Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Sistani's Office Response to His Thighing Fatwa

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, skinee said:

Who was supposed to phase it out? And where do you get this idea that it was mean to be temporary? There is nothing in Islamic laws/history which indicates that slavery wasn't acceptable. The imams them selves owned slaves, no matter how much they were loved and taken care of, the point is that Islam accepts the idea of owning another human, it isn't considered "evil" or morally unacceptable. Like there is actual fiqh related just to slave ownership and the right of a master over his slave, but you won't find these laws in our "updated" law books. 

Capturing woman during war and having sex with them is rape.... I don't see how it falls under taking "even better care". This is besides the point, the point is that human owning another human is legal and acceptable, regardless whether they sleep together or not. I take issue with a man owning another man, much less owning a woman and then essentially sleeping with them.

Just like how drinking Alcohol is evil but it was allowed in Islam for quite a while. If you want to discuss this at length then please do start a new thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Salam brother,  You have hit alot of good points in your post. I have thought many times about leaving the site because I think 'What's the point ? '. I do one post, which gets quickly spammed ov

Many people have responded to this thread saying it is haram due to x or due to y. If you are convinced that it is haram, then you already have your answer. For matters which are not clear t

Hello everyone. So I just got off the phone talking to Sistani's office about the Thighing fatwa. Just so we are on the same track I asked a few days ago about Sistani's fatwa on thighting (more

  • Advanced Member
Just now, pisceswolf96 said:

Just like how drinking Alcohol is evil but it was allowed in Islam for quite a while. If you want to discuss this at length then please do start a new thread.

forget about it... no need to start a new thread. (Alcohol was in fact disallowed, slavery was not and under current Islamic laws, the same laws the Prophet left for us, slavery is allowed. The Prophet and Imams never drank alcohol, but they did own slaves, as well as their companions. The comparison to alcohol is completely meaningless.).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
13 minutes ago, pisceswolf96 said:

Thank you so so much. You put my mind to peace with this, May Allah grant you Jannat Al-Furdus.

Getting back to the topic. I don't understand how a guardian can marry of a minor without her consent, this one blows my mind. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
12 minutes ago, skinee said:

Who was supposed to phase it out? And where do you get this idea that it was mean to be temporary? There is nothing in Islamic laws/history which indicates that slavery wasn't acceptable. The imams them selves owned slaves, no matter how much they were loved and taken care of, the point is that Islam accepts the idea of owning another human, it isn't considered "evil" or morally unacceptable. Like there is actual fiqh related just to slave ownership and the right of a master over his slave, but you won't find these laws in our "updated" law books. 

Capturing woman during war and having sex with them is rape.... I don't see how it falls under taking "even better care". This is besides the point, the point is that human owning another human is legal and acceptable, regardless whether they sleep together or not. I take issue with a man owning another man, much less owning a woman and then essentially sleeping with them.

Sorry to jump in and intercept here.. But slaves also have sexual needs and can find their owners worthy of satisfying them. Therefore I don't think that sex with a slave has to be rape. It can be love too. Or fun or just the best thing available for them to fulfill a basic need. I think that sex with a slave is a form of marriage that also requires consent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Just now, Allah Seeker said:

Sorry to jump in and intercept here.. But slaves also have sexual needs and can find their owners worthy of satisfying them. Therefore I don't think that sex with a slave has to be rape. It can be love too. Or fun or just the best thing available for them to fulfill a basic need. I think that sex with a slave is a form of marriage that also requires consent. 

The thing is that all scenarios can be true, from rape all the way to consent and everything in between. The "sex" part is a secondary issue, the bigger issue is the concept of owning another human being + marrying someone who can't consent to it (a prepubescent child)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
20 minutes ago, skinee said:

Getting back to the topic. I don't understand how a guardian can marry of a minor without her consent, this one blows my mind. 

Did you read Sistani's response in the link that @AbdusSibtayn posted? If you don't understand Arabic then I can translate it for you?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
57 minutes ago, skinee said:

Who was supposed to phase it out? And where do you get this idea that it was mean to be temporary? There is nothing in Islamic laws/history which indicates that slavery wasn't acceptable. The imams them selves owned slaves, no matter how much they were loved and taken care of, the point is that Islam accepts the idea of owning another human, it isn't considered "evil" or morally unacceptable. Like there is actual fiqh related just to slave ownership and the right of a master over his slave, but you won't find these laws in our "updated" law books. 

