Just curious - how many muslims are on mumsnet?

(1000 Posts)
Galvanise Sat 01-Dec-12 00:21:53

Hello/Salaam,

I know mumsnet has a wide and diverse population and I tend to recognise some MN usernames as regulars. Just intrigued to know how big/small a community it may be.

Of course, I respect that there may be those who do not wish to even identify themselves for various reasons - which is fine too.

I am not asking for 'religiousness' levels or any vital stats! Nor is this a muslim-only thread or an 'no non-muslims' thread.
If you really wish to tell me that you are not a muslim, that is fine too smile

<Waves enthusiastically to all muslims and non-muslims> smile

HardlyEverHoovers Wed 13-Feb-13 19:54:17

hmm, thought it went a bit downhill at the end though!

BigMomma77 Wed 13-Feb-13 23:21:39

Salaam
I've just joined mumsnet - hoping to get good advice and learn from others. I think I was wondering the same thing. Hopefully we can all help each other out when needed W/salaam xx

crescentmoon Thu 14-Feb-13 07:43:23

Would you choose dictatorship over democracy cote? Would the familiarity of the middle eastern brand of tyrannical corrupt cruel despot win over the risk of a religious party?

Or do you prefer the dirty politics of the turkish secularists- susurluk the last in a long line? - over the self righteous AKP?

Were living in interesting times. I'm still trying to recover from the images of NATO air support given to rebels in Libya. Totally changed my whole perception of things.

Salams hardly I think those types of salafi groups as in that video are the ones best placed to tackle the likes of the takfiri al muhajiroun!

crescentmoon Thu 14-Feb-13 07:49:45

Thanks juules that was abit unfair of me to say headache! Can it be done for more than one child though? I really liked esp ? I think it's called? Or early potty training? Some people do it for babies as young as 5months old- mashaallah iv seen that as well really amazing! In the Middle East and Far East people potty train little ones from age 1?it would be a mountain of nappies saved that way but It would mean being very attuned to your child's natural rythyms.

Salams bjg momma glad your here!

juule Thu 14-Feb-13 10:17:12

A lot of people think washable nappies are a headache Crescent smile I can understand why as obviously you have to deal with the soiled nappy where with a disposable you don't (although at some point the mountain of non-degradable disposables will have to be dealt with by someone). I have used a mix of disposables and washables at various times.
After a while it becomes no more than another item of your baby/toddler clothing that needs to be washed.

It does save you a lot of money too. Particularly if you are going to have more than one baby and use the same nappies.

I found it doable for more than one child. I had 3 in washables at one point (3 babies in 2.5 years). Although I did need a few more nappies than just for one baby grin

I think it's Elimination Communication you are talking about in your post. I always thought that sounded interesting but personally couldn't see me having the patience to do it.

juule Thu 14-Feb-13 10:21:29

Apologies for derailing onto nappy chat.

crescentmoon Thu 14-Feb-13 16:35:07

hello jules - 3 babies in 2.5 years you say? that would have me reeling but i have very bad organising skills! and you still used washable nappies? was it for environmental reasons? you are so right that at some point (for upto 200 years!) that mountain of non degradable nappies will have to be dealt with by so
somebody.
"After a while it becomes no more than another item of your baby/toddler clothing that needs to be washed."
hardly, jules do you have to use separate washing machines? do you have those services in your area that come and collect your washable nappies to launder then deliver them back? i would maybe have gone for something like that! and hardly you colourcode your wipes as well lol. i do buy 'ecover' products sometimes (once in a blue moon!) now but i used to much more often before when finding them was much easier.
your right about elimination communication - dont know where i got esp from? thanks for linking that wiki page i read it through, very interesting that its likened more to breastfeeding because its about 'enhanced attachment and communication'. dont have the patience for that though - the time for that was when Ds1 was my pfb and only!

crescentmoon Thu 14-Feb-13 16:57:41

dear littleducks, waynetta, lostandneverfound, and any other sisters who are expecting at this time:

heres a list of adhkar to do during pregnancy if you are interested. i only did the reading of the 3 surahs Al Luqman, Yusuf and Maryam but there is much more!

