There is thus a real risk that Dubai is indeed the new New York, and like New York – itself a symbol of brash materialism and licence - it too will be targeted by those in its shadow. The bubble shows little sign of bursting yet, though burst it might – literally – if Wahhabi extremists decide to do something evil and spectacular. Walking around the streets of Dubai at night, or gazing down on the city from the cocktail lounge in Emirates Towers, one can't help think, however, that Sheikh Mohammed's project has reached the point beyond which it would survive adversity, as New York has done. Just like New York, it is a melting pot, a point on the globe where people meet, work hard and play hard. It has a soul, not altogether a spotlessly clean one, but a soul nevertheless. All it needs now is a bespectacled, immigrant from Iraq telling self-deprecating jokes about sex, and survival is guaranteed. This is indeed a false analogy that has no legs. This author should know that terror is precisely the price of hegemony. It’s the weapon of the week. To my knowledge Wahabism is not a week ideology in the Gulf. And there’s no dominating power emanating from these week emirates.

Originally posted by Nur: i-Nuri Softwaano Series As much as we strive in this life term for achieving our short term ambitions, it should never blind us of our eventual return to Allah AWT. Our life on earth should not be viewed to be separate from the continuum march to our eventual encounter with our creator and our past, and hence our final appraisal and retirement. A timely reminder, indeed.

You refuse reason if it contradicts revealed knowledge? In a simple answer, I say yes. I refuse reason when it contradicts (when that happens) the revealed truth. Now, I think we are not that far apart. To spare you another delineation of why reason is important, let me follow the footsteps of that revered scholar of ours, Ibn Taymiyya, who states when that contradiction occurs, reason looses its reasonability and rational. Our faith is not irrational. It’s the reason that has a tendency to dwell (some tines) in illusion and aberration and is in dire need of the validation of the infallible Source. Normally though the two are more united in harmony than they are in discord. And the words of the Shiekh still ring true: العقل الصريح لا يخال٠النص الصحيح My examples were poorly presented and perhaps worded. Re-reading it gives me the impression of faith as inexplicable of sort! Where I headed with it, though, is without the illumination of the light of faith, reasoning does not enjoy certainty and it looses vigor and verve. What is conveyed in the Qur’an can’t be different from the reality and the truth. A reality we may or may not be able to see! And the truth we may as well fail to accept. Reason need not be blamed; it’s the ability of the reasoner that need be reproached. That’s the essence of the Ibn Dhalib’s famous words: لو أخذالإسلام بالعقل لمح علي بواطن الخ٠بدلا من ظواهره How are Allah's decrees explained in the tafseer, saaxib? The words of Allah are not, and shouldn’t be, explained by freelance reasoning. Rather these heavy verses are interpreted and expounded by the second source of our faith: Xaddiith. I am sure you (I could be wrong) know how the process of the tafsiir works. PS. (if it ever should arrive) implies doubt!

Nomads, 'Mourn the losses, because they are many.' Originally posted by OG_Girl: some times Law sounds injustice or unfair but better than lawless.. OG_Girl, Though the explicit and strong words might have breathed some vulgarity to your tone, truth is, nevertheless, hard to ignore!

