News:

About us: a forum for monotheists, and discussion of Islam based on The Quran

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - mubashir55

#1
Introduce Yourself / Re: UK: New Member LONG POST
September 28, 2015, 11:08:22 AM
http://www.hindustantimes.com/editorial-views-on/ColumnsOthers/Hazrat-Aisha-was-19-not-9/Article1-408894.aspx

Hazrat Aisha was 19, not 9
A Faizur Rahman   May 09, 2009

About a month ago the world media reported a shocking decision by a Saudi judge in which he refused to annul the marriage of an 8-year old girl to a 47-year old man. But to those who are already familiar with the so-called Islamic laws of Saudi Arabia, this ruling was merely the latest in the sequence of several such cases of human rights abuse in the name of the shariah. The question is: does Islamic law really uphold child marriage?

What the Quran says

A perusal of the Quran will reveal that marriage in Islam is a civil contract, meesaaq (4:21), and as such it can be finalised only between persons who are intellectually and physically mature enough to understand and fulfill the responsibilities of such a contract. This can be further understood from the verse; ?And test the orphans until they reach the age of nikah (marriage), and if you find in them rushdh (maturity of intellect) release their property to them.?(4:6). It may be noted here that the Quran makes intellectual maturity (which always falls beyond the age of puberty) the basis to arrive at the age of marriage. This is also in conformity with the Quranic description of marriage as emotional bonding between two mutually compatible persons through which they seek ?to dwell in tranquility? (see 7:189 and 30:21) in the companionship of each other which is not possible if either of the spouses is mentally undeveloped.
 
But, even in India?

Unfortunately, Muslim jurists don?t seem to have understood these Quranic teachings. Recently the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh, issued a fatwa legitimising the marriage of girls as young as 10.  Even in India, Muslim institutions including the Deoband and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board have not outlawed child marriage. Yet they congregated not once but twice to condemn terrorism. It is astonishing that those who claim an Islamic basis for their shariah disregard the primary source of Islamic law, the Quran, to the extent of overruling it through their exploitation of spurious traditions. For instance, child marriage in Islam is justified on the basis of a hadith in Bukhari, which says that the Prophet married Hazrat Aisha when she was just six and consummated the marriage when she was nine.
Hazrat Aisha?s age

This hadith cannot be true for several reasons. First, the Prophet could not have gone against the Quran to marry a physically and intellectually immature child. Secondly, the age of Hazrat Aisha can be easily calculated from the age of her elder sister Hazrat Asma who was 10 years older than Hazrat Aisha. Waliuddin Muhammad Abdullah Al-Khateeb al Amri Tabrizi the famous author of Mishkath, in his biography of narrators (Asma ur Rijal), writes that Hazrat Asma died in the year 73 Hijri at the age of 100, ten or twelve days after the martyrdom of her son Abdullah Ibn Zubair. It is common knowledge that the Islamic calendar starts from the year of the Hijrah or the Prophet?s migration from Mecca to Medina.

Therefore, by deducting 73, the year of Hazrat Asma?s death, from 100, her age at that time, we can easily conclude that she was 27 years old during Hijra.
 
This puts the age of Hazrat Aisha at 17 during the same period. As all biographers of the Prophet agree that he consummated his marriage with Hazrat Aisha in the year 2 Hijri it can be conclusively said that she was 19 at that time and not nine as alleged in the aforementioned hadiths.

The Saudi judge also abused another hadith when he ruled that the minor girl shall have the right to seek a divorce only after reaching puberty. This is known as Khiyar-al-Buloogh or the Option of Puberty and is based on Ibn Abbas?s report in the collection of Abu Dawood. According to that, the Prophet is supposed to have given a minor girl the option to repudiate her marriage when she informed him that her father had married her off against her will.

False premise
But a reading of this hadith shows that the girl in question was not a minor because the word used to describe her is bikran, which means a grown-up, unmarried girl. Also, there is no mention of puberty in the report. Therefore, the concept of Khiyar-al Buloogh is bad in law as it is based on a false premise. In short, there is no authentic statement of the Prophet justifying child marriage and hence, the question of his advising any minor to wait until puberty to exercise her right to divorce simply does not arise.

