Leaderboard

Religion does not define citizenship. Unless being non Muslim is a prerequisite for citizenship in Switzerland, your statement is ridiculous. I am a Muslim American who was born and raised in the United States and when someone tries to take away my rights as a citizen of the United States I will not stand for it, nor will I stand for someone describing me as "the other" group in "their country."

(salam) Defending the Woman's Rights by : Mohammad Hakimi Translated by : Hamideh Elahinia . . . Chapter Three : Woman's Reason Keeping in mind these teachings as well as the Qur'anic verses referring to the faithful women, as equal to faithful men, it becomes clear that women possess the kind of reason necessary for high-rank faithfulness. So anywhere that true faith, humbleness before Allah, chastity, and worship exist, reason and human wisdom inevitably exist. Therefore, woman's mindlessness, referred to in some traditions, may mean the momentary state caused by human negligence. As these passing states are related to behavioral factors, they can be changed by a change in behavior, thus regaining the innate human nature. For instance, one who suffers from pride and despotism may lose reason. Then if these vices are wiped out by training and refinement of the soul, the barriers of thoughtfulness are removed, and thus the human mind regains its capacity and guides man. According to what has preceded, woman's folly referred to in some traditions is related to the contemporary women who were less engaged in intellectual issues and they only thought of their female aspects. The mentioned traditions hence do not refer to woman's permanent nature. Some descriptions of certain people or social classes are commonly seen in traditions that are related to changeable dispositions, just as common as these changeable states in traditions are sometimes interpreted as natural ones by mistake. To make the point clearer, a tradition from Imam Ali (a.s) follows. Imam Ali (a.s) said, "Women are not pious when in need and not patient with their lust. Cosmetics are necessary for them even if they are old. They are arrogant and proud even if they are disabled ... anyway, treat them kindly and speak with them well that they may improve their behaviors." The last phrase of Imam Ali's statement indicates that the mentioned vices are not permanent innate ones; rather they are caused by women's milieu and education. Otherwise, the Imam would not say, "Treat them kindly that they may improve their behaviors." In fact, these faults are due to inadequate education and improper culture of the society. They can be changed by kindly reactions. Therefore, by the term 'mindlessness' in traditions, it is meant the improper effect of society's culture on women. b. Perhaps, the lack of reason implies the different brain weights of man and woman that is a reality about these two human kinds. It is also proved by scientific researches that women's emotional intelligence is stronger. But this is not a weak point for woman; rather, it is an important necessity for her motherhood tasks. Woman's emotion plays a more central role in children's personality development and family's warm environment than man's strict mind-governed role. This quality diverts woman from complex intellectual issues to make the family warm and lovely. c. If one or some traditions contain a certain controversial issue, it should be scrutinized to see if there are other contrasting traditions or verses. If the tradition's document is correct and no contrasting traditions are found, the principle of "ta'adol wa tarjih" (balance and preference), a principle of Osul filed, should be followed. Perhaps, after expert studies it is found that there is in fact no contrast. However, there may be two traditions or a tradition and a Qur'anic verse that are labeled as 'general' and 'specific', 'absolute' and 'provisional' and so on. Also, two traditions may be about two separate subjects or about two states of the same subject. In these cases, there remains no contrast. Finally, if a tradition is in total contrast with the meaning of a Qur'anic verse and they are by no means compatible, the tradition is ignored, clue to its contrast to Allah's words. As a result, surface incompatibility cannot be regarded true contrast without careful investigation. It should, of course, be kept in mind that this is a completely specialist job done by precise standards. Not everyone can nullify a tradition because of his/her own criteria. In investigating about the tradition of 'woman's folly', it does not seem compatible with the Qur'anic verses. Nowhere in the Holy Qur'an there is a mention to such an issue; rather, woman and man are mentioned equally in case of good and bad conditions, as was pointed out in the section of 'woman's perfection'. Moreover, the mentioned tradition is not in accord with another tradition of Imam Ali (a.s) in Nahjol Balagha : "Avoid consulting with women, except women whose reason has been tried." Therefore, the traditions containing 'woman's folly' and traditions like the one just mentioned are "Itlaq wa Taqyeed' (absolute and limitation acceptance) and the former are rejected. Therefore, Imam Ali's tradition does not include all women, but some exceptions. Today, however, those exceptions are more than those days, and perhaps they are the majority. Another tradition is narrated from Imam Sadiq (a.s.) that refers to women's exceptional cognition. "So many women who may have more religious understanding than men have." This is not equal cognition of men and women, but the occasional superiority of women. This tradition will be discussed in later chapters, too. ----------------- Chapter Eleven : Superiority When some woman asked him what the women's rights over men were, the Prophet (a.s.) replied, "My brother Gabriel (a.s.) often and always recommends me about women, until I thought that a husband has no right to say to his wife even "ugh". (He said to me), 'O Muhammad! Fear Allah the Almighty as to women, for they are deposits in your hands. You have taken (married) them by the covenant of Allah the Almighty, and so they have obligatory rights on you for what you have get lawful of their bodies and enjoyed their pleasures, and for that they bear your children in their inners until they suffer bitter labor (of childbirth) because of that. Therefore, be kind to them and delight their hearts, so that they continue living with and assist you. Do not force them to do anything (they hate), do not make them angry, and do not take back anything from what you have granted to them, except with their satisfaction and permission ..." Some phrases of the Prophet's statement said by Gabriel deny the imposition of husbands' opinion upon the wives, such as 'delight their hearts!' or 'Do not force them to do anything the hate!' The ending phrase, too, rejects men's superiority over women. Islam orders men to get permission from women for taking their property, so it is clear that their opinion, mind, and mood should be taken into account in all other issues, too. In sum, these Islamic criteria are incongruous with the least amount of men's superiority and autocratic behavior. ----------------- Chapter Ten : Consultation with Woman The third instance is about consultation in the family. (... But if both (parents) desire weaning by mutual consent and counsel, there is no blame on them.) The word (mutual consultation) in this verse means two-sided consultation. This may refer to the fact that the husband and wife should ask each other's views regarding the education of children. In fact, the joint experience and understanding of two managers directs the family members. In Majma' al-Bayan, we read : '"Mutual counsel' means joint consultation between man and woman in the family. The agreement of the two parents is necessary for deciding about children. Since, mother knows things about the children of which the father is-unaware, not consulting may harm the children." Based on this Islamic principle, man and woman should manage the family jointly. Though the family tasks should be divided between husband and wife, its management should be done by their cooperation. This cooperation of man and woman in the family issues and the education of children is stated in another verse, too : (... Then if they (wives) suckle (the children) for you, give them their recompense and enjoin one another among you to do good; and if you disagree, another woman shall suckle for him (the child).) For the phrase (enjoin one another among you to do good) three meanings have been mentioned : 1. Accepting each other's opinion if it is a good one; because Allah has ordered the breastfeeding woman and her husband to follow Allah's command, and each other's opinion if logical. 2. Ordering each other about the breastfeeding in a good manner 3. Consulting with each other A fourth meaning is said by Aminul Islam Tabarsi: "You manage among you the affairs of the child and the taking care of his mother so that not to make the child miss his mother's kindness ..." In all the four notions, there are joint concepts that respect woman's personality, consulting with her, and respecting her opinion in family and children's concerns. The Holy Qur'an commands: Discuss with each other, suggest ideas, and accept each other's opinions. This verse in general denies the superiority of men or fathers. Therefore, the husband and wife should cooperate and consult with each other regarding the physical and mental education and growth of children. The husband should not impose his own opinion and tendency on the others. Wassalam

