I just had a thought! Sometimes I have them (thoughts that is) and on occassion I've had some good ones (thoughts that is).
But anyway I was thinking most rapes happen in the home. Yes the home. So when Hilali says that women should stay at home shrouded in darkness and hidden in the shadows he's actually setting them up to be raped!
It is obvious that despite his defence in his press statement that he is... wait for it because it is funny..."an advocate" for women (yes I laughed my arse off too), the whole purpose of Hilali's 'sermon' is not to protect women at all as he professes but to oppress women by keeping them barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen.
If you look at the transcript of his sermon you will see that he not only blames women for rape but for every ill befalling the human race.
I went to the Koran this evening in an effort to make sense of it all. I felt like I had to do this. I felt that I had to find some comfort and some reassurance from somewhere that this is not Islam. This is not the religion that I have chosen to follow. I needed to remind myself that there was beauty in something that sometimes seems so ugly.
The first thing I read was that Eve was not blamed for the expulsion of man from the Garden of Eden. There is no reference to Eve being tempted by Satan in the Koran. Both Adam and Eve were held equally responsible. So I thought to myself, what is it in this sick man's head that makes him interpret the Koran in such a way that he can then turn around and say that women are to blame for theft, rape and crime.
He is sick in the head and that's it. He has an intense hatred of women. He is a fool. Pity the fool but pity more those who follow the fool!
Islam is being hijacked by fools. Fools who lead fools. Men of hatred who lead men into hatred. Who will stop this? Who will speak up when there are so many fools and so much hatred?
Friday, November 03, 2006
What Hilali said
Here's the transcript.
It seems we women are to blame for everything- rape, theft, global warming, the economy, war, famine, disease, natural disasters... I'll just leave it to you to read because I am actually speechless. Try not to choke.
BELOVED brothers and sisters, we have spent this good and blessed night kneeling and prostrating, worshipping God, Lord of the Universe, through the prayer of al-Qiam, listening to the most truthful of words. And from the Sura of Al-Ma'ida (The Table), I stand before you to discuss this legal, criminal, legislative position through a Koranic judgment issued by the Supreme Koranic Court of Justice for the crime of theft.
In it, God put forward man before woman. God says, "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred" - an example from God, for God is ... What should it be, God is forgiving, merciful, or mighty, wise? No, it has to be mighty, wise, not forgiving, merciful. Not at all. No way. For God is mighty, wise.
So, we look at the penal code in the Koran for the crime of adultery. In theft, the man was put forward before the woman. We come to the penal code in the Koran for the crime of adultery. God says, "The adulteress and the adulterer, you shall whip each of them a hundred lashes."
So why is the man put forward before the woman for theft, and the woman put forward before the man. In the code of what? Adultery.
Dear beloved, God called the Koran the Al-Dhikr Al-Hakim. He called it the Al-Dhikr Al-Hakim. A book whose verses are wise, a book whose verses are detailed. And who is someone wise? The one who prescribes the right medicine for the right illness, we call him wise. And the one who says the right word at the right time, we call him wise. And the one who acts appropriately on issues, wise. All the verses of the wise Koran, at their beginnings and at their ends, there is a connection between the body and the end. Between the context of the verse and its beginning, and then its closing, the end of the verse.
"Forgiving, merciful" has a meaning. "Mighty, wise" has a meaning. "Forgiving, patient" has a meaning. "Patient, forgiving" has a meaning. "Hearing, knowledgeable" has a meaning.
Every verse, when it ends with the mention of one of the attributes of God, has a wisdom that is legislative, rhetoric, in the body of thatverse.
This verse in particular, the verse in the Sura of Al-Ma'ida, when the Koran was revealed, and it used to get revealed to the Messenger of God, there were no recording devices to tape them. And they didn't have then telephones that can take pictures and record. And at that time, there were no cassettes, and even 99 per cent of the people didn't know how to read or write. So they relied on memorising. On intuition. On their memories. One would hear the verse spoken by the Messenger of God, so he'd recite it and chant it in prayer until he memorised it. Very few knew how to write.
One Arab man heard this verse by the Messenger of God, and while he was in his field, his orchard, at his work - he's a working man - he was reciting the verse: "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred - an example from God." But instead of saying "for God is mighty, wise", he said "for God is forgiving, merciful".
A nomad was passing by, he was a non-Muslim. The companion of the Prophet was reciting the verse, and the nomad was passing by. He heard the verse. Immediately, naturally, and with refined eloquence, he said that it was not right. Without hearing the full verse. So that nomad asked the companion of the Messenger of God what was he saying. He answered, "I am reciting something from the Koran". But the nomad said, "Your Koran is in Arabic, but you have never had such linguistic fault. Recite it again."
So the companion recited, "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred - an example from God." But instead of saying "for God is mighty, wise", he said "for God is forgiving, merciful". He (the nomad) said, "That is not right". The man said, "You, a nomad, (inaudible). He answered, "It's not right. And I challenge you that it is not right. These words could never have been spoken by Mohammed son of Abdullah, the master eloquent. And they could never be words revealed unto him by God.."
He said, "Let's go to the Prophet." He then said, "Oh, Messenger of God, I have recited a verse but the nomad corrected it for me." He said, "Yes, your companion says, for God is forgiving, merciful". If God forgave and was merciful, He wouldn't command the 'cutting off'. But He is mighty, wise, which is why He commanded the cutting off. The verse should end with "For he is mighty, wise". The Prophet said to him, "The nomad has corrected your mistake with the eloquence and good style and beauty of the Arabic language."
