Author Topic: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?  (Read 11643 times)

Zees

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #50 on: September 02, 2010, 09:15:16 AM »
?O you who believe, obey God and obey the messenger, and those in authority amongst you. But if you dispute in any matter, then you shall refer it to God and His messenger if you believe in God and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for knowing.? (4:59)

An authority which decides upon a common interpretation maybe to run the affairs of the society. Who are the men of authority??
There are two wings to success

Ayisha

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2782
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #51 on: September 02, 2010, 09:54:09 AM »
?O you who believe, obey God and obey the messenger, and those in authority amongst you. But if you dispute in any matter, then you shall refer it to God and His messenger if you believe in God and the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for knowing.? (4:59)

An authority which decides upon a common interpretation maybe to run the affairs of the society. Who are the men of authority??
For a child your parents would be, for an employee your boss would be
In the name of God, The Compassionate, The Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of the Universe,
The Compassionate, The Merciful,
Sovereign of the Day of Judgement!
You alone we worship, and to You alone we turn for help.
Guide us to the straight path,
The path of those You have favoured,
Not of those who have incurred Your wrath,
Nor of those who have gone astray.

Ayisha

  • Wise One / Burnout
  • *****
  • Posts: 2782
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #52 on: September 02, 2010, 10:42:19 AM »
Ayisha

Just to give you an example of what I mean by muslims struggling to merge faith with western society I have translated an article from a Swedish newspaper. I am sorry for the translate mistakes.

In January 2009 Alia reports, born in Egypt but raised in Sweden, ?so adult high school to the discrimination ombudsman (DO) for discrimination. The school does not allow her to wear a niqab. She was told by the school that her place in the Child and Recreation Program would be canceled if she continues to cover her face. Alia makes a compromise proposal to the school, she agreed to remove the veil when no man can see her face. If she can sit in the front of the classroom and if the teacher in front is a woman, she can consider taking the veil off. She would only put it on when a man passes by. The school said no to the compromise proposal. Alia says that the Niqab ban violates her religious rights and her right to education.

?so Adult High School and Stockholm City argues that the reasons for the ban is educational, and social security. It is important that the teacher can see students' faces. Teaching is, except through lectures, through group work, role playing, field trips and more. Alias proposal would have limited teachers and other students' freedom. They would not be able to move freely in the classroom. In anticipation of the DO's decision the school will however allow that Alia continues to wear a niqab.

Alia continues her studies. The months go without DO deciding the case. When Alia is about to do her practical training the problem is back. Grimsta School, where she is to do her training, says no to giving her internship, instead, another school offers Alia a place with yet another compromise. She was allowed to wear the niqab during outside activities but not indoors. Alia asked if there were men working in the school and the answer was yes. Alia therefore declined the internship with the reason that she is not allowed to show her face to men.
 
Miriam, born in Guatemala and just arrived to Sweden. Miriam reports the Hjalmar Str?mer School in Stromsund to the discrimination board. The school does too little to fight the discrimination and harassment by Muslim men against female classmates - in adult education for immigrants (SFI) the men force the women to sit in the back of the classroom, also forcing the Muslim women to wear niqab and do not allow them to speak for themselves.

The school says Muslim men, mainly from Uzbekistan has for years relied on their belief that " it requires specific classes for men and women according to their faith",  "their women must wear face veil" and  "women are not allowed to speak when other men listen" . The school management did not fight. Managament?s approach was that ?The men would probably change over time.?

In Autumn 2006 the classes were still gender-segregated, but the in spring semester of 2008 Muslim men, could consider making a compromise, the men could say ok to being in the same classroom as the women if the school were to set up screens between them and the women.

Screens were set up and the women (muslim and non-muslim) were placed behind the screens. Teachers, however, were dissatisfied. Teaching became impossible when the women sat behind screens and they were still not allowed to participate in the talks by the men. Every issue that the teachers wanted to discuss the needed first to be taken up with the men.

Non muslim students were also appalled by the fact that no muslim women were allowed to be in a room alone with a teacher, no matter if they were one, two, or three women present.

School management managed to reach another compromise: the screens would be removed if the women were placed at the back instead.

At this point in time, the fall of 2008, Miriam started attending the school. She refused to follow the rules and sat wherever she wanted. She was offended by how condescending the men acted towards all women and especially the Muslim. Miriam was not the first who complained to school management. Several women had pointed to gender discrimination.

