certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islam, Women and Feminism

33 - COMMENTS

  • Triple talaq is mentioned in the book of hadith below:
    'A'isha (Allah bjpl'eased with her) reported that Rifa'a al Qurazi divorced his wife and afterwards Abd al-Rahman b. al-Zubair married her. She came to Allah's Apostle (may peace he upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Rifa'a has divorced me by three pronoucements. (The rest of the hadith is the same.)  (Book #008, Hadith #3356)
    Despite triple talaq is mentioned in the book of hadith, I have mentioned in my previous comment that the book of hadith does not support instant triple talaq.  Besides, I also have quoted a verse from the book of hadith previously that wives might could oppose it even though their husbands might declare triple talaq to them.
    As both Quran and hadith support that women could have the right to oppose triple talaq when their husbands declare, it seems to be that men and women share equal right to object triple talaq.  As triple talaq could be opted out by husbands and wives, that could be the reason why Quran does not vividly deal with triple talaq since it is up to them to accept it in practice. By zuma - 6/2/2017 1:57:31 AM



  • Hadith mentions that women have the right to oppose if husbands divorce.  The following is the extract:
    Narrated Aisha: Regarding the explanation of the following verse:-- "If a wife fears Cruelty or desertion On her husband's part." (4.128) A man may dislike his wife and intend to divorce her, so she says to him, "I give up my rights, so do not divorce me." The above verse was revealed concerning such a case.  (Book #43, Hadith #630)
    As the phrase, she says…do not divorce me, is mentioned in the book #43, hadith #630, it implies that women have the right to oppose triple talaq that is unfair to them.
    The hadith verse below supports that women have the right to choose men to be their own husbands:
    Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle forbade the selling of things by a town dweller on behalf of a desert dweller; and similarly Najsh was forbidden. And one should not urge somebody to return the goods to the seller so as to sell him his own goods; nor should one demand the hand of a girl who has already been engaged to someone else; and a woman should not try to cause some other woman to be divorced in order to take her place.  (Book #34, Hadith #350)
    As the phrase, a woman should not try to cause some other woman to be divorced in order to take her place, is mentioned in the book #34, hadith #350, it implies that women could have the choice to choose men to be their husbands.  However, they are forbidden to seduce other men who have wives to be their future husbands. By zuma - 6/2/2017 12:51:05 AM



  • Quran 16:58/59 condemns Muslims to bury female infants alive. The following is the extract: Quran 16:58/59, Mohsin Khan translation: “(58) And when the news of (the birth of) a female (child) is brought to any of them, his face becomes dark, and he is filled with inward grief! (59) He hides himself from the people because of the evil of that whereof he has been informed. Shall he keep her with dishonour or bury her in the earth ? Certainly, evil is their decision.” As the phrase, keep her with dishonor or burry her in the earth, is mentioned in Quran 16:59 with the phrase, evil is their decision, it implies that Quran condemns the act of burying female infants alive. By zuma - 6/1/2017 6:07:43 PM



  • Quran 81:8 does not encourage Muslims to burry female infant alive.  The following is the extract:
    Quran 81:8 (Mohsin Khan translation), “And when the female (infant) buried alive (as the pagan Arabs used to do) is questioned:”
    As the phrase, female (infant) buried alive, is mentioned in Quran 81:8 with the phrase, as the pagan used to do, it implies that this practice was exercised by pagan, non-Muslims, in the past instead of Muslims.
    The subsequent verse of Quran 81:9 even questions the reasonableness in burying female infant alive.
    Quran 81:9 (Mohsin Khan translation), “For what sin, was she killed?”
    As the phrase, For what sin was she killed, is mentioned in Quran 81:9, Quran forbids Muslims to kill female infants. By zuma - 6/1/2017 5:45:21 PM



  • The answer for the hathdharmi is simple. They are Muqallids by their madhab. What you are asking them is to change their madhab and you know how difficult that is even for the animists. 

    Try convincing Ghulam Ghaus sb on this issue before trying to convince others.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 5/13/2017 9:43:30 PM



  • Dear Manzurul Haq Sahab,

     You have asked in your comment:Is hathdharmi ka matlab koi mujhe samjha de!”

