It is Never OK to Hit a Woman

Re: # 186 zeena

please relax sister; None of us here is a woman abuser.how can a real muslim man be like

that?yap.mullahs might be

---

.

but zeena you know that i agree with your stance on hadiths.i also think that a lot of them are false and fabricated but we are not discussing here the issue of women or how false hadiths can be used to exploit women.

we are discussing the role of those hadiths which are necessary to interpret the allegorical verses of the Holy QURAN.

WE can not ignore them altogether.
but yap,i agree with you,as for as the legislation on the basis of hadiths is concerned would be unacceptable by most of us.coz hadiths are so confusing and people have played a lot of mischief with them.

i know you are munkar-e-hadith and believe only in the Quran,that is fair enough but please be tolerent to people who have different opinion.

as Quran says ;unto you is your religion ,unto me is mine[the verse that you quote].

regards

[[[[#142 by abu_safwaan on January 20, 2007 2:10am PT
Re: # 139

Sweetie do u realize that u come off as being a retard when u do ``hahahahahaha`` for no apparent reason? i know it must be lonely cuz obviously with ur attitude & girth it`ll always be hard to find a man but u can always buy cats. Think about it...]]]]

Now, look @ this mullah`s abusive attitude. calling me retard and then telling me to find a man for having sex.............This kind of abusive attitude and then they are telling me NOT to laugh @ their retarded attitude.

So, @ the end Who is seeking for sex? And who is retard?

It is so obvious.........rubbish, plain rubbish.


Yes, yes Mullahs I am laughing at your nonsense Hadiths. Come and kill me. I am munkir-e Hadiths.......If, Hadiths are producing such kind of women abusers, then I am better off with my own strong and brave personality who doesn`t need any false Hadiths guidance.

All these weak and evil mullahs discussing hadiths on this board don`t have a clue what they are saying or what their point is? They make NO sense at all and then they took few seconds to start abusing me.

And, funny thing is they are the ones who claim to be religious figuers. I am the one who didn`t personally attack them , yes, I did make my points and they were all fair and justified with out the guidance of any religion.

So, who is the real winner? These women abusers who are discussing all this nonsense and then ready to attack me like wolves and hounds..............

[[[[#144 by Naqshbandi on January 20, 2007 7:05am PT
zeena--what`s your problem? we weren`t even talking about women specific issues but about hadith scholarship in general..

Why are YOU getting your knickers in a twist? I swear, lady, you sound like you haven`t been laid in ages...]]]]

Look @ this religious man, who claims to be expert in hadiths.

And look At the language he used for me.

Chowk staff

This is shame for all of us, that this abusive man is around. This is what this man can`t hold his decency and look, he has stooped to an abusive attitude for me for NO reason.

He can`t handle any decent dialogue.

He is clearly women abuser.

Naqsh

If I ask samething for your repetitive post about Hadiths non sense on and on and on.......and then ask you it sound like your mom has not been laid down in ages by anyone..............How will you feel? Or, it sound like your sister has not been laid down in ages.........or your daughter...........How will you feel?

Your kind of men are the reason more and more muslim women are being physically abused.

shame, shame, shame. on your abusive attitude. This is the good example you`re setting up for all other muslims......tsk, tsk, tsk.........

Re: # 181 kalaachakar sahib;

i am not a philosopher i am only a humble student of philosophy.but being student of philosophy may i tell you something very intresting;

.if a person is not a doctor he will never say he is a doctor but there is a serious problem with philosophy.every body considers himself a philosopher.

regards

Re: # 181

now what has poor iqbal done to you? :-)

iqbal is the greatest thinkers of modern times. his philosophy is a sort of mixing of sufism and nietzschean ideas of the ubermensch. iqbal has praised the german greatly in his works.

Aristotelian philosophy has had an important role in the development of islamic philosophy--muslim philosophers tried to reconcile peripatetic philosophy and revelation.

ibn rushd [averroes], al-ghazali [algazel] and mullah sadra are the three big names.

Not only that, Urstruly, philosophy doesn`t really care about ``Absolute Truth.`` Worse, the basic justification for philosophy is that the ``Absolute Truth`` is unknowable, even if it exists.

So how anyone can be a philosopher and a Muslim at the same time is unclear. From the outside, even Iqbal comes across as someone about whom the less said the better (although, he must make a lot of sense to believing Muslims and liberals).

This is an interesting and amusing article.