this is a media disinformation article part of the global war on Hizbullah and Iran to tarnish their image in any way possible. (wasalam)

There are manyyy factual mistakes, not just some. It even says mutah can be practiced from an hour to a year as the limit, when it can be practiced as long as the people agree as long as it is realistic of the common age people die in the region. For example: a 30 year old can do one for 40 years if people normally die at 70 in his country, but he can't do it for 100 or something of the like because that is unrealistic and probably won't happen. Also, as i said before i lived in the dahyeh for a while this summer and people that read articles like this think that everybody in it is in hizbullah and they are some giant cult running things. Yes there are a lot of people in it but there are also A LOT of people who aren't, and mutah is common amongst ALL the shia there, not just the ones that are in hizbullah. Mutah with prostitutes is not allowed under many marjas rulings, and hizbullah can't and wouldn't tell people they can do that too because they say so. In fact, hizbullah doesn't tell their followers to do anything of that nature, yes if they want to do mutah they can because its islamically acceptable, but hizbullah doesn't go around finding girls for people and encouraging them to engage in mutah. Honestly they have more important things to worry about :rolleyes: Anyway i never got through the article because its all BS, and made with the purpose of further making hizbullah look like some form of weird cult running lebanon to make people hate it. Keep in mind that however long there are girls willing to do mutah, there will be guys who do it with them, and i don't see women stopping what Allah swt has allowed for them, so this will go on for probably a long time. :)

Source: MIDDLE EAST ONLINE http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/opinion/?id=35869

