Monday, March 24, 2008
Quraan, Hadith and Women
QUR’AN, HADITH AND WOMEN
Asghar Ali Engineer, February 1, 2008
Moderator's comments are followed by the essay.
.
The more I learn about Qur’aan, the more confidence I derive knowing that God is Just, Equitable, Kind and Merciful. In this essay Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer brings to the fore the Just words of God with reference to Women.
Muslims ought to take pride that they are more equipped with knowledge of Islam today than ever before in the history of Islam. The message of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is coming to fruition, in his last speech he had said that I am leaving Qur’aan to you for guidance, read and understand on your own. No one was given the authority to interpret the book for us, we are back to full circle now focusing on the original source for knowledge, and certainly must respect what was interpreted in Sharia but fine tune it to reflect Qur’aan. A tremendous research work is being put out and thank God for the internet.
The primitive societies were termed as “Jahiliya” characterized by ignorance. Only few could read and write and the scholars who knew had an upper hand and passed on their local traditions as Universal traditions that Qur’aan had fine tuned all the native practices to be in tune with what would be universally acceptable regardless of where one lived. However the writers of Sharia law remained entrenched with their traditions.
Sharia laws were essentially compiled to understand Qur’aan in terms of “how to”, when the Lord talks about the need to pray, Sharia lays it out in terms of “how to”. The men extended the “how to’s” to cover every aspect of life. The intention was good and certainly benefits the followers. However in the areas of women, apostasy, and adultery their understanding did not reflect the universality and Justness of Qur’aan.
Islam means peace and peace is an outcome of Justice and Qur’aan is all about Justice.
A few highlights are as follows;
1. Women lost in hadiths what they had gained through Qur’an
2. Unfortunately for hadiths honesty and integrity of narrators became the only criterion rather than its conformity with the Qur’anic approach, values and ideals.
3. He thought he was ruler over women and many Qur’anic verses were explained under the ethos of men’s superiority.
4. Qur’an says it is Adam who disobeyed his Lord and acted ignorantly Thus Qur’an says “And Adam disobeyed his Lord, and was disappointed” (20:121)
5. It was too hard for men to accept equal dignity for men and women in the feudal society within which Shari’ah rules were compiled.
6. Qur’an gives equal rights and equal dignity to both men and women but Hadith literature is full of hadiths contradicting this Qur’anic approach.
7. See how in this verse Qur’an treats men and women equally and talks of equal degree of forgiveness and equal reward. In the above Hadith, on the other hand, more women than men are consigned to flames of Hell
Please read and reflect.
Mike Ghouse
http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/
QUR’AN, HADITH AND WOMEN
Asghar Ali Engineer
(Islam and Modern Age, February 2008)
What is position of women in Qur’an and Hadith? It is very interesting to compare what is stated in Qur'aan about women and what do we find on women in Hadith literature? And here I am not referring to hadiths from an other source but from what is known as Sihah Sitta (.e. six most authentic sources of Hadith). I wish our Ulama reflect on the contrast between how Qur’an treats women and how hadiths treat them. Much of woes of Muslim women will be over if we follow Qur’an rather than these hadiths.
Women lost in ahadith what they had gained through Qur’an. Today if world thinks Islam treats women in very unfair way it is because we follow hadiths rather than Qur’an as far as women are concerned. In pre-Islamic period women had lowest of low social status and Qur’an lifted them far above and our ‘Ulama never tire of saying this. But within few decades of the revelation of the Qur’an women came down to their pre-Islamic status in a fiercely male dominated society. And this was accomplished through ahadith as a legitimizing factor.
Those who narrated these ahadith never thought for a moment how they contradict Qur’an as these ahadith served the social purpose very well. Qur’an provided ideals and values but society could not rise to that level and instead dragged Islam to its own level and ahadith served that interest best.
When Islam was confined to Arabian peninsula it was different but when it spread to far off places, parts of Roman empire, Sasanid empire (Iran), Central Asia etc. these regions were very different in their culture, religious values and social ethos and it was quite natural for Islam to adapt to what these societies needed. Even Shari’ah, all jurists (fuqaha’) agree incorporated much of Arab ‘adati (customary law).
It was not easy to avoid these cultural values and customary practices found in non-Arab societies when people of these regions embraced Islam. Position of women in these regions was no different from what it was in pre-Islamic Arabia and when one embraces a religion which originated outside that region he/she does not automatically caste away his/her own cultural values and social ethos.
Also, it is a well-known fact that Islam spread far and wide much quicker than Shari’ah laws were compiled in different schools. In fact various Shari’ah schools (madahibi) came into existence in different regions where Islam had spread. Even before the Arabs could grasp full significance of Islam and adjust their lives to new values and ideals, it had already spread to various parts of the world, right up to China. In fact Islam spread to these regions with lightening speed.
It is also interesting to note that various companions of the Prophet (PBUH) also had spread to these parts of the world and these companions in many cases married local women and adopted cultural values of the region and being companions of the Prophet (PBUH) they were also source of Islamic knowledge and those converted to Islam would flock to them for guidance and hence number of ahadith were narrated by these companions relying on their memory and understanding. Thus along with authenticity of ahadith sociology of ahadith also becomes equally important.
While Qur’an was compiled during Prophet’s (PBUH) life time and when some deviations from standard recitation was noticed (on account mainly of tribal dialects) Hazrat Uthman had wisdom to compile standard copy and destroy all others and thus Qur’an was saved from differences in the text. All other copies of the Qur’an were prepared from this copy.
Ahadith, on the other hand, were compiled two to three centuries after the death of the Holy Prophet and underwent much changes due to passage of time. Though there was chain of narrators and despite honesty and integrity of narrators, there was every possibility of change in text with different narrators with even differences in their understanding and cultural background. Unfortunately for ahadith honesty and integrity of narrators became the only criterion rather than its conformity with the Qur’anic approach, values and ideals.
Also, there were those who did not hesitate to produce a hadith to legitimize some action or requirement of someone powerful and influential. Thus while there never arose any differences about the Qur’anic text, there have been all sorts of differences about authenticity or otherwise of ahadith. In fact much problems could have been avoided if ahadith in such large numbers and in different compatios had not been accepted. For these very reasons the Prophet (PBUH) had discouraged from compiling these ahadith. But ahadith became socio-cultural and socio-religious needs in vastly different circumstances.
These needs were such that a doctrine was evolved that even if a hadith stands in contradiction of the Qur’an hadith will prevail. Many Shari’ah injunctions were developed on this basis. Then various questions arose whether hadith is da’if (weak), narrated by only one or by several narrators or its different variations or whether its narrators (ravi) were da’if (weak) and so on. The whole hadith literature is full of these controversies. Also different sects relied on different ahadith to legitimize their positions. In short many controversies originated due to excessive reliance on ahadith.
Much more so ahadith were used to lower women’s status as Qur’anic ideals and values in respect of women could not be accepted by societies which treated women as subordinate to men. Men in any case wanted to retain his superiority. He thought he was ruler over women and many Qur’anic verses were explained under the ethos of men’s superiority. Most of the Qur’anic verses on women are not explained in the light of other Qur’anic verses (only reliable methodology to understand real intent of the Qur’an) but in the light of ahadith which degrade women.
I would like in this article to compare ahadith about women with Qur’anic verses and show how mutually contradictory these Qur’anic verses and ahadith are. Qur’an talks of equal dignity of men and women and even story of Adam and Hawwa is narrated in a way which does not blame Hawwa at all for eating the fruit of a tree which Adam was prohibited to go near to. Qur’an talks of creation of men and women from one nafs and hadith says Hawwa was created from rib of Adam. Qur’an says it is Adam who disobeyed his Lord and acted ignorantly Thus Qur’an says “And Adam disobeyed his Lord, and was disappointed” (20:121)
Also, the entire discourse in Qur’an on women is rights based but in Shari’ah, thanks to hadith literature, entire discourse is duty based for women and right based for men, something which one found during period of jahiliyyah. It was too hard for men to accept equal dignity for men and women in the feudal society within which Shari’ah rules were compiled.
Qur’an gives equal rights and equal dignity to both men and women but hadith literature is full of ahadith contradicting this Qur’anic approach. For example in Bukhari we find a hadith which stands in contradiction to the Qur’anic verse 33:35. The hadith is narrated thus:
“The Prophet (PBUH) urged the women to be generous with their gifts, for when he had glimpsed into the flames of Hell, he had noted the vast majority of people being tormented there were women. The women were outraged, and one of them instantly stood up and demanded to know why that was so. ‘Because,’ he replied, ‘you women grumble so much, and show ingratitude to your husbands! Even if the poor fellows spent all their lives doing things for you, you have only to be upset at the least of thing and you will say, ‘I have never received any good from you!’, At that the women began vigorously to pull off their rings, and throw them into Bilal’s Cloak. (Bukhari 1.28, Abu Dawud 439).
See the content and tenor of this hadith. It is full of anti women attitude and women are supposed to be, in this hadith, ungrateful to their husbands. As against this see the Qur’anic verse 33:35 which says, “Surely the men who submit and women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and truthful women, and the patient men and patient women, and the humble men and humble women, and the charitable men and the charitable women, and fasting men and fasting women, and the men who guard their chastity and the women who guard, and the men who remember Allah and women who remember – Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and mighty reward.”
See how in this verse Qur’an treats men and women equally and talks of equal degree of forgiveness and equal reward. In the above hadith, on the other hand, more women than men are consigned to flames of Hell because they are ungrateful to their husbands. Qur’an no where requires women to be obedient to their husbands. It is husband who is exhorted to be kind to their wives (see 2:229) “keep them in good fellowship (bi ma’ruf) and let them go with kindness (bi ihsanin).
Also men and women are described each others garment (libas) (2:187). According to Qur’an men and women are each others zawj (one of the couple) thus indicating equal dignity and love and respect, not obedience or subordination. The Prophet (PBUH) never treated any of his wife as subordinate. He not only treated them with dignity, he often consulted them in various matters and even followed their advice. In fact Umm Salma’s advice to sacrifice animal at Hudaybiya proved very beneficial.
WOMAN HALF A WITNESS?
Let us examine one more hadith which apparently appears to be in conformity with Qur’anic provision but indeed it is not. We find it in Muslim. The hadith is narrated as under:
Prophet is reported to have said, ‘I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you.’ Upon this a woman remarked: ‘What is wrong with or common sense and with religion? ’He observed: ‘You lack of common sense (in) that the evidence of two women is equal to that of one man, that is the proof of your lack of common sense. And you spend some nights (and days) in which you do not offer prayer and in the month of Ramadan 9during the menstrual days) you do not observe fast; that is your failing in religion.’ (Muslim 31)
This hadith has several flaws. Qur’an nowhere states that she is half witness, much less because of lack of common sense. And messenger of Allah will not say such things which degrade women whom he consulted in difficult times as pointed out above. Qur’an simply says that when you take loan, write it down and let two male witnesses be summoned as witnesses and if two men are not available let one man and two women bear witness so that if one forgets, other can remind. (2:282)
This verse no where says she lacks in common sense. She may have lacked in experience as in those days women did not indulge in financial transaction. Lack of experience cannot be equated with lack of common sense. Also, if women cannot offer prayers or fast during menstruation, how can it be construed as ‘failing in religion’? It is state of disability, not lack of belief or commitment. Belief or religion has something to do with ones heart and soul, not physical condition. Our Prophet (PBU) had high respect for women and for his wives. It is unthinkable that he would say such degrading things for women. He loved Khadija, Fatima and Ayesha so much. All these women were highly intelligent and great upholders of Islam. In fact they were more firm in their belief of Islam than many men. Entire Muslim world holds these women in high respect. In fact Islam gave such high status to women and guaranteed their rights when all over the world women had no rights at all. In fact it was this general demeaning attitude towards women which is reflected in these ahadith.
WOMEN RULERS BRING BAD LUCK TO THOSE OVER WHOM THEY RULE
We find another hadith in Bukhari which is often quoted against women becoming rulers of countries or nations. In fact Bukhari has reported three traditions connected with this episode, two of which were in the chapter on “Letter of the Prophet to Chosroe and Caesar”. Abu Bakra’s hadith is no. 4425. The preceding hadith, no. 4424, was reported from Ibn Abbas who said that “the Prophet of Allah sent Abdullah Ibn Huzaifa with his letter to Chosroe. When Chosroe read it he tore it. I believe said Bin Musayyab said: Then the Prophet prayed to Allah that he tear them up completely.” The third hadith is No. 6639 reported by Bukhari in the chapter on “how the oath of Prophet was” and it goes: “When Ceaser dies there will be no Ceaser after him. When Chosroe dies there will be no Chosroe after him.
Bukhari (4425) reports from Abu Bakr ahthe following hadith: “Allah provided me with considerable benefit during the battle of the Camel with one word (or one statement). When news reached the Prophet (S.A.W.) that the Persians had appointed Chosroe’s daughter as their ruler, he said: “A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper!”
Now it is well known that Abu Bakra narrated this hadith after battle of Camel in which Hadrat Ayesha participated and the battle was aimed against Hadrat Ali. This hadith surfaces only with the narration of Abu Bakra who was aspiring for governorship of one of the provinces and wanted to please Hadrat Ali. Abu Bakra obviously had a purpose in narrating such a hadith.
It is quite contradictory to Qur’an in as much as Qur’an upholds leadership of Queen of Sheba (Bilquis) who over-rules the advice of her male advisors and makes peace with prophet Salman (Soloman). See verses 32 to 35 of Chapter 27. When Bilquis asks for opinion of all her male advisors whether we should fight or make peace with Sulaiman, they advise her to fight and not to surrender. But she over rules them and decides to make peace arguing “Surely kings when they enter a town, ruin it and make the noblest of its people to be low; and thus they do.”
Thus we see that Qur’an upholds wisdom of a woman in not fighting and making peace with stronger ruler and saves the nation from ruin. But the hadith quoted above says just the opposite that if a woman becomes ruler it would prove ruinous for the nation. The hadith thus suggests that Prophet contradicts Allah’s revelation which is not thinkable. The only conclusion in either the narrator had his own motive in narrating the hadith or could not at all understand what the Prophet said. I leave conclusion to the readers.
We find even more shocking ahadith ascribed to the Prophet regarding women. One such hadith found in Sahih Bukhari and narrated by Sahl ibn Sa’d which says “Evil omen was mentioned before the Prophet (PBUH). The Prophet (PBUH) said, “if there is evil omen in anything, it is in the house, the woman and the horse.”
