Sheikh Azhar Nasser on why women take the dominant role

[3wliya_maryam]

 

[kadhim]

I get the sinking feeling from this recent series that Skeikh Azhar is getting kind of seduced into the orbit of the Red Pillers. I find some of the word usage shifting in that direction. That would be an unfortunate development. 

This rhetoric of “restoring/reviving masculinity” is seductive and sounds pretty innocent, even uplifting. Unfortunately in practice, too often it’s just a code word for “regaining control over women.”

This whole zero-sum attitude that someone has to be running the show has to go. How about no one “dominates?” How about two people just partner together to support each other as they each need to be supported and fight the battles of life together. Isn’t that beautiful?

Edited August 17, 2022 by kadhim

[3wliya_maryam]

35 minutes ago, kadhim said:

This whole zero-sum attitude that someone has to be running the show has to go. How about no one “dominates?” How about two people just partner together to support each other as they each need to be supported and fight the battles of life together. Isn’t that beautiful?

Couldn't agree more. 

35 minutes ago, kadhim said:

This rhetoric of “restoring/reviving masculinity” is seductive and sounds pretty innocent, even uplifting. Unfortunately in practice, too often it’s just a code word for “regaining control over women.

I understand your pov, even though Islam says that the man should be the provider and the women takes on the motherly role, unfortunately in this day and age either they become too toxic about it like you just stated or they're useless and do not fulfil their role at all. 

I still liked the sheikh's pov on how men are the reason why they are driving women to be more dominant, because men often like to blame the feminist movement.

[khizarr]

Well, there wasn't too much to take away from this, in the sense that most of it was a repetition of past ideas about masculinity. I do have some reservations, but I don't think there was a lot to really disagree with overall. It was sort of an inferior version of the Jordan Peterson-styled "go clean your room, men" all over again.

I don't think he should have shoved in the little sentence on gender confusion, though. I thought he was going well, up until that point. It's easy getting away with that sort of naivety in Muslim settings (although that is changing), but you're not going to get too far once you step out of that circle. The abandonment of divine values has as much to do with gender identity as ritual prayers have to do with mental health/suicidal thoughts. Whatever it is that he believes Islam has to say about gender identity, I thought it was unsympathetic (and dangerous) to slip that in there, for no apparent reason other than distinguishing between male and female clothing and fashion. So much for being a real, wise man.

[Abu Hadi]

6 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Couldn't agree more. 

I understand your pov, even though Islam says that the man should be the provider and the women takes on the motherly role, unfortunately in this day and age either they become too toxic about it like you just stated or they're useless and do not fulfil their role at all. 

I still liked the sheikh's pov on how men are the reason why they are driving women to be more dominant, because men often like to blame the feminist movement.

His main point, I agree with. Let me just summarize. 

In a marriage / household there is always a leader, i.e. the one who guides the trajectory of the marriage / household and has the 'final word' on important issues. The word 'domination' in English is a loaded word and I think it should be used much less than it is. 'Domination' has the connotation of oppression which is never 'ok' in a marriage or a household. The issue is who is the leader in the household ? Traditionally in most societies, this has been the man because the man is generally more suited to this role, for various reasons which he gave in the lecture, I'm not going to repeat all of them here. 

The only time a women is more suited for this role is when the man 'checks out' for various reasons (he is scared/intimidated by his wife, he has drug/alcohol/addiction issues, he never had a male role model to teach him, etc) and refuses to take on this role or the man is actually absent. The idea of masculinity, in Islam,  in it's basic form, is that the man embraces this role as the leader, provider, and protector of the household and tries to excel at it by doing his responsibilities and practicing justice(haqq). 

I think almost everyone, women or man would agree with the above as a general role of leadership of the man in the household, and this is difference between muslims and non muslims. A muslim women would not question the role of leadership of the man, in general, although she might question as lot of the specifics (the devil is in the details, as they say) whereas a non muslim will question the basic role of the man as the leader of the household. 

