posted
Hello guys, Now...we were talking about 2 hours for the following topic with my husband! "Is it allowed to a Muslim Men,to beat their wives?!"I mean ...is there a part,sura or whatever in the Coran,which states that to her husband,is not forbidden to beat his wife?? He say-impossible!That he must respect,lov and keep his wife,and etc.....But i am sure i readed before,in part from the Coran that:" If your wife do not follow her obligations,you must talk to her first,after this you separate from the bed..for few days ..and the last you can hit her too,but not on her face"(Excuse me that i dont say it by the correct way,i forgot where i readed this already!)But i`m sure that this is stated there! Can you please,1 who is very good with the Coran knowledge to give me exactly this part,including the page,surah..and everything so that i can show it for him!LOL He made me to do it,as he deny something like this,and im sure there IS! And as we made a bet,i want to prove him im not completely crazy,& i really readed this! Thanksss so much guys, i apprecite it! Didi
Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
004.034 YUSUFALI: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). PICKTHAL: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great. SHAKIR: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. ----------------------------------- I think this is it...
good luck...
by the way Mohamed (pbuh) never hit any of his wives...
and a wise man should know better than hitting his hubby..
posted
''by the way Mohamed (pbuh) never hit any of his wives...''
That's NOT true. In a hadith Aisha narrated one night Muhammad, left her home after he thought she is asleep. She secretly followed her and when he came back and saw she was panting, she inquired and made her confess by telling her if she concealed what she was doing the “Subtle and the Aware” [ghosts] would inform him. Aisha says that when I confessed that I had followed him, “He struck me on the chest which caused me pain,” [Muslim4.2127] http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/004.smt.html#004.2127Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The husband does not have to explain to anyone why he beats his wife. Book 11, Number 2142:
Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:
The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.
He went even as far as to say women should prostrate in front of their husbands:
”If I were to command anyone to make prostration before another I would command women to prostrate themselves before their husbands, because of the special right over them given to husbands by Allah.”
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
"And of His signs is that He created for you, of yourselves, spouses, that you may repose in them"
The Arabic text makes it clear that “for you” is masculine meaning the verse is addressing men and “them” is in feminine gender. (In fact Allah in the Quran never addresses women directly. He always speaks to the Prophet or the male believers. Women are always referred to in third person.) What this verse is conveying is that women are created FOR men and are for their enjoyment.
Razi in At-Tafsir al-Kabir, commenting on Q. 30:21wrote:
"His saying 'created for you' is a proof that women were created like animals and plants and other useful things, just as the Most High has said 'He created for you what is on earth' and that necessitates the woman not to be created for worship and carrying the Divine commands. We say creating the women is one of the graces bestowed upon us and charging them with Divine commands to complete the graces bestowed upon us, not that they are charged as we men are charged. For women are not charged with many commands as we are charged, because the woman is weak, silly, in one sense she is like a child, and no commands are laid upon a child, but for the grace of Allah upon us to be complete, women had to be charged so that they may fear the torment of punishment and so follow her husband, and keep away from what is forbidden, otherwise corruption would be rampant."
Hadi Sabzevari, an eminent Muslim scholar, in his commentary on another grand Muslim thinker, Sadr al-Mote'alihin wrote:
That Sadr ad-Deen Shirazi classifies women as animals is a delicate allusion to the fact that women, due to the deficiency in their intelligence and understanding of intricacies, and due to their fondness of the adornments of the world, are truly and justly among the mute animals [al-haywanti al-sa^mita]. They have the nature of beasts [ad-dawwa^b], but they have been given the disguise of human beings so that men would not be loath to talk to them and be compelled to have sexual intercourse with them. That is why our immaculate Law [shar'ina al-mutahhar] takes men's side and gives them superiority in most matters, including divorce, "nushuz," etc.
------------- These scholars did not make up these derogatory remarks about women on their own. They were interpreting the sayings of Muhammad whom to them was the best messenger of God and an example to follow. The reference to the inferiority of woman and their deficiency in intelligence and religion is abounding in the Hadith and the Quran.
In fact "naqisatan 'aqlan wa dinan" (deficient in intelligence and religion), an aphorism used among the Arabs, is an allusion to women and stems from the sayings of Muhammad.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
As if all these derogatory remarks about women were not enough, Muhammad even compared them to pudenda.
"Ali reported the Prophet saying: 'Women have ten ('awrat). When she gets married, the husband covers one, and when she dies the grave covers the ten."
What is awrah? ..The Encyclopedia of Islam defines 'awrah as pudendum, that is "the external genitals, especially of the female. [Latin pudendum (literally) a thing to be ashamed of]"
And according to the following Hadith, women not only have ten 'awrat, but the woman herself is perceived as 'awrah:
"The woman is 'awrah. When she goes outside (the house), the devil welcomes her."
As the following Hadith indicates women are discouraged from going outside the house, even to pray in the mosque.
"A woman is closest to God's face, if she is found in the core of her house. And the prayer of the woman in the house is better than her prayer in the mosque."
This is a far cry from the time when Arabs respected women as businesswomen (khadija), listened to them as leaders of thoughts (Asma bt. Marwan), received encouragements from them (Hind) and followed them as prophetesses. Gradually, as the new generations were indoctrinated by the teachings of Muhammad they became scornful of women and eventually Muslim women lost their rights along with their dignity.
Women Have Less Legal Rights
The “deficiency of women” in intelligence affects their legal rights as well.
Qur'an, 2:282 "And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witness as you approve of, that if one woman errs the other will remind her."
In other words not only a woman alone cannot witness against a criminal, if there is no male witness the testimonies of any number of women without the testimony of a man are worthless. This means that if a woman is raped and she cannot produce any male witnesses, (which is logically almost always the case) she cannot witness against her assailant. However, her testimony can be regarded as confession of fornication and can be used against her. Also if the victim of rape becomes pregnant, that is evidence of the adultery and she could be charged and punished with death by stoning. The jury can recall the famous case of Amina Lawal who was sentenced by the Islamic courts of Nigeria to be stoned as soon as her infant was weaned. The father of the child could not be charged with adultery because her testimony was not enough. This case came to the attention of the public, but thousands of such cases have happened and continue to happen without ever anyone hearing of them.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Status of Woman in Islamic Law "The Islamic extremists are imposing the infallibility of the basic Quranic text on interpretations of the text. In effect a human interpretation is being made infallible." English Translation of the Lecture held by Dr. Jur., Ph.D. Christina Jones on June 14th, 1998 in Göttingen, Germany.
Deutsche Fassung
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP
Preface
My lecture has four parts: The first part deals with jurisprudential questions. In the second I compare the position of the woman in the three monotheistic religions. Then I discuss certain aspects of the position of woman in Tunisian and Egyptian Islamic family law. Finally in the fourth part I illustrate various points with two court decisions from Tunisia. What I hope comes across is the complexity of the position of woman in Islamic law.
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP Part I - Jurisprudential questions
From the start I want to make clear that I speak not as an historian, or a linguist, or a philosopher or theologian, rather as a sociological jurist and lawyer, with practical and academic experience. This means that I regard Islamic law as I would any other legal system. A legal approach involves the following: It accords first of all primacy to the word of the text. The text serves as what is commonly called the source of the law that is pronounced in the form of a legislature enacted law or a judgment. If as in many Islamicized countries the legislated law -- including the constitution -- has in its text a further reference to the Quranic text, then the Quran is also made part of the legal text which constitutes the basic tool of the lawyer and jurist.
The emphasis on the text serves one function. This is to detract from the personality of the person pronouncing a judgment as the source of the law. Hence, when in reality, however, different personalities -- whether as academic jurists or as judges, as a university sheikh ul islam or government appointed mufti as in the case of Egypt -- pronounce different interpretations of the same text, then there is the possibility that the personality becomes the source of the law, and the text becomes secondary. This of course worries jurists because this can undermine the primacy of the text as the source of law. It is believed to be important to keep the primacy of the text to serve what is thought to be one of the functions of law, which is to avoid arbitrariness.
This concern is of equal importance in our European legal systems as in contemporary Islamic legal systems. So if there arises different interpretations of the text, jurists start searching for the source of this difference in the hope of eliminating it and thus eliminating the danger of arbitrariness. The difference they might find lies in the text itself. It is simply unclear, for example. The difference might in fact lie in the personality of the legislators or the judges. If the text is at fault, it will be changed. If the person is at fault, then the legislator or the judge will be substituted. At this point we see a divergence between the Islamic legal approach and the so-called secular Euro-approach. While the Islamic legislature can change the text of the legislated law, and this occurs in fact, such as amendments to family law codes in Tunisia, Egypt, Pakistan, etc., it cannot change the Quranic text which are named in the legislated law as supplementary text sources.
From a legal point of view this is not really a very serious problem. This is because no text that serves as a source of law is regarded by jurists as a self-contained text in itself. That is to say, that each text contains references in it to something else outside it. The reader of the text has to go outside the text to other sources of information in order to understand what the text means. These other sources are primarily what we call sociological norms or phenomena, public morality and the general sense of what constitutes fairness. For example, when the German constitution refers to the protection of marriage, the courts have used the religious Christian norms to understand the phenomenon of marriage that exists outside the text. Marriage is a union rooted in the Christian norm of monogamy, although the word monogamy is not mentioned in the Constitution. Another example from British jurisprudence: As 7 sailors shipwrecked at sea and found themselves in a few days without provisions, they murdered one of their fellow sailors and ate him in order to stay alive. When rescued they were prosecuted for murder. The British courts found the sailors guilty. The reason was that this was morally so outrageous that it warranted punishment, even though the penal law regulating murder and self-defence had no reference to moral outrage.
Or when we examine the Quranic text regulating polygamy, we see that there is reference to a psychological phenomenon, namely, just treatment in relation to the ability of the man to act equally to all his four wives. On the basis of this reference to the psychology of husband/wife relationships, the Tunisian executive Bourguiba convinced the legislature to abolish polygamy. This has also served in other countries such as Egypt to justify a law whereby the husband is obliged by what is known as Jehan Sedat's reformist law to at least inform each of his wives that they have co-wives. Other contemporary jurists have emphasized the references in the same Quranic text to demographic phenomena, namely, if there are too many women because of war, for example, then men being in the minority should take on extra responsibility by marrying more than one wife, just as this was proposed by a Protestant pastor after the war here in Germany. This demographic reference in the Quran, as some contemporary jurists point out, can also be taken to imply that if there comes a time when there is a surplus of men, then the woman will have to care for more than one man. But if most of the time the demographics are balanced by and large equally between men and women, then polygamy does not have to be permitted. On this basis most Islamic countries where the demographics allow it could follow the example of Tunisia by suspending the man's right to polygamy until such time that the demographic conditions require otherwise. At this point I repeat, the above cited examples are given to show that the fact the Quranic text as a source of law - even when found to be a source of difference of opinion -- cannot be changed does not pose a legal problem per se.