This hadith equates woman with house and horse. There cannot be any comparison between the three. Also both house and horse are extremely useful for human beings which facilitate his/her living and traveling. House is from basic necessity for human beings and horse was needed in those for travel and were valued highly. They were used in wars as well as their movement was quite swift. Such thoughts are product of very low kind of mind unfortunately ascribed to a mind Allah had graced with highest kinds of thought. He had chosen him to be His Prophet, His messenger. One cannot think he would say such things.
There is one interesting hadith found in Bukhari and narrated by Ayesha. The hadith is like this: the things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me (Ayesha). They said, “prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people)”.
Ayesha said, “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet PBUH) praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qiblah. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away, for I disliked to face him.”
We can see how some narrators equated women with dogs and donkeys and Ayesha challenged them. It shows how men held women in low esteem and ascribed their despicable thoughts to the Prophet (PBU). Always there may not be women like Ayesha to challenge such low thoughts and hadith may be believed uncritically.
Similarly we find another hadith in Sahih Bukhari narrated by Osamah which is again totally contradictory to the Qur’an. The hadith says “And I advise you to take care of the women, for they are created from a rib and the most crooked potion of the rib is its upper part. If you try to straighten it, it will break, and if you leave it, it will remain crooked, so I urge you to take care of the women.”
Very degrading to women, like similar such ahadith. It completely contradicts the Qur’an where there is no mention at all of Hawwa’s creation from the rib of Adam. This hadith also has been created to prove inferiority of women. In all the verses on women in Qur’an there is not a single verse which degrades women like this or proves her inferiority to men in any way.
This was prevailing social attitudes of men towards women which made them create such ahadith so that they could rule over them and women could not use Qur’an to claim equality with men. Qur’an was revealed to the prophet so that he could give equal dignity and status to women but society was not prepared for this in any case and sought to lower the status of women by producing such ahadith as they could not temper with the Qur’an they used another weapon to bring down status of women.
It is unfortunate that still our Ulama are not prepared to critically evaluate these anti-women ahadith. On the contrary they keep on quoting them to keep status of women lower in the society and under the thumb of women. It is precisely for this reason that non-Muslims think very adversely about Islam and how Islam has ‘suppressed’ dignity and status of women.
Time has come for Muslim women to evaluate these ahadith critically and refute the fatwas Ulama issued on the basis of such ahadith. We need great scholars of Islam among the women who could take independent position. Where are such women?
---------------------------------------------
Institute of Islamic Studies, Mumbai.
COMMENTS
Pamela Taylor
Salaams Mike,
Thanks for forwarding the article. I don't know if I had mentioned it on this list, but not long ago I had a remarkable (for me at least) epiphany. We are all probably aware of the verse that says women have rights like unto men's, but men have a degree above them. (usually translated as a degree of advantage). This has always been a stickler for me, until I happened to be reading about divorce (not rights per se) and came across the verse of which that fragment is a part.
2:227 But if their intention is firm for divorce, Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
2:228 Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
A light went on! The degree (of advantage) is that men don't have an iddah, they do not have to wait three months to remarry because they don't get pregnant. Hello! That makes sense! That men would have more rights did not.
Perhaps the most striking thing about this, is I consider myself both pretty well versed in the Qur'an as well as a dyed in the wool muslim feminist, and the obvious hadn't struck me before now. Geesh. If I, of all people, didn't realize this obvious interpretation, how many other women haven't? As far as women's rights go, we have such an easy fight -- because the tools are right in front of our eyes if we just open them up!
Of course, the iddah these days could be much shorter... pregnancy tests that are 99% effective can be used two or three days after a missed period (or, if you'd rather, a couple-three weeks after the last sexual encounter with one's ex).
Salaams,
Pamela
Mike: Pamela, thanks for highlighting this - "A light went on! The degree (of advantage) is that men don't have an iddah, they do not have to wait three months to remarry because they don't get pregnant. Hello! That makes sense! That men would have more rights did not."
...............................................
Ed:
yes, I do share your interpretation and I also take it one step further not only to include the iddah, but also the right of the x-husbands to go back on it (in case the divorce isn't the third and final one) and to return their wives during the iddah, whereas the wife cannot ask her ex-husband for the same, but on the other hand, couple that step with the verses about dignity and voila, women are honoured that way because they retain their dignity in terms of being asked back and not doing the asking.
Salaams
...............................................................
Dr. Javed Jamil
Dear Mke,
AA
I happened to be present at the lecture by Dr Asghar Ali Engineer on the subject of "Women in Islam". I was requested by the organisers to be present in the lecture and I hoped to reflect upon what the eminent speaker said. But there was such a hostile reaction to what he said that the whole lecture ended in a pandemonium. Seeing the mood of the people, the organisers did not invite me to speak, which further infuriated the audience as they believed I would undo the damage done by Dr Engineer.
I respect Dr Asghar Ali nginner as a crusader against communalism in India; but as Islamic scholar he is rank apologetic and defeatist in his approach. Reinterpretation of Quran does not mean distortion to make things suitable to the demands of the modern world. I am not going to dwell upon the subject in detail here. But I would like to make a few points in the context of Dr Enginner's lecture:
1. Men and women in Islam are equal not uniform. They have many common but many uncommon functions to perform and Islam has given each of them privileges in specific areas.
2. Dr Engineer said that there was no evidence that there were no women prophets. This is absolutely ridiculous, as this is agreed upon by all. But women not being prophets does not in any way reduce their status as a whole. Prophetic mission is a difficult mission to perform that alows a huge, uninterrupted action, which the biological woman will find hard to sustain. There are other reasons as well which require separate treatment. Women as mothers are more respectable than fathers; they are allowed the privilege to earn if they like and not earn if they like; their husbands are duty bound to earn for them and their children. They are also privileged to eiher join the armed Jihad or refuse it. If they are not prophets, they are the mothers, daughters and wives of prophets; and many of them like Mary, Saara, Hajrah, Jasiah, Fatima and Aishah are excellent examples of missionary activists.
3. Women have certain disadvanatages that can render them vulnerable to pressures; so their evidence in certain matters has half the importance of men.
4. Women have lesser economic duties to perform and liablities on them are much less; so their share in inheritance is half.
Attempts to turn equality into uniformity are ridiculous. Though all human beings basically enjoy the same rghts but the privileges change according to the functions the individuals perform. A President of the country and a CEO of a company have privileges in their own positions.
Dr Javed Jamil
Mike: Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer brings out perspectives in the light of what is just and right, that has been my reading. It is easy to misunderstand him on the face of it, but it is the right thing for you, me and every one to question everything in life - that is the essence of one's freedom. On the issue of Women Prophets, Dr. Engineer has raised a serious question, none of us may have an answer to it, but that question is legitimate. Just because it is not mentioned any where, it does not mean that there were no women prophets. Our renaissance has really begun in this millennia and we may be in surprise with the discoveries - (Pamela above has pointed out the logic for Iddah) God knows all, and we may learn little by little... may be once we understand every one of God's Hikmah, the world would come to an end.
From Dr. Javed Jamil – Islam, Quraan and Sharia
Pamela is right in saying that men as husbands have a degree of advantage ove women as wives. These relate to not only Iddah but also the fact that it is the woman who leaves her house to live with her husband. Iddah is of extraordinary importance. I have a full article on the issue. But here I am reproducing parts of what has appeared in my book, "Islam means Peace":
"Iddah is the period for which a woman has to wait after the initiation of the process of divorce or after the death of her husband. The following facts about Iddah are to be noted:
(1) The period of Iddah in case it follows the pronouncement of divorce is three menstruation-cycles if by that time she shows no signs of pregnancy.
(2) If a woman undergoing Iddah develops signs of pregnancy her Iddah will be extended till the termination of the process of delivery. (This must include the postnatal period of 40 days.)
(3) If she is having irregular menstruation cycles her Iddah will be of three months.
(4) If she is undergoing Iddah after the death of her husband its duration will be four months and ten days.
The legal provision of Iddah has enormous implications on family and social health. I was struck with the extraordinary role of Iddah during the compilation of my monograph, “Islamic Model for Control of AIDS” when to my amazement I found that Iddah would play a crucial role in protecting men and women from sexually transmitted disease. Since then I have continued to get more and more convinced about the extraordinary importance of Iddah in Family Health and Peace. One of the primary objectives of Iddah is to ensure that right from the first day of conception till the completion of the process of delivery (including postnatal period) she would be looked after financially, physically as well as socially by her husband. During this period, the husband is not entitled to formalise the divorce even if he has decided to part with her. Thus the antenatal, natal and postnatal cares are obligations imposed by Islam on fathers. This also provides the couple with an opportunity to reconcile their differences; the news that she is pregnant is more often than not likely to facilitate this reconciliation. It is obvious that such an extraordinary status of mother also ensures the safety of child.
Family is not an artificial creation of man for every born has a father and a mother. It is therefore necessary that the parentage of every child must be established beyond doubt. The establishment of the identity of mother is a foregone conclusion, as she physically delivers the child. But the establishment of the identity of father will create huge problems if the propriety of the institution of marriage is not maintained. If there had been no provision of a mandatory period of waiting it would have become impossible, in case a woman married within a few days of separating from her husband, to know the real father. If the identity of the father of the child is not established, it is bound to cause immense damage to the future prospects of the child; he or she may have to grow outside the shadow of fatherly protection. Thus Iddah preserves the family system ensuring that the children and parents live without their mutual love and affection getting diluted by any kind of suspicion. This of course also preserves the credibility and honour of the woman.
Another important role of Iddah is to prevent the sexually transmitted diseases. The provision of Iddah means that no woman can ever have sexual relations with two men without a gap of at least three months. This is greatly helpful in minimising the risks of HIV and other STDs. It is interesting to note that the incubation period of all STDs is less than 90 days, and the window period of HIV/AIDS is also about 90 days. In Syphilis for example the median period of incubation is 21 days though occasionally it may be up to 90 days. Thus in the case of Syphilis, the woman will develop symptoms of Syphilis within and not more than three months. The development of a painful swelling in her private parts is likely to prevent her from marrying till she gets relieved. The same is true of other STDs like Lymphogranuloma venereum, Reiter’s disease, Herpes etc. In the case of AIDS, while the incubation period may be several years, the blood test for HIV becomes positive within three months. So if the spread of AIDS warrants a strict vigilance a woman may get her HIV tested after the expiry of Iddah before getting married again. This rule may be used with good effect for the AIDS prevention programmes. (See my book “The Killer Sex” for details)?
Dr Javed Jamil
Moderator: Dr. Jamil, this is good research indeed and goes along with extensive research work you have done. Thanks for highlighting these items. It is critical indeed and is amazing to have included in Quraan. Though these deceases may not have been known to the common public then, but the prevention is mentioned in the book. It reinforces the idea that Quraan is for all ages. Thank you.
Dr. Inayat Lalani
A lot of of what passess for the Sunnah of the prophet must be the mischief of Abu Sufyan who hijacked Islam upon the Prophet's (PBUH) passing away and reintroduced the Jahaliyah into the body of Islam through the back door, robbing women of so many of their gains under Islam as revealed by the Quran. This, as I understand it, was the gist of a speech given by Sister Merve Kavakci last June and I was astounded by her very courageous assertions (with most of which I heartily agree). The authentic ahadith, under the Shi'a school, is said to include only about 300 whereas the ahl-e-Sunnat assert the number at 6,000 (not counting a large number of additional ahadith characterized as 'weak' ahadith, one of them including endorsement of Nikab!).
Every time I express an opinion to this effect, I am challenged as lacking the expertise (true) and not having spent the years other Ulema have devoted to the study of Islam. This is clearly an attempt to stifle debate which alone can lead to enlightenment. My answer is that you can spend your life persuing false 'knowledge' and one doesn't need a Ph.D. in anything to understand what is written. Many a voracious readers of everything have grave difficulties with the body of ahadith (Imam Bukhari clearly did) and besides, many thinking people have asserted the need for Ijtihad. If the injunctions of the Ahadith were satisfying and adequate, there would be no calls for Ijtihad (which really amounts to reassessment of the false knowledge of the deen as prescribed by the ahadith, in clear contravention of the Quran).
So let us submit every Hadith to the test of reason, reasonability and consistency with the Quran.
Inayat Lalani
Mike Ghouse
"Words" are usually the source of conflict. Through the right use of words we can bring understanding or aggravate conflict. Consider this sentence " Women have certain disadvantages that can render them vulnerable to pressures; so their evidence in certain matters has half the importance of men." and check the effects of this alternate sentence " Men and women are endowed with different physical capabilities that generates different responses to a given pressure, men or women can be half as productive at times".
God is just and his word cannot be unjust towards men or women, it is in this light we may want to understand the Qur'aan.
A Muslim is one who on consistently works on mitigating conflicts and nurturing peace and harmony.
Send your comments to: WMCArchives@Gmail.com
Subject line write: Qur'aan, Hadith and Women
The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com
Workshops Seminars Education News Letters
2665 Villa Creek Dr, Suite 206, Dallas, TX 75234
Asghar Ali Engineer, February 1, 2008
Moderator's comments are followed by the essay.
.
The more I learn about Qur’aan, the more confidence I derive knowing that God is Just, Equitable, Kind and Merciful. In this essay Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer brings to the fore the Just words of God with reference to Women.
Muslims ought to take pride that they are more equipped with knowledge of Islam today than ever before in the history of Islam. The message of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is coming to fruition, in his last speech he had said that I am leaving Qur’aan to you for guidance, read and understand on your own. No one was given the authority to interpret the book for us, we are back to full circle now focusing on the original source for knowledge, and certainly must respect what was interpreted in Sharia but fine tune it to reflect Qur’aan. A tremendous research work is being put out and thank God for the internet.
The primitive societies were termed as “Jahiliya” characterized by ignorance. Only few could read and write and the scholars who knew had an upper hand and passed on their local traditions as Universal traditions that Qur’aan had fine tuned all the native practices to be in tune with what would be universally acceptable regardless of where one lived. However the writers of Sharia law remained entrenched with their traditions.
Sharia laws were essentially compiled to understand Qur’aan in terms of “how to”, when the Lord talks about the need to pray, Sharia lays it out in terms of “how to”. The men extended the “how to’s” to cover every aspect of life. The intention was good and certainly benefits the followers. However in the areas of women, apostasy, and adultery their understanding did not reflect the universality and Justness of Qur’aan.
