Women Protection Bill protested by religious leaders as &#x27;un-Islamic&#x27;

Original post by blah3210

The Muslims girls who know their rights are more than happy with Islam.

Why would you be happy to receive half the inheritance that their brother receives from parents?
Why would you be happy with your testimony only being worth half that of a man in some courts?
Why would you be happy with a beating for being disobedient?
Why would you be happy being cursed for refusing to have sex?
Why would you be happy with having a far more difficult divorce procedure than men?

I think you may be confusing the reality of individual Muslim women's lives with what is contained in the Quran and sunnah.

Reply 142

wdkmwd

3

Original post by QE2

Why would you be happy to receive half the inheritance that their brother receives from parents?
Why would you be happy with your testimony only being worth half that of a man in some courts?
Why would you be happy with a beating for being disobedient?
Why would you be happy being cursed for refusing to have sex?
Why would you be happy with having a far more difficult divorce procedure than men?

I think you may be confusing the reality of individual Muslim women's lives with what is contained in the Quran and sunnah.

Ignorant Westerners see Irshad Manji and Sayeeda Warsi and think that muslim women are just as free as muslim men in muslim countries.

Reply 143

Original post by blah3210

Even so, Muslims are under a divine obligation to obey the laws of the land they're in; there's nothing preventing a Muslim woman from reading up on her rights in her country and exercising those rights.

Only if it does not contradict Islam.
http://www.daruliftaa.com/node/5852
Therefore, a woman's right to be free from domestic violence is abrogated to the Quran's permission for a husband to beat a disobedient wife.

As for the rights of women in Islam, it is generally recognised by Islamic scholars that the rights of women are more numerous than the rights of men in shari'ah. Critics of Islam like to focus on verse 4:34 (the "wife-beating" verse) but such criticisms are misinformed. Educate yourselves: http://nour-dv.org.uk/tafseer-surah-434-does-islam-really-allow-wife-beating

That has to be one of the most ridiculous defences of 3:34 I have ever seen! How long? Jeez.

And what was the final conclusion?
Oh yes, that the hisband is allowed to hit his disobedient wife!
So what was the point of it all?

The author does try to mitigate this admission by attempting to claim that the beating should only be a light one (like this makes it OK), but that argument has been simply refuted many times. (And note, it does not take several thousand words to do it).

1. The word used in 4:34 (waiddribu) is only used in that form in one other place in the Quran, 8:12. There, it is used to describe striking enemies in battle, so it has clear implication of physical force (unless Allah was instructing the Muslim soldiers to tap their enemies lightly with a tooth stick!)

2. There are several hadith that describe the nature of the beating given to the wife. It is described as being "not too severe" not "outrageous/obscene), that it should not leave wounds or break bones, and the face should be avoided. So that leaves quite a lot of scope.

3. The "miswak" quote is not from Muhammad and it is not in a hadith. It is an opinion given by a companion and recorded in a sirah. Moreover, he actually says "with a miswak or suchlike". It should be realised that the word refers to the cane of the miswak tree before it is cut down to size, as well as the stick for tooth cleaning. The reference to Muhammad using a miswak to straighten ranks of troops makes him look ridiculous if it is a 6 inch toothbrush. It makes far more sense as a 3 foot cane. It's the sort of thing that is still carried by military officers and often used as a means of pointing and dressing the ranks.

So we can see that even if we follow the apologetic gymnastics of that piece, Muslim husbands are still allowed to beat their wives if they fear disobedience, although thay cannot go too far, but thay may flog her lightly with a cane, as long as they don't break the skin.

How very civilised and egalitarian!

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 144

Original post by blah3210

That's because it's generally true. Hint: reading a few wikiislam articles does not constitute "examining the relevant documents".

If you had looked a WikiIslam, you would know that it goes something like this....
1. Subject title
2. Introduction
3. Quotes from the Quran, hadith and tafsir, with links to original sources and sometimes a short commentary.
4. Further and contemporary information

It's not some far-right tirade and opinion piece. It is basically a compilation of links and sources.

Read this and then explain to me precisely what is wrong with the content. It even lists the Muslim arguments against 4:34
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Wife_Beating_in_Islam

The Muslims have a duty to clarify and explain any misconceptions about their faith. It's clear to me that you're not interesting in learning what Muslims actually believe, and would happily dismiss any Muslim sources, regardless of whether of not it's actually right. Here's a crazy idea: read it, and address it.

No. Muslim apologists have a duty to defend their faith against criticism.
The problem you have is that you (and millions of others) accept that it is all perfect and as valid today as it was 1400 years ago. However, there are passages that clearly belong in medieval times, but you cannot reject them because you claim that it is all perfect, so you have to construct a justification for it. Confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance,and a lifetime's indoctrination mean that these justifications might even seem reasonable to you.
However, to an objective observer without a vested interest in maintaining faith at all costs, they are clearly nonsense.

And the ultimate irony is that the only tools needed to debunk them are the Quran, hadith and tafsir!

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 145

Original post by blah3210

There's no interpretation - the fact that Muslims are advised to use a twig indicates the symbolic punishment, as opposed to making it a physical one.

He has provided an interpretation, and you have rejected it... then you start talking about "indication" and "symbolic punishment".

Original post by blah3210

Why would he advise the lady to rush to divorce? What would you advise instead?

I never suggested divorce. It was you who suggested that Islam allows divorce for such things.

Original post by blah3210

A sensible first step, given how influential our friends can be.

Sure. I'll admit that could be a good advice.

Original post by blah3210

I'd say the same thing if the wife was the one with a tendency to lash out.

Read the question, it tells you the story.

Original post by blah3210

Both spouses in Islam are encouraged to overlook the minor flaws of each other and focus on their good qualities. The 2nd Caliph, Umar's wife would often demean, insult and cuss Umar - did Umar beat her? No - he would remove himself from the situation and/or take her insults since she used to cook and clean for him (despite there being no obligation on her to cook for him in Islam).

I forgot "repetitive wife beating" was a "minor flaw" - you're right, maybe that's why I don't keep the girls keen... :dontknow:

Its interesting to note that Umar - the 2nd Caliph - disliked the fact that women of Ansar had more independence than what he accustomed to. See Bukhari Volume 3, Book 43, Number 648

Original post by blah3210

Read what Muhammad said about the treatment of women. He was more of a feminist than you'd think :wink:

Yes, Sahih Muslim 11:2141, 11:2142 is particularly interesting. Also the story in Sahih Muslim 4:2127 is very enlightening, specially "He struck me on the chest which caused me pain"

Original post by blah3210

Well oppression IS considered haram.

Not even going to talk about how women are supposed to get less inheritance and legal rights, or the fact that angels will curse the women if they deny sex to their husband.

Original post by blah3210

How do you know the external world is real?

Eh?

Original post by blah3210

The implication being that Islamic ethics are not perfect? Care to substantiate that claim?

Its pretty obvious.

Original post by blah3210

I don't know, I'm not interested in watching his YouTube videos.

But millions do, and follow his advice. Are those people Not True Muslims because you're not interested?

Original post by blah3210

The same way you'd define any academic/scholar.

An Islamic Scholar?

Original post by blah3210

Some elements of Islam are indeed prone to interpretation, and there's nothing wrong with that (see the differences between the 4 schools of Sunni Islam).

And why is the interpretation from the Hanbali school (which is what they follow) wrong?

Original post by blah3210

Depends on the interpretation and the weight of evidence supporting it.

Does the evidence include asking "does this put Islam in a good light"?.... yet the same "weak" evidence you decline here is also used to support things like the taboo on interfaith marriages or the "weakest" evidence of them all, science in the Quran.

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 146

Original post by Good bloke

(b) The Koran does not mention twigs, but it does say that people should not interpret it, neither should they add to or subtract from its message; the twig is clearly a scholarly addition, and
(c) the Koran doesn't say "tap"; again, all this light tap stuff is interpretation (which Allah specifically forbade).

Excellent point.
Ibn Kathir's tafsir on 3:7 states that the muhkamat verses (which are clear and must not be interpreted), are the ones that cover rulings, laws, limits, etc. 4:34 is clearly an ayah that is a ruling on obligations and permissions, and and is therefore muhkamat and should be "believed and implemented" and "cannot be changed or altered".

Not believing what Allah actually said and altering "strike with force" (see 8:12 for context) to "tap lightly with a twig" certainly seems like a form of bidah to me!

Reply 147

Original post by QE2

Excellent point.
Ibn Kathir's tafsir on 3:7 states that the muhkamat verses (which are clear and must not be interpreted), are the ones that cover rulings, laws, limits, etc. 4:34 is clearly an ayah that is a ruling on obligations and permissions, and and is therefore muhkamat and should be "believed and implemented" and "cannot be changed or altered".

Not believing what Allah actually said and altering "strike with force" (see 8:12 for context) to "tap lightly with a twig" certainly seems like a form of bidah to me!

Definite Bidah! But its "good bidah" (i.e. puts Islam in a good light), as opposed to bad "Bidah" (I.e."Islamophobes hasn't criticised us on it yet, so let's not change it" )

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 148

Original post by wdkmwd

Ignorant Westerners see Irshad Manji and Sayeeda Warsi and think that muslim women are just as free as muslim men in muslim countries.

Tbf people like Irshad Manji and Asra Nomani (and Maajid Nawaz) don't say this. They openly admit how oppressive the Muslim world is ... and they get attacked, vilified and even death threats - from Muslims and regressives alike.

It's the Reza Aslan crew who I think are dishonest.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 149

troubadour.

19

Original post by chemting

Tbf people like Irshad Manji and Asra Nomani (and Maajid Nawaz) don't say this. They openly admit how oppressive the Muslim world is ... and they get attacked, vilified and even death threats - from Muslims and regressives alike.

