Still, salam and Islam have a common root.

Shabbat Shalom,

So often I have been confronted with the ugly side of Islam. In fact I studied Islam – and Arabic, though I never mastered it beyond the very basics – during my first Germany stay and in many ways I was fascinated by its ideas. But then, since I went to Israel, it has sometimes been hard to keep track of this beauty and poetry my younger self had found beyond Islam and its believers. However I kept telling myself that it’s always the radicals you get to see. It’s the same with Paganism, anyhow. I kept telling myself that behind all these know-it-all-converts and hardly-having-anything-in-common-with-Islam terrorists, behind “muslims” hiding their weapons in schools and mosques, behind all these people who seem to choose death over life there still is the beauty I’d come across earlier. Those people had just, like many moderate pagans, taken cover from the over proportional influence of hardliners.

And then, of course, I have that flirt with hijabs - they fascinate me utterly. I know they’re not supposed to be, but I think they’re unbelievably beautiful. And even more beautiful are those women underneath them that had the unimaginable strength to choose hijab in a society as focused on the surface as ours. I have to admit I’m one of those women that could be caught staring at hijabs in the street and I hope the women affected don’t feel all too bad for it – I just can’t help it. Sometimes I’d love to just walk over and ask them how they heck they made that miracle on their heads happen. I’ve stood in front of the mirror once with a decent piece of a scarf and a hand full of pins. But no matter what I did it all fell down again once I’d shaken my head.

However this goes off topic here. What I was going on about is how difficult it sometimes is to keep believing there is the “real thing” behind the ugly face of Islam. Today I found this and between the words and lines there was that beauty again. It is alive:

What i say in my weblog, that’s all i learnt from islam and other religions. I researched so much in religions and i believe all religions have ONE spirit. If i love Islam, bcs i found it more complete than others, and if some akhounds are too severe or extremist, it is their ego that rules them.
You know human can be very selfish. when he learns something, he thinks he is little God and can make his edicts. That’s why he falls people in hate. Anyway i just can hope for better world, and i know there are better days in the future..

- Shahrazad

 

Yeah*nodnod*all of religions have the some spirits,it’s just humans that make them look different with each other :/…

- Raidex

There’s just nothing to add …

again.

yours,

Migdalit

That makes a Heathen’s Day

Merry Meet everybody,

remember back when I started my blog in April 2008 when I desperately tried to put together a blogroll that would include some really great Pagan sites and failed? It’s been a while since – hard to believe that I’ve already had this blog for a year now and, despite occasional lazy- and uncreativeness haven’t abandoned it yet ;-)

However it seems like I am finally finding the odd one out who’s writing about more then spells and recipes and that “more” isn’t limited to Christian bashing (though I can understand that it can be funny from time to time – and actually some Christians just deserve any other). Check out “A Heathen’s Day“, written by a mid-50ies cosmopolitan academic Asatrú currently living in the US. You’re absolutely gonna love him as much as I do.

He did write one on Pagans and Jews by the by, however they aren’t quite good off there:

[...] You know what’s sickening about all this bs? I will tell you. The rampant anti-Gentilism (anti-Paganism, if you will). The Philistines were Mycenaeans, as archaeologists have proven. The Jews hated them. [...]

[...] So we see in the Hebrew Bible the tide of ethnic cleansing. We see it again in the Hasmonean era, when the Jewish kings tried to restore the Israel of mythology and killed, drove out of their homes, and forcibly converted Gentiles, burning their cities when they resisted.[...]

source

It’s interesting to finally read something on the Israel – Palestine – Gaza issue that has become so important for me, written by another Pagan. One, who has possibly never been to Israel, knows it from news, his study, and – most of all – for its part in the development of Christianity. Another perspective, less preoccupied by personal experience, perhaps more free-minded then mine. I mean: I’ve never made a secret of me being not quite objective especially when it comes to Israel. Actually I just don’t believe in blogs being an objective media (well I don’t believe in objective media at all but this is going too far off here).