Yes, the nomad is right. "For God is mighty, wise", not forgiving. "For God is forgiving, merciful", that's in another life where forgiveness and mercy is hoped for. But in a verse where there is "cutting off", and where there is a limit imposed, God is mighty and wise, so He commanded the cutting off. But if He was forgiving and merciful, He wouldn't have commanded the cutting off.
Also, in the same context, what we heard yesterday in the verse from Al-Ma'ida, in its end, what Jesus said. "And when God asked: Oh Jesus, son of Mary! Didn't you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside God?" He said, "Be glorified." He did not even want to repeat the accusation. He didn't want to repeat the same word. He said "Be glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then you knew it. You know what is in my mind and I do not know what is in your mind? You alone know what is hidden."
We come to the end of the verse, "I only told them what You bade me. I said, 'Serve God, my Lord and your Lord. I watched over them while living in their midst, and ever You took me to Yourself, You have been watching them. You are the witness to all things'." We come to the closing of the verse, "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them, surely You are forgiving, merciful?" Not at all.
Why wasn't the verse ended with forgiveness and mercy? Because there is a crime of polytheism. God does not forgive polytheism, and forgives everything else. These people said that God took a son, these people said that divinity united with man, and the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and they will see mercy? They will never see it, not him or his father. Not dad or mum. No one will see mercy, of those who believe in polytheism. Our Master Jesus knows that the crime is big. And there is no appeal for it. No way the judgment can be appealed. And they will never have intercession on the Day of Judgment, because polytheism is a great injustice. If it was a simple matter, the verse would have ended with "For God is forgiving, merciful". But it ended with "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them." They'll never see it. You will be wise, You will rule, then they'll cop it.
Those who disbelieve amongst the people of the Book and the polytheists, where will they go? Surfers Paradise? Gold Coast? Where? To the fire of hell. And not part-time, they'll be in it for eternity. What are these people? The most evil of God's creation on the face of earth. The issue is clear. So, the verse should be ended with what? "For God is mighty, wise." Not "For God is forgiving, merciful". In regard to polytheism with our Master Jesus, and in regard to the judgment on those who steal, rob and mess everything, God is mighty, wise. "The man thief and woman thief." Why, my Lord. I am wondering, why didn't the Koran say "The woman thief and man thief, cut off their hands"? While there is "The adulteress and the adulterer, whip them". Why didn't He say, "The adulterer and the adulteress"? It's because they are wise words. The reason for putting the man ahead of the woman in the issue of stealing is because it is the wisdom. This is reality. This is the truth.
On the issue of stealing, when the man is responsible for earning. He's responsible for the expenses, for the food and water. He is the one who has to pay the rent, he is responsible for the alimony, he is responsible for feeding his children. Maybe circumstances forced him and Satan tempted him, and there is a woman like hell behind him; she never has enough. She wants to change the furniture, change the lounge every year. And behind every man who is a thief, a greedy woman. She is pushing him. Not our women in Australia, the women of Canada. The hall up there is full. They are the women of Canada and Mexico, the ones who encourage their men - to do what? Go! Get me! And no matter how much he brings her, she wants more. She wants to change the car, and change ... Of course, the woman keeps demanding from her husband more than his ability. Either she will tell him to go and deal in drugs, or to go and steal. What's more than that? Spend as much as you have! You know your husband, upside down! If you demand from your husband more than his ability, then what does that mean? Who is the one who would have to become a mafia? A gangster? And steal cars? And smash banks? And deal in the "blue disease" (drugs)? Who is the one who commits these crimes of stealing? Who? The man or the woman? It's the man.
That's why the man was mentioned before the woman when it comes to theft, because his responsibility is to be the provider. "The male thief and the female thief, cut off their ..."
But in the event of adultery, the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time with women. Why? Because the woman possesses the weapon of seduction. She is the one who takes her clothes off, cuts them short, acts flirtatious, puts on make-up and powder, and goes on the streets dallying. She is the one wearing a short dress, lifting it up, lowering it down, then a look, then a smile, then a word, then a greeting, then a chat, then a date, then a meeting, then a crime, then Long Bay Jail, then comes a merciless judge who gives you 65years.
But the whole disaster, who started it? The Al-Rafihi scholar says in one of his literary works, he says: If I come across a crime of rape - kidnap and violation of honour - I would discipline the man and teach him a lesson in morals, and I would order the woman be arrested and jailed for life.
Why, Rafihi? He says, because if she hadn't left the meat uncovered, the cat wouldn't have snatched it. If you take a kilo of meat, and you don't put it in the fridge, or in the pot, or in the kitchen, but you put in on a plate and placed it outside in the yard. Then you have a fight with the neighbour because his cats ate the meat. Then (inaudible). Right or not?
If one puts uncovered meat out in the street, or on the footpath, or in the garden, or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, then the cats come and eat it, is it the fault of the cat or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem! If it was covered the cat wouldn't have. It would have circled around it and circled around it, then given up and gone.
If she was in her room, in her house, wearing her hijab, being chaste, the disasters wouldn't have happened. The woman possesses the weapon of seduction and temptation. That's why Satan says about the woman, "You are half a soldier. You are my messenger to achieve my needs. You are the last weapon I would use to smash the head of the finest of men. There are a few men that I use a lot of things with, but they never heed me. But you? Oh, you are my best weapon."
