Listen to the PodCast

* (6.16m) Starts. Br Azad, Br Kalam and Br Talha in studio.
* (7.45m) Intro on topics:
- Brand/Ross furore
- Home Office have announced that they will publicise preachers of hate and stop them from coming into the country.
- King Abdullah has invited Israel for interfaith dialogue.. And discussion on Muslims going to see the pope.
- Changing Islam by using ‘context’ argument.

* (12.10m) Reminder – to give to Interpal. Then Al Ardu played.
* (20.25m) Why do we use ‘man’ as slang?
* (21.50m) Discussion on the topic of reinterpreting the Quran.
Reading quran within current context and current understanding. If we are going to determine what is right and wrong, what’s the point of Allah?
Maqasid argument - Scholars and Ulama who study Quran and interpret it.
There’s a world of difference between scholars interpreting the qur’an/making ijtihad and lay people/academics doing it.
Brothers are for the maqasid argument, however disagree when for example, something has become a norm like homosexuality, and regardless of what punishment there is for it in the quran, people argue that the punishment is not relevant in current context and should not apply.
- Question: Is context or circumstances outweighing the Islamic principles?
- How do we understand something like freemixing, in our context?
- Point: Many people who fall into a trap with this text/context issue do so because they do not appreciate the serious weight of the text. With every situation the text will hold some kind of guidance or indication and that will pave the way to a solution within our context. However people get stuck on concentrating too much on context over text.
- Another example: Quranic ayat giving permission for husbands to hit wives. It’s a big no-no in current norms/society. How do we understand this permission in current context where a lot of people think it is wrong?
- Point that Norms and values change and Quranic ayats with punishments and permission should not be overruled for these norms.
- Point that there are different definitions that can be derived from the Arabic in the Quran. ‘Strike’ in the Quran has many meanings. Some of the ulama have said that the word refers to a light tap with a miswak. It is more a symbolic action to show displeasure and that’s what permission has been given for.
- Point: There should be a massive emphasis on scholarship. We should never stop referring to the Ulama and people of scholarly knowledge when it comes to interpretation of the quran. We should not be referring to academics or people who don't even have a basic knowledge of Arabic.

* (38.10m) Football scores daroonly announced by Br Talha ( )
* (42.50m) Call to brothers in Italy – Brothers on Daroon Road Run - Raising money to build houses for Bangladeshi flood victims.
Br Kalam asks them to bring him back some handbags ()
* (55.35m) Discussion on Interfaith Dialogue.
- Why invite Israel for interfaith dialogue? Israel is not recognised by us as a legitimate state. If it’s about interfaith, you need to invite Rabbis etc, why invite head of Israel?
- It may not be recognised as a legit state but it’s there and it’s a reality. We still need to engage with the lead people.
-Also why are all these Muslims going to see the Pope?
You have to have principles. Shaykh Qaradawi holds the position that he will not talk to the pope until he apologises and retracts a previous speech. However other shuyukh hold the position that they need to have discussions because its politics.. and there needs to be some kind of discussion happening.
Point: - We should discuss. However there needs to be respect there. If someone does not show you common courtesy and if they don’t behave considerately, taking care not to offend you, then no point in meeting people like that.
* (1hr 4.45m) – Br Kalam ranting about the media’s reporting of the Pakistan bombings, how there’s a justification for the killings of 30 odd people because of the possibility of one suspected Taliban leader being killed.
- Point that this is hypocritical and if it was about Americans, there is no way it would have been reported in this way. And how this as well as all other injustices committed under foreign policy is the cause of radicalisation and people need to accept that.
* (1hr 8.05m) Call to Br Mamun whose abroad. They leave a voicemail. (Poor brother!)
*(1hr 11.10m) Daroon Chart – Number Three!
* (1hr 15.35m) Discussion – Death threat towards Sarah Maple for creating horrible images of Muslims and the Russel Brand + Jonathan Ross issue.
Question: On one side we have offence created towards a group of people like Muslims and that’s acceptable. But on the other side, offence caused by Brand/Ross is not acceptable. Why? If you believe in the right to offend, why does it come with conditions - Why is it acceptable in one situation but not another? Hypocrisy.
* (1hr 24.10m) Discussion - Foreign policy, brotherhood and nationalism.
- Non Muslim people not understanding that the feeling of brotherhood transcends across countries.
- Nationalism - How people try to brainwash us with concepts of nationalism.
- Question: Wondering whether Muslims living in the West feel more affinity for other Muslims around the world, than those living in the East.
* (1hr 30.10m) Celebrating that ELM won Model Mosque. Final was between Central Mosque and ELM and ELM/LMC won!
* (1hr 35m) 3 Nasheeds dedicated to our mothers.
* (1hr 46m) A little on elections, corruption, vote rigging.
* (1hr 48m) Br Kalam rants about elections - 1. No apparent Muslims amongst the background people who are showing support for Obama. 2. Background people look so useless, what’s the purpose of their existence? (Ey? )
* (1hr 51.25m) Round Up!
Br Azad has nothing more to say other than that he’s really really hungry. (Gotta be THE most overused line in these shows – has it not become a cliché yet? )