The problem with these 'masculinity' speeches is that the sheiks go too far in 'prescriptive' masculinity and try to urge men to do specific things which are not part of the basic role of leadership of a husband/father in Islam but are cultural. They mix the cultural idea of 'masculinity', which varies from culture to culture, time period to time period, and community to community, with the Islamic ideal of a man as the leader of the household and treat them as one thing called 'masculinity' when they are two different things. This treatment of the issue carries the implication that if you don't embrace everything in this 'mixed' version of masculinity, then you're not a real 'man'. This is why most of the brothers who don't fully embrace the cultural idea of masculinity (whatever cultural idea the speaker is presenting) usually 'tune out' these speeches and are not fans of these speakers, so they miss the main idea, which is important, which I outlined above. 

I wish I would hear a speech about 'masculinity' that doesn't mix these two together and just gives the Islamic definition, and gives examples from authentic hadith and then stops there. That would be great. 

 

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Abu Hadi

[Uni Student]

3 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

His main point, I agree with. Let me just summarize. 

In a marriage / household there is always a leader, i.e. the one who guides the trajectory of the marriage / household and has the 'final word' on important issues. The word 'domination' in English is a loaded word and I think it should be used much less than it is. 'Domination' has the connotation of oppression which is never 'ok' in a marriage or a household. The issue is who is the leader in the household ? Traditionally in most societies, this has been the man because the man is generally more suited to this role, for various reasons which he gave in the lecture, I'm not going to repeat all of them here. 

The only time a women is more suited for this role is when the man 'checks out' for various reasons (he is scared/intimidated by his wife, he has drug/alcohol/addiction issues, he never had a male role model to teach him, etc) and refuses to take on this role or the man is actually absent. The idea of masculinity, in Islam,  in it's basic form, is that the man embraces this role as the leader, provider, and protector of the household and tries to excel at it by doing his responsibilities and practicing justice(haqq). 

I think almost everyone, women or man would agree with the above as a general role of leadership of the man in the household, and this is difference between muslims and non muslims. A muslim women would not question the role of leadership of the man, in general, although she might question as lot of the specifics (the devil is in the details, as they say) whereas a non muslim will question the basic role of the man as the leader of the household. 

The problem with these 'masculinity' speeches is that the sheiks go too far in 'prescriptive' masculinity and try to urge men to do specific things which are not part of the basic role of leadership of a husband/father in Islam but are cultural. They mix the cultural idea of 'masculinity', which varies from culture to culture, time period to time period, and community to community, with the Islamic ideal of a man as the leader of the household and treat them as one thing called 'masculinity' when they are two different things. This treatment of the issue carries the implication that if you don't embrace everything in this 'mixed' version of masculinity, then you're not a real 'man'. This is why most of the brothers who don't fully embrace the cultural idea of masculinity (whatever cultural idea the speaker is presenting) usually 'tune out' these speeches and are not fans of these speakers, so they miss the main idea, which is important, which I outlined above. 

I wish I would hear a speech about 'masculinity' that doesn't mix these two together and just gives the Islamic definition, and gives examples from authentic hadith and then stops there. That would be great. 

 

 

What are some examples of cultural notions of masculinity that do not align with Islam

[kadhim]

5 hours ago, Abu Hadi said:

In a marriage / household there is always a leader, i.e. the one who guides the trajectory of the marriage / household and has the 'final word' on important issues.

Is that true though? Your overall post is fine and reasonably balanced. But I want to poke a bit at this notion. 

We often see this statement dropped sort of axiomatically in these discussions. Often preceded by some sweeping explanation analogizing from the oneness of God and the reality that political entities will generally have one leader and then conclude a household is the same. But is it true?

Does a household really need only one leader?

A household needs leadership. But I don’t know that that necessarily means one person all the time. Lots of businesses for example are even flat partnerships. 

Sure, men and women are different. And I’m open to the idea that men will maybe tend to be better at certain aspects of leadership of a household. Physical confrontation with a physical threat is probably a good example. But then other things I can see a woman tend to offer better leadership on those issues.

I don’t know. I just don’t see this solitary decider in my own marriage dynamic, and I don’t think that’s from any failure of “Islamic masculinity.” When my wife and I have a disagreement on a question, we talk it out until we reach a consensus. Sometimes I win the day, sometimes she wins the day, sometimes we mutually compromise in the middle or negotiate a trade off. And if it’s truly deadlocked we just don’t move on that thing. Maybe I’m just privileged, but I don’t think I have yet encountered a situation where there is a deadlock combined with a truly urgent need to do something quickly.

I just think we’re giving the wrong impression to both our young men and young women as to how this actually plays out in practice. 