^ Look in the society/family issues thread, and go to the mutah thread - you'll find plenty of information there. As for the idea of serial monogamy, I would concur with Dirac Delta Function. I would see the end of each relationship as being a failure. The more failures, the more I would think that I'm at fault, since the only factor remaining the same in all these relationships is myself. But, I guess it depends on your goals when getting into a relationship. If your goal is simply to pass the time with someone to avoid being alone, have companionship, and fulfill sexual desires, then a mutually agreed upon end wouldn't be seen as a failure, but rather natural closure. But, that only works if the relationship runs smoothly and there aren't any problems that arise that break up the relationship instead. And, if your relationship has no major issues, then why would you end it and start over with someone else, knowing that the potential for problems is present? Anyway, I suppose in the end, I'm in the same category as the rest of the women, as I desire long-term commitment and stability in a romantic relationship. Perhaps as sister Smiley and Bint alHoda (I think) mentioned, when someone is younger the idea of short term, casual relationships is more appealing when they aren't in a position (such as being dependent on parents, in college, etc.) to actively engage in long-term decisions.

The analogy is this: A lot of Muslims get upset, arguably rightly so, at seeing American fast food joints in Mecca mere minutes from the haraam al-sharif. There is a certain intangible "feel" to Mecca that Muslims feel is somehow violated by these restaurants being built there. They feel like this place that is sacred to them is being "invaded" culturally by a foreign culture of globalized consumerism. From the standpoint of bare objectivity, it seems rather silly. After all, on the face of it, it's just a place to buy something that can technically be called food, and even pilgrims need food, so what's the big deal, right? But from the standpoint of a lot of Muslim purists, it is a sort of affront. It is something that doesn't quite fit in with the spirit of the place. Indeed, it jars. It's as much emotional as rational, but the response is genuine and comes from somewhere legitimate. The Swiss have a culture theyt have built up over a period of centuries. There is a distinctive local "feel" to Switzerland that people who have lived there for a long time treasure and feel protective over. Architecture is part of it; there are a lot of other things. It is this sort of local feel that tourists fly from the other side of the world to experience. If someone comes in from outside, they need to have some consideration for that. Is it completely rational? No. Four minarets and a few hundred thousand Muslims are not a serious threat to Swiss culture. And the minarets are to a large extent a symbol of deeper discontents. But the fact of the matter is that these feelings are a reality in Switzerland. This referendum passed handily. For Swiss Muslims who are serious about making a life and future in Switzerland, the reality of this discomfort on the part of the native Swiss (and the same argument applies to native Brits, French, Germans, Scandinavians, Italians, Dutch, Belgians, etc) is a reality Muslims there have to come to terms with and deal with. It's not going to disappear by calling the people bigots or xenophobes. In fact, that will probably just make it worse. Does some of this fear on the part of native Europeans come from ignorance? Certainly. And so to some extent the solution will lie in these Europeans repairing this ignorance. But do we really do our share in making ourselves known? No, we don't. We have our mosques, keep to ourselves, shut the doors of the mosques and speak foreign languages inside them instead of the languages of the countries we're living in, so that even the adventurous European who works up the courage to come in through the doors will be left bewildered wondering what is being talked about. There is a lot that we can do to help allay these fears of the native Europeans, simple things. Understanding that minarets and niqab are simply not going to fit in in modern Europe and forgoing them is one of the ways to do this. Opening up mosues and running their programs in European languages is another. Developing a taste for fine chocolates, fondue, good cheeses, and skiing wouldn't hurt either. I'm sure they'll understand if we forgo Scnapps on religious grounds. To reply to a few who asked if I was joking: Partly yes but mostly no. I was being deliberately provocative, but mostly the spirit of it was sincere. Kvetching about Europeans being afraid of Islam is not going to accomplish anything. Doing what we can to understand the roots of that fear and take what steps are within our control and don't involve a compromise of core values and educate and make connections with Europeans will accomplish something. In the choice between the easy, yet useless, and the difficult, yet useful, I choose the latter.

]Zahratul_Islam -this is happening in switzerland not the us. the us bill of rights doens't apply to swiss muslims.

I believe that religion should not take away from the quality of other peoples lives, so if they had loud adhaan every morning for fajr I could understand why the Swiss government would feel compelled to pass a law or allow a vote to forbid that. I don't want anyone's religious beliefs to inconvenience me in that manner, so Muslims should not expect their religious beliefs to be above scrutiny. There should be an obvious benefit to laws. But the minaret on the mosque does nothing to take from their quality of life and the only purpose of this law seems to be a barely concealed Islamaphobia in a country with a growing Muslim population. The minarets do not do any harm except remind people in that country that Muslims exist, just like a hijab would, and I see a problem with being so nonchalant about this very obvious attempt at suppression. I can't see anything too ominous about 4 minarets in a country with 400,000 Muslim citizens. This is not being peddled in the name of unity, it is being pushed by Christian groups who are not concerned with making Islam more welcoming and compatible. The intentions are not nearly as benign as we are painting them. Edit: The government should stay the hell out of peoples mosques and churches unless they are disturbing the lives of the citizens.. in EVERY instance.