Now to return to our point above, that when the source of the difference in opinion lies not in the text itself, but in the personality of the legislator or judge interpreting the text, then the person has to be removed and replaced by those who will conform to one authoritative interpretation of the text. Certainly this is a phenomenon that happens in any legal system. In the USA as in Germany, when there is a change of government and there is a vacancy in the constitutional court, the person selected will reflect the politics of the new government. In the contemporary Islamic world, I observe that the Islamic extremists are overemphasizing the difference in personality as the source of difference understandings of the unchangeable Quranic text even though it is said that they rest solidly on the foundation of the Quranic text.
A good example of this overemphasis on the personality of the judge can be found in Egypt. A few years ago judges under pressure from the Islamic extremists to prove their Muslim identity and faith were issuing criminal judgments ordering the cutting off of the hand of a theft on the basis of the Quranic text alone. They ignored the legislated penal law texts until the Egyptian government reprimanded them and brought them under control just as they are trying to contain the extremists. This, from a legal point of view that upholds the primacy of the text and the references to phenomena outside the text that are necessary to undertake the hermeneutics of the legal text, is particularly disturbing.
The Islamic extremists are imposing the infallibility of the basic Quranic text on interpretations of the text. In effect a human interpretation is being made infallible. This can be taken as a blasphemy. Only God's Word is infallible, not a human interpretation of it, as Ibn Malik, the founder the Maliki school of law prevalent in North Africa, unsuccessfully tried to make clear to the political ruler at the time. This emphasis on the infallibility of the human interpretation is also undermining the uniqueness of the Islamic identity , which the extremists believe they are stressing. They could be said to be emulating the notion of infallibility propagated by the European Roman Catholic Pope.
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP
Part II - The position of woman in the three monotheistic religions
Against this background on defining a legal approach as emphasis on the primacy of the text, I wish now to show how the woman has been treated in basic legal texts in the contexts of Islamic and Euro-Christian law. From the start of its very appearance the Quranic text has referred explicitly to women and men. While the fourth sura, al Nisa', is a special tribute to the existence of the particular rights and obligations of women, this explicit textual reference to women was not revolutionary. The preceding Judaic Mishnaic interpretations of the Old Testament text have very explicit references to a woman or a man, such as a woman having to undergo an ordeal to prove herself innocent of her husband's suspicions of adultery, so that she could claim compensation from her husband if he, driven by jealousy, had unreasonable suspicions of her adultery. A woman as well as a man could vow not to touch strong drink and never to cut their hair (Numbers). This is in contrast to the New Testament texts after Jesus' death, which are written more in the spirit of erasing separate sexual identities, e.g. „There is neither slave nor free, female nor male in Christ“ (Galatians).
This process of erasure was further enforced by the rise of the religious culture of celibacy that emphasized placing power and authority in priestly men who subsumed an asexual character, which in turn subsumed woman into man. Over time in Christianized Europe the lost identity of the woman came to be reflected also in the legal texts. For example, in British statutes, the married woman had no property rights of her own. Her property became that of her husband. This was thought to be compatible with the biblical text whereby man and woman joined together become one, and the one was the man.
By the time of the French Revolution's The Declaration of the Rights of Man, woman was excluded. She did not exist for purposes of the new human rights text. For this reason those contemporary Islamic jurists who are proud to point out the progressiveness of Islamic law vís à vís European law emphasize that the Quranic text and the juristic interpretations gave Muslim women in principle economic independence much earlier than the European legal systems by allowing her to own her property in her own name. Now that the European legal texts have caught up with the Islamic law on this point, there are now the issues of equality between men and women. The present legal endorsement of equality is a logical result of the French and American Revolution's abolition of discrimination on the basis of social and economic status. The prohibition of discrimination has been extended to the sexual and attempts to abolish it.
The law has not completely accepted this approach, especially in certain areas of family law. For example, the British and German legal systems accept a marriage in which the man and woman can agree to inequality, i.e. one can choose as an adult perfectly capable of earning one's own living, to be economically dependent on the other, the so-called housewife or househusband marriage. In such a case the law provides for a separation of the types of duties of each partner. Both are not under an equal obligation to make monetary contributions to the maintenance of the family. One makes a contribution in kind, that is, cooking, cleaning, rearing the children. The other makes a contribution in terms of money.
Although the law text does not explicitly attribute one kind of contribution to one sex, the legislative debate of the legal text shows that a deliberate choice was made not to require each partner to make the same kind of contribution in equal measure because the sociological norm for women had to be preserved. Sociologically it is mainly the woman who makes her contribution to the maintenance of the family in kind. This has further consequences for the woman on the larger job market. She is not taken seriously as a "homemaker" since she is not regarded as the main breadwinner. Indeed public morality tends to regard a double earner family with some disapproval.
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP
Part III - Position of woman in Tunisia and Egypt
The Islamic law takes a somewhat different approach. The Quranic text explicitly separates the duties along sexual lines. The man is to give the woman a gift, categorized by the jurists as a dower, mahr. The mahr is in my opinion the basis of the entire Islamic family law. Once it is accepted by the woman, it is a sign of conclusion of the marriage contract. It gives her a property right in her own capital. If the actual payment is not deferred, she may use it any way she wishes, and if she uses it for making her own business, she may keep the profits for herself. She is not obliged to contribute to maintain the family. If of a certain social status, her husband is obliged to pay for a servant to help her. If the payment of the mahr is deferred, and the husband dies, the mahr is treated as a debt on the entire estate, so that if large enough it could eat up the estate and no one of the other heirs, including the children, could in principle inherit anything. The man by contrast is obliged to pay the woman the mahr, make a monetary contribution to the maintenance of the family. He is awarded for these one-sided obligations a double inheritance share -- assuming a dower has not eaten it up. The man as son or as surviving widower inherits twice that of the daughter or the surviving widow.
This edifice in which the rights and duties of the woman are distinguished from those of the man is not unshakable according to the Quranic text. The text provides not only that the husband is to make a gift to the wife, but that the wife may remit it if she wishes. It is referring to a situation that the wife may herself create. This implies that such a situation could in principle change the chain of complementary duties and rights based on sex. If she returns the dower to the man so that he may add it to his monetary contributions to the maintenance of the family, then she has chosen to place herself on an equal par with her husband, and so it could be argued that she has obliged herself to help maintain the family and is then entitled to an equal inheritance share.
Recent changes in the text of the family code in Tunisia are pointing in this direction. Previously the woman was not obliged to contribute monetarily to the maintenance of the family. Now with the reforms she is so obliged. The sociological reasons for this change were the protests of the men. They were fed up with the discrimination against them. They felt as inflation increases and salaries decrease that the demands of the working wife for new dresses and new shoes out of her husband's salary instead of her own were unfair. The slogan was that the Tunisian woman has not only equal rights with the man but also equal responsibilities in monetary terms. The resulting reforms of the law combined with the opinion of public morality that the mahr should be limited to a symbolic value have now fueled a debate on whether such a change in the obligations of the woman requires an interpretation of the inheritance laws that would conform to the situation foreseen in the Quranic text of a woman foregoing a high mahr.
By way of contrast in Egypt, especially in Upper Egypt, the mahr is commonly given. It is of market value, more than symbolic value. It consists of gold, especially jewelry. But the juridical importance of it to the woman in terms of her right to control it is lost on her. For her what is to be emphasized in the Quranic text on making and receiving a gift or remitting a gift is the reference in the text to the act outside the text of receiving, especially the subjective feelings of the receiver. What has become important to the woman since the availability of money from migrants' jobs in the Gulf and Libya are the personal bridal gifts, namely lingerie, glass goblets, stainless steel trays. The possession of these goods is symbolic of the onset of womanhood and independence that permits ownership of luxury goods. This dimension of marriage is relevant only to a completely feminine world. The trousseau embodies possessions which the woman can claim solely for herself. Her family and her husband may not take them away.
Gold jewelry is different. It is not as personal as china and clothes. Gold becomes family property in times of crisis -- to buy land for the husband, to finance the husband's trip to Saudia Arabia, to buy a water buffalo, to pay for unexpected medical expenses. Some women are known to refuse to part with the mahr of gold -- they are labeled those who refused to sell their gold. With the recent deregulation of land in Egpyt the pressure on women will grow to remit their gold. The deregulation will so increase land rents that men are exhausting all means to buy a small plot, only a fraction of the rented lands they now farm. Thus, the woman's remittance of her gift of gold to her husband as her contribution to the family maintenance is, juridically seen, voluntary. Because of its individual voluntary nature, the act of remittance in Egypt could mean that the family then is free to agree not to apply the strict inheritance rules and perhaps allow in individual cases the woman to receive a larger inheritance share recognizing her assuming an obligation that is ascribed normally exclusively to the husband.
The security of the Upper Egyptian woman thus lies elsewhere, not in her mahr. It lies rather in endogamous marriage within the family. A woman marries preferably her cousin. There is little security for a woman who marries a stranger. Only marriage within the family assures her fair treatment. The only way to secure relief from an abusive husband who is a stranger is through the court, but the woman tends to be reluctant to wash dirty linen in public with a stranger. When the husband is a stranger the fathers and kin of the woman do not rescue the woman; they feel they have no leverage with the stranger's family.
In Tunisia in this respect the situation differs. The Tunisian father's affection for his daughter is proverbial according to sociological and anthropological studies, regardless of whether she is married to a stranger or not. He gives more support to his daughter than his wife in terms of helping her find work whether she is married or divorced. Women do not have difficulties using the courts. They know they have the support of their families, and use of the courts is further reinforced in Tunisia, unlike in Egypt, with a legislated text that requires parties to register births -- which is important for school registration -- and marriages and gives to the court exclusive privilege to decide on divorce and custody. This different attitude -- different from Egypt -- towards the use of courts to get one's rights under a liberal legislature favouring women is rooted in the history of bureaucracy in Tunisia. Since Ottoman times Tunisia has enjoyed a well organized bureacracy which the French Protectorate allowed to further develop, unlike in Algeria or the British in Egypt. The Tunisian executive and legislature can guarantee a less restrictive interpretation of Islamic law regarding women -- such as abolishing polygamy -- because they know they can rely on the courts, the state prosecutors, and the juridical bureaucracy to uphold the legal text more or less (less in respect to the highest court because it is possessed by an older generation that tends to be restrictive in interpreting the legal text) and to have the judgment enforced as intended by the legislature and executive. A woman who knows that she too can rely on a liberal Islamic legal text and executive of the judgment is more likely not to resist the state obliging her to use courts, unlike her sister, for example, in Egypt.