[Abu Hadi]

8 hours ago, Uni Student said:

What are some examples of cultural notions of masculinity that do not align with Islam

1. He said you need to play competitive sports to be a 'man'. That's not true. It's cultural. I'm not saying playing competitive sports is bad, and it does teach certain things like teamwork, learning to deal with physical pain, etc, but someone can learn those in other ways besides sports. 

2. One of the main causes of divorce is emasculated men. The main cause of divorce, Islamically, is lack of taqwa, either from the man, the women or both. 

A few other minor points, but like I said, I think in general this was a good speech, and I don't want to criticize it too much because I think Sheik Nasser is doing a good service to the community. He is probably the most close to presenting the actual concept of masculinity in Islam, without the cultural baggage. 

The few of the minor points, which I don't think have anything necessarily to do with his speech directly is that the way he presents masculinity is that you have to do all these things in order to be considered a 'good husband'. IMHO, he is scaring a lot of brother away from marriage by presenting the subject in this way. If I were to give the speech, I would start off saying that here are the requirements for marriage (the minimum requirements). Once you meet those, you should get married. You will not be the perfect masculine role model, but you can work toward that, and make that as a goal, but don't think you need to be the ideal 'man' like he was talking about in order to get married. 

99.9% of brothers here (both the married and single ones) fall far short of the ideal he is presenting (including myself). I can tell you that when I first got married, I had a really bad temper, although I never did anything to my wife or my kids that would be classified as 'abuse' that would get me put in jail, I wasn't the most pleasant person to be around. I was also emotionally retarded, i.e. like many men I didn't know how to express my emotions to my wife / family in a constructive way. I have been working on these issues, and it has taken alot of hard work but I made progress to the point that I don't hear any 'complaints' any more. 

So I think he should have incorporated some of this into his speech, but overall it was a good speech and I have listened to it all the way thru twice now and I learned some things.  

[Abu Hadi]

7 hours ago, kadhim said:

Is that true though? Your overall post is fine and reasonably balanced. But I want to poke a bit at this notion. 

We often see this statement dropped sort of axiomatically in these discussions. Often preceded by some sweeping explanation analogizing from the oneness of God and the reality that political entities will generally have one leader and then conclude a household is the same. But is it true?

Does a household really need only one leader?

A household needs leadership. But I don’t know that that necessarily means one person all the time. Lots of businesses for example are even flat partnerships. 

Sure, men and women are different. And I’m open to the idea that men will maybe tend to be better at certain aspects of leadership of a household. Physical confrontation with a physical threat is probably a good example. But then other things I can see a woman tend to offer better leadership on those issues.

I don’t know. I just don’t see this solitary decider in my own marriage dynamic, and I don’t think that’s from any failure of “Islamic masculinity.” When my wife and I have a disagreement on a question, we talk it out until we reach a consensus. Sometimes I win the day, sometimes she wins the day, sometimes we mutually compromise in the middle or negotiate a trade off. And if it’s truly deadlocked we just don’t move on that thing. Maybe I’m just privileged, but I don’t think I have yet encountered a situation where there is a deadlock combined with a truly urgent need to do something quickly.

I just think we’re giving the wrong impression to both our young men and young women as to how this actually plays out in practice. 

In an ideal world, all decisions would be made jointly or as part of a democratic process in the family. I agree this is the ideal, but at the end of the day in the real world, not everyone is going to agree, not even a husband or wife are going to agree 100% of the time. The only person you agree with 100% of the time is yourself. 

So in situations that are non trivial (I'm not talking about what color should we pick for the drapes or which restaurant are we going to eat at tonight) and the outcome would affect the family in a significant way, someone needs to make the final decision, after reflection and consultation as much as possible. The one who makes that decision is the leader. Because someone makes it, that means there is always a leader. 

This is especially true when there is disagreement within the family / between husband and wife. Leadership is not always constant, and can switch back and forth depending on the circumstances or situation, but there is always a leader. In Islam, the one who makes the decisions regarding major issues, like where are we going to live, what do we do for money, should we buy this house or not, who is going to live in our house or not (besides the immediate family), etc, issues which will have a profound effect on the family, in Islam, the man is the leader in those things. 