I always reported that being a Pagan in Israel I felt fine – way better then being one in Austria or Germany. There indeed was one occasion where “Pagan” was been related to the Romans who enslaved Jews, ergo “evil“, but that was a one-time-thing soon to be solved as my (Jewish) friend said: “But her people were genocided by the Romans too! That’s other Pagans!” The old the enemy-of-my-enemy-issue again. However does Hrafnkell’s article make me reconsider? I read it a couple of times but all I end up with is: It’s just true. It is true that the Israelis/Jews never belonged to Gaza (however nor did today’s “Palestinians” who are on no proven way related to the Philistine population of the strip as far as I am concerned). And it’s true that before the Jewish people (which according to the Hebrew Bible descend from some place in today’s Iraq) there have been other peoples living in erez ysrael. In fact there have likely even been other people in Europe before what would later evolve into “Celts” and “Norse people” -  my ancestors – came there. It seems like there might have been a major culture clash (as for not to call it a “genocide”) when neolithic people arrived from the east (though it’s not yet clear whether this was “culture transfer” or actual migration or what of both to which extend). It’s kinda hard to draw the line and decide who “belongs” where … Well anyway: I did point your nose at the article.

There’s another one I particularly liked. It’s an piece as written in April on the sacred in Paganism. And just while writing this Hrafnkell accidentally gives the one of the best definitions of Paganism I have found as far as what we believe in is considered (I can’t count anymore how often I’ve been asked what makes a Pagan a Pagan and what we believe in … and I can’t count anymore how often I’ve stood speechless not knowing what to reply; how to word the million of things I feel about being Pagan):

Tacitus wrote of the Germans in 98 CE, “This is what they consider the strongest of bonds, the sacredness of the home, the gods of wedded life.”

So in the broadest possible sense, what is sacred to the Heathen mind is the community. The community, the Inangarðr, is the home of luck. In it, people dwell ”in luck, in frith, in honour.” while the wilds, the utangarð “is waste, the home of evil and unluck.” (Grönbech, 111). The wild is a joyless place, lacking not only the comforts of home, but the necessities of life.

source

It just lately at Beltaine struck me how useless being a Pagan is in a way if there’s no (Pagan) community to share with. You just cannot possibly celebrate any of our fests alone … you need other people; a circle, a family, a coven – just something. Being Pagan just means being part of a community; without that it’s just not the real thing …

However the rest of the article is really worthwhile too. It goes on about Christianity and how it tends to break apart the community first when coming to “rescue” some “savages” and then about how the principles of 1000 CE Vikings just can’t be applied to 2009 CE Asatrú although, in the end, they are worshipping the same gods, trying to follow the same part. I do absolutely agree with that one too. Just have a look at other religions (I’ve just had the religions-debate with Avarra, however I still consider Paganism a religion for the reason that my personal definition of the word is another then hers.): They do evolve and they do mirror the changes of society. Just look how much Christianity has changed over the last fifty years. Certainly there are a lot of old-fashioned Christians sticking to the whole idea of no-sex-before-marriage and crap like that but then there are a lot of modern, liberal Christians too who are deeply religious people in the midst of their heard but still live modern lifes for they just adapted their religion. And of course the same is true for modern Muslims, Jews and other religions. So why for the god’s sake is Paganism supposed to be just the same then 1000 years ago? Isn’t that kinda ridiculous?

Well I see I’ve given you plenty of things to think of today. Certainly enough to get you over the weekend. If not check out The Pagan Blogger’s Network which I just joined. This is where I stumbled over A Heathen’s Day and there’s certainly more where that comes from.

so far a wonderful weekend and shabbat shalom to all of you

yours

Migdalit

Does medinat ysrael belong to erez ysrael?

shalom everybody,

so this is the day: The comments of Poor Insane – which I appreciated a lot for he, finally, seems to be a person sincerely looking for a dialog where one listens to the other’s arguments – and a discussion I had with a dear friend, D., who is reading this blog though only commenting in private (why by the way?) pushed me into getting something written down I have pushed off for quite a while now. Nearly a year to be specific; as long as I have had this blog: Does Israel belong there?

