The Islamic tradition and al-khara' wa al-istinja' and other sordid matters

Submitted by dhimmi no more (United States), Sep 28, 2010 at 18:18

Our dear Abdellah Another victim of Arabian imperialism

Oh are you aware our dear Abdellah that your Allah says

wa ma arsalna men rasulan ila bilisani qawmihi

So who was the rasul that was sent to your qawm? Any guesses?

For the readers: I suspect that it would be surprising to most of you but the Islamic tradition has strange pre-occupation with matters of the bowel be it al-khara' (feces or stools) and al-istinja' or the act of cleaning after defecation and with so much orthopraxy in Islam this sujbect is the real deal

> first of all sorry for my english!!i never explaned kindly that bible are corrupted! i was explaning the fatwa that was very bad translated! now they deleted the phrase who were really added from the mind of the translator, but it still has a lot of translation problems!what we must say immediately is that as a muslim who can read arabic, i understand that i cannot clean my self with bible!! because first i dont know what is corrupted or notn and second because there is a lot of sacred names : god, jesus, maria etc.about corruption : it is said in our tradition that it's changed from the original! it's said too that there is jesus bible! who dont exist in the actual version of the bible! and in the same time! there is some diffrences between diffrent christian mouvements versions! But the more important is that we thing that a big part from the bible is true! so we understand the coran and the story of the world by reading the bible!!

For the readers: Most of you make too much out of fatwas as in actual fact a fatwa is no more than a religious edict that can be issued by just about any sheikh or Muslim cleric that can read and write where the sheikh is telling who ever is listening his own view of a subject in the vast orthopraxy literature of Islam and in most cases such fatwas do not mean very much and have very limited audience

And at times the ridiculous reigns supreme and where would you find except in islam where we have what i would regard as a mega fatwa where an Egyptian shiekh wrote a fatwa that was a booklet about the allowed sexual positions is Islam (see Amr Adeeb's al-Qahira al-Yum)! Sobhanallah

The root of the word yafti or he issues a fatwa is FTW and what is most amazing is that in Egyptian Arabic the term inta bitifti (in Modern Classical Arabic it would be inaka tafti) or you are issuing a fatwa is a form of sarcasm! as many Muslims cannot stomach this nonsense.

So much for fatwas

One more point Islamic theology is about

1. The A

2. But not the A

3. And if nothing works then it is Allahu a3lam or only Allah knows and this fatwa is a case in point

So let me translate the first part of this fatwa:

"Insulting the Torah or the Injiil (read this as the NT) that is not corrupted or the corrupted that has a truth or some great name as in the case of the name of allah and who makes that (insult) with knowledge and his choice he brought infidelity (kufr) and seek refuge in allah and that is known that is corrupted or changed from the two (the Torah and the NT) and there is nothing great in it there is no problem with insulting it"

The syntax is a bit confusing but you get the idea

Then he quotes a reference from a certain al-Shams al-Ramli and for the readers most of these qutoes are not for real and i will do a search to check the primary source quoted but i have not been able to locate it in Arabic so far and it is called Nihayat al-muhtaj

"said al-shams al-ramli in nihayat al-muhtaj not allowed al-istinja' by the respected or part of it and the respected are many types among them what was written in it something from the sciences (read this as kutub al-turath al-islami or the books of Islamic tradition) example the hadith and al-fiqh (read this as Islamic law) and there was (there is word here that I was unable to read and it looks like alif and lam and a teh marbouta ilah may be?). not respected like (books) of philosophy the Torah and the injiil (read this as the NT) science and made corrupted and made of it great name al-istija' is allowed with it. End"

So now back to the confused Islamic theology:

A. The A here is

1. the Qur'an tells us that the NT and the Torah and the zabour (read this as the Psalms of David) are Allah's words

2. The Qur'an also says that no one can change Allah's words

3. which means that based on 1 no one can corrupt the Bible which means that the Bible cannot be corrupted which means that it cannot be used for al-istinja'

4. But the ultimate hypocricy is that muslims tell us that we can find Muhammd's name in the "corrupted Bible (the Biblical comforter) or even in the sira we have the Syriac Munahimanna so how come the Jews and Christins kept the name of Muhammad in their books any guesses?

5. and here is your bonus for today our dear Abdellah how come Allah was unable to stop the Jews and Christians from corruting his words any guesses?

And this is the A and it means that no one can use the Torah or the injiil for al-istinja'

B. Now not the A

1. We are also told that the Jews and the Christians, as ridiculous as it sounds, harafu or corrupted their books

2. Therefore their books can be insulted and can be used for al-istinja'

3. But the real question is how about pages that let us say have the name of Allah?

So in short he who wants to use the Torah or the injiil for al-istinja' he must first remove and preserve the paper where he finds the name of Allah

C. Now the only allahu a3lam here is that you are darn to do it and you are darn not to do it

et voila boys and girls one gem from the annals of Islam

>and in all ways we dont know what is "Corrupted" so (as it said in the original fatwa) i cannot clean my self if i'm not sure!my message was clear? or you have questions ?

I urge you to leave Islam and be free again

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".