It seems we women are to blame for everything- rape, theft, global warming, the economy, war, famine, disease, natural disasters... I'll just leave it to you to read because I am actually speechless. Try not to choke.
BELOVED brothers and sisters, we have spent this good and blessed night kneeling and prostrating, worshipping God, Lord of the Universe, through the prayer of al-Qiam, listening to the most truthful of words. And from the Sura of Al-Ma'ida (The Table), I stand before you to discuss this legal, criminal, legislative position through a Koranic judgment issued by the Supreme Koranic Court of Justice for the crime of theft.
In it, God put forward man before woman. God says, "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred" - an example from God, for God is ... What should it be, God is forgiving, merciful, or mighty, wise? No, it has to be mighty, wise, not forgiving, merciful. Not at all. No way. For God is mighty, wise.
So, we look at the penal code in the Koran for the crime of adultery. In theft, the man was put forward before the woman. We come to the penal code in the Koran for the crime of adultery. God says, "The adulteress and the adulterer, you shall whip each of them a hundred lashes."
So why is the man put forward before the woman for theft, and the woman put forward before the man. In the code of what? Adultery.
Dear beloved, God called the Koran the Al-Dhikr Al-Hakim. He called it the Al-Dhikr Al-Hakim. A book whose verses are wise, a book whose verses are detailed. And who is someone wise? The one who prescribes the right medicine for the right illness, we call him wise. And the one who says the right word at the right time, we call him wise. And the one who acts appropriately on issues, wise. All the verses of the wise Koran, at their beginnings and at their ends, there is a connection between the body and the end. Between the context of the verse and its beginning, and then its closing, the end of the verse.
"Forgiving, merciful" has a meaning. "Mighty, wise" has a meaning. "Forgiving, patient" has a meaning. "Patient, forgiving" has a meaning. "Hearing, knowledgeable" has a meaning.
Every verse, when it ends with the mention of one of the attributes of God, has a wisdom that is legislative, rhetoric, in the body of thatverse.
This verse in particular, the verse in the Sura of Al-Ma'ida, when the Koran was revealed, and it used to get revealed to the Messenger of God, there were no recording devices to tape them. And they didn't have then telephones that can take pictures and record. And at that time, there were no cassettes, and even 99 per cent of the people didn't know how to read or write. So they relied on memorising. On intuition. On their memories. One would hear the verse spoken by the Messenger of God, so he'd recite it and chant it in prayer until he memorised it. Very few knew how to write.
One Arab man heard this verse by the Messenger of God, and while he was in his field, his orchard, at his work - he's a working man - he was reciting the verse: "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred - an example from God." But instead of saying "for God is mighty, wise", he said "for God is forgiving, merciful".
A nomad was passing by, he was a non-Muslim. The companion of the Prophet was reciting the verse, and the nomad was passing by. He heard the verse. Immediately, naturally, and with refined eloquence, he said that it was not right. Without hearing the full verse. So that nomad asked the companion of the Messenger of God what was he saying. He answered, "I am reciting something from the Koran". But the nomad said, "Your Koran is in Arabic, but you have never had such linguistic fault. Recite it again."
So the companion recited, "The man thief and the woman thief, cut off the hands of both as a punishment, for that they have erred - an example from God." But instead of saying "for God is mighty, wise", he said "for God is forgiving, merciful". He (the nomad) said, "That is not right". The man said, "You, a nomad, (inaudible). He answered, "It's not right. And I challenge you that it is not right. These words could never have been spoken by Mohammed son of Abdullah, the master eloquent. And they could never be words revealed unto him by God.."
He said, "Let's go to the Prophet." He then said, "Oh, Messenger of God, I have recited a verse but the nomad corrected it for me." He said, "Yes, your companion says, for God is forgiving, merciful". If God forgave and was merciful, He wouldn't command the 'cutting off'. But He is mighty, wise, which is why He commanded the cutting off. The verse should end with "For he is mighty, wise". The Prophet said to him, "The nomad has corrected your mistake with the eloquence and good style and beauty of the Arabic language."
Yes, the nomad is right. "For God is mighty, wise", not forgiving. "For God is forgiving, merciful", that's in another life where forgiveness and mercy is hoped for. But in a verse where there is "cutting off", and where there is a limit imposed, God is mighty and wise, so He commanded the cutting off. But if He was forgiving and merciful, He wouldn't have commanded the cutting off.
Also, in the same context, what we heard yesterday in the verse from Al-Ma'ida, in its end, what Jesus said. "And when God asked: Oh Jesus, son of Mary! Didn't you say unto mankind: Take me and my mother for two gods beside God?" He said, "Be glorified." He did not even want to repeat the accusation. He didn't want to repeat the same word. He said "Be glorified. It was not mine to utter that to which I had no right. If I used to say it, then you knew it. You know what is in my mind and I do not know what is in your mind? You alone know what is hidden."
We come to the end of the verse, "I only told them what You bade me. I said, 'Serve God, my Lord and your Lord. I watched over them while living in their midst, and ever You took me to Yourself, You have been watching them. You are the witness to all things'." We come to the closing of the verse, "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them, surely You are forgiving, merciful?" Not at all.