First of all I feel I have to make you learn two pieces of vocabulary so we can tell things from each other in this posting: medinat ysrael, the State of Israel, referring to today’s political nation Israel and erez ysrael, referring to the historic-geographic land of Israel as it is described in the bible.

So far … any more to procrastinate the “hard issue”? I am afraid nothing that wouldn’t be all to obviousely distracting from it …

To put it in a nutshell: I don’t have an answer to that question. There’s just too much information amiss or information I’ve only gotten from untrustworthy (either pro-Zionist or pro-Palestinian) sources to come to a solution. I’ll include those questions I’d love to have answered and if somebody can provide sources to any of them he’s more then welcome!

Nevertheless, me not being able to answer that question doesn’t change anything about the right of existence of today’s medinat ysrael, State of Israel. As far as the situation goes today the world – and that does include the Arab and thereby also the Palestinian world – will have to accept Israel existing and Israeli and Palestinians will ultimately have to come to a solution that grants both populations a peaceful, free and sustainable way of living. Whether that will be a classical two-state-solution or one or another kind of a joined state or maybe a completely different approach is another topic and a question only to be answered by history in the years to come. Even if Israel was to be proven “guilty” as the trigger of the current conflict (though I suppose even in the worst case scenario plenty of other entities would have their part too) it cannot be suggested today’s Israeli population (neither the Jewish nor the Muslim or any other) is punished for what their parents might have done wrong. This is why untouched by the historic “truth” I will never accept any voices questioning today’s medinat ysrael’s right of existence.

As far as history goes – and I hope Poor Insane and others are with me as far as that – there was some kind of political entity inhabited by Jews at some point in history at least to the Jewish rebellion against Rome and the destruction of the second temple by the Romans in 70 CE. And this is where my first questions to historians enter the stage: Who – ethnically – were the inhabitants of erez ysrael up to 70 CE? Was there already an Arab (Jordanian / Palestinian) population in erez ysrael? (remember there where no Muslims back then!) and about what percentage of the total population were they? What other minorities (?) used to live there in that time? (Today it’d be Druze and Beduin people and a number of other minorities).

Around 70 CE and the centuries following would also be the time when Rome did its best to get rid of the Jews of Israel. They did prohibit teaching of Judaism – Rabbis had to teach in hiding – and destroy everything and everybody Jewish they could get hold of. Also they “exported” plenty of Jews off to Europe as slaves (the last “Roman” diaspora). What I don’t know, though would love to find out is how many (what percentage of the total population) Jews remained in erez ysrael in about 700 CE? How and when did they disappear from the land that apparently at one point was inhabited mainly by them? When would be the first time there where more Arabs (Jordanians / Palestinians) then Israelis (Hebrews) in erez ysrael?

The 8th century CE brought about the rise of Islam and subsequently them taking over erez ysrael. But what happened to the Jews living there? My idea of it – though I might be mistaken so feel free to correct me – is that a number of them apparently converted to Islam and another group was killed (let’s avoid the g-word here). If this is correct it’d mean that ethnically today’s “Palestinian” population of erez ysrael was no more no less then Jews who converted to Islam at one point around the 8th century. Which is interesting if you consider that Judaism isn’t only about what religion one chooses but also about genetics – inherited belonging to the tribe of Israel.  ((I’ve suggested that to some rather zionist friends of mine once and they nearly freaked out *lol*. I wonder how pro-Palestinians ‘d react to that one?))

I know for sure though that there were some places in Israel that are known to have continuously and in direct line been inhabited by Jews all the time from the time of the second temple: Jerusalem, Hevron (well, no longer, apparently), Zfat and Pki’in.  So I dare to claim that there have, since the days of Moses, been Jews living in erez ysrael. It’s not like they completely disappeared at any given time … they just declined from a majority to a minority in the land that used to be their’s.

