Dear Friends,
I am reproducing here the last portion of Professor Ismail Poonawala’s long address to the Progressive Bohras' World Conference held in Daventry, England, from July 30 to Aug.1, 2004. My sole aim is to get your valuable views on this subject:
……. In short the Islamic world has made progress. We the Bohras, on the other hand, have lagged far behind. In the past our spiritual ancestors were in the forefront. The Ismaili movement achieved spectacular political success by founding the Fatimid dynasty that ruled North Africa, Egypt, and parts of greater Syria for over two centuries. Some of the great dais, such as Nasafi, Razi, Sijistani, Qadi Nuaman, Kirmani, and Muvayyad Shir?zi have enriched Arabic literature, philosophy, law, theology, and history. Ismaili literature of the Fatimid period reflects the general concern of Muslims and of Islamic theology and law that were being developed and debated among the various Muslim schools of thought. The major Ismaili contribution to Islamic thought is their formulation of a new synthesis of reason and revelation based on Neo-platonic cosmology and Shiai doctrine. Thus, they offered a new world order under the aegis of the Imam who resembles Plato's philosopher-king. The classic formulation of this synthesis is found in the Rasail Ikhwan al-Safa, a well-known encyclopedia of the philosophical sciences. It was compiled by Ismaili authors and occupies a unique position in the history of Islamic thought and exercised a great influence on the Muslim elite.
Without dwelling too much on the past, let us inquire about the causes of stagnation. One of the main reasons in my opinion was the precarious nature of the existence of our community after the fall of the Fatimid dynasty, first in Yemen for four centuries, and then in India. Especially in Yemen, it was the question of its very survival under extremely adverse circumstances that have molded the attitudes of the religious establishment in order to keep the community together. Intellectually the community was more or less isolated from the main stream of Islamic thought. The situation in India somewhat fluctuated depending on the political rule in Gujarat, but then the linguistic and cultural environments had completely changed.
I am not concerned here as to when, where, and how the Bohra reform movement originated. For convenience and personal familiarity, I will begin with the first conference, known as the Bagasra Sammelan, held in the late fifties of the last century. At one time, under the leadership of the late Noman Contractor when several thousand copies of the weekly Bulletin were sold, the movement looked like a mass movement that was about to yield some fruits. Unfortunately, the religious establishment outmaneuvered the reformists. The movement was also narrowly focused on the democratization of community institutions and their financial accountability. Looking back at half a century of struggle one has to ask, what have we achieved? Since I left India in 1960 I do not claim to have first hand information as to what happened on the ground. However, watching it from a distance I have to conclude that the achievements of the movement appear disappointing. Please do not get me wrong, besides blind faith and lack of moral courage on the part of the people, the Mullaji's use of the weapon of excommunication and refusal to perform religious rites of marriage as well as the funeral rites of a member of the reformist family created enormous hardships to those families in the closely-knit Bohra society of the Indian sub-continent.
During the last several decades the religious establishment, on the other hand, has thrived. All of the community waqf property has been taken over. Driven by consummate greed the establishment has devised numerous ways to squeeze more and more money from the naïve and blind followers. Many old mosques and mausoleums were razed to the ground, millions of rupees collected to rebuild them under the pretext of revival of the Fatimid art and architecture. Codes of personal appearance and dress, both for men and women, were mandated to delineate members of the community from non-members and to fortify group solidarity. Like the neo-revivalists, such as the Ikhwan al-Muslimin, and Jamaat-e Islami groups, some of the pet themes of the establishment are: bank interest is unlawful; the unveiling of women is a cardinal sin; and that intellectualism is dangerous.
I would like to propose the following. The scope of reform needs to be broadened to include religious issues. The two main fundamental sources of Islam, namely the Quran and the sunna/hadith, need to be re-examined in light of recent research and development. The principle of ijtihad, rejected by our forefathers due to special circumstances and the very nature of the theory of the Imamate, need to be reconsidered. I further propose that certain un-Islamic practices, such as female circumcision, mithaq ceremony, very cruel practice of imprisoning a widow following her husband's death in a room or a house for four months and ten days under the pretext of observing the mandatory ordinance of iddat, must be abandoned. Religious education is in dire need of drastic reform. As a modest beginning towards achieving our goals we need to organize ourselves by setting up local, regional, national, and international councils within an appropriate constitutional framework.
