It’s been a long time since I last  published anything on FTL, and I terribly miss doing so. I’ve been wanting to get back to blogging, but somehow i couldn’t find the time. However, I hope I’ll be able to write at least one post per week.

Anyway, now that I’m back I have a new idea for the blog;  I’m going to start a new segment called “Wacko of the Day"—I don’t think there’s any need to explain  what it will be about. I believe that, along with the “Fatwa of the Day” segment, this new section would hopefully bring back the pulse of this blog.

For those of you who enjoyed my previous “Fatwa of the day” posts, I’m sure you are going to love this one. This Fatwa revolves, once again, around the issue of breastfeeding.

Back in 1974, a Fatwa was issued by the Egyptian Dar Al-Ifta (Arabic for Home of Fatwa Issuing) in response to following inquiry:

A man was wondering whether he is allowed to marry a women whom his grandmother had breastfed almost 40 times, back when she was a baby (as you will see below, the number of times—here 40—is very important).

Dar al-Ifta, issued a Fatwa in response to this inquiry (you can read the arabic version here). The verdict was as follows:

When a woman breastfeeds a baby not her own, and she does it more than five times, that baby is considered her child. He or she become a sibling to her own children.
Hence, in the case above, the inquirer is not allowed to marry the woman who breastfed from his grandma. She is an aunt to him per breastfeeding; and marrying your aunt is forbidden!

There are literally hundreds of Fatwas concerning the issue of breastfeeding that you can read about on the Dar al-Ifta website (the texts are in Arabic). One other Fatwa, in particular, caught my eye. It says that if two people are already married, a similar discovery to the case above—the partner had breastfed from the mother or grandmother of the other—the marriage must be annulled! Can you imagine the consequences?

Ladies, if you are considering converting to Islam—a decision I encourage you to make; for all the advantages you gain from being a woman in Islam—I recommend you read the following Fatwa which will make you think twice before visiting your beauty parlor again.

As always, the Egyptian Dar al-Ifta (Arabic for the “Home of Fatwa Issuing”), succeeded at making me shake my head in disbelief and laugh at the same time.
The following inquiry was submitted to their website urging them to advise on this extremely critical matter:

The Question: Is plucking one’s eyebrows considered a sin for Muslim women?

The Answer(s):

- According to one group of scholars: YES, IT IS DEFINETELY A SIN! Plucking one’s eyebrows and/or the eyebrows of another woman is absolutely prohibited in Islam. In order to back this ruling, Dr. Ali Goma Mohammed, the wise Muslim scholar who responds to these important questions—in the form of Fatwas, refers to the following saying in the Hadith:

Allah curses the women who perform tattoos, get tattos, the women who pluck the eybrows of others, and those women who get their eyebrows plucked, and part their teeth for adornment, who change Allah’s creation.

- the other group advocates for the following: If a woman is unmarried she is prohibited from plucking her eyebrows. On the other hand a married woman is permitted to do so on the conditions that her husband gives her permission, and that she does it for adornment purposes only (i.e. she plucks her eyebrows to make herself prettier and more attractive to her husband).

Having read that, I believe that unmarried young Muslim women who are going to remain celibate for quite some time, and who dislike their bushy eyebrows should simply get used to it. And who knows, maybe one day “unibrowness” might become the next fashion sensation!

The website of Dar Al-Ifta Al-Masriya (the Egyptian House of Issuing Fatwas) is a popular online database, which logs millions of Fatwas in the form of Q&A. Muslims from all over the world submit an inquiry about a certain personal, familial or social issue; and religious scholars respond with a ruling. According to this article, the “Dar” has issued 465,000 Fatwas in 2010 alone! I chose the one below from a huge compilation of absurd topics.

The Question:

This Fatwa is divided into two parts. The first question was whether a divorcee woman is allowed to have the fertilized egg, which she had stored in a fertility clinic prior to her divorce, planted in her womb. The second question is the same except that it inquires about a widow rather than a divorcee.

For the first part, Dr. Ali Goma Mohammed (the “GRAND Mufti”) explains that in the case of a divorcee whether the divorce is irrevocable or not is crucial. In other words, if a man says to his wife “I divorce you” three times, it is an irrevocable divorce. If he says “I divorce you” once, it is revocable. In the latter case, [the woman] can be taken back” by the husband, and marital bonds are not broken.

