loot through stoking flames of communal hatred was mohammed himself.

    Like it or not Islam is not about personal beleifs but social practices that it forces on others.
    It has a strong dichotomy between believers and non believer. It is quite interesting as it still threatens apostates with death.

    That is my axe to grind with Islam.
    And of course I have another axe to grind with those who suggest I am stoking flames.
    I dont tell others what to do or what to say or what to publish or what to read And Allah-Damn-It I dont want others to tell me or by extenstion people in india otherwise.

    Do tell me why did mr hitchens not get into the details of Eastern religion prose but stayed on dogma on guru based sects like rajnish’s.
    There he would be hard pressed to find evidence like the vile works in hadith and kuran.
    Sam Harris did a better job differentiating on these topics.

    Like

  7. “…the breast-feeding fatwa”, this must be a joke or NY Times trying to malign Islam or Fatwahs. Religious fanatics may also have some limit to their stupidity and blindness! or is at as infinite as the Lord himself.

    Like

  8. Hi

    This is thinking blog of all the reader, the only the reason behind is nature of person thinking some one say it and some one do it. But i think Fatwa , Monotheism is one way of person nature “How he/she utilize it.” But if the people are aware of all the nonsens and stupidst thing then he /she will not fall into it. There are many who belive in god and who dosent believe in god. The person who believe in god are the right one and who dosen’t the he wrong one.

    After all it is the nature who havce develop it we the humanbeing are liable for it.

    Like

Comments are closed.