Capturing woman during war and having sex with them is rape.... I don't see how it falls under taking "even better care". This is besides the point, the point is that human owning another human is legal and acceptable, regardless whether they sleep together or not. I take issue with a man owning another man, much less owning a woman and then essentially sleeping with them.

So, what?

All the talk to condemn and denounce slavery isb because the individuals always used to treat there slaves in a manner worse than animals. 

Which was the major sin and which made the practice of slavery a very dangerous sin?

Even today wage slavery as termed by Dr. Noam Chomsky in his book 'Anarchism' is a very very common practice. I work for a company and a miad comes and works at my house. She gets paid monthly just like me. I am into wage slavery and she is also in the same category but our masters are different. This is itself slavery. 

Feminists of today who are craving to become employed and 'independent' (as they say) in reality are asking for 'wage slavery'.

Now, condemn this practice and call it rubbish. And see how your economy breaks. 

But finally liberalists ended up creating more and more laws for employee safety and their rights. 

Similarly, Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) never stopped slavery as a practice but improved it by improving the way a person should treat his slave. He went so far as to allow marriage with a slave girl who was almost an untouchable in the pre-Islamic Arab.

It is slave exploitation that is extremely comdemned. 

Slavery though less preferred is not an issue in itself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

Are the office staff not supervised closely?

Salaam brother,

Firstly, may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless you because you did an extremely nice thing by sharing this link. You ended up a fitna getting propagated on SC. 

I was too frustrated with this. And many people with whom I usually don't agree but there criticisms were correct (keeping aside there bad conduct).

So, again it falls upon the same problem that I shared in the similar thread at another place. 

It is not the marjas who are a problem but the deputies. They are only good at roaming around the world attacking Sunnis. It has been a long time but there arguments don't change. They don't discuss these extremely important and controversial issues which creates a gap between Marja and people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, skinee said:

The thing is that all scenarios can be true, from rape all the way to consent and everything in between. The "sex" part is a secondary issue, the bigger issue is the concept of owning another human being + marrying someone who can't consent to it (a prepubescent child)

Owning a human is more vague these days than ever. I think in the past three was a fixed routine of contracts of ownership, while today it is all more black market style. Probably there will be slavery until after that advent of the golden age, when everyone will be free, and safe in Sha Allah. Islam clearly deals with the issue of slavery by encouraging a trend towards freeing slaves and being good to them, and even marrying them after freeing them, which is the highest honor. 

But "marriage" without consent has no place in Islamic texts from what I've seen. Unfortunately people are forced to marry all the time, by the parents treating them like camels at a camel market. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
On 4/14/2021 at 7:00 AM, guest 2025 said:

That's interesting, I didn't realize it was to combat infanticide.

 

On 4/14/2021 at 8:28 AM, Allah Seeker said:

Sounds like nonsense to me personally. What about consent which is a pillar of Islamic marriage? And some of them aren't even girls, but toddlers and babies. 

So in other words they say you can sell your baby daughter to perverts, because there are men who bury their babies alive. That's human trafficking paradise fatwa to me! 

I'm probably going to get in trouble for saying this, but I thought in order to get married, a woman or girl must be baligh, which is in nine lunar years; Thighing is by default haram because not only can toddlers and infants not consent to the marriage, they aren't even physically mature according to Islam. Astaghfirillah, nobody can convince me that thighing is remotely "halal", this practice is straight from the days of Abu Jahl and sullies Islam!  Combat infanticide? No, this will absolutely encourage it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 4/14/2021 at 8:28 AM, Allah Seeker said:

Instead of saying you are not allowed to bury them or give them to perverts under the supposed "marriage" term. What kind of a marriage is that? Id say it's a satanic marriage. 

It is not a marriage at all. It is child abuse and i cant understand why our scholars allowed it!!! Everything immoral and inhumane must be declared haram even if there is no mention of it in the narrations

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

There is nothing mentioned about thighing in the early days of Islam to make it haram, which makes me sure that this practice came into recent history from nonIslamic people.

Shia scholars say that it is haram to consummate a marriage with a girl who has not become baligh (signs of physical maturity).

If a girl later in life realized that she had not given permission for the marriage because she was too young to agree to it, she can ask for a divorce. 