(salam) I think the quranic verses have been presented in this thread. To answer your second question, there are many reasons for permanent marriage. I will briefly mention few benefits here i) Long term goal (including religious goal) ii) Security iii) Children upbringing iv) Level of comfort v) Growing old together vi) Companionship/friendship vii) Financial gain/ business/ social partnership and others.

Salam, I am the sort of person who loves being married (long term and committed relationship), I got an arrange marriage when I was only 17 year old which lasted about 7 years but unfortunately it ended in divorce when I turned 24 because not only my ex was controlling and violent but also I discovered he was cheating on me throughout our marriage. Since I got divorced I’ve been wanting to get married again but unfortunately the right person has not came to propose to me, I did have proposals but I didn’t think there’re right for me so I rejected them, I think my divorce made me more aware. This year I’ve turned 30 years old so I bit worried about not finding my soul mate; you might think I don’t have a life but I do, I’m studying, working and living with my lovely family but I feel there’s something missing in my life.

Salam, You should not remain willfully ignorant of anything that was commonly practiced and well understood and halal during the lifetime of the prophet and the early Muslim community. Marriage is a very important part of Islam, and mutah is another type of marriage that all Muslims agree was allowed during the lifetime of the Prophet Mohammad (a.s.) That is not to say that mutah (like plural marriage) is generally wajib or even mustahab in most situations....however, the knowledge that it is halal (and the rules regarding mutah) should not be ingored. You have asked for proof from the Quran, while ignoring the sunnah of the Prophet (a.s.). As you know, the Sunnah of the Prophet (a.s.) is an equivalent proof which gives a detailed exegesis of the Holy Quran. Also, for the women the issue of whether it is a "lose/lose" in some situations is irrelevant to whether or not it is halal because it is ultimately the women's choice to enter into a marriage or not, regardless of the type of marriage. The best course is to arm oneself with knowledge before arguing about something that you are "willfully ignorant" of.

Lolz. That's quite reassuring.

WB SyedMuhammad, Now SC looks quite bland and inactive. You came here and vanished like a spook. :lol:

There are different gray levels of Shirk. Some of them are very minute and are easily forgiven and some of them are very severe. But the doors of repentance and forgiveness are always open.

I am sure the non-Muslims have seen this word "Allahu Akbar" a zillion times in the newspaper or email etc. And they know it means God is Great. If they don't know or curious, they will asked. Educate them. Enlighten them. As muslims, words like "Subhanallah", "Alhamdullilah", Mashallah" is automatically embedded in us and part of our everyday life. They're also humans, they know whether our actions are genuine or not.

Not much to laugh at, this is either extreme incompetence or someone on the Iraqi side is getting kick backs from the sale. Either way, bombs are going to get through, and food is being taken from the mouths of orphans into the pockets of some foreign companies.

The internet search giant, Google, says 14,000 images of the precious artefacts kept in Iraq's National Museum will be available online from early next year. Google's chief executive, Eric Schmidt, said the world should see Iraq's rich heritage and contribution to culture. "The history of the beginning of - literally - civilisation... is preserved in this museum," he said. Some 15,000 artefacts and antiquities were stolen from the museum when it was ransacked after 2003 US-led invasion. “ I can think of no better use of our time and our resources than to make the images and ideas from your civilisation, from the very beginnings of time, available to billions of people worldwide ” Eric Schmidt Google Only about a quarter are believed to have been retrieved, despite international efforts to ban their trafficking or sale. The museum, which only re-opened in February, nevertheless still holds countless relics from the Stone Age to the Babylonian, Assyrian and Islamic periods. "I can think of no better use of our time and our resources than to make the images and ideas from your civilisation, from the very beginnings of time, available to billions of people worldwide," Mr Schmidt told Iraqi officials at a ceremony in Baghdad. Mr Schmidt said the thousands of images, "plus a few surprises", would be available on the internet early next year. The costs of the project, which have not so far been released, are being borne jointly by Google and the US state department. Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/middle_east/8376554.stm Published: 2009/11/24 13:15:22 GMT © BBC MMIX

LOL. You know why that became a big story and something happened in response? Because in Canada we have freedom of speech and press. The press, including, and especially the state sponsored station, CBC, were active in publicizing this story and criticizing the politicians about it. Opposition politicians spoke out about the case without fear of being jailed or added to some blacklist of politicians who are blocked from running for future office. In a word, it became a story because of our system working.