The Intention:
You should make the intention of Sayyida Hanna - the mother of Mary, the mother of Jesus (may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon all of them). Sayyida Hanna (AS) dedicated the child in her womb to the service of Allah.

Her intention is described in the Quran:
“Lord, I have vowed to You, in dedication, what is in my womb for Your service. So accept this of me, for You hear and know all things} and {…I have named her Mary, and commend her to You with her seed, to protect them from the accursed Satan. Her Lord received the child with gracious favour, and caused her to grow up in goodly growth, and placed her in the care of Zakariya." (3:35-3:37)
and
"Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah has chosen you and purified you --chosen you above the women of all nations.” (3:42)

In a lecture entitled, Jesus and his Blessed Mother, Habib ‘Ali al-Jifri attests to the sincerity and far-reaching consequences of Sayyida Hanna’s intention: “The intention of Hanna made the one she bore be accepted by Allah. She possessed an intention with Allah...when she intended that in her offspring there would be someone who serves Allah, someone who would serve this religion - when she was truthful in such an intention, Allah honored her because of her intention. Look at the effect of that intention: the very deliverance this Community will take place at the hands of our Master Jesus, peace be upon him.”

[crescentmoon interruption: its a convention to say our Master Muhammad, our Master Jesus amongst traditionalist, its a term of respect not a term of authority]

Repeat the following Quranic verses during pregnancy:
Rabbi hab li milladunka dhurriyatan tayyibah innaka sami`u-du`a ("O my Lord, grant me a progeny that is pure, for You hear (our) prayers!" 3:38)
Rabbana hab lana min azwajina wa dhurriyyatina qurrata `ayun wa’ja’lna lilmuttaqin imama ("Our Lord, grant us wives and offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and give us (the grace) to lead the righteous.”) (25:74)
Thumm ‘assabila yassarah (“Then He made the path easy”) (80:20)
W’Allah akhrajakummin butuni ummahatikum (“Allah brought you forth from your mothers’ wombs ”)(16:78)

Read Daily:
Sura Inshiqaq (sura 84) – to be recited on a daily basis throughout pregnancy
Sura Luqman (sura 31) – to be recited in the 1st trimester
Sura Yusuf (sura 12) – to be recited in the 2nd trimester
Sura Maryam (sura 19) - to be recited in the 3rd trimester as labour approaches
“Ya Latif” – to be recited 129 times every morning and evening
“Ya Qawi” – to be recited 116 times daily for strength
Ask your husband to recite Sura Sharh (sura 94) 152 times (in one sitting) on the baby during the 7th month.

the rest to be found here...

www.muslimobgyn.com/1/post/2012/05/pregnancy-advice-from-sayyid-habib-omar.html

BlueOrange Thu 14-Feb-13 23:14:44

Salaam crescent. Some beautiful surahs and duas that you have mentioned. Just one point - i would rather just read the surahs and duas as much as possible (or even once) rather than reading them say 152 times or 129 times. Allah has made islam easy for us and imposing so many readings (ie: a number) which may not be from the quran or sunnah can become a hardship.

The duas that you have mentioned from the Quran are most beautiful mashallah. May Allah reward you for your efforts. Ameen.

Many congratulations to all the expecting ladies. smile

crescentmoon Fri 15-Feb-13 08:45:30

Salam alaikum dear blue that's a very fair point. I also wondered about the specific numbers 152 or 129- is it arbitrary or is there some explanation to it?i actually copied and pasted from the website as I found it abit similar to what I was advised when pregnant with my first but most was new to me. I hope other sisters explore her blog it's really got great advice and links to other websites.

Also Just to say sayida is a term of respect like sayidina is a term of respect. It said sayyida Hanna and maybe some sisters would be unused to that term.

Sayyida Hanna : Our Lady Hanna, Sayyida Maryam: Our Lady Mary,
Sayyida Fatima: Our Lady Fatima, Sayyida Khadija: Our Lady Khadija

Sayidina Ibrahim: our Master Ibrahim, sayidina Isa: our Master Jesus,
sayidina Muhammad: our master Muhammad.

