Al-Azhar okays controversial book about Prophet Mohammed
Book, published in 1837 by Reverend George Bush, portrays Prophet Mohammed as 'imposter'.
The highest authority in Sunni Islam approved a book describing the Prophet as an "imposter" and Muslims as "locusts" that the Egyptian press continued Friday to attribute to the US president's great grandfather despite denials from Washington.
"The Al-Azhar Institute for Islamic Studies approved the book titled 'The Life of Mohammed, founder of the religion of Islam and of the Empire of the Saracens'," Egyptian newspapers announced on their front pages.
The book was published in 1837 by Reverend George Bush, whom Egyptian newspapers - including state-owned publications - have consistently presented as the current US president's great-grandfather.
But the government-run Al-Ahram daily said it had approved the book's publication "because it is a piece of documentation that paints a lively picture of the life of Prophet Mohammed."
Publication of Reverend Bush's work had initially been rejected by Al-Azhar and the turnaround puts an end to a year-long controversy.
An unnamed Al-Azhar official quoted in the official Al-Akhbar daily denied rumours that the publication was the result of US pressure.
"Al-Azhar does not bow to any pressure, whether foreign or local, when it comes to matters related to Islam," the cleric said.
[url=http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/egypt/?id=13859]Link[/url]
I don't think the book had been approved per se, it's more that it has not been banned.
if u dont bann sumin aint u approving it?
You can't ban everything you don't agree with.
That's silly.
If i was an Admin here and everyone had a serious issue with someone yet I didnt bann him/her
this would mean that i dont have an issue with him/her
the Azhar lots JOB is to ban/approve literature
anyway that link says
"But the government-run Al-Ahram daily said it had APPROVED the book's publication"
A while ago there was a report that al-Azhar might ban the book, but they decided not to.
If you don't agree with something then you should say that you dont agree with it. You don't try to erase it from history.
Are we going to go through all historical works and ban the ones we dont agree with?
But they didnt even say that they didnt agree with it
they said "it is a piece of documentation that paints a lively picture of the life of Prophet Mohammed."
You are basing everything on the link you posted.
It is obvious that the scholars at Al-Azhar don't agree with the book's anti-Islam stance, its calling the Prophet an 'imposter' and its comparison of Muslims to locusts.
i didnt post the link-my sister did-wake up
btw do u have any links that show that the "scholars at Al-Azhar don't agree with the book's anti-Islam stance"
The only thing the scholars could do is to get it banned under blasphemy or similar laws. If the subject matter is not covered under such legislation, they have no power.
I would rather have such material available as you can see the mindset of your opponents, and can then combat their ignorance.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Lilsis. Do you seriously think that Al-Azhar agrees with everything that is in the book?
Admin. Why even consider banning it? It's over one hundred and fifty years old! There are many more examples of that kind of literature.
A Chistian preacher thought Muhammed SAW was an imposter!?! Well hello! He is a Christian preacher. He would say that.
I suspect that the only reason this book is even being talked about is because the author was called George Bush and also a relative of Dubya.
yeah good point
and the text wasnt blasphemous
and irfan calm down :roll:
I never said ban it. If it is blasphemous then it should be banned. It does not seem to be, just insulting.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Even if it is blasphemous it is still very very old. It was not meant for a Muslim audience. It gives an insight into how many Americans would have thought about Islam during the 19th century.
If it was a piece of contemporary work then arguemnets for censorship could be made.
Lilsis. I can't calm down. You can't ban history.
but person shudnt approve it either
So why republish it in cairo?
History is always revised by the victors, so your arguments their are in vain.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Like I said before, if you don't agree with something then say so.
I very much doubt that Al-Azhar 'approved' the book. It is not only the Western media which sensationalises stories, the Arab media does it too I suspect. Like I said before, the only reason this book is being disscussed in the Arab media is because of its links to George W Bush.
Like you said before it may be to 'see the mindset of your opponents, and can then combat their ignorance.'
It is a rare book. Not 50 copies of it have been sold.
BTW History is always being revised, be it by the victors, the losers or the spectators.
France gets nuclear fusion plant
France will get to host the project to build a 10bn-euro (£6.6bn) nuclear fusion reactor, in the face of strong competition from Japan.
The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (Iter) will be the most expensive joint scientific project after the International Space Station.
Some green groups criticised Tuesday's announcement as a waste of money. They are doubtful whether Iter will ever deliver practical technologies.
"With 10 billion [euros], we could build 10,000MW offshore windfarms, delivering electricity for 7.5 million European households," said Jan Vande Putte of Greenpeace International.
"Governments should not waste our money on a dangerous toy which will never deliver any useful energy. Instead, they should invest in renewable energy which is abundantly available, not in 2080 but today."
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629239.stm]BBC News[/url]
Teenager admits killing parents
A public schoolboy has admitted killing his parents before using their credit cards to fund a £30,000 spending spree.
Brian Blackwell, 19, stabbed his father Sydney, 72, and mother Jacqueline, 61, Liverpool Crown Court was told.
Their bodies were found in September 2004, several weeks after they had been attacked at their Merseyside home.
Blackwell admitted manslaughter with diminished responsibility and will be sentenced later. The teenager suffers "narcissistic personality disorder".
Mr Justice Royce said he was considering a life sentence in view of the nature of Blackwell's disorder.