Because Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has made the man accountable for certain things, like protection and support of the family and education of the children, etc, He(s.w.a) has also given the man authority in those areas. Because Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is just, he does not give accountability without authority and does not give authority without accountability. They go hand in hand. This is a strange concept to some people, because most of us live in unjust societies where many people are given authority without accountability, and given accountability without authority. 

For example, we are held accountable by Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) for what we eat, what we do with our hands and feet, etc, because Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) has given us authority over our mouth and tongue, and our hands and feet (except if we are handicapped, but that is another topic). In the same way that Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) will hold the man accountable if his family was not supported financially, if they were put in an unsafe situation deliberately, or if the children did not get an education and they could have been given an education, and he will not hold the wife accountable for those things. Because of that, He(s.w.a) has given the man authority in those areas. 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Abu Hadi

[notme]

Being a good man is exactly the same as being a good woman: be a good human being.  

Start with that.  If you've achieved it,  then you will be able to negotiate roles and responsibilities in a just and equitable way, building upon strengths and scaffolding weaknesses in both partners.  It's that simple and not easy. 

[VoidVortex]

 

[VoidVortex]

In sheikh sekaleshfar's video, he talks about how husband and wife manifest different attributes of Allah.

Sayyed Hussain Makke has a similar video. 

This is kind of the irfani perspective on marriage, which in my humble opinion is how we should look at marriage. 

This is my input, although not directly related:

at the base level, there are rights, these rights are wajib to do such as man financing wife, and wife pleasing the husband. 

After that, for a good marriage, both husband and wife should go above and beyond. 

If you study the lives of our scholars, you'll see that their ettiquette with their wifes is something we can only dream of applying. They are most similar in applying the sunnah of the Prophet and Imams and therefore they are who we should be emulating.

Quote

Throughout our life together never once did she say to me why did you carry out that particular act, or why didn’t you do something! For example, you know that I work at home and am continually occupied with writing and studying. As a result I get tired and occasionally I need to rest and to renew my energy. My wife was aware of this. She would always have the kettle on and tea ready. Although she was busy with housework, she would pour me one cup of tea every hour. She would place it in my study and would return to her work until the following hour…how can I ever forget such love and kindness?! - Allamah Tabatabai speaking about his wife

Imam Khomeini:

The wise lady noted that the great leader never imposed his own will on any of family members or friends.

The great leader of the Islamic world had only demanded her to perform obligatory worships and fulfill religious obligations. He never demanded too much extra or beyond expectations regarding the worldly and religious affairs, Lady Khadijeh noted.

Imam's wife had remained with Imam during years of exile and never gave him up for a single moment in thick or thin times.

She exercised a great amount of patience and tolerance during all tough years of struggle and following the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

Imam and Home Life | Rays of the Sun, 83 Stories from the Life of Imam Khomeini (رضي الله عنه) | Al-Islam.org

its enough to read the above and see exemplary conduct. 

The key to this whole thing is Islam and how it commands people to act. I'm talking about especially acting maximally rather than minimally. Here you see true love between husbands and wives, and true support during trying times. This is all tied in obedience to Allah. 

On a side note, pray for me that I get married

[Abu_Zahra]

On one hand its good that speakers are trying to address social issues rather than to ignore them.

On the other hand sometimes they jump into topics that they don't necessarily have a lot of knowledge and experience in.

For such topics a seminar with multiple participants would make more sense, with one person bringing religious guidelines to the table, another one experience from counseling or social work etc.. 

[VoidVortex]

generally a lot of people might only go to majlis in Muharram and that's the time they will sit and gain knowledge from the majlis. Its possible some youth have some doubts or don't know how islam responds to the ideologies in today's world like red pill, feminism. This is why modern topics are covered according to community needs. Because most youth will come in Muharram its a perfect oppurtunity and maybe even one of the only oppurtunities to dispel their doubts. The amount of people that are going to go to a semainar are far far less than a majlis in muharram. 

Maybe the best approach towards these things is that if a sheikh will cover a modern topic, they can check with experts on the topic before delivering the lecture. I'm not commenting on sheikh Azhar Nasser's lecture because I haven't watched it, its just a general principle that might be good, although its possible that some sheikhs already do a lot of fact checking and I've seen one famous sheikh use books by experts to make points too.

[Reza]

Discussion of these topics happen frequently in non-Islamic spaces, so it's nice to have it directly addressed as a majlis.