Islam means peace and peace is an outcome of Justice and Qur’aan is all about Justice.
A few highlights are as follows;
1. Women lost in hadiths what they had gained through Qur’an
2. Unfortunately for hadiths honesty and integrity of narrators became the only criterion rather than its conformity with the Qur’anic approach, values and ideals.
3. He thought he was ruler over women and many Qur’anic verses were explained under the ethos of men’s superiority.
4. Qur’an says it is Adam who disobeyed his Lord and acted ignorantly Thus Qur’an says “And Adam disobeyed his Lord, and was disappointed” (20:121)
5. It was too hard for men to accept equal dignity for men and women in the feudal society within which Shari’ah rules were compiled.
6. Qur’an gives equal rights and equal dignity to both men and women but Hadith literature is full of hadiths contradicting this Qur’anic approach.
7. See how in this verse Qur’an treats men and women equally and talks of equal degree of forgiveness and equal reward. In the above Hadith, on the other hand, more women than men are consigned to flames of Hell
Please read and reflect.
Mike Ghouse
http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/
QUR’AN, HADITH AND WOMEN
Asghar Ali Engineer
(Islam and Modern Age, February 2008)
What is position of women in Qur’an and Hadith? It is very interesting to compare what is stated in Qur'aan about women and what do we find on women in Hadith literature? And here I am not referring to hadiths from an other source but from what is known as Sihah Sitta (.e. six most authentic sources of Hadith). I wish our Ulama reflect on the contrast between how Qur’an treats women and how hadiths treat them. Much of woes of Muslim women will be over if we follow Qur’an rather than these hadiths.
Women lost in ahadith what they had gained through Qur’an. Today if world thinks Islam treats women in very unfair way it is because we follow hadiths rather than Qur’an as far as women are concerned. In pre-Islamic period women had lowest of low social status and Qur’an lifted them far above and our ‘Ulama never tire of saying this. But within few decades of the revelation of the Qur’an women came down to their pre-Islamic status in a fiercely male dominated society. And this was accomplished through ahadith as a legitimizing factor.
Those who narrated these ahadith never thought for a moment how they contradict Qur’an as these ahadith served the social purpose very well. Qur’an provided ideals and values but society could not rise to that level and instead dragged Islam to its own level and ahadith served that interest best.
When Islam was confined to Arabian peninsula it was different but when it spread to far off places, parts of Roman empire, Sasanid empire (Iran), Central Asia etc. these regions were very different in their culture, religious values and social ethos and it was quite natural for Islam to adapt to what these societies needed. Even Shari’ah, all jurists (fuqaha’) agree incorporated much of Arab ‘adati (customary law).
It was not easy to avoid these cultural values and customary practices found in non-Arab societies when people of these regions embraced Islam. Position of women in these regions was no different from what it was in pre-Islamic Arabia and when one embraces a religion which originated outside that region he/she does not automatically caste away his/her own cultural values and social ethos.
Also, it is a well-known fact that Islam spread far and wide much quicker than Shari’ah laws were compiled in different schools. In fact various Shari’ah schools (madahibi) came into existence in different regions where Islam had spread. Even before the Arabs could grasp full significance of Islam and adjust their lives to new values and ideals, it had already spread to various parts of the world, right up to China. In fact Islam spread to these regions with lightening speed.
It is also interesting to note that various companions of the Prophet (PBUH) also had spread to these parts of the world and these companions in many cases married local women and adopted cultural values of the region and being companions of the Prophet (PBUH) they were also source of Islamic knowledge and those converted to Islam would flock to them for guidance and hence number of ahadith were narrated by these companions relying on their memory and understanding. Thus along with authenticity of ahadith sociology of ahadith also becomes equally important.
While Qur’an was compiled during Prophet’s (PBUH) life time and when some deviations from standard recitation was noticed (on account mainly of tribal dialects) Hazrat Uthman had wisdom to compile standard copy and destroy all others and thus Qur’an was saved from differences in the text. All other copies of the Qur’an were prepared from this copy.
Ahadith, on the other hand, were compiled two to three centuries after the death of the Holy Prophet and underwent much changes due to passage of time. Though there was chain of narrators and despite honesty and integrity of narrators, there was every possibility of change in text with different narrators with even differences in their understanding and cultural background. Unfortunately for ahadith honesty and integrity of narrators became the only criterion rather than its conformity with the Qur’anic approach, values and ideals.
Also, there were those who did not hesitate to produce a hadith to legitimize some action or requirement of someone powerful and influential. Thus while there never arose any differences about the Qur’anic text, there have been all sorts of differences about authenticity or otherwise of ahadith. In fact much problems could have been avoided if ahadith in such large numbers and in different compatios had not been accepted. For these very reasons the Prophet (PBUH) had discouraged from compiling these ahadith. But ahadith became socio-cultural and socio-religious needs in vastly different circumstances.
These needs were such that a doctrine was evolved that even if a hadith stands in contradiction of the Qur’an hadith will prevail. Many Shari’ah injunctions were developed on this basis. Then various questions arose whether hadith is da’if (weak), narrated by only one or by several narrators or its different variations or whether its narrators (ravi) were da’if (weak) and so on. The whole hadith literature is full of these controversies. Also different sects relied on different ahadith to legitimize their positions. In short many controversies originated due to excessive reliance on ahadith.
Much more so ahadith were used to lower women’s status as Qur’anic ideals and values in respect of women could not be accepted by societies which treated women as subordinate to men. Men in any case wanted to retain his superiority. He thought he was ruler over women and many Qur’anic verses were explained under the ethos of men’s superiority. Most of the Qur’anic verses on women are not explained in the light of other Qur’anic verses (only reliable methodology to understand real intent of the Qur’an) but in the light of ahadith which degrade women.
I would like in this article to compare ahadith about women with Qur’anic verses and show how mutually contradictory these Qur’anic verses and ahadith are. Qur’an talks of equal dignity of men and women and even story of Adam and Hawwa is narrated in a way which does not blame Hawwa at all for eating the fruit of a tree which Adam was prohibited to go near to. Qur’an talks of creation of men and women from one nafs and hadith says Hawwa was created from rib of Adam. Qur’an says it is Adam who disobeyed his Lord and acted ignorantly Thus Qur’an says “And Adam disobeyed his Lord, and was disappointed” (20:121)
Also, the entire discourse in Qur’an on women is rights based but in Shari’ah, thanks to hadith literature, entire discourse is duty based for women and right based for men, something which one found during period of jahiliyyah. It was too hard for men to accept equal dignity for men and women in the feudal society within which Shari’ah rules were compiled.
Qur’an gives equal rights and equal dignity to both men and women but hadith literature is full of ahadith contradicting this Qur’anic approach. For example in Bukhari we find a hadith which stands in contradiction to the Qur’anic verse 33:35. The hadith is narrated thus:
“The Prophet (PBUH) urged the women to be generous with their gifts, for when he had glimpsed into the flames of Hell, he had noted the vast majority of people being tormented there were women. The women were outraged, and one of them instantly stood up and demanded to know why that was so. ‘Because,’ he replied, ‘you women grumble so much, and show ingratitude to your husbands! Even if the poor fellows spent all their lives doing things for you, you have only to be upset at the least of thing and you will say, ‘I have never received any good from you!’, At that the women began vigorously to pull off their rings, and throw them into Bilal’s Cloak. (Bukhari 1.28, Abu Dawud 439).
See the content and tenor of this hadith. It is full of anti women attitude and women are supposed to be, in this hadith, ungrateful to their husbands. As against this see the Qur’anic verse 33:35 which says, “Surely the men who submit and women who submit, and the believing men and the believing women, and the obeying men and the obeying women, and the truthful men and truthful women, and the patient men and patient women, and the humble men and humble women, and the charitable men and the charitable women, and fasting men and fasting women, and the men who guard their chastity and the women who guard, and the men who remember Allah and women who remember – Allah has prepared for them forgiveness and mighty reward.”
See how in this verse Qur’an treats men and women equally and talks of equal degree of forgiveness and equal reward. In the above hadith, on the other hand, more women than men are consigned to flames of Hell because they are ungrateful to their husbands. Qur’an no where requires women to be obedient to their husbands. It is husband who is exhorted to be kind to their wives (see 2:229) “keep them in good fellowship (bi ma’ruf) and let them go with kindness (bi ihsanin).
Also men and women are described each others garment (libas) (2:187). According to Qur’an men and women are each others zawj (one of the couple) thus indicating equal dignity and love and respect, not obedience or subordination. The Prophet (PBUH) never treated any of his wife as subordinate. He not only treated them with dignity, he often consulted them in various matters and even followed their advice. In fact Umm Salma’s advice to sacrifice animal at Hudaybiya proved very beneficial.
WOMAN HALF A WITNESS?
Let us examine one more hadith which apparently appears to be in conformity with Qur’anic provision but indeed it is not. We find it in Muslim. The hadith is narrated as under:
Prophet is reported to have said, ‘I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you.’ Upon this a woman remarked: ‘What is wrong with or common sense and with religion? ’He observed: ‘You lack of common sense (in) that the evidence of two women is equal to that of one man, that is the proof of your lack of common sense. And you spend some nights (and days) in which you do not offer prayer and in the month of Ramadan 9during the menstrual days) you do not observe fast; that is your failing in religion.’ (Muslim 31)
This hadith has several flaws. Qur’an nowhere states that she is half witness, much less because of lack of common sense. And messenger of Allah will not say such things which degrade women whom he consulted in difficult times as pointed out above. Qur’an simply says that when you take loan, write it down and let two male witnesses be summoned as witnesses and if two men are not available let one man and two women bear witness so that if one forgets, other can remind. (2:282)
This verse no where says she lacks in common sense. She may have lacked in experience as in those days women did not indulge in financial transaction. Lack of experience cannot be equated with lack of common sense. Also, if women cannot offer prayers or fast during menstruation, how can it be construed as ‘failing in religion’? It is state of disability, not lack of belief or commitment. Belief or religion has something to do with ones heart and soul, not physical condition. Our Prophet (PBU) had high respect for women and for his wives. It is unthinkable that he would say such degrading things for women. He loved Khadija, Fatima and Ayesha so much. All these women were highly intelligent and great upholders of Islam. In fact they were more firm in their belief of Islam than many men. Entire Muslim world holds these women in high respect. In fact Islam gave such high status to women and guaranteed their rights when all over the world women had no rights at all. In fact it was this general demeaning attitude towards women which is reflected in these ahadith.
WOMEN RULERS BRING BAD LUCK TO THOSE OVER WHOM THEY RULE
We find another hadith in Bukhari which is often quoted against women becoming rulers of countries or nations. In fact Bukhari has reported three traditions connected with this episode, two of which were in the chapter on “Letter of the Prophet to Chosroe and Caesar”. Abu Bakra’s hadith is no. 4425. The preceding hadith, no. 4424, was reported from Ibn Abbas who said that “the Prophet of Allah sent Abdullah Ibn Huzaifa with his letter to Chosroe. When Chosroe read it he tore it. I believe said Bin Musayyab said: Then the Prophet prayed to Allah that he tear them up completely.” The third hadith is No. 6639 reported by Bukhari in the chapter on “how the oath of Prophet was” and it goes: “When Ceaser dies there will be no Ceaser after him. When Chosroe dies there will be no Chosroe after him.
Bukhari (4425) reports from Abu Bakr ahthe following hadith: “Allah provided me with considerable benefit during the battle of the Camel with one word (or one statement). When news reached the Prophet (S.A.W.) that the Persians had appointed Chosroe’s daughter as their ruler, he said: “A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper!”
Now it is well known that Abu Bakra narrated this hadith after battle of Camel in which Hadrat Ayesha participated and the battle was aimed against Hadrat Ali. This hadith surfaces only with the narration of Abu Bakra who was aspiring for governorship of one of the provinces and wanted to please Hadrat Ali. Abu Bakra obviously had a purpose in narrating such a hadith.
It is quite contradictory to Qur’an in as much as Qur’an upholds leadership of Queen of Sheba (Bilquis) who over-rules the advice of her male advisors and makes peace with prophet Salman (Soloman). See verses 32 to 35 of Chapter 27. When Bilquis asks for opinion of all her male advisors whether we should fight or make peace with Sulaiman, they advise her to fight and not to surrender. But she over rules them and decides to make peace arguing “Surely kings when they enter a town, ruin it and make the noblest of its people to be low; and thus they do.”
Thus we see that Qur’an upholds wisdom of a woman in not fighting and making peace with stronger ruler and saves the nation from ruin. But the hadith quoted above says just the opposite that if a woman becomes ruler it would prove ruinous for the nation. The hadith thus suggests that Prophet contradicts Allah’s revelation which is not thinkable. The only conclusion in either the narrator had his own motive in narrating the hadith or could not at all understand what the Prophet said. I leave conclusion to the readers.
We find even more shocking ahadith ascribed to the Prophet regarding women. One such hadith found in Sahih Bukhari and narrated by Sahl ibn Sa’d which says “Evil omen was mentioned before the Prophet (PBUH). The Prophet (PBUH) said, “if there is evil omen in anything, it is in the house, the woman and the horse.”
This hadith equates woman with house and horse. There cannot be any comparison between the three. Also both house and horse are extremely useful for human beings which facilitate his/her living and traveling. House is from basic necessity for human beings and horse was needed in those for travel and were valued highly. They were used in wars as well as their movement was quite swift. Such thoughts are product of very low kind of mind unfortunately ascribed to a mind Allah had graced with highest kinds of thought. He had chosen him to be His Prophet, His messenger. One cannot think he would say such things.
There is one interesting hadith found in Bukhari and narrated by Ayesha. The hadith is like this: the things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me (Ayesha). They said, “prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people)”.
Ayesha said, “You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet PBUH) praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qiblah. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away, for I disliked to face him.”
We can see how some narrators equated women with dogs and donkeys and Ayesha challenged them. It shows how men held women in low esteem and ascribed their despicable thoughts to the Prophet (PBU). Always there may not be women like Ayesha to challenge such low thoughts and hadith may be believed uncritically.
Similarly we find another hadith in Sahih Bukhari narrated by Osamah which is again totally contradictory to the Qur’an. The hadith says “And I advise you to take care of the women, for they are created from a rib and the most crooked potion of the rib is its upper part. If you try to straighten it, it will break, and if you leave it, it will remain crooked, so I urge you to take care of the women.”
