It is Never OK to Hit a Woman

#137
Saroya

Yes, indeed. We`re living in a modern age. But, these mullahs are still there stuck up thousands of years back in time and place................hahahaha

LOL
All these Mullahs are still busy in discussing Hadiths and trying their heads over heels to prove their Hadiths among each other............

This thread is getting funnier and funnier...................Hadiths and Quranic verses (convoluted according to their own minds) are being discussed and problems are being solved day and night..............

All the miseries of the Muslim women are being solved.............WoW!!!

What a great bunch of Paki muslims have gotten together to solve all these issues according to hadiths..................And chowk is the right place to discuss.............LOL.

``People are educated and much more educated than our ancestors....``

Says who????

#98 by akberm on January 19, 2007 8:51am PT
One of the things that we all need to comprehend crystal clear is that if we are looking at any verse of the Holy Quran we HAVE to look into the CONTEXT ... we got to know the verses before and after, revelation of the verse was in Mecca or Madni, the political, social conditions etc ... It`s very pivotal to know the context ... and my understanding is that ISLAM is a dynamic religion ... People are educated and much more educated than our ancestors.... There are laws and rules and regulations now ... in a nut shell, Men has no grounds to beat a women from the Islamic perspective...
[Reply to interact #98]
akerm,
I fully agree with you .Those old principles arn`t applied now.why should have edge , only because they are physically strong ?now trend has changed , if you abuse daughter-in law ,next moment her family is at your door step.

[[[#133 by Saroya on January 19, 2007 10:51pm PT
``I feel I have stumbled on, what appears at first sighting, an extraordinary group of beings that, to all intents and purposes, could be considered human.

They are by no means short on intellect as they communicate lucidly with one another on matters most profound and esoteric.

Yet, given their obvious intellect and ability to communicate, the subjects raised in their communication casts doubt as to the period in our history to which they belong.``

Please forgive the sardonicism but I just couldn`t help myself!

I mean no disrespect, I will in due course read all the 130 posts in this interact, purely for interest`s sake; however, for the time being, I must say that of the posts I have read, with the exception of Zeena, you all belong to a galaxy `far, far, away` from this one!! ]]]]

Well said!!!!

Re: # 131urstruly sahib

i am not challenging your scholarship on religious matters but what i have learnt from your posts so far is that you reply people`s posts without reading them carefully.

you might be a great scholar but you wont understand other`s view unless you listen to the crap others have got to say.

i have never said that all hadith are invalid and fabricated.just read my posts again.i have said that they are a great source of information about prophet[pbuh] seerah and the interpretation of the allegorical verses of the HOLY QURAN.


we can learn from hadith how prophet[pbuh] solved the problems of his time.but there is no need to accept the doubtfull hadiths and the hadiths which contradict the Quran like the one about rajm.

we should develop a general approach towards hadiths.but the problems with scholars like you is that they always make every hadith and the verse of Quran a proposition and start deriving ridicilous meaning and conclusion from it rather than developing a general ,comprehensive philosophy based on those hadiths and the Quran.


being a humble student of philosophy i know
how poorly you guys apply that formal logic on the religious assertions which have social dynamics.

the relationship of religion and society is not formal or logical coz logical is immutable,whereas the relation b/w society and religion is multidimensional.

you can not apply formal logic on relgion.unfortunatly the whole structure of fiqah[jurisprudence]is based on that formal and fallacious greek logic and even that is not applied properly.

ulema are just unable to understand that this formal logic which they teach in madarssah is absolutly irrelevent to religion.religious language is multidimensional and it represents existential truths not formal.

in the formal logic you can fill anything you want, like,

e.g

all men are mortal

socrates is man

therefore socrates is mortal

the arguement is ``valid``[though it is valid only in syllogism not in every branch of logic``]

but you can derive a valid result with applying some ridiculous facts to act

e.g

all men are tables

akram is a man

therfore akram is a table.

logicaly its a valid arguement but materialy its an absurd arguement.

coz logic is only concerned with the formal validity of thought,it has nothing to do with material validity or existential structure of reality.


Now society doesnt work like that.this logic has created so much mess in the muslim thinking and just eaten away the spirtual message of the HOLY QURAN.

hadith ,on the contrary, doesnt work like that,in fact prophet[pbuh] never dealt with problems with ``formal logic`` but HE always responded to the situation of His society realisticaLY and pragmaticaly.

HE set a great example for us.but ulema applied that logic to prophet[pbuh]`s saying as well completly ignoring spirit behind it.ulema only see what prophet[pbuh]did not why when and how HE did.

we need a dynamic methodology to understand our religion.islam has got great potential in it but this immutable logic is destroying it potential.

this logic is absolutly irrelevent to religion and in fact anything outside the domain of epistemology.

we need multidimensional methodology not the``either be or not be``kinda poor logic.

regards.

``I feel I have stumbled on, what appears at first sighting, an extraordinary group of beings that, to all intents and purposes, could be considered human.

They are by no means short on intellect as they communicate lucidly with one another on matters most profound and esoteric.

