As has been widely reported, the Tablighi Jamaa are building a new mosque in London. The mosque, once completed, will be the largest religious building in the United Kingdom and is intended to be opened in time for the London Olympics. However, its development has been met with some resistance from some Muslims who seem to object to the mosque being run exclusively by the Tablighi Jamaat. The Times report:
Asif Shakoor, chairman of Sunni Friends of Newham, said the petition was a response to a feeling that the voices of most Muslims in the area were not being heard. The petition text states: “We propose that when and if planning permission is granted . . . that all Muslim groups be equally represented at the proposed place of worship that is to celebrate the 2012 Olympic Games in London.”
This raises an interesting question. If a particular group or individual funds and builds a mosque, does that group or person have the same rights over that property as one would have over any other building? That is, do they have the right to control how that property is used?
If the answer is that they do not but rather sovereignty over the property is shared by all those people who might seek to use it, then this has some ramifications. Given that mosques are often funded and built by particular sects or ethnic groups with a view to catering for the specific ideological or linguistic needs of the group, there will be little incentive to build further public places of worship if it means that any such structure must be coopted by ideologies that one might find disagreeable. Why, for example, would a Sufi build a mosque if he knew that Salafis would have equal say in how that mosque is run (even though they didn’t themselves fund it)? Or vice versa?
However, if the mosque is considered private property and remains the property of the group or individual that built it then they have sovereignty over how that property is used. This means they have the right to exclude people from the mosque and control what is being taught there. It also means that the mosque itself may be built to reflect the ideas and religious views of the group even though these might not reflect majority-held values amongst Muslims. For example, it might reflect the fallacious though relatively common view that women should not pray in congregation in the mosque.
I’m inclined to see mosques as the private property of the groups that funded them and/or run them. If the Tablighi Jamaat want to raise the money to build a super-mosque then they are entitled to decide what they teach there and how it is run. If other members of the Muslim community don’t like that then they can simply go and build a mosque that reflects their values and is run the way they want it to be run.
8 comments ↓
What about a masjid just for women?
As-Salaamu ‘alaikum,
There are a number of legitimate objections to the proposal as it stands, most significantly the fact that the proposed building is a modernist eyesore; you can see a model of it here insha Allah. It looks nothing like any mosque seen anywhere else. From the air, the building will resemble “a prayer from the Qur’an”, which is somewhat inconsistent with its “environmental” credentials, such as locating it next to the Channelsea river to harness its tidal power.
There is also the question of who will be around to use the mosque once the Olympics have torn through town? The strong possibility is that the Olympics, if they are successful (and it’s a very big “if”) will cause that part of town to become gentrified, being as it is next to the Docklands, and many of the Muslims will be priced out of the local housing market. The district already has plenty of mosques.
Another objection is that money for a building like this will probably come from a source of oil money - like Saudi Arabia - and this will expand Saudi influence over the local community. It’s been known for imams to be threatened with losing their jobs (or actually to lose their jobs) for refusing to follow the Saudi line on issues like moonsighting. That will displease a lot of the more traditional Muslims (like myself).
On the other hand, the land, which is already used for the Tablighi markaz, is on the “Olympic belt” and it’s likely that the government won’t let it be used for normal local use; if it’s going to be a mosque, some sort of “Olympic showcase” is going to be required.
Why should the saudi government fund a tablighi masjid ?
Are’nt tablighis regarded as ‘deviants’ and tabligh a kind of bidah in hardline ‘wahhabi’ circles?
Secondly RPG a masjid exclusively for women is silly considering that in traditionally women are not required to goto the masjid while men should offer prayers in Jamaat as far as possible
on 28 Nov 2006 at 6:23 pm history_lover said:
Not being obligated to go and exercising the right to go are obviously not in contradiction.
As for women-only masjids per se, it is obviously novel. What of women-only study groups?
as-salamu alaykum
Yusuf Smith said,
“From the air, the building will resemble “a prayer from the Qur’an”, which is somewhat inconsistent with its “environmental” credentials”..”
I dont see where the inconsistency lies but *shrug*.
I do however dislike the idea on the grounds of exposing quranic to filth.
(This is partially the reason I absolutely *hate* seeing quranic ayat as logos or decorations on clothing.. but I digress).
Not only dirt, bird droppings etc.. but any muslim hater can go and take a p**** against it or happily have their dog do.
Anyway - I just dont see the merits of it.. what is the rationale?? Is this what the quran was revealed for, for it to be treated this way?
HEy perhaps this is tablighis idea of ‘making the Word of Allah high’ .. *grin*
It is unlikely that the Ministry of Islamic Affairs would fund such a project but it is possible that there might be private donations from some of the royal family. There are also many Saudi tablighis (who are, it must be said, quite different to their South Asian counterparts) and a lot of tablighis in other gulf countries.
If you have men-only masjids then given that many women want and need to attend the masjid (as it may be the only means they have of interacting with other Muslims or they wish their children to grow up familiar with the mosque), the natural result of that is for women to establish female-only masjids. Given the situation in the UK, I’m surprised that this hasn’t happened already. I remember reading recently that a woman-only masjid was being built in Tamil Nadu, India. Obviously, this isn’t optimum but, as I said, this is the result of excluding women completely from the mosques.
The number of mosques and musallah’s my wife and I visited in London earlier this year that were “men only” was very… frustrating. In the end being a typical Aussie she muscled in and we prayed in a corner (me leading). If this is the case, then I don’t see what the fuss about women-only facilities is about.
Wow, that Masjid looks like a convention center.
Leave a Comment