For your views
Re: For your views
002.234
YUSUFALI: If any of you die and leave widows behind, they shall wait concerning themselves four months and ten days: When they have fulfilled their term, there is no blame on you if they dispose of themselves in a just and reasonable manner. And Allah is well acquainted with what ye do.
So if the progressives are suggesting to abandon this practice then they are suggesting to abandon the belief in the quran to be the word of Allah. How it is followed can be discussed, abandoning it cannot be discussed.
YUSUFALI: If any of you die and leave widows behind, they shall wait concerning themselves four months and ten days: When they have fulfilled their term, there is no blame on you if they dispose of themselves in a just and reasonable manner. And Allah is well acquainted with what ye do.
So if the progressives are suggesting to abandon this practice then they are suggesting to abandon the belief in the quran to be the word of Allah. How it is followed can be discussed, abandoning it cannot be discussed.
-
Kaka Akela
- Posts: 484
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Dear Insaf:
I agree with some of the points in the speech of Dr. Poonawala but not all the points. 1) In bohra religion the female circumcision is not as brutal as in some African countries. Man's penis has a hood over it which is removed, similarly in women there is hood over their clitoris which is cut or slit to expose the clitoris and this is not as extreme, it may be that some old ladies do a more brutal job than the required removal of hood, they must be given training by trained female doctors and this training must be made mandatory for all those performing this circumcision. 2) I don't think the whole of Misaq should be abolished, but I think the tampering and modifications made to it by the previous Dai should be removed as he literally made everyone a slave and has claimed ownership of their property and he claimed to own all his believers body and soul with all their worldly belongings. All refrences to these should be removed and get back to the original misaq that all previous dais used to take before him. 3) Remove all Dai's family members from all charitable Boards as trustees. They do nothing but collect monies just for lending their names, what we need is hard working people who will do a good job for helping the poor in the community be appointed to these Boards as Trustees. 4) We need to approach all the government authorities in each and every country to look into the fund-raising and funnelling of money by the aamils and Kotharis all over the world. I believe that Dawat is more rich than Bill Gates but they don't have to report to anybody so no one knows their richness but still fleecing of the flock never stops.
5)The communist thinking has to change in our religion. In communism the Party and the State reign supreme,however, in our religion the Dai and the dawat reign supreme. No one can dare question any thing Dai or Kotharis say as it would be considered a rebellion and immediately his head will be smashed to set an example for others. We are told that we only exist for Dai we are told to live and breathe Dai, consequently we are fed day to day or minute to minute status on what Dai is doing, when he sneezed, when he bathed, when he came out on the balcony to give sharaf of deedar,when he went for ziyarat, which masjid he prayed namaaz in today etc.etc., Do we need all this to create a hyper paranoia in us. Basically, our religion is great but it has been hijacked by the previous Dai and continued on the same path unbder this Dai.
I agree with some of the points in the speech of Dr. Poonawala but not all the points. 1) In bohra religion the female circumcision is not as brutal as in some African countries. Man's penis has a hood over it which is removed, similarly in women there is hood over their clitoris which is cut or slit to expose the clitoris and this is not as extreme, it may be that some old ladies do a more brutal job than the required removal of hood, they must be given training by trained female doctors and this training must be made mandatory for all those performing this circumcision. 2) I don't think the whole of Misaq should be abolished, but I think the tampering and modifications made to it by the previous Dai should be removed as he literally made everyone a slave and has claimed ownership of their property and he claimed to own all his believers body and soul with all their worldly belongings. All refrences to these should be removed and get back to the original misaq that all previous dais used to take before him. 3) Remove all Dai's family members from all charitable Boards as trustees. They do nothing but collect monies just for lending their names, what we need is hard working people who will do a good job for helping the poor in the community be appointed to these Boards as Trustees. 4) We need to approach all the government authorities in each and every country to look into the fund-raising and funnelling of money by the aamils and Kotharis all over the world. I believe that Dawat is more rich than Bill Gates but they don't have to report to anybody so no one knows their richness but still fleecing of the flock never stops.