Anyway: After the Muslims came the Crusaders or better to say the split the country between the two of them for a while. There’s plenty of records of Jews living in erez ysrael during crusader time and the impression I got – though I am not a historian nor an expert of any kind – is that the population seems to have been rather mixed at that time with no population outnumbering the other all too much. In general Jews seemed to have had quite a lot of power and influence when it came to trade whilst political power, unless it was with the Christians, was more likely to be with Muslims. But again: That could be my fantasy going wild.

Later on, however, Muslims took back the land and held it basically until Ottomane times. By then Aliya Alef, the first wave of, mostly European, Jews migrating back to Israel would already have started. David Ben Gurion, for instance, legendary first Israeli Prime Minister, used to have a Turkish passport at some point. So now we are well into Zionism and Jews already moving back to Israel. A Israel that, by that time, hadn’t been existing anymore for about 1′800 years but then, though it was in contemporary literature referred to as “Palestine” talking about the geographic area wasn’t Palestine either but a part of the Ottomane empire until World War I in which it was taken over by Great Britain until medinat ysrael’s Independence in 1948.  An Independence that, according to Israeli sources, wasn’t all to much Great Britain’s doing anyway for apparently (according to Israeli sources) Jewish underground organisations, such as the Ha-Ganah, had already fought a decent battle against Britain’s rule for some decades pushing her to the point of getting out of the region before they completely lost their face.

I’ve read in a book about Theodor Herzl’s life once that in the beginning of Zionism many weren’t all too concerned about where that Jewish State would be located. The most important point about it, at that point, was to have a state that was mainly Jewish in order to protect Jews from persecution. There were talks about giving the Jews some piece of land in today’s Uganda (Africa) but it never happened for one reason or the other. Only later on Zionists chose their old homeland, erez ysrael, as the target for Jewish migration in order to establish that Jewish State.

What I’d love to have are reliable sources about the percentages of ethnic groups in erez ysrael around 1800 and their development during the 19th century yet I haven’t found any reliable (paid neither by Jews, nor Ottomanes) sources about that one. So I can’t tell you anything about who “inhabited” erez ysrael when Aliya Alef started. I’d love to know. I’ve seen some charts but not only am I afraid their numbers mirror that of those who paid the author but also did it strike me that the numbers only consist of “Jews” and “Muslims” or similar but there’s no word about Christians, Beduins, Druze safe any other minority and no difference between a “Palestinian” Arab and a Turk which limits the reliability of the sources to nil in my opinion.

The time of the foundation of the State of Israel is known as the “nakba”, the catastrophe, in Palestinian and Arab history. For Jews of course it was exactly the opposite: They finally had a country of their own, a place where they could feel safe. Well, mostly. At least now their enemies came from outside and they knew who they were.

I know some survivors of the Shoah and I can clearly depict what a great feeling it must have been for them. One lovely elderly lady, an Auschwitz survivor, H., whom I love dearly and who – in her way and perhaps without knowing of it – taught me a couple of very important lessons about “life” and “fate”, told me the point where she had really been able to make her peace with her past was the day when her son, while at the army, visited Auschwitz with his unit; that regular Israeli soldiers could go and visit there was the greatest of all feelings to her. Anyway where I want this to lead to is the following: Of course Jews at that time had a lot of wounds to hatch – psychologically as well als physically – and a whole state to build up so yes, it is perfectly possible that they forgot about those who had to innocently suffer for their happyness. I am sure wrong has been done and people have come to harm without contributing to it.

