This is a guest post by Al-Qanaas Al-Masri
****
Yusuf Smith, a white convert to Islam who runs the popular blogistan website under the pseudonym of ‘Indigo Jo’, wrote an extraordinary blog last week in which he states that converts to Islam who then renounce Islam have ‘no excuse’.
Writing about some western Muslim women who recently left Islam after their involvement in the Kharabsheh Sufi community in Jordan, Smith wrote:
“The theme of someone leaving Islam after coming to associate it with a particularly unpleasant or rigid variant is not new – the essay The Wahhabi who Loved Beauty gives an example from Saudi Arabia – but it’s not an excuse at the end of the day; a person may be forgiven for it if it’s temporary, but at the end of the day accepting Truth is a duty and this means accepting that the extreme behaviour of one group is not the same as Islam itself.”
I’m sorry but what on earth does Yusuf mean when he writes:
“it’s not an excuse at the end of the day; a person may be forgiven for it if it’s temporary, but at the end of the day accepting Truth is a duty”
I’d like to think that Smith is simply saying that a person will not be forgiven by God if they leave Islam (such views are common, if slightly unpleasant, and are held by most religions and their followers). However, his phrase “it’s not an excuse at the end of the day” is certainly ambiguous if not worse. People who wish to change their beliefs do not need “an excuse”.
Smith’s other assertion that “accepting truth is a duty” is even more unclear and is arguably even potentially sinister. Individual human beings do not have “a duty” to accept any beliefs whatsoever whether this in the fields of religious beliefs, politics, geography, physics, economics or anything else. Why then does Smith think that any person has a “duty” to believe in Islam?
Needless to say, Smith was recently given a platform by the Radical Middle Way, a government-funded ‘counter-extremism’ outfit, that looks increasingly drawn towards the “radical” rather than the “middle way”.
52 Comments
I first thought their name was ironic but now I think they actually are offering a ‘radical’ way.
It’s depressing, but characteristic, to see how these women who have most likely been seriously abused by the Nuh Ha Mim Keller cult should be ones in the wrong for leaving Islam.
Whereas the bullies, freaks and perverts who populate this cult (and indeed any such cult) are excused for any amount of physical and psychological damage they inflict on their fellow-adherents in the name of Islam.
It’s certainly a very strange and ambiguous posting – particularly when one recalls that so many militants and Islamists believe that apostates from Islam should be killed.
I hope that Yusuf Smith is able to clear up exactly what he meant by it.
cult? really? i hadn’t heard that before. what is it based on?
b’shalom
bananabrain
Yusuf Smith uses this disclaimer:
“I can’t personally accuse Shaikh Nuh or the two women involved of anything because I have only met them briefly and my encounters with them were pleasant, but these problems are real and cannot be brushed under the carpet for much longer, even though this is not a cult, let alone a Jonestown type affair, but a dysfunctional tariqa group.”
The expression “dysfunctional tariqa group” is a perfectly good euphemism for “cult”.
yes, but you said “bullies, freaks and perverts”. now, i’ve had experience with friends involved in a dysfunctional tariqa group, so i am quite aware of what can happen if the shaykh decides that the female tariqa members are, shall we say, his personal harem. i just wanted to know if you had better information than what you’re saying here specifically about this particular group, or if you are making an assumption of the sort of thing you would expect to find.
b’shalom
bananabrain
No first hand experience with this group in particular. thankfully. But this is not the first time that I have heard of incidences of this kind going on in this particular “dysfunctional tariqa group”. And I don’t think all of it is “baseless slander”.
What exactly did go on? Did the Sheikh apply a flexible meaning to ‘brotherly and sisterly love’?
i know that sometimes there is baseless slander and sometimes, of course, there is perfectly valid and desirable whistle-blowing. the question, of course, is to know which is which, which is why i try not to judge without better information.
b’shalom
bananabrain
which is why i try not to judge without better information
But the point is, this hasn’t stopped Yusuf Smith from passing judgement on the women for leaving Islam on the basis of abuse meted out by people in the Nuh Ha Mim Keller cult.