SH. Nur, ‘Making difference’ is indeed the purpose of productive life! It’s the essence and the spirit of the faithful servants! This story of yours is indeed an act of worship (with the actor's intent of Ixtisaab,)and heed of Allah’s call to assist the needy and elderly. The messages and the lessons of this simple encounter are too numerous to count. On a one hand, this story is a beautiful illustration of the Muslim compassion that knows no boundaries, and favors no race. It’s that message of compassionate that Allah refers to, when He says “And we desired to bestow a favor upon those who were deemed weak in the land.†It’s the message of compassion that teaches Muslims to be sensitive to the others suffering. The humanity of our faith is unambiguously clear. It goes without saying our sheikh was driven by the forces of that compassion and sympathy. And the quality of the Muslim character has indeed kicked in when he needed it. On the other hand, this encounter signifies the endless struggle against the forces of our desires. The selfishness, self-centeredness, and the ego are indeed forces to reckon with. Seldom do we ponder the blessings of our Allah. The health, the wealth, the knowledge, the children, the spouse, the stability, and the security (to just name few) are all blessings that we tend to take it for granted. We don’t often think the weaker section of the society. This story is a timely remainder for that ilk who remained true to the illusions of life and its gladiatorial contest where only the fittest survive and weaker is deservedly doomed! Take the Blind Old Man as an opportunity that presents itself to remind us the need for us to reflect and ponder Allah’s countless blessings. As for you, Yaa SH. Nur, celebrate the victories (any time you defeat the Shaydan count it as a victory), I say, as there’re few of them.

Ngonge, Says who that this topic is about the relationship between the two? Are you conveniently trying to obscure my words to, somehow, suggest that mine is extraneous of sort? I was simply addressing the obvious implication of your statement. To be blunt, your lecture-like writing about reason and its value to strengthen our faith sounded, at least to me, as there is a class of nomad who are unable to reason and see, worse yet, its desirable value. That, I repeat, is a rare case! Then I attempted to point out where nomads could raise objections against philosophical reasoning (that, sorry to say, you miserably failed to acknowledge). As to what I think about this thread, well, re-read my last post. Back to your take on the issue of reasoning, based on my read on your last post, it seems to me that you’re trying to argue with the wrong person or create an argument that does not exist! Who’s against the reason, I ask? Have you not read my declared allegiance to reasoning as long it does not supersede nor contradict with the revealed truth? Now, this is where I draw the line on the sand. When the sound verses of the Qur’an clash (I believe some times this is the case) with the reasoning of the inept human intellect, the revealed truth takes precedence over the guesswork. Reason if you will, but not on the expense of your faith. Don’t reason with Allah’s decrees! Male gets twice of what his female sister gets from the wealth of their deceased parents. Why? Why would a khuf be cleaned on top while its bottom directly contacts the dirty? And the list of unceasing questions goes on! Where would you stop? Granted, that faith and reason are both sources of authority upon which beliefs can rest. And blind faith is not a desirable thing. But faith, Good Ngonge, involves a stance toward some claim that is not, at least presently, demonstrable by reason. Thusly the basis for one’s faith comes usually from the authority of revelation, and not from a reasoning inquiry! -----Going back to my bunker----------- PS. Potential for some misuse, I concede.

Originally posted by NGONGE: We seem to have reached the usual crossroad, which way will we choose? Does one use reason to find, strengthen and compliment their faith, or, do we follow the words of the famous old English poet and say “ ours is not to reason why� This writing of yours seems to assume that some people on this forum suspend reason to strengthen and reinforce their faith. The crowd you wouldn’t desire to reason with as they tend to idle their faculty of thinking! Only if you know seldom that is the case! The issue, prudent Ngonge, is the relationship between the revealed knowledge and the philosophical reasoning, particularly the one which our fellow nomad tirelessly advocates. How do you reconcile when the reason and faith eventually clash? Would you assert that the two will never clash? Or would you accept the limitations and inability of human mind to find, understand, and decipher the divine secretes of the Higher One? If you would, would you there fore not agree that questions alone would not do the trick? Needless to say that I am for reasoning as long it does not supersede nor contradict the revealed truth. After all, ‘there’s no good in worship devoid of knowledge,’ as Ali Ibn Dhalib said. ‘Nor in knowledge devoid of understanding and un-attentive recitation’ he added as if he intentionally wanted to signify the fiqhi of pondering! As for the subject of this topic and the misuse of the word, I am tempted to say that Mutakalim’s intellectual curiosity (testing if the dieing for the cause of philosophy is similar to that of our noble faith)is rapidly vanishing in the face of good Bashi’s scrutiny! It’s sort of curiosity not unlike tightrope walking at the circus! Let’s see how the old man employs the art of argumentation he so zealously prides as he attempts to utterly elevate the position of philosophy in this piece of the net. PS. Pog was not a mistake.