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP
Part IV - Cases from Tunisia
I have used the Tunisian and Egyptian examples to illustrate how the contemporary social and bureaucratic context affects the Islamic family law regarding women in different ways -- even though the basic Quranic text remains the same for both countries. Tunisia is a model of more liberal interpretations of the Islamic legal texts, while Egypt has more restrictive interpretations. Yet the Tunisian model, guaranteeing equal rights between women and men, has a uniformizing effect that can have unexpected consequences.
I illustrate the last point I want to make with two cases from the mid-90s from Tunisia. They have to do with women who had not entered into the marriage contract. In one case the woman had lived several years together with the man and had three children from him who at birth were registered as the children of the man. He had recognized them as his. The state prosecutor issued against them both a complaint on the basis of anonymous information that the woman and man were living together without having registered their union as a marriage. The Tunisian family code requires registration of marriage -- the state replaces the traditional two witnesses. The registration is also needed to uphold the prohibition on polygamy. The code penalizes anyone who enters into a union with an intent to marry and who does not register it.
The evidence given in court revealed that the woman was working as a prostitute. The court found for that reason that she was not under the authority of the man, meaning that he did not have exclusive conjugal rights over her, and that she accordingly could have no intent to marry. Only the man had the intent to marry. Yet they both intended that their children be treated as children of a marriage. There was no mention of whether the woman has an equal right to have authority over the sexual relations of her male partner. The family code's requirement of registration of a union as marriage was directed originally towards parties who intend to marry and marry under traditional circumstances but do not register the marriage. The court in the case at hand extended the scope of the penal provision of the family code to cover those who live together where it is difficult to determine if there be a mutual intent to marry.
In the second case I want to discuss the woman and man again were living together. They were trading partners, trading in animals (which is not clear). The man then used their common business profits to buy a plot of land. The woman thought that both would co-own the land. The man resold it and took all sale proceeds for himself. The woman sued for her share. She was in turn prosecuted the man for not registering her living together as marriage. The lower court ordered a fine from both the woman and the man. But it allowed the woman to get her share of the sale proceeds. The Ministry of Justice raised objection -- she should as a woman who was penalized for entering into an illegal "marriage" not benefit in regard to the land.
The results of these two cases would have been different in Iran. The woman would have had the chance to bring evidence of a temporary marriage contract. The customary mahr would have been fixed by the court and prosecution thus avoided. The temporary marriage contract is the means by which living together and marriage can be treated equally -- which is even more liberal than here in Germany. The point I want to make here is that while the Tunisian state is supporting the women's rights movement in family law it has introduced a uniformized system that does not have the flexibility for women who wish for whatever reasons to live together with the man they love. The traditional system such as in Iran -- while not as liberal as Tunisia -- offers this flexibility for women.
Preface --- Part I --- Part II --- Part III --- Part IV --- Conclusion / TOP
Conclusion
In conclusion I would like to leave you with the following proposition: It is possible to use Islamic law in the interests of women's rights. It is possible to combine the very best for women from all of the interpretations of the Quranic text. The decision to do this is political. We lawyers are not political scientists. But we can open new directions for political decisions
posted
Claiming Our Rights: A Manual for Women's Human Rights Education in Muslim Societies "The spirit of Islam is egalitarian. We can have a life of civility, of plurality, that is respectful of the religion and draws on it." Barbara Crossette reports on an "Islam-based and not threatening" manual on women's rights.
For several years, an informal group of Muslim women from around the world has met to spur discussion among Muslims everywhere about the rights of women. Now, with the shadow of a repressive Islamic regime in Afghanistan hovering over the debate, the group has produced a manual on the rights of women under Islam.
Intended to be adaptable to a wide range of cultures at the grass-roots level, the new publication, "Claiming Our Rights: A Manual for Women's Human Rights Education in Muslim Societies," will be tested over the next year in five very different countries: Bangladesh, Jordan, Lebanon, Malaysia and Uzbekistan.
The plan is to assemble discussion groups to exchange ideas on the subject. There has already been a quiet trial run among a group of university women in Iran.
"There is a great change in self-awareness among women in Muslim societies," said Mahnaz Afkhami, executive director of the Sisterhood Is Global Institute, a private organization based in Bethesda, Md.
Ms. Afkhami directed the effort on the manual, which the institute produced with the help of the National Endowment for Democracy and the Ford Foundation.
Sometimes at great risk to themselves, women are making gains, though frequently small and fragile. But developments like the introduction of more egalitarian family laws in North Africa often go unnoticed, Ms. Afkhami said, because militants and fundamentalists dominate contemporary images of Islam.
"This very sound-bite-friendly Islamicist movement doesn't allow the other side to be heard," she said in an interview. "But women are often the center of debate, even in Iran."
Ms. Afkhami, who was minister for women's affairs in the government of the last Shah of Iran, Mohammed Riza Pahlevi, has strong critics among Islamic women because of that. And she is aware that promoting women's rights from a base outside the Muslim world attracts the criticism that the campaign is Western and alien.
"We are not confrontational," she said. "Our manual is Islam-based and not threatening. Our hope is that we can get people to engage in dialogue."
The manual on women's rights in Islam -- which is being published in Arabic, Bengali, Malay, Persian and Uzbek as well as English -- contains instructions for conducting grass-roots discussions. It also includes sometimes provocative passages from the Koran -- like those about a husband's punishment of an "ill-behaved" wife -- and the Hadith, the often-disputed collection of teachings of the Prophet Mohammed as recorded by religious leaders centuries later.
Juxtaposed are texts of major international agreements on human rights, particularly women's rights, which many Muslim nations have signed.
The book briefly profiles four women it calls "the first heroines of Islam": two wives of Mohammed; his daughter Fatima, and Zainab, the sister of a Shiite leader who went into battle and successfully pleaded with a victorious enemy to spare her brother's life in defeat.
There is also a sampling of Arab proverbs about women, a bibliography, and the names, addresses and telephone and fax numbers of women's rights groups throughout the Islamic world.
Women who contributed to the manual brought a range of experiences to bear, Ms. Afkhami said. In Bangladesh, where grass-roots women's groups are strong and women are well represented in politics, there is an interest in more sophisticated political training at the local level.
In Uzbekistan, women are concerned that the process of sloughing off the Soviet system could allow the adoption of a fundamentalist order in the name of Uzbek nationalism, with the consequent loss of the considerable rights Muslim women enjoyed under communism.
In Malaysia, where the equality of women has been fostered by the government, several women's organizations are engaged in scholarly revision of traditional Muslim laws and practices to make them more relevant to the times. Islamic militancy has been largely marginalized.
"Give women rights, let them participate -- that's the lesson of Malaysia," Ms. Afkhami said. "The spirit of our religion is egalitarian. We can have a life of civility, of plurality, that is respectful of the religion and draws on it."
This article originally appeared in the New York Times, December 29, 1996
posted
Women's Rights and Equality in Islam By American convert to Islam, Yahya M. At the beginning Islam was the most revolutionary liberalization of women's rights the civilized world has ever seen. But afterwards Muslims became ignorant of this and now Muslim countries are the scene of some of the worst abuses of women's rights. As the Latin proverb says, "Corruptio optimi pessima" (When the best is corrupted, it becomes the worst). The Qur’ân expresses the same theme in Sûrat al-Tîn: "We created man in the best pattern, and later reduced him to the lowest of the low."
Think of the possibilities for liberalization based on purely Islamic sources, not taking anything from the modern West. That would be truly Islamic feminism. The origin of Islam is far more liberal and feminist than what subsequent generations made of it. Women's rights were established by the Qur’ân and the Prophet (peace be upon him), who after all loved women; we need to filter out the spurious anti-woman hadiths that were added later. Although the term feminism has developed a somewhat poisonous connotation in today's discourse, it really just means the promotion of women's God-given rights and liberties, which is to the good of everyone.
We humans are essentially spiritual souls, and true liberation would begin from that identity. It's a shame that so often in the profane modern world, which only believes in quantity, all relationships are reduced to a zero-sum game of power. If feminism becomes nothing more than a power grab—men hold power over women, so now it's women's turn to seize the power and use it against men in turn—then no one advances any further toward higher enlightenment; the contest stays on the same horizontal level, the same problems recur in new guise with no resolution.
Men may fear or distrust "feminism" if they think it means nothing more than women gaining control over them. But genuine women's liberation would be liberating for all people, men and women alike. Not an issue of who wields power over whom, but transcending that whole issue of power, lifting our consciousness to a higher plane. A woman who is truly liberated would not be stuck in that old power struggle; she would not seek to control men any more than she would accept being controlled by men. Rather, both men and women would rejoice at being freed to relate to one another as loving, spiritual beings. This is real, and most of all the Sufis have actualized it. This is what the Prophet (peace be upon him) brought, if only that original liberating spirit could be released from under the dead weight of centuries of cultural repression like "purdah", which came not from Islam, but from the concubinage of the ancient Greeks and Romans, where women had no rights and were property owned by their fathers, husbands, and slave masters, so it is nothing but jâhilîyah pretending to be Islam, while Islam established the independent, equal status of women for the first time in civilization.
No More Denial. I have noticed in forums over and over that if Muslims call attention to systemic injustice against women in Muslim countries, they are likely to get attacked and accused of supporting kufr against Islam. This reminds me of the divisive Vietnam War days when if anyone criticized the U.S. government for atrocities in Vietnam, the superpatriots would accuse them of supporting the Commies. It is sad that much of what passes for "Islam" these days is nothing more than mindless jingo flag-waving with no attention to the actual content of what Islam requires of us.
inna Allâha ya’muru bi-al-‘adli wa-al-ihsân "Allah commands justice and the doing of good."