Yet, given their obvious intellect and ability to communicate, the subjects raised in their communication casts doubt as to the period in our history to which they belong.``

Please forgive the sardonicism but I just couldn`t help myself!

I mean no disrespect, I will in due course read all the 130 posts in this interact, purely for interest`s sake; however, for the time being, I must say that of the posts I have read, with the exception of Zeena, you all belong to a galaxy `far, far, away` from this one!!

Re: # 128

Typical Mirzai response - when mirzais have nothing to say they start insulting other peoples` beliefs. How many times do I have to tell you that an insult does not constitute as a rebuttal.

Re: # 130

So I take it that you are also not taking up the challenge. That`s OK. But you know what, I have real trouble communicating with people who say ``Oh I do not know anything about the Newtons Laws of motion, I have no ``expertise`` on physics, but one thing I know is that those laws are wrong``. Well excuse me.

Just because you ``think`` that ahadith are compromised or they do not feel right to you, means squat. You have to prove your thesis with scholarship - as the saying goes, opinions are like a-holes, everbody has got one.

Re: # 126 urtrustly sahib

i am not expert on Quranic inerpretation.whether it was a historical incident or the one happened in the prophet[pbuh]`s ,it has nothing to do with the validity of those hadiths on which the whole structure of law is based.

if you have read my posts,you would know that i have always said that we can accpet hadiths which are helpful to understand the allegorical verses of the Quran like the one you have posted.But there is no reason on this earth to accpet those which are crucial in legal matters especialy one concerning the stoning.


these hadiths are so vague and contradict Quran.even if there is evidence supporting those hadiths the matter remains doubtful and we have been told in the religion that whatever is doubtful ,leave that.this matter is so crucial,its the matter of someone`s life.and most importantly it brings bad name to our religion.


had it been in the Quran i would have had no problem with it[stoning]but now its insanity to accept such brutal act and attributing it to the HOLY PROPHET[PBUH],ESPECIALY when the matter is so doubtful.

as for as other hadiths are concerned they can be accpeted if they are compatiable with Quran.or if they are explaining the Glorious Quran.we should take hadith literature as general guidance.it is not rational to make every single single hadith an independent proposition and start meessing up with it.

i dont deny hadith,but i have great problem with hadith like stoning which contradicts the Quran.after all hadith were written200 years after the HOLY PROPHET[PBUH].

REGARDS

... Urstruly (#126),

Quick comment for now as I sign out.

There is nothing wrong in consulting works of others (or ahadith), as long it does not violate Quranic teachings or collective humam experience. Quran does say that some of its commandments are easy to understand, while some require effrots of varying degrees.

And if the meaning of something still remains unclear, it is alright to admit that one can`t make full sense of something.

None of this however validates the smoke your ullema are blowing in the name of ``scholarship`` and calling it Islam.

Try to keep things in perspective. You are making ill-thought out, rash arguments.

Naqshbandi (#120),

Thanks for making your views clear. Obviously your Islam has no reason or sense. It is based on blind-faith, an amalgamation of “superstitious” ideas (the term is from your brother in faith, Urstruly, who is ashamed of “superstitious” Muslims like you).

+++++++++++++++++++++

Urstruly (#124),

As it turns out, problem lies with your own ullema. I am merely pointing this out … so don’t get upset with me.

So you think the prophets had the gift of talking to animals? Once again you are misinterpreting verses of Quran. Quran is referring to an inhabitant of the “Valley of Ants” … and not an “ant” literally. Do note that Quran uses metaphors and allegories. But I’ll digress for now …

+++

In essence you are admitting that “talking animals” ahadith are metaphors which are being incorrectly interpreted as miracles by ignorant ullema. Apparently a great many “Islamic scholars” are superstitious, according to you! Coming from you this says volumes about their scholarship, which is the point I have made all along.

Feel free to take the issue up with Naqshbandi and his “Islamic scholars”. While at it, do ask him what he really thinks of Maudoodi. Again, don’t get upset … I am only making a point here.

And feel free to explain the Issa-in-the-sky ahadith. Islamic world anxiously await his arrival. And then there are ahadith about water flowing from the fingers of the dear Prophet (pbuh). Word has it that 1400-1500 people performed wazu with this water. Metaphor? Or real? And did the earth really expel the corpse of one of his enemies? Your ullema think so … so don’t get upset with me …

+++

Have a good weekend folks. Let’s pick this up again on Monday …

I need to light up a doobie to really appreciate this one...anyone game?

Re: # 125

You are not the first Quranite on this board and you are not the first I have posed this challenge to. I promise to you that I will stop quoting any hadith, if you explain the following chapter of the Qura`n. It is one of the shortest chapters. Lets see how you explain it without using any hadith. Remember you have a convert waiting:


Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the possessors of the elephant? Did He not cause their war to end in confusion, And send down (to prey) upon them birds in flocks, Casting against them stones of baked clay, So He rendered them like straw eaten up?

.............The Elephants (Al-Fiil) 105 - 1-6

Please explain what is Allah trying to say here. Is He pointing towards a historical incidence? What is it; how do you know.