Nur, I very much appreciate your efforts and ask Allah for good return. This is a Dacwah in its purest form. Needless to say that I share my sister’s sentiment and I would as well prefer to have it all. But if it comes to conform to the dictates of my Sheekh, I nevertheless have a pick: (2), (4), and (7). And dare you ask why?

Originally posted by STOIC: Is it fair to relinquish all the claims(considering that you have read the entire article) that the profesor raised about the somali politics just because his writting contained impiously irrelevant quote toward what we held sacred? STOIC, The answer of your question would’ve been a big NO, had the good professor had a point! A purely selective historical narrative from which he deduced that Somalis lack the restrains that are normal to civilized human beings, and through which he highlighted their (Somalis that is) beast-like political savagery is not worthy of the praises that it has been so hastily awarded, I thought. When I couple his ‘pointless’ article with his sarcastic reference to the One I so submissively worship (I suspect you as well), I can’t help but wonder if we all cheer and clap for the empty looms of the secular mind!

Originally posted by Mutakallim: Alahayoow nimaan wax ogeeyn ha cadaabin AAMIIN. :cool:

If only the cameras of the Discovery Channel were there to record the gladiatorial scene! Hope though, the boy does not utilize his beast-killing teeth on his bears!

SH. Nuurow, Only a mulish mind would not see the benefits of open and genuine debate! Provided the rules of civil discussion are honored, the convincing logic combined with the penetrating verses of the revealed Truth would surely overwhelm the squabble of the wicked (if there's one on this forum). So lets keep the discussion rolling.

Originally posted by MsWord: ..... since you don't hold the said Faith as I. Najjaasaa Fayleh! :confused: Originally posted by MsWord: Clearly, as you can see I rely on my faith whilst you rely on logic so lets just agree to disagree and live happily ever after. A gracious exit of this bog.

Originally posted by CAAMIR: Such are the baffling ways of the curmudgeon called Allah! And alas, his writings mesmerized and captivated some imprudent minds! And the hasty praises are, indeed, unceasingly showering on thee! In these unsettling times I find my-self retreating to the secured-bunkers of my faith. But yet again I risk joining that unholy club of unthinking, and blinded class! أتيت حدود الله مذ أنت ياÙعا وشبت Ùما ينهاك الشيب الهازم

رحمة الله عليه/عليها

Originally posted by Baashi: Mise ina Yussuf hawshiisu waa tii Inna Abdille Hassan ee uu lahaa: Annigu waxaan goosan karo waa gurubsanaayaa! Baashi, Old habits die hard. Doofaar ma daahiro haddaad wabi dabaalsiiso Dubka iyo lafaha hoose baa dixiri jiifaaye …. Lets hope this time he gets it right. Xoogsade, Ethiopia is no good (I agree with you on that).

O-G, blessing to your marriage. And welcome to the prestigious club.

Maxkax Dhuuqow, Laba nin naag lagulama tar-tamo sideedaba: 1-La jooge 2-Loo Jaaje Waxaad tilmaamtay oo dhan waa sahal helidoodu haddaad labadaa midkood tahay! Haddii kale, wiilow, yaan suxul-baruuraha lagaa dhammaysan!

Baashi, Mogadishu is a marked city. It’s the symbol of Somali instability. An emblem of anarchy, to be sure! Aggression, hostility, antagonism, and animosity are at the core of its character. It’s where justice, law, order, and righteousness met its demise. Though I once called it home, today I think of it as the city that shelters that unrepentant ilk, the lynching crowd, if you will, whose mission is nothing less than to oversee the sabotage of the entire nation. Gardarroy dhibbaad geysataa goor iyo ayyaane Waxaad goyso mooye lawaa nimaad gargaartaaye Gurigii barwaaqaysan baad gubi taqaanaaye Gefkii aad samysaa batiyo godabahaagiiye Gashi aan yareyn baad qabtaa jeer lagaa gudo e! Yet, its name is synonymous with that of our national identity. No government could claim legitimacy without winning its control. A real dilemma, isn’t it? Now, what would one (this government) do to pay pass this quagmire (Essentially, avoid the looming civil war), yet secure both international recognition and have some domestic authority? Shift the southern dynamics and undertake a mission of perception changing. How do you shift dynamics? What would perception changing mean? I have to leave now.......