Very degrading to women, like similar such ahadith. It completely contradicts the Qur’an where there is no mention at all of Hawwa’s creation from the rib of Adam. This hadith also has been created to prove inferiority of women. In all the verses on women in Qur’an there is not a single verse which degrades women like this or proves her inferiority to men in any way.
This was prevailing social attitudes of men towards women which made them create such ahadith so that they could rule over them and women could not use Qur’an to claim equality with men. Qur’an was revealed to the prophet so that he could give equal dignity and status to women but society was not prepared for this in any case and sought to lower the status of women by producing such ahadith as they could not temper with the Qur’an they used another weapon to bring down status of women.
It is unfortunate that still our Ulama are not prepared to critically evaluate these anti-women ahadith. On the contrary they keep on quoting them to keep status of women lower in the society and under the thumb of women. It is precisely for this reason that non-Muslims think very adversely about Islam and how Islam has ‘suppressed’ dignity and status of women.
Time has come for Muslim women to evaluate these ahadith critically and refute the fatwas Ulama issued on the basis of such ahadith. We need great scholars of Islam among the women who could take independent position. Where are such women?
---------------------------------------------
Institute of Islamic Studies, Mumbai.
COMMENTS
Pamela Taylor
Salaams Mike,
Thanks for forwarding the article. I don't know if I had mentioned it on this list, but not long ago I had a remarkable (for me at least) epiphany. We are all probably aware of the verse that says women have rights like unto men's, but men have a degree above them. (usually translated as a degree of advantage). This has always been a stickler for me, until I happened to be reading about divorce (not rights per se) and came across the verse of which that fragment is a part.
2:227 But if their intention is firm for divorce, Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
2:228 Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods. Nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah Hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands would do better to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise.
A light went on! The degree (of advantage) is that men don't have an iddah, they do not have to wait three months to remarry because they don't get pregnant. Hello! That makes sense! That men would have more rights did not.
Perhaps the most striking thing about this, is I consider myself both pretty well versed in the Qur'an as well as a dyed in the wool muslim feminist, and the obvious hadn't struck me before now. Geesh. If I, of all people, didn't realize this obvious interpretation, how many other women haven't? As far as women's rights go, we have such an easy fight -- because the tools are right in front of our eyes if we just open them up!
Of course, the iddah these days could be much shorter... pregnancy tests that are 99% effective can be used two or three days after a missed period (or, if you'd rather, a couple-three weeks after the last sexual encounter with one's ex).
Salaams,
Pamela
Mike: Pamela, thanks for highlighting this - "A light went on! The degree (of advantage) is that men don't have an iddah, they do not have to wait three months to remarry because they don't get pregnant. Hello! That makes sense! That men would have more rights did not."
...............................................
Ed:
yes, I do share your interpretation and I also take it one step further not only to include the iddah, but also the right of the x-husbands to go back on it (in case the divorce isn't the third and final one) and to return their wives during the iddah, whereas the wife cannot ask her ex-husband for the same, but on the other hand, couple that step with the verses about dignity and voila, women are honoured that way because they retain their dignity in terms of being asked back and not doing the asking.
Salaams
...............................................................
Dr. Javed Jamil
Dear Mke,
AA
I happened to be present at the lecture by Dr Asghar Ali Engineer on the subject of "Women in Islam". I was requested by the organisers to be present in the lecture and I hoped to reflect upon what the eminent speaker said. But there was such a hostile reaction to what he said that the whole lecture ended in a pandemonium. Seeing the mood of the people, the organisers did not invite me to speak, which further infuriated the audience as they believed I would undo the damage done by Dr Engineer.
I respect Dr Asghar Ali nginner as a crusader against communalism in India; but as Islamic scholar he is rank apologetic and defeatist in his approach. Reinterpretation of Quran does not mean distortion to make things suitable to the demands of the modern world. I am not going to dwell upon the subject in detail here. But I would like to make a few points in the context of Dr Enginner's lecture:
1. Men and women in Islam are equal not uniform. They have many common but many uncommon functions to perform and Islam has given each of them privileges in specific areas.
2. Dr Engineer said that there was no evidence that there were no women prophets. This is absolutely ridiculous, as this is agreed upon by all. But women not being prophets does not in any way reduce their status as a whole. Prophetic mission is a difficult mission to perform that alows a huge, uninterrupted action, which the biological woman will find hard to sustain. There are other reasons as well which require separate treatment. Women as mothers are more respectable than fathers; they are allowed the privilege to earn if they like and not earn if they like; their husbands are duty bound to earn for them and their children. They are also privileged to eiher join the armed Jihad or refuse it. If they are not prophets, they are the mothers, daughters and wives of prophets; and many of them like Mary, Saara, Hajrah, Jasiah, Fatima and Aishah are excellent examples of missionary activists.
3. Women have certain disadvanatages that can render them vulnerable to pressures; so their evidence in certain matters has half the importance of men.
4. Women have lesser economic duties to perform and liablities on them are much less; so their share in inheritance is half.
Attempts to turn equality into uniformity are ridiculous. Though all human beings basically enjoy the same rghts but the privileges change according to the functions the individuals perform. A President of the country and a CEO of a company have privileges in their own positions.
Dr Javed Jamil
Mike: Dr. Asghar Ali Engineer brings out perspectives in the light of what is just and right, that has been my reading. It is easy to misunderstand him on the face of it, but it is the right thing for you, me and every one to question everything in life - that is the essence of one's freedom. On the issue of Women Prophets, Dr. Engineer has raised a serious question, none of us may have an answer to it, but that question is legitimate. Just because it is not mentioned any where, it does not mean that there were no women prophets. Our renaissance has really begun in this millennia and we may be in surprise with the discoveries - (Pamela above has pointed out the logic for Iddah) God knows all, and we may learn little by little... may be once we understand every one of God's Hikmah, the world would come to an end.
From Dr. Javed Jamil – Islam, Quraan and Sharia
Pamela is right in saying that men as husbands have a degree of advantage ove women as wives. These relate to not only Iddah but also the fact that it is the woman who leaves her house to live with her husband. Iddah is of extraordinary importance. I have a full article on the issue. But here I am reproducing parts of what has appeared in my book, "Islam means Peace":
"Iddah is the period for which a woman has to wait after the initiation of the process of divorce or after the death of her husband. The following facts about Iddah are to be noted:
(1) The period of Iddah in case it follows the pronouncement of divorce is three menstruation-cycles if by that time she shows no signs of pregnancy.
(2) If a woman undergoing Iddah develops signs of pregnancy her Iddah will be extended till the termination of the process of delivery. (This must include the postnatal period of 40 days.)
(3) If she is having irregular menstruation cycles her Iddah will be of three months.
(4) If she is undergoing Iddah after the death of her husband its duration will be four months and ten days.
The legal provision of Iddah has enormous implications on family and social health. I was struck with the extraordinary role of Iddah during the compilation of my monograph, “Islamic Model for Control of AIDS” when to my amazement I found that Iddah would play a crucial role in protecting men and women from sexually transmitted disease. Since then I have continued to get more and more convinced about the extraordinary importance of Iddah in Family Health and Peace. One of the primary objectives of Iddah is to ensure that right from the first day of conception till the completion of the process of delivery (including postnatal period) she would be looked after financially, physically as well as socially by her husband. During this period, the husband is not entitled to formalise the divorce even if he has decided to part with her. Thus the antenatal, natal and postnatal cares are obligations imposed by Islam on fathers. This also provides the couple with an opportunity to reconcile their differences; the news that she is pregnant is more often than not likely to facilitate this reconciliation. It is obvious that such an extraordinary status of mother also ensures the safety of child.
Family is not an artificial creation of man for every born has a father and a mother. It is therefore necessary that the parentage of every child must be established beyond doubt. The establishment of the identity of mother is a foregone conclusion, as she physically delivers the child. But the establishment of the identity of father will create huge problems if the propriety of the institution of marriage is not maintained. If there had been no provision of a mandatory period of waiting it would have become impossible, in case a woman married within a few days of separating from her husband, to know the real father. If the identity of the father of the child is not established, it is bound to cause immense damage to the future prospects of the child; he or she may have to grow outside the shadow of fatherly protection. Thus Iddah preserves the family system ensuring that the children and parents live without their mutual love and affection getting diluted by any kind of suspicion. This of course also preserves the credibility and honour of the woman.
Another important role of Iddah is to prevent the sexually transmitted diseases. The provision of Iddah means that no woman can ever have sexual relations with two men without a gap of at least three months. This is greatly helpful in minimising the risks of HIV and other STDs. It is interesting to note that the incubation period of all STDs is less than 90 days, and the window period of HIV/AIDS is also about 90 days. In Syphilis for example the median period of incubation is 21 days though occasionally it may be up to 90 days. Thus in the case of Syphilis, the woman will develop symptoms of Syphilis within and not more than three months. The development of a painful swelling in her private parts is likely to prevent her from marrying till she gets relieved. The same is true of other STDs like Lymphogranuloma venereum, Reiter’s disease, Herpes etc. In the case of AIDS, while the incubation period may be several years, the blood test for HIV becomes positive within three months. So if the spread of AIDS warrants a strict vigilance a woman may get her HIV tested after the expiry of Iddah before getting married again. This rule may be used with good effect for the AIDS prevention programmes. (See my book “The Killer Sex” for details)?
Dr Javed Jamil
Moderator: Dr. Jamil, this is good research indeed and goes along with extensive research work you have done. Thanks for highlighting these items. It is critical indeed and is amazing to have included in Quraan. Though these deceases may not have been known to the common public then, but the prevention is mentioned in the book. It reinforces the idea that Quraan is for all ages. Thank you.
Dr. Inayat Lalani
A lot of of what passess for the Sunnah of the prophet must be the mischief of Abu Sufyan who hijacked Islam upon the Prophet's (PBUH) passing away and reintroduced the Jahaliyah into the body of Islam through the back door, robbing women of so many of their gains under Islam as revealed by the Quran. This, as I understand it, was the gist of a speech given by Sister Merve Kavakci last June and I was astounded by her very courageous assertions (with most of which I heartily agree). The authentic ahadith, under the Shi'a school, is said to include only about 300 whereas the ahl-e-Sunnat assert the number at 6,000 (not counting a large number of additional ahadith characterized as 'weak' ahadith, one of them including endorsement of Nikab!).
Every time I express an opinion to this effect, I am challenged as lacking the expertise (true) and not having spent the years other Ulema have devoted to the study of Islam. This is clearly an attempt to stifle debate which alone can lead to enlightenment. My answer is that you can spend your life persuing false 'knowledge' and one doesn't need a Ph.D. in anything to understand what is written. Many a voracious readers of everything have grave difficulties with the body of ahadith (Imam Bukhari clearly did) and besides, many thinking people have asserted the need for Ijtihad. If the injunctions of the Ahadith were satisfying and adequate, there would be no calls for Ijtihad (which really amounts to reassessment of the false knowledge of the deen as prescribed by the ahadith, in clear contravention of the Quran).
So let us submit every Hadith to the test of reason, reasonability and consistency with the Quran.
Inayat Lalani
Mike Ghouse
"Words" are usually the source of conflict. Through the right use of words we can bring understanding or aggravate conflict. Consider this sentence " Women have certain disadvantages that can render them vulnerable to pressures; so their evidence in certain matters has half the importance of men." and check the effects of this alternate sentence " Men and women are endowed with different physical capabilities that generates different responses to a given pressure, men or women can be half as productive at times".
God is just and his word cannot be unjust towards men or women, it is in this light we may want to understand the Qur'aan.
A Muslim is one who on consistently works on mitigating conflicts and nurturing peace and harmony.
Send your comments to: WMCArchives@Gmail.com
Subject line write: Qur'aan, Hadith and Women
The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com
Workshops Seminars Education News Letters
2665 Villa Creek Dr, Suite 206, Dallas, TX 75234
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Respecting the Qur'aan
RESPECTING THE QUR’AN
Ingrid Mattson, PhD
President
The Islamic Society of North America
Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who broke with a mainstream national party to form his own extreme-right, anti-immigrant platform. Wilders has directed most of his hatred in recent years at Muslims. Wilders has called for the Qur’an to be banned and in the last few months has been promoting his “documentary” attacking the Qur’an. Wilders has intimated that the documentary will show a copy of the Qur’an being desecrated or destroyed.
Geert Wilders wants the Qur’an to be banned. Many Muslims want Wilders’ film to be banned. Wilders wants Muslims out of “his country” and to be denied the rights of other citizens to practice their faith. No doubt, many Dutch Muslims wish that Wilders would just go away (and Wilders has received threats of violence from some). Neither Wilders nor these Muslims will (or should) get what they want. Now what?
Many have looked to this situation only through the lense of the law. News articles have focused on threats made to Wilders’ life and the calls to ban his film. Of course, the threats are unacceptable and criminal. Wilders should be afforded the full protection of the law and those threatening violence against his person should be prosecuted.
As for the right of freedom of speech, Wilders’ film should be treated like other statements within Dutch law. The Netherlands, like most other countries, has certain restrictions on speech that is defamatory, libelous or insults a group of people based on their race or religion. The Dutch Prime Minister has publicly stated that if the film, once released, is judged to have violated the law, then his government has the duty to enforce their legislation. This treatment of Dutch Muslims as equal citizens under the law shows to the Muslim world that the Netherlands is not an enemy to Islam.
My plea is that we also need to look at this issue more broadly so we can find better ways of living together in a world in which there will always be people whose views and beliefs we find odd or even obnoxious. We should not justify or excuse extremism of any kind, whether they are racist and hateful attacks on the Muslim community or vigilante violence by Muslims against those who make such statements. What we should try to understand is why some otherwise ordinary people feel caught in the middle, and are sometimes attracted, in part, to the emotional appeals of the extremists.
In the last few decades most societies in the world have gone through enormous transitions. Many European countries have had to give up significant symbols of their national sovereignty to join the European Union and even those who did not join the EU have seen significant changes in their societies due to globalization. Even those who have benefited economically and in other ways from these changes are sometimes are troubled by the loss of traditional forms of communal solidarity and culture: local farmers’ markets, church pews filled with families on a Sunday morning, neighborhood bakeries and craftsmen; landscapes, streetscapes and the rhythm of life have changed. Perhaps each generation has a limited capacity for change, or perhaps none of us, as progressive as we claim to be, can help but romanticize the society of our youth.
