April 24, 2012
The Ayatollah Under the Bed(sheets)
Karim Sadjadpour in Foreign Policy:
In the early years of the Iranian Revolution, an obscure cleric named Ayatollah Gilani became a sensation on state television by contemplating bizarre hypotheticals at the intersection of Islamic law and sexuality. One of his most outlandish scenarios -- still mocked by Iranians three decades later -- went like this:
Imagine you are a young man sleeping in your bedroom. In the bedroom directly below, your aunt lies asleep. Now imagine that an earthquake happens that collapses your floor, causing you to fall directly on top of her. For the sake of argument, let's assume that you're both nude, and you're erect, and you land with such perfect precision on top of her that you unintentionally achieve intercourse. Is the child of such an encounter halalzadeh (legitimate) or haramzadeh (a bastard)?
Such tales of random ribaldry may sound anomalous in the seemingly austere, asexual Islamic Republic of Iran. But the "Gili Show," as it came to be known, had quite the following among both the traditional classes, who were titillated by his taboo topics, and the Tehrani elite, who tuned in for comic relief. Gilani helped spawn what is now a virtual cottage industry of clerics and fundamentalists turned amateur sexologists offering incoherent advice on everything from quickies ("The man's goal should be to lighten his load as soon as possible without arousing his woman") to masturbation ("a grave, grave sin which causes scientific and medical harm").
More here.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 10:23 AM | Permalink






















Comments
ahistorical, anecdotal tripe that plays on bigotry and prurient interests instead of providing an actual critique of gender apartheid in Iran. Probably because FP has absolutely no interest in the latter but the former makes a wonderful causus belli.
(and of course always easier to avoid all those uncomfortable, inconvenient class-based truths like that the modernization of Iran has happened for the vast majority of Iranians under the IRI and not the Pahlavis.)
Posted by: ajay | Apr 24, 2012 11:31:09 AM
Whoever thinks this sounds funny should read what Andre Breton wrote about the proper code of sexual conduct for men in the Surrealist group. You could hardly find a bunch of guys who knew less. They thought they were liberated, of course, but they sought only the level of liberation that stopped short of understanding women. Nevertheless, they were the advance guard, back in the day. But, it's all relative, no? And it's a safe assumption not everybody in any in-group goes by the book. In general, if you want to enrage people, you will surely succeed by mocking their sexual folkways, for they are more free to disrespect these behaviors than you are. Is it really worth the giggle, to write this article and others like it? I think it is not helpful and not brotherly -- and it adds up to what they call in the theater a "bad laugh." That is, a laugh that is so costly to the rest of what's going on that you just shouldn't have gone for it.
Posted by: Elatia Harris | Apr 24, 2012 4:42:00 PM
Ahistorical, anecdotal? These "tripe" are the subject of a great deal of scholarly debate by learned theologians from various important Islamic schools. And they are actively published and referred to by layperson and cleric alike all over the Muslim world.
Arun Shourie wrote a fascinating book, The World of Fatwas or the Shariah in Action, in 1995 that covers this territory in the Indian context. As I recall, he quoted chapter and verse from well-regarded, important collections that are stocked and sold in religious stores throughout Delhi.
It appears that Iranians themselves found the absurdity of these religious rulings funny, and the writer is Iranian. But how dare they mock their Ayatollah tyrants!
Posted by: Sam | Apr 25, 2012 12:54:42 AM
the "tripe" in question was the FP article. these q/a volumes are essentially habilitation dissertations by ayatollahs; mock them all you want but they're merely answering the questions put to them (sometimes mockingly!) to the best of their juridical ability. the interest in pulling these out of context in this case is to play on politically useful images of Islam, not on historical realities.
Posted by: ajay | Apr 25, 2012 4:04:47 PM
You can't make this up! This is happening now.
"Egypt’s National Council for Women (NCW) has appealed to the Islamist-dominated parliament not to approve two controversial laws on the minimum age of marriage and allowing a husband to have sex with his dead wife within six hours of her death according to a report in an Egyptian newspaper."
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/04/25/210198.html
Posted by: Sam | Apr 26, 2012 1:34:22 AM
Related: http://www.brownpundits.com/sometimes-men-like-women-like-the-chinese-like-pork/
(Razib Khan's response to the Mona Elthahawy article)
Posted by: omar | Apr 26, 2012 12:33:15 PM
Post a comment