Why wasn't the verse ended with forgiveness and mercy? Because there is a crime of polytheism. God does not forgive polytheism, and forgives everything else. These people said that God took a son, these people said that divinity united with man, and the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and they will see mercy? They will never see it, not him or his father. Not dad or mum. No one will see mercy, of those who believe in polytheism. Our Master Jesus knows that the crime is big. And there is no appeal for it. No way the judgment can be appealed. And they will never have intercession on the Day of Judgment, because polytheism is a great injustice. If it was a simple matter, the verse would have ended with "For God is forgiving, merciful". But it ended with "If You punish them, they surely are Your servants. And if You forgive them." They'll never see it. You will be wise, You will rule, then they'll cop it.
Those who disbelieve amongst the people of the Book and the polytheists, where will they go? Surfers Paradise? Gold Coast? Where? To the fire of hell. And not part-time, they'll be in it for eternity. What are these people? The most evil of God's creation on the face of earth. The issue is clear. So, the verse should be ended with what? "For God is mighty, wise." Not "For God is forgiving, merciful". In regard to polytheism with our Master Jesus, and in regard to the judgment on those who steal, rob and mess everything, God is mighty, wise. "The man thief and woman thief." Why, my Lord. I am wondering, why didn't the Koran say "The woman thief and man thief, cut off their hands"? While there is "The adulteress and the adulterer, whip them". Why didn't He say, "The adulterer and the adulteress"? It's because they are wise words. The reason for putting the man ahead of the woman in the issue of stealing is because it is the wisdom. This is reality. This is the truth.
On the issue of stealing, when the man is responsible for earning. He's responsible for the expenses, for the food and water. He is the one who has to pay the rent, he is responsible for the alimony, he is responsible for feeding his children. Maybe circumstances forced him and Satan tempted him, and there is a woman like hell behind him; she never has enough. She wants to change the furniture, change the lounge every year. And behind every man who is a thief, a greedy woman. She is pushing him. Not our women in Australia, the women of Canada. The hall up there is full. They are the women of Canada and Mexico, the ones who encourage their men - to do what? Go! Get me! And no matter how much he brings her, she wants more. She wants to change the car, and change ... Of course, the woman keeps demanding from her husband more than his ability. Either she will tell him to go and deal in drugs, or to go and steal. What's more than that? Spend as much as you have! You know your husband, upside down! If you demand from your husband more than his ability, then what does that mean? Who is the one who would have to become a mafia? A gangster? And steal cars? And smash banks? And deal in the "blue disease" (drugs)? Who is the one who commits these crimes of stealing? Who? The man or the woman? It's the man.
That's why the man was mentioned before the woman when it comes to theft, because his responsibility is to be the provider. "The male thief and the female thief, cut off their ..."
But in the event of adultery, the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time with women. Why? Because the woman possesses the weapon of seduction. She is the one who takes her clothes off, cuts them short, acts flirtatious, puts on make-up and powder, and goes on the streets dallying. She is the one wearing a short dress, lifting it up, lowering it down, then a look, then a smile, then a word, then a greeting, then a chat, then a date, then a meeting, then a crime, then Long Bay Jail, then comes a merciless judge who gives you 65years.
But the whole disaster, who started it? The Al-Rafihi scholar says in one of his literary works, he says: If I come across a crime of rape - kidnap and violation of honour - I would discipline the man and teach him a lesson in morals, and I would order the woman be arrested and jailed for life.
Why, Rafihi? He says, because if she hadn't left the meat uncovered, the cat wouldn't have snatched it. If you take a kilo of meat, and you don't put it in the fridge, or in the pot, or in the kitchen, but you put in on a plate and placed it outside in the yard. Then you have a fight with the neighbour because his cats ate the meat. Then (inaudible). Right or not?
If one puts uncovered meat out in the street, or on the footpath, or in the garden, or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, then the cats come and eat it, is it the fault of the cat or the uncovered meat? The uncovered meat is the problem! If it was covered the cat wouldn't have. It would have circled around it and circled around it, then given up and gone.
If she was in her room, in her house, wearing her hijab, being chaste, the disasters wouldn't have happened. The woman possesses the weapon of seduction and temptation. That's why Satan says about the woman, "You are half a soldier. You are my messenger to achieve my needs. You are the last weapon I would use to smash the head of the finest of men. There are a few men that I use a lot of things with, but they never heed me. But you? Oh, you are my best weapon."
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Hilaly's Press Statement
I received these two press statements by email. The first was issued by Hilaly in defence of his comments. The second is from the United Muslim Women's Association Inc.
I'll start with Hilaly. First of all there's the high moral ground and insidious references to the "western mentality" as if it is somehow not as sophisticated as the warped Islamist mentality.
Then there is the inference that Muslim women who do not adopt so called "Islamic dress code" are destined to burn in Hell. And as if that is not enough he goes on to condemn those who do not tolerate the "moderate balanced way which I adopt to advocate for women’s issues, national harmony and co-existence, and to hold fast to the love of our Australian home, to protect it from all forms of extreme thoughts and to reject all acts of violence and any act that breaches the rule of law."
What a joke! Moderate? Balanced? Advocate? National harmony?
The fact is that this Press Release actually reiterates exactly what he said- that women should be covered lest THEY provoke men.
What's even sadder is that IT WORKED. The Press Release from the UMWA, who originally spoke out in full force against what he said, now appeases him and blames the media for blowing it out of proportion!
