Muhammed Ali

I don't disagree that speakers could do more to speak about things that inspire people to read. But even then most wont do much. What is needed is greater than that. The whole culture of education has to change. We can't remove the blame from people who do not even have the curiosity to read about the most important subjects in life.

Where am I only blaming others? I believe that ISIS was a major factor but not the only one. I do agree that the clerics have done a terrible job dealing with some of the matters that you have mentioned. I don't necessarily think that many of them are against any improvements in that area, I think it may be a case of incompetence or unawareness. And the situation is even worse in more fundamental areas such as natural theology. However I believe that about 15 years ago things were different in regards to apostasy. Anti-Islamic websites did exist with all the negative material, but how many Muslims even visit them? Most Muslims read nothing about their religion. ISIS had a major impact because they highlighted the very worst of what Islamic history has to offer. Issues such as slavery where not even considered by some Muslims before the appearance of ISIS.

I have noticed a greater number of ex-Muslims in person in recent years. Anyone else experienced that? I think the phenomena linked to ISIS played a major role in some Muslims questioning Islam.

Even before opening the thread, I guessed that it was probably the Templeton Foundation. They have done an enormous amount for us theists. Some theists might be a bit more lost without the kind of work they have done. They accept funding applications for research work. Have a look at their grants page: https://www.templeton.org

What happened to your meme posting?

I was specifically responding to the notion that mahr is a test for generosity. I don't see how charity being a continuous act negates the fact that it can be used as a measure of generosity instead of the mahr. If the wife and her family want to see his generosity, he can give 100k to some destitute people and have his in-laws as witnesses. A high mahr would have to be justified for reasons other than being a potential measure of wealth. You have theorised that a low mahr was encouraged because of the poverty of the Muslim community. However you know that the Muslims were not poor throughout the lives of all 12 Imams {s}. There were very wealthy Muslims at certain times and yet do we have any evidence that the wealthy were encouraged to give higher mahrs? I theorise that one reason a low mahr is encouraged is because it removes social pressure and difficulty from the poorer men. If I was a billionaire I would refuse a high mahr on the principle that it promotes the societal acceptance of the phenomenon. If the rich don't do it, then the poor wont have as much pressure to do it. I can also theorise that a low mahr was promoted because it asks the wives to give importance to other characteristics of the man, rather than his wealth. I.e. she shouldn’t marry him for his money. If Islam didn’t promote a low mahr, what would that do to society? It would be worse than it is. How does that justify a high mahr? It only justifies not the lowest amount. But maybe that was your point. Reports differ. Some say she paid her own mahr.

He could demonstrate his generosity by giving the money to charity instead.

If up to 20k is the minimum safety net, then why is 30k (1.5x) too much? And between 20k and 30k worthy of downward negotiation? Does 20k allow a single person to sustain themselves more than 12-18 months, leave aside a pregnant woman? In many situations the wife may need a lot more. E.g. a medical student in their 1st year who was dependent on her husband. What about costs for things such as mental help if the divorced woman is subsequently depressed? What about non-financial costs? If the mahr is supposed to remove her from harm due to a divorce, then why didn't Islam prescribe anything for non-financial difficulties? Although I can understand the weakness in that argument. In the case of pregnancy, don't forget that Islamically this situation has already been covered, the waiting period is up to birth and the father must provide for the child.

I don't see the harsh language. People should see things like a high mahr as a filter. If someone asks you for one, thank God you found out about this person's probable major character flaws before you married them. In most cases don't even try to change their mind, because you may be seeing the tip of the iceberg.

I don't think you can necessarily use that number in any calculation in another context. That number I believe is for that particular context. {22:47} And they ask you to hasten on the punishment, and Allah will by no means fail in His promise, and surely a day with your Lord is as a thousand years of what you number.

But then the verse right after it: {41:9} Say: What! do you indeed disbelieve in Him Who created the earth in two periods, and do you set up equals with Him? That is the Lord of the Worlds. {41:10} And He made in it mountains above its surface, and He blessed therein and made therein its foods, in four periods: alike for the seekers. What do you say?

https://www.al-islam.org/forty-hadith-an-exposition-second-edition-imam-khomeini/twelfth-hadith-contemplation-tafakkur#desirable-and-forbidden-contemplation-divine-essence

A long distance does not automatically make someone a horrible person. It can't be used as any sort of justification.

Sorry, I am going to sound rude: With respect, you have given terrible advice. Human character does not change easily. You can't expect him to 'make a contract' and become a better person overnight. That is not how people are. What are you suggesting? That we must remain in that sort of hardship because it makes our prayers worth more? I have never seen any Islamic injunction asking us to seek out or remain in detrimental marriages because it makes our prayer more meritorious.