An increased presence of Muslims in Europe, while part of this change, is not the cause of all these changes. Muslims did not cause a decline in attendance at European churches; they were not responsible for the fact that some churches have been turned into museums or bars. Muslims did not cause the declining birth-rate in many European societies. But the fact that Muslims are building mosques and attending religious services in higher numbers than European Christians, and that many Muslims have larger families than most European Christian families, makes Muslims easy targets of scapegoating. Europe has seen this kind of ethnic hatred before in its history. Financially-successful Jews were for many centuries viewed with jealously and resentment by some European Christians.
Muslims should not be scapegoats for the problems not of their making. At the same time, we have to be fair and acknowledge the fact that large-scale Muslim immigration to Europe has presented real challenges to these societies. Unlike in the United States, many of these immigrants arrived with little education and were often settled in large numbers in government housing that set them apart from the rest of the population. The natural process of adaptation to the new environment was stifled by many of these well-meaning policies. On the other hand, blatant and persistent discrimination experienced by many immigrants in their daily lives, combined with the availability of some extreme Islamic ideologies in the communities too often mitigated against a positive model of integration.
Most of the time, however, the problems have been cultural. This is because even when communities share the same basic values (as I believe is true of most European Christians and Muslims), the different cultural ways communities express these values can lead to misunderstandings and tensions. Our values are conveyed not only with words, but with our actions, our clothing, and our architecture.
Let’s look, for example, at the issue of respect, an important value in any society. What constitutes a respectful encounter with another? In many east-Asian societies, business cards need to be offered with two hands like a gift; to thrust a card out towards a new acquaintance is interpreted as rude. In American society, one indicates interest, respect and attention when speaking to others by looking them straight in the eye. In many Muslim cultures, such a direct gaze might be considered disrespectful, especially if one is conversing with an elder or a member of the opposite sex. I once had a student who complained to me about another student in the class: ‘he is so disrespectful to women,’ she said, ‘he never looks at me.’ The young man, an international student from a Middle Eastern country expressed dismay at her perception, ‘I was trying to respect her by not staring at her!”
The point is that you cannot simultaneously look someone straight in the eye and avert your gaze from them. Only one of these culturally specific means of signifying respect can be adopted in any one encounter. Most people learn to adapt, and even become bicultural. But this process takes time, and if the differences are politicized or idealized, conflict ensues.
As new communities settle in areas that previously were inhabited by a dominant cultural group, misunderstandings can multiply. I grew up in a mid-size Canadian town first settled by German, and then English and Irish immigrants. I heard many nasty comments when Portuguese families started moving to town and planted their front yards with vegetable gardens. We lived in a Platonic universe where beanstalks and carrot tops must line up in the backyard, never in the front.
These adjustments are natural, they happen every day across the world. Muslims have for centuries adopted their cultures and customs to new environments; that is why from Indonesia to Jordan to Senegal, Muslims differ in their dress, architecture, aesthetics, economies and other aspects of community life. Islamic law, in fact, requires the adoption of “good” customs as long as they do not violate fundamental religious principles.
European Muslims are slowly figuring out what is necessary and sacred in their lives and what is cultural and can be adjusted and adapted. Most Europeans understand that this can be a difficult process, and they are patient and supportive of their Muslim neighbors. Unfortunately, the voices of self-proclaimed nationalists – really, racists – like Wilders, often seem louder and more powerful because they are threatening. This is also true of the extremists in the Muslim community who preach against good relations with non-Muslims. Although they are small in number, they can affect great damage to society.
The most important thing to keep in mind in the midst of all this changes is that we can never live together peacefully with all our differences unless we are willing to respect the different choices that others make. We do not have to agree with each other or love each other, but we have to afford respect to each other. This means that we do not deliberately try to humiliate each other. Defacing or destroying symbols of each other’s most cherished beliefs violates the basic principle of respect.
Wilders’ actions are designed to hurt, offend, and even intimidate. This is why many Dutch people, including the current government, have rejected Wilders’ actions and insist that such hateful statements are not consistent with Dutch values of tolerance and communal harmony. Many Dutch Muslims have responded positively to an assertion of Dutch citizenship based on diversity within the framework of common values and they are working with their non-Muslim neighbors to create a positive environment of mutual respect.
Still, there are some people who are just looking for a fight. No matter how many Dutch interfaith and civic groups join with their Muslim neighbors to demonstrate their solidarity and mutual respect, al-Qaeda and their ilk will point to Wilders’ film as more proof of the “Western crusade against Islam.” And no matter how many Muslims respond to Wilders’ film calmly, or not at all, Wilders will point to the violent response of some extremists as more proof that Islam is barbaric.
All I ask is that we do not blame whole communities for the actions of a few. Muslims should not blame all the Dutch people, much less “the West,” for Wilders’ hateful actions. Similarly, no one should blame all Muslims, much less Islam, for the hateful actions of some extremists.
As for me, I have vowed that if and when Wilders releases his film, the first thing I will do is pick up my Qur’an, kiss it as a symbol of the reverence it deserves from me, then sit down and read it for an hour. This is the best defense of the Qur’an.
Ingrid Mattson, PhD
President
The Islamic Society of North America
Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who broke with a mainstream national party to form his own extreme-right, anti-immigrant platform. Wilders has directed most of his hatred in recent years at Muslims. Wilders has called for the Qur’an to be banned and in the last few months has been promoting his “documentary” attacking the Qur’an. Wilders has intimated that the documentary will show a copy of the Qur’an being desecrated or destroyed.
Geert Wilders wants the Qur’an to be banned. Many Muslims want Wilders’ film to be banned. Wilders wants Muslims out of “his country” and to be denied the rights of other citizens to practice their faith. No doubt, many Dutch Muslims wish that Wilders would just go away (and Wilders has received threats of violence from some). Neither Wilders nor these Muslims will (or should) get what they want. Now what?
Many have looked to this situation only through the lense of the law. News articles have focused on threats made to Wilders’ life and the calls to ban his film. Of course, the threats are unacceptable and criminal. Wilders should be afforded the full protection of the law and those threatening violence against his person should be prosecuted.
As for the right of freedom of speech, Wilders’ film should be treated like other statements within Dutch law. The Netherlands, like most other countries, has certain restrictions on speech that is defamatory, libelous or insults a group of people based on their race or religion. The Dutch Prime Minister has publicly stated that if the film, once released, is judged to have violated the law, then his government has the duty to enforce their legislation. This treatment of Dutch Muslims as equal citizens under the law shows to the Muslim world that the Netherlands is not an enemy to Islam.
My plea is that we also need to look at this issue more broadly so we can find better ways of living together in a world in which there will always be people whose views and beliefs we find odd or even obnoxious. We should not justify or excuse extremism of any kind, whether they are racist and hateful attacks on the Muslim community or vigilante violence by Muslims against those who make such statements. What we should try to understand is why some otherwise ordinary people feel caught in the middle, and are sometimes attracted, in part, to the emotional appeals of the extremists.
In the last few decades most societies in the world have gone through enormous transitions. Many European countries have had to give up significant symbols of their national sovereignty to join the European Union and even those who did not join the EU have seen significant changes in their societies due to globalization. Even those who have benefited economically and in other ways from these changes are sometimes are troubled by the loss of traditional forms of communal solidarity and culture: local farmers’ markets, church pews filled with families on a Sunday morning, neighborhood bakeries and craftsmen; landscapes, streetscapes and the rhythm of life have changed. Perhaps each generation has a limited capacity for change, or perhaps none of us, as progressive as we claim to be, can help but romanticize the society of our youth.
An increased presence of Muslims in Europe, while part of this change, is not the cause of all these changes. Muslims did not cause a decline in attendance at European churches; they were not responsible for the fact that some churches have been turned into museums or bars. Muslims did not cause the declining birth-rate in many European societies. But the fact that Muslims are building mosques and attending religious services in higher numbers than European Christians, and that many Muslims have larger families than most European Christian families, makes Muslims easy targets of scapegoating. Europe has seen this kind of ethnic hatred before in its history. Financially-successful Jews were for many centuries viewed with jealously and resentment by some European Christians.
Muslims should not be scapegoats for the problems not of their making. At the same time, we have to be fair and acknowledge the fact that large-scale Muslim immigration to Europe has presented real challenges to these societies. Unlike in the United States, many of these immigrants arrived with little education and were often settled in large numbers in government housing that set them apart from the rest of the population. The natural process of adaptation to the new environment was stifled by many of these well-meaning policies. On the other hand, blatant and persistent discrimination experienced by many immigrants in their daily lives, combined with the availability of some extreme Islamic ideologies in the communities too often mitigated against a positive model of integration.
Most of the time, however, the problems have been cultural. This is because even when communities share the same basic values (as I believe is true of most European Christians and Muslims), the different cultural ways communities express these values can lead to misunderstandings and tensions. Our values are conveyed not only with words, but with our actions, our clothing, and our architecture.
Let’s look, for example, at the issue of respect, an important value in any society. What constitutes a respectful encounter with another? In many east-Asian societies, business cards need to be offered with two hands like a gift; to thrust a card out towards a new acquaintance is interpreted as rude. In American society, one indicates interest, respect and attention when speaking to others by looking them straight in the eye. In many Muslim cultures, such a direct gaze might be considered disrespectful, especially if one is conversing with an elder or a member of the opposite sex. I once had a student who complained to me about another student in the class: ‘he is so disrespectful to women,’ she said, ‘he never looks at me.’ The young man, an international student from a Middle Eastern country expressed dismay at her perception, ‘I was trying to respect her by not staring at her!”
The point is that you cannot simultaneously look someone straight in the eye and avert your gaze from them. Only one of these culturally specific means of signifying respect can be adopted in any one encounter. Most people learn to adapt, and even become bicultural. But this process takes time, and if the differences are politicized or idealized, conflict ensues.
As new communities settle in areas that previously were inhabited by a dominant cultural group, misunderstandings can multiply. I grew up in a mid-size Canadian town first settled by German, and then English and Irish immigrants. I heard many nasty comments when Portuguese families started moving to town and planted their front yards with vegetable gardens. We lived in a Platonic universe where beanstalks and carrot tops must line up in the backyard, never in the front.
These adjustments are natural, they happen every day across the world. Muslims have for centuries adopted their cultures and customs to new environments; that is why from Indonesia to Jordan to Senegal, Muslims differ in their dress, architecture, aesthetics, economies and other aspects of community life. Islamic law, in fact, requires the adoption of “good” customs as long as they do not violate fundamental religious principles.
European Muslims are slowly figuring out what is necessary and sacred in their lives and what is cultural and can be adjusted and adapted. Most Europeans understand that this can be a difficult process, and they are patient and supportive of their Muslim neighbors. Unfortunately, the voices of self-proclaimed nationalists – really, racists – like Wilders, often seem louder and more powerful because they are threatening. This is also true of the extremists in the Muslim community who preach against good relations with non-Muslims. Although they are small in number, they can affect great damage to society.
The most important thing to keep in mind in the midst of all this changes is that we can never live together peacefully with all our differences unless we are willing to respect the different choices that others make. We do not have to agree with each other or love each other, but we have to afford respect to each other. This means that we do not deliberately try to humiliate each other. Defacing or destroying symbols of each other’s most cherished beliefs violates the basic principle of respect.
Wilders’ actions are designed to hurt, offend, and even intimidate. This is why many Dutch people, including the current government, have rejected Wilders’ actions and insist that such hateful statements are not consistent with Dutch values of tolerance and communal harmony. Many Dutch Muslims have responded positively to an assertion of Dutch citizenship based on diversity within the framework of common values and they are working with their non-Muslim neighbors to create a positive environment of mutual respect.
Still, there are some people who are just looking for a fight. No matter how many Dutch interfaith and civic groups join with their Muslim neighbors to demonstrate their solidarity and mutual respect, al-Qaeda and their ilk will point to Wilders’ film as more proof of the “Western crusade against Islam.” And no matter how many Muslims respond to Wilders’ film calmly, or not at all, Wilders will point to the violent response of some extremists as more proof that Islam is barbaric.
All I ask is that we do not blame whole communities for the actions of a few. Muslims should not blame all the Dutch people, much less “the West,” for Wilders’ hateful actions. Similarly, no one should blame all Muslims, much less Islam, for the hateful actions of some extremists.
As for me, I have vowed that if and when Wilders releases his film, the first thing I will do is pick up my Qur’an, kiss it as a symbol of the reverence it deserves from me, then sit down and read it for an hour. This is the best defense of the Qur’an.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Muslim response to Wilders
14 mis-translated verses of Qur'aan in the movie Fitna are corrected here below.
Mike Ghouse with commentary from Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh
“Geert Wilders, Dutch conservative lawmaker, has made a ten-minute film exposing the horrific passages of the Koran. Per AP Wilders refers to the selected verses as “fascist.’” http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/29496.html
First of all, as a Muslim, I want to thank Geert Wilders for making this documentary, the verses, as he has quoted certainly sound fascist. These verses have not only been misquoted for millennia, but were mis-translated with the intent of maligning Islam in the middle ages to protect the European kings and their kingdoms. My gratitude to Wilders comes from the fact that he is putting it on the spot light, so we have an opportunity to discuss and clarify them, hopefully for ever. Otherwise a whole lot of people would have believed in the wrong thing. Thank you my friend.
Prophet Muhammad was pelted with stones by a bunch of miscreants, he was bleeding, and his associates and angel Gabriel were requesting him to give permission to go belt the bad boys, the Prophet said no, instead he asked them to pray with him that God gave goodwill and a good sense to the misled miscreants.
Following the model of Prophet of forgiveness and the belief that there is good in every human soul, we have to relentlessly stoke the goodness in humans. I ask fellow humans in general and Muslims in particular to pray for Geert Wilders’ safety and well being.
Mr. Wilders, I have personally prayed for your safety and well being and have requested our Imams to do the same across the world. The report expressed that "You do not fear being slain, claiming 24-hour protection." Again, I admire you for your courage and conviction and request you to consider another aspect of the equation that nearly 1.5 billion Muslims believe.
Note to the Muslim Leadership:
As Muslims leaders, we have a responsibility to prevent mis-haps. To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker; one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for co-existence and world peace - God wants his creation to be in peace and harmony, and that is the chief purpose of religion. Islam is indeed peace.
Geert Wilder's is going to show a 10 minute documentary on the 25th - all hell may broke loose that day and all of us will be scrambling to defend the ugly actions of the few. If our Imams can address this in the Friday Sermons, and urge Muslims to follow the model Prophet has created, we can avoid a big mishap and turn this upcoming nightmare into a peace building effort. I request all Imams to call their counterparts around the globe to win this propaganda war with love and kindness, it is an opportunity God has provided to become leaders. If you like, please circulate.