I agree to some extent that it has been blown out of proportion. The Sydney Morning Herald devoted a whole 8 pages to Hilaly's rant. A bit much really don't you think? But that is no excuse to appease him and accept his half arsed apology.
Read it and try not to laugh...
Explanatory Statement by the Mufti Al-Hilaly
Regarding the Recent Media Campaign
I would like to outline clearly and plainly some of the facts and basics that formulate my faith, belief and my understanding of the teachings of the true religion of Islam:
1-The crime of rape against any woman is an abominable crime; it has no justification, and the perpetrator deserves the severest punishment and would not deserve to belong to a religion or to humanity.
2-Women in Australia or any other western society are free to wear what they like, and no Muslim has the right to dictate the rulings of his religion on others. While non-Muslim women can cover or reveal whatever they choose of their bodies, Islamic Shari’a made it incumbent upon Muslim men to lower their gaze. It is prohibited for them to stare at the beauty of strange women.
3- It is my duty as a religious leader to advise Muslim women to adhere to and abide by the Islamic dress code. Having said that, Muslim women are free to comply with or reject my advice, and their reckoning will be with Allah the Almighty.
4-By saying the “exposed meat” displayed in a degrading way is a simile for a woman, making herself subject to abuse by men with diseased souls whose animalistic instincts will overcome them whereby they would abandon their humanity, mind and religion. These men are responsible for their crime.
5-The metaphor I used of the “exposed meat” was not appropriate for the western mentality. It has been quoted and misinterpreted by some groups with ill intentions. This metaphor was used in a private lesson given inside the mosque after the Taraweeh (optional night) prayers on the fourth day of Ramadan. It was meant for the Muslim attendees at the mosque and not the general public and particularly not the general women of our Australian society.
Apart from the above-mentioned facts, I would like to make it known to all my brothers and sisters in and out of Australia that:
After the Taraweeh (optional night) prayers on 27/09/2006, at the Lakemba Mosque in Sydney, Australia, I gave a lesson to the members of the Islamic community of Australia, the title of which was: “Why did Allah, the Almighty, mention ‘man’ before ‘woman’ in the crime of theft? as is quoted in the Quran: {[As for] the thief, the male and the female, …} [Al-Ma’idah 5.38] while He mentioned ‘woman’ before ‘man’ in the crime of adultery?, as is quoted in the Quran: {The woman and the man found guilty of adultery or fornication, …} [An-Nur 24.2]”.
This lesson lasted approximately 15 minutes; 10 minutes of these were spent on explaining the meaning of the first verse, and the remaining time was spent on giving advice and guidance relating to the way a woman dresses and the methods of seduction and the beauty given to her by the Almighty Allah. I emphasised that exceeding the limits in this regard is dangerous to both men and women; and that the devil exploits these charms of seduction to tempt both men and women to commit adultery and fornication. In this case, both men and women are committing a sin. So the topic did not deal with the crime of rape.
At the end of the lesson when I was explaining the reason why ‘woman’ was mentioned before ‘man’ in the verse dealing with the crime of adultery, I said it was because she possessed the charm, the methods of seduction and all similar devices given to her by Allah to tempt the man. For that I borrowed a metaphor used by an author called Ar-Rifa’i. He said exposing the meat in an illicit way would encourage the cats to devour it. I didn’t mean by that to humiliate the immodest women; I meant to censure the person who would abandon his humanity and turn into a vicious animal; and there’s a big difference between a cat’s behaviour and that of a human’s, as the latter is commanded and responsible for their actions.
I confess that this analogy is inappropriate and unacceptable for the Australian society and the western society in general.
I am deeply saddened and distressed by the acts of some devious groups which lurk in the dark watching me, and who cannot tolerate the moderate balanced way which I adopt to advocate for women’s issues, national harmony and co-existence, and to hold fast to the love of our Australian home, to protect it from all forms of extreme thoughts and to reject all acts of violence and any act that breaches the rule of law.
Yes, I feel deeply saddened that such an ordinary lesson has been used to slander and defame me after it had been translated with the ill intention of a dubious media that wishes to incite and they present an unfair campaign, the aims of which are very well known.
Once again, I turn to all the women of Australia and the world. You are the shining lights of the world, you are more than half of the society, and you are the daughters, the sisters, the mothers and the aunts. How could any sane person think of humiliating you?
You are the cherished pearls, the dearest thing in the world. So don’t be taken as offerings at the temples of the merchants of pleasure, or advocates of decadence and corruption.
Each one of us is responsible for accounting for his or her own actions before he or she is asked about them by the almighty Allah (on the Day of Judgment). Once again I am very sorry and apologize for what resulted from an unintentional analogy.
With all my respect to the women of the world.
In due course I will take the necessary decision that shall lift the pressures that have been placed on our Australian Muslim community and that which will benefit all Australians.
The pressure of the last couple of days has had an obvious effect on my health and well-being. I ask the public to give my family and I some privacy, time and space to recover. I have also asked for indefinite leave from my duties at Lakemba mosque.
Sincerely
Sheikh Taj El-Deen El-Hilali
Mufti Of Australia
PRESS RELEASE
The current situation involving His Emminence Sheikh Taj Aldin Alhilali, Mufti of Australia, is of grave concern to the United Muslim Women's Association.