The spirit of the Quran
The problem with the present day Islamic law is that most of it is not based on the spirit of the Quran. This is because of the belief of Muslim theologians (particularly the Salafi ideologues, commonly known as the Wahabis) that hadiths have an overriding effect on the Quran. One such preacher Abu Ammar Yasir Qadhi  has the temerity to write in his book, An Introduction to the Sciences of the Quran, that the Sunnah of the prophet can abrogate the Quran.

The truth is that the Quran being the locus classicus of Islam, no authority can supersede it. Even the Prophet was commanded to judge by it (4:105, 5:49, 6:50, and 7:203).  Furthermore, as the Quran claims to be a guide for all periods, it supports the notion that any law formulated on the basis of its framework has to evolve from time to time.

For this to happen, the doors of ijthihad (independent interpretation) must be reopened and the entire corpus of hadiths must be re-evaluated, to discredit such hadiths that are antithetical to the spirit of justice, equity and fairness embodied in Quranic universalism.   

The author is a Chennai-based peace activist.
#2
Introduce Yourself / Re: UK: New Member LONG POST
September 28, 2015, 11:01:40 AM
[Just sharing]

MARRIAGEABLE AGE

The beginning of the physiological cycles in a girl and nocturnal emissions in a boy are commonly believed to be their age of marriage. To the unfortunate Mullah, everything revolves around sex. A Hadith of Bukhari atrociously tells us that a girl can have Nikah (the marital contract) at 6 and the marriage can be consummated at age 9 since the exalted Prophet did that with Hazrat Ayesha! Is there any wonder that the West call him a child-molester? Why don't then the Sunnah-peddlers "marry off" their daughters at 6 and 9? Many countries set an arbitrary 16 years for the girl and 18 years for the boy. The Divine Wisdom enshrined in the Qur?an makes things so sensible. It sets up three rational criteria that take into account physical as well as mental maturity of the would-be bride and groom. The exalted Prophet did not violate the Glorious Book once in his life.

The Criteria:
1 -Sufficient maturity to grant consent.
2 - Ability to sign a solemn, legal contract.
3 - Competence to take care of one's own finances.
4:19 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! It is not lawful for you to force women into marrying or holding on to them in marriage against their will. ---.
5:5 This Day, all good things of your choice are made lawful for you. ?. And so are the virtuous, chaste women of the believers and the virtuous, chaste women ?..
4:21 And how could you take the marital gift back from her after you have lived intimately with each other and after she has taken from you a very Solemn Pledge of the marital contract? (Meethaqan Ghaleeza).
4:6 Train and educate the orphans well and test them. When they reach the age of marriage and attain sound judgment, release their property to them. The marriageable age shall mean attainment of physical and mental maturity when one can express free consent and legally make a solemn contract (4:21). ----.

Shabbir Ahmed, M.D.
www.ourbeacon.com
#3
Sharing a reply to the question (4:47 vs 2:62) from another forum:

"....Check the tense of verses. in 2:62 verbs are in past tense (perfect tense) while in 4:47 verbs are in present tense (imperfect tense).  In my opinion they have to believe in Quran once it is revealed. 2:62 was applicable before revelation of Qur'an. Just mark the translation you quoted, it is in present tense and that creates misunderstanding. ...."

#4
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: 4:47 Vs 2:62
April 21, 2015, 11:37:18 AM
Just to give you an example how different people handle 2:62, here is one reply to this question from Dr. Shabbir:

".........The Qur'an lays great emphasis on 'tasreef-il-aayat' (looking at other verses on the subject in focus). The results are then eye-opening.

Here is a glimpse from QXP with due respects:

2:62 (That was a glimpse of the past.) Those who believe (in the Qur?an), and those who are Jews, and the Christians and the Sabians; whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does beneficial works, their reward is with their Lord. On them shall be no fear, nor shall they suffer from depression.