With that said, this is merely introductory. I agree there needs to be longer panel discussions, preferably including people who specialize in social work and psychology, as well as religious experts.

[3wliya_maryam]

On 8/17/2022 at 6:32 PM, Abu Hadi said:

I think almost everyone, women or man would agree with the above as a general role of leadership of the man in the household, and this is difference between muslims and non muslims. A muslim women would not question the role of leadership of the man, in general, although she might question as lot of the specifics (the devil is in the details, as they say) whereas a non muslim will question the basic role of the man as the leader of the household. 

I dont really understand what this means. Could you elaborate.
 

Everyone's answers here are fairly balanced. But I believe that not only Sheikh Azhar, but Sayyed Jawad Qazwini, Sayyed Hussain Makke and the likes are the type of scholars we need in this generation. 

[ShiaMan14]

I didnt find much wrong with this lecture. Agree with @Reza that it was introductory but if you look at the audience, there was a lot of youth there so perhaps it was at the right level.

[kadhim]

14 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

I dont really understand what this means. Could you elaborate.
 

Everyone's answers here are fairly balanced. But I believe that not only Sheikh Azhar, but Sayyed Jawad Qazwini, Sayyed Hussain Makke and the likes are the type of scholars we need in this generation. 

Jawad Qazwini had a good series this year. At least the few talks I heard.

[علوي]

4 hours ago, kadhim said:

Jawad Qazwini had a good series this year.

wallah

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqzY6Q0DGZv_hNGRamJjviqIaRu1IZ_-3

[Traveller_]

If everyone is a leader, then who's going to follow? 
If you are a leader you have authority which must be intertwined with accountability. 
You must also be decisive and static, so you can't tiptoe around certain matters, you must take a decision

When you do this, you must handle the repercussions of your actions and stand by them

In a union between a man and a woman, which one of them fits this description more? 

[notme]

2 hours ago, Traveller_ said:

In a union between a man and a woman, which one of them fits this description more? 

Do you want an experiential answer, or a hypothetical one? 

In my experience, men fail to lead,  which forces women to take charge, not because they want to but because they are more responsible.   

[EiE]

2 hours ago, notme said:

Do you want an experiential answer, or a hypothetical one? 

In my experience, men fail to lead,  which forces women to take charge, not because they want to but because they are more responsible.   

I disagree, women have become more chaotic and society supports them to act in this manner.
It seems as though everything is taking place on purpose in order to defy "religion".

We are literally digging our own graves by elevating women to positions of leadership when there are far more capable and competent males to do so. And no, I'm not referring to the males in power right now. I'm talking about real men who have taqwa of Allah and see the world for what it is.
I've heard they're few, some say 313.

[علوي]

1 hour ago, EiE said:

I disagree, women have become more chaotic and society supports them to act in this manner.

The holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) says to Salman al-Mohammadi (رضي الله عنه) about the signs of the Day of Judgement:

“O Salman, at that time, women will be rulers and the concubines will be consulted..."

(Source: Biharol Anwar, Vol.6, Pg. 305-309)

Sayyid Sa'eed Akhtar Rizvi writes about this quote:

"It may mean the government of the women and/or the domination of women over their husbands - so much so that the husbands will not, or cannot, ask them to remain within the limits of the Sheriat, leaving them free to go wherever they want in whatever clothes they like..."

[notme]

2 hours ago, EiE said:

I disagree, women have become more chaotic and society supports them to act in this manner.

Clearly you and I live in very different societies. 

[Uni Student]

4 hours ago, EiE said:

I disagree, women have become more chaotic and society supports them to act in this manner.
It seems as though everything is taking place on purpose in order to defy "religion".

We are literally digging our own graves by elevating women to positions of leadership when there are far more capable and competent males to do so. And no, I'm not referring to the males in power right now. I'm talking about real men who have taqwa of Allah and see the world for what it is.
I've heard they're few, some say 313.

Thats the entire point of the lecture though. When the "real men who have taqwa of Allah" are missing from leadership in society for whatever reason, and instead we get the male leadership we currently have, then women will be pushed to lead

[3wliya_maryam]

5 hours ago, EiE said:

I disagree, women have become more chaotic and society supports them to act in this manner.

No, women have become more "chaotic" because most men don't fulfil their role nowadays hence it drives women to act in this manner. I wouldn't use the word chaotic though.