The collapse of His Emminence today highlights the stress that the media harassment of Sheikh Alhilali has placed him under. The United Muslim Women's Association sends its prayers and well wishes to His Emminence for a speedy recovery.
The manner in which this incident has been scrutinised and sensationalised by the Media has also placed all Muslim women under strain. The United Muslim Women's Association calls on all media outlets to show restraint and decency in the reporting of this matter. Regardless of the controversy itself the method of reportage has been grossly intrusive and inappropriate.
The United Muslim Women's Association further calls on all levels of government to show leadership during this critical time and to temper the language currently being used which is inflaming community ill will against Muslims generally and Muslim women in particular. It is disappointing to see our elected leaders using the current crises for political mileage at the expense of the Muslim community.
His Emminence, Sheikh Taj Aldin Alhilali, has been a long term supporter of the United Muslim Women's Association and a Champion of women's rights generally, not just those of Muslim women. He has been unstinting and unselfish in his support for the betterment of women in our society. He has, and will continue to, enjoy the support of many women, both Muslim and non-Muslim, within our community.
The United Muslim Women's Association accepts the explanation provided by His Emminence, as outlined in his Press Release of today, as to both his words and his intent. The Association considers the matter to be closed and would urge all parties, media, government and community to show responsibility and restraint in allowing His Emminence to recover his health in private.
United Muslim Women's Association Inc.
30th October 2006
I'll start with Hilaly. First of all there's the high moral ground and insidious references to the "western mentality" as if it is somehow not as sophisticated as the warped Islamist mentality.
Then there is the inference that Muslim women who do not adopt so called "Islamic dress code" are destined to burn in Hell. And as if that is not enough he goes on to condemn those who do not tolerate the "moderate balanced way which I adopt to advocate for women’s issues, national harmony and co-existence, and to hold fast to the love of our Australian home, to protect it from all forms of extreme thoughts and to reject all acts of violence and any act that breaches the rule of law."
What a joke! Moderate? Balanced? Advocate? National harmony?
The fact is that this Press Release actually reiterates exactly what he said- that women should be covered lest THEY provoke men.
What's even sadder is that IT WORKED. The Press Release from the UMWA, who originally spoke out in full force against what he said, now appeases him and blames the media for blowing it out of proportion!
I agree to some extent that it has been blown out of proportion. The Sydney Morning Herald devoted a whole 8 pages to Hilaly's rant. A bit much really don't you think? But that is no excuse to appease him and accept his half arsed apology.
Read it and try not to laugh...
Explanatory Statement by the Mufti Al-Hilaly
Regarding the Recent Media Campaign
I would like to outline clearly and plainly some of the facts and basics that formulate my faith, belief and my understanding of the teachings of the true religion of Islam:
1-The crime of rape against any woman is an abominable crime; it has no justification, and the perpetrator deserves the severest punishment and would not deserve to belong to a religion or to humanity.
2-Women in Australia or any other western society are free to wear what they like, and no Muslim has the right to dictate the rulings of his religion on others. While non-Muslim women can cover or reveal whatever they choose of their bodies, Islamic Shari’a made it incumbent upon Muslim men to lower their gaze. It is prohibited for them to stare at the beauty of strange women.
3- It is my duty as a religious leader to advise Muslim women to adhere to and abide by the Islamic dress code. Having said that, Muslim women are free to comply with or reject my advice, and their reckoning will be with Allah the Almighty.
4-By saying the “exposed meat” displayed in a degrading way is a simile for a woman, making herself subject to abuse by men with diseased souls whose animalistic instincts will overcome them whereby they would abandon their humanity, mind and religion. These men are responsible for their crime.
5-The metaphor I used of the “exposed meat” was not appropriate for the western mentality. It has been quoted and misinterpreted by some groups with ill intentions. This metaphor was used in a private lesson given inside the mosque after the Taraweeh (optional night) prayers on the fourth day of Ramadan. It was meant for the Muslim attendees at the mosque and not the general public and particularly not the general women of our Australian society.
Apart from the above-mentioned facts, I would like to make it known to all my brothers and sisters in and out of Australia that:
After the Taraweeh (optional night) prayers on 27/09/2006, at the Lakemba Mosque in Sydney, Australia, I gave a lesson to the members of the Islamic community of Australia, the title of which was: “Why did Allah, the Almighty, mention ‘man’ before ‘woman’ in the crime of theft? as is quoted in the Quran: {[As for] the thief, the male and the female, …} [Al-Ma’idah 5.38] while He mentioned ‘woman’ before ‘man’ in the crime of adultery?, as is quoted in the Quran: {The woman and the man found guilty of adultery or fornication, …} [An-Nur 24.2]”.
This lesson lasted approximately 15 minutes; 10 minutes of these were spent on explaining the meaning of the first verse, and the remaining time was spent on giving advice and guidance relating to the way a woman dresses and the methods of seduction and the beauty given to her by the Almighty Allah. I emphasised that exceeding the limits in this regard is dangerous to both men and women; and that the devil exploits these charms of seduction to tempt both men and women to commit adultery and fornication. In this case, both men and women are committing a sin. So the topic did not deal with the crime of rape.