If some of us protest injustice that is being done in the name of Islam, that is because we love Islam and hate to see its good name being misused as a cover for oppression that is completely contrary to the spirit of Islam. Muslims have to clean up their own act, and insisting on denial of a problem is no service to the ummah. The injustice against women perpetrated by the system of power is very real. Willful blindness to the problem is no excuse for going along with it. If you really care about the essence of Islam, you need to establish justice. The injustice against women in Muslim countries is terrible, and there has been more than enough pious preaching about how Islam is great for women (in an ideal world), and not enough correcting of injustice on the ground. The evil comes from the system that keeps people locked in roles that stunt their growth, the system that unjustly penalizes women who would exercise their rights. As long as it isn't happening to someone you know, it's easy to stay complacent and acquiesce with the conventional system, overlooking its injustice. There has been more than enough (merely verbal) assertion that Islam is good for women. Indeed, true Islam would be good for women, if it were ever implemented properly! There has to be an end to the denial and more attention to the very real injustices that Muslim women are suffering right now. Why are girls left uneducated? What about access to medical treatment? Why are rape victims in Pakistan jailed or murdered while rapists go free? Why do those vicious thugs, the Taliban, think they can get away with beating and confining women? The situation is compounded by the pretense that "Islam" can somehow be the justification for harming women. That is nothing but a slander against the good name of Islam.
Why focus on the rights of Muslim women only? This question sometimes comes up when discussing Muslim women's issues. The reason women's rights in Islam need special concern is because women in Muslim countries are made to suffer disproportionately by the system. What adds insult to injury is the way they try to justify their oppression of women by calling it "Islam." How could it be, when true Islam requires us to honor women? We have to make women's rights a top priority if the society as a whole is ever going to be healed. As Malcolm X said, the fate of a nation depends on how it treats it women. I am careful to emphasize that truly Islamic feminism wouldn't make the error of the modern world by treating human beings as quantities; we are spiritual beings above all. In Islam men and women equally submit to God and both are equally ennobled by the faith. Next, redressing injustice is a divine command: inna Allâha ya’muru bi-al-‘adli wa-al-ihsân.... (Allah commands justice and the doing of good.) When you look to the Qur’ân and the mercifulness of the Messenger, peace be upon him, you can see this beautiful vision of how life could be if selfishness weren't governing human dealings as it does. I am saying that Muslims should make sure to be good to women first of all, since they have been wronged the most. The systemic crimes against women have now increased drastically under those woman-beating Taliban hoodlums. The pain is even more acute right now.
This is in the spirit of the Prophet's answer to the Sahâbî asking who was most deserving of good treatment and honor: 1) Your mother; 2) your mother; 3) your mother; 4) your father.
* * * A vignette from my Hajj diary. Miná, 11 Dhî al-Hijjah 1416/April 29, 1996. At the washing faucets at the end of the lavatory building, I have heard some men trying to drive away the women who were using the faucets for wudû’ and washing clothes. There are five faucets, and the men had been using the two or three on the right, the women the one or two on the left, according to their allotted sides of the lavatory building; the one in between was used by either, depending on the traffic of the moment. Some of the men decided that they would take over all five faucets, so they said things like "Hâjjah! Harâm!" Both times I saw this, I said out loud, "Lâ ba’s, lil-akhawât huqûquhunna." The sisters went and lined up alongside the building, waiting for their oppressors to go. When I would come back later, they would be using the left side faucets again. The unfair mentality of these brothers is not Islam. People use the word "harâm"much too freely. It should be limited to its technical meaning as defined in Islamic law.
posted
Denying women access to the ‘Main Space’ - A Betrayal of the Prophet (pbuh) Presented to the Jamaat Khanna Committee of the University of the Witwatersrand - 1995. Shamima was a 'community member' of the committee which was negotiating with the university administration for a new Mosque complex and participating in decisions regarding the design of the complex. She argued for women to be accommodated in the 'main space' of the mosque.
An ‘Ignorance’ that's frightening
I was prompted to put together these few thoughts after a meeting with a group of architects (who are also popular mosque designers in South Africa) and students who presented their proposals for the WITS mosque. The architects expressed their certainty as to where a woman may be located in a mosque, saying that any other accommodation was bid'ah (innovation). A young student presenting his design said women and men reading alongside was unacceptable; they had to be completely separated (he said that women should be accommodated in a gallery). His other assumption was that men at WITS could not control their libidos.
It was their certainty that their beliefs and perspectives were actually the Prophetic tradition and that anything else was bid'ah, that I found frightening. I was in no doubt about the sincerity and love these men have for the Prophet (pbuh). It is because of this and my own love for Islam and the Prophet (pbuh) that I feel the need to inform them about what I've come to learn about women and the space they occupied in the Prophet's mosque.
Women's Space in the Prophet's Mosque
Women occupied the back rows of the Prophet's mosque; where they could be seen and heard by the rest of the congregation. (Remember that the Prophet's mosque was fairly small.)
Ibn Abaas (ra) said: "Once the Prophet came out (for the 'Id prayers) as if I were just observing him waving to the people to sit down. He then, accompanied by Bilal, came crossing the rows till he reached the women. He recited verse 12 of chapter 60 to them and asked: 'O ladies, are you fulfilling your covenant?' None except one woman said 'Yes'. The Prophet then said: 'Then give sadaqah.' Bilal (ra) then spread his garment and said 'Keep on giving alms'. 1
Access to the Imam
Direct contact between the Prophet, as the imam who led the prayers, and those who attended the prayers seems to have been an important element in the Friday khutba:
". . . On Friday he (the Prophet) preached the khutba leaning on a staff. . .. And the people were in front of him, their faces raised toward him, they listened as they watched him. . . ."²
The idea that the mosque is a privileged place, the collective space where the leader debates with all the members of the community before making decisions, is the key idea of Islam which today is presented to us as the bastion of despotism. Everything passed through the mosque which became the school for teaching new converts how to do the ritual prayer, the principles of lslam, how to behave towards others in places of worship and elsewhere. Was it fitting to come armed or not? Could one do buying and selling there (the Prophet and his Makkan supporters were originally merchants)? Could one keep prisoners of war in the mosque courtyard (to keep better watch on them) or not?³
The mosque was a space where dialogue between the leader and the people could take place. The apparently simple decision to install a mimbar in the mosque was treated by the Prophet as a matter that concerned all Muslims:
The Prophet used to say the Friday prayers standing, leaning against a palm trunk. One day he announced that standing made him tired. Tamim al-Dari answered: 'Why not build a pulpit like I have seen in Syria?' The Prophet asked their advice on the question, and they agreed to the suggestion.(4)
A Madinah carpenter cut a tree and built a pulpit with a seat and two steps up to it.
Other versions say that the Prophet was urged to take his place on the mimbar at the time of prayer so that he could be seen by everybody, because in a few months the number of Muslims had grown considerably, and this seemed a more plausible reason than fatigue. The Prophet was only 54 years old at the time of the Hijra and was in the prime of life.
From access to denial of access
In the Kitab al-Jum'a (Book of Friday) of Imam Bhukhari (d. 256H),(5) who wrote two centuries after the death of the Prophet (pbuh), he quotes the hadith:
"Do not forbid the mosques of Allah to the women of Allah."
A half-century later (300H), Imam Nasa'i, wrote his al-Sunan. In his chapter on al-masjid, he gives specifications for the rows between men and women: how crowded they may be and how far from each other.
He states that a man has no right to forbid his wife to go to the mosque. He quotes the Prophet:
"When a woman asks authorisation from one of you to go to the mosque, let him grant it to her."(6)
Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597H), wrote a book on the laws that govern women in Islam and devoted his chapter 24 to 'Women's Friday Service'. He had to acknowledge that they had a right to the service since the hadith on the subject was incontrovertible. However he raises four issues:
On the question of rows he said 'the prayers of men who are seated behind women are worthless.'(7) It often happened that men came to the mosque late and were blocked by the rows of women. It is very easy to imagine the fatal next step: ban women from the mosque, since the mere presence of women risked creating a problem.
Ibn al-Jawzi than asks a question which in itself contains a betrayal of the ancient texts: 'Is it permitted for women to go to the mosque?' And his answer: 'If she fears disturbing men's minds, it is better for her to pray at home.'(8)
He cites Bukhari's key hadith in which the Prophet stresses that the mosques of Allah are not forbidden to women. He concludes by saying that 'the Friday service is not a duty for women'.(9) And, 'A woman should try to avoid going out as much as she can.'(10)
But it is in reading modern authors like Muhammad Sadiq al-Qannuji, the twentieth-century Indian scholar (d. 1308H), that one notes the institutionalisation of the exclusion of women from such a crucial place as a mosque. In his chapter on "What has been said on the fact that the Friday sermon is not a duty for women", he brings out a dubious hadith which says: "The Friday service is a duty for all Muslims, with four exceptions: slaves, women, children, and the ill."(11)
We are certainly a long way from the Prophet's mosque, open to all, welcoming all those interested in Islam, including women. The mosque now suffers a betrayal of Muhammad's (pbuh) ideal community: women are declared strangers to the place of worship. Women, who had the privilege of access to the mosque as sahabiyyaat, companions of the Prophet, very quickly became polluting, evil beings.
Sexual men and invisible women
The premise that women 'distract' men from their spiritual endeavours and that they stimulate sexual urges rests on a certain understanding of what it means to be human, and a certain understanding of what constitutes maleness and femaleness.
This argument operates from the premise that our focus of control, and our focus of self as human beings, as Muslims, is outside ourselves, and that men have weak inner centres since, upon seeing and listening to women, they are overcome by irresistible uncontrollable sexual urges. By such reasoning we imply that man are incapable of taking moral responsibility for their behaviour and relations.
The solution is to manipulate the external environment - women must be invisible - to keep men's responses in check. This raises important questions: What does this say about man's capacity to take full responsibility for his spirituality? On what understanding of humanity are these arguments based?
In order that we believing men and believing women, God-conscious men and God-conscious women, can reclaim our full humanity, reclaim our Islam, we need to revolutionise our categories of maleness and femaleness. We must reject the idea of uncontrollable male sexuality and evil women.
Allah says in the Qur'an:
"The Believers, men and women, are protectors one of another: they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil: they observe regular prayers, practice regular charity, and obey Allah and His apostle. On them will Allah pour His mercy: for Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise."(12)
Therapy for male 'sexuality'
For those men and women who view each other only as sexual beings, the mosque precinct - a holy precinct - can be therapeutic. On seeing women in the holy precinct, the depraved soul has to recognise that women are not just sexy beings but spiritual beings, members of the ummah, their sisters in faith. If women are invisible in this holy precinct his perception of women as just sexy beings will not be challenged and he will never be able to reclaim his full humanity, his Islam.