(DH calls my dad sayyidi which makes my dad very happy! Some men instead of saying brother to each other say Sidi or Sayedi!)

CoteDAzur Fri 15-Feb-13 11:24:37

crescent - re "Would you choose dictatorship over democracy cote?"

As I said, quite possibly yes. I would rather live in the Principality of Monaco than Iran, where I would have the right to vote but no hope at all of having many rights I'd consider essential to my happiness.

"Would the familiarity of the middle eastern brand of tyrannical corrupt cruel despot win over the risk of a religious party?"

You seem to be assuming that religious governments are not dictatorial and they cannot possibly be corrupt. I assure you that is not the case.

Personally, I'd choose to live in Saddam's Iraq than Iran or in Saudi Arabia.

"Or do you prefer the dirty politics of the turkish secularists- susurluk the last in a long line? - over the self righteous AKP?"

Religious nuts of AKP are just as corrupt as the others. Look at how they have enriched themselves and how they have totally ruined the justice and education system in Turkey and you will be sick to your stomach.

Susurluk was very far from being "last in line", by the way. That was 20 years ago.

How about you? I'd be interested to hear whether you would like to live in Iran, seeing how it is a "democracy" and an Islamic government as well.

crescentmoon Fri 15-Feb-13 11:39:42

No not Iran nor Saudi Arabia, both are supremacist. Iran is a theocracy- it's a structure familiar to Shia Islam not Sunni Islam because of the claims to infallibility of the imams and the grand ayatollah. That And marrying political power to religious power- the Sunni dynasties of the past kept those two things separate.

As for Saudi also no because of the many points iv stated before in this thread. They are very similar to the Shia basing their fundamental argument on 'blood' - that because they are from Arabia that they have a greater claim to religious and political leadership. They would render anyone not of that lineage or heritage slaves then.

I get what you mean about religious parties being corrupt. The British media reported that the unrest in Egypt was because of the Muslim brotherhoods religious policies but actually- it is because they have maintained the neo liberal policies of the previous government. Or increased them in fact taking away alot of state subsidies n basic goods and ushering in high austerity measures whilst granting the army immunity from having business and property deals / wealth investigated.

m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/21/egyptians-held-back-neoliberalism-not-religion

crescentmoon Fri 15-Feb-13 12:07:29

its funny how vehement you are about the AKP, all i ever read about is how much the other 'religious' parties in the Middle East would do well to model them.

thats by western political analysts. the chief thing is Turkey's economy whose growth and stability is attributed to the AKP and then how they - sorry to attack your beloved institution cote - managed to neutralise the power of the army.

fuzzywuzzy Fri 15-Feb-13 12:15:45

crescent the translation of the verse you posted fmor surah imran is incorrect.

Hannah did dedicate her child to the service of Allah before it was born but she did it under the assumption she would have a male child to send to the temple. She was sorrowful that her intention could not be completed when she had her daughter instead of a son, but it was Allah's plan that her daughter would be better than any son would have been for her.

fuzzywuzzy Fri 15-Feb-13 12:20:20

actually no sorry mis read, you have translated up to verse 37.

CoteDAzur Fri 15-Feb-13 19:54:42

crescent - re "No not Iran nor Saudi Arabia, both are supremacist"

What, they are both governed with the belief that Islam is a better religion than any other? Isn't that what you and others on this thread believe as well?

"Iran is a theocracy"

So? Wouldn't you be happy to obey the rules of Islam? To feel the hand of Sharia in government as well as justice system? If not, why not?

"That And marrying political power to religious power- the Sunni dynasties of the past kept those two things separate. "

They were SECULAR, you mean? smile I thought you didn't like secular states?

CoteDAzur Fri 15-Feb-13 20:24:54

crescentmoon - re "its funny how vehement you are about the AKP, all i ever read about is how much the other 'religious' parties in the Middle East would do well to model them"

And what does that tell you? That (1) I am an idiot or a liar, or (2) that UK media you follow either deliberately ignored or incompetently missed all that has been happening?