Isn?t  Alias and Miriam's reports two sides of the same coin?

In an email to the discrimination board Alias says that she refers her arguments to the Quran and Sunnah. This is her faith. This argument is the same that the muslim men in Hjalmar Str?mer school use. Their interpretation contains the idea that women and men can never be just friends and that's exercise qawama over the woman, that man is "supervisor" over the woman.

Near Hjalmar Str?mer the Vattudals  school is located. There, the children of the adult Muslims who are Miriam's classmates attend. Girls in the 13-year-old or even younger wears the niqab. The muslim girls refuse to participate in swimming and physical education when boys are present. The muslim boys do not accept female teachers of physical education and they refuse to play or swim with the girls.

The discrimination board rules that in Miriam?s case the school has done all in its power to make Miriam comfortable in the gender segregation issue and her feeling inferior to the men because of their behavior.

Shortly before the discrimination board ruling Miriam?s school releases a statement in their annual report that during the academic year 2008/2009 one of the achievements had been that "The men and women can work together and in the same classroom."

Under the heading "Results and compliance rate" they wrote: "We have succeeded in the academic year to remove the screens that uszbekik women previously sat hidden behind. However, one cannot say that the students can work together, because gender barrier makes team-oriented exercises and communicative activities in the classroom difficult / ... / contact with the teacher becomes worse if some students sit quietly behind a screen with a Niqab / ... / The men take more space, the speak loudly and freely, therefore speech therapy for the women is neglected / ... / Women also speak Swedish less in their daily lives when contacts with the surrounding community was mostly done by the men. "

Before the academic year 2009/10 one of school?s objective was "to teach students of SFI to not treat each other in a degrading manner ". I really want to emphasize that no shadow might fall on the teachers. They have had desperate working conditions and have sacrificed a lot of time, also private, to create a fair and equal manner. But they lacked support from both politicians and from the DO.

Aliases case concerning ?so adult high school is still pending. The investigation is complete and the case was delivered but the decision is not formulated.

I don?t  believe that the DO will give Alia right. But I am worried.

A pilot case from 2003. Burg?rdens training center in Gothenburg, had questioned whether the school could prohibit two girls to wear burqas. National Agency for Education said: If the "wearing of the burqa is a serious risk to the order in the school, then the burqa can be banned. So also for pedagogical reasons. Not otherwise.

The parliament has followed the pilot case. A no to the burqa can be admitted as exceptions to the prohibition of degrading treatment of pupils' clothing if in individual cases would significantly hinder the contact between teachers and students or to present specific risks related to laboratory or similar exercises.

Thus: a ban only in exceptional cases and only for educational or practical reasons.

UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women prohibits not only discrimination but also obliges states to "alter or abolish / ... / customs and practices which constitute discrimination against women", to "change the men's and women's social and cultural patterns of behavior to the thus eliminate prejudices and customs based on the idea of the inferiority of one sex or the stiffened roles for men and women ". No authority, individuals, organizations and businesses should discriminate against women.

Why is the DO, National Agency for Education and the parliament not following the UN? What reason do they have to "forget" the most important international rules against discrimination against women?

Read the rules of the Convention quoted again and replace the "discrimination against women / ... / inferiority of one sex" with "racial / ... / inferiority of one race". With the reading ? do you think the Swedish authorities would have ?forgotten? the Convention then?

And is it a coincidence that almost all Muslim countries have made reservations to the Convention with reference to the Shariah?

Women and girls who cover their faces do it out of free will. There is an argument used many times. A burqa and niqab ban would violate the free will.

Possibly it is a violation, but the equation doesn?t add up. No one may invoke their human rights to nullify or impair somebody else?s right.. This basic rule is called "prohibition of abuse of rights".

And no, consent cannot be used as an excuse for certain actions. Slavery could not have been abolished if consent  was considered. Trafficking Convention makes women consent to prostitution invalid. Female circumcision is not legal, with or without the consent of the female. Underage marriage is not legal, even though the underage person in question has given consent.

Precisely in view of the difficulty in separating genuine consent of cultural or religious habit, the European Council decided that "religion must not be accepted as an excuse for the violation of women's rights", the religious excuses to "open or subtle," infringing the rights of women must not be accepted even when the woman herself "expressly agreed" to infringement. States "must combat sectarian stereotypes of male and female roles and the States may" not accept freedom of religion or the respect of culture and tradition "as a reason for forcing including minor girls' religious dress codes".

