LOL @ culture. (or, "how i learned to stop worrying about the bomb by finally blogging again")

"And it is [God], Who created man from water: then from him He caused two kinds of kindred, by blood and by marriage; your Lord is all-Powerful (Qadeer)."
(Qur'an, Al-Furqan 25:54)

If kindred/relationship is created not only by blood, but also by marriage.. why should that be taken as patriarchal only? Shouldn't it be that not only is there a new kinship that a wife becomes part of her husband's family, but also that a husband becomes part of his WIFE's kin? Is this not also an equally important kinship? Is this the way of Islam or a double standard created by our patronizing cultures? MY Prophet (peace and blessings on him) would never teach this, my Prophet will recognize such relationship on the day of Judgment.. HE taught that women keep their name after marriage. So how could this verse (or rather, our cultures) suggest that it is only the man that creates the ties of relationship??

This much thought because of reading that one sentence... Heh.

Why so thought-provoking, provoking? Well.. I'm not one for giving introductions, but my family puts a lot of stress on our blood, and marrying to preserve the "blood-line." So I found something in our Holy Book that conveys an idea that blood is NOT bigger than marriage, but they are equal causes of kinship and honor. I have my proof. I'm so tired of double-standards against women.. these ideas that we have learned from old pagan traditions.
--------

now i will go off on a tangent:

Although I quoted one verse from this surah (chapter) as an argument against marriage-for-preservation-of-culture, I really really want you to read the rest of Al-furqan. Do you guys often just pop open your holy book to any random page and see what it tells you? I do that a lot, especially when I just feel "bleh." I opened it to this verse, 25:54. The rest of the page is a thorough reflection of my sentiments towards God, when I connect science and spirituality. It's weirdly analogous to the way our body connects our emotions and our health. Isn't it amazing how stress affects so many of our bodily functions? Or how eating healthy and exercising releases endorphins that make us feel better?

I don't care what allopathic medicine teaches you, or what "Big pharma" markets to us, you just cannot talk about physical health without emotional health. You cannot treat one without the other; symptoms or side-effects should not be limited to "headaches, diarrhea, jaundice, inflammation, teeth-grinding and mud butt".. but should include "restlessness, scatterbrain, frustration, hopelessness, anhedonia, paranoia, a false sense of immortality and security"
(and the latter cannot be limited by psychiatry or psychology or whatever, lol)



Just the same, you cannot talk about God as merely a "spiritual force", or the drive behind emotional depth, that feeling of Love. You cannot limit worship to the lifting of hands in prayer, the up-down-up-down movement of your joints and limbs. because God tells us in Qur'an, "The sun and the moon adhere to a fixed schedule, and the stars and the trees, all bow down (prostrate) in worship!" (Al-Rahman 55:5-6).
But the tree that is rooted and cannot move except as it resonates with the wind, the celestial sphere that is made of hot gas whose movement is only described by gravity and inertia: how can they move to bow down without limbs and motor neurons?

With that I present the definition of science, as Yours Truly sees it. Who the hell is Webster, anyway?

Science, (sns) n.

1. the methodical study of how the universe worships God.
2. An attempt to disguise human ignorance by using fancy words to describe the phenomenon of `ibadah (worship); especially the physical manifestation of said phenomenon.
3. The projection of man's limitations in understanding what God already taught him.
   

   [Perhaps... perhaps our ignorance is compensation for having free will. Or is it a result of the definition of free will? (based on the Islamic model): free will is essentially intelectual freedom. Before you can make an actionable decision, you first make these decisions: How should I use the intangible aspect of my cerebrum? what is intelect? then, are my decisions based on intelect? i.e. intelectual capacity is necessary to have free will. caveat: intelectual capacity must be nurtured; intelectual potential demands individual accountability.]
   

==> [thus] We are able to define worship: "a recognition and acceptance of autonomy" where, autonomy describes the seemingly "self-governing" physical laws and biological processes.


To be continued...



I know.. real thought-heavy. sorry. I'm a geek.