(salam) (bismillah) Brother/Sister Try these websites for starters: http://www.al-islam.org/quran/ http://www.shiasource.com/al-mizan/ (wasalam)

List of scholars in USA that I know of: Austin, Tx: Ja'far Muhibullah Costa Mesa, Ca: Sayyed Mustafa Qazwini Dearborn, MI: Sayyed Hassan Qazwini, Rizwan Arastu, Hassanain Rajabali, Haidar Bahr-ul-uloom Tampa bay, Fl and surrounding areas: Mohammed Baig Almost all islamic centers have websites so just search the US city your interested in and you can find contact info...whenever I travel to a different city thats what I do and I meet up with different scholars/people.

The secret to becoming a world famous athlete is a harsh grueling work term at your local McDonalds below minimum wage.

As others have already mentioned, this is a life-long struggle; it is the journey without end, it just gets more subtle the further we go. There are two aspects of this struggle: intellection and practice. Intellection refers not only to knowing about God, but also ourselves and the world around us and the meaning in everything around us. It is in recognizing that we live in a world of symbols, a world where haqq is hidden inside the veil of illusions and to be able to see through the "pasteboard masks", as Herman Melville calls them. When are enraptured by the beauty of women, for example, it is because you are seeing a reflection of the beauty of God and in recognizing that you can move beyond the "form" to the the real source of beauty. And in the end life is self-correcting; when you go to extremes it always causes discomfort and turbulence within you to force you to change course. In a sense, even in our errors there is perfection. All we have to do is submit to the program of self-development implanted within our souls. Practice, as the term suggests, is things like prayer, fasting, reflection, dhikr, du'a, and taking ourselves to account. These are like the spiritual food and drink that sustains us on our journey and I think it is important to have some practice that you do every day whether you want to or not. It not only fills the heart with light, but also helps train us to do those things which we may not incline towards, but are for our own benefit. Often in the sunni spiritual tradition the focus is more on practice while amongst the shi'a it has tended more towards intellection.

I can see some factual mistakes in it, for example it states that it is Hizbullah that - while this is clearly allowed in fiqh and not something that only Hizbullah allowed.All in all, I dont really see anything strange here - an Islamic organisation facilitating an Islamic practice.

^ I don't think that's simply the case, but anyway, what the statement implies is incorrect; abuse doesn't necessarily indicate ignorance. Conflict is common, but self-control isn't. Depth and complexity of a relationship make it more sophisticated and less obvious. As a result, many victims of abuse in general experience a false sense of guilt and insecurity. Parents and children are human first and last by right and responsibility. That human side of their lives is what makes the relationship possible despite the odds.

I think you should stop treating people as just dawah targets and potential converts to what you believe in. You talk to a friend constantly analyzing "how to proceed" to win them over? At the end of the day, if someone is comfortable with differences being less relevant than similarities then theres not much you can do. Sunnis don't bother about their 4 imams from centuries ago having some beef with one another. They moved on and you wont find shafi'i scholars being somehow anti-maliki today, they all consider one another legitimate followers of sunnism, so why would you want to impose your ideas on them? Would you like sunnis to teach you what Shia Islam is? By the way, all I'm saying is not based in any naive sunni-shia unity concept, what I am saying is you have to give up on the idea you should be winning over everyone around you to your beliefs. If you do your best to be a perfect example of Shia Islam yourself, you wont need to analyze "what argumentative trick can I use on them now". We're not Jehovas Witnesses who have handbooks on how to talk to people. If you see that someone is searching, help him by all means but dont turn yourself into some kind of dawah machine - people will feel that, they will eventually feel that your intention is to win them over and nobody likes that. Just be a good example of Shia Islam and be prepared to give the right information to those who are interested, theres no better dawah.

^^Sorry about that. I should have clarified that they are not based in the US. In Hawzai sence they aren't scholars, but they do speak on topics regarding Islam and are knowledgeable about it.

Salaam, Just go easy on the washing. I certainly don't mean to be lax on it, far from it, but some people you'd think they were taking a bath in there or something, while in washing yourself from the "minor" operation only so much is really necessary. Using a smaller water bottle (like a travel bottle) for that instead of a watering can and be more careful on your positioning. If you're really worried, putting a few tissues below you in the water in the front can help prevent the splashing. As to the "major" operation, I have no advice. I go in the shower to wash myself from that out of personal preference.