Do you know any Muslim father or grandfather that would marry his baby, toddler or young girl to a man? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

From the link to Sayed Sistani’s website that AbdusSibtain provided:

Quote

3. Marriage of the young - of a male who has not reached puberty to a female who has not reached puberty - was until recently very common in many Eastern societies, and hence the book of religious rulings included some of its rules in its previous versions, but it was observed that it had receded at current times, and that was removed in the latest versions. What we wish to emphasise is that the parent of a girl cannot give permission for her marriage unless it is in her interest, and most often there is no interest in her marriage until she reaches physical maturity and mental preparedness for sexual activity, as it is also not in her interest to marry in contravention to law which would make her liable for unnecessary repercussions and problems.

 

3 minutes ago, Hameedeh said:

Do you know any Muslim father or grandfather that would marry his baby, toddler or young girl to a man? 

No but what I don’t understand is why is it allowed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, Zainuu said:

So, what?

All the talk to condemn and denounce slavery isb because the individuals always used to treat there slaves in a manner worse than animals. 

Which was the major sin and which made the practice of slavery a very dangerous sin?

Even today wage slavery as termed by Dr. Noam Chomsky in his book 'Anarchism' is a very very common practice. I work for a company and a miad comes and works at my house. She gets paid monthly just like me. I am into wage slavery and she is also in the same category but our masters are different. This is itself slavery. 

Feminists of today who are craving to become employed and 'independent' (as they say) in reality are asking for 'wage slavery'.

Now, condemn this practice and call it rubbish. And see how your economy breaks. 

But finally liberalists ended up creating more and more laws for employee safety and their rights. 

Similarly, Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) never stopped slavery as a practice but improved it by improving the way a person should treat his slave. He went so far as to allow marriage with a slave girl who was almost an untouchable in the pre-Islamic Arab.

It is slave exploitation that is extremely comdemned. 

Slavery though less preferred is not an issue in itself. 

 

1 hour ago, Zainuu said:

So, what?

All the talk to condemn and denounce slavery isb because the individuals always used to treat there slaves in a manner worse than animals. 

Which was the major sin and which made the practice of slavery a very dangerous sin?

Even today wage slavery as termed by Dr. Noam Chomsky in his book 'Anarchism' is a very very common practice. I work for a company and a miad comes and works at my house. She gets paid monthly just like me. I am into wage slavery and she is also in the same category but our masters are different. This is itself slavery. 

Feminists of today who are craving to become employed and 'independent' (as they say) in reality are asking for 'wage slavery'.

Now, condemn this practice and call it rubbish. And see how your economy breaks. 

But finally liberalists ended up creating more and more laws for employee safety and their rights. 

Similarly, Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) never stopped slavery as a practice but improved it by improving the way a person should treat his slave. He went so far as to allow marriage with a slave girl who was almost an untouchable in the pre-Islamic Arab.

It is slave exploitation that is extremely comdemned. 

Slavery though less preferred is not an issue in itself. 

For me the issue isn't about how they are being treated, and I completely agree with you that today it's slavery in another form, which is also a system of abuse. the banking system and world economy is completely run by oppressors, so the result is obviously oppression. I can only condemn oppression, wherever it occurs, wither it's through feminist ideas, or if it comes from west, or if it exists in my traditional belief/law system.

For me the issue is the idea of owning another human being. I understand that slavery was improved, and slaves were given greater rights, yet to me that doesn't resolve the moral dilemma of owning another human being... just like the Prophet ended racism by stating an arab is equal to a non-arab, in the same way I consider slavery on the same scale as racism, it can be declared as an evil/incorrect notion/concept in whatever forms it exists and continues to exist. 

I would request you to step out of the framework and how bad/good it was/is, how many rights were given/not given, and consider the entire concept of owing another human being as a whole.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, 313_Waiter said:

3. Marriage of the young - of a male who has not reached puberty to a female who has not reached puberty - was until recently very common in many Eastern societies, and hence the book of religious rulings included some of its rules in its previous versions, but it was observed that it had receded at current times, and that was removed in the latest versions. What we wish to emphasise is that the parent of a girl cannot give permission for her marriage unless it is in her interest, and most often there is no interest in her marriage until she reaches physical maturity and mental preparedness for sexual activity, as it is also not in her interest to marry in contravention to law which would make her liable for unnecessary repercussions and problems.