Over a period of several years, I have been shock shock and shock some more over UK newspapers' coverage of the political situation in Turkey, to the extent that I have lost all trust in their abilities and now don't read them at all. I can tell how wrong they are re Turkey, so how can I now trust their judgement re other parts of the world?

I could give you links, but you can't read Turkish. Courts are no longer independent, but merely tools for this government to jail even potential dissenters. There is no such thing as freedom of speech and people are scared even on anonymous forums on the internet, because people have been tracked through their IP numbers and taken to court. There are hundreds of people in prison for years without trial, with each dissenter's name added to an ever-growing list of supposed plotters of a plot to overthrow the government some years ago.

"the chief thing is Turkey's economy whose growth and stability is attributed to the AKP"

The main thing that massively helped Turkey's economy is the drop in global interest rates, which finally brought Turkey's debt payments to a manageable level. And I don't need to tell anyone that this is not some magic that AKP performed but the result of the global credit crunch. (I can go into this in detail if you like, as a former analyst & fund manager in Turkey's financial markets).

"and then how they - sorry to attack your beloved institution cote - managed to neutralise the power of the army"

You make that sound so pleasant hmm They have jailed over 20% of army's top brass with no trial in sight so they could put their cronies in place. It is very naive of UK media to think for a second that AKP crippled the army for the sake of EU-style democracy. They did it to take out the only force that could stop them turning the country into another Iran.

For the time being, it's not Iran. But have turned the country into a totalitarian place, not dissimilar to Putin's Russia. Prison population of Turkey has doubled in the last decade, and not because AKP is so much better in catching pickpockets.

That is the political party you seem to admire so. I don't know what else to say sad

crescentmoon Fri 15-Feb-13 21:14:44

again its the opinion of british political analysts im talking about cote with their praise of Turkey's government and saying the other revolutions could do much worse than not following them. yes that is the only access to information i have - you bring another perspective to it which i would not have heard of before. and which gives me alot of food for thought.

"Over a period of several years, I have been and some more over UK newspapers' coverage of the political situation in Turkey, to the extent that I have lost all trust in their abilities and now don't read them at all. I can tell how wrong they are re Turkey, so how can I now trust their judgement re other parts of the world?"

yes i agree with you, and that is why i took their word more im so used the press's default islamophobic setting that the regular praise of the AKP made it seem truly objective. even the Israelis hoped that the arabs would follow turkey not iran. but nothing ever is. Ghaddafi was courted in 2010 then aerially bombed in 2011 - western politics in the middle east is much more pragmatic than ideological as we are all seeing.

who said i didnt like secular states? i like UK secular am grateful i do not grow up under Turkish secular. If Ataturk banned even the Sufi tariqahs then it wasnt only the institutional islam of the caliph and courts but even the spiritual or 'private' islam of the sufis. you are offended that youngsters from religious high schools are allowed to go to university now right? that hijabis are no longer discriminated from public sector jobs? how staunch was turkey in the year 2000 against religiosity and then look 10 years later. remarkable really.

even in the prophet (pbuh) time there were a group of muslims who settled in a Christian country even after Mecca was opened because they had intermarried, settled, made businesses and wanted to remain. they lived there with the blessing of the prophet (pbuh) himself. so i feel no guilt about loving the UK and being proud of being British. the precedent was set over 1400 years ago and if the prophet (pbuh) didnt take it against himself when those muslims wished to remain in a non muslim country as a minority who can take it as a lack of religious commitment now?

"No not Iran nor Saudi Arabia, both are supremacist"

one is a monarchy and one is a theocracy. the monarchy model is familiar to sunni and shia history but theocracy is only familiar to the Shia.

i dont know if you would call the sunni dynasties secular. partly no and partly yes. as for political power they had it, 'leader of the faithful' 'defender of the faithful', but there was no rule by a 'clergy' as in shia islam. that was a separate area still under the authority of the caliph. then as now there were scholars, qadis, grand muftis, but they were judicial, experts in the sharia law not members of a priest class.

as for iran and saudi both are based on an idea that only their interpretation of Islam is correct which comes not from an intellectual basis but by dint of being - of the shias that they are infallible which is very close to blasphemous in sunni islam - and with the saudis that other forms of interpretation are irrelevant or illegitimate because those muslims do NOT COME FROM THE LAND OF ARABIA. the house of Saud and the wahhabi sect are both reliant upon each other for support - if one falls so does the other.

