Category Archives: Theology

Saudi Arabia: The Jinn made me do it

A judge who allegedly confiscated large plots of empty government land using forged deeds claimed it was a jinn who made him carry out his illegal activities. He said he was possessed and did not know what he was doing.

The human lawyer of the judge refused to continue defending him and apologized for not being able to do so. The lawyer was sure that all evidence was against his client so he gave up on him.

The apology of the lawyer gave me an idea. I think the judge should pick up a jinn lawyer since he has worked with them before and they are not strangers to him.

The judge had graciously accepted the advice of the jinn when he confiscated empty government land worth more than SR2 billion through forged documents. The land, in Madinah, is known as “Hamra Al-Assad” after the name of the residential district in which it is located.

The judge had more than 30 other accomplices including court employees and realtors. They were all investigated with a view to determining the role of each one of them in the case.

As we have advised the judge to pick up a jinn lawyer, it is only natural that his other accomplices do the same. Each one of them should choose a lawyer to defend him.

The defendants may also classify themselves into groups and each group should assign its own lawyer. The jinni lawyer of the judge should chair the group of lawyers because he is the most experienced of them and because he corrupted the judge and induced him into stealing land worth billions of riyals.

If a group of jinni lawyers was formed to defend the prime suspect and the other defendants, people would closely follow the trials. This would be an unprecedented court case in the legal history of mankind.

My suggestion seems okay from outside but in fact it is impractical. The judges in the case would not be accustomed to dealing with jinn in their courts.

In fact many judges do not see any need for lawyers. They believe that courts will be better without them. Many judges would accept lawyers only because the system of litigation has made provisions for their inclusion.

Therefore my proposal remains a comic one in line with the judge’s claim that he committed his crime under the influence of the jinn.

Saudi Arabia Religious police chief escapes bid on life #KSA


The chief of Saudi Arabia’s feared religious police escaped a bid on his life in August by old guards opposing his reforms within the security system, a newspaper in the Gulf kingdom reported on Wednesday.

Abdul Lateef Al Shaikh, chairman of the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, escaped unscathed after a car tried to run him over just as he was leaving a mosque after performing dawn prayers, Alwatan said.

“The assassination attempt has been confirmed… it followed news that a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood intended to liquidate Al Shaikh after his decision to sack some Brotherhood leaders in the Commission,” the paper said, quoting reliable sources.

It said those leaders were opposed to reforms implemented by Al Shaikh, including stopping Commission cops from chasing cars on roads and halting part time agents.

“The Commission Presidency will disclose all details of the reforms in the next period… it is believed that the reforms harmed the interests of the opponents who are described by the sources as a fifth column… they used to collect donations in the name of the Commission to serve private interests,” it said.

Saudi religious police to be investigated for corruption allegations


Saudi Arabia’s religious police, officially known as the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, has come under criticism for alleged financial and administrative corruption.

A source in the Saudi National Anti-Corruption Commission (known as “Nazaha”) said the commission has received a complaint with alleged violations and that an investigation would be launched, the Saudi daily newspaper Okaz reported on Tuesday.

One of the violations included a contract with a real estate firm to rent a tower on Riyadh’s King Fahd Road.

The contract was allegedly for SR17.8 million ($4.53 million), despite that the same building was previously approved for rental to the Ministry of Housing for SR15 million ($4 million).

The complaint also included a claim that an official from the commission received a SR800,000 ($213,000) loan, of which SR400,000 ($106,000) was allocated for the opening of an “intellectual security” training program.

The report noted that it was the Imam Muhammad Bin Saud Islamic University that is in charge of organizing this program not the commission official who received the loan. Besides, there is no clear mechanism to oversee how the funds are spent, according to the report.

The commission spokesman, Turki Al-Shaleel, rejected the allegations as baseless and part of attempts to smear the religious authority, according to local daily, Okaz.

Shaleel said the general secretariat of the commission reserves the right to prosecute parties that spread wrongful reports about it.

The head of the Saudi religious police, Sheikh Abdel Latif al-Sheikh, at the governmental ranking of minister, reports directly to King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz.