May Allah guide us and help us respect each other
___________________________
(1) Bukhari, vol. 2, no. 95
(2) Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, vol, l, p, 238
(3) One of the most fascinating descriptions of the Prophet's mosque is in Imam al-Nasa'i, Sunan, vol. l, pp. 31- 59
(4) Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, vol. l, p. 250
(5) Askalani, Fath al-bari, vol. 3, p. 34
(6) Imam Nasa'i, Sunan, vol. 2, p. 32
(7) Ibn al-Jawzi, Kitab ahkam al.nisa' eirut: Al-Makbba al-'Asriyya, 1980), p. 201.
(8) Ibid., p. 202.
(9) Ibid., p. 205.
(10) Ibid., p.209.
(11) Muhammad Sidiq Hasan Khan al-Qannuji, Husn al-uswa bima tabata minha allahi fi al -niswa (Beirut: Mu'assasa al.Risala, 1981) p. 345.
IMAGE OF MUSLIM WOMEN As a Muslim woman, I found myself thrown right into the controversy of women's role in today's society. Over and over I had to explain that what you see in a Hollywood movie about Islam has nothing to do with Islam. For years and years, the average western person has been subjected to one image of a Muslim woman: mysteriously veiled, heavily guarded, living in a harem with a brutal sex maniac for a husband. One can't really blame this person if he or she accepts this image as true especially if he or she never saw Muslim women in any other light.
So how can one start this preconceived image and get this person to see where a woman fits in a truly Muslim society? I can only try to highlight the status of women in the actual teachings of Islam as opposed to the practices of many so-called Muslim countries and the misrepresentation of Hollywood movies. Then, it would be up to the individual to pass a fair judgement on where women stand in a truly Muslim society.
MEN AND WOMEN ARE EQUAL Let us start right from the beginning, the creation of Adam and Eve as revealed by God in the Qur'an. Adam and Eve were forbidden to eat fruit from the tree but both were tempted by Satan to taste it. They both sinned and later regretted it. God repeatedly reprimanded them both. Thus, in no way was Eve and subsequently all women held responsible for the original sin nor was she considered as Satan's way to get to Adam and all his male descendants. That, to start with, breaks to pieces the general belief that women are the cause of men's sufferings on earth, that they are Satan's temptation, an evil to be avoided if at all possible. In Islam, men and women are created equal as human beings though obviously not identical. Throughout the Qur'an, it is repeated over and over that men and women are created as companions on earth to complement and comfort one another. They are both held accountable for their deeds, individually. Both are rewarded or punished equally for their deeds. Muslims have been spared the debate about whether a woman had a soul or whether she was a person or not. That was never questioned while it was a hot issue in western societies up to the 1930's when the Supreme Court of Canada passed a judgement that women really are persons! This was simply a fact asserted by a religion that was born in a society where burying newborn girls alive, out of shame, as common practice. Sons were a source of pride while girls brought along disgrace. Islam immediately prohibited such a brutal discrimination. It was spelled out clearly that one person, be it male or female, can be better than another by virtue of his or her piety alone, not sex, not origin.
ACTIVE PARTICIPATION However, Islam's regard for women is not simply giving her a chance to survive. Muslims, men and women, are told to seek knowledge and education wherever they find it and to use this knowledge to help fellow human beings. This is a duty about which they will be asked on Judgement Day. When the Prophet himself could not read or write, his wife Hafsa, taught others to read and write. History tells us about the immense contribution of women to the Islamic community. The first believer in the message of the Prophet Muhammad was a woman. She was his wife, Khadija, and his source of protection from the pagans of Mecca in the early years. The Prophet himself was later actually physically saved by a woman during one of the battles after having been isolated by the pagans. Later, after he died, many of his sayings and teachings were narrated by another woman, his second wife Aisha. These sayings are an essential part of Islamic teachings. So what does that say about how Islam views woman, to entrust her with these roles? The Muslim woman's active participation in community affairs was established from the earliest days. This includes the right to vote. She has always been a separate individual with a separate vote. She had to swear allegiance independently of her husband and father.
MARRIAGE AND DIVORCE Now what happened if this Muslim woman got married. For starters, she couldn't be married against her will, her consent was essential. If she did accept, she did not give up her family name for her husband's name. She did not have to be a staunch feminist or proclaim I am not a property to be passed on from father to husband. She simply was never expected to change her name. Important as that may be symbolically, it is even more important, on a practical level, that she was always considered a separate financial entity. When she married, her property remained her own and her husband had no access to it without her consent. She wasn't even required to share in the family's expenses even if she were a lot richer than the man. She was entitled to an explicit share of inheritance from family members. That share might be less than her male counterpart but that was only fair considering that her money was hers to keep while his money belongs to his whole family including his wife and any other women in his family who need financial support. All this was established more than 1400 years ago even before people in Europe realized it was unfair to shut daughters out of their father's inheritance or for the man to automatically acquire his wife's wealth upon her marriage.
If the marriage relationship fails and a divorce becomes the only option, a woman's rights are protected. A Muslim woman is entitled to maintain the right to divorce her husband if she specifies that right in the marriage contract. Otherwise, he retains that right. In any case, whoever has this right does not change the fact that divorce is considered a last resort, highly discouraged and to be used only if attempts for reconciliation by family members and even the judge have failed.
A MOTHER As a mother, she is held in the highest regard. We are told that our mothers are the most worthy of our care, love and companionship. Fathers come in a distant second. Because God knows his own creation, he knows that men would be tempted to abuse their physical strength when dealing with women. Repeatedly, throughout the Qur'an and in the Prophet's sayings, men are reminded of their responsibility to be kind and compassionate to women. That was again stressed by the Prophet in his last public address where he highlighted the essentials of Islam. Men are told that the best among you are the kindest to the women in their families. They are often reminded not to take advantage of the woman's relative physical weakness since they will eventually have to answer to an even stronger Being, God himself.
WOMEN'S DRESS All this seems to paint such a beautiful picture of women in Islam but what about the veil or, less romantic but more real, the Muslim dress code? Islam, as a whole, is described in the Qur'an as a religion of the centre balancing the needs and freedom of the individual with the good of the society. This is the general rule which also governs the relationship between men and women in society. They have the right to work and mix together as long as that right is not abused, hurting the society as a whole. This implies that the environment in which they see and talk to one another should be a clean respectable environment where sexual temptation is practically eliminated. Some westerners, and regrettably, some Muslims, take this to imply locking up the women or hiding them in veils. However, that contradicts the practices in the Prophet's life when women fought in battles, nursed the wounded, argued with the Caliph and even taught religion. The whole idea of modesty in dress is to ensure that both sides are not distracted by physical appearances. The dress code applies equally to men and women. Both should not look sexually inviting. That might not seem like too much fun, it certainly will not allow for Dallas-like episodes, but it would improve the chances for a better family-oriented society where men and women treat each other with mutual respect as human beings, rather than as sex objects. These are the general requirements for the Muslim dress code for men and women. How women actually dress in specific Muslim countries has a lot to do with the local culture and not just with Islam.
FACT OR FICTION: YOUR CHOICE One can't help but wonder, if Islam is so good for women, how come what we see in countries with Muslim majorities is utterly different? If it makes things any easier to understand, without, justifying them, the same applies to all other religions. I am sure Jesus would be appalled to see how his teachings have been twisted around for ages to the extent of promoting slavery or tolerating exploitation through turning the other cheek.
Muslims, like people of other beliefs have done a super job of twisting their religion to suit the needs of the more powerful in their society by generalizing specific rules on the one hand and limiting general rules on the other as they find convenient. Add this to innovations added onto the religion to suit the local cultures and you get something that may or may not represent the original. If on top of that you have a media that is either too ignorant or too hostile then the end product that reaches the average unbiased non-Muslim definitely has nothing to do with the real teachings of Islam. The only hope lies in people realizing that before one judges anything, one has to separate fact from fiction, opinions from actual happenings, etc. . . The true image of a true Muslim woman in a true Muslim society may not be as fascinating as what we see in the movies. However, if given a choice between this image and any other alternative available to date, I doubt it will be a hard choice.
quote:Originally posted by Tiger1225: II. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES
One major objective of this paper is to provide a fair evaluation of what Islam contributed (or failed to contribute) toward the restoration of woman's dignity and rights. In order to achieve this objective, it may be useful to review briefly how women were treated in general in previous civilizations and religions, especially those which preceded Islam (Pre-610 C.E.). Part of the information provided here, however, describes the status of woman as late as the nineteenth century, more than twelve centuries after Islam.
Womankind prior to Muhammad in Arabia and in virtually every other country that later fell under the domination of Islam, enjoyed more liberties and rights than in the society that he created. Muhammad not only did not give enough rights to women but that he took away their already earned rights and relegated them to second class citizens, dependant on men and at their service. He imposed gender slavery on women and lowered their status to that of chattels and animals. In no society and in no moment of history, women were as much vilified and belittled as they are in Islam. Islam is a misogynist religion par excellence.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fran: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Snoozin: [qb] Originally posted by Fran: Womankind prior to Muhammad in Arabia and in virtually every other country that later fell under the domination of Islam, enjoyed more liberties and rights than in the society that he created.
Proof, please.
Prior to Islam, in non-Arab countries, such as in Persia and Byzantine, women had more rights than in Arab countries. In fact in Iran women could become Queens and rulers of the country. What Muhammad thought of that?
‘When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, "Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler."’
Someone once asked me why then in some Islamic countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan there were women prime ministers? The answer is that many Muslims do not know their religion and unwittingly follow the customs of their pre Islamic “jaheliah” era. Jaheliah means ignorance and Muslims often ignorantly do things that are not Islamic. The Taliban, on the other hand, know the real Islam. The more a country is Islamic and the more the Sharia takes over, the more women lose their rights and privileges.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Women before Islam,,Let us start with Khadijah the first wife of Muhammad. This woman was a widow; she was wealthy and ran her own successful business. She employed men to work for her including Muhammad. This shows that women could own and manage businesses. And men of the Quraysh did not think it is degrading to have a woman as boss. As the hadith reports, it was Khadijah who proposed to Muhammad. This is yet another indication of the level of freedom reached by women in the pre-Islamic Arabia. In Islamic societies, even today, such a thing would be taboo.