This is exactly the issue and question. Since there is no forseeable scenario in which it is in the interest of any parent to marry a "female who has not reached puberty", it nullifies the law and doesn't follow that there should be a law to begin with... common sense states that if any society was practicing such traditions, the problem lies with that society's culture and should be condemned.

Even if it was very common in many eastern societies, it seems strange why Islam didn't condemn such a practice and instead allowed it under impossible circumstances (which apparently were not impossible in eastern and even western societies).

For example suppose some society has a common tradition of gay marriages, and then you create laws around it to cater for it... does it make sense?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
8 minutes ago, skinee said:

For example suppose some society has a common tradition of gay marriages, and then you create laws around it to cater for it... does it make sense?

Islamic Laws are not created based on what is common in a society. Furthermore, all Islamic laws are based on the Quran and ahadith so the laws do not change just because society changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 hours ago, skinee said:

Since there is no forseeable scenario in which it is in the interest of any parent to marry a "female who has not reached puberty"

Yes this is my question. Why are underage marriages halal in the first place?

It seems to be an ancient tradition. According to Rabbi Rashi (medieval French rabbi) Rebekah was 3 when she married 40 year old Isaac. See:

https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/10/26/the-age-of-rebecca-when-she-married-isaac-biblical-perceptive/


1 possible explanation that I have come up with is poverty. People may have had to marry off their boys or girls in desperation. Further, the likelihood of abuse may have been low and it may be a practice seen as normal. Then again I am not sure and this is just a theory.

Allahu A’lam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
5 minutes ago, Muhammad Al-Hurr said:

Furthermore, all Islamic laws are based on the Quran and ahadith

Is there any Hadith for thighing? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Who said thighing is allowed? The fatwa was to answer a question about a rare occurrence, to know if a man should be punished for going against the marriage law (females 9 years old and males 15 years old are allowed to marry if they are mature enough). 

According to Ayatullah Sistani, marriage does not require witnesses nor written legal papers, because a man and woman can marry themselves to each other (either temporarily or permanently) and then announce their marriage when it is in their best interest to do so. Obviously some secret marriages are maintained because the family of one or both would harm them.

When a father or grandfather wanted to marry his child or grandchild to someone else, there might not be a sheikh or maulana at the wedding to question the age of the bride and groom. Scholars have said if the female wants a divorce when she is more mature, she can ask for it.

Our scholars do not approve of underage children getting married and they agree that Muslims who do not live in Islamic countries need to follow the age restricted marriage law where they live. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
5 hours ago, Guest guest said:

Our scholars do not approve of underage children getting married and they agree that Muslims who do not live in Islamic countries need to follow the age restricted marriage law where they live. 

Different countries have their own marriageable age laws: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

This has been a long list of entertaining back-and-forth comments. I don't know much on the history of Islamic rulings, but I think the case was: Scholars a long time ago made a ruling that isn't consistent with today's time. Al-Sistani decided to fix it but, instead (I think) is receiving flak from folks like us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team
19 minutes ago, Muhammad Al-Hurr said:

Islamic Laws are not created based on what is common in a society. Furthermore, all Islamic laws are based on the Quran and ahadith so the laws do not change just because society changes.

The problem is this thighing fatwa contradicts the Qur'an: 

Quote

وَإِذَا بَلَغَ ٱلْأَطْفَـٰلُ مِنكُمُ ٱلْحُلُمَ فَلْيَسْتَـْٔذِنُوا۟ كَمَا ٱسْتَـْٔذَنَ ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ يُبَيِّنُ ٱللَّهُ لَكُمْ ءَايَـٰتِهِۦ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌۭ

And when the children among you reach puberty, let them ask permission [at all times] as those before them have done. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses; and Allah is Knowing and Wise.

 ^ Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) knows best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
8 minutes ago, Guest guest said:

According to Ayatullah Sistani, marriage does not require witnesses nor written legal papers, because a man and woman can marry themselves to each other (either temporarily or permanently) and then announce their marriage when it is in their best interest to do so. Obviously some secret marriages are maintained because the family of one or both would harm them.

This is true, that witnesses are not necessary for marriage (mutah or nikah) but it is wajib (required) to have witnesses for divorce. 

https://www.al-islam.org/organizations/AalimNetwork/msg00200.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 4/15/2021 at 1:51 AM, pisceswolf96 said:

I now kinda want to find another Marjaa that is unquestionably against this

Most maraji3 believe in the same thing.