There are some common themes in this thread which keep cropping up Why do non-Iranians comment on Iranian matters Speaking as a non-Iranian myself, but frequent visitor to the country here’s my opinion. Jews, Christians, Americans, Brits, Israelis all comment on Iran. These countries and others all shape policies and opinion towards Iran. So what’s wrong if fellow Muslims and Shias do the same? Of course the enemies of Islam would love a world where only they had views/opinions about Muslim countries and Iraqis kept quiet about Iran and Iranians did not say anything about Palestine and Lebanese said nothing about Iraq. A world where each group of Muslims only cared about themselves, so each one could be picked off one by one. Why can’t people be free to do live as they please? This sounds like a very attractive argument. Let the hijabis wear hijab and let the miniskirtis wear miniskirts. No compulsion in religion. This is a very superficial argument. In any country people can do what they like at home, but the public space is different. Here people do what is socially acceptable, and this applies in western countries as much as it does in Iran. It’s just that the limits are different, you can’t go nude on Times Square. We also need to recognize that what is considered “normal” has a big impact on behaviour. In recent years many countries have followed a policy of de-normalising smoking. It is being progressively banned in public places and sales are being restricted. Surely this goes against all claims of freedom to choose? It’s because the years of research that have been done have shown that no matter how many public information/advertising campaigns you run, there are some behaviours that people simply won’t change. If you want to stop people smoking you have to ban it. People also need to recognize that fashion and other aspects of consumer culture have a big impact on the national psyche. I have a lot of experience of working with people in the Far East. Economically well to do many of them may be, but they take their cultural lead from the West. Ideas about what is fashionable, attractive, valuable etc. all come from the West. The brands, the labels, etc. are all western. They are sold at a high mark-up. This is psychological colonialism. This is the modern equivalent of the colonies paying a tax to the centre of the empire. I call it a culture tax. Does Iran have a right to opt out of this culture tax? Sure it does. The state should be secular, and separate from religion This position would hold that the State should be separated from religion. Politicians could be religious in their private lives, but religion should not dominate law-making. I don’t understand this position at all quite frankly. Religion is a philosophy that guides human behaviour. But a secular approach also has philosophies that guide human behaviour. Instead of Imams and clerics developing the philosophies you would have politicians guided by Marx, or Smith, or Friedman or Keynes etc. Iran should welcome American encouragement to be more democratic On the face of it, this sounds very attractive. The Americans seem to be very keen on promoting freedom and democracy in Iran. The question is this. How much freedom do the people in American supported countries in the Middle East have? Do they have more or less than the Iranians? Every single Muslim country in the Middle East apart from Syria is either the recipient of American arms, or aid or both. If the Americans were so keen on freedom and democracy would they not be using the leverage they already have with these countries? America liberated Kuwait in 1993, there was the chance of a fresh start, do we have democracy in Kuwait? The answer is of course that the Americans don’t do democracy. What they do is regimes favourable to America. Not an unreasonable position to have, but one that limits their credibility to claim that they promote freedom and democracy. There is another angle to this. When countries seek rapprochement, they try and make good the wrongs of the past. If you read the American narrative the only wrong that was done in their relationship with Iran was the taking of U.S. hostages. There is no recognition of the economic, political and social interference that the U.S. committed against Iran over many decades. If the U.S. were truly interested in a relationship with equals it would first of all recognize its own wrongs. Otherwise it is not a relationship with an equal that it is seeking but more colonialism.

Banned member Naziri (aka Three Temples Kung Fu and a number of other accounts) banned under his latest accounts. enemy_of_the_oppressor (listing his religion as Islam Shia) and Isawiyyah (listing his religion as Judaism). Micah, do you think we're idiots that we wouldn't catch on when you're _that_ obvious?

It's not completely Macisaac's problem. There could be many different ways to perceive this: 1. He does the translation and he's comfortable with what it says and so clearly are some other people. If this is what the religion says, so be it. 2. You read it and the equality warning signals start flashing red. 3. Kadhim reads it and it's ok, because it only applied to another period in time. 4. Personally the way I read it, is that someone has identified limitations of women, using words that are not politically correct today, but where the overall sentiment may still be valid, but you can't tell without reading more*. Just to reiterate what I said before, you can't dismiss hadiths because they are politically incorrect in today's world. If religion did that there would not be a lot of Shia fiqh left, because so much of it was politically incorrect during Sunni dynastic rule. *Let me explain. I don't know precisely what is meant by 'weakness, feebleness and incapacity', but I'll have a guess. I know someone who used to be the Finance Director of a lower market chain of women's clothing stores. In his assessment in the UK, of the types of stores that would survive on the the high street would be women's clothing stores. Because only they made margins high enough to be able to pay the rents. Now the hadith writer may be using politically incorrect language, but I can assure you the marketer of cosmetics, the shoe brand owner, the clothing retailer all know which segment of the population to sell overpriced rubbish to (repeatedly). But they'll never call their customers feeble-minded. So everyone is happy.