It's the Reza Aslan crew who I think are dishonest.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I agree, but Reza Aslan is almost a Muslim because it's convenient more than anything else. He openly claims that the Koran is historically inaccurate to state that Jesus wasn't crucified, but raised to the heavens and replaced on the cross by a doppelgänger.

That's a pretty strong statement for somebody who claims to be a Muslim. My guess is that he calls himself a Muslim simply because of the misplaced authority that people get from just about everyone on all matters to do with Islam and the Middle East if they can claim to be practising Muslims themselves.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 150

FlareBlitz96

8

i know some people here love to criticise aspects of Islam, but I feel that if u truly want to learn sincerely and not have bias clouding ur minds, then it's best to speak to a scholar 1 to 1. You could start off by telling them that ur a non Muslim but u wanted a few questions cleared up. I just feel that taking information from stuff like the media, it tends to get distorted in some way to support some idea. In a 1 to 1 discussion ,ur can make sure to ask about absolutely everything and try to point out if they've said some mistake

Reply 151

username2385417

14

Original post by blah3210

The tap with the twig (doesn't have to be a twig - it can be your finger) is not meant to be a patronising gesture. It could simply be a way of getting her attention - besides, this step would only be carried out in an extreme case. Before this step, other methods (i.e. talking, admonishing, refusing to share the bed) must be exhausted. When it gets to the tapping stage, it's likely that the husband is the one who's inclined to end the relationship.

Oh come on now.

How ridiculous.

I honestly cannot even imagine this scene in my head.

Also, that is a pretty dishonest interpretation .

Reply 152

tumshie

11

Original post by leavingthecity

Oh come on now.

How ridiculous.

I honestly cannot even imagine this scene in my head.

Also, that is a pretty dishonest interpretation .

This is the sort of idiocy I was referring to in my previous post. They think the whole tapping with a twig nonsense makes it OK :rolleyes:

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 153

username2385417

14

Original post by tumshie

This is the sort of idiocy I was referring to in my previous post. They think the whole tapping with a twig nonsense makes it OK :rolleyes:

Posted from TSR Mobile

The creativity of these people ....

PRSOM

Reply 154

Original post by blah3210

TYou do realise that women in Islam are allowed to divorce their abusive husbands, right?

They are. Could you describe the methods of obtaining a divorce for both men and women?

Thanks.

Reply 155

Good bloke

19

Original post by blah3210

The scriptural evidence for the validity of the interpreation has been provided in the form of "Sahih Hadeeth" (see the link provided).

Why do you ignore the fact that the Koran itself forbids adding to or subtracting from the rules it lays down, as well as interpretations?

Reply 156

Original post by blah3210

The Qur'an need not mention twigs or the nature of hitting since it's not the only source of prescriptions and legislation. The scriptural evidence for the validity of the interpreation has been provided in the form of "Sahih Hadeeth" (see the link provided).

There is no sahih hadith that says that husbands must only use "a twig" to beat their wives.

BTW, have you actually seen a miswak twig.

There is nothing in your argument that says the "twig" must be cut to short lengths and trimmed. Once a miswak has been cut to individual lengths, they start to dry out and loose their efficacy as a dental aid. That's why street sellers cut them down as needed and commercial versions are sealed in plastic.

So, at best, your position is that Muslims are advised that one means of beating their wives is to thrash them with a cane (kinda like an old school, school caning).
How nice!

Reply 157

wdkmwd

3

I just find it ƒucking funny How Muslims call the Qur'an a perfect book, yet they have to explain the so called perfect book to non-believers every second.

Reply 158

Original post by Hydeman

I agree, but Reza Aslan is almost a Muslim because it's convenient more than anything else. He openly claims that the Koran is historically inaccurate to state that Jesus wasn't crucified, but raised to the heavens and replaced on the cross by a doppelgänger.

That's a pretty strong statement for somebody who claims to be a Muslim. My guess is that he calls himself a Muslim simply because of the misplaced authority that people get from just about everyone on all matters to do with Islam and the Middle East if they can claim to be practising Muslims themselves.

Yeah he is a curious case. He also said religion is a man-made institution to help people "explain faith", as if Islam is just about believing in god(s). The thing that's most annoying that he has these lovely liberal interpretation and then says the majority of Muslims follow the liberal ones... which is utterly not true and he knows it. When you try to point this out, he calls you a bigot...

I think he could just be out there to fool Muslims (and non-Muslims) to sell books... or I don't know how much he genuinely, that doesn't change the fact that he's dishonest about the interpretations.

Very much like Dr Maurice Bucaille who decided he could fool Muslims and the Arab world by writing about how Quran is in complete agreement with modern science, essentially kick-starting the "Islamic Science" bandwagon.
He thought he could make a lot of money... and he did.

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/abulkazem/science_in_quran.htm

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 159