On 4/15/2021 at 1:52 AM, pisceswolf96 said:

It is for you to choose, do you want your daughter dead or do you want her mentally damaged for life

neither

16 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:
16 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

 

Salaam bro, Where has this been said? From what I know we only have ages for consummation like 9 for women

Well according sistani and others you can do lustful acts with them when they’re babies.

5 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

@pisceswolf96

I think this might be relevant to this thread. Ayatollah Sistani (ha) himself is discussing this ruling here, and why it was rescinded in the latest edition of Minhāj üs Sāliheen. Refer to the third point.

https://www.sistani.org/english/archive/26348/

From what I can glean from the response, the Sayyid (ha) means to say that the ruling was made keeping in mind the conditions of the old societies, and is not relevant to our times.

But I can't understand why an office staff would say something that is not in line with the written statement of the marjā himself. Are the office staff not supervised closely?

That’s not an excuse. None of what the office staff or the marja is saying are good excuses.

every generation is different, if it’s not relevant why would he put up such a ruling In the first place? And if we focus on the old times, you think Rasullulah (sawas) would marry off his beloved daughter sayeda Fatima (عليه السلام), at a very young age? You think the prophet would allow a toddler to be given off to some lustful man during their time? It makes no sense

it’s an excuse to use the past to justify such a ruling, and it is illogical to say that such an act was allowed in Islam even during the old times.

Just because there’s supposedly no evidence to refute it, doesnt mean that thighing is okay.you just require an 3aql that’s it. Any person with a pea sized amount of logic would know that it’s a cruel act and doesn’t go under islam. It’s a shame that these scholars are the reason why Islam are given such a terrible image.
 

WAKE UP PEOPLE

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
4 hours ago, skinee said:

would request you to step out of the framework and how bad/good it was/is, how many rights were given/not given, and consider the entire concept of owing another human being as a whole.

Here I agree with you and I have already given a thought by stepping out of it. But as you said, "Owning a human being is an issue." 

Can you please bring me a solution to that?

In Islam, there are completely unusual methods of freeing the slaves. For example, there are many sins, if committed, then one or more slaves should be freed as a reparation.

And the basic and core Islamic fundamentals actually cause a shift in this (master-slave) perspective also. For example, the Islamic doctrine states that all of us are slaves of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). Now, if a woman is in obedience to her husband or parents then she is obeying Allah's (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) command because she is a slave of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and not those people. Similarly, a slave itself is in obedience to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) finally and not his master. He is obeying his master just in respect and obedience of the command of Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى).

So, there is not only an empowerment through increased rights etc but there is an effort to shift the perspective. In this manner, a slave will never be treated or presented. Rather, it will be just left as a mere relationship.

It is known for Imam al Sajjad (عليه السلام) and narrated by public speakers that he kept a lot of slaves and maids but the purpose was not to take works feom them (it was secondary). The primary purpose was to educate them and make them more firm in belief. Because Banu Umayya kept a strict eye on the Imam (عليه السلام) and never gave ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) any room to spread the truth. 

Now I would definitely like to hear from you a solution to abolish slavery completely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

No but what I don’t understand is why is it allowed

Actually, the point above from the website should be read carefully:

Quote

2. This is also condemned and the same applies as described above. We emphasise on the necessity for the relevant official authorities to prosecute those who appear with religious attire, and yet conduct such acts, or promote such practices which entail extremely bad effects on society, and the status of religion in the minds of people.
3. Marriage of the young - of a male who has not reached puberty to a female who has not reached puberty - was until recently very common in many Eastern societies, and hence the book of religious rulings included some of its rules in its previous versions, but it was observed that it had receded at current times, and that was removed in the latest versions. What we wish to emphasise is that the parent of a girl cannot give permission for her marriage unless it is in her interest, and most often there is no interest in her marriage until she reaches physical maturity and mental preparedness for sexual activity, as it is also not in her interest to marry in contravention to law which would make her liable for unnecessary repercussions and problems.

Read both second and third points. 

In the second point, he clearly condemns and denounces the practice of marrying young girls, let alone having any sexual activity.

In the third point (where are main focus lies), the example being conveyed is about child marriage and not a 50 year old man marrying a 3 year infant or having sex or such activities with the infant.

I think, the issue of pedophilia is addressed in the second point and the fatwa in the book (which is removed now) is in a case where a young boy is married to a youn girl.