[Sabians = Nature worshipers. Note: The author of this rendition is not aware of any instance in the Qur?an where the use of Tasreef, that is, looking at the related verses, is more crucial than in the understanding of this verse.

Some great commentators have misunderstood this verse for missing related verses such as these:

2:135 They say, ?Be Jews or Christians, then you will be rightly guided.? Say, ?Nay, we follow the Creed of Abraham the upright. He associated none with God.?

2:136 Say, ?We believe in God and what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus and to other Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among them. And for Him, we are Muslims."

2:137 Thus, if they come to believe as you believe, then they are rightly guided. But if they turn away, they will be falling into opposition and God will be Sufficient for you against them. He is the Hearer, the Knower.

5:69 Those who believe (in the Qur?an) and those who are Jews, and the Sabians, and the Christians; whoever believes in God and the Last Day, and does works that benefit humanity, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

7:157 The non-Israelite Prophet liberates the People of the Book from the shackles of their manmade dogmas and brings them from darkness to light.

98:1 It is inconceivable that the opponents of the truth, whether they are the People of the Book, or the idolaters, could get out of error until the clear proof, Al-Qur?an, comes to them. .................. O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! = O You who acknowledge the Qur?an!

Reflecting on the above verses makes it clear that the belief in God and the Last Day must be in accordance with the Qur?an. Verses

2:62 and 5:69 emphasize that mere giving of a name to one?s religion or creed carries no importance]..."

So, in other words, what Dr. Shabbir has understood is that after revelation of the Quran, the People of the Book must accept it !
#5
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: 4:47 Vs 2:62
April 21, 2015, 11:34:48 AM
Some translate 2:62 in the following manner to suggest that those who in the past  were believers, Jews, Christians or Sabeans would have no need to fear if they believed in God, believed in Day of Accountability and did good deeds:

[Laleh Backhtiar] Truly, those who believed, and those who became Jews, and the Christians and the Sabeans, whoever believed in God and the Last Day and did as one in accord with morality, then, for them, their compensation is with their Lord. And there will be neither fear in them nor will they feel remorse.

[Sahih International] Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans [before Prophet Muhammad] - those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness - will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.
#6
Questions/Comments on the Quran / Re: 4:47 Vs 2:62
April 21, 2015, 08:50:03 AM
Salam Huruf

So, are you suggesting that the Jews and Christians must accept the Quran and convert otherwise they are doomed?
#7
I tend to agree with Haris. The blessed Messenger may have married other women but not to bed them; If he had, he would have had many more children.

I have been raising the same point in response to those who accuse the blessed Messenger of being a [God forbid] womanizer.

Story of Maria and a son from her comes from secondary sectarian sources and we all know what kind of material we are dealing with. The good, the bad and the ugly all mixed up!
#8
Questions/Comments on the Quran / 4:47 Vs 2:62
April 20, 2015, 11:29:03 PM
Dear All, Salam


4:47 O you who have been granted revelation [aforetime]! Believe in what We have [now] bestowed from on high in confirmation of whatever [of the truth] you already possess, lest We efface your hopes and bring them to an end - just as We rejected those people who broke the Sabbath: for God's will is always done.

2:62 VERILY, those who have attained to faith [in this divine writ], as well as those who follow the Jewish faith, and the Christians, and the Sabians -all who believe in God and the Last Day and do righteous deeds-shall have their reward with their Sustainer; and no fear need they have, and neither shall they grieve.

-----------------------------------------
One seems to be commanding People of the Book to believe in the Quran lest they are visited by punishment.

The other says belief in God, last day and good deeds should be good enough for those who are not among those who have attained faith in [in this divine writ]

How do  you understand these verses? Have they been translated properly? Thanks
#9
Wonder what a common person supposed to do when with a fundamental terms like "Islam" and "Muslim" there seems to be differences of opinion among those who know the language!