5)The communist thinking has to change in our religion. In communism the Party and the State reign supreme,however, in our religion the Dai and the dawat reign supreme. No one can dare question any thing Dai or Kotharis say as it would be considered a rebellion and immediately his head will be smashed to set an example for others. We are told that we only exist for Dai we are told to live and breathe Dai, consequently we are fed day to day or minute to minute status on what Dai is doing, when he sneezed, when he bathed, when he came out on the balcony to give sharaf of deedar,when he went for ziyarat, which masjid he prayed namaaz in today etc.etc., Do we need all this to create a hyper paranoia in us. Basically, our religion is great but it has been hijacked by the previous Dai and continued on the same path unbder this Dai.
Re: For your views
Bro Anajami i wud like to ask u which surah this ayat is frm n in wat context was this said....Originally posted by anajmi:
002.234
YUSUFALI: If any of you die and leave widows behind, they shall wait concerning themselves four months and ten days: When they have fulfilled their term, there is no blame on you if they dispose of themselves in a just and reasonable manner. And Allah is well acquainted with what ye do.
So if the progressives are suggesting to abandon this practice then they are suggesting to abandon the belief in the quran to be the word of Allah. How it is followed can be discussed, abandoning it cannot be discussed.
Ur quote shows that the practice of iddat is clearly mentioned in the Quran...but can u justify the practice rationally...i dont understand how it wud help a widow to live in a secluded life as soon as her husband passes away..wudnt it help if she cud be with her friends who cud console her.....also pls tell me does the Quran specify how strictly iddat needs to be practiced in the following ayats....
Re: For your views
makberi,
It might do you good if you were to read properly. The surah and the ayah number is clearly specified in my post. It is the very first line. Let's see if you can find it. Next read the last sentence in my post where I have said "How it is followed can be discussed, abandoning it cannot be discussed."
Not sure if I can be clearer than that, but you definitely can be a little bit smarter.
It might do you good if you were to read properly. The surah and the ayah number is clearly specified in my post. It is the very first line. Let's see if you can find it. Next read the last sentence in my post where I have said "How it is followed can be discussed, abandoning it cannot be discussed."
Not sure if I can be clearer than that, but you definitely can be a little bit smarter.
Re: For your views
thanks Bro anajmi but their are few other questions that i have raised...first being in which context was this ayat quoted...for ex after the battle of uhud the Prophet allowed 4 marriages for a muslim, but that was in the context of the situation cuz there were many widows after the battle of uhud n no one to take care of them...now most muslim countries dont even allow a second marriage ...thus to udnerstand quranic verses n hadith...n need to udnerstand the context in which they were quoted.....also i have asked does the quran specify in the following ayahs the strict conditions in which iddat is practised......
i respect ur knowledge of the Quran n hope for a more forthcoming response
i respect ur knowledge of the Quran n hope for a more forthcoming response
Re: For your views
bro makberi,
I repeat, the conditions under which iddat is carried out can be discussed further. There is no need for any woman who is undergoing the period of iddat to face any hardship whatsoever, provided she can fulfill the minimum requirements of iddat. I am not a scholar but you can approach the imam of your local mosque for more details. The kothar being a corrupt organization, may not be able to give you a good answer. If you want the context, you need to study the quran. Read a few ayahs before and after the ayah that I quoted and you might get the context. If you don't then, just consider it to be a command of Allah(provided you believe in him) and follow it.
As far as 4 marriages are concerned, the prophet wasn't the one who allowed 4 marriages. The quran and Allah allowed 4 marriages provided you can be just. Other wise just one. This is the ayah
004.003
YUSUFALI: If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.
I am not sure where you got the context from, regarding the battle of uhud, but the next time you point out anything that the prophet said or did, I would appreciate it if you can point out your sources.