A Prelude to Qur'aan Translations:
When the European Kings were threatened by the invading Arab armies in early part of the millennia, to safeguard and protect their Kingdoms, they came with a strategey that has come be known as Islamophobia, and their strategy was:
1. To label the Invading Kings as "Muslim", as that was one of the ways to get their subjects to fight for them.
2. To mis-translate the Qur'aan to create a permanent wedge between the two communities
3. To paint the religion negatively as a Mohammedan cult.
4. To reinforce this strategy they roped in the Pope to issue a fatwa approving crusades.
Their Blueprint worked well for them and the Arab Kings were pushed back and defeated. It is important to note that a majority of the kings of the time were thieves and robbers, whose only purpose in life was to invade and annex the neighboring territories, loot their wealth, destroy their cultures and come back home stronger and erect a statue of themselves as Heroes. Very few of them wanted to spread their faith for the purpose of spreading piety and goodwill. Their goal was to control the resources and the people; in the process they destroyed civilizations, no different than today's Neocons.
The Neocons of middle ages were exceptionally successful in steering public opinion against Islam via the translations. The foundation they laid at that time has become the basis for building baseless theories against Islam. The kings happened to be Muslims that they were against, instead their propaganda turned against all Muslims and Islam.
Dahlia Sabry is researching on the effects of this work and reports that " it was found out that translating the meanings of the holy Qur'aan offered an opportunity to distort and misinterpret its meanings. This played a crucial role in framing a negative and an inaccurate image of Islam. The problem can be ascribed mostly to translations by non-Muslims, however, also partially to translations by Muslims."
Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete (English: "Law of Mahomet the pseudo-prophet") was the first translation of the Qur'aan into Latin by Robert of Ketton in 1142. Peter the Venerable persuaded Robert to join a team he was creating to translate Arabic works into Latin in hopes of aiding the religious conversion of Muslims to Christianity. It was the standard translation for Europeans from its release until the 18th century. This translation is loaded with inaccuracies.
Another Latin translation by Ludovicus Marracci was published in 1698. It was supplemented with quotes from Qur'an commentaries "carefully juxtaposed and sufficiently garbled so as to portray Islam in the worst possible light" (Colin Turner,1997 p. xii). The title of the introductory volume of such translation was A Refutation of the Qur'an.
Such translations formed the foundation for a number of subsequent translations into English, French, Italian, German, etc. The first English translation was that of Alexander Ross published in 1649. In his introduction, Ross says "I thought good to bring it to their colours, that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter … his Alcoran" (p. A3).
Similarly, H. Reckendorf (1857) says in his Hebrew translation of the Qur'an, "I can now stop writing and ask God's pardon for the sin I committed when I profaned our sacred language and transferred to it the talk of lies and falsehood" (as cited in Abdul Aal, January 29, 2006, p. 78).
In 1734, George Sale’s translation came out based on Marracci’s earlier notorious work. In 1861, J. M. Rodwell’s work provided a further example of a writer "gunning for Islam" (Turner, 1997, p. xii).
That was the story of Neocons who shamelessly wore the Christian label, and inaccurate and brazen translations were made by Muslims as well. The Noble Qur'an, also informally known as the Hilali-Khan translation was published in early 1900's and is despicable. http://www.foundationforpluralism.com/Quraan/Not-like-Jews-and-Christians.asp
Religions emerged to allay individual fears and bring a balance in one's life and peace for the society. It is obvious that the Kings of the past have raped the religion to their own advantage and we must not give them the religious label. Their purpose was simply expansion, exertion and oppression and religion did not figure in the conquests, they were far from it.
It is time for us to strip the wrongs people have ascribed to religion, every religion, and get to know the truth. I am amazed neither the Universities, nor the responsible Governments have under taken research project to dismantle the false castles of hate from the past. It is time now, and we have begun this process.
Mike Ghouse with commentary from Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh
“Geert Wilders, Dutch conservative lawmaker, has made a ten-minute film exposing the horrific passages of the Koran. Per AP Wilders refers to the selected verses as “fascist.’” http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/29496.html
First of all, as a Muslim, I want to thank Geert Wilders for making this documentary, the verses, as he has quoted certainly sound fascist. These verses have not only been misquoted for millennia, but were mis-translated with the intent of maligning Islam in the middle ages to protect the European kings and their kingdoms. My gratitude to Wilders comes from the fact that he is putting it on the spot light, so we have an opportunity to discuss and clarify them, hopefully for ever. Otherwise a whole lot of people would have believed in the wrong thing. Thank you my friend.
Prophet Muhammad was pelted with stones by a bunch of miscreants, he was bleeding, and his associates and angel Gabriel were requesting him to give permission to go belt the bad boys, the Prophet said no, instead he asked them to pray with him that God gave goodwill and a good sense to the misled miscreants.
Following the model of Prophet of forgiveness and the belief that there is good in every human soul, we have to relentlessly stoke the goodness in humans. I ask fellow humans in general and Muslims in particular to pray for Geert Wilders’ safety and well being.
Mr. Wilders, I have personally prayed for your safety and well being and have requested our Imams to do the same across the world. The report expressed that "You do not fear being slain, claiming 24-hour protection." Again, I admire you for your courage and conviction and request you to consider another aspect of the equation that nearly 1.5 billion Muslims believe.
Note to the Muslim Leadership:
As Muslims leaders, we have a responsibility to prevent mis-haps. To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker; one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for co-existence and world peace - God wants his creation to be in peace and harmony, and that is the chief purpose of religion. Islam is indeed peace.
Geert Wilder's is going to show a 10 minute documentary on the 25th - all hell may broke loose that day and all of us will be scrambling to defend the ugly actions of the few. If our Imams can address this in the Friday Sermons, and urge Muslims to follow the model Prophet has created, we can avoid a big mishap and turn this upcoming nightmare into a peace building effort. I request all Imams to call their counterparts around the globe to win this propaganda war with love and kindness, it is an opportunity God has provided to become leaders. If you like, please circulate.
A Prelude to Qur'aan Translations:
When the European Kings were threatened by the invading Arab armies in early part of the millennia, to safeguard and protect their Kingdoms, they came with a strategey that has come be known as Islamophobia, and their strategy was:
1. To label the Invading Kings as "Muslim", as that was one of the ways to get their subjects to fight for them.
2. To mis-translate the Qur'aan to create a permanent wedge between the two communities
3. To paint the religion negatively as a Mohammedan cult.
4. To reinforce this strategy they roped in the Pope to issue a fatwa approving crusades.
Their Blueprint worked well for them and the Arab Kings were pushed back and defeated. It is important to note that a majority of the kings of the time were thieves and robbers, whose only purpose in life was to invade and annex the neighboring territories, loot their wealth, destroy their cultures and come back home stronger and erect a statue of themselves as Heroes. Very few of them wanted to spread their faith for the purpose of spreading piety and goodwill. Their goal was to control the resources and the people; in the process they destroyed civilizations, no different than today's Neocons.
The Neocons of middle ages were exceptionally successful in steering public opinion against Islam via the translations. The foundation they laid at that time has become the basis for building baseless theories against Islam. The kings happened to be Muslims that they were against, instead their propaganda turned against all Muslims and Islam.
Dahlia Sabry is researching on the effects of this work and reports that " it was found out that translating the meanings of the holy Qur'aan offered an opportunity to distort and misinterpret its meanings. This played a crucial role in framing a negative and an inaccurate image of Islam. The problem can be ascribed mostly to translations by non-Muslims, however, also partially to translations by Muslims."
Lex Mahumet pseudoprophete (English: "Law of Mahomet the pseudo-prophet") was the first translation of the Qur'aan into Latin by Robert of Ketton in 1142. Peter the Venerable persuaded Robert to join a team he was creating to translate Arabic works into Latin in hopes of aiding the religious conversion of Muslims to Christianity. It was the standard translation for Europeans from its release until the 18th century. This translation is loaded with inaccuracies.
Another Latin translation by Ludovicus Marracci was published in 1698. It was supplemented with quotes from Qur'an commentaries "carefully juxtaposed and sufficiently garbled so as to portray Islam in the worst possible light" (Colin Turner,1997 p. xii). The title of the introductory volume of such translation was A Refutation of the Qur'an.
Such translations formed the foundation for a number of subsequent translations into English, French, Italian, German, etc. The first English translation was that of Alexander Ross published in 1649. In his introduction, Ross says "I thought good to bring it to their colours, that so viewing thine enemies in their full body, thou must the better prepare to encounter … his Alcoran" (p. A3).
Similarly, H. Reckendorf (1857) says in his Hebrew translation of the Qur'an, "I can now stop writing and ask God's pardon for the sin I committed when I profaned our sacred language and transferred to it the talk of lies and falsehood" (as cited in Abdul Aal, January 29, 2006, p. 78).
In 1734, George Sale’s translation came out based on Marracci’s earlier notorious work. In 1861, J. M. Rodwell’s work provided a further example of a writer "gunning for Islam" (Turner, 1997, p. xii).
That was the story of Neocons who shamelessly wore the Christian label, and inaccurate and brazen translations were made by Muslims as well. The Noble Qur'an, also informally known as the Hilali-Khan translation was published in early 1900's and is despicable. http://www.foundationforpluralism.com/Quraan/Not-like-Jews-and-Christians.asp
Religions emerged to allay individual fears and bring a balance in one's life and peace for the society. It is obvious that the Kings of the past have raped the religion to their own advantage and we must not give them the religious label. Their purpose was simply expansion, exertion and oppression and religion did not figure in the conquests, they were far from it.
It is time for us to strip the wrongs people have ascribed to religion, every religion, and get to know the truth. I am amazed neither the Universities, nor the responsible Governments have under taken research project to dismantle the false castles of hate from the past. It is time now, and we have begun this process.
Geert Wilders produces 14 Verses of Qur'aan in the movie "Fitna".
Geert Wilders adds "When taking the Koran seriously as divine revelation, a superficial review of the Koran’s extremist verses is not what meshes with democracies."
All the fourteen verses quoted below have one theme in common "Punishment" for those who do not follow the rules. Mr. Geert may understand this better, if he were to look at it from an universal perspective and not as Islam V. Christianity issue.
One can find ‘punitive’ verses in every holy book. However, the critical element overlooked is the most powerful and dominant aspect of the creator; Qur'aan 1:1 "In the name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace." This verse is repeated 113 times in Qur’aan, more than any other verse.
For societies to function on equilibrium there must be law and order. When there is justice in a society, peace is a natural outcome. The Criminal and Civil laws are designed to bring net-peace to the society. For every violation of a rule, punishment is determined. If there were no punishment, then crimes go un-checked creating chaos in the society.
From a common man’s perspective, the word ‘painful doom’ appears to be cruelty coming from a kind God. Well, then what should hold any one from murdering and butchering the other. If you are a good guy who holds the temptations to steal someone else's hard earned goods, and the bad guys steal with no consequences to it, then every one may resort to stealing. What will happen to a society when every one is stealing, lying or cheating? No one would trust and everyone is frightened of the other.
Imagine the nightmare in America, if we were to remove the punishment aspect from the United States Constitution, civil and criminal laws.
Religions emerged to allay individual fears and bring a balance in one's life and peace for the society. It is time for us to strip the wrongs people have ascribed to religion, indeed every religion, and find the truth for ourselves. I cannot believe that the Universities and responsible Governments have not undertaken the research to dismantle the false castles of hate from the past.
We have undertaken the work to fix 60 misrepresented verses, hopefully to mitigate the conflicts and nurture goodwill for co-existence, as citizens of the world, you and I, every one included, have the responsibility to watch for the trouble makers whose business is manufacturing enemies and cashing in on fears of ordinary people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surah 9: Repentance
A full copy of the text from Geert Wilders is pasted at the bottom that includes 14 verse that sounds fascist, indeed they are as quoted. Actual verses from Qur'aan are pulled with each one of the 14 verses.
Mohammad Asad - http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/
1:1 In the name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace:
According to most of the authorities, this invocation (which occurs at the beginning of every surah with the exception of surah 9) constitutes an integral part of "The Opening" and is, therefore, numbered as verse I. In all other instances, the invocation "in the name of God" precedes the surah as such, and is not counted among its verses. - Both the divine epithets rahman and rahrim are derived from the noun rahmah, which signifies "mercy", "compassion", "loving tenderness" and, more comprehensively, "grace". From the very earliest times, Islamic scholars have endeavoured to define the exact shades of meaning which differentiate the two terms. The best and simplest of these explanations is undoubtedly the one advanced by Ibn al-Qayyim (as quoted in Manar I, 48): the term rahman circumscribes the quality of abounding grace inherent in, and inseparable from, the concept of God's Being, whereas rahrim expresses the manifestation of that grace in, and its effect upon, His creation-in other words, an aspect of His activity.(Quran Ref: 1:1 )
#1. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve. 3Mohammad Asad - http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/ At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:3 And a proclamation from God and His Apostle [is herewith made] unto all mankind on this day of the Greatest Pilgrimage: "God disavows all who ascribe divinity to aught beside Him, and [so does] His Apostle. Hence, if you repent, it shall be for your own good; and if you turn away, then know that you can never elude God!" And unto those who are bent on denying the truth give thou [O Prophet] the tiding of grievous chastisement.
There is no unanimity among the commentators as to what is meant by "the day of the Greatest Pilgrimage". Most of them assume that it refers to the pilgrimage in the year 9H., in which the Prophet himself did not participate, having entrusted Abu Bakr with the office of amir al-hajj. This very fact, however, makes it improbable that the designation "the Greatest Pilgrimage" should have been given in the Qur'an to this particular pilgrimage. On the other hand, there exists a Tradition on the authority of `Abd Allah ibn `Umar to the effect that the Prophet described in these very words the last pilgrimage led by himself in 10 H. and known to history as the Farewell Pilgrimage (Zamakhshari, Razi); one may, therefore, assume that it is this which is alluded to here. If this assumption is correct, it would justify the conclusion that verses 3 and 4 of this surah were revealed during the Farewell Pilgrimage, i.e., shortly before the Prophet's death. This might explain the-otherwise perplexing-statement, reliably attributed to the Prophet's Companion Al-Bara' (Bukhari, Kitab at-Tafsir), that At-Tawbah was the last surah revealed to the Prophet: for, although it is established beyond any doubt that the surah as a whole was revealed in 9 H. and was followed by several other parts of the Qur'an, e.g., Al-Ma'idah, it is possible that what Al-Bard' had in mind were only these two key-verses (3 and 4) of At-Tawbah, which conceivably were revealed during the Farewell Pilgrimage.(Quran Ref: 9:3 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: This is a classic example of misinterpretation of the Quran. You needn’t look very far in understanding what the verse is talking about. The VERY NEXT VERSE talks about observing peace treaties and NOT attacking those people that weren’t a threat! Here is the verse: (9:4. Except those of the Mushrikin with whom you have a treaty, and who have broken that treaty, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty for them until the end of their term. Surely, Allah loves those who have Taqwa (awareness of God).)