"The main thing that massively helped Turkey's economy is the drop in global interest rates, which finally brought Turkey's debt payments to a manageable level. And I don't need to tell anyone that this is not some magic that AKP performed but the result of the global credit crunch. (I can go into this in detail if you like, as a former analyst & fund manager in Turkey's financial markets)."

actually i would like to know more about that!

crescentmoon Fri 15-Feb-13 21:37:26

"So? Wouldn't you be happy to obey the rules of Islam? To feel the hand of Sharia in government as well as justice system? If not, why not?"

i do obey the laws of Islam as much as I can, as i said earlier, even in the time of the prophet (pbuh) there were a group of muslims who settled in a Christian country even after Mecca was opened because they had intermarried, settled, made businesses and wanted to remain. they lived there with the blessing of the prophet (pbuh) himself. so i feel no guilt about loving the UK and being proud of being British.
the precedent was set over 1400 years ago and if the prophet (pbuh) didnt take it as an insult against himself when those muslims wished to remain in a non muslim country as a minority who can take it as a lack of religious commitment now?

nailak Fri 15-Feb-13 21:46:44

the shariah can be in government and justice system, while being run by separate authorities.

is that hard to understand?

the ulama and the qadis are different. the Qadi and ulama can declare laws made by shura against Islam.

crescentmoon Sat 16-Feb-13 08:09:34

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7689897.stm

crescentmoon Sat 16-Feb-13 08:30:02

what do you think of those comments naila and others?

nailak Sat 16-Feb-13 18:31:29

i think Islam and feminism share many common concerns.

I also think Islam and feminism are totally oppossite on many issues.

nailak Sat 16-Feb-13 18:32:22

I studied Amina Wadud a bit, I dont agree with her

peacefuloptimist Sat 16-Feb-13 22:07:36

Hi Cote. Have been meaning to reply to your post but have been really busy. I realise the conversation has moved on and apologise in advance for derailing it again.

“Religion was between each man and God, with no need for an institution or leader in the middle. I happen to think that is a good thing.”

I also agree that it is a good thing to cut out the middle man between God and people. However the Caliph in Islam is not a middle man or intercessor between man and God. The role of the Caliph is to be a leader of the community of Muslims. Any community or country or society or organisation needs a head or leader in order to function in an organised fashion otherwise there would be anarchy. That is basic common sense. Even in a democracy you elect presidents and prime ministers who fulfill that role. Islamically the basic description of the job of the caliph is to be a just ruler. In the Quran it emphasises this in the verse that talks about the Prophet David who was the leader/king of the Jews in his lifetime.

“Oh Dâwud (Prophet David)! We have made you a caliph on earth. Then judge with justice.” Surah Saad, verse 26

Unlike the pope the caliph is not God’s representative on Earth and is not considered infallible or owed unquestionable allegiance or anything like that. The first caliph of Islam, Abu Bakr’s first speech gave a succinct explanation of his role and the relationship of the Muslim masses to the caliph.

"I have been given the authority over you, and I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me; and if I do wrong, set me right. Sincere regard for truth is loyalty and disregard for truth is treachery. The weak amongst you shall be strong with me until I have secured his rights, if God will; and the strong amongst you shall be weak with me until I have wrested from him the rights of others, if God will. Obey me so long as I obey God and His Messenger (Muhammad, pbuh). But if I disobey God and His Messenger, you owe me no obedience."

The institution of the caliphate for many centuries provided a measure of unity (not complete unity), security and stability in the Muslim World. For example the Ottoman Empire sent fleets of soldiers with arms to support Muslim rulers in East Africa and in Aceh against the European colonial powers. Its no wonder they plotted its demise as it enabled them to finally colonise some of its former territories such as Syria, Palestine and Iraq amongst others. Now am I saying that we need to reinstate the Ottoman empire. No way. It would be impossible and anyway I think it is delusional to portray it as some sort of ideal of Muslim governance as it certainly wasnt particularly in its later years. But a new system has to be set up to fill that gap.