[``Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah), and guard in the husband`s absence what Allah orders them to guard (e.g. their chastity, their husband`s property, etc.). Regarding the woman who is guilty of lewd, or indecent behavior, admonish her (if she continues in this indecency then), stop sharing her bed (if she still continues doing this lewd behavior, then), [set forth for her the clear meaning of either straighten up or else we are finished and when she returns to proper behavior take up sharing the bed with her again], but if she returns in obedience (to proper behavior and conduct) then seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allah is Ever Most High, Most Great``]

What`s the take of learned men on ``because Allah has made one of them to excel the other and because they spend from their means`` ? In today`s day and age, women are both spending and earning as men are. Based on that, I am sure women can be considered equal to men. What about those women who are earning more than their spouses and they contribute in their household and share the burden with their better-halves? I am positive that they would not like to be considered in anyway or shape anything less than their spouses. Also, I am sure such women would not look down upon their spouses for not earning/spending as much as they do. The beginning of the above passage can create a lot of conversation and debate.

In my opinion, this passage has a lot to do with men (in olden days) not taking responsibility of their women. As a result, Allah Taa`la had to straighten them up and inculcate role based responsibility. I am sure the latter half of the passage has something to do with issues of the olden days.

The above is also assuming that muslim men are full of piety and nobility. How can we assume that?

Last but least, it is not at all ok for a man to hit his wife or for the the wife to spank her hubby. By letting it go, we are encouraging aggressive behavior. There is already too much aggression in our culture. The valentine`s day is not very far away. Hopefully, some of us will take full advantage of it.

[Muslim scholars should count their blessings that True Islam is logical and anyone with an open-mind can see the wisdom, if you think it’s hard to bring people back to Islam try explaining an elephant-GOD.]

Well, just like we won`t like to have anyone say anything about our God, we`ll need to nurture similar sentiments about others. It does not matter whether it`s elephant or butterfly. To us, it may be God`s creation. To someone else, it may be God herself. When you live in a pluralistic society, you have to respect the differences vs. harp on the similarities.

Excuse me, ramchander, for the cynicism, but are you really ``real?`

I have tried to understand Islam as a system of (Greek?) logic, and there is nothing in Islam that will let a Muslim easily and formally leave the fold of Islam. That is the religion`s one of the many great strengths in managing humans.

So how did you achieve the ```impossible?`` If you are `real` then some really unique set of factors must have come together such as available to few others.

Re: # 176

Philosopher:

I have no problem with adopting a new thought process to further human mind, since mind is not stagnant and never will be. I think our disgreement is on approach. There is a basic difference between Arstotlian philosophy which Muslims inherited from Greeks and Romans and the present day philosophy. The Aristotilian philosphy basically contended that there are many paths to reach to the One Absolute Truth, as long as you tread on any path with the intention to find that Truth. The Qura`n, however, elaborated that among various paths there is one Starightest and One Shortest path too, which it refers to as ``Sirat-e-Mustaqeem`` (the staright path). That is the reason Muslim philosophical thought had no problem reconciling with Aristotilian philosophical process.

But the present day philosophical thought starts out as saying that ``since there is no Absolute Truth, hence any path is just relative`. In moral sense it only means that morality and righteousness only becomes irrelevant. That gives rise to the `victimless crime` mentality. Man thinks that since no one is watching me, therefore, whatever I do is Ok. THe West tries to fill this gap between their thouht and morality with propaganda. When no one has any direction, it ultimately comes to that. Just imagine a group of blind people who are confined in an absolutely dark room. What will they do. They would just follow any voice that would lead them to God knows where; even if the path passes over a bottomless pit they have no option but to tread the path.

Compare this to, if the same people have a vision a sense of direction and ultimate objective in mind. Wouldn`t they qualify every voice first, that would claim to guide them? This is what Qura`n elaborates in one of its verses in a question: how can a blind man and man with a vision be equal??

Ref#[#74 by philosopher on January 18, 2007 7:39pm PT
Re: # 72 zeena

if you said all that as a non-believer i wont surprise but i know you love islam and that`s what makes me stunned about you.

you love islam and still have pick and choose approach.why should we blaim mullah for that.this atittude is every where,irshad manji,isra noumani who are making lesbianism and illegitimate children the part of islam also claim to be humanist.

why dont this kinda people reject religion altogether? ]

Zeena is quite logical and straight forward and direct. She is an ideal human being. What you are saying is an Ideal human being should leave Islam.

That is why I left Islam.

Re: # 173 urstruly sahib wrote;

[my stance is how can be a reconcilliation possible between Tauheed (One Absolute Truth) and Kufr (No Absolutes). ]

the answer is very much in the assertion you yourself have presented if you look into it closely.

the one absolute [tauheed] encompass every contingent and relative thing in it.the knowledge of human is to recognise its proper perspective.

THE GLORIOUS QURAN exhorts its readers to find the the ultimate truth in the complexity and relativity of ``appearance`` through Imaan.Imaan shows you the path in the illusion of ``appearance and relativity``to comprehend the reality beyond that.

Now if we have Imaan with an existential and vital approach towards relativity, we can find the way in that to reach the ultimate reality where this reality unviel immediatly.we comprehend without applying ``this-therefore-this``or any other systematic demonstration but without[according to Quran} contemplating on the splendid and awe-inspiring phenoumena ,we will only end up with ``belief or dogma``not the true Imaan.

Quran makes a very important distinction b/w ``islam`` and ``imaan`` islam is following ritual or we can say a way of life concerning the appearance.

Imaan is absolute but ``islam``is dynamic it is flexible always there mold itself to the new challenges and needs of the time with a strong sense of Imaan.isam is the path to imaan.

The holy prophet[pbuh] gave us the right to do ijtihaad.ijtihaad is recognising and reshaping of the appearance to make it smoother and clear to see the light of Imaan.

so modification of islam without doing violence to ``imaan``or the basic principle of islam is the duty of MUSLIM.

if we accept westren thinking with that perspective than we can make islam clearer and transparent.after all the greek logic which we have been using to understand our religion is also the product of west.

so why cant we borrow more relevent methodology from the modren west to solve our intellectual problems.

the principles are absolute but the contingent part can be reshaped.recociliation doesnt mean the reconcialiation of the basic principles of both of them but only the surface part of them.

well as for as facts about THE GLORIOUS QURAN tha you have mentioned ;what can i say?

THE GLORIOUS BOOK is the LIGHT[NOOR] of ALLAH.

That`s OK, philosopher sahib. The question, in any case, wasn`t specifically about you or your doctoral committee, so apologies are due for the personal tone of the query. Cheers.

#168 by Urstruly on January 20, 2007 3:46pm PT
[... I know that you are wrong but there is chance that you might be right and I know I am right but there is a chance that I might be wrong.]

Ama yaar, I must give you your due!

I NEVER said you don`t have a sense of humor!!

Just like Begum Saima rana (hopefully still with her genitals uncut (unlike you, my friend!)) does have a sense of irony - comparing Karva chauth to getting ass-whipped! Indeed!

I am sorry I used harsh words to you. But harsh reality from Iraq - in the news item I provided below - has not gone down well with me.

How about this - you agree to the following:

(1) Stop blowing up people like me and others not of your faith all over the world.

(2) Stop cutting female genitalia, beating the females, raping them in the name of ``honor``, and stoning them, and approving of ``enjoyment`` marriages.

(3) Accept the essential equality of all people - Muslim or non-Muslim.

Do those three things for starters, and then I will start agreeing that Islam CAN BE practiced indeed as a religion of peace - a stance which our very own GWB is so fond of reiterating in every speech!

Re: # 169 Philosopher,

So I see that we are basically in agreement on our assessment of Western and Islamic philosophical thought process. But lets agree to disagree on the reconcilliation aspect of it. In this regard my stance is how can be a reconcilliation possible between Tauheed (One Absolute Truth) and Kufr (No Absolutes). These two ideals are mutually exclusive. However, I would like to explore how and why do you think there is a reconcilliation possible.

As far as your thesis on Qura`n is concerned, you or other readers may find these statistics quite amazing:

No. of times Rights of Allah are mentioned in Qura`n = 193
No. of times Rights of Man are mentioned in Qura`n = 673
No. of times Qura`n urges human beings to explore this universe to discover Him= 750

In other words, there is far more emphasis on exploring Cosmos to find God than to just blindly obeying into a belief system. Such confidence, such assertiveness, and such challenging directness can only come from One Absolute Truth. How can then be hope and faith reconcilable and equal to disbelief and doubt. How can hope compliment utter hopelessness?

Re: # 171 kaalchakra sahib, aadaab

aaraay hazoor-e- waala aap kiya karein gey jaan kar?

one thing i can tell you for sure no one worship the CoW.SO by that standard no one is liberal among them.

lol,just kidding plz dont mind.