The most glaring example of women’s lofty status before Islam is the fact that during the time of Muhammad a woman claimed to be a prophetess and gained many following. Today a Muslim woman cannot be even a cleric or an Imam. Amazingly Muslim women today are the first apologists of their low status and fully accept the denigration with which Islam has enshrouded them.
Here is a hadith where it shows that the close companion of Muhammad Umar b. Khattab who eventually became the 2nd Khalif, complains that the Muslim women are learning “the bad habits” of emancipation and independence from the women of Medina and that the Prophet should do something about it. This story took place when Muhammad had his fling with the Coptic girl Mariyah who was a maid of his wife Hafsa, had a fight with his wives because they complained and threatened to divorce them. He was sitting at home pouting when Umar paid him a visit. Umar later narrated:
“We, the people of Quraish, used to have authority over women, but when we came to live with the Ansar, [Muslims of Medina] we noticed that the Ansari women had the upper hand over their men, so our women started acquiring the habits of the Ansari women. Once I shouted at my wife and she paid me back in my coin and I disliked that she should answer me back. She said, 'Why do you take it ill that I retort upon you? By Allah, the wives of the Prophet retort upon him, and some of them may not speak with him for the whole day till night.' What she said scared me and I said to her, 'Whoever amongst them does so, will be a great loser.' Then I dressed myself and went to Hafsa and asked her, 'Does any of you keep Allah's Apostle angry all the day long till night?' She replied in the affirmative. I said, 'She is a ruined losing person (and will never have success)! Doesn't she fear that Allah may get angry for the anger of Allah's Apostle and thus she will be ruined? Don't ask Allah's Apostle too many things, and don't retort upon him in any case, and don't desert him. Demand from me whatever you like, and don't be tempted to imitate your neighbor (i.e. 'Aisha) in her behavior towards the Prophet), for she (i.e. Aisha) is more beautiful than you, and more beloved to Allah's Apostle….” http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/043.sbt.html#003.043.648
" So, I entered upon the Prophet and saw him lying on a mat without wedding on it, and the mat had left its mark on the body of the Prophet, and he was leaning on a leather pillow stuffed with palm fires. I greeted him and while still standing, I said: "Have you divorced your wives?' He raised his eyes to me and replied in the negative. And then while still standing, I said chatting: "Will you heed what I say, 'O Allah's Apostle! We, the people of Quraish used to have the upper hand over our women (wives), and when we came to the people whose women had the upper hand over them..."
'Umar told the whole story (about his wife). "On that the Prophet smiled." 'Umar further said, "I then said, 'I went to Hafsa and said to her: Do not be tempted to imitate your companion ('Aisha) for she is more beautiful than you and more beloved to the Prophet.' The Prophet smiled again.”
The above Hadith is self-explanatory. The Meccans were more bigoted than the rest of the Arabs. Often people living in religious hubs are more extremists and more misogynists than the people living in cities that are less religious. However, people do not think uniformly. In any society some are more fanatical than others. As it appears Umar and Muhammad were particularly more close-mined than the rest of the Meccans. In other words these two men were the bigots of the bigots. While the rest of the Meccans did not have any problem listening to the pep talks of their women or accepting women to run their own businesses, these two men thought emancipation of women is gross, an indecency that must be corrected.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tiger1225: baby girls used to get buried alive before Mohamed....and Islam came and prohibited this bad and unhuman habit...
LOOK AT WOMAN'S CONDITIONS IN THE WHOLE WORLD BEFORE ISLAM AND SUPPLU US WITH PROOF OR FOREVER SHUT UP..
They want you to believe this odious act was the common practice of the Arabs that was stopped only after Islam. However, this myth can be dismissed with a simple logic. If this practice was so common, how come the Arabs could afford to have several wives and how did their race survive at all? Female infanticide is practiced in China and in India even today. This is done only among the least educated and the poorest people. This practice, though, is illegal and a criminal act and the perpetrators will be prosecuted if caught. There is no reason to believe that it was different in Arabia. Certainly most Arabs disdained this act. It just goes against the human nature. When Muhammad prohibited it, he echoed the voice of the majority and said what was commonsense to everyone. It is like a self styled prophet today prohibit drinking and driving. Would that be regarded as a groundbreaking law?
Muhammad did not fail to portray woman as evil, crooked, deficient in intelligence, created only for the enjoyment of man. Whose only function is to be the incubator for his sons! Who must serve him and be obedient to him! Who is not capable to be responsible for her own life but must be maintained by a man. Who should receive less inheritance and whose testimony is worth half of that of a man because she is deemed to be imbecile with faulty memory!
Women in Islam lost every right, including the right to travel alone.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is obvious that Muhammad did not have much reverence for women.
The Prophet said, "After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women."
In another place he compares the women to a crooked rib.
“Woman is like a rib. When you attempt to straighten it, you would break it. And if you leave her alone you would benefit by her, and crookedness will remain in her.”
These hadith are classified as “agreed upon” because it is reported by other collectors of hadith too!
In another hadith he said:
“The woman advances and retires in the shape of a devil, so when one of you sees a woman, he should come to his wife, for that will repel what he feels in his heart”.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
How these verses that you quote establish equality between man and woman is beyond me. If I say to you that you and your dog should not walk on the grass, should do this or should do that, does that imply that you and your dog are equal? I see no hint of equality in these verses.
From example you quote:
'' Allah Grants permission to women for going to the mosque''
which says Muslim women can pray by themselves. Is that the sign of their equality and liberation?? Can’t women of other Faiths pray by themselves? Wouldn’t God accept their prayers?
Another quote of yours say:
''Women's Right of Proposal''
I ask you, how can a 9 year old child consent to a marriage? How can a Muslim woman be free in her choice when she is not even allowed to date the man whom she is planning to marry in order to know him? How can you choose when you do not even know the person? What choice one has? How can you make any intelligent and educated decision when you do not know your prospect mate? A blind choice is not a choice.
''Narrated Sahl: A woman came to the Prophet, and presented herself to him (for marriage). He said, "I am not in need of women these days." Then a man said, "O Allah's Apostle! Marry her to me." The Prophet asked him, "What have you got?" He said, "I have got nothing." The Prophet said, "Give her something, even an iron ring." He said, "I have got nothing." The Prophet asked (him), "How much of the Quran do you know (by heart)?" He said, "So much and so much." The Prophet said, "I have married her to you for what you know of the Quran." (Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 72)''
Can you imagine?? Prior to Islam women had so many rights that could even propose to their spouses! However, after Islam, when Muslims started to put into practice their prophet’s teachings, they found there was no room for women anywhere and hence women were discarded and were relegated to second class citizens. Khadijah, prior to marring Muhammad was a businesswomen who had made a fortune running her own trading business and who had many men at her service. Can women succeed in any Islamic country the way Khadijah succeeded in a pagan society?
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tiger1225: On the Treatment of Women Narrated Mu'awiyah al-Qushayri: I went to the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) and asked him: "What do you say (command) about our wives?" He replied: "Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them." (Sunan Abu Dawud: Book 11, Number 2139) "The best of you is one who is best towards his family and I am best towards the family". (At-Tirmithy). "None but a noble man treats women in an honourable manner. And none but an ignoble treats women disgracefully". (At-Tirmithy)
I can't see any hint of equality in this verse either. Is there any difference between this dynamism and that of a master and his slave? There are hadiths where Muhammad names asses, women and dogs in one sentence. Muslim 4,1232 says a man’s “prayer would be cut off by (passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog”.
In another hadith Muhammad says “He created women for you, of yourselves, spouses, that you may repose in them"
The Arabic text makes it clear that “for you” is masculine and “them” is in feminine.
What this verse is conveying is that women are created FOR men and are for their enjoyment.
Razi in At-Tafsir al-Kabir, commenting on this verse wrote:
"His saying 'created for you' is a proof that women were created like animals and plants and other useful things, just as the Most High has said 'He created for you what is on earth' and that necessitates the woman not to be created for worship and carrying the Divine commands.”
Hadi Sabzevari, an eminent Muslim scholar, in his commentary on another grand Muslim thinker, Sadr al-Mote'alihin wrote:
That Sadr ad-Deen Shirazi classifies women as animals is a delicate allusion to the fact that women, due to the deficiency in their intelligence and understanding of intricacies, and due to their fondness of the adornments of the world, are truly and justly among the mute animals [al-haywanti al-sa^mita]. They have the nature of beasts [ad-dawwa^b], but they have been given the disguise of human beings so that men would not be loath to talk to them and be compelled to have sexual intercourse with them. That is why our immaculate Law [shar'ina al-mutahhar] takes men's side and gives them superiority in most matters, including divorce, "nushuz," etc.Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tiger1225: ''A MOTHER As a mother, she is held in the highest regard. We are told that our mothers are the most worthy of our care, love and companionship. Fathers come in a distant second. Because God knows his own creation, he knows that men would be tempted to abuse their physical strength when dealing with women. Repeatedly, throughout the Qur'an and in the Prophet's sayings, men are reminded of their responsibility to be kind and compassionate to women.''
Yes indeed there are one or two verses and hadiths that praise women but we are talking about rights. Praising women does not imply they have equal rights. I could have lots of praises for my dog; this does not imply I consider him equal to humans. You quoted several verses where women are mentioned but none of them suggest that women are equal in rights to men. Telling men to treat their wives with kindness does not imply equality. One could say, be kind to animals. This does not mean you and animals have the same right.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tiger your long posts will never take the verses out of the Quraan neither justify it, what is done is done my friend and no repair. You remind me of Hala Sarhaan!!!
Posts: 321 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is a Koranic principle that woman (in her natural condition, not in her intelligent essence) occupies an inferior degree to that of man - confirming the Koranic Word: 'As for men, they precede (in their legal dignity) women by one degree'. Koran II 228. Women, you see, were created in the 'form' of God, whereas men were created in 'His form'.
Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by didi_elsayed: But i am sure i readed before,in part from the Coran that:" If your wife do not follow her obligations,you must talk to her first,after this you separate from the bed..for few days ..and the last you can hit her too,but not on her face"(Excuse me that i dont say it by the correct way,i forgot where i readed this already!)But i`m sure that this is stated there!
Hi Didi,
some interesting articles on the verse you're referring to:
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: something like this was discussed before,, click here....[/URL]
But she was asking about Qur'anic reference – whether the verse she thought she remembered reading was actually in the Qur'an or not and what it might actually mean. The thread you're referring to is just an exchange on opinions on the subject ...