 

5 hours ago, EiE said:

there are far more capable and competent males to do so.

First you say this

And then you contradict yourself by saying they are few:

5 hours ago, EiE said:

I'm talking about real men who have taqwa of Allah and see the world for what it is.
I've heard they're few, some say 313

 

The issue lies within our communities that don't know how to raise their sons to be proper men. And instead shift the blame onto women saying they are "destroyer of families."
 

 

[EiE]

3 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

No, women have become more "chaotic" because most men don't fulfil their role nowadays hence it drives women to act in this manner. I wouldn't use the word chaotic though.

4 hours ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

The issue lies within our communities that don't know how to raise their sons to be proper men. And instead shift the blame onto women saying they are "destroyer of families."

 

The majority of males, in my opinion, fail to fulfil these obligations because they are afraid of women, that they will lose custody of their children, that their wives will leave them, or that they will never find a female companion if they hold a different stance.

 

 

 

[VoidVortex]

its enough for men and women to follow what Islam told us to do. 

I'll be frank, every issue that has come up in marital life is because individuals thought that applying their own ideologies is better than applying Islamic ones. 

In a marriage, at the minimum level, rights of the husband and wife should be fulfilled. Some women do not fulfil their husband's rights for petty excuses. Some women want the benefits of being provided for when they don't provide for their husbands. This is quite a major crime. On the other hand, some husbands become tyrants when they are supposed to be compassionate with their wives.

 Some men don't provide the wife with her emotional needs, they won't offer to help their wives with housework.

After we fulfil the minimum, then men and women have to follow the Islamic conduct if they want their marriage to flourish. Men have to follow the conduct of the Prophet and the Imams and women have to follow the examples of Sayyeda Zahra AS. 

Quote

And among His Signs (is) that He created for you from yourselves mates that you may find tranquility in them; and He placed between you love and mercy. Indeed, in that surely (are) Signs for a people who reflect.  

– Surah Ar Rum; Verse 21

Once men and women start acting according to Quran and Ahlulbayt, we won't have these marital issues.

However some people suffer from trauma and this affects the marriage. They need to treat themselves through a therapist, hypnosis and other treatments. 

Ideologies like red pill and feminism are poisonous and have caused too much damage. The Quran and Ahlulbayt have been given as a solution, but man made ideologies have been influencing many marriages and as a result causing problems in these marriages. 

Some men will not fulfil their responsibilites for a few reasons, either they are lazy, or they grew up in a way where they weren't taught how to be responsible in a marriage, or there may be other reasons.  

Many if not nearly all marital problems are caused by a moral deficiency in either the husband or wife. Of course no one is perfect, but its possible to train yourself to become near perfect and be vigilant. The reason Imam Ali and Fatimah Zahra had a perfect marriage despite their harsh conditions is because they were both perfect. They treated each other only in a way that is most pleasing to God. We can achieve something similar to that, if both husband and wife strive to get closer to God. 

The solution is piety in most cases, and piety is practical. You don't need to be one of the 313, you can achieve a very high level of piety that will help the marriage and reduce marital problems.

Psychological Differences between Men and Women | Ali Reza Panahian - YouTube

Ali reza Panahian has a fantastic series of videos on this topic, and he derives it from the ahadith of Ahlulbayt and even sometimes uses modern findings to support what he is saying.

[3wliya_maryam]

45 minutes ago, EiE said:

The majority of males, in my opinion, fail to fulfil these obligations because they are afraid of women, that they will lose custody of their children, that their wives will leave them, or that they will never find a female companion if they hold a different stance.

In some cases yes, and in most cases no. i dont know where you live or what you've seen.

[Abu Hadi]

On 8/18/2022 at 9:30 AM, 3wliya_maryam said:

I dont really understand what this means. Could you elaborate.
 

Everyone's answers here are fairly balanced. But I believe that not only Sheikh Azhar, but Sayyed Jawad Qazwini, Sayyed Hussain Makke and the likes are the type of scholars we need in this generation. 

A Muslim women knows that the husband is the Wakil (Protector / Authority Figure) of the household. This is something that is not disputed in Islamic Fiqh / Theology. At the same time, this is a general statement. While she might recognize his authority in a general sense, she might have issues with 'how' he exercises that authority on a day to day basis. There is an expression in English , 'where the rubber hits the road'. In other words, where the theoretical is put into practice is usually where the problems occur between husband and wife. 

