Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!bes
From: whaddara@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Dress Codes in Islam ....
Message-ID: <1991Apr13.015553.1844@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 13 Apr 91 01:55:53 GMT
Sender: bes@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Behnam Sadeghi)
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 66
Approved: bes@tybalt.caltech.edu

In article <1991Apr5.044254.15940@nntp-server.caltech.edu> whaddara@kean.ucs.mun
>>
>>The issue that I'm trying to adress is that Islam is not an irrational
>>religion, especially as regards social restrictions. When a ruling has
>>been made in Islam you could expect that breaking that rule will bring
>>adverse consequences. This applies to such varied things from 'moral'
>>behaviour and relations between the sexes to alcohol consumption.
>>
>>
>>Wael M. R. Haddara
 
 
>I think we should avoid attempting to justify or defend Islamic injunctions
>rationally.  Rationality, as we know it today, is a product of a culture
>that does not (admit to) believe in the non-empirical, i.e. that which
>is not perceived by the five physical senses.
 
        I agree that we should avoid trying to rationalize Islam. That
does not mean, however, that Islam is not rational. It simply means
that we do not posess enough knowledge to make such judgements across
the board. Islamic rulings ARE rational. God does not forbid something
just to make it a pain for us. In surat Al-Ma'eda, verse 6 : " God
does not wish to burden you". Hence if you can't eat pork it's because
there is a reason behind it.
 
>There can be no religion without belief in the unseen (al-iimaan bil-ghayb).
>It is then entirely useless to discuss religion with people who
>will not believe in the unseen.
 
>In addition, I prefer to equate rationality with hawaa, or whim.  In most
>cases, we merely rationalize whatever we wanted to believe anyway, and
>then we sanctify it (our whim) over revelation by calling it rationality.
 
        I must disagree with that. We are asked to *rationaly*
evaluate Islam. We are presented with a book ( Qur'an). The claim is
that this book is from God. You must sit down and objectively
determine for yourself whether or not it indeed is. This stems from
the precept that God is just. He gives us the wherewithal for
guidance. Now, once you believe that the Qur'an is the word of God,
you do not judge its individual rulings because that is to presume
that you can understand the mind of God, which of course is not true.
So, in summary, you can rationalize the theology, but not  the
practice ( i.e Al-'aqeeda vs al-'ibadat )
 
>salam,
Wa alaikum alsalam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
 
>ayman
 
>--
>FADEL,AYMAN HOSSAM
>Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
>uucp:    ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt8145a
>Internet: gt8145a@prism.gatech.edu
>--
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Wael M. Haddara                    | whaddara@kean.ucs.mun.ca
School of Pharmacy                 |
Memorial Univ of Newfoundland      | "I have tried too to be a
St.John's, Newfoundland            | philosopher in my time; but I
Canada                             | don't know how, cheerfulness was
                                   | always breaking in"
All Disclaimers apply- I'm only    |   Oliver Edwards
a student :-)                      |
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=