Sharing what I just read:

"......The word ?al-muslimeen? is the plural of ?muslim? with the definite article ?al? preposed.
The word ?muslim? is of the form muf?il and comes from the Arabic three letter
root ?slm?. In Arabic the word ?salaam?/ م__ (form fa?aal) means ?peace?. The words
?muslim? and ?salaam? have a straightforward relation like the relationship between
other words of the form muf?il and fa?aal. Words of the form muf?il have the meaning of
?maker of fa?aal?. For example, ?salaah? means goodness and ?muslih? is the maker of
goodness, ?najaah? means success and ?munjih? means the maker of success, ?fasad?
means corruption and ?mufsid? is the maker of corruption, and so on. By the same token,?salaam? means peace and ?muslim? means the maker of peace, in other words it means?peacemaker?. It follows that like ?islah? means ?making good?, ?injah? means ?makingsuccess? and ?ifsad? means ?making corruption?, ?islam? means ?peacemaking?. So in22:78, the common noun ?al-muslimeen? should be translated as ?the peacemakers?.

Another word that is not translated by the majority of translators in 22:78 and elsewhere
in the Quran is the Arabic word ?allah?. As we saw in the previous chapter, like the word
?al-muslimeen? (peacemakers), the word ?allah? is a universal common noun and not the proper name of an Arab deity. The word ?allah? is essentially the contracted form of ?alilah?,which literally means ?the god?. With this understanding, let's reexamine 22:78 and provide a better translation.

22:78. And strive for the god his true striving. He has chosen
you and has made no hardship on you in the obligation, the
creed of your father Ibrahim. He (the god) named you the
peacemakers previously and in this, so that the messenger will
be a witness on you and you will be witnesses on humankind. ...

We are told that the reason for naming the followers of the god?s message "the
peacemakers" is two fold; the messenger will be a witness on them; and they will be
witnesses on humankind.

The definition of a witness can be summed up as one who testifies in the case of a
dispute. The messenger is by definition the deliverer of the message and therefore in this capacity the message is the vehicle for communication. So what is the issue in dispute and how does delivering the message accomplish the purpose of witnessing against its own followers?

The issue in dispute is mentioned right at the beginning of the passage. By pointing to the true striving for the god, it is implicit in that statement that there is false striving for the god. The message of the passage is that its followers have been described as "the
Peace makers" by the god. This message will be a witness against its own followers in the dispute of what constitutes true striving ("jihad") for the god as opposed to false striving ("jihad") for the god. Thus, by virtue of their god-given description, the followers of the messenger cannot corrupt and cause destruction and shed blood and then turn around and claim that they are doing it because they are striving for the god. By describing its followers as the peacemakers, the god?s message will be a witness against them.

Many evils in the world and plenty of wars and destruction have taken place by followers of all creeds in the name of striving for the god. So in turn, the peacemakers will be witnesses on humankind that testify the truth in the issue of those like Al-Qaeda who do not strive for the god the true striving and instead corrupt in the earth and shed the blood while claiming to strive for the god. The single word, ?peacemakers?, describing the true strivers for the god stands as an overwhelming witness against those who cause death and destruction while claiming to strive for the god. There are many implications to understanding "islam" as peacemaking. This is the real legacy of Abraham according to 2:132:

2.132. And this was the legacy that Abraham left to his sons,
and so did Jacob; "Oh my sons! The god has chosen the
obligation for you, so do not die except while you are
peacemakers."

As 2:132 indicates, the primacy of the concept of peacemaking as a god-given obligation is not a new invention but it was already very well known to the previous people since the time of Abraham. In fact, the concepts of peace, peacemaking, and peacemakers are mentioned no less than 450 times in the Bible. For example, there are several prominent mentions of peacemakers (Arabic: ?muslimeen?) in the Bible??
#10
Just sharing what I found on WikiIslam:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Meaning_of_Islam

It claims when we take into consideration the derivatives of the root S L M it is wrong to assume that it means peace !!

Quote"...Many people have wrongly attempted to equate the word Islam with peace by showing that Islam, meaning 'submission', shares a root word with Salaam, meaning 'peace'. But if such relationships between the meanings of Arabic words can be created then that would imply that there is a relationship between one of the derivations of the infinitive Salama, meaning the stinging of the snake or tanning the leather, and Salam, meaning peace; a relationship which obviously does not exist..."