Mike Ghouse: There is just a God, and there is no Muslim, Christian or other God. If Wilders can see one source of Creation called God, he would not have the problem. God is essentially saying if you have some one else besides me, go to him or her, don’t come to me if you don’t believe in me.
#2. Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. 5Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:5 And so, when the sacred months are over [6] , slay those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God wherever you may come upon them, [7] and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place [8] ! Yet if they repent, and take to prayer, and render the purifying dues, let them go their way: for, behold, God is much forgiving, a dispenser of grace. [9]9:2 [Announce unto them:] "Go, then, [freely] about the earth for four months [2] -but know that you can never elude God, and that, verily, God shall bring disgrace upon all who refuse to acknowledge the truth!"
9:5 Article: http://www.foundationforpluralism.com/Quraan/Slay-the-idolaters-whereever-you-find-them.asp .
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: The four months were given for the hostile people so that they can come and go peacefully amongst the Muslims and see what Islam is about. If it was not for them, they could leave the Holy Lands, and seek refuge elsewhere. If the whole purpose was killing and butchering them, then what is the purpose behind giving them four months??
# 3. Don't let idolaters tend the sanctuaries. Their works are in vain and they will be burned in the Fire. 17
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:17 IT IS NOT for those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God to visit or tend [26] God's houses of worship, the while [by their beliefs] they bear witness against themselves that they are denying the truth. It is they whose works shall come to nought, and they who in the fire shall abide [27]
In its transitive form, the verb `amara comprises the meanings of both visiting and maintaining a place; hence my rendering of an ya'muru as "that they should visit or tend".(Quran Ref: 9:17 )
Some of the commentators conclude from this verse that "those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God" are not allowed to enter mosques ("God's houses of worship"). This conclusion, however, is entirely untenable in view of the fact that in 9 H. -that is, after the revelation of this surah -the Prophet himself lodged a deputation of the pagan Banu Thaqif in the mosque at Medina (Razi). Thus, the above verse expresses no more than the moral incongruity of the unbelievers' "visiting or tending God's houses of worship". As regards their exclusion from the central mosque of Islam at Mecca ("the Inviolable House of Worship"), see verse 28 of this surah.(Quran Ref: 9:17 )
9:28 O YOU who have attained to faith! Those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God are nothing but impure: [37] and so they shall not approach the Inviolable House of Worship from this year onwards [38] And should you fear poverty, then [know that] in time God will enrich you out of His bounty, if He so wills: [39] for, verily, God is all-knowing, wise!
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: The whole purpose of all religions, including Judaism and Christianity is that God alone should be worshipped. If polytheists were allowed to tend to or attend or build the holiest sanctuaries whose whole foundation was on Tawheed (the sole worship of God), it would be a huge contradiction in the religion. So to avoid this contradiction and conflict, Islam very clearly outlines the rules about who could or couldn’t come to the Haram of Makkah.
Bear in mind that the Prophet himself hosted a delegation of Christian dignitaries and priests from Najran, whom he allowed to STAY and whom he allowed to PRAY in his own mosque in the Holy city of Madina, the second holiest site to all Muslims.
Mike Ghouse:: Those who do not believe in God, simply cannot serve in the sanctuary with sincerity. Obviously one feels the pain of doing things that which is not in his or her nature. Caveat: There is no compulsion in faith, no one can push any one to believe what he or she is not willing to.
#4. Give tiding of a painful doom to Christians and Jews. 34Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:34 O you who have attained to faith! Behold, many of the rabbis and monks do indeed wrongfully devour men's possessions and turn [others] away from the path of God. But as for all who lay up treasures of gold and silver and do not spend them for the sake of Gods [51] - give them the tiding of grievous suffering [in the life to come]:
Most probably this is, in the first instance, an allusion to the wealth of the Jewish and Christian communities, and their misuse of this wealth. Some of the commentators, however, are of the opinion that the reference is wider, comprising all people, including Muslims, who hoard their wealth without spending anything thereof on righteous causes.(Quran Ref: 9:34 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: The purpose of religious leadership is to focus on the Hereafter, and they should lead by example is this respect. If they are seen to be hoarding wealth, and not distributing it to the poor and needy, what kind of example are they setting for their followers? Also bear in mind that the condemnation in this verse is the hoarding of ILLICITLY gained funds and riches.
Mike Ghouse: Another good example of misquoting the Verses. Indeed, those (not all) who embezzle public funds need to be punished, be it Muslim, Jew, Christian or otherwise. Those are the laws of any civilized nation including the Netherlands. In the verse 34, there is word like Christian and Jew.
Pasted below is the transliteration and actual Quranic verse.
Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo inna katheeran mina alahbari waalrruhbani layakuloona amwala alnnasi bialbatili wayasuddoona AAan sabeeli Allahi waallatheena yaknizoona alththahaba waalfiddata wala yunfiqoonaha fee sabeeli Allahi fabashshirhum biAAathabin aleemin
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الأَحْبَارِ وَالرُّهْبَانِ لَيَأْكُلُونَ أَمْوَالَ النَّاسِ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَيَصُدُّونَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللّهِ وَالَّذِينَ يَكْنِزُونَ الذَّهَبَ وَالْفِضَّةَ وَلاَ يُنفِقُونَهَا فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ فَبَشِّرْهُم بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ (9:34)
#5. If you refuse to fight, Allah will afflict you with a painful doom. 39
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:39 If you do not go forth to war [in God's cause], He will chastise you with grievous chastisement, and will place another people in your stead - whereas you shall in no wise harm Him: for, God has the power to will anything.
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: The purpose of religious leadership is to focus on the Hereafter, and they should lead by example is this respect. If they are seen to be hoarding wealth, and not distributing it to the poor and needy, what kind of example are they setting for their followers? Also bear in mind that the condemnation in this verse is the hoarding of ILLICITLY gained funds and riches.
Mike Ghouse: In the USA, and perhaps in the Netherlands, these men are referred to as draft dodgers, during the Vietnam war if you dodge going to the war, you faced grievous chastisement by the Government of the United states of America, even though that was the wrong war. Perhaps Netherlands may not be sympathetic towards them either.
#6. Disbelievers go to hell. 49
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:49 And among them there was [many a one] who said," [71] Grant me permission [to remain at home], and do not put me to too hard a test!" Oh, verily, [by making such a request] they had [already failed in their test and] succumbed to a temptation to evil: [72] and, behold, hell will indeed encompass all who refuse to acknowledge the truth!
See verses 44 and 45 above. It is to be noted that both the verbal form la taftinni (rendered by me as "do not put me to too hard a test") and the noun fitnah have the same root, comprising a great complex of meanings: e.g., test, trial, affliction. temptation to evil, seduction, persecution, oppression, discord, civil strife, etc. (cf. surah 8, note 25). Since it is impossible in any language but Arabic to reproduce all these many shades of meaning in a single expression, the rendering of the term fitnah must necessarily vary in accordance with the context in which it is used.(Quran Ref: 9:49 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: Here the analogy of the draft-dodgers is appropriate. Anyone who opposed or even voices dissent in the “war on terror” was labeled unpatriotic. But, here the verse is referring to those hypocrites who showed that they were Muslims in front, but internally held malice against the Muslims. Part of their malice was not supporting the Muslims in anything they did including fighting if the need was there. God chastises these people, as their negative actions raised disorder and disunity and pessimism and negativity amongst even the true Muslims.
Mike Ghouse: Any one who refuses to acknowledge the truth must be punished. I don’t know what kind of tortures Netherlands applies to criminals, but most nations in the world including the United States of American, has used the water boarding techniques to extract the truth.
God could have made us all sinless angels; instead he chose to make us humans, giving guidance on one hand, temptations on the other – then giving room to make mistakes, and room for correction. Islam has not claimed monopoly to heaven; it is assured to those who do good deeds. Good deeds are defined by Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as how your treat others.
#7. Those who vex the Prophet, for them there is a painful doom. 60
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:60 The offerings given for the sake of God [83] are [meant] only for the poor and the needy, and those who are in charge thereof, [84] and those whose hearts are to be won over, and for the freeing of human beings from bondage, and [for] those who are over burdened with debts, and [for every struggle] in God's cause, and [for] the wayfarer: [this is] an ordinance from God - and God is all-knowing, wise. [85]
Note 83/81: Since there is no English equivalent for the term sadaqat (sing. sadagah), I am rendering it here as "offerings given for the sake of God". This comprises everything that a believer freely gives to another person, out of love or compassion, as well as what he is morally or legally obliged to give, without expecting any worldly return: that is, charitable gifts and deeds of every description (which is the primary meaning of sadaqat -e.g., in 2:263 and 264), as well as the obligatory tax called zakah ("the purifying dues", because its payment purifies, as it were, a person's property from the taint of selfishness). In the context of the above verse, this term refers to the funds thus collected and administered by the Muslim community or state. When these funds are disbursed for the purposes stipulated in verse 60, they assume once more - this time in relation to the recipients-the aspect of "charitable gifts".(Quran Ref: 9:58 )
Note 84- I.e., the officials entrusted with the collection and administration of zakah funds.(Quran Ref: 9:60 Note 85: These eight categories circumscribe all the purposes for which zakah funds may be expended. By "those whose hearts are to be won over" are apparently meant such non-Muslims as are close to understanding and, perhaps, accepting Islam, and for whose conversion every effort should be made, either directly or indirectly (i.e., by means of the widest possible propagation of the teachings of Islam). As regards the expression fi 'r-rigab ("for the freeing of human beings from bondage"), which relates both to the ransoming of prisoners of war and to the freeing of slaves, see surah 2, note 146. The term al-gharimun describes people who are overburdened with debts contracted in good faith. which - through no fault of their own - they are subsequently unable to redeem. The expression "in God's cause" embraces every kind of struggle in righteous causes, both in war and in peace, including expenditure for the propagation of Islam and for all charitable purposes. Regarding the meaning of ibn as-sabil ("wayfarer"), see surah 2, note 145.(Quran Ref: 9:60 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: I don’t see anything that can be held as negative in the verse. It is simply talking about giving in charity, and that includes to non-muslims.
Mike Ghouse: Another falsity.
#8. Those who oppose Allah and His messenger will burn in the fire of hell. 63Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:63 Do they not know that for him who sets himself against God and His Apostle there is in store the fire of hell, therein to abide -that most awesome disgrace?
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: This verse was specifically for those hypocrites who raised their voices of dissent and fueled disunity amongst the Muslims. It is not a general verse for everyone. The next verse emphasizes this point.
Mike Ghouse: Once you pledge your allegiance, and then betray it to do harm, it is called treason. However, if you chose not to believe, but not hurt any one in the process, you go Scot free. Justness is paramount in Islamic values. This is no different than the civil laws of any nation.
# 9. Allah promises hypocrites and disbelievers the fire of hell. Allah curses them. They will have a lasting torment. 68Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:68 God- has promised the hypocrites, both men and women-as well as the [outright] deniers of the _ truth-the fire of hell, therein to abide: this shall be their allotted_ portion. For, God has rejected them, and long-lasting suffering awaits them.
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: The reason hypocrisy is so bad is because these were the “wolves in sheep’s clothing”, i.e under the guise of being Muslims they fueled rancor amongst the Muslims. It is better to know your enemy up front, so you can avoid them, rather than an outwardly friendly person who is really your enemy.
Mike Ghouse: Please remember God is merciful and forgiver. Prescription of punishment is a deterrent to crime, at least most average people will not commit crime. Mr. Wilders, Welcome to the United States of America, and particularly Texas, those who deny the truth get the life time imprisonment or the electric chair.
#10. Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway. 73
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:73 O PROPHET! Strive hard against the deniers of the truth and the hypocrites, and be adamant with them. [101] And [if they do not repent,] their goal shall be hell -and how vile a journey's end!
Note 101 - I.e., "do not compromise with them in matters of principle". Regarding the meaning of the verb jahada ("he strove hard", i.e., in a righteous cause), see surah 4, note 122. The imperative jahid is obviously used here in its spiritual connotation, implying efforts at convincing both the outspoken unbelievers and the waverers, including the various types of hypocrites spoken of in the preceding passages. Although the imperative is addressed in the first instance to the Prophet, it is considered to be morally binding on all believers.(Quran Ref: 9:73 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: Comments It is obvious that the order is for striving to guide them, otherwise the translation be adamant would be rendered useless if one was to simply kill them. If the meaning is punishment, then punishing criminals is not wrong.
Mike Ghouse: Think in terms of civic societies and how the criminals are punished or at least there is a law ranging from a day in Jail to the death penalty. Shall we be lenient to rapists, murderers? Shall we tell them, that we believe in civility and as a bonus for their crimes, there is no punishment fro them.
#11. Allah will afflict disbelievers with a painful doom in this world and the Hereafter. 74
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:74 [The hypocrites] swear by God that they have said nothing [wrong]; yet most certainly have they uttered a saying which amounts to a denial of the truth, [102] and have [thus] denied the truth after [having professed] their self-surrender to God: for they were aiming at something which was beyond their reach. [103] And they could find no fault [with the Faith] save that God had enriched them and [caused] His Apostle [to enrich them] out of His bounty! [104] Hence, if they repent, it will be for their own good. but if they turn away, God will cause them to suffer grievous suffering in this world and in the life to come, and they will find no helper on earth, and none to give [them] succour.