An only child described as an "exemplary student", he had studied A-Levels at the £7,000-a-year Liverpool College and was weeks away from starting a degree in medicine at Nottingham University.
Blackwell's personality disorder meant he fantasised about unlimited success, power and brilliance.
After battering and stabbing his parents, he went on holiday to the US with his girlfriend Amal Saba, where his excesses included spending £2,200 on a three-night stay in the Presidential Suite of the Plaza Hotel in New York.
When he returned home on 12 August he stayed with his girlfriend's parents claiming he was locked out of his house until his parents returned "from holiday".
One week later, he learned he had obtained A grades in his maths, chemistry, biology and Spanish A levels and was accepted into Nottingham University.
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/merseyside/4633339.stm]BBC News[/url]
There was a thread on the last forum about this disorder....
I find it impossible to believe that a sane individual could be capable of such an act.
i like to see Mr Admin diss psycological disorders now :twisted:
angel this make him appreciate the science of human behaviour
lol admin probs has a theory of his own! hmm lets just watch wat he comes up with..
First of all let me find out what it is, then I will reply properly.
hmm... blame it on a disorder and get your sentence reduced? Am I pessimistic or realistic to assume such a situation is begging to be corrupted?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Mr Admin I was just watching BBC news-the guy got sentenced for life
i dont know why they didnt take his disorder in to consideration
they must have been anti psycology like u
Well first look [url=http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&hs=4Cj&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org... ,It does not seem to even be relevant.
Why does opinion of self importance make you more likely to commit a crime? why does lack of empathy make you commit a crime?
Where are the grounds for diminished responsibility? Not feeling bad about something does not mean you will do it.
Its all codswallop. Just using a disorder to lighten the punishment.
If I have the Extreme Thievery Disorder (ETD for those in the know...), should I not be punished for stealing?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
"sufferers can be confrontational, believe their problems are unique, and fly into a rage if their inflated sense of self-worth is challenged
Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of the mental health charity SANE, said: "Although narcissistic personality disorder is not that rare, it is seldom that it becomes a pathological disorder that could lead to this kind of brutal act."
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4633843.stm]BBC News[/url]
even Islam says that in order for someone to be punished for their crime they should be mentally sane
Yes, but how is the responsibility diminished with this order?
Its just like saying one should get elected in an election because they have athma. Its got nothing to do with anything!
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
hey! he's lucky to have got sentenced for manslaughter and not murder!
he's got a 'personality' disorder - thats not the same as a mental disorder!! so he is very much sane, just thinks more of himself than the rest of us - a bit like saddam and bush... they're all murderers, they think too much of themselves and that their opinions rule - thats narcissism for you.
or to be precise:
www.dictionary.com
nar·cis·sism [i]n. [/i]
1. Excessive love or admiration of oneself. See Synonyms at conceit.
2. A psychological condition characterized by self-preoccupation, lack of empathy, and unconscious deficits in self-esteem.....
(and before u pick up on the reference to psychology in that definition, this still does not make it a mental condition, which would be detected by a psychiatrist as opposed to a psychologist).
i gotta agree with admin on this one.
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
Dress code deters muslim medics
Hospitals should allow Muslim women to wear a "theatre hijaab" in surgical environments, doctors have heard.
Sabrina Talukdar, a medical student at the University of St Andrews, said many hospitals asked women to take the traditional head clothing off.
She said this failure to respect culutural values was discouraging women from entering the medical profession.
Doctors at the British Medical Association conference in Manchester overwhelmingly supported her proposal.
She said there was no standard practice in the UK at the moment, and she had heard of some hospitals insisting staff take hijaabs off, while others allowed them to cover it with surgical head gear.
Outside the hospital theatre, NHS staff are free to wear religious clothing.
Ms Talukdar, 25, said the hijaab would be made from sterile material so it was completely risk-free to the patient.
"We are very aware that MRSA and infection is a concern. We do not want to put patients at risk."
But she said the measure was necessary as some women were being put off medicine because of the issue.
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4634351.stm]BBC News[/url]
In the LOST thread I posted the news that a woman was ordered to mary her rapist father in law and divorce her husband
here's an update
Muslim order on rape sparks storm in India
MUZAFFARNAGAR, India (Reuters) - About 200 women protested outside a northern Indian court on Thursday against a religious order prohibiting a rape victim from living with her husband after she was raped by her father-in-law.
Imrana Bibi, a poor rickshawpuller's wife in the predominantly Muslim town, was raped by her father-in-law earlier this month, prompting a Muslim village council to decree she had to live as the "wife" of her father-in-law and treat her husband as her son.
"Punish the rapist, not the victim," the women shouted as the 28-year-old burqa-clad Imrana Bibi met a team from the National Commission for Women (NCW) which demanded justice for her under India's secular constitution.
"Personal laws should be modified and made gender-just and human rights-friendly. No religion punishes the innocent," Subhashini Ali, a senior leader of the All India Democratic Women's Association, told reporters.
"Any Muslim who opposes our fatwa is not a true Muslim and is betraying Islam," said Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric of the Darul Uloom Deoband, known for its conservative views.
"She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law. It does not matter whether it was consensual or forced. She cannot live with her husband."
[url=http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=9450]Muslim News[/url]
Mr Admin please confirm that ^^^ is not the teaching of the deobandi's
cos a certain deoband comes to mind
Pages