The commission employs an estimated 4,000 “so called religious police” on the ground and tasked with patrolling streets and cracking down on aspects and behaviors deems to be in contradiction with the Islamic Shariah.

The 2013 budget of the commission is estimated at $390 million, a 35 percent increase from the 2012 budget, according to a report by Arabian Business.

Saudi Arabia: A Need to discipline imams

Wow, Someones thinking in KSA..

Abdo Khal

The fight that took place among devotees at Al-Firdous Mosque in Riyadh following the Friday sermon further confirms the fact that mosques are often unregulated. There are imams (preachers) who are not properly educated and do not have sufficient knowledge of the political, philosophical or economic realities of life. Regardless, these imams do not shy away from talking about such issues and tend to forget that times have changed and that some of the attendees may be more knowledgeable than them even in religious matters.

During his sermon in the Al-Firdous Mosque, the imam did not realize that he was agitating people with inflammatory statements. Those in the congregation are usually a mixture of people with different political beliefs that should not be attacked. Controversial issues should not be tackled by the imams so as to preserve peace among all people in the mosque.

Climbing up the dais, many imams blurt out things without realizing their inherent danger. They talk without depth about certain issues and without any consideration for the feelings of those in attendance. They speak on controversial issues in which political, economic, social and cultural factors intertwine, and end up making matters worse.

In recent years, we have become accustomed to some imams talking about controversial issues in their sermons. Not only do they pass judgments, they would go further to abuse the people they were talking about whether they were individuals or groups.

The simplest term an imam may use to describe a man or a woman not of his liking is that he or she is immoral or indulges in debauchery. He will then use another popular accusation and that is of being Westernized, meaning that they have sold themselves to the West. He may be discussing issues which have no direct relevance to the attendees. What does it mean for an imam to accuse anyone of debauchery just because he does not agree with him politically? Why do the imams want to impose their political beliefs on the congregation?

There is no purpose in all of this except to turn people against each other. Such an imam lacks the language of tolerance. He is also poor in social ethics.

The mosque is a place for unity and harmony, and not disparity and antagonism. Why dothe imams not follow the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)? Though the Prophet knew the hypocrites by name, he never abused them during his sermons. Why do these imams learn not to be nice to people? Do they believe that they are free to say whatever they want just because they have complete dominance over the dais?

The imams should realize that during the olden days mosques played the role of the Council of Ministers of our present time. This was because the imam was none other than the ruler or the caliph himself. Whatever he said was to be followed by people. With the expansion of the Islamic World and the construction of mosques in all corners, the rulers were no longer imams. They abandoned this role to ordinary scholars.

Some imams have taken advantage of their positions to say unacceptable things and to accuse those with whom they do not agree as being immoral or corrupt. The new trend is that some imams will discuss current political issues in a manner in which many of us do not agree. They expect all to agree with their political views and to say amen to anything they may utter.

Egypt: Islamic supremacists forcing Christians to pay jizya, Qur’an’s tax on non-Muslims

The Times calls the jizya “a seventh-century tax.” That is broadly true, but they’re following the standard dhimmi journalistic practice of exonerating Islam from every crime and atrocity done in its name. In reality, the jizya is a tax that non-Muslims must pay as a sign of their subjugation to the Muslims, and it is mandated in the Qur’an: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” — Qur’an 9:29

The Tafsir al-Jalalayn says that this when v. 29 specifies that Muslims must fight against those who “follow not the Religion of Truth,” it means those who do not follow Islam, “which is firm and abrogates other deens [religions].” Ibn Kathir gives a hint as to why this is so when he explains that the People of the Book were in bad faith when they rejected Muhammad, and that they are not true believers even in their own religions:

Therefore, when People of the Scriptures disbelieved in Muhammad, they had no beneficial faith in any Messenger or what the Messengers brought. Rather, they followed their religions because this conformed with their ideas, lusts and the ways of their forefathers, not because they are Allah’s Law and religion. Had they been true believers in their religions, that faith would have directed them to believe in Muhammad, because all Prophets gave the good news of Muhammad’s advent and commanded them to obey and follow him. Yet when he was sent, they disbelieved in him, even though he is the mightiest of all Messengers. Therefore, they do not follow the religion of earlier Prophets because these religions came from Allah, but because these suit their desires and lusts. Therefore, their claimed faith in an earlier Prophet will not benefit them because they disbelieved in the master, the mightiest, the last and most perfect of all Prophets.

As-Sawi specifies that the payment of the jizya signifies that the non-Muslims are “humble and obedient to the judgements of Islam.” As-Suyuti notes that the jizya is “not taken from someone in a state of hardship,” although that was a stipulation at times honored in the breach. For example, a contemporary account of the Muslims’ conquest of Nikiou, an Egyptian town, in the 640’s, says that “it is impossible to describe the lamentable position of the inhabitants of this town, who came to the point of offering their children in exchange for the enormous sums that they had to pay each month…”

This was a manifestation of the “state of abasement” specified by this verse and spelled out by the Bedouin commander al-Mughira bin Sa’d when he met the Persian Rustam. Said al-Mughira: “I call you to Islam or else you must pay the jizya while you are in a state of abasement.”

Rustam replied, “I know what jizya means, but what does ‘a state of abasement’ mean?”

Al-Mughira explained: “You pay it while you are standing and I am sitting and the whip hanging is over your head.”

Similarly, Ibn Kathir says that the dhimmis must be “disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimmah or elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated.” The seventh-century jurist Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab stated: “I prefer that the people of the dhimma become tired by paying the jizya since He says, ‘until they pay the jizya with their own hands in a state of complete abasement.’” As-Suyuti elaborates that this verse “is used as a proof by those who say that it is taken in a humiliating way, and so the taker sits and the dhimmi stands with his head bowed and his back bent. The jizya is placed in the balance and the taker seizes his beard and hits his chin.” He adds, however, that “this is rejected according to an-Nawawi who said, ‘This manner is invalid.’” Zamakhshari, however, agreed that the jizya should be collected “with belittlement and humiliation.”

Muslim spokesmen in the West routinely claim that this verse has no applicability in the modern world. They’re lying.

“Egypt’s Copts in hiding after churches are burnt,” from the Times of London, August 26 (thanks to Patrick Poole):

Dozens of churches, homes and businesses have been set alight and looted in Egypt, forcing millions of Christians into hiding amid the worst bout of sectarian violence in the country’s modern history.Some Coptic Christian communities are being made to pay bribes as local Islamists exploit the turmoil by seeking to revive a seventh-century tax, called jizya, levied on non-Muslims….

Koran Teacher Dismembers Wife for Not Wearing Burqa

By Daniel Greenfield

A cleric cut his wife into pieces on Wednesday for refusing to wear a veil and sending their children to school, police said.

They said the body was recovered from near their house. They said they found his confession on the body and had also recovered the weapon he had used.

Ahmad Aziz, father of the deceased Farzana Bibi, 36, said that she married Muhammad Sharif, 42.

Sharif led prayers at the neighbourhood mosque and also gave Quran lessons at their home. He said Sharif was short-tempered and would often beat up Farzana Bibi. He had been telling her to cover her face when she left the house.

Aziz said Farzana Bibi wore an abaya (gown), but did not want to cover her face.

He said they often quarreled over the matter.

He said he had not wanted his children to study at a school. Instead they should have gone to a religious seminary. He said Farzana Bibi had enrolled their children into an English medium school against his will. He said he had wanted to punish her for that, too.

He said he had been telling her to cover her face with a veil when she stepping outside, but she had not listened. He also wrote that he did not want to be responsible for her sins and thus killed her.

On Wednesday morning, after the children left for school, he wrote, he attacked her with a sharp knife, used to slaughter animals. He later cut the body into 10 pieces.

He wrote that he had deemed his action the best way to “punish his wife for rebelling against Allah’s orders”. He wrote that he wanted all women to learn from their example.

The Supreme Council of Cyberspace


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 15,595 other followers

%d bloggers like this: