Looking for a New Islamic Fiqh

OK , my bad. I came across the Islamic law of legitimacy.
I also discovered that the reason it is so long, is for the protection of women, and not any other. Also, medically I have found cases where there have been extrauterine fetuses developing...the fetuses die, but can remain in the woman`s body for a very very long time. Perhaps it is for cases such as these that may call the woman bearing the fetus into question, but that is why the fiqh would protect them from any wrong doing.

But the Hudood ordinances of 1979 is used by thousands of parents and others to tarnish the honor and reputation of the very women Islam is meant to protect. The ‘ethical’ mismatch between the Hudood ordinance of 1979 and the law on legitimacy belies belief.

Well then that is your ignorance... if you are hell bent on confusing ``iddah`` with ``gestation``.

Under your jurisprudence, a woman`s child would be accepted as the former husband`s if the child is born within 2 years (Hanafi) or even 4 years (Maliki)

Ahh... the kufr name calling. Go ahead.
Only Allah knows who is truly muslim and who is not. I don`t need anyone else`s confirmation, especially yours.
As to having me check the facts. I did. I didn`t find the 2-4 yr limit anywhere. And I wasn`t confusing the iddah.

I followed the sunni madhab untill recently. Please check the facts before you speak. Confusing the iddah (during which time, the woman would show signs) with pregnancy is not right... under Sunni law, it can extend to a period of 2 to 4 years. You can check this.

Islam needs Ijtehad... and denying Ijtehad is also Kufr.

I don`t know if anyone has mentioned this before, since I didn`t have the time to read over everyone`s comments, so here`s my $0.02.

First off, you post a disclaimer that you are no scholar of Islam, but a muslim. Well, as a muslim, or a member of any other faith for that matter, you really need to use valid references before making your arguments. Its says here that this article has been read 1980 times! Don`t you think its your responsibility to actually research what you write, for those readers out there who may believe everything they read about Islam since you mention that you are muslim and so they`d think you`d actually knew what you were talking about????

Your first paragraph states that ``according to Hanafi law a child born within 2 years of the dissolution of marrige is considered ligitimate``. Please provide proof. And for Maliki and Shafi ``4 years``, once again please provide proof. Your only logical statement about this is with the Shi`a law, for ``10 months``...obviously you follow the Shi`a madhab, otherwise you`d know better about the other fiqh rulings.

You can look up even on the interenet various sites which have questions and answers provided on a variety of subjects. One such source is Sunnipath.org.

As far as I`ve know and have read, the waiting period for a non-menstrating woman according to Hanafi, Shafi, and Hanbali, is 3 months. For a non-pregnant woman it is 4 months and 10 days, and for a pregnant woman it is until delivery.

I never read beyond your first paragraph...so that`s all I can comment about.

There really is no need to make up new laws....the only need is to re-educate those that should really know better.

Monto

I say why mix Islam with the Muslims, theory with the practice, like mixing law with the lawyer. As the professional lawyers abuse law so do the practicing Muslims with Islam. What use are these Fiqahs today. It is 5.45 am in Islamabad and you can hear the den the abominable loudspeakers fixed on mullah plazas are making. The lodspeaker is the almighty today for the mullah but the Fiqah did not say anything about it. All Fatwas condemning it as a `Biddat` and all laws banning its use have gone waste as the almighty Loudspeaker shareef has no ears.

The main theological issue driving conflict in Islam today is essentially the same controversy that has divided modernist and fundamentalist Christians for the past century. Fundamentalist and modernist Christians can be differentiated by many criteria, but the one which applies equally to Muslims relates to principles for interpreting divinely inspired texts. Fundamentalists vest their scriptures with authority. They take them at face value and interpret them literally in all instances except those where a figurative meaning is blatantly obvious. Modernists are more skeptical. They treat their scriptures more as literature than as divine law. They prefer allegorical and figurative applications for formulating ``enlightened`` religion. For a more thorough investigation of this perspective and its implications visit
http://www.oprev.org/Shofar.htm#feature1 .

Simon Templar...

The Prophet gave this method...

By denying it we robbed humanity of modernity that could have been achieved 5 centuries before the age of reason dawned in the west.

Imagine where we would be today...

All because some fellow like you decided that the 4 Aima`s work was a sacred cow. Talk about Hindu rasm or riwaj.

aquaris,

Absolutely.

Javed Ahmed Ghamdi is Islam`s hope for the future.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#78, I don`t think the ``erudite gora`` as you put it are the criteria for judging truth or falsehood of anything. Also by stating that the only baggage is hindu rasm-o-rivaaj, you are thinking of a narrow segment of Muslims and an even narrower view of what is recognized as ``Islam``. Islam`s source is the Quran, everything else combined under its banner that forms part of it today dates from atleast 200 years after the prophet, that means every single hadith and every paragraph of fiqh. They are the ``rasm or rivaj`` that are just as alien to Islam as the other ``rasm or rivaj`` that you mention.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#75, true, but in determining specificity we need to use the context of the Quran, logic and science and not associate with that the ``manufactured context`` given to it by the hadith and other ahistorical documents that under the guise of explanation offer little other than total distortion of the Quran.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

I fail to understand the logic of this article. Just because some men
are behaving badly in India, abusing Islam, doesn`t mean you start
re-writing Quran to suit your personal agendas. The only baggage
Muslims of the Sub-Continent have, are the hindu rasm-O-rivaaj. If
we recognise and jettison them from our daily lives, we`ll be just fine.

I wish, all of you gutless wonders, the strenght to leave Islam if you
can`t abide by it`s tenets. But that`s asking too much from athiests,
agnostics... whatever, who simply cannot tolerate religion around them.

This year in Germany around 1000 Christians left their religion and
embraced Islam. The majority among them, were well educated and
well-placed women who weren`t married to a Muslim.

Islam, in it`s original form, is the fastest growing religion in the world.
If the erudite gora, who was born into and lived around a `reformed
Christianity` all his lives, chooses Islam, it should certainly be modern
enough for all coconuts.

I say ``Fuqh the Fiqh,`` and let`s start thinking outside the box. Let`s stir up some originality. Let`s invent some theological fiqh faqh that will put Islam right back where it belongs - in the hearts of men and not in their throats (as in force fed.) :)