The Ruling:

In the case of an irrevocable divorce the ex-wife is prohibited from planting egg because now that marital bonds are broken “she becomes foreign to [the ex-husband]”; and in Sharia Law, planting the egg of another female or an egg fertilized by a man other than her husband is considered “unlawful”.
In the case of a revocable divorce, the woman is allowed to plant the egg, only if the husband gives permission.

As for a widow, the same “reasoning” applies. A woman is prohibited from planting her own egg, fertilized by her dead husband, because, according to Sharia Law, death breaks marital relations and therefore the husband becomes a stranger to the wife.

Older Fatwa of the Day articles:

Fatwa of the day #1 — Fatwa of the day #2 — Fatwa of the day #3 — Fatwa of the day #4 — Fatwa of the day #5 — Fatwa of the day #6 — Fatwa of the day #7

A month ago I launched a new segment on Free Thinking Lebanon, writing about Fatwas issued by Muslim scholars in the Arab world. Seven posts later, I’m still amazed by some of the material I read on new Fatwas, while I decide on which of these bizarre edicts to write my next article. After reading so much about these Islamic rulings, I formed a somewhat personal opinion on the reason why some of these Fatwas—if not all—are issued. I believe that the folks who come up with those ridiculous Fatwas—except for a minority who might have a political agenda—are simply bored individuals, looking for a couple minutes of media exposure.

As an atheist I regard organized religions as a threat to the advancement of science—and to human progress in general, and I usually condemn any stumbling block(s), fashioned by religious absurdities, to hold back our development as a reasonable and scientifically-oriented culture; however, I find some of these Fatwas extremely funny, and I enjoy reading about them. I hope you’ve been enjoying them as well, because I’ve prepared another ridiculous one (below) for you to digest.

As you all know, Islam—as well as Judaism—prohibits the ingestion of any products coming from pigs (I will not go into the detail to why it is prohibited, because I am preparing a detailed article on this subject, which I hope to publish soon). One day, Ayatollah Sheikh Qasim Attayi declares that all Muslims should avoid drinking Pepsi or Coke because they contain an enzyme called Pepsin which is extracted from pig intestine. Even though, the information he offers about the source of this enzyme is true (pig intestine is one source from which this enzyme can be extracted, read here); however he doesn’t indicate the source of the information on which he bases his affirmation that these two beverages contain Pepsin. I did some research on this issue and came across other forums discussing it, but none gives any reliable source of information, which is normal because the companies producing these two popular drinks do not release their secret recipe to the public, and therefore it would not be possible to affirm if they do contain Pepsin or not.

Coca Cola was hit by an additional wave of hate from the Muslim world. An Islamic website, “specialized” in propaganda for boycotting western products and Israel, offers another reason why Muslims should not drink Coke. They claim that Coca Cola is a supporter of Israel since 1966, despite the boycott lobbied against Israel by Arabs. To enforce their claims, they point to a page on the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ website titled “Timeline of Events- Half a Century of Independence 1948-1998”, which under the year 1966 reads the following:

“Coca Cola announces its plans to open a plant to produce Coca Cola in Israel, despite the Arab boycott”

I’m not an expert in politics but I’m inclined to believe that the reason behind this BUSINESS expansion by Coca Cola is, well, to expand their Business! I don’t really see a conspiracy taking place, but maybe I’m too naïve to uncover this Zionist scheme. Unlike me, however, many seem to have exposed this mysterious plan; one of them is Fahri Hassan, a filmmaker who shot a documentary titled “Coca Cola & Israel: Is Not the Real Thing”. In an interview with a correspondent from IslamOnline.net, Hassan explains the meaning of this title, he said “[…] it is a play on the Coca Cola slogan: "Coke is the real thing." [What] I am saying is that Coca Cola is not the real thing. It is deception since they are upholding the State of Israel with their money.” I tried to look for this documentary on YouTube but couldn’t find it. However, below is a bonus video which claims to expose Coca Cola and Pepsi; enjoy!

This time it’s the athletes’ turn to be “Kuffar” (Arabic for sinners), according to Islam. Dr. Abdullah Al-faqih issued a Fatwa, claiming that wearing any clothing or accessories baring the Nike sign is a sin. According to this Muslim scholar, the Nike commercial sign is “a sign of a goddess of victory, daughter of the giant Pulas, as the Greeks believed.” And according to the Hadith, the prophet Mohammad said: "Whoever imitates some people, he is one of them." And since the Greeks are Kuffar, as per Muslim doctrine, imitating them—by wearing clothes with a sign symbolizing a goddess whom they worshipped—is a deadly sin.

I started this post by a statement that athletes are being considered sinners because they wear Nike clothes; however, this is not very accurate since Nike products are not restricted to athletics. From hats to shoes and even electronics, Nike products target a wide variety of customers. The Arab world is not an exception, and Nike regards the Middle-East region as an important marketing venue. Additionally, demand for Nike products haven’t really changed in the years following this Fatwa; it seems, this time, Islam has lost a battle to the Greek goddess of victory!

So far I’ve been focusing on Fatwas that have received a fair share of publicity. For this post, however, I’ve chosen one from a website that issues Fatwa’s by the dozen, every day. Those Fatwas are in the form of Q & A; any Muslim, who has a concern or a question about a certain matter, can log in to this website/forum and submit a question. A group of religious scholars (Imams and Muftis) moderate the question and reply to each and every one. They offer “evidence” from the Sharia Law and refer to conversations from the Hadith. When I found this website I knew I have discovered the mother-ship of Fatwa’s.

Question number 11471 (they maintain a serialized system on this website), is titled:

“What is masturbation? And why is it haraam [a sin]?”

Masturbation (or Solo Sex as it appears in the reply), is considered a sin in all three Abrahamic Religions, and in each doctrine we find a different reasoning on this matter. In the response to this query, they divide the answer into two parts: Scientific reasoning (or what I’d like to call Pseudo-scientific) and by reference to the Hadith.

In the first part, they quote a “dignified physician of the Unani medicine”, who’s referred to as Miftahi. After doing some research I found that this supposedly physician is Mufti Zafeeruddin Miftahi, a practitioner of Unani medicine, which is an alternative medicine, based on the belief that the body holds a mixture of the 4 elements: fire, water, earth and air. This Mufti (or religious cleric)—a reliable source according to the academic issuing this Fatwa—states in his book the following:

“[Masturbation] is such an evil practice that has ruined many families and many more are being ruined today… [It] affects equally the heart, the brain, the liver, the stomach, the kidneys along with the reproductive organs. This practice makes the muscles and the nerves of the reproductive organ sagging and lifeless. Accumulation of fluids in the veins makes it unfit for its normal function. There is extreme feebleness in the power of erection. The heat of the friction between the delicate muscles of the organ and the tough hide of the hand damages the former beyond repair."

After offering this pseudo-scientific answer they move to a more scriptural reasoning. Similar to the formation of all Fatwa’s, the scholars try to refer to conversations by the Prophet Mohamed and his followers in order to develop a “reliable” answer. In this case, they cite the Quran:

“The Believers are those who abstain from sex except with those joined to them in marriage bond, or those whom their right hand possess for (in their case) they are free from blame, but those who crave something beyond that are transgressors."

Other sources were alluded to as well, but I’m not going to mention them since they all approach the issue in the same manner; they claim that masturbation is a sin because the prophet said so. However there are two sentences which I would like to highlight:

“Beyond the wife and slave woman all ways and means of sexual satisfaction are unlawful.”

And,

“… [Masturbation] was only permitted when it was performed by the hand of a man's wife or concubine, for he has a right to the enjoyment of her hand as he has to the rest of her body."

I quoted those two sentences just to underline the unreasonable approach to sexual affairs in Islamic doctrine. It seems masturbation is Haram but female sex-slaves are a queerly tolerable concept!

According to Muslim doctrine, around 157 Million Muslims living today are sinners for reasons they probably ignore. Why is that? Well, according to this Fatwa, eating or writing with your left hand is a sin. And since the percentage of Muslims in the world is 23% (2009) and the total population is 6.8 billion (2009), and the estimated percentage of left-handed individuals in the world is 10%, if you run a straight forward calculation, you come up with the figure 157 million left-handed Muslims living today.