 

What I see is that either he (رضي الله عنه) has never addressed this question or he has already answered it by invalidating the marriage.

Edited by Zainuu
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Is there any Hadith for thighing? 

Not in favor of this act. But some hadith are there against this act. Not exactly but to some extent. Have a look:

Quote

 

The Prophet of Islam has said:

“When the child reaches the age of seven years, arrange a separate bed for him." - Makarem al Akhlaq v1, pg 256

Imam as-Sadiq narrates from his ancestors:

“The women and children of ten years must have separate individual beds." Wasail al Shiah vol 14 pg 268

"If a mother rubs her body against the body of her own daughter, she is doing a sort of molestation." Wasail al Shiah vol 14 pg 170

“A man should not kiss his six year old daughter, and a woman should not kiss her seven year old son." Wasail al Shiah vol 14 pg 170

 

Now, if a mehram as close as a father or a mother cannot kiss there child or rub the body against them then how can that be allowed with someone who is a non-mehram and cannot become mehram unless married and cannot marry until the 9 years of aged is reached.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
11 hours ago, Zainuu said:

Salaam brother,

Firstly, may Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) bless you because you did an extremely nice thing by sharing this link. You ended up a fitna getting propagated on SC. 

I was too frustrated with this. And many people with whom I usually don't agree but there criticisms were correct (keeping aside there bad conduct).

So, again it falls upon the same problem that I shared in the similar thread at another place. 

It is not the marjas who are a problem but the deputies. They are only good at roaming around the world attacking Sunnis. It has been a long time but there arguments don't change. They don't discuss these extremely important and controversial issues which creates a gap between Marja and people. 

Wa Alaikas Salaam, brother,

All praise belongs to Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى), brother. It is my fortune that He (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) made me useful in this regard. 'Wata izzu man tashā, wata zillu man tashā'.

And I can very well understand your frustration with certain users here. That sort of behaviour is the reason why some of the best minds who were present on the forum previously, have now left it- and that too after such had been stated publicly. There was a time when I would engage with them, but not anymore. At a time when literally everything is just a Google search away, such appalling ignorance amazes me. If someone is this uninformed about the paradigm shift that has occurred in the philosophy of ethics over the past couple of centuries, the impact of the colonial modernity, Orientalism and Eurocentrism on the Muslims' self-image, the philosophy (and let me say, modern religion itself) of secular liberalism, and all of their impact on how Islam has come to be viewed today, then Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forgive me, but I don't have the patience to educate someone in all of this from scratch.

Imagine thinking that parameters invented as recently as 200 years ago are rationally self-evident, unquestionable and apply to all of human thought both past and future. I no longer dignify their shrill, self-righteous rants with responses. No point in having 'rational' discussions when they are not informed. Even if I sit them down to explain things, they won't understand anything, because they don't read or reflect. They are like ants, mired in the wood chipping machine of modernity, who cannot see beyond the letters printed on the pages they are crawling on.

One can do only so much, and I can understand why those learned brothers lost their patience at a point.

As for your point about the junior clergy- the deputies, office staff etc, I share your frustration. It is high time the hawzas begun courses in public dealing along with the regular dīnī curriculum. Nowadays scholars graduate from the hawzas, get their degrees, wear the amāmah and even begin giving lectures, but they are not able to deal with the masses satisfactorily. They can hardly answer the questions which was youngsters pose to them. If this continues, it is not surprising that more and more youth will keep turning away from Islam. Marājā like Sayyid Kamāl al-Haydari- however much we may be critical of him- have repeatedly expressed their concern about this issue. Hardly any attempt is made to address these issues from the pulpits- the impact of modern ideologies on the youth, their struggles with religion etc. People like the Qazwini brothers, Shaykh Azhar Nasser, Shaykh Usāmā al -Attar, Shaykh Nuru Muhammad, Shaykh Abdul Jalil, Shaykh Muhammad al-Hilli etc, who are our best known speakers, are only an exception in this regard, and a small minority. It gives the impression that the hawzas, and the marājā kirām are cut off from the masses and don't care about their issues.

The incompetence of the lower clergy one of the factors that fuelled the Reformation in Europe,that permanently eroded most of the Catholic Church's (and ultimately religion in general) influence there. Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) forbid something like that happens to Islam in the near future,if we fail to learn from history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
6 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

And if we focus on the old times, you think Rasullulah (sawas) would marry off his beloved daughter sayeda Fatima (عليه السلام), at a very young age?