Re: # 124 urstruly sahib

possibilities of such miracles is one thing and the validity of the hadiths narrating them another.

off course it is not impossible for Allah to give certain qualities to HIS prophet[pbuh] but it doesnt validate those hadiths.

there is no problem in accepting those miracles if they are mentioned in the Quran.e.g prophet[pbuh]`s ascension to heavens.

but for God sake do not misguide people ,dont creat confusion in the minds of the muslims.

why are we always enthusiastic to quote hadiths when we have got THE GLORIOUS QURAN.

why do always create controversies by quoting hadiths.for God sake get rid of this insane atittude.just make the CATEGORICAL VERSES of the QURAN the source of islamic laws. self contrading hadiths would only worsen the situation.

regards

Re: # 117 sattar

Sure lets take them one by one. Lets examine the hadith titled as the ``Speech of the Wolf``, but before we do that lets examine these Qura`nic verses, which describe an incident involving Prophet Solomon (pbuh):

Till when they came to a valley of ants, one of the ants said: ``Ants, get into your habitations or Solomon and his armies may trample you without [even] knowing it.`` He smiled, at what she said. And he said: ``My Lord, support me to be grateful for the blessings that You have bestowed upon me and my parents, and grant me to do the pious deeds, which please You; and admit me, with Your abounding Grace, to the ranks of Your righteous people.``

............... (The Ants) Al-Nam`l 27: 18 - 19

The reason for quoting this verse from Qura`n is to elucidate a point to a person who is seemingly a Qura`n thumping Mirzai, that if Allah wishes, He may bestow any gift to any human beings. So if Holy prophet (pbuh) had the gift to communicate with animals then there is a precedent for that. So the question is, was God of Solomon (pbuh) so helpless to give any of the gifts to the Reason (pbuh) for whom this universe was created - a gift that He had already given to Solomon (pbuh)? So if your answer is `no` then Qura`n, which you quote at every occasion must also be wrong. Having said that....

Now lets come to the Hadith in question. Although I am so tempted to call it Mirzai hypocrisy but in your case I will give you the benefit of doubt and call it your jihalat (ignorance) that you just accept the lies fed by your religious establishment with out investigation or seeing what is being said. I am quoting the hadith below. As you can see that the said narration has two parts, the first part is the actual description of the hadith while the second part is an addition of a certain incident by the narrator, which may or may not have happened as described. May be the narrator just dreamt it, lets see. Now here is the text of the hadith:

Part I:

Volume 3, Book 39, Number 517:
Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, ``While a man was riding a cow, it turned towards him and said, `I have not been created for this purpose (i.e. carrying), I have been created for sloughing.`` The Prophet added, ``I, Abu Bakr and `Umar believe in the story.`` The Prophet went on, ``A wolf caught a sheep, and when the shepherd chased it, the wolf said, `Who will be its guard on the day of wild beasts, when there will be no shepherd for it except me?` ``After narrating it, the Prophet said, ``I, Abu Bakr and `Umar too believe it.`` Abu Salama (a sub-narrator) said, ``Abu Bakr and `Umar were not present then.``


Part II:
(It has been written that a wolf also spoke to one of the companions of the Prophet near Medina as narrated in Fatah-al-Bari:

Narrated Unais bin `Amr: Ahban bin Aus said, ``I was amongst my sheep. Suddenly a wolf caught a sheep and I shouted at it. The wolf sat on its tail and addressed me, saying, `Who will look after it (i.e. the sheep) when you will be busy and not able to look after it? Do you forbid me the provision which Allah has provided me?` `` Ahban added, ``I clapped my hands and said, `By Allah, I have never seen anything more curious and wonderful than this!` On that the wolf said, `There is something (more curious) and wonderful than this; that is, Allah`s Apostle in those palm trees, inviting people to Allah (i.e. Islam).` ``Unais bin `Amr further said, ``Then Ahban went to Allah`s Apostle and informed him what happened and embraced Islam.)`` palm trees or other trees and share the fruits with me.``



Now if you look at the text of the first part, which actually is the Hadith, by definition, the Holy prophet (pbuh) is elaborating a point by mentioning a parable, and not an actual dialogue with cow or wolf. Using a parable to explain a point is the standard method all around the globe and there are several proverbs in almost every language that are a summary of a parable, like ``Sour Grapes`` which is the parable of a fox. I think this Hadith shouldn`t even be in the miracle category, but I am ashamed to say that among Muslims there are many who feed on superstition without even examining it first.

The second part is not a Hadith but an incident where the name of the Prophet (pbuh) has been used. It is quite possible that the narrator might have dreamt a dialogue with a wolf, which propmpted him to accept Islam. However, there are certain facts that are undeniable

(i) the narrator found inspiration in his experience, which may or may not be real, and accepted Islam.

(ii) He mentioned the incident to Holy prophet (pbuh), whose reaction is unknown.

(iii) Imam Bokari has catalogued an incident that directly or indirectly involves Holy Prophet (pbuh).