Some claim that religious freedom is not important, it is about the right to dress as you want. But is a face-covering veil a fashion statement in general? Ku Klux Klan - is their hoods a dress? Protesters with black hoods over their face ? do they have the right to dress as they please?

Someone says: okay, banning burqas and the niqab in schools and workplaces. But not in a public place.

But where we cannot meet someone face to face - it is still a public place?

Finally, some claim that it should not make a big thing of a phenomenon so rare. Those who wear burqa or niqab are few. And a prohibition is fueling Islamophobia.

Does the number matter? Should we refrain from legislation to remove the marriage of underage children because such marriages are not believed to be so many in our country?

And if the problem is so small - well, then it is difficult to understand how a ban would add to Islamophobia. Most Muslims and Islam experts believe that the niqab and burqa are impositions only in the most fundamentalist interpretation of Islam. Being opposed to prohibition of the burqa with reference to Islamophobia-threatening, it is by no means to pave the way for the prejudice that Islam itself would be extreme and fundamentalist.

The burqa ban which is now under way in France is often portrayed as Sarkozy's idea. But behind the ban is most women's rights organizations, especially those who daily work with vulnerable girls and women in immigrant dense neighborhoods, so-called banlieus. An investigation revealed that the France around 2000 burqa-bearing women, two thirds were born in France. The majority had their roots in North Africa where the custom to wear burqas never existed. Spontaneous you could think of two reasons, therefore, the "new" custom of covering her face. The fact that some Muslims have become radicalized - Talibanized if you like - just because they live in the West. Or that some Muslim women (and their families) feel special aversion to the infidels, that is, Christian or secular, men who have access to the woman's face.

It was a parliamentary commission that after an extensive investigation presented the proposal to ban the burka. The survey had consulted lawyers, human rights organizations, field workers, imams, historians and philosophers.

One of the persons asked by the French was Nadeije Laneyrie-Day, professor of art history. She referred to portraiture. Portrait painting is linked to humanism, the notion that the individual has value, its own personality, unique individuality. The face expresses the body. It is the individual's quintessence.

This is precisely what it extremely well all about. To discourage practices that de-personalise people and prevent us to meet each other as individuals. Open. Face to Face.



Peace Emil, phew that was longggggggggg

What i have gathered from that is that the schools should take the pupils to the discrimitaion board and not the other way round as it's the pupils that are discriminating

covering the face, segregation, men ruling women including female teachers! NONE of it in Quran. They are disrupting a place of education and forcing conformity to their views which have no religious basis IMO.

The sikh religion requires men to carry the Kirpan, a knife. Are they allowed this in schools where no one else is allowed a knife? no, do they shout its a religious obligation? no.

If a religion required one to have a purple mohican and piercings in every part seen, would a school allow this? no

A Buddhist kills absolutely nothing of God's creatures, not even an ant! would they start shouting about a sciene class doing disection? no, they would not participate in it though but they would not take the school to discrimination board for holding the class

The pupils in these cases are not in any way trying to live or integrate in the society they live in, no one is making the niqabi sit on a mans lap, her face is just a face and we all have one given by God, showing it is not going to make men want to jump on her in particular unless they are already jumping on other girls because of their face, which they don't appear to be.

This is an example of the discrimination caused by 'muslims' that is happening all over the world by 'talibanized' 'muslims' who think they own the right to have everyone comply with their wishes and invented religious obligations and this is why the world is coming to hate the intollerance of these muslims. Muhammed never taught this! These muslims want to segregate themselves within the society they live in, Muhammed didnt do this.




In the name of God, The Compassionate, The Merciful.
Praise be to God, Lord of the Universe,
The Compassionate, The Merciful,
Sovereign of the Day of Judgement!
You alone we worship, and to You alone we turn for help.
Guide us to the straight path,
The path of those You have favoured,
Not of those who have incurred Your wrath,
Nor of those who have gone astray.

Zidane

  • Apprentice
  • **
  • Posts: 261
  • Karma +0/-0
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #53 on: September 02, 2010, 04:24:28 PM »
peace Zidane, all,

I find the following analogy very helpful:
http://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598901.0


Say "Indeed, I do not possess for you harm nor right-guidance."
[72:21]

Peace bro Wakas,

Great analogy in that link and thanks for the verse too. Maybe that's why God didn't preserve the hadith books.

Peace,
Zidane

 

Emil

  • Truth Seeker
  • ***
  • Posts: 695
  • Karma +0/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #54 on: September 03, 2010, 12:21:14 AM »
Peace Emil, phew that was longggggggggg

What i have gathered from that is that the schools should take the pupils to the discrimitaion board and not the other way round as it's the pupils that are discriminating

covering the face, segregation, men ruling women including female teachers! NONE of it in Quran. They are disrupting a place of education and forcing conformity to their views which have no religious basis IMO.

The sikh religion requires men to carry the Kirpan, a knife. Are they allowed this in schools where no one else is allowed a knife? no, do they shout its a religious obligation? no.

If a religion required one to have a purple mohican and piercings in every part seen, would a school allow this? no

A Buddhist kills absolutely nothing of God's creatures, not even an ant! would they start shouting about a sciene class doing disection? no, they would not participate in it though but they would not take the school to discrimination board for holding the class

The pupils in these cases are not in any way trying to live or integrate in the society they live in, no one is making the niqabi sit on a mans lap, her face is just a face and we all have one given by God, showing it is not going to make men want to jump on her in particular unless they are already jumping on other girls because of their face, which they don't appear to be.

This is an example of the discrimination caused by 'muslims' that is happening all over the world by 'talibanized' 'muslims' who think they own the right to have everyone comply with their wishes and invented religious obligations and this is why the world is coming to hate the intollerance of these muslims. Muhammed never taught this! These muslims want to segregate themselves within the society they live in, Muhammed didnt do this.


Yes exactly, Ayisha. But why do they? Like the article pointed out, many of the french niqab wearing women come from countries where niqab is not in force. Why do they put one on when coming to France? Because they or their husbands/men feel threatened. They feel like like they are going to loose their identity as muslims and become just like the "infidels".
I see it all the time here in Sweden. Women (and men) who feel uneasy at first, but then start to relax a little and try to adjust to the new surroundings....Then it takes one minor setback and they regress to an even more extreme philosophy than before.

Many muslims in Sweden put the law of Allah before the country's because it are based on a secularity. One example of that was the riots in Gothenburg. The police was helpless. Then the Imams went out of their mosques and talked to the kids setting fire to cars and throwing stones at the ambulances. The riots didn't stop but there was a significant decrease.

Again, I am looking for unity. Call me a fanatic or whatever, but I want to help people, especially abused women. Right now muslim women are abused in Sweden and they can't get help because
1.)muslim community will not/cannot help them the "religious" way has no power (no Sharia court).
2.)Asking for help from society is not an option because society is secular, and as beleiving muslim woman, they feel not at ease with that.

What they need is to hear and see that they CAN be muslims and on the same time enjoy the rest of society, even though they live in a secular state. They need support and help from a islamic group that do not follow Sharia, that puts equality first, that reacts strongly towards any oppression. They need to feel safe and right now, today, the only option they have to feel safe is to break away from all muslim groups and be alone.
You, Ayisha, cannot help them by screaming "Muhammed didn't teach this!"......But WE can help them if WE scream. Can we today? No, because WE don't know if we agree with each other....

I hope that God Alone muslims such as those on FM can one day get the guts to stand up for what they believe and unite. Some did in Egypt, some in Mauritius.... I did it (not saying I am a hero or anything). I declared to the muslims around me I do not follow hadiths . Now I am banned from the mosque and I don't know for sure but I think the only reason why I haven't gotten my ass kicked is because I am born Swedish. It was easy for them to laugh in my face and get rid of me. But what if you, Ayisha, were standing next to me? Do you think they would laugh then?

monostheos

  • Beginner/Inquirer
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Karma +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Quran alone interpreted according to whom?
« Reply #55 on: July 24, 2012, 01:10:50 AM »
"I hope that God Alone muslims such as those on FM can one day get the guts to stand up for what they believe and unite. Some did in Egypt, some in Mauritius.... I did it (not saying I am a hero or anything). I declared to the muslims around me I do not follow hadiths . Now I am banned from the mosque and I don't know for sure but I think the only reason why I haven't gotten my ass kicked is because I am born Swedish. It was easy for them to laugh in my face and get rid of me. But what if you, Ayisha, were standing next to me? Do you think they would laugh then?"

Well man, normally we dont believe in the same ideology of Sunnis/Shias, that is, to add Muhammad to everything. So being banned from their mosque is a blessing.
As Quran says, it's better to avoid ignorant people