The actual quotation from macisaac's post was, 'Do not take counsel with them in confidential talk'. To be honest that can mean so many different things, that it's almost impossible to speculate. For example if I have something confidential (related to work), it may be perfectly reasonable from an ethical etc. point of view not to share it with anyone else. Secondly it may not necessarily be with reference to the female that this is being said, but the nature of the relationship between male and female. The emotional bonds between the two make the transmission of information quite different to that between any other pair of individuals. Thirdly, if (for the sake of argument) the Islamic position is that women are more *emotional* than men and can't deal with such issues, why is that immediately taken to mean that the female is inferior? Anyway though Bro macisaac is to be commended for having a go at translating, I have big problems about the epistemology of all of this. The best example of my concerns is highlighted by the occasional debates about slavery. People assume that just because the word is being used in ancient texts, it means the same thing as the word being used today. And people use this assumption to make various pro/anti Islam points. The word "Slavery" today conjures up images of plantations, whips, racism, exploitation, Roots, Arthur Haley/Chicken George (the tv series from the 80s, curiously never repeated). But IMHO it may have meant many different things at different points in time and as I've argued in another thread some time ago, I can easily conceive circumstances and relationships where it is acceptable. In addition I can think of exchange relationships today where the word is not used, but the features of those relationships come close IMHO to slavery. So the OP may have asked the question with the best of intentions, but I doubt they will get a totally enlightening answer off this BB. I wouldn't write off this debate, because I think the practice of some cults to have their texts restricted to the chosen few is even worse. But every sensible person here should recognise the limits of their rationality (used in the economics sense of the term).

There's a lot of wisdom in the bit I have put into red. And I get round to saying why towards the end. Some people's beliefs, values and attitudes appear to be firmly embedded in the present non-Islamic system and everything else is judged, based on those values. So for example, today in some countries women can be judges, this is perceived to be a *good* thing. If some Islamic rulings appear to contradict this then they are automatically considered either to be weak or if they cannot be challenged on grounds of weakness are considered applicable only to a particular point in time and hence not valid today. Each of us is constrained by their education and experiences. In my personal context, over the past decade there have been a number of occasions where, in the financial markets, I have come across the argument that, "it is different this time", new economic laws need to be applied, in order to understand and justify the latest bubble. Only it isn't new and the basic features of human behaviour, fear, greed and hubris keep playing out time after time and the bubbles keep bursting. Perhaps the hadiths that the western-centric people don't like are based on some immutable laws of human nature, perhaps they were supposed to be applicable for all time? Perhaps, what is at fault is not the hadiths themselves but us. Is our perception of inferiority based purely on today's values e.g. which hold that earning money is superior to being domestically focused and if so is that perception justified? Is our perception of inferiority based on the notion that dealing with adults outside the home conferring more power on the individual than dealing with children within the home? I find it curious that today's notions of a "worthwhile career" are very closely embedded with an atomistic, anti-family, anti-senior, capitalistic system that sets great store in terms of the wage that each individual is able to earn and crucially spend. The argument is always couched in terms of whether or not women can be judges or hospital consultants. That level of emancipation is a reality only for a very very tiny minority. For the vast majority patriarchical power has been replaced by the market's power, but instead of women being able to exercise power over their sons and daughters - the current status quo has removed that as well.

People who know the value of their worth don't crave for recognition. You may expect reward only for achieving what was necessary of you. What you ought to be fighting for is your right. It begins with their recognition and ends with your acceptance. The need for change lies within ourselves and others. "The best change you can make is to hold up a mirror so that people can look into it and change themselves."-Charles de Lint.

Don't justify your anger, but try to contain it, and find better ways to express it. It's not how you feel about others that matters; it's how you treat them in spite of it. As a friend would say "life must be understood backwards. But it must be lived forward." -Soren Kierkegaard.

WOW DID U JUST NEGATIVE ME??? THAT ALONE IS YOUR PROBLEM. IF I COULD NEGATIVE YOUR FACES, YOUD ALL LOOK LIKE PROFESSIONAL FACE PAINTED CLOWNS

Salaam: yes Islamicly he did nothing wrong and if you oppose then Islamicly you are doing a sin because its his god given right and the jealousy of the female is described as kufr by Imam Ali In Nahjulbalagha. you have absolutely no say in his marriage to some one else because that is a matter between other people ( him and his other wife) and if you prevent him from m marriage and he falls into sin then you will bear a share of the sin. If he has a need for second wife then by Islam he is obligated to seek marriage and is wajib on him. if anyone prevents him from the wajib then its just like preventing some one from praying. if your marriage is suffering then you are the reason for that because you are rejecting the law of god and if you insist on rejecting god's law then you will be digging your own grave by challenging god. majority of the prophets and imams had multiple wives and their wives did not wreck the family just because they got new wives.

thank you brothers for your great advice and warm thoughts

What a strange question. If someone murders someone, it's better than if they raped and then murdered them right?

Don't worry, a lot of people are in your position. A lot of men are single well into their 30's these days, and there are always divorcees. I actually think that once you're in your 30's, the whole matching game becomes easier, because there are not the hinderances that come with youth and family influence. So relationship wise, it's a good age.

Tahir-ul-Qadari et al belong to a Hanafi (non-Salafi) group of Sunnis whose beliefs about the twelve Imams and related doctrines are very much similar to a historic group of Sunnis which was dubbed as Ithna 'Ashari Sunnis. They have sufi persuasion and believe that spiritual leadership (as opposed to temporal/political leadership) was bestowed on Ahalul bayt especially the twelve Imams, starting from Imam Ali. They are proper Sunnis in their all other beliefs.

salaam souroush There are some scholars who allow it to be read in other languages...

LOL

I thought Marbles was a female! :Hijabi:

Marbles get out of the sisters forum. Everytime i log on i see your post on the main forum.

I'm female and I'm speaking from a female perspective. I don't think it is advisable for parents to send daughters who do not have a lot of life experience (including experience with men) to live alone, unless they are sure they will have a mahram or a female relative or acquaintance there who will be able to watch over them, or unless the benefits greatly outweigh the risks (as I said above). Having good personal morality (e.g. knowing right from wrong) is different from being street smart and recognizing a stranger is trying to take advantage of you (whether sexually, financially, or some other way). Of course that can happen anywhere but, as I said, when you are alone, you are more vulnerable, and are perceived as more vulnerable. It also depends on what you consider 'safety'. Obviously no one is saying that it is safe to move into a war zone.

There is no standard "right or wrong" answer to your question because it really depends on the person, on the girl. In the same family, siblings raised the same way but each have a different personality, parents can allow one girl to go study in another country and at the same time forbidding her biological twin to study in the nearest city. The same rule goes for guys too. If the girl is independent, knows how to manage her life alone wisely and is not scared or vulnerable, if she is trust worthy, mature, organized and knows right from wrong, then I see nothing wrong in sending her to study on another country or planet.

salaam religiously it's ok, but she should be sure she is ready to live alone in another country, especially if she has never lived alone before and is not strong or independent. it is dangerous to go somewhere new and live by yourself, you don't know what to be careful of, you are unstable and sometimes do unsafe things you wouldn't ordinarily do (like getting lost at night and walking 3 hours in the middle of nowhere). it is easy to get taken advantage of too. a person who is alone is vulnerable. young people are sometimes more trusting of acquaintances than they should be and sometimes that leads to bad consequences. or sometimes they are taken advantage of financially. when you are young you don't usually think of all the things that could happen and you are not always as alert about them. girls are physically more vulnerable than boys although i would say the same for both. i am not saying NOT to do it.... but i am saying there are risks that should be considered too. i think it is important to see whether the benefits are greater than the risks.

Planning would be to commit to a certain period of time (months or years) with the option to extend. There are realtionships (including perma marriage) that dont develop past a certain point - but I dont know if I would call them failures - they are just relationships that end without developing passion. There is lots written on serial monogamy - but as Muhammed Ali said -it is similar to the Western comcept of dating. I was wondering if it could be redefined within the Eastern concept of mutah. Yes - it sounds strange to us but the concept has been around for a long time... the study of it comes from the fact that people are increasingly in several monogamous relationships - Muslims too - perhaps connected to the fact that we live longer. I was wondering if it was advantagous for some women to engage in defined term marriages - for whatever reasons. However, the women that responded would rather be in a relationship that had promise of long lasting deep romantic love.

Kind of a strange suggestion. How would this work exactly? I men what is serial monogamy but a series of multiple failures? It strikes me that there are only two types of relationships you would plan on having. One is defined from the outset to be for the fulfilment of physical needs, and is intended to be broken off when either partner want to move on. The other is a long-lasting commitment. How can you plan for serial monogamy?