Note 102- See the first sentence of verse 61 above, and the corresponding note 86. The allegation that the Prophet deceived himself in the matter of revelation is, naturally, equivalent to disbelief in the outcome of his revelation, i.e., the Qur'an.(Quran Ref: 9:74 )
Note 103 - Lit., "which they were unable to attain to". The classical commentators take this as a reference to an abortive plot, on the part of some of the hypocrites, to kill the Prophet during the expedition to Tabuk. However, without contesting the validity of this historical interpretation, I believe that the above allusion has a far deeper meaning-namely, the existential impossibility of one's ever attaining to inner peace without a positive belief that man's life has meaning and purpose, either of which can be glimpsed only through the revelations bestowed on those exceptionally gifted and receptive personalities, the prophets. (An indirect reference to divine revelation as the only source of this kind of cognition appears in 96:5, that is, in the earliest Qur'anic passage revealed to the Prophet.) Thus, torn between their half-hearted desire to "surrender themselves to God" and their unwillingness to accept the divine guidance offered them by the Prophet, the hypocrites "were aiming at something which was beyond their reach".(Quran Ref: 9:74 )
Note 104- I.e., by means of the spiritual guidance contained in the Qur'an and the material welfare resulting from an adherence to its moral and social principles. The above phrase implies that the reluctance of the hypocrites to pay heed to the Prophet was not due to their finding fault with the Faith as such but, rather, to their lack of gratitude for the spiritual and material benefits which they had derived from it. (Because of its historical associations, most of this verse is expressed in the past tense, although its moral import is obviously timeless.)(Quran Ref: 9:74 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: Comments
#12. For disbelievers there will be a painful doom. 90
Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:90 AND THERE came [unto the Apostle] such of the bedouin as had some excuse to offer, [with the request] that they be granted exemption, [122] whereas those who were bent on giving the lie to God and His Apostle [simply] remained at home. [123] [And] grievous suffering is bound to befall such of them as are bent on denying the truth!
Note 122 - I.e., from participating in the expedition to Tabuk. The term al-mu'adhdhirun connotes both "those having a valid excuse (`udhr)" and "those offering false excuses"; it is, therefore, best rendered as "such as had some excuse to offer". The specific mention of the a'rab ("bedouin") in this and the following passages probably arises from the fact that their attitude - positive or negative-towards Islam was of the greatest importance within the context of early Muslim history, inasmuch as the message of Muhammad could not obtain a real, lasting foothold in Arabia without first securing the allegiance of those warlike nomads and half-nomads, who constituted the great majority of the Peninsula's population. At the time when the Prophet was preparing to set out towards Tabuk, many of the already-converted tribesmen were willing to go to war under his leadership (and, in fact, did so), while others were afraid lest in their absence their encampments, denuded of man-power, be raided by hostile, as yet unconverted tribes (Razi); others, again, were simply averse to exposing themselves to the hardships of a campaign in distant lands, which did not seem to them to have any bearing on their own, immediate interests.(Quran Ref: 9:90 )
Note 123 - I.e., without even caring to come to Medina and to excuse themselves.(Quran Ref: 9:90 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: All religions carry the same criteria, that if you don’t believe in the fundamentals of that particular religion, you will be punished. Why is Islam being singled out?
Again the verses in question are about the hypocrites of the time.
Mike Ghouse: The key phrase is bent on telling the lies, which is denying the truth.
#13. Don't pray for idolaters (not even for your family) after it is clear they are people of hell-fire. 113Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:113 IT DOES NOT behove the Prophet and those who have attained to faith to pray that they who ascribed divinity to aught beside God be forgiven [by Him] even though they happened to be [their] near of kin [148] -after it has been made clear unto them that those [dead sinners] are destined for the blazing fire.
Note: As is obvious from the sequence, this prohibition relates to the dead among such sinners-i.e., those who have died without repentance (Zamakhshari, Razi)-and not to those who are still living: for "a prayer for forgiveness in respect of a living [sinner] ... amounts to asking God that He grace him with His guidance ... and this is permissible" (Manar XI, 60).(Quran Ref: 9:113 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: There is no point in praying for one who has died as a polytheist, as this is an unforgivable sin. This verse was specifically revealed about the Uncle of the Prophet SAW, whom the Prophet loved very much. If the Prophet was not allowed to pray for him then how can any regular person from his followers?
Mike Ghouse: Those who do not believe in God, don't really have to worry about any punishment after death as there is no God for them to believe in the first place, prayers for them don't mean a thing. However, God's most endearing quality, that comes as a creator is kindness and grace that he or she reserves to itself. (deliberate use of words). Then he advises in the most pluralistic terms, giving respect to one's belief. Mind you, disagreement is handled in the most civil terms, putting the other person on equal footing.
109:1 SAY: "O you who deny the truth!
109:2 "I do not worship that which you worship,
109:3 and neither do you worship that which I worship!
109:4 "And I will not worship ~hat which you have [ever] worshipped,
109:6 Unto you, your moral law, and unto me, mine !
#14. Fight disbelievers who are near you, and let them see the harshness in you. 123 Mohammad Asad - At-Tauba (The Repentance)
9:123 O you who have attained to faith! Fight against those deniers of the truth who are near you, and let them find you adamant ; [163] and know that .God is with those who are conscious of Him.
Note 163- I.e., uncompromising with regard to ethical principles. For the general circumstances in which war is permitted, see 2:190-194, 22:39, 60:8-9, and the corresponding notes, as well as notes 7 and 9 on verse 5 of this surah. The reference to "those deniers of the truth who are near you" may arise from the fact that only "those who are near" can be dangerous in a physical sense or, alternatively, that - having come from afar- they have already approached the Muslim country with an aggressive intent.(Quran Ref: 9:123 )
Imam Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh: Uncompromising rigidity in the matters of right and wrong, black and white is not something to be ashamed of. If I am not harsh in for example somebody robbing my house at night by calling the police and prosecuting those involved, what message does it give?
Mike Ghouse: How does one translate Adamant to harshness? Shows lack of freedom on the part of Neocons to question what is dished out to them. They are taking that false translation as gospel. The least they can do is see if there is another translation. Isn’t that what democracy is all about?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zia-ul-Haq Shaikh
ICI is fortunate to have Shaikh Zia as Imam of our center. Imam Zia ul Haque Sheikh was born in Azad Kashmir, and at the age of four he migrated to England with his parents. He attended regular schools until the age of thirteen, when he enrolled in a full time Islamic school.
He memorized the Quran, and at the age of sixteen, he started an Islamic Theology course, which consisted of Arabic Syntax, Etymology and Grammar, Logic, Quranic Exegesis, Hadith Exegesis, Comparative Religions, Islamic Jurisprudence of the four main schools of thought, Foundations of Jurisprudence, Quran and Hadith, and other subjects. After extensive studying for approximately twelve years, he graduated in 1994 with a Masters in Islamic Theology. He is still engaged in various courses to further his education.
He is a founding member and Board Member of the North Texas Islamic Council, an umbrella organization representing Islamic Organizations in the North Texas Area. He is also one of the Board Members of Irving Faiths together, a group of various religious organizations, dedicated to Peace and Harmony between faiths.
He is one of the instructors at Suffa Academy in the Islamic Association of North Texas, teaching subjects such as Seerah, Aqidah, and Hadith studies.
He also conducts regular study circles at the Islamic Center of Irving, and is often invited to speak at colleges, universities, conferences and seminars.
He is actively involved in Interfaith and Dawah work.
He has served as an Imam in the USA since 1996.
Education & Other Skills:
Masters in Arabic and Islamic Theology
Memorized the complete Qur'an
Languages: Arabic, Urdu, English, Punjabi, Gujarati fluently
Has his own website : www.isaina.org
Has written a complete explanation of Imam Bukhari's Book of Iman
Hobbies & Interests:
Soccer, Weight Training, Keeping Fit, Dawah Work
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Ghouse is a Speaker, Thinker and a Writer. He is president of the Foundation for Pluralism and is a frequent guest on talk radio and local television network discussing interfaith, political and civic issues. He is the founding president of World Muslim Congress with a simple theme: Good for Muslims and good for the world. His comments, news analysis and columns can be found on the Websites and Blogs listed at his personal website www.MikeGhouse.net. Mike is a Dallasite for nearly three decades and Carrollton is his home town. He can be reached at MikeGhouse@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Grant Swank
Koran's Verses via Dutch Film
December 04, 2007 12:00 PM EST
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/29496.html
Geert Wilders, Dutch conservative lawmaker, has made a ten-minute film exposing the horrific passages of the Koran.
Per AP Wilders refers to the selected verses as “’fascist.’”
He does not fear being slain, claiming 24-hour protection.
Theo van Gogh, film director, made “Submission” available for public viewing. It was a “fictional study of abused Muslim women with scenes of near-naked women with Quaranic texts engraved on their flesh.”
Theo van Gogh was murdered—shot with throat slit by a Muslim extremist. His body was discovered on an Amsterdam street in 2004.
“Prominent Muslim critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who wrote the (van Gogh) screenplay, was threatened in a note left on Van Gogh's body. She now lives under round-the-clock protection in the United States.
“Wilders plans to depict parts of the Quran he says are used as inspiration ‘by bad people to do bad things.’
“Less than 10 minutes long, the film is expected to air in late January.
"It will show ‘the intolerant and fascist character of the Quran,’ said Wilders, whose anti-Islam campaign helped his Freedom Party win nine seats in parliament in last year's election.
“In the past, Wilders has said that half the Quran should be torn up and compared it with Adolf Hitler's book ‘Mein Kampf.’ He has claimed the Netherlands is being swamped by a ‘tsunami’ of Islamic immigrants.”
In other countries, there are those sympathetic with Wilders’ point of view. There is grave concern on the part of persons enjoying democracies that infiltration of extremist Islamic lifestyle, especially that built upon the sharia so-called justice system, is a real-life real-time deadly threat to civility.
Numerous persons who have researched the Koran verse-by-verse have concluded that the general public in the main is ignorant of the Allah-dictates that threaten civility. This ignorance is evident when uninformed individuals still refer to Islam as a “peace religion.”
When taking the Koran seriously as divine revelation, a superficial review of the Koran’s extremist verses is not what meshes with democracies.
A sample of extremist Koran verses includes the following:
Surah 9: Repentance
1. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve. 3
2. Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. 5
3. Don't let idolaters tend the sanctuaries. Their works are in vain and they will be burned in the Fire. 17
4. Give tiding of a painful doom to Christians and Jews. 34
5. If you refuse to fight, Allah will afflict you with a painful doom. 39
6. Disbelievers go to hell. 49
7. Those who vex the Prophet, for them there is a painful doom. 60
8. Those who oppose Allah and His messenger will burn in the fire of hell. 63
9. Allah promises hypocrites and disbelievers the fire of hell. Allah curses them. They will have a lasting torment. 68
10. Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway. 73
11. Allah will afflict disbelievers with a painful doom in this world and the Hereafter. 74
12. For disbelievers there will be a painful doom. 90
13. Don't pray for idolaters (not even for your family) after it is clear they are people of hell-fire. 113
14. Fight disbelievers who are near you, and let them see the harshness in you. 123
Concerning the Dutch situation, AP reports: “Immigrants from Muslim countries number about 1 million of the country's 16 million people.
Wilders informs the media: "’I will make the film and see what reaction it creates.’"
Read "Dutch lawmaker planning film criticizing the Quran" at www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=8512622
Send your comments to: WMCArchives@Gmail.com
Subject line write: Muslim Response to Geert Wilders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com
Koran's Verses via Dutch Film
December 04, 2007 12:00 PM EST
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/29496.html
Geert Wilders, Dutch conservative lawmaker, has made a ten-minute film exposing the horrific passages of the Koran.
Per AP Wilders refers to the selected verses as “’fascist.’”
He does not fear being slain, claiming 24-hour protection.
Theo van Gogh, film director, made “Submission” available for public viewing. It was a “fictional study of abused Muslim women with scenes of near-naked women with Quaranic texts engraved on their flesh.”
Theo van Gogh was murdered—shot with throat slit by a Muslim extremist. His body was discovered on an Amsterdam street in 2004.
“Prominent Muslim critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who wrote the (van Gogh) screenplay, was threatened in a note left on Van Gogh's body. She now lives under round-the-clock protection in the United States.
“Wilders plans to depict parts of the Quran he says are used as inspiration ‘by bad people to do bad things.’
“Less than 10 minutes long, the film is expected to air in late January.
"It will show ‘the intolerant and fascist character of the Quran,’ said Wilders, whose anti-Islam campaign helped his Freedom Party win nine seats in parliament in last year's election.
“In the past, Wilders has said that half the Quran should be torn up and compared it with Adolf Hitler's book ‘Mein Kampf.’ He has claimed the Netherlands is being swamped by a ‘tsunami’ of Islamic immigrants.”
In other countries, there are those sympathetic with Wilders’ point of view. There is grave concern on the part of persons enjoying democracies that infiltration of extremist Islamic lifestyle, especially that built upon the sharia so-called justice system, is a real-life real-time deadly threat to civility.
Numerous persons who have researched the Koran verse-by-verse have concluded that the general public in the main is ignorant of the Allah-dictates that threaten civility. This ignorance is evident when uninformed individuals still refer to Islam as a “peace religion.”
When taking the Koran seriously as divine revelation, a superficial review of the Koran’s extremist verses is not what meshes with democracies.
A sample of extremist Koran verses includes the following:
Surah 9: Repentance
1. Give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom to those who disbelieve. 3
2. Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. 5
3. Don't let idolaters tend the sanctuaries. Their works are in vain and they will be burned in the Fire. 17
4. Give tiding of a painful doom to Christians and Jews. 34
5. If you refuse to fight, Allah will afflict you with a painful doom. 39
6. Disbelievers go to hell. 49
7. Those who vex the Prophet, for them there is a painful doom. 60
8. Those who oppose Allah and His messenger will burn in the fire of hell. 63
9. Allah promises hypocrites and disbelievers the fire of hell. Allah curses them. They will have a lasting torment. 68
10. Fight the disbelievers and hypocrites. Be harsh with them. They are all going to hell anyway. 73
11. Allah will afflict disbelievers with a painful doom in this world and the Hereafter. 74
12. For disbelievers there will be a painful doom. 90
13. Don't pray for idolaters (not even for your family) after it is clear they are people of hell-fire. 113
14. Fight disbelievers who are near you, and let them see the harshness in you. 123
Concerning the Dutch situation, AP reports: “Immigrants from Muslim countries number about 1 million of the country's 16 million people.
Wilders informs the media: "’I will make the film and see what reaction it creates.’"
Read "Dutch lawmaker planning film criticizing the Quran" at www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=8512622
Send your comments to: WMCArchives@Gmail.com
Subject line write: Muslim Response to Geert Wilders
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)