As concerns the “nakba” there’s quite a lot of controversial information again that makes it hard for me to sort out who’s “right” and who not. Whilst Palestinian sources claim “Palestinians” had been displaced from their homes by Israelis or similar I’ve read and heard plenty of Israeli sources claiming the only people that called for Arabs to leave the newly founded medinat ysrael was Arabs. I couldn’t remember ever having heard of Israelis actually killing or driving Arab people out by force – though this, again, might be due to me lacking sources so feel free to supply any. Anyway apparently for one reason or another many Arabs didn’t feel welcome in a Jewish state so they left to neighbouring countries who in the subsequent decades gravely betrayed them by declining even second and third generation refugees citizenship, work permits and a live outside refugee camps. (Or am I mistaken concerning this? How do you think about this, Poor Insane? Why do they do that?)

Talking about medinat ysrael and its foundation: British Mandate Palestine consisted not of today’s medinat ysrael but rather of both today’s medinat ysrael plus today’s Jordan. So when UN allowed – more or less voluntarely – medinat ysreal to be founded it already split the land and gave the bigger part, Transjordan – today’s Jordan – to the Arab population. A part of land Israel wasn’t all too interested into anyway for first of all they just wanted some land where they could finally settle down in peace and second of all according to bible sources it didn’t belong to them or their ancestors anyway.

So I can kinda understand why many Israelis claim they have already given half of the land to the Arabs anyway and them feeling the Arabs are just taking more and more of the land until, if they keep giving the Arabs more land, there will be no land left for Israel in the end. From the Israeli perspective it looks like every time they give land to the Arabs they just want more which of course makes Israel reluctant to give them any.

Another word to the name “Palestine”: There is two possible roots for the name “Palestine”. One of them being the ancient people of the Philisters, a people of whom we hardly know a thing but that they settled down in today’s Gaza strip and were pretty misterioue tradesmen – there’s quite a lot of really cool archaeological stuff left over from the Philistines in Gaza. Some say they were responsible for a series of raids in all the Eastern Mediterranean in that time but there’s not sufficient proof to be sure yet. Anyway it seems that those Philistines were no Semitic people, neither Arab nor Hebrew, but indogermanic spoken so they didn’t “belong” to the area at all. So I suppose as “original Palestines” the Philistines can be ruled out (though I’d love to run some genetic testing on today’s Gaza population (the part of it that’s not refugees from somewhere else) to find out if they are the actual descendants of Philistines).

Possibility number two and what is broadly accepted as historic truth (again I am open for sources suggesting the opposite) is the Romans renamed what used to be Judea into Palestine in order to disconnect the Jews with Judea; as a punishment for the Jewish revolts so to say. So as far as I am concerned there has never been such a thing as a “tribe of Palestine” that today’s Palestinians could derive their name and identity from. So here – again – comes one question: When and why did Palestinians begin to call themselves “Palestinians”? And what did they call themselves before that? I’ve heard rumors though unfortunately nothing reliable (sources anybody?) that up to some point in the 1960ies the average Palestinian would identify himself as “Jordanian” and only as the Palestinian liberation movement gained momentum were they told to call themselves “Palestinians”. There is hearsay about some elderly Palestinian people telling they were born “Jordanian” until one day somebody dropped by telling them that now they were “Palestinian”. I’d love to know whether there’s truth in that for that really makes it sound as if there is a possibility that “Palestinians” and thereby “Palestine” is no more no less then an artificially constructed entity in order to be used for Arab foreign politics (while nobody cares what happens to those being called “Palestinians”). Which even in the worst case scenario of  medinat ysrael not “belonging” to erez ysrael wouldn’t make “Palestinians” any better then “Israeli”.

This is just a rather random serving of aspects being part of the big question. There’s plenty more where that comes from at nearly every blog concerned with the area and its politics and history.

