The “D” Word

Aisha:

I have only recently signed a piece of paper that declares me a divorced woman. I did not read it. My lawyer helpfully told me that now I am a free woman. At this point in time, I am pretty clueless about what to do with this `freedom`.

It is too fresh, so I do not have the benefit of hindsight to give you. All I can say is that educated, independent-minded women can do things for entirely emotional reasons (and I do not wish to know what the hadith has to say about that).

Strangely, I envy you the `structured` strictures for there is something you can lay the blame on. I cannot. My background has been so liberal that I wish someone had stopped me or told me to get out earlier. It was always, ``Get married when you want, marry who you want to, want babies... have them, don`t want babies... don`t...`` So, what happens? You take complete responsibility, even though you may not be responsible at all. You cannot lash out because you made the choice, remember?

I am sure this has been a cathartic piece of writing for you. I have written one quite different about the struggle of the process towards that `freedom`, the dealing with nitty-gritty...it is the worst phase. And for the first time I have held back, thought twice about an article. I asked a couple of friends here and they said, ``Are you ready for the backlash?``

What had I done to deserve a backlash? It set me thinking...what people say in their anonymity here is also what is implied in real life. I spoke with my mother and she said, ``Get it out of your system, don`t let it fester.``

I will...it is not written with your simplicity and, dare I say, a certain sensible detachment. But I wrote it slowly in bits and pieces while I was being slowly torn apart from myself as I knew me. It was written often on days when he and I pretended we did not know each other. It was written when I had my fists clenched because I had to appear brave.

Aisha, I want you to read it when it is put up. If you wish to touch base before that or if I change my mind, then write to me at farzanavee@chowk.com.

And before I leave, let me tell you what a friend told me while I was still under the mistaken belief that all was well. She took one look at us, dragged me to the kitchen and said, ``What are you doing to yourself? What do you have to worry about? Loneliness? When you look back you will realise that this had in fact been the loneliest time in your life.``

Perhaps...but I fear that I am beginning to enjoy my aloneness a bit too much...

Wish you peace and happiness,
Farzana

#153: Thank you for the guilt trip. Now, please leave this board and do not come back!

ZahraJ

Your Dad was a South Asian muslim male was he not? So is my Dad, so is the father of your father, so is the father of your mother, and so are all of the males in your family

Please be mindfull of your comments and of the honorable name `Zahra` the daughter of the prophet (pbuh)

Ana: Thank you for your support, but my perspectives did not need a pat on the back. I do not consider majority of the insecure + demented boys on Chowk (of Pakistani Origin) worth even a penny. They are just here to write gibberish. No doubt their women file lawsuits with amnesty and rest of the international women rights` services. You do not hear this happening elsewhere in the world. This is the hallmark of current day and age muslim society. Unfortunately, they do not want to admit and face the reality. They would go back and repeat like a beaten and haggard parrot on the rights granted to women under Islam. Utter Nonsense! Britain has to provide support to women from Pakistani Origin not in a Jewish or Christian Land. It`s to save the British citizens who are of Pakistani origin from the hypocrite pakistani muslim male. There are sevaral documentaries available worldwide. Who the bloody hell are these !@#%^&* kidding?

In my opinion, whenever a muslim male quotes a religious sermon to tell an adult woman how she should lead her life, the ``ideal state (I hope it ever exists)`` should bless him 1000 lashes on his rear. That way he will know when to murmur and when to keep his mouth shut.

I`d be the 1st one to vote for an ideal state!

ana,

Again, and with all due respect...actually no, to hell with respect - a person who calls all Pakistani males wolves in sheeps` clothing and anyone who supports that view - does not deserve respect. They deserve the blinding contempt they are spewing.

Oh but no, being males we should just take it on the chin...right? No love, you can`t have your cake and eat it. Equality is a very Western idea. If you`re going to dish it, then be prepared to take it. Otherwise, go home and cook a chappati...oops, I did a very mcp thing. Oh well, what can I do. I`m of Pakistani origins.

Umer M.

Urstruly #144: ``If we follow your approach, all we get is a religion with a book minus the messenger, his life and his work, because everything about his life would be a fabricated lie.``

``This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion.`` - Qur`an 5:3 ``

The messenger`s job was to bring the book. The book is complete. The book itself says that. It does not say that it will be complete 200 years later, when Bukhari comes along. What would have happened to Islam had Bukhari not come along? Would it have siezed to exist? It certainly would not have. Bukhari is a historian, who has been given exalted status by the theocracy, since the Quran does not allow the theocracy to implement its rigid agendas.......

What has ended up happening is that we have turned Bukhari into a Prophet. Infact Bukhari is now the most important entity in Islamic theocracy. He has become more important than Muhammad. He has even become more important than God. The theocracy follows what he wrote, even though it cannot prove his mechanism to be valid. You cannot prove it to be valid either. There are no parchments and oral traditions over 200 years cannot be considered valid. Yet you keep suggesting it has to be followed. Why?

Yet the theocracy clings hard to Bukhari, because it can use his words to build itself up. One can follow the Islam of the Quran and Muhmmad, or one can follow the Islam of Bukhari. You chose to follow the later, because if you chose to follow the former, it would completely liberate Islam from the theocracy. People wouldn`t be able to condemn women to hell, so easily..............

If one takes out Bukhari from the picture, the Islamic theocracy comes crashing down....This is why, come hell or highwater, without any logic, the theocracy will fight tooth and nail, to not let that happen, even if has to come up with illogical arguments.

This is also why the theocracy runs to hadith, and away from the Quran, when one challenges it form the from the Quran.........Bukhari was not a Prophet nor God. He was a normal person who wrote a book of his own, about Muhammad more than 200 years after Muhammd`s death, in a time when technology and communicaitons weren`t advanced. His book was based on oral communications and storytelling. His work should be treated like a book written by a historian.......One cannot build up a religion on top of that. That is actually quite blasphemous.......

reading most of these posts (and even not reading these) i completely understand why zahra has said all that she has said. unfortunately minds who feel that a woman has to be dumped (or the crass insinuations boomblast makes) in order to make such statements do not.

then again, oppressive folk are often clueless as to their oppressiveness.

urstruly,

..... do you really want to dig into the character of the prophet ?......... i think it is safer to stick with the koran whose many contradictions and shortcomings you can explain away by blaming them on gabriel garbling the message, usman playing footsie with the editors, narrators with bad memories and, of course, hungry goats looking for something to munch on ............ the prophet`s life and deeds are too well documented to allow too much wiggle room ...........

Re: Urstruly #144
you say in response to:
Romair # 138
If we follow your approach, all we get is a religion with a book minus the messenger, his life and his work, because everything about his life would be a fabricated lie``.

I dont think Romair is promoting that approach at all. The funny thing that you, Mr Urstruly fail to get is that without the Messenger we would not have the BOOK. What was the purpose of the Messenger in the first place? To bring a message, and that he did. Muhammad (pbuh) brought us the Quran.

Surah 62: 2
``It is He Who has sent amongst the Unlettered an apostle from among themselves, to rehearse to them His Signs, to sanctify them, and to instruct them in Scripture and Wisdom,- although they had been, before, in manifest error``

Surah 5:16
``O people of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that ye used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary). There hath come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book``.

Surah 44:58
``Verily, We have made this (Qur`an) easy, in thy tongue, in order that they may give heed``.

Surah 17: Verses 73-75 Admonishing Muhammad
``And their purpose was to tempt thee away from that which We had revealed unto thee, to substitute in our name something quite different; (in that case), behold! they would certainly have made thee (their) friend!``

``And had We not given thee strength, thou wouldst nearly have inclined to them a little.``

``In that case We should have made thee taste an equal portion (of punishment) in this life, and an equal portion in death: and moreover thou wouldst have found none to help thee against Us!``

Surah 10: 15
``But when Our Clear Signs are rehearsed unto them, those who rest not their hope on their meeting with Us, Say: ``Bring us a reading other than this, or change this,`` Say: ``It is not for me, of my own accord, to change it: I follow naught but what is revealed unto me: if I were to disobey my Lord, I should myself fear the penalty of a Great Day (to come).``

Surah 33:45
`` O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner.``

Lastly, Please ponder upon this, Mr Urstruly.
Surah 46:9
``Say: ``I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the apostles, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration; I am but a Warner open and clear.``

I think the Quran makes a clear enough rebuttal to your arguments. What can I add to that!

Teshah

The hadith that you have quoted in your post is mentioned in various other books of hadith as well and considered authentic. As I mentioned in my post to Romair, that the final criterion toverify a hadith to be authentic is that it should not contradict Qura’n. According to Quranic teachings, Holy Prophet (pbuh), has either revoked the Mosaic or Jesuit Law or laws of other prophets or he has made them permanent by practicing them. For example, Holy prophet (pbuh) has revoked the Mosaic Law of an eye-for-an eye (although he had practiced it himself), and replaced with the laws of Qisas and Diyat (Compensation and retaliation). One such Mosaic law, is the Law of Blasphemy and apostasy. The Mosaic law prescribes the death penalty for each crime. Holy Prophet has maintained this law by prescribing death penalty on various occasions to those who commited these heinious acts.

The religion of Islam and Islamic law did not establish itself overnight. For example, the
revelation of Qura`n was completed in 23 years and so the law and institutions that enforce those laws evolved over time. For the first 13 years of Prophet`s life he was a fugitive and an outcast. The issue of establishing institutions in that part of his life is logically out of question. In the early days, the law of divorce, was just a matter between man and woman, hence a man could just divorce a woman by uttering Talaq three times, but later as law and instituions begining to emrge in the later part of Prophet`s (pbuh) life these laws also began to evolve. The state institutes become more intrusive in the matters between man and his wife and the laws of divorce became more complicated. Men and women begin to get more responsibilities along with rights in this matter.

In the early days, when message was incomplete, Holy Prophet (pbuh) used local customs and laws of the society. As the message began completion some of these practices were forbidden later and yet others became Islamic laws.

This particular hadith describes an event in which a woman is murdered by her husband for she continuously blasphemed Prophet (pbuh). She aggravated her husband to the extent that he had to kill her. Please keep it in mind that it is not Holy Prophet (pbuh) who had sanctioned this murder but he is informed post fact. We do not know, when that event occured and what was the local law (Islamic or local) at the time regarding such an act. Therefore, it is almost impossible to judge whether Holy Prophet`s (pbuh) verdict is according to the law or not.

However, the evidence thru the hadiths of later times confirm that Prophet (pbuh) did actually acted according to the divine law regarding blasphemy.

I do not understand how such a verdict violates a woman`s right of being a woman - would you care to explain.

I find it interesting when people dig up such ahadith, neither care about context and history, and present them as an evidence as how ``regressive`` Islam is. Shouldn`t these people reject such ahadith as well since they reject the whole body of ahadith. In fact they want to eat their cake and have it too.

The fact of the matter, however, is that, it is Quadianis who reject the whole body of ahadith because of three reasons:

1. There are 450+ ahadith that explain the Quranic verses regarding the Finalty of Prophet
Mohammad and every aspect of it.

2. They reject Hadith because they want to convert and corrupt Muslims into Quadianism, whereas Apsotasy in Islam is a Capital crime punsihable by death. And that makes their belief system fall flat on its face.

3. In order to act on their agenda they must cut off the relationship of Muslims with their
Prophet so they sow the seeds of doubt in the minds of unsuspecting Muslims hiding behind their apparent ``scholarship``. They blaspheme Prophet to lower his status in the eyes of Muslims and in order to save themselves they challenge the ahadith regarding Blasphemy, which is also punishable by death.


Oh what a tangled web we weave.

........


In order to get a detailed insight into the role of ahadith into the development of Islamic law of apostasy and blasphemy please consult my article:

Blasphemy Law: An Academic Investigation

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00001344&channel=university%20ave&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1

UmerMurtaza:141
[Zahra,
I say this in all respect but, and because, of your bitterness...I wonder if you were dumped pretty bad. What was it, a text message?]

---

Tch tch!
You ``outside-the-100-mile-radius-south-asian-muslim-male-cute-rabbit-eater-wolf-in-sheep-clothing``

``How can I be dumped?
I`ve ne`er been lumped``

your`s
funny bunny of Cuny.

Romair # 138

If we follow your approach, all we get is a religion with a book minus the messenger, his life and his work, because everything about his life would be a fabricated lie. Lets admit that you are only ready to accept that part of history or part of life of Prophet (pbuh) which suits your agenda, and that which doesn`t, is a fabrication for you. This is an extremist point of view. The underlying principle of this mindset is that all people are basically corrupt, incompetent, and petty. (One wonders, where did you get that mindset from; NaPak Fauj?) Islam is not a buffet religion, where you pick up things that suit your lifestyle and discard everything else that doesn`t. If you believe in Qura`n then it is Qura`n that says that enter in Islam in its entirety. It is my understanding that you have neither read Qura`n nor Hadith, and all your scholarship is just pure speculation. For example; if you are so pro-Qura`n then please explain to me this when it says:

“And We have revealed the Scripture unto thee (Mohammad) only that thou mayst explain unto them that wherein they differ, and (as) a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe.” – The Bee 16:64

Is Qura’n telling us that when we differ on the interpretation then we should look into how Prophet has explained it to us?

So basically, with your approach, you are telling God that – “Thank you very much for sending the book, but I do not care what the messenger and teacher who is explaining this book to me says and does.”

Similarly, the Qura’n says:

“And whatsoever the messenger giveth you, take it. And whatsoever he forbiddeth, abstain (from it). And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is stern in reprisal.” Exile 59:7

Your approach is a clear rebellion against Allah’s direct order.

Hadith is the historical documentation of Prophet’s life, words, and actions – it has no direct religious value. Like all historical documentation, there were factual errors that occurred during the process of collation. So a process of elimination was adopted to verify the authenticity. Those people who collated ahadith used a very stringent criteria to ascertain the authenticity of Ahadith. You make it a trivial issue as if some bunch of crooks with a nefarious agenda embarked on collecting Hadith in order to dominate Muslims. Some 1300 years ago, when Ahadith were being collated don’t you think that there were sceptics like you present in those days? So, in order, to verify the authenticity of a Hadith the final criteria is that it must not contradict Qura’n – any such hadith was discarded summarily no matter how authentic the chain of narrators would be. That is the reason, out of a body of 500k + ahadith only about 10,000 are considered authentic. Most of these hadith repeat themselves when same hadith approaches to the collator through different chains of narrators. So actual number of authentic ahadith are further reduced to 7000+. The most authentic ahadith are collated in six books written by six different authors. It is the science of collection of Ahadith from where the modern “library science” has emerged. And the white man, your masters, gives Muslims credit for that.

Like I said there are different types of Ahadith; some ahadith explain the Quranic verses and other explain certain judicial decisions that Prophet (pbuh) took according to his Ijtehad basing it on Quran. So when you say that “If you take a look at the regressive religious views that exist in Islam 49 out of 50 will be from hadith. And if you take a look at the progressive religious views, 49 out of 50 will be from the Quran“, the fact is that all the so-called “regressive religious views” that are based on hadith have their root in Qura’nic interpretation by Prophet himself as he interpreted them with his words and actions. Some ahadith are mere collection of his day to day sayings which have nothing to do with jurisprudence, for example a saying when Prophet(pbuh) said to his companions on a certain occasions “…that (pointing towards a horse) brown horse with a white spot on its forehead is better than that white (sic) horse)”. Some companion of Prophet remembered that event and described it to other people and hence it became a hadith’ thus recording a certain event of Prophet’s life. Only through these ahadith we are today able to understand the life and personality of the Prophet (pbuh); every biography of Prophet (pbuh), whether it is written by white men or brown men is actually based on these hadiths. The nature of this religion or Qura’n cannot be understood, unless we understand the nature and history of the people and its Prophet (pbuh).

#136 - Good Lord, how could I forget that....

[Last but not least, a progressive, independent and outgoing woman should stay 100(0) miles away from the south asian male breed (pakistanis, in particular). I forgot to add that.]

Regarding the emotional and psychological disorders amongst men, you do not have to go very far, Chowk provides an ample opportunity to observe that.

I think that`s enough for the weekend.

Good Day All! Happy Snow Season!

See. This is what happens when you tell the truth. Are you carefully following the comments on you article, Her Excellency? Our people are not ready to face the truth yet let alone coming out of the mythical ``D`` word. Do not wake the people up. The slumber is absolute. Its time for you to go after sleep again.

>Last but not least, a progressive, independent and outgoing woman should stay 100 miles >away from the south asian male breed.

As long as the south asian male breed stays away from progressive, independent and outgoing woman such as yourself and as long as you move away at least 100 miles to an island in the middle of the indian ocean away from the mainlands of india, bangladesh, sri lanka, and pakistan, I`m sure you won`t end up marrying someone from the south asian male breed and thereafter every thing will be fine :)

Shabber

Zahra,

I say this in all respect but, and because, of your bitterness...I wonder if you were dumped pretty bad. What was it, a text message?

Umer M.