“One person's "radical, unorthodox" is another's "normal". I honestly think it is a good thing that nobody is "policing" anyone's religion. If there has to be religion in the world, everyone should be free to practice it as he/she sees fit.”

I disagree that ‘everyone’ should be free to practice it in the way that they have interpreted it, in particular if the way they have interpreted it means that they are oppressing others or damaging the image/reputation of Islam. I am forever being made to answer for the abominable actions of the minority of extreme, radical muslim groups even though I despise what they do as do the vast majority of muslims in the world. It is in the interest of some people to take the actions of the worst group of Muslims to be representative of what Islam as a whole teaches to the extent that the Radicals and Extremists are actually described by some Western, Islamophobic commentators as being the true muslims, the ones who are practicing Islam properly. Rather then having to defend my religion against accusations of allowing ‘honor killings’ and ‘fgm’ and ‘terrorism’ etc I think it would be better to have some sort of organistion or authority that can speak for Muslims as a whole to say that yes there are people within our community who do xyz but the majority of us condemn that, do not agree with that interpretation and do not accept that their actions have anything to do with Islam. Does that make sense?

“Personally, I'd choose to live in Saddam's Iraq than Iran or in Saudi Arabia.”

It comes as no surprise that an athiest such as yourself would decline to live under a religious government. What does surprise me though is that you would rather live in Saddam Husseins Iraq. Really? How about if you were a Kurd living in Halabja in 1988, would living in Iraq really be preferable to living in Saudi then? Or how about if you were a Syrian in the town of Hama when Bashar Assad’s father was in power, would living in Iran with less freedoms really be a worse alternative then having your entire family slaughtered because they happen to be living in the wrong place at the wrong time?

“You seem to be assuming that religious governments are not dictatorial and they cannot possibly be corrupt. I assure you that is not the case.”

Maybe so but in the Middle East the secular, athiest despots like Saddam Hussein, Hafez al Assad, Muammar Gaddafi, Ben Ali, Gamal Abdel Nasser and the rest of their ilk have demonstrated much greater ruthlessness and contempt for their people then the Saudi rulers (not so familiar with Iran) who prefer to bribe their people in to submission. I would much rather live in Saudi Arabia where I could practice my religion without being treated like a criminal and live in peace and security then live in Tunisia under Ben Ali where my husband would have most probably been arrested, interogated and possibly tortured for attending the mosque daily to pray his five daily prayers; where I would not be allowed to access education or work because I wear a headscarf; or live in Syria where my 6 month old ds would have been slaughtered by the Syrian army with impunity. Don't kid yourself that these secular despots would have any more mercy for the non-religious. I spent a bit of time living in Egypt when Hosni Mubarak was in power. I shared a flat with several girls from different countries and also an Egyptian native. One of the girls in our flat had a minor altercation with another girl who subsequently called the police. I will never forget the reaction of the Egyptian girl who stayed with us when she heard the news. She packed all her bags as quickly as possible and made arrangements to stay somewhere else that night and warned us all to do the same. The rest of us who were staying in the flat were all from European countries and we could not understand why she was so afraid of the police coming to our flat when we had done nothing wrong and the incident was relatively minor but her behaviour panicked us enough that we all left the flat that night. Now this girl was not religious in the slightest. She worked in the fashion industry in Egypt and was thoroughly Westernised in appearance and in thought and yet even she was terrified of the Egyptian police. One of my teachers there told us about the last time she saw her son years earlier when he left the house before fajr to go and get breakfast for the family. He never came back as his journey back from the shops took him past a mosque that was being raided at the time and his reason and shopping bags were not a good enough excuse to the Egyptian security police for being out at that time and they arrested him and dragged him off. Would you really prefer to live under dictators like these (not the European variety like that of Monaco) then live in a democracy like Turkey that has an ‘Islamist’ party in power. If you live in a country where the government has decided that the religion practiced by over 90% of the population is the biggest threat to it then really what chance do you have of living a normal life?

This thread is not accepting new messages.