There are some men who use this idea of Wikalat of the household in order to abuse / oppress their wife / family. They use it to insist or rights that this Wikalat does not give them. Like I said, this is a limited and not a general Wikalat, and it only involves certain areas, which the Sheik went over in the speeches, and which I also mentioned. 

On the other side, there are some muslim women who mistakenly believe that this Wikalat is limited to financial support and intimacy only. In other words, my husband has to support me financially, and I have to be intimate with him, and that is the extent of it. This is also wrong, and there are other aspects to it. This is why I think we, as muslims, should make it a requirement that before a couple gets married, they need to take a class, with a midterm and final exam, and they need to get a passing grade before they can get married so that they understand what their rights and responsibilities are in a marriage. I hope this answers your question. 

Edited August 21, 2022 by Abu Hadi

[notme]

2 hours ago, EiE said:

 

The majority of males, in my opinion, fail to fulfil these obligations because they are afraid of women, that they will lose custody of their children, that their wives will leave them, or that they will never find a female companion if they hold a different stance.

So you're saying men need to push through their fear? To "man up"?

[notme]

23 minutes ago, Abu Hadi said:

This is why I think we, as muslims, should make it a requirement that before a couple gets married, they need to take a class, with a midterm and final exam, and they need to get a passing grade before they can get married so that they understand what their rights and responsibilities are in a marriage.

I like this idea.  

I would suggest we encourage our young adults to take it as a general course,  and then have a refresher and detailed course when they are preparing to marry.  

[Ethics]

Personally I do not think we need to get so deep with terminology and philosophy and theology. A simple look at the quran and the life of the Prophet Muhammad (عليه السلام) will answer everything -> The role of Khadija (عليه السلام).

But I posted this a few weeks ago. If you have time I highly recommend listening to this lecture. The main topic is why do we exist but he discusses the role and status of women in Shia Islam.

[313_Waiter]

On 8/17/2022 at 1:04 PM, kadhim said:

I get the sinking feeling from this recent series that Skeikh Azhar is getting kind of seduced into the orbit of the Red Pillers. I find some of the word usage shifting in that direction. That would be an unfortunate development. 

This rhetoric of “restoring/reviving masculinity” is seductive and sounds pretty innocent, even uplifting. Unfortunately in practice, too often it’s just a code word for “regaining control over women.”

This whole zero-sum attitude that someone has to be running the show has to go. How about no one “dominates?” How about two people just partner together to support each other as they each need to be supported and fight the battles of life together. Isn’t that beautiful?

The truth of the matter is that hierarchies exist all around us. Do we not all submit to Allah (azwj) and to His representatives on Earth? Without a hierarchy, there would be chaos. Similarly a level of hierarchy exists within the household.

It’s not just about men being in charge of women, if you say this you disregard that beneath that beneath the feet of our mothers lies our paradise. Nonetheless, when it comes to our wives, we men are the qawwāmun (maintainers, upholders) of (our) women:

الرِّجالُ قَوّامونَ عَلَى النِّساءِ بِما فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعضَهُم عَلىٰ بَعضٍ وَبِما أَنفَقوا مِن أَموالِهِم ۚ فَالصّالِحاتُ قانِتاتٌ حافِظاتٌ لِلغَيبِ بِما حَفِظَ اللَّهُ ۚ وَاللّاتي تَخافونَ نُشوزَهُنَّ فَعِظوهُنَّ وَاهجُروهُنَّ فِي المَضاجِعِ وَاضرِبوهُنَّ ۖ فَإِن أَطَعنَكُم فَلا تَبغوا عَلَيهِنَّ سَبيلًا ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كانَ عَلِيًّا كَبيرًا

“Men are the managers of women, because of the advantage Allah has granted some of them over others, and by virtue of their spending out of their wealth. So righteous women are obedient, care-taking in the absence [of their husbands] of what Allah has enjoined [them] to guard…” (4:34)

[313_Waiter]

We Muslims should not care if our religion is not politically correct. We should focus on being the best representatives of the religion of Muhammad wa ‘Aal Muhammad ((عليه السلام)). 
When it really comes to it, NO major world religion is politically correct: