Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Arabia

Ulemas slam woman leading Muslim prayer

2005-03-22

The Congress of Islamic Jurisprudence in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, Tuesday denounced Muslim services led by a woman in in Manhattan last week. The congress which is affiliated with the Organization of Islamic Conference said in a statement the services were misguided.

"Prayers don't work when they're led by a babe. Everybody knows that!"

"This act is contradictory to the rules of sharia (Islamic law), which forbids having women and men praying side by side," the statement said.

"Allan don't listen to them both at the same time!"

"Friday prayer is a religious duty for men only, while women can only attend if they wish to but not as a duty ... Prayers are totally not valid if they are led by a woman," the statement said.

"Nope. Sorry. You wasted the whole Friday. Might as well have gone bowling."

I'm sure the National Organization for Women will denounce these sexist islamic males any minute now.......

Posted by:Steve

#16 My biggest problem with all of this is that the legs in the picture looks sorta like drumsticks ... give the ladies a little credit ...

Posted by: Unugum Sneth6886 2005-03-22 11:18:51 PM

#15 More like a fantasy, I suspect.

Posted by: too true 2005-03-22 6:49:39 PM

#14 Frank, is that your idea of a Lenten post?

Posted by: Matt 2005-03-22 6:37:49 PM

#13 let me tell ya, when you're tied naked to a bed and the babe's got a knife and says "start prayin'" ....you do

oops....was I free associating again?

Posted by: Frank G 2005-03-22 6:02:11 PM

#12 Prayers don't work when they're led by a babe...

Heh.

Posted by: Seafarious 2005-03-22 5:58:26 PM

#11 LH

I can't comment about your question on moslem prayer. However, regarding the Shema, there is no injunction against mixed prayer.

The injunction on mixed prayer in the amidah is partially because the amidah substitutes for the offerings.

The shema doesn't require a minyon (actually neither does the amidah unless you want to repeat it out loud).

I just realized how geeky this all sounds. Uggggh

Posted by: mhw 2005-03-22 5:36:53 PM

#10 One of the MSM organs had a piece on this, and one of the individuals interviewed (surrounded by co-religionists on a happenin' street in NYC) was an Angry Young Muslim Man. "This is blasphemy!" he shouted into the camera. "And the penalty for blasphemy is DEATH!"

I mean, really. This isn't Amsterdam, buster.

Posted by: mrp 2005-03-22 5:34:55 PM

#9 Now my hed hurtz.

Posted by: Shipman 2005-03-22 5:26:34 PM

#8 Friday prayer is a religious duty for men only, while women can only attend if they wish to but not as a duty ... Prayers are totally not valid if they are led by a woman,

injunction against woman and men praying together only exists with the 18/19 benedictions

but its the shmoneh esreh, along with the shma, thats the halachacilly REQUIRED prayer, tehillim (psalms) etc are NOT. So the parallellism still holds, I think - though i wonder if the muslim daily prayers included optional portions as well as required ones, or if they have a parallel to the distinction between required by law (halacha) and custom (minhag)

Posted by: liberalhawk 2005-03-22 4:15:19 PM

#7 well its been awhile since ive davened at and MO shul, so take what i say with salt:

Most of the leniencies mhw mentions i dont recall seeing. OTOH many of the MO congregations ive been in have been fairly large established ones, and usually just on shabbat or yom tov, and it may not have come up. I would guess these leniencies are more utilized by smaller cutting edge MO shuls, or in special services, etc?

Still im aware of lots of ferment in MO, so i dont suppose any of these should surprise me.

Posted by: liberalhawk 2005-03-22 4:07:57 PM

#6 actually Orthodox Judaism, especially modern orthodox Judaism, is more complex than that

in many, maybe most, Orthodox congregations, a woman may lead the after meal benedictions even with men present if there are 3 or more women and less than 3 men; in a few Orthodox congregations, a woman may lead as long as there are more than 3 woman, even if there are 3 men

the injunction against woman and men praying together only exists with the 18/19 benedictions; not with the kaddish, nor with the preliminary prayers

a woman can lead in a stand alone recital of the psalms also in most orthodox congregations

there are, however, many haradi orthodox congregations where non of the above noted leniencies exist

Posted by: mhw 2005-03-22 3:37:01 PM

#5 Could it be said as generally true of more traditionally-bound Abrahamic religions? I wonder how non-Abrahamic-based religions approach it.

Posted by: Jules 187 2005-03-22 3:04:12 PM

#4 Orthodox Jews also only let women lead prayers in all female groups (and some dont even hold with that) but like Sobie says, they dont threaten to kill people about it, and thats the key difference. (my own branch of Judaism, Conservative J, does allow them lead to prayers, though there are SOME residual gender inequalities in C Jewish law - Reform J holds with full equality in all matters)

Posted by: liberalhawk 2005-03-22 2:49:07 PM

#3 I don't disagree with you, Sobiesky. Of course it is a substantial difference. Christianity is light years ahead of Islam as far as the lives of women go. But some sects of Christianity could stand a little bit of growth in the direction of being EOE for women leaders, don't you think?

Posted by: Jules 187 2005-03-22 2:44:58 PM

#2 Jules, difference is that within 'Some Christian churches', a woman won't get death threats. It may be very sublime difference in your view, but I think it is rather a substantial one.

Posted by: Sobiesky 2005-03-22 2:17:27 PM

#1 That feminist organization may not, Steve, but this feminist will.

It goes deeper than Islam, however, I am afraid. Some Christian churches also refuse to allow women positions of authority.

Posted by: Jules 187 2005-03-22 2:06:18 PM

00:00