Talk:Loudspeakers in mosques

Prod

I have improved article with content and references. It would be nice if the proposed user specifies the article needs to be kept. Pust aware2 (talk) 13:46, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm still not convinced it should be an independent article, but you've done a good job of showing relevance and notability. I'll honour the request to remove the prod tag. 98.248.33.198 (talk) 05:27, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for removal, I have yet to expand misuse section. It is indeed notable, it is opposed because extra loud noise is imposition of fundamentalists on their own moderate community. Pust aware2 (talk) 05:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Big issue

As a comment in one of the refs says:

"In an era when church bells are silenced on Sundays because of complaints, why the special exemptions for Muslims?"

That is, restrictions on religious utterances have been imposed before on religious institutions. I don't know enough of how things have worked out in different places. I 'think' one place judged whether the sounds were a public service. That is, if the church/mosque rang the hours, and also rang for a couple special circumstances, keeping the hours was public service. In that way, a muted call five times a day might be okay, but anything lengthy or "too loud" would serve only a limited group, not the community? Haranguing the community is harassing the community? Anyway, you might have to relate this instance of community vs. religious institution to the broader area of religious freedom vs. community responsibility? Shenme (talk) 11:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

I think it is not appropriate to discuss the topic here, instead this place is to discuss about the article. Pust aware2 (talk) 05:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

People tend to relate any questions about a noisy loudspeaker of a mosque, directly to very existence of islam. Any responsibile and educated citizen who has ability to judge can understand the point but there are very few such people in whole islamic community. A simple logic is that Islam is 1400 years old while it's been awhile when first loudspeaker was mounted on a mosque, roughly around 80 years. Before that call prayers were done successfully without any megaphone, why can't it be done now. We are looking forward to make society more civilized and disciplined and in a disciplined civil society loudspeakers are only used when it is very important to use. Prashantmudgal7 (talk) 21:42, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Really?

I couldn't believe Wikipedia had an article on "loudspeakers in mosques." Bizarre. This line gave me some chuckles though:

There is no Islamic religious requirement to use loudspeakers in the call to prayer, and loudspeakers are not mentioned in the Koran or any other Islamic text such as the Hadith.

Had to have been trolling. 108.172.143.182 (talk) 04:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

True, the use of loudspeakers is actually haram, according to the Koran it should just be a guy climbing up and shouting from the minaret. Shame how people do not follow the guidance any more. They will get their punishment for the abuse of loudspeakers in the next life I guess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.0.147.0 (talk) 07:50, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Restrictions in various Muslim majority countries

Suggest creating a section detailing loudspeaker limitations that have been put in place in various Muslim (majority) countries. The second paragraph already has links to Saudi and Egyptian measures. Indonesian V.P. Jusuf Kalla has also recently brought this to public attention: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2016/03/10/kalla-urges-mosques-tone-it-down.html Baba Bom (talk) 14:06, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Why doesnt this article say what the Koran says about committing noise pollution while praying. It is surely haram. This is a huge issue that causes major problems. this article should be expanded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.124.211.161 (talk) 11:28, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Proposed move

This article needs to be moved/renamed. It should rightly be entitled "Loudspeakers ON mosques," because in means inside while these are outside. A mosque's internal features would not even merit an article, only those which are external because of their effect on those outside the mosque, which is the impetus of the entire article. Thoughts? - JGabbard (talk) 02:01, 8 May 2021 (UTC)