    I have explained this in my jt. exegetic work, Essential Message of Islam in the concluding sentence under Enc. 4, evaluating Sunnah and Hadith in these words:

    “Since the literary style, setting, paradigms, and dialectical constructions of the Hadith literature date back to the early medieval era, their continued teaching and propagation, such as in traditional religious schools (madrassas), can adversely impact the mental development of the students, shackling their power of reasoning and virtually freezing their intellect into the early medieval era.”

    So, with their reasoning power shackled, the AIMPLB activits fail to see the sufferngs of an instantly divorced Indian Muslim woman from a poor family. She loses her husband, her chidren (that she cannot support and wouldn’t be allowed to take with her), her home and hearh, all her furniture and belongings that the husband may have bought for her – except whatever alimony she gets when the husband choses to give, her livelihood (in most cases such women are housewives and the husband is the primary source of livelihood), her reputation as married lady and all her hopes and aspirations – all in one moment like a terror attack, and going from pillar to post past the instant divrce, she either stands with a begging bowl before a mosque or temple gate or is manipulated by a agent for a less dignified work.

    And Muslims in India are so proud of their heritage. I write article upon article protesting it and hardly any educated Muslim responds. So thank you for your response. By muhammd yunus - 5/12/2017 8:02:24 PM



  • I am not afraid of the abusers of Islam, almost all of whom (who happened to cross my path) have been trashed by me in a right royal way. I dare say most Muslim maulanas are not comptent enough to answer the present breed of Islam-bashers who are intelligent, well educated, quite knowledgeable about Islamic literature, and can think scinitifically. I am also similarly placed, but I also have instinctive understanding of the ideology of Islam and of its practical application in Muslim muashra which informs me, which elements come from Islam and which from non-Islam or even anti-Islam, in the Muslim muashra. 
    But I find myself fully handicapped while talking to Muslim brothers. I have failed to understand why, Muslims can't even listen to an appeal which asks them to see what our holiest scripture has to say on a subject. Are their minds and hearts sealed in the quranic sense? What is the point in issue? Why can't Teen talaq as laid down by Privy Council in 1934 be reviewed by us Muslims in the light of the holy Quran? Is hathdharmi ka matlab koi mujhe samjha de!
    By Manzurul Haque - 5/9/2017 7:45:52 PM



  • Manusmriti is an anti-women and anti-people document written by casteist, racist and misogynist preachers. They did not believe in the equality of human beings. The good thing is that this anti-people document does not dictate the Hindu life any more. 
    However, there are some sections of society which still subscribe to it. Its major portions have already been banned by Indian laws. Those interested may read some comments of Manu about women on : 

    nirmukta.com/2011/08/27/the-status-of-women-as-depicted-by-manu-in-the-manusmriti/    : 
    Themain achievement to be noted is that nobody dares to defend Manusmriti in public. Nobody claims that Manusmriti was final for all times to come. Even if some of its tenets are still in practice among many Hindus, these are withering away with rapid changes in technology and society. Several laws have been enacted about it over the years. In contrast, Sharia is defended by majority of Muslims who claim it to be a divine law for all times. 
    Islamicscholars and Ulema should study this problem without prejudice and see whether Muslim society could also accept secular and more rational laws in socio-cultural domain. Educated and elite Muslims have already moved forward. Larger sections of society also need transformation.
    By Ashok Sharma - 4/30/2017 3:08:37 AM



  • Who is Jadodaben. Please introduce her. By Mohammad Mahboob Alam - 4/30/2017 12:32:45 AM



  • Mr Medhi as per hindu mythology a divorce or widowed women is a curse on society.... if not then why there is widhwa ashrams... and world biggest widhwa ashram is in Banaras up.... By Md Shamim Siddiqui - 4/30/2017 12:32:22 AM



  • I think Mr.Shamim has made a Valid Point. #JusticeforJasoda By Md Kashif Jawaid - 4/30/2017 12:30:02 AM