This number would be much bigger if you consider all the population, and not only Muslims. However, it wouldn’t make any difference since non-Muslims are sinners “by default”. It is worthy of noting, however, that some scholars have a slightly different opinion. They believe that writing with your left-hand can be excused only if writing with the other hand is difficult. It would be great to know the opinion of those religious know-it-alls regarding masturbation with the left hand? But wait a second; isn’t masturbation a sin in the first place?

(I will be moving this segment “Fatwa of the Day” to a separate blog soon. Meanwhile I will keep posting them here.) 

A Fatwa have surfaced on the Islamic religious forum ahlalhdeeth.com, which claims that, according to several narrations in the Islamic Hadith, the replication of God’s creations (humans, animals etc..) is “Haram” (impermissible), even in drawing. This can explain one of the reasons that might have driven Muslims to protest the “Draw Mohamed” phenomenon; however this is not the subject of this Fatwa. This one is related to EMOTICONS! It prohibits the use of smiley faces & co. on internet forums, chat rooms, blogs, emails and even in SMS. If you have read the previous two Fatwa’s that I have posted (the one about killing Mickey Mouse and the one about breastfeeding adult strangers), this shouldn’t be too bizarre in comparison. This edict, however, can be divided into 3 parts: 

1) Attempting to simulate God’s creations is a sin. Drawing any face that has eyes, a nose and a mouth, regardless of how distorted they are, is prohibited. In other words, even though a smiley face such as this one :-] can only be “read” if you visually flip it 90 degrees to right, it is still a prohibited, simply because it has the three facial features I mentioned above.

2) Women are specifically proscribed from using emoticons while chatting online, especially if they are engaging in a private conversation with a male stranger. This is because, in Islam, a woman is not allowed to communicate her feelings to a man who is a “non-mahram brother”. However, if women think wisely they can solve this problem simply by breastfeeding this stranger – at least five times. By doing so a family bond will be created between the two and the man will no longer be an “outsider”.

3) A third reason for this ban comes from the Hadith as well. One narration states “Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture”. So in order not to prevent those winged creatures from entering your house, make sure there are no pictures inside; and if you’re writing a message online, make sure you don’t type in “a colon, a dash and a closed parenthesis” consecutively; and finally don’t forget to keep your dog in the backyard at all times!

When you hear about a religious scholar, especially a Muslim Sheikh, fighting for women’s rights you might be thinking what a great step this is for the Muslim world. You might also praise him for finally breaking free from the nonsensical stereotype, which is deeply rooted in his religion, and which sets Men as the superior gender. But then you learn about the “workaround”, which this Sheikh has devised, and you discover that this supposedly improvement for the Muslim culture is, in fact, a more dehumanizing act for Women, that brings to light the sickening obsession of Islam in the matters of sex and the oppression of Women.

As a solution to the segregation of sexes at the workplace in the Arab World, Dr. Izzat Atiya, an Egyptian scholar, found a “solution” that would make it okay for a man to stay alone with a woman colleague in the same room while at work (which is a great sin in Islam). He claims that if a woman breastfeeds a man five times, a family bond will be created between the two and it will become acceptable for them to be left alone in a room. Dr. Atiya based his research on sayings from the Hadith and he claims that since the prophet Mohamed gave this idea to his wife A’isha then it should be a genuine and blessed solution.

I’m not going to comment further on this Fatwa; simply thinking about the subject makes me sick. Such reasoning underlines the fact that religions are man-made, and by MAN I’m not only referring to human beings but to Males in particular.

The Islamic Sharia law, states that all mice are evil and calls for their total extermination. This idea by itself is silly but then a cleric comes up with a Fatwa that takes this statement to a higher level of absurdity. Sheikh Mohamed al-Munajid, a renowned religious scholar in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, issued a Fatwa against Mickey Mouse! He stated that all mice are “agents of Satan” and that Mickey Mouse is one of his soldiers. His exact words were: “Mickey Mouse has become an awesome character, even though according to Islamic law, Mickey Mouse should be killed in all cases.”  

This makes me wonder what’s next? A Fatwa for female Disney characters ordering them to wear a Hijab? Also, I wonder if a price will be placed on the head of this devilish mouse. In my opinion, a reward of “3 magical beans” would be the most appropriate compensation, by the sheikh, to anyone who kills this pesky little rodent.