The Prophet (S) married Ā'isha when she was 9 years of age, and he was about 50. Fatima (sa) was 12 years old when she gave birth to Īmām al-Hassan (عليه السلام), her eldest child, suggesting that she was married to Amīr ul-Mu'minīn (عليه السلام) still earlier. Anthropologists believe that women in the older societies reached puberty, married and gave birth to children much earlier than they do now; in fact as recently as around a century ago 10-12 years was considered a nubile age for girls over most parts of the world, even in the West. What we understand as 'child' today hasn't been a timelessly fixed category thorough history.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
3 hours ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

Anthropologists believe that women in the older societies reached puberty

Where can I read more about this. I tried to Google but the first article I got was saying the opposite.

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiVruX_s4LwAhVxzDgGHXrKDPcQFjABegQIBBAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theguardian.com%2Fsociety%2F2020%2Ffeb%2F10%2Fgirls-puberty-year-earlier&usg=AOvVaw0x-QjaRN2yCK5vBsZe6_Dy

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
16 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

I think we need to go back to gathering in person, rather than online for this because gathering in person reduces alot of the 'noise' associated with having online discussions and people tend to be much more polite and empathetic in person than they are virtually which will foster more discussion and encourage people more to engage in it. 

Salaam brother, whilst I agree that people are more polite in-person and it can be easier to express yourself and explain your thought process, the internet offers the benefit of anonymity. Half these brothers and sisters talking about addictions and social problems would not feel confident enough to approach a Sheikh due to the fear of being judged. I for one would not be comfortable in discussing such topics like the one on this thread with ordinary Shia brothers let alone Shuyukh (I am part of a very traditional Pakistani community).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@AbdusSibtayn and @Abu Hadi,

Brothers you were absolutely right on spot with what all you said. There was a reason why I mentioned this saying of Imam Ali (عليه السلام) in this thread and I was thinking exactly what you said above:

Quote

Amir al-mu'minin, peace be upon him, said: When this world advances towards anyone (with its favours) it attributes to him other's good; and when it turns away from him it deprives him of his own good. 

We all are learners from birth to death and we all come up from different backgrounds. It is true that even I had a defect of passing judgement but now I feel I am curing myself slowly. 

But unfortunataly we live in the end times and I would mention only two major defects that I see over here:

1. Lack of tolerance to digest a different opinion.

2. Lack of interest to learn coming along with a quest to win the debate.

We derive our religion from our perceptions. We draw out conclusions from Quran through our perception. 

It should actually be just opposite. It is Quran that should give us a perception/spectacle. 

And from where does this perception comes up. It is natural that it is derived from the environment and the atmosphere and the ideologies we always feel comfortable with. We are fed with a thought through media which is most probably quite away from Islam. But we drag our Quranic interpretation so that it matches that perspective. This is extremely wrong on our end.

But such defects are not even observed by the scholars who speak and show up as representatives of marjiyyah, let alone the thought of pointing out. 

 

I remember when the biography of Allama Tabatabai (رضي الله عنه) where it was written that when he entered the hawza, he saw deficiencies in the hawza such as most of the books being in Arabic and not translated. People studying more Fiqh and Usool and no one focussing on research of Quran and Nahj ul Balagha. So, he fixed targeted to fix those deficiencies. This is the scholarly level we need. And it should always remain.

There must be reformers in every sphere of hawza studies. Specifically on this lower level of representatives of office. 

But I would ask you to please stay instead of thinking to leave. Sabr is an eternal weapon of a believer and we should not leave it anytime. Because it is Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) who guides and provides and who rewards for our deeds. Doesn't matter how much bad situation becomes, Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will grant us if we are righteous. So, trust, hope and expectations should be layed on none but Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). And even if you quit here, you will see the same level of nonsense everywhere.

May Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) hasten the appearance of Imam (عجّل الله تعالى فرجه الشريف).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

I recall hearing that in a conversation, brother. Unfortunately, I can't find references at this very moment, but as soon as I come across one, I will post it here. Although even from anecdotal evidence, it appears to have been the norm because there are so many famous women in history who were married off around the age of 10 and had children as early as their early teens. We needn't look very far. Look at many of the women of early Islam itself.

Nonetheless, I will link a reference here as soon as I find one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...