But no such damnation is passed to the perpetrators of the psychological and sexual abuse of credulous murids that goes on in cults like Keller’s. Often at the hands of “scholars”
See here:
http://getoutlines.wordpress.com/2009/08/06/stone-hearts-dont-bleed/
and here:
http://nuhkeller.blogspot.com/
The Radical Middle Way sounds as incongruous and silly as Sensible Popular Terrorism.
I was especially taken with the following exchange between Nur Keller and one of his muridiin:
Murid’s question: : “I don’t watch TV but my wife does. My wife, however, only watches Islamic programs and some cooking shows. Without TV my wife would find life too constricting.”
Nur Keller’s answer: “Send her to her mother.” [that is, divorce her]
What a horrid little man.
http://nuhkeller.blogspot.com/search/label/What%20To%20Do%20With%20A%20Wife%20Who%20Watches%20TV%3F
I had no idea that Nuh Keller was so conservative and, well, borderline crazy. This is the first time I’ve seen his outfit described as being cult-like – and I had also assumed that, socially, he was relatively progressive. Will have to read up on him a bit more.
Is he linked to Murabitoun at all?
Al-Qanaas al-Masri
“Is he linked to Murabitoun at all?”
To the extent that al-Murabitoun are a part of the Darqawiyya tariqa; and this is a branch of the Shadhiliyah order. The latter has as one of its more well-known murshideen, Nuh Keller.
(vid: http://www.spittoon.org/archives/2574)
i second the comments above, i thought he was far more forward-thinking than this. tush and fie.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Faisal
Hilarious. You even hate the Sufis!
This post is typical Spitton tabloid-hackery.
The point is those who reject Islam after having known it will have no excuse in the hereafter. A sane adult person who has properly heard the message of Islam and rejects it will be in the hellfire forever.
If she didnt like this group she could have left them, joined another or joined none at all. She could even have stopped practing altogether but still believe the shahadah in her heart. That would save her. Leaving Islam entirely is inexcuseable before God.
“A sane adult person who has properly heard the message of Islam and rejects it will be in the hellfire forever.”
Well you’re going to have a hot time of it then, old man, after rejecting Islam for your heretical pseudo-Islamic cults like HT and the Ikhwan.
“Hilarious. You even hate the Sufis!”
I love the Sufis, particularly Abu Madyan. I hate religious cults which degenerate into misogynistic, sexually and psychologically abusive religious Ponzi-schemes.
Al Qaanas Al Misri
1. Im not a member of either group. I disagree with them on many points.
2.In any case both groups are Muslims (wow Spittons ARE takfeeris)
3. You will have to answer for making takfir on me. If you are Muslim take cognisance of the Prophetic hadith on this matter
If you are Muslim Fear Allah.
And if you are not fear a day when you wish you would be.
Faisal
Right you love the Sufis but attack one of the main promoters of tassawuf in the west. And attack a noble tariqa based on heresay and grotesque slander you read on a blog.
Oh dear.
“Right you love the Sufis but attack one of the main promoters of tassawuf in the west. “
Eveything with “Sufi” on the tin isn’t real sufism. Real sufis warn people of charlatans and occultists like the Keller cult.
But then you are, after all, someone who claims that the racist ideology of Hizbut Tahrir is far closer to “orthodox Islamic notions”.
I’m afraid that you’re the one who started trying to define who would be in the hellfire and who wouldn’t. I was merely responding in language that you would be able to understand. You’re right though – perhaps I should have risen above this rather than stooping to your level.
Muslim
Nuh Keller’s cult is a “noble tariqa”, eh?
Not according to the senior shyukh in Damashq who have recently heavily criticised and sanctioned Keller for his deviant views and methods.
http://nuhkeller.blogspot.com/
For “muslim” and this co-thinkers, I suppose that makes the Shuyukh of Damascus attackers of “one of the main promoters of tassawuf in the west. And attack a noble tariqa based on heresay and grotesque slander”.
They must hate Sufis!
Nuh Keller’s cult is a “noble tariqa”, eh?
Not according to the senior shyukh in Damashq who have recently heavily criticised and sanctioned Keller for his deviant views and methods.
————-
The shuyukh in Damascus have expressed dismay and disapproval regarding the marital customs of our tariqa, saying that it is not usual for a sheykh to be so involved in this area of a person’s life and that it is an area that is meant for the dervish’s parents and family to be involved in.
————-
For “muslim” and this co-thinkers, I suppose that makes the Shuyukh of Damascus attackers of “one of the main promoters of tassawuf in the west. And attack a noble tariqa based on heresay and grotesque slander”.
———————
Abu Faris and Faisal
Whic Shuyukh? You dont name a single name
Typical Spitoon dishonesty
And whats with the “Muslim” – are you make takfeer Mr Gazi
Wow Spitoonis really are takfeeris arent they. Ive been on the site for a couple of hours and been called a non-Muslim twice!!
And whats with the “Muslim” – are you make takfeer Mr Gazi
Wow Spitoonis really are takfeeris arent they. Ive been on the site for a couple of hours and been called a non-Muslim twice!!
No, “muslim” is reference to the pseudonym you’ve chosen for yourself, remember? You dickhead
Faisal
A rather odd position for people who promote themselves as followers of heresy ”
Heresy is another word for freedom of thought” as well as having highly heretical ideas such as homosexuality being halal, supporting people who abuse the Quran and the Prophet (peace be upon him), as well as, as Faisal has done supporting the Mughal emperor Akbars attempt to start a new religion Din-e-illahi and deny things known from Islam by necessity such as the obligation of the hijab
Whats racist about HT’s ideaology?
Faisal
Thanks for the clarification. Just think if a member of an Islamic group had said what you said Spittoon could have done a whole article on it. And swearing when you are fasting isnt good (Im sure at Spitoon are doing the sunnah fasts of Shawaal as you all fasted Ramadan)
So what are the names of the Damascus Shukuyh who have criticised Nuh Keller?
I see you’re busy moving goalposts. Well good luck with that.
Muslim – you have a narrow minded view of Islam, since when was hijab universally accepted by all theologians? Are you saying there is absolutely no iktilaf on this issue? You see this is why Sharia can never be sychronised with state law and why the Islamist project to doomed to failure, because Sharia is so diverse despite recent attempts to champion one view on issues above others. That and of course the arab-centric nature of Islamism which you seem to approve of. Those who adopt the theology of their masters are destined to remain slaves.
Faisal
So what are the names of the Damascus Shukuyh who have criticised Nuh Keller?
You’ll have to ask Nuh Keller. Or you could go to the site Abu Faris linked to and ask for their names and mobile numbers yourself. Let us know what you find.
Abu Wanabe Arab (aka racist)
There is ijma that its Fard
“There was thus nothing new or surprising in the Islamic legal opinion promulgated in December 2003 by the Grand Mufti of Egypt, Sheikh ?Ali Jumu?a of the Egyptian Fatwa Authority (Dar al-Ifta? al-Misriyya) that the hijab is an obligation on all Muslim female adults, as firmly established in the Holy Quran and the Prophet Muhammads hadiths, as well as unanimously agreed upon by Muslim scholars. He pointed out that unlike the cross sometimes worn by Christians, or the skullcap worn by Jews, the hijab is not a ?symbol? of Islam but rather that ?Islam orders female adults to wear hijab as obligatory religious clothing.? It is part of every Muslim woman?s religious practice.”
We are discussing the hijab. This doesnt relate to the state .Its an obligation regardless.
Your trying to ignore Islams law while hiding behind racist Arab bashing is
shameful.
It isnt the theology of Arabs its the theology of Islam. Many indeed most of the greatest ulema of Islam were non Arab
(Unless you belive Islam is Arab tradition rather than the divine religion of God)
Do you think all Arab women wear hijab? And since for a large part of Islamic history Arabs were ruled by non Arabs this comment is absurd.
Muslim (aka brainless turd)
Ijma is not the same as ‘know in Islam by necessity’, ijma refers to a general consensus but does not mean that all theologians agree. E.G. There is ijma that Islam allows wife beating and sex with slave girls, others disagree. Issues that are known by necessity are articles of faith like believing in angels and the hereafter, there is a huge difference. So one can reject the view that the hijab is fard and yet be a Muslim.
Yes I know Islam is not all about Arabs you prat, my username does NOT degrade Arabs in any way, rather it degrades those who seek to be Arab when in fact they are not. Just like if I called you a Michael Jackson wannabe – does not mean I am insulting MJ does it? No wonder your still an Islamist.
Muslim,
I think I am in a better position to decide what is “racist Arab bashing” than you. That is by the by, however.
The jilbab and khimar worn today date only from the 1970s, when, for example, Egyptian women who belonged to the Muslim Brotherhood adopted them as Islamic dress. Wearing a jilbab advertised the wearer’s adherence to a particular interpretation of Islam. This dress code is a modern invention, even though it is asserted to be strictly Qur’anic.
Fadwa El Guindi says:
El Guindi, Fadwa — Veil: Modesty, Privacy, and Resistance, Berg, 1999, p. 7
Another Islamist myth disposed of, then.
Faisal
Hilarious. So you claimed before that Damascus shuyukh ahve criticised Sheikh Nuh Keller then admit you dont actually know who those Shuyukh are !!! You just like passing on baseless slanders against Muslims dont you? I mean its pretty much the basis of your whole site.
Abu Faris
You are aware that the quote on hijab being fard by ijma I posted was from Sheikh Ali Gomaa the Mufti of Egypt – a supporter of the Mubarak regime and strong critic of Islamic political parties !!!
You people just try and deny the bits of Islam you dislike by calling anyone (including the entire corpus of ulema) who points it out an “Islamist”
You just like passing on baseless slanders against Muslims dont you? I mean its pretty much the basis of your whole site.
Not as much as you like to support the sexual exploitation of women under the worthy name of Sufi Islam. What a surprise.
Abu Wanabe Arab (aka racist)
Actually reflecting on your user name and it seems obvious its a dig at the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wasalaam. No Ajami Muslims want to be Arab as your name suggests- they dont spend their time replacing their national dishes with Arab food or watching Adel Imam films or listen to Umm Kulthum or joining Arab nationalist parties etc.
They do however want to be like the Prophet salAllahu alayhi wasalaam because he was the guide for all humanity, the prefect human being and everyone on earth should want to be like him salllAllahu alayhi wasalaam.
So you are actually clearly making fun of Muslims wishing to follow the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wasalaam and his sunnah – which is kufr on your part.
And if a Muslim called someone else a “wanabee Jew” or “wanabee Hindu” you would be screaming about it all day.
dawood
I dont support that all. But unfortunately you havent produced a shread of actual evidence of it so why on earth should we believe you?
Bring your proof if you are truthful !
Who are you kidding? Of course you support the sexual exploitation of women.
What about the accounts of the women themselves on their blogs? I suppose it’s more important for you to suppress that information. What evidence do *you* have to reject their personal accounts?
Absolutely none.
dawood
Im familiar with the sister in question since she posted numerous times on another blog (now deleted) making numerous wild and false accusations about people. She was asked repeatedly to name name but failed to do so. So why would anyone believe her? I know people from that tariqa who are the most pious truthful Muslims I know and they say what she said isnt true. So who should I believe? An anonymous blogger who fails to bring any evidence or people I know dont lie ?
Not at all – why would it be? If Muslims are being exploited it should be exposed. But there has to be evidence.
See above. The Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wasalaam said the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. That is my evidence
Actually you have no concrete proof of her allegations. You just like slandering religious Muslims.
“An anonymous blogger who fails to bring any evidence or people I know dont lie ?”
1) If she is an “anonymous blogger” how can you claim to “know” her?
She was asked repeatedly to name name but failed to do so. So why would anyone believe her?
2) Why should her failure to name the individuals suggest she is lying. It actually says more about her integrity by questioning the culture of the so-called “tariqa” rather than name and shame individuals. You’re in no position to judge.
” If Muslims are being exploited it should be exposed. But there has to be evidence.”
3) There are personal accounts from various men and women in other cases to do with the Keller cult. But it’s more important for you to insinuate that they are lying because, according to you, you know “people from that tariqa who are the most pious truthful Muslims”. But do you know *all* the people and how they might behave in *all* circumstances?
“Actually you have no concrete proof of her allegations. You just like slandering religious Muslims”
4) You’re not willing to take all accounts into consideration and you’re more concerned about protecting the name of the Keller tariqa because of personal affiliation. By doing so, you’re supporting the clandestine sexual exploitation of some women members by some of its adherents.
And?
Gomaa is also on record as supporting the murder of “apostates”, limiting Copts’ access to state employment, reduction of women’s rights…
Is the fact that he is Grand Mufti reason enough to support his medievalist and fantastic claims, then?
Of course, I quoted an Egyptian woman and academic who has been working in the area of women’s rights and Islam for quite some time. What would she know, eh? She’s only a woman, after all.
Fascinating, as only people of a “certain age” in the Arab world, specifically Egypt, would ever dream of doing such things. Most of us spend our time watching Hollywood blockbusters (sans kissing) with dodgy Arabic subtitles on Saudi MBC satellite channels, listening to Nancy Ajram (or Rosie, if we like a bit more sauce) and not being members of any political party.
However, you also seem to “know” the Muslim mind (as if you are possibly blessed with such sovereign knowledge!):
Actually, most Muslims (Arab or not) want decent employment, a decent future for their children, freedom of expression, a secular government and a state which does not torture/maim/imprison/disappear/murder them for expressing even quite mild dissent with the very often corrupt, venal and vile regimes that oppress the Muslim peoples, and those resident in Muslim-majority states of whatever religion and none. This has been reflected in responses from opinion polls conducted quite recently in Muslim-majority states as far afield as Indonesia and Egypt.
Oh, and most regard religion as a private matter.
More on hijab:
As the Islamists here just *love* anecdotal evidence (when it runs their way, of course), perhaps we should look at all those photographs of women from Sudan to Syria, taken in the ’60s and ’70s and count the number of hijabs and niqabs we can see in the photographs…
Not many, eh?
Wonder why that is, then?
You’re a stupid ugly man aint ya Faisal?
I’m no oil painting D but how is that relevant?
I feel I should make some further comments about Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa of Egypt, as it is certainly the case that the man has been subject to some fairly crude depictions by enemies both within and without the Islamic fold.
As an appointee of the Mubarak government in Egypt, the Shaykh is obviously going to be (more or less) a creature of that regime – and not some cheerleader for al-Ikhwaan (Muslim Brotherhood) and other Islamists in Egypt and beyond. As a result, Gomaa has remained silent on a wide range of issues of day-to-day importance to ordinary Egyptians (like employment, wages, education, health care), whilst towing the government line on issues such as the undesirability of the rule of the “Brothers” (MB), the continued I/P conflict, etc.
Yes, Gomaa has gained a reputation in the West as a moderate (save amongst the frothing loonies of Jihadwatch and Little Green Footballs) and he is certainly more moderate on a range of issues than many of the Islamists. However, he has also made a series of statements (especially about culture and women’s rights) that are less than appetising for those in the Arab world who would like religious figures to stick to their last and spend less time talking cobblers about issues over which they clearly know nothing and care about even less.
One needs to be careful about either being too supportive, or too condemnatory of Gomaa. He is a traditionalist in the pay of a state run as a family affair by a closely related gang of families from Lower Egypt.
Certainly, citing Gomaa butters no onions – it is the reality of things that concern me, not the opinions of old men, however well-educated (and Gomaa was, recall, educated in the Western education system) about issues over which he has sometimes shown a tendency towards traditionalist misogyny and bigoted disregard.
Sheikh Ali Gomaa the Mufti of Egypt – a supporter of the Mubarak regime…
Abu Faris
Good grief Abu Faris you are dumb. D-u-m-b. OK I’ll repeat this s-l-o-w-l-y just for you.
You claimed the notion hijab is Fard is an “Islamist myth”
I posted a fatwa from Ali Goma showing it is fard by consensus of all the scholars.
Ali Goma is a supporter of the secular Egyptian state.
Are you going to call him an “Islamist” too? You jokers just call anyone you disagree with an” islamist”"!!
And the quote from the Egyptian writer you posted has zero relevance to the ruling of hijab in sharia unless you are jahil enough to believe Islam is “whatever Egyptians do”
No it’s whatever Saudi’s do