At the end of the lesson when I was explaining the reason why ‘woman’ was mentioned before ‘man’ in the verse dealing with the crime of adultery, I said it was because she possessed the charm, the methods of seduction and all similar devices given to her by Allah to tempt the man. For that I borrowed a metaphor used by an author called Ar-Rifa’i. He said exposing the meat in an illicit way would encourage the cats to devour it. I didn’t mean by that to humiliate the immodest women; I meant to censure the person who would abandon his humanity and turn into a vicious animal; and there’s a big difference between a cat’s behaviour and that of a human’s, as the latter is commanded and responsible for their actions.
I confess that this analogy is inappropriate and unacceptable for the Australian society and the western society in general.
I am deeply saddened and distressed by the acts of some devious groups which lurk in the dark watching me, and who cannot tolerate the moderate balanced way which I adopt to advocate for women’s issues, national harmony and co-existence, and to hold fast to the love of our Australian home, to protect it from all forms of extreme thoughts and to reject all acts of violence and any act that breaches the rule of law.
Yes, I feel deeply saddened that such an ordinary lesson has been used to slander and defame me after it had been translated with the ill intention of a dubious media that wishes to incite and they present an unfair campaign, the aims of which are very well known.
Once again, I turn to all the women of Australia and the world. You are the shining lights of the world, you are more than half of the society, and you are the daughters, the sisters, the mothers and the aunts. How could any sane person think of humiliating you?
You are the cherished pearls, the dearest thing in the world. So don’t be taken as offerings at the temples of the merchants of pleasure, or advocates of decadence and corruption.
Each one of us is responsible for accounting for his or her own actions before he or she is asked about them by the almighty Allah (on the Day of Judgment). Once again I am very sorry and apologize for what resulted from an unintentional analogy.
With all my respect to the women of the world.
In due course I will take the necessary decision that shall lift the pressures that have been placed on our Australian Muslim community and that which will benefit all Australians.
The pressure of the last couple of days has had an obvious effect on my health and well-being. I ask the public to give my family and I some privacy, time and space to recover. I have also asked for indefinite leave from my duties at Lakemba mosque.
Sincerely
Sheikh Taj El-Deen El-Hilali
Mufti Of Australia
PRESS RELEASE
The current situation involving His Emminence Sheikh Taj Aldin Alhilali, Mufti of Australia, is of grave concern to the United Muslim Women's Association.
The collapse of His Emminence today highlights the stress that the media harassment of Sheikh Alhilali has placed him under. The United Muslim Women's Association sends its prayers and well wishes to His Emminence for a speedy recovery.
The manner in which this incident has been scrutinised and sensationalised by the Media has also placed all Muslim women under strain. The United Muslim Women's Association calls on all media outlets to show restraint and decency in the reporting of this matter. Regardless of the controversy itself the method of reportage has been grossly intrusive and inappropriate.
The United Muslim Women's Association further calls on all levels of government to show leadership during this critical time and to temper the language currently being used which is inflaming community ill will against Muslims generally and Muslim women in particular. It is disappointing to see our elected leaders using the current crises for political mileage at the expense of the Muslim community.
His Emminence, Sheikh Taj Aldin Alhilali, has been a long term supporter of the United Muslim Women's Association and a Champion of women's rights generally, not just those of Muslim women. He has been unstinting and unselfish in his support for the betterment of women in our society. He has, and will continue to, enjoy the support of many women, both Muslim and non-Muslim, within our community.
The United Muslim Women's Association accepts the explanation provided by His Emminence, as outlined in his Press Release of today, as to both his words and his intent. The Association considers the matter to be closed and would urge all parties, media, government and community to show responsibility and restraint in allowing His Emminence to recover his health in private.
United Muslim Women's Association Inc.
30th October 2006
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Letter to the Edior re Shiekh Hilaly's comments
My letter was published in The West Australian on Wednesday 31 October.
Dear Editor
For Sheikh Taj El Din al Hilaly to imply that Muslim women such as myself should stay at home, hidden behind their hijab or else expect to be treated as a 'piece of meat' is not only offensive but utterly disgusting. It appears the Sheikh would have us all shroud ourselves in black, walk ten steps behind our husbands and hide our faces in shame lest we unwittingly provoke lust in men who cannot control themselves. How, then are Muslim women expected to make positive contributions as Australian citizens in our society? How are we to excercise our right to education, to work, to life? Rights stated in the Quran.
I call for the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils to act on behalf of the people it is supposed to represent. I call for AFIC to publicly renounce the comments made by the Sheikh and to remove him from his role as spiritual adviser at Australia's largest Mosque.
To date, AFIC has proven itself to be nothing but a platform for individuals such as Ameer Ali to promote their own political agendas. It is time AFIC took some action and showed Australian Muslims where its interests really lie. It is time AFIC did something for the people it supposedly represents and sent a clear message to the broader Australian community that Australian Muslims reject the rantings of Sheikh Taj El Din al Hilaly.
Dear Editor
For Sheikh Taj El Din al Hilaly to imply that Muslim women such as myself should stay at home, hidden behind their hijab or else expect to be treated as a 'piece of meat' is not only offensive but utterly disgusting. It appears the Sheikh would have us all shroud ourselves in black, walk ten steps behind our husbands and hide our faces in shame lest we unwittingly provoke lust in men who cannot control themselves. How, then are Muslim women expected to make positive contributions as Australian citizens in our society? How are we to excercise our right to education, to work, to life? Rights stated in the Quran.
I call for the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils to act on behalf of the people it is supposed to represent. I call for AFIC to publicly renounce the comments made by the Sheikh and to remove him from his role as spiritual adviser at Australia's largest Mosque.