  • @Md Shamim Siddiqui Who told you? Before any stupid comment, learn the tradition and culture of Hinduism first. And bringing a lady in a controversy, better ask her views first. By Chidananda Medhi - 4/30/2017 12:20:01 AM



  • women who got divorces through triple talak have full freedom to marry anyone of her choice... where as deserted and abandoned women like jashoda ben don't have any right to choose right man of her choice.... By Md Shamim Siddiqui - 4/30/2017 12:18:53 AM



  • Bastab Biswas ji , According to you not the Islam. Stop spreading false Propaganda before saying anything about any Religion give the references from authentic book. You are very well now about practice of child marriage in Hindu society specially lower caste but you people not consider them as a Hindu. You now what about there Age?? You come to my home town I will show you. You now nearly 12 million Indian children were married before the age of 10 years, 84% of them Hindu and 11% Muslim, reveals India Spend analysis of recently released census data. By Rizwanullah Khan - 4/30/2017 12:16:13 AM



  • Marriageable age in islam is 9 years.! By Bastab Biswas - 4/30/2017 12:15:18 AM



  • Dear Sheik Aftar Ali,

    It appears to me that you have not read the article closely. I have not talked about any post-revelation ideology. All I have said is what the Qur'an says regarding the process of divorce and rights of a married woman under divorce, as extracted below from the above article.
       
    "It abolishes the custom of a man’s abandoning his wife by simply taking an oath without releasing her (2:226). It lays down clear protocol of arbitration to reconcile estranged relations in wedlock (4:35) and sets out a three month time-frame or waiting period for a divorce (2:228/229) to become irrevocable. It commands a man to accommodate his wife under notice of divorce during the waiting period in the manner he lived and according to his circumstances (65:7), and mandates a reasonable alimony for the divorced woman (2:241). It permits a divorced woman to marry a person of her choice after the waiting period (2:230)

    By muhammd yunus - 4/27/2017 3:35:26 AM



  • Ok then u accept the salafi or shia ideology
    By Sheik Aftar Ali - 4/26/2017 9:40:14 PM



  • Respected - dear AIMPLB see how our indian muslims will think differently and identify indian muslim and how integrate all indians. any language - dress - population code think and education is main key driver along with knowledge manangement to improve muslim bandhu. Also think which way women education - empowerment will make family managemnet. wish to see diff invading india by mughals over now Democracy - Secular want to be establish or only fanatic. I strongly feel thought process of indian bandhu will look forward and will guide world for peace. It is possible indian to start and vote bank - appeasement will not develop - only power politics. Spritual - ritual - love - respect - peace only will enable us to survive and wish kashmir will be set example to be peacefull within short period. Regards to all religious leaders and Religious management policy - practice mechanisam for all round development.
    By Kolipaka Sudeep Kumar - 4/26/2017 9:39:44 PM



  • Dear Hidayath Basha,
     Answer is 1 provided the triple tallaq is pronounced in a state of mental equanimity. However a tallaq pronounced 3 or 100 times in state of anger or drunkenness when a man has no control over his thoughts or words may be dismissed as thoughtless outburst in light of the following Qur'anic verses:
    "God will not take you to account for any frivolity in your oaths, but He will take you to account for the intention* in your hearts. (Indeed) He is Most Forgiving and Gracious” (2:225). *[Lit., ‘earnings’.] “You who believe, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated (sukara) until you know what you say…” (4:43). By muhammd yunus - 4/26/2017 3:17:11 AM



  • There is no need to prove or, deny something which is in public domain. The sight of hijab or burqa clad women with several children in tow is a common sight in European shopping malls these days. If this is gender equality and freedom, no arguments can help. Moreover, condition of women in Islamic countries has not changed either. By Ashok Sharma - 4/26/2017 2:36:55 AM



  • Beautiful 1 By ଜ୍ୟୋତିର୍ମୟ ପଣ୍ଡା - 4/25/2017 10:55:12 PM



  • Until the advent of Islam, women in all major civilization lived virtually at the mercy of men and suffered deep and oppressive misogyny. NO. By Deepa Natarajan - 4/25/2017 10:54:03 PM