So here comes the thing with the question asked above: Who is to judge which people “belongs” to erez ysrael? What conditions have to be met for a people to rightfully “own” the land they are living in and what conditions have to be met in order for a people to loose that right? Poor Insane is absolutely right that, if following the logic of the Jews belonging to Israel because they did live there at some point you had to displace half of mankind and draw a completely new map. Many Jews claim they are a special case because of being persecuted for so many millenia and that historically proven the only way to grant their savety is by giving them the possibility to stand up for themselves by giving them a state of their own – medinat ysrael. Is this valid? I don’t know but I think if we have a look into history we cannot completely dismiss the argument nor the one that whilst Arabs do have half a continent to run to Jews have nothing but that tiny place called “Israel”. But then of course I can perfectly understand every Palestinian asking what the heck this does have to do with him and why this means his grandmother had to (?) leave her home in order to go someplace else.

I don’t believe anyhow that further forced displacements (neither of Jews nor Muslims) can pose a solution to the conflict but rather does a solution have to be found with everybody staying in the place he is living in now (which of course leaves open the question of what to happen with millions of “Palestinian” second and third generation “refugees” that likely couldn’t be supported by the pure size and resources of erez ysrael whatsoever.)

That’d be my personal overview of the situation. I think it’s the longest posting I’ve written so far but still merely scratches the surface of the whole problem, anyway I hope I could give you an idea of how complicated and multi-layered it is. I am more then open to any questions and any further discussion and if you are interested in any particular aspect just tell me and I’ll see what information I can get.

looking forward to a great discussion

Migdalit

The non-muslim Hijabi

Hi folks,

I found this when browsing Hijab-videos on utube and actually I liked that woman the more the more I heard of her. Actually I too had that idea of wearing Hijab despite not being Muslim because I too felt that kind of stereotyping Hijab with Islam wasn’t just. And of course also because matching some kind of outfits it can be really pretty and / or handy and I just don’t see why I should be restricted to wear it (by society) just because I am not Muslim.

Somehow I had that thing in mind about organising a “international Hijab day”where women all around the world – no matter whether they are Muslim or not – were encouraged to wear Hijab for a day thereby making a statement about freedom. Freedom of religion and freedom to wear whatever a woman wants without being stared at and without people – men especially – taking her clothing as a symbol of being oppressed by men or whatsoever. In addition I think it might be a great and unifying experiencefor women all over the place if they wore Hijab for a day not giving a damn about conventions. Somehow it’s a reclaiming issue … reclaiming most of all women’s individual responsibility and choice without others interfering.

Well, however I am short of time – as usually this week as might have crossed your mind already – so I’ll let the non-muslim Hijabi girl speak for herself. She has a lot of great tutorials on how-to on utube too, don’t miss them!

Have a great Lughnasad

yours,

Migdalit

60 Ways to Keep your Wife’s Love

shabbat shalom lakh,

Here’s a really great one I found in an Islamic Internet forum and that can be seen at utube. And dear men reading this: Not being a Muslim is not a good excuse, have a read through that and you might happen to learn something you didn’t know (or kept yourself from knowing) until now:

1. Make her feel secure and sakinah – don’t threaten her with divorce
2. Give sincere salaams
3. Treat her gently – like a fragile vessel
4. Advise in private, at the best time, in the best way and atmosphere
5. Be generous with her
6. Warm the seat for her, you will warm her heart
7. Avoid anger, keep wudu at all times
8. Look good and smell great for your wife
9. Don’t be rigid or harsh-hearted or you will be broken
10. Be a good listener
11. Yes for flattery, No for arguing
12. Call your wife with the best names, cute nicknames, names she loves to hear
13. Utilize pleasant surprises
14. Preserve and guard the tongue
15. Expect, accept, and overlook her shortcomings
16. Give sincere compliments
17. Encourage her to keep good relations with her family
18. Speak about topics that interest her
19. Express to her relatives, how wonderful she is
20. Give each other gifts
21. Get rid of routine, surprise her
22. Have a good opinion of each other
23. Have good manners, overlook small things, don’t nitpick
24. Add a drop of patience, increase drops during pregnancy, menses
25. Expect and respect her jealously
26. Be humble
27. Sacrifice your happiness for hers
28. Help at home and with housework
29. Help her love your relatives, but don’t try to force her
30. Let her know that she is the ideal wife for you
31. Remember your wife in dua
32. Leave the past for Allah subhanahu wa ta ala, don’t dwell on, dig into, or bring it up.
33. Don’t act as if you are doing her a favor by working or providing, Allah is the Provider, the husband is the carrier of the sustenance to the family
34. Take shaytaan as your enemy, not your wife
35. Put food in your wife’s mouth
36. Treat your wife like she is the most precious pearl that you want to protect
37. Show her your smile
38. Don’t ignore the small things, deal with them before they become big
39. Avoid being harsh-hearted
40. Respect and show that you appreciate her thinking
41. Help her to find and build her inner strengths and skills
42. Respect that she might not be in mood for intimacy, stay within halal boundaries
43. Help her take care of the children
44. Give her gifts with your tongue, be an artist with your compliments
45. Sit down and eat meals together
46. Let her know that you will be traveling or returning from travel, give her sufficient notice
47. Don’t leave home in anger
48. Maintain the secrecy and privacy of the home
49. Encourage each other in ibaadat
50. Respect and fulfill her rights upon you
51. Live with her in kindness, goodness, fairness in good and bad times
52. Kiss your wife, foreplay, “Don’t jump on her like a bull”
53. Keep disputes between the two of you, don’t take it outside
54. Show care for her health and well-being
55. Remember you are not always right or perfect yourself
56. Share your happiness and sadness with her
57. Have mercy for her weaknesses
58. Be a firm support for her to lean on
59. Accept her as is, she is a package deal
60. Have a good intention for her

In Paganism, by the by, there is a Celtic tradition in which a marriage is valid only for four years and the ceremony needs to be repeated – traditionally at Beltaine – after four years. Else the partners are free to leave and, if they want, look for another mate. The idea being that four years after the marriage children are supposed to be big enough for the woman to be able to make it on her own and that no marriage should be kept by any kind of force but rather by the partners truly and deeply loving each other and enjoying their life with each other. And frankly: What could be more beautiful then marrying the man (or woman) you love again and again and again?

In Shi’ite Islam there is a kinda similar way of getting married, Muta’a, also referred to as pleasure marriages and posing a huge problem especially in Iraq where they used to be illegal under Husein and are now being abused for halal, religiously legal, prostitution where the wife has hardly any rights while the man has all of them. Yet the concept of a contracted mid- or short-term marriage indeed is interesting. It means husband and wife can make a valid contract that enables them to live together according to Islamic law and adding the agreements they made – e.g. no physical contact – later on they may choose to turn Muta’a into a “conventional” long term marriage. A practice which is used a lot within the community of religious Shi’ites living in Europe so that they can get what every secular European has: A time of sharing the other ones live without already having made a final commitment.

According to Patti Wigington and an article at the Modesto Bee Pagan weddings are increasing in popularity lately in America – whilst in other parts of the world it still is a legal problem to get a pagan wedding. In Austria a wedding needs to be done by a civil servant, mostly in the local town hall once – yet those are mostly open to suggestions as regards the ceremony which traditionally is rather small – and then, traditionally yet not obligatory, before the god of your choice (e.g. a Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Pagan … marriage). Once for the files and once for the faith so to say which I guess is a rather neat idea and lived secularism.

Israel’s policy on marriage is a little less open minded. In fact in recent years tourism to Cyprus for marriages has become common for in Israel you can only be married by a Rabbi (or Imam or Christian Priest). Period. If neither of them agrees in the marriage (e.g. if the fiancées are of different religions) you are into troubles and cannot get married in Israel. So if for instance I wanted to marry a Jewish man I’d face two choices: 1. convert to Judaism 2. marry outside Israel. But hopefully even Israel will open up to a multireligious world one day when it is not so paranoid about intermarriage anymore and people have really and deeply realized that Jews are no endangered people anymore (which might not be before a final peace which might take another decade … or century).

love,

- Migdalit

« Older entries