Samuel Heilman

After reading the the brief autobiographical excerpt from Samuel Heilman, I want you to think about and answer ONE (you can address more, but don't feel obligated to do so) of the following questions:

1. What does Heilman mean when he says "The Temple now was portable"(264)?

2. Heilman describes living a "double life" and being "compartmentalized." To what is he referring? Have you ever felt a similar way?

3. Eventually Heilman will say "Here compartments collapse"(276). Explain.

4. Describe Heliman's experience of prayer on 273. Have you ever felt that way in prayer?

5. "I have gone through the Talmud three times," the learned man answered. "Yes" the rebbe replied, and then inquired, "but how much has the Talmud gone through you" (277)? Explain.

REMEMBER: No anonymous posts - please post under your first name and last initial. Refrain from using internet short hand (no 'lol' or 'u,' etc.). You do not have to create a completely new comment as your participation; you may respond to someone else's comment as your contribution and participation, BUT be courteous to other posters. No personal or ad hominem attacks

Zaynab al-Ghazali

After reading the brief autobiographical excerpt from Zaynab al-Ghazali, I want you to think about and answer ONE (you can address more, but don't feel obligated to do so) of the following questions:

1. Al-Ghazali seems to have conflicting ideas of women's role in Islamic society. At one point she says "...in Islamic society it is a grave error to speak of the liberation of women"(377), and at other times she seems to be quite stern and unyielding in speaking to her husband (cf. pp. 386-7). How can she hold both positions?

2. What do you think al-Ghazali means when she talks of "complete incorporation" on page 380?

3. "Muslims only carry arms in order to spread peace" (378). How is this possible? [hint: think of the spread of the Umma and the Shariah in early Islam]

4. From reading this short excerpt, what do you think al-Ghazali's and the Muslim Brotherhood's ideal religio-political reality would be? What does she mean when she writes "...Islam is both religion and state..."(389)? Would the existence of individual states like Egypt or Iraq or Jordan cease to exist in the ideal religio-political reality of al-Ghazali and the MB?

REMEMBER: No anonymous posts - please post under your first name and last initial. Refrain from using internet short hand (no 'lol' or 'u,' etc.). You do not have to create a completely new comment as your participation; you may respond to someone else's comment as your contribution and participation, BUT be courteous to other posters. No personal or ad hominem attacks

Jalal Al-e Ahmad

After reading the brief autobiographical excerpt from Jalal Al-e Ahmad, I want you to think about and answer ONE (you can address more, but don't feel obligated to do so) of the following questions:

1. In general, what was your reaction to Al-e Ahmad's description of the Hajj? Does it seem like an attractive event? Do you think that your reaction would be different if this text had been written by a fervent believer?

2. From pp. 364-366, Al-e Ahmad discusses two rituals: the running back and forth between Safa and Marveh and the circumambulation of the Kaaba. In both of these rituals, Al-e Ahmad says that one loses the sense of "self." Explain why and if you think this is a positive or negative thing.

3. Al-e Ahmad also talks about pilgrims finding real meaning in the Hajj. "A meaning higher than this dealing, marketing, tourism, discharge of obligation, and ritual enactment economy, government, and a thousand other inevitable things"(367). Having studied the infancy of Islam, of what does this remind you? It seems that Al-e Ahmad is indirectly comparing the Saudi administration of the the Hajj to what?

4. What is Al-e Ahmad's view of the West's influence on and relationship with Islam (or Islamic peoples and cultures)?[hint: look at pp. 368-72]

REMEMBER: No anonymous posts - please post under your first name and last initial. Refrain from using internet short hand (no 'lol' or 'u,' etc.). You do not have to create a completely new comment as your participation; you may respond to someone else's comment as your contribution and participation, BUT be courteous to other posters. No personal or ad hominem attacks