  • You are advocating
    1. Triple talaq in one sitting is only one talaq or
    2. Triple talaq in one sitting should not be encouraged
    Choose 1 or 2 By Hidayath Basha - 4/25/2017 10:52:31 PM



  • Dear Khwaja Saadat Noor

    Thank you so much for reading the article in full to appreciate its significance. It appears to me that some commentators read the caption only or take a merely cursory glance and charge the writer of writing against Islam or accusing others.
    By muhammd yunus - 4/25/2017 7:01:55 PM



  • this is an excellent article a must read for the ignorant ulemas. this article is also for those non muswlims who think Islam is about subjugation of women's rights.
    By Khwaja Saadat Noor - 4/25/2017 9:33:52 AM



  • I have shown that the road for reform through the Ulema is blocked and the reasons for it.

    I have also shown the alternate path to reform.

    Why then insist on taking the road that is blocked? Seriously, are we going to make the Muqallids Ghair Muqallid? Abusing, blaming and attributing motives to such Ulema also betrays our own ignorance of the situation.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/25/2017 2:16:12 AM



  • Naseer Ahmed says: "No one actually supports Triple Talaak, or considers it desirable. The traditionalist ulema and sects which believe in taqlid are bound by legal precedent that is traced to Hazrat Umar (RA), one of the 'four rightly guided Khalifas'. For them to now oppose triple talak and declare it illegal,  would mean that they should give up their madhab and become ghair muqqalid".
    Very strange. I was under the impression that their madhab was Islam. The Kalima of Islam clearly says, " La Ilaha Illallah. Mohammed RasoolAllah". There is no mention of Hazrat Umar (AS). How can we accept him as infallible, unless, God forbid, we are equating him with The Holy Prophet.
    The Holy Prophet had a mission to spread Justice, which we should make efforts to understand, and try to fulfill. Making an obviously faulty decision by one of the 'Rightly Guided Khalifs' sacrosanct, even if it causes injustice to innumerable women cannot be justified.

  • True! No one actually advocates triple talaq  or considers it as desirable. The traditionalist ulema and the sects which believe in taqlid are bound by legal precedent that is traced to Hazrat Umar (RA), one of the four "rightly guided Khalifas". For them to now oppose triple talaq and declare it illegal, would mean that they should give up their madhab and become ghair muqqalid.
  • - See more at: http://www.newageislam.com/islam,-women-and-feminism/advocates-of-instant-triple-talaq-are-gender-terrorists-and-traitors-of-islam-and-may-be-sued-for-human-rights-violation-under-cover-of-religion/d/110871#sthash.JQzLkTGM.dpuf
By Asif Merchant - 4/25/2017 12:44:11 AM



  • Dear Zaheer Hussain Khan,

    Hazrat Umar (r/a)'s era was different. It overlapped with the pre-Islamic era, when the sexual relations were lose and women were free to cohabit with men other than their husbands when the latter were away from home on any trading woman. There was no stigma on a divorced woman and no agony, physical hardship or trauma of divorce. Today the situation is totally different especially for an instantly divorced loewer income Muslim woman as captured in the article:

    "She may have no place to go and at best be an unwelcome guest in the house of any of her next of kin or relative. She will have no money with her in most cases as married Muslim women of lower middle class and below are normally housewives. So for practically every necessity of life, she has to depend on others. And the ‘others’ can help her only for a very limited time. Besides, as a divorced woman, she also bears stigma and is vulnerable to lustful desires of the musclemen in her locality. Any attempt to capture the agony and trauma of such a women is beyond the capacity of this writer. The only parallel that comes to his mind is that of a woman whose home is blown up before her eyes, with her husband and children and all belongings and dreams inside at an instant notice – for an instantly divorced woman loses not only her husband but also her children and all her belongings and dreams. In other words, an instantly divorced woman of lower middle income group suffers no less agony and trauma than the victim of a terror attack. Thus instant triple tallaq can be paralleled with Gender Terrorism"

    What really compelled this writer to do this article and coin the abrasive caption is the shamelessness of the religiously educated body of AIMPLB to make the following claims in their affidavit to Supreme Court of India:


    if triple tallaq mode of divorce was declared illegal, it would amount to disregarding Allah's directions and rewriting of the Holy Quran [1] and if triple tallaq is abolished, “some Muslims may resort to illegal, criminal ways of murdering or burning her (estranged wife) alive to avoid the time consuming and costly way of processing a divorce through legal channels. [2]

    Thus
    [1] they virtually conflated Hazrat Umar r/a with Allah in a very shameless manner just to give support their views. 

    [2] they made a Muslim mean a beast who could burn his wife alive or kill her if he did not have the option of triple divorce. I really wonder how many Muslim men who are taught to respect women would commit this heinous act. Is there is any statistics.

    So the innovation in today's scenario, without any regard to historical relativism and with complete disregard of the following Qur'anic principles of divorce spelled out in the article becomes gender terrorism:  

    "It lays down clear protocol of arbitration to reconcile estranged relations in wedlock (4:35) and sets out a three month time-frame or waiting period for a divorce (2:228/229) to become irrevocable. It commands a man to accommodate his wife under notice of divorce during the waiting period in the manner he lived and according to his circumstances (65:7), and mandates a reasonable alimony for the divorced woman (2:241).

    Hence, the AIMPLB to which the article is directed stand as Gender Terrorists and can be should for human rights violation.
    By muhammd yunus - 4/25/2017 12:17:25 AM



  • ALL AHLE SUNNAH WAL JAMA'A AND ALL WAHABIS HAVE FAITH IN TRIPLE TALAQ & HALALA FOR THESE INNOVATIONS WERE INTRODUCED BY UMAR IBNAL KHATTAB . By Zaheer Husain Khan - 4/24/2017 9:16:13 PM



  • Dear Zakir,

    The article never meant to suggest that the Indian Muslims advocate triple divorce. You seem to get it all  wrong. Have you read the whole article. If not, please read it and tell me which sentence gave you this impression. This article is prompted by two reported affidavits by the AIMPLB stating that:
    if triple tallaq mode of divorce was declared illegal, it would amount to disregarding Allah's directions and rewriting of the Holy Quran [1] and

    "if triple tallaq is abolished, some Muslims may resort to illegal, criminal ways of murdering or burning her (estranged wife) alive to avoid the time consuming and costly way of processing a divorce through legal channels. [2].


    Your contention that  AIMPLB supports the view that triple tallaq is a bad way is obviously incorrect - because if they thought so why in the first place they say a lie that it accords with the Qur'anic message and why they blackmail the Supreme court as in affidavit 2 above.
    By muhammd yunus - 4/23/2017 3:54:45 AM



  • True! No one actually advocates triple talaq  or considers it as desirable. The traditionalist ulema and the sects which believe in taqlid are bound by legal precedent that is traced to Hazrat Umar (RA), one of the four "rightly guided Khalifas". For them to now oppose triple talaq and declare it illegal, would mean that they should give up their madhab and become ghair muqqalid.

    The solution does not lie in high decibel  intemperate accusations and throwing meaningless  challenges but recognizing that change is possible by making it possible for those who seek change to live by their beliefs.

    Recognize alternate bodies to represent the Muslims and their personal laws rather than having a single body and let people choose what they wish.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/23/2017 1:18:58 AM



  • All Muslims including All India Muslim Personal Law Board support the view that Instant triple talaq is bad way of Talaq. No Muslims advocate it. The writer is sadistic. Such writer has spread lies about Muslims. He needs to think the issue in the relevant way. This is his website and can write hundreds of articles of his own choice and wrongly claim that Muslims advocate instant triple talaq. This is dishonesty for which he claims to face the fate in the divine court in an arrogantly manner. The habit of such writer has become to take the passage to mean what is actually not in the passage. You and me both will meet in the divine court.  By Zakir - 4/23/2017 12:14:38 AM



  • Yunus saheb's detailed explication of the rights and protections enjoyed by women in Islam is a powerful statement that must be read by our ill-informed ulema.
     
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 4/22/2017 12:25:52 PM