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wow I LOVEEEEEE You Guysssssss!You are absolutely Cool and superb friends!I have no words to thank you! I knew i can depend on you,as always:D Yes ill need little time to read it more deep,as now i just checked it fast,as i could!And Tiger yes,exactly the first of your answers is what i wanted to see...but i needed the number of the page or sura from the coran,so that he can see it by his own eyes,LOLLLLLLll...he dont trust me i think,hehe! Anywa i want to thank all of you Tiger,and Fran,Dalia ty sweetheart...&Ki$$7eaven too...Mrs Doubtfire,really thanks to all of you for your comments and help! Hugs:D Bless you
-------------------- "If you judge people, you have no time to love them" Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dalia is right anyway,i forgot where i readed this part,but i was sure i really did!Thats what we have discussed with Ahmed(my husband),and we make a bet!He said im not right,and men shouldnt touch the wife like beating,and i said i readed that he can punish her,by the way u already readed!This by one or another way allow to the man to punish the wife by slap,hit or beat her,or im wrong? Anyway i was right,thanks!
-------------------- "If you judge people, you have no time to love them" Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JOSHUA: Tiger your long posts will never take the verses out of the Quraan neither justify it, what is done is done my friend and no repair. You remind me of Hala Sarhaan!!!
First off I'm not your friend niether that I want to be. Second off Without the QURAN ...WE MAY STILL HAVE BEEN LIVING IN THE DARK AGES THAT INCLUDE EUROPE AND THE WHOLE WORLD... third off What damage...the one people like you and mahir in the end of each spectum do and say about great faith will never hurt Islam..it is even ten zellion time less than a flea bite....
SO ..DO NOT FREIND ME AND F*CK OFF..
Posts: 2691 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by didi_elsayed: Dalia is right anyway,i forgot where i readed this part,but i was sure i really did!Thats what we have discussed with Ahmed(my husband),and we make a bet!He said im not right,and men shouldnt touch the wife like beating,and i said i readed that he can punish her,by the way u already readed!This by one or another way allow to the man to punish the wife by slap,hit or beat her,or im wrong? Anyway i was right,thanks!
Ahmed is right a man must not touch his wife our beat her...it is only licensed for the (nashez) a woman who her husband and her family and the community have exhausted all vanues to make her stay in while she wanted to go around whoring leaving her family behind... also remember that the prophet never hit a wife or any of the good sahaba..also..
So..I 'd rather lose this bet..unless you like to have a black eye..
Posts: 2691 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: something like this was discussed before,, click here....[/URL]
But she was asking about Qur'anic reference – whether the verse she thought she remembered reading was actually in the Qur'an or not and what it might actually mean. The thread you're referring to is just an exchange on opinions on the subject ...
opinoon always starts to fly from left, eight and centre..... I really liked what Asooma said on that thread....which I wanted her to see Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Whether it is literally stated in the Koran or not, It is NOT RIGHT for any man to beat a woman because in our enlightend age, it is morally wrong.
Anything that comes from God, is good, but if it is turned into something evil, then it is of thyself. Posts: 304 | From: egypt | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ki$$7eaven: I really liked what Asooma said on that thread....which I wanted her to see
I didn't like that particular post at all. Sorry. Miswak or not – hitting someone is a humiliation and nobody should humiliate another human being, let alone his / her spouse.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem ladies & gentlemen is that people takes what quran mentioned & translate it to their own understanding. What people dont know is that Quran has incidents & has rules etc...its not just a simple book anyone can read & completely understand its a science however still the basics is very simple anyone can understand and thats a bliss cause the less you know the less you judged at however thats doesn't mean that we wont be asked if we didnt strive to know. The point is that at the end ISLAM & Quran always advise men in many many many situations to be very calm with ladies cause they're our half that helps us to live & feel tha happiness of this life, our life is meaningless without them, how come we beat & hate & mis treat them!! however sometimes you love your kid but you've to hit him to learn & hittin' means not to break an arm!! just a simple slap not even on the face, just on the shoulder or so. We've to be more deteministic when it comes to translatin' quran & rules of islam so we clear the confusion of other...also dont rely on others talk, Go & READ with open mind.
posted
The wife has no religious obligation to take the beating. She can ask for and get divorce any time. The suggestion applies only in the case when the husband is seriously disturbed by a prolonged nasty behavior on the part of the wife but neither he nor the wife is as yet seriously thinking of breaking up... If the husband beats a wife without respecting the limits set down by the Qur'an and Hadith, then she can take him to court and if ruled in favor has the right to apply the law of retaliation and beat the husband as he beat her.
"And if you fear a breach between them twain (the man and his wife), appoint (two) arbitrators, one from his family and the other from her's; if they both wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation. Indeed Allah is Ever All-Knower, Well-Acquainted with all things." (Qur'an 4:35) Sura An-Nisa:35
Posts: 817 | From: Egypt | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JOSHUA: Tiger your long posts will never take the verses out of the Quraan neither justify it, what is done is done my friend and no repair. You remind me of Hala Sarhaan!!!
First off I'm not your friend niether that I want to be. Second off Without the QURAN ...WE MAY STILL HAVE BEEN LIVING IN THE DARK AGES THAT INCLUDE EUROPE AND THE WHOLE WORLD... third off What damage...the one people like you and mahir in the end of each spectum do and say about great faith will never hurt Islam..it is even ten zellion time less than a flea bite....
SO ..DO NOT FREIND ME AND F*CK OFF..
crap nonsens ..backward idiot go to hell
Posts: 1223 | From: Home | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Frans story about Omar is completely mutilated and lacks logic. Omar was refering to the obidiance women practiced before islam and how HE THOUGHT they were becoming spoiled by liberty given by isalm. He was refering to how women in Qurishe were different than what they became after isalm has dominated the Madina (Qurishe was not a muslem city or dominated my Muslems when Omar lived their). If the islamic instructions was to opress and force women into obidiance then the prophit would have been the first to apply those rules. Instead, the story shows how Mohamed was upset with his wives and yet all he did is stop talking to them. Omar's wife when wanted to have an argument with Omar she gave him the example of the Prophits wives and how they deal the Prophit, she didn't take the women of the Madina as an exmaple. Omar was a man of temper and he was well know of his sharp character, and he confesed on several ocasions that before Islam he used to look down at women, yet after Islam he did not (as far as I read of his biography) lay hand on his wife ever. (He did hit his sister before converting). And in the same story when he went to ask some of the prophits wives about why they are talking back to the prophit he was told off and Hafsa (as far as I remeber) said to him what meant "So now you are going to interfere between the prophit and his wives?". When he went up to check on the Mohamed as you mentioned Mohamed never answered him or told him why he was upset, a good example of family discretion. And all he got from the jokes he made about Aisha being the pretiest (it is mentioned in history as a joke he said to cheer Mohamed, but I am not saying she wasn't) was a smile.
Just give us some consistancy in your stories for them to make sens. HOW CAN THE PROPHETS WIVES TALK BACK TO HIM IN A WAY OMAR DON'T LIKE AND THE PROPHIT TAKE IT IN AND ACCEPT IT WHEN HE IS THE EXAMPLE FOLLOWED BY ALL MUSLIMS UNLESS THIS IS THE MESSAGE HE IS SENDING OUT TO EVERY ONE? unless you are suggesting that the man who dominated the whole Arabia had a week personality!!
Posts: 134 | From: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JOSHUA: Tiger your long posts will never take the verses out of the Quraan neither justify it, what is done is done my friend and no repair. You remind me of Hala Sarhaan!!!
First off I'm not your friend niether that I want to be. Second off Without the QURAN ...WE MAY STILL HAVE BEEN LIVING IN THE DARK AGES THAT INCLUDE EUROPE AND THE WHOLE WORLD... third off What damage...the one people like you and mahir in the end of each spectum do and say about great faith will never hurt Islam..it is even ten zellion time less than a flea bite....
SO ..DO NOT FREIND ME AND F*CK OFF..
crap nonsens ..backward idiot go to hell
not without you baby... Posts: 2691 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love your simple logic, so This practice was not taking place in the Arabia becuase of what you caliam as simple logic that men afforded several wives and population grew, then you say that it was practiced in presia and India (even uptill now) but those two nationes proved to live and populate and even men used to marry lots and lots of women in those times were u claim it was only practiced in thier land!! I think this is not simple logic, becuase I can't understand it!! Please try and make it more smple for me to understand. And again, do you think that Mohamed was such a stupid person (with all his achievments) that he would make up a whole part of the Quran that talks about baby girls being burried alive when he was still just a minorty (this part of the Quran where it is mentioned has descended in Makka before the imigration) so that he would weaken his argument with the people of Makka!! I think this represents a more simple logic, he was opposing all what they were doing and said it out loud and clear to them, thats why he and his followers were rejected. It's easier to believe this than to imagin that he made up a story and they hated him for critisizing something they didn't do! I think you are ignoring a very important fact in real life here and you are demeaning women in general by posting what you are saying or claiming that women who depend on thier men are some how deficient because NEWS FLASH many women in the world, west, east, north and south do so, simply for the fact that life is sharing. Many women settel for being a mother and a house wife and that doesn't make them any less or means they should be looked down at. House wifes (according to social studies) work as much as 2 working women. So they are earning what they are getting. The Fatehr provide for the family and the mother take care of the house and kids. I personally think that work of women is a fantastice thing and I'd love my wife to have her own career. But I WOULD NEVER LOOK DOWN AT WOMEN WHO CHOSE TO BE HOUSE WIVES. And simple logic means that a house wife must have someone to provide for her. The physical nature of the woman as she is the one who gets pregnant is the one that puts the man in charge for a more stable income (not all countryies are rich enough to provide sallaried for non working pregnant or new moms).
Thanx for baring with me. Cheers
quote:Originally posted by Fran:
quote:Originally posted by Tiger1225: baby girls used to get buried alive before Mohamed....and Islam came and prohibited this bad and unhuman habit...
LOOK AT WOMAN'S CONDITIONS IN THE WHOLE WORLD BEFORE ISLAM AND SUPPLU US WITH PROOF OR FOREVER SHUT UP..
They want you to believe this odious act was the common practice of the Arabs that was stopped only after Islam. However, this myth can be dismissed with a simple logic. If this practice was so common, how come the Arabs could afford to have several wives and how did their race survive at all? Female infanticide is practiced in China and in India even today. This is done only among the least educated and the poorest people. This practice, though, is illegal and a criminal act and the perpetrators will be prosecuted if caught. There is no reason to believe that it was different in Arabia. Certainly most Arabs disdained this act. It just goes against the human nature. When Muhammad prohibited it, he echoed the voice of the majority and said what was commonsense to everyone. It is like a self styled prophet today prohibit drinking and driving. Would that be regarded as a groundbreaking law?