To date, AFIC has proven itself to be nothing but a platform for individuals such as Ameer Ali to promote their own political agendas. It is time AFIC took some action and showed Australian Muslims where its interests really lie. It is time AFIC did something for the people it supposedly represents and sent a clear message to the broader Australian community that Australian Muslims reject the rantings of Sheikh Taj El Din al Hilaly.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
The Caliphate and You...
In anticipation of the reestablishment of the Caliphate what better way to
prepare for that coming paradise than with a quick quiz to help one get
acclimated to the new rules? This test was sent to me by email.
1. When the Caliphate is established, it will be run by which nationality?
a. Nigerians
b. Pakistanis
c. Saudis
d. Egyptians
2. Under the Caliphate, slave markets will return to what city?
a. Mecca
b. Dar es-Salam
c. Cairo
d. All of the above
3. Under the Caliphate, a woman is free to marry which of the following?
a. any man she chooses
b. any man her father chooses
c. any man her brother chooses
d. any man who offers the most money to the family
4. A woman becoming Caliph will happen when which of the following occurs?
a. hell freezes over
b. the 12th imam returns
c. the 1200th imam returns
d. one week after never
5. During the Caliphate Inauguration, Nancy Ajram will be stoned in what
city?
a. Beirut
b. Tripoli, Libya
c. Tripoli, Lebanon
d. Too close to call
6. During Caliphate Inauguration, Amr Khaled will be where?
a. Los Angeles
b. Las Vegas
c. Jet skiing in Sharm el-Sheik
d. Disneyworld
7. Under the Caliphate, South Asians in the Persian Gulf will be treated
how?
a. like human beings
b. like Africans
c. somewhere between Africans and Jehovah’s Witnesses
d. the same.
8. With respect to Darfur, the Caliphate will do which of the following?
a. not a damn thing
b. not a Goddamned thing
c. a & b
d. b & a
9. Please complete the following: It will take Turkey ____ year(s) to seize
control of the Caliphate.
a. 5
b. 10
c. 0, they already control it
d. However long it takes but there is no way Pakistanis will be allowed to
call the shots. Maybe a Sudanese, but that’s it.
10. Life in a Sharia paradise is
a. totally awesome
b. awesome for women since they can be fully protected
c. like Mardi Gras without the booze, boobs, and music
d. pretty chill but only if you get to wear the black turban, otherwise it
ranks below a root canal in Kinshasa.
The answer key:
1. d
2. d
3. b, c, or d
4. c or d
5. c
6. c
7. c
8. d
9. d
10. a
The breakdown:
If you got 100% correct congrats you are officially Caliphate ready.
80-90% correct you have achieved zealous convert status.
60-70% correct you are licensed to work Jeddah, Dubai and Khartoum
30-50% correct you are kafir scum. Get away from here.
0-20% correct you had better pray brother.
I got a whopping 60% correct. Was hoping to get lower!
prepare for that coming paradise than with a quick quiz to help one get
acclimated to the new rules? This test was sent to me by email.
1. When the Caliphate is established, it will be run by which nationality?
a. Nigerians
b. Pakistanis
c. Saudis
d. Egyptians
2. Under the Caliphate, slave markets will return to what city?
a. Mecca
b. Dar es-Salam
c. Cairo
d. All of the above
3. Under the Caliphate, a woman is free to marry which of the following?
a. any man she chooses
b. any man her father chooses
c. any man her brother chooses
d. any man who offers the most money to the family
4. A woman becoming Caliph will happen when which of the following occurs?
a. hell freezes over
b. the 12th imam returns
c. the 1200th imam returns
d. one week after never
5. During the Caliphate Inauguration, Nancy Ajram will be stoned in what
city?
a. Beirut
b. Tripoli, Libya
c. Tripoli, Lebanon
d. Too close to call
6. During Caliphate Inauguration, Amr Khaled will be where?
a. Los Angeles
b. Las Vegas
c. Jet skiing in Sharm el-Sheik
d. Disneyworld
7. Under the Caliphate, South Asians in the Persian Gulf will be treated
how?
a. like human beings
b. like Africans
c. somewhere between Africans and Jehovah’s Witnesses
d. the same.
8. With respect to Darfur, the Caliphate will do which of the following?
a. not a damn thing
b. not a Goddamned thing
c. a & b
d. b & a
9. Please complete the following: It will take Turkey ____ year(s) to seize
control of the Caliphate.
a. 5
b. 10
c. 0, they already control it
d. However long it takes but there is no way Pakistanis will be allowed to
call the shots. Maybe a Sudanese, but that’s it.
10. Life in a Sharia paradise is
a. totally awesome
b. awesome for women since they can be fully protected
c. like Mardi Gras without the booze, boobs, and music
d. pretty chill but only if you get to wear the black turban, otherwise it
ranks below a root canal in Kinshasa.
The answer key:
1. d
2. d
3. b, c, or d
4. c or d
5. c
6. c
7. c
8. d
9. d
10. a
The breakdown:
If you got 100% correct congrats you are officially Caliphate ready.
80-90% correct you have achieved zealous convert status.
60-70% correct you are licensed to work Jeddah, Dubai and Khartoum
30-50% correct you are kafir scum. Get away from here.
0-20% correct you had better pray brother.
I got a whopping 60% correct. Was hoping to get lower!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