Jamaal11, A little spelling error you felt so compelled to correct! And I should be embarrassed by this, I suppose. But you’re entitled to your opinion, I confirm! :cool:

Baashi, Mogadishu is a multi-faceted puzzle that is not easy to crack. Any guesswork from my part could only invite the wraths of Juma and Xoogsade, and I, needless to say, do not desire to be the receiving end of that vengeful anger! But I do indeed sense the gathering clouds. Let us hope the spur of falling rain cause no torrent flood! Horn, Intriguing is how you regard praise with a man who, so to speak, bite a piece that swallow he couldn’t. Strategist he was, but the political events are changing faster than he can devise. And the proxy wars are about to halt as the buffer zones get narrower. Take no pride in him, he is the weakest link! PS. I always think of Barre as a freelancing warlord.

Baashi, thanks for posting. this is a good read. The message of human approach rings true. And this is a case for ceaseless quest to improve one’s life regardless of how big the chances of success is.

Shiekh Muhamed, If a cultural anthropologist asks this question: ?الصوماليون:أهم عرب تÙارقو أم Ø£Ùارة تعاربو Then, I would settle with the latter.

Group 2. Central Somalia sub-clans, Mogadishu lords, criminal entrepreneurs, one RRA malcontent warlord, nervous and confused JVA junior partners, and clannish militia wrapped with noble Islamic garb. Strength: Successfully changed the headlines from Mogadishu security, government relocation, and reconciliation process into nationalistic rhetoric - Ethiopians are coming! Used the democratic process to stop the FTs forcing IGAD and international observers to take an unambiguous stand on the issue. Made sympathetic friends from US embassy and ICG. Forced the TFG leadership to fumble nervously the aftermath of the parliamentarian vote. Weakness: Demonstrated the need of FTs by sabotaging the TFG’s intensions. Internal weakness. The lack of unified political resolution to the Mogadishu question. Unable to open the much needed ports or coming up some sort of city administration. Talking and acting as if the governance and the rule of law is problem. Playing opposite roles ministers of TFG and warlords. Lack of understanding of how decisions are made in the government (cabinet branch). ---------------------------------------------- Fair analysis. In both the strengths and the weaknesses of this group, you captured the astounding failure of these warlords to comprehend that this Government is greater that thee (Mr. Yusuf).

Originally posted by sahal: the School that you're advocating is built on HATRED.. How so, Mr. Easy? Do you not understand the words you so un-carefully use? When discussing Religion and its tenets, would you employ some prudence, dear Sahal? It seems that you have gravely been ill informed about Salafism. Or may be your critique (I am being generous here) is aimed erroneously at Wahabism! For that, read here. Salafism's hallmark is a call to modern Muslims to revert to the pure Islam of the Prophet Muhammad's generation and the two generations that followed his. Muslims of this early period are referred to as al-Salaf al-Salih (the pious forefathers) whence the name Salafi. Salafism's message is utopian, its adherents seeking to transform completely the Muslim community and to ensure that Islam, as a system of belief and governance, should eventually dominate the globe. Salafis are not against technological progress nor its fruits; they do, however, abhor all innovations in belief and practice that are not anchored in their conception of the pristine Islamic age. They refer to such reprehensible innovations as Bid'a, a term of deligitimization in Islamic law or the Shari'ah. Read more if you care to have civil discussion against Salafism (here I take the risk of dangerously being openhanded mood).