Muhammad did not fail to portray woman as evil, crooked, deficient in intelligence, created only for the enjoyment of man. Whose only function is to be the incubator for his sons! Who must serve him and be obedient to him! Who is not capable to be responsible for her own life but must be maintained by a man. Who should receive less inheritance and whose testimony is worth half of that of a man because she is deemed to be imbecile with faulty memory!
Women in Islam lost every right, including the right to travel alone.
posted
Mmmmm sorry for my late reply as always i was busy,anyway its Christmas here,so i had to prepare about 9 meals for the day,LOL!Plus to make the tree nice for looking,haha! Actually i prefer to forget the bet we had with Ahmed,ill just let it pass away!I just not want any missunderstandings between,as i dont want to make him feel attacked,as we have a different religions!So thanks again for your answer,no matter i dont see why cant we discuss such topics more calm!We all know how easy it is to curst each other!I do it good too,but try to change my character for goodness!lol;) So Tiger ,let us end the discussion stating,that the man do not have a right to abuse,hit or hurt his wife!Our case is definately not a question of whoring,cheating or vice versa!Even in a case like this,i wouldnt recommend hiting or beating BTW!
-------------------- "If you judge people, you have no time to love them" Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW i dont agree that all Muslm Women loose their rights from their religion!!!!!!!Also i see nothing wrong in being household wife,no matter that i am NOT! No matter muslim or Christian,my husband would treat me the same good,respectful way,as he does now!Thanks God he have wonderful family,who raised him with love,respect,and mostly to respect himself!I know good his sister also,she is not closed,nobody forbid her to work,or anything she want,she can have it!She put her moral borders by herself,and she is happy,practicing her religion,Islam!I respect this very much,and i do not mind the Religion,or i if i was,i wouldnever marry a Muslim,isnt it?! I am a happy woman,married for lovely man,who love and respect me as well!I know by myself whats my morals,and never was needed him to remind me,nor my wife`s obligations,Thx God! I wish only the women to have selfrespect,to know that in every community there are borders to folow,to keep your freedom,without u look cheap,or low woman without morals, within her!This is my life...i have my freedom,i can work,i can go ou free,i can see my girlfriends normal,i can late when this happens,we had no fights for these things,i waqsnt beated or punished for this!LOL The Woman must know her price,not to let anyone,being woman or a man,terorise her,or make her feel like nothing!Know your price,know your rights,but dont forget your morals and self values! Peace everyone,be Happy! Didi
-------------------- "If you judge people, you have no time to love them" Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by didi_elsayed: Hello guys, Now...we were talking about 2 hours for the following topic with my husband! "Is it allowed to a Muslim Men,to beat their wives?!"I mean ...is there a part,sura or whatever in the Coran,which states that to her husband,is not forbidden to beat his wife?? He say-impossible!That he must respect,lov and keep his wife,and etc.....But i am sure i readed before,in part from the Coran that:" If your wife do not follow her obligations,you must talk to her first,after this you separate from the bed..for few days ..and the last you can hit her too,but not on her face"(Excuse me that i dont say it by the correct way,i forgot where i readed this already!)But i`m sure that this is stated there! Can you please,1 who is very good with the Coran knowledge to give me exactly this part,including the page,surah..and everything so that i can show it for him!LOL He made me to do it,as he deny something like this,and im sure there IS! And as we made a bet,i want to prove him im not completely crazy,& i really readed this! Thanksss so much guys, i apprecite it! Didi
Hello didi i like to say one note and it is important god gives us hands, eyes , feet ,brain,...,etc and he told us what is the right and what is the wrong so u can use the tools to make a good thing or a bad thing depend in your beleives and your personality.
also god gives us other tools not in our bodies but we still can use it in good or bad this tools is the rules in Quran about everything
i will talk about beating the woman as u saying. when we talk about the problems with womans and men in marriage life islam gives us many different tools
-advise and talk to her -show your annoying in her action by give her your back in the bed -beat her -bring a judge from her family and your family to solve the problem -Divorce her once -Divorce her another time -Leave her
see there is a lot tools and the person decied to use which one of it according to situation, his beleives, his personality and his culture. and u will be asked about this tools how u use it and why u did so. cause muslims beleives this life is a temporary life it is a test if u pass it u will go to heaven if not ..... u know
even when god order the man to be the leader he put him in a test ( are u good to lead the home as god rules) also when god order the woman to obey the man (are u going to obey god rules)
posted
-advise and talk to her -show your annoying in her action by give her your back in the bed [Wink] -beat her -bring a judge from her family and your family to solve the problem -Divorce her once -Divorce her another time -Leave her
You forgot to add one Item...
- have her walk naked/headless on a thin object.
hahahaaa
-------------------- With respect to Islam and the Muslim world! Posts: 321 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JOSHUA: -advise and talk to her -show your annoying in her action by give her your back in the bed [Wink] -beat her -bring a judge from her family and your family to solve the problem -Divorce her once -Divorce her another time -Leave her
You forgot to add one Item...
- have her walk naked/headless on a thin object.
hahahaaa
that not in islam may be it is only in your culture
Please try to respect anyone say his openion as u want ppl respect you
quote:Originally posted by MohdAnwar: see there is a lot tools and the person decied to use which one of it according to situation, his beleives, his personality and his culture. and u will be asked about this tools how u use it and why u did so.
also when god order the woman to obey the man (are u going to obey god rules)
Women aren't dogs, God didn't order them to obey their husband, nor did he allow the husbands to beat them.
I got more than just a bit nauseous reading your post.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
mm shukran for your answer Mohammed,i do not agree again that anyone have the right to beat or abuse,anyone else,we are all human beings,khalas!Thats my own opinion! About the other you r right,it depends on our nature,background,inteligence,and character!God keep us with right mind and clean heart!We all loose nerves sometimes,but to rise a hand......this is a disgusting for me! God for me is goodness,forgiveness,kindness....i dont respect people using his name for bad ideas,and actions!We all know that the Man by any holy book,is created first,but is this eman the women must be obbeying them even when they do not respect you enough not to rise you a hand and love and keep you! The man in my eyes must be protecting,to find peace and ssfety in his arms,not to hurt you with them! I love them touching tender,not causing pain! Anywy ty again Mohammed! I agree Dalia,we r not DOGS!And ill repeat,if even worst thing happen i prefer to tALK reasonably,to discuss,even fight,but never ever to rise my hand,the worst action i would make is to leave the home and divorce!Thats enough! God bless you everyone! Joshua,what can i say to you!naughty and colorful mind u have,lol!God keep your wife from fights;)! Didi~
-------------------- "If you judge people, you have no time to love them" Posts: 1134 | From: NoNe oF uR BuSiNeS | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by didi_elsayed: mm shukran for your answer Mohammed,i do not agree again that anyone have the right to beat or abuse,anyone else,we are all human beings,khalas!Thats my own opinion! About the other you r right,it depends on our nature,background,inteligence,and character!God keep us with right mind and clean heart!We all loose nerves sometimes,but to rise a hand......this is a disgusting for me! God for me is goodness,forgiveness,kindness....i dont respect people using his name for bad ideas,and actions!We all know that the Man by any holy book,is created first,but is this eman the women must be obbeying them even when they do not respect you enough not to rise you a hand and love and keep you! The man in my eyes must be protecting,to find peace and ssfety in his arms,not to hurt you with them! I love them touching tender,not causing pain! Anywy ty again Mohammed! I agree Dalia,we r not DOGS!And ill repeat,if even worst thing happen i prefer to tALK reasonably,to discuss,even fight,but never ever to rise my hand,the worst action i would make is to leave the home and divorce!Thats enough! God bless you everyone! Joshua,what can i say to you!naughty and colorful mind u have,lol!God keep your wife from fights;)! Didi~
Dear Didi did i say u have to agree that your husband can beat u, i never say so. u can choose your husband that meet your conditions and if after u choose him he was not as u want u can make divorce (by him = normal divorce) or (by u = Kola divorce) cause actually the man who developed that he can beat his wife he will do that even he promise he will not do i mean it is something in the culture and where he grow up. I myself i always say to my wife if the problems between me and u to extent that i can beat u. i will prefer to divorce u i would never my children grow up in enviroment like that.
Dear Dalia I don't want to annoy u but as i feel it normal thing in any home that someone must be a leader. matters can't be loose. in (ISLAM) god give the man this leadership with all its responsiablities and its problems and he will be asked what he did with it.and i think also in christainity.
But u still can choose any man meet your conditions.
Also u have to think that leadership is something that god give to men as god give u your beauty that effecting in men . i mean god gives each of us men and womans different things to compelete each other not to fight. but the problems that men are not satisfied and womans not satisfied also and that is the real test.
posted
A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife...11.2142
A woman who complains about the beatings she receives from her husband is not the best woman...11.2141
Abdur Rahman I Doi, the recognized authority on Sharia, in his book, ‘Women in Society’writes:
A refractory wife has no legal right to object to her husband exercising his disciplinary authority. Islamic law, in common with most other systems of law, recognizes the husband's right to discipline his wife for disobedience. (Prof. Abdur Rahman I. Doi Professor and Director, Center for Islamic Legal Studies)
To uphold the right of a husband to have four wives at any time and any number of sex-slaves for all times; in case of objection by any wife the husband can beat her
• The Qur’an
For men four free women wives (some say nine) at a time and any number of slave girls is permitted...4:3
• Sunaan Abu Dawud
Umar told a man to beat his wife for suckling a slave-girl with whom he used to have sex…30.2.13
In this hadith a woman tries to trick her husband so he stop sleeping with their maid. But Umar tells him to beat his wife and to go to his slave-girl.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MohdAnwar: see there is a lot tools and the person decied to use which one of it according to situation, his beleives, his personality and his culture. and u will be asked about this tools how u use it and why u did so.
also when god order the woman to obey the man (are u going to obey god rules)
Women aren't dogs, God didn't order them to obey their husband, nor did he allow the husbands to beat them.
I got more than just a bit nauseous reading your post.
Aisha complained to Muhammad about the same thing: 'you have put us (women) on the same level as a donkey and a dog'.
Posts: 524 | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic