it appears that the mainstream orthodox rabbinical council of america has picked a fight with the powerful chabad / lubavitch movement over the perennial problem about whether the last lubavitcher rebbe is dead, or the messiah, or both, or what. obviously, there is a slight problem with jews who start believing that the messiah has already come if the relevant prophecies haven’t been fulfilled. similarly, if the messiah in question hasn’t rebuilt the Temple, hasn’t ingathered the exiles of the jewish people or has, in fact, shuffled off this mortal coil and run down the curtain to join the choir invisibule, but his followers start coming out with terms like “occultation” and claiming he isn’t really dead and has Divine powers, G!D forbid, it does start to look a tiny bit like, well, er, christianity.
king messiah, or ex-parrot?
just so you don’t think it’s only muslims and christians who like to impose unnecessary strictures on daily life, this just in from ha’aretz:
the latest halachic ruling banning the use of elevators on the Sabbath shocked residents of the Tovei Ha’Ir retirement home in Jerusalem.
Most residents at this institution, which caters to the religious and ultra-Orthodox, received news of the rabbinical edict with indifference.
Tovei Ha’Ir residents have been using elevators on the Sabbath for years – this is the only way they can get from their rooms on the upper floors to the dining hall and synagogue.
One of the retirees, a Haredi man, barely concealed his sarcasm when he responded, “What changed suddenly? What was kosher until now is suddenly treyf?”
Also posted in Obscurantism | Tagged Judaism |
By Guest | Published:
September 16, 2009
This is a cross post from the Averroes Press
****
Ten years ago, this cover story in The Atlantic caused quite a stir. It revealed, researchers were proposing new theories about Islam’s holy book and Islamic history to reinterpret Islam for the modern world.
I believe Muslims will be well served if they read this essay rather than burn it. We do not have to agree with the findings, but we need to know how academia views the Muslim holy book.
Read and reflect.
Tarek
—————-
January 1999
Toby Lester
The Atlantic Monthly
IN 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of Sana’a, in Yemen, laborers working in a loft between the structure’s inner and outer roofs stumbled across a remarkable gravesite, although they did not realize it at the time. Their ignorance was excusable: mosques do not normally house graves, and this site contained no tombstones, no human remains, no funereal jewellery.
we’ve already seen in my last piece how islamists manage to pervert the Quran’s open-minded approach to the other abrahamic religions:
the only true followers of Moses [pbuh], are the Muslims, for it is part of moses religion [and the religion of all other prophets] to accept the latest Messenger and revelation; that is why Muslims are considered to be the followers of all the Prophets.
it also appears that the last piece upset some of our local islamist trolls.
good.
anyway, what i’m going to take a look at now is the assumption i noted in the previous piece, namely that “the jews” possess a “corrupt” verion of the Torah and that, as a result, we have drifted away from the “original religion” of every prophet from adam to abraham – which was, of course, “islam”. there are four components to this idea, namely:
By Zorro | Published:
June 25, 2009
Sarkozy’s call for a ban on the veil has indeed opened up a number of issues and perspectives, even if he may well have had his own motives for doing so!
We have had the normal reaction on the left to condemn him, the reaction from the right in the UK to call for a ban and even claim Muslims support them and this has caused a little stir amongst Islamists.
iEngage for example originally followed the 1st electronic print of the Express article stating that Ghaffar Hussain from the Quilliam Foundation had stated that the Burka/Burqa was a cultural practice and not sanctioned in the Quran, but then went further and mistakenly claimed that he supported a ban. This has subsequently been “corrected”, by both the Express and iEngage.
A number of ancilliary discussions have persisted some of which are quite interesting, hypocritical and opportunistic.
Also posted in Anti Fascism, Anti Muslim bigotry, Democracy, Ethics, Freedom of Expression, Hermeneutics, Human Rights, Islamism, Politics, Secularism, Sharia |
By Zorro | Published:
June 17, 2009
It seems that the Islamists, and some anti-Islamists, are getting into the debate involving the implementation of Sharia with certain assumptions in mind.
1. There is such a thing as The Sharia!
This is simply not true. Muslim scholars do not have a single detailed rule of Sharia that they agree upon. They agree on broad principles which most humans do, but in general they do not agree on a single body of law which they call Sharia. They have loads of different interpretations on most aspects of their religious code – if not all. To give an example let’s take the rulings of alcohol and wine. Is wine or alcohol forbidden? If it is both or either, is there a punishment? If so, what is the punishment? If not then it is up to the authorities to criminalize or not – a process called Tazir. The fact is there is no consensus on such issues.
By Zorro | Published:
June 11, 2009
“Islamic” economic ‘thinkers’ and Islamist political activists ranging from the terror crew (Bin Laden et al), to the “moderates” often like to have a rant at the evil Capitalist economic system, and specifically interest based banking. They often equate the above with the Islamic prohibition on Riba – usually vaguely translated as usury.
Many Islamic theologians/scholars do in fact consider interest an aspect of usury, though many don’t (see here for a full discussion of all of the Islamic scholars who permitted interest and did not see it as Riba). Assuming many did forbid interest as Riba, it does not necessarilly mean that is the complete picture.
Traditionally theologians have developed elaborate means of ensuring that effective financial transactions are not prevented through the blanket application of Islamic rules of Fiqh (human interpretations of Sharia divine law) to situations without recourse to strategies where necessary.