I repeat, the conditions under which iddat is carried out can be discussed further. There is no need for any woman who is undergoing the period of iddat to face any hardship whatsoever, provided she can fulfill the minimum requirements of iddat. I am not a scholar but you can approach the imam of your local mosque for more details. The kothar being a corrupt organization, may not be able to give you a good answer. If you want the context, you need to study the quran. Read a few ayahs before and after the ayah that I quoted and you might get the context. If you don't then, just consider it to be a command of Allah(provided you believe in him) and follow it.
As far as 4 marriages are concerned, the prophet wasn't the one who allowed 4 marriages. The quran and Allah allowed 4 marriages provided you can be just. Other wise just one. This is the ayah
004.003
YUSUFALI: If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.
I am not sure where you got the context from, regarding the battle of uhud, but the next time you point out anything that the prophet said or did, I would appreciate it if you can point out your sources.
Re: For your views
The scripture doesnt say anything about a woman being imprisoned in the house for 4 month and 10 days. It only specifies the length of time during which a widowed female can't remarry.
Keeping a woman in closed quarters is a really barbaric act and not justified by any means.
Keeping a woman in closed quarters is a really barbaric act and not justified by any means.
Re: For your views
Bro Anajami
here is a link which also points out that the quranic verses for polygamy was revealed after the the battle of uhud when many muslim women had become widows.....
http://www.thetruecall.com/home/modules ... =0&thold=0
Thus its imp to ascertain the context in which the verses were revealed to c if the practice is appropriate or not....
regarding the iddat verses...i will do sme research n try to figure out the context in which they were quoted
here is a link which also points out that the quranic verses for polygamy was revealed after the the battle of uhud when many muslim women had become widows.....
http://www.thetruecall.com/home/modules ... =0&thold=0
Thus its imp to ascertain the context in which the verses were revealed to c if the practice is appropriate or not....
regarding the iddat verses...i will do sme research n try to figure out the context in which they were quoted
Re: For your views
unfortunately i m not able to get anythin on the context of the ayahs....but on reading the translations of the ayahs before n after 2:234....i can say that atleast there is no specification of how strictly iddat has to be practicesed....its got more to do with not marrying for the period of iddat.....are there any hadiths which specify the strictness of the practice of iddat???.....if not then from where did the present day practice of seclusion of the widow cme from....???
Re: For your views
It is generally held that divorced or widowed women must spend their ‘Iddat while being permanently stationed in their houses and wearing white clothes. Moreover, the ‘Iddat period is generally not spent at the husband’s house.
In this regard, the following points must be clearly understood:
Firstly, the basic reason for observing this period is to ascertain whether a lady is pregnant or not. It is to protect the lineage of the husband that she undergoes this wait. The words ‘فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ’ (no period of ‘Iddat have they for you which you can ask them to complete) of Surah Ahzab clearly point to the fact that if pregnancy is a possibility then observing the ‘Iddat is an obligation imposed on the wife from the husband. Consequently, if a lady is past her child bearing age or if it can be determined through scientific means that a lady is not pregnant she will not be required to observe the ‘Iddat. On these very grounds, the Qur’an has exempted newly married women who have not gone near their husbands from ‘Iddat:
يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نَكَحْتُمْ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا (49:33)
O you who believe! when you marry believing women, and then divorce them before you have touched them, no period of ‘Iddat have they for you which you can ask them to complete. (33:49)
Secondly, during ‘Iddat neither should a wife leave her house nor is the husband authorized to turn her out from her house. Living together might hopefully be beneficial for both and they might reconcile and thus save a family from breaking. The only exception to this is that if a wife is guilty of fornication in which case neither is it proper to demand from the husband to keep the wife in the house nor can the benefit be attained for which this directive had been given.
Thirdly, as far as the restrictions of ‘Iddat are concerned, all of them are based on protecting the lineage of the child that a widow or a divorced lady might be carrying. She can go out for any purpose which includes activities as austere as the Hajj and as light as an amusement park if she has made sure that this basic objective is not sacrificed.
Fourthly, for a widow, the ‘Iddat has its own sanctity and she should observe this period with solemnity and austerity. So natural is this observance that widows are not required to be told to dress and behave in accordance with the norms of the circumstances that face them.
http://www.renaissance.com.pk/Feb132y5.htm
In this regard, the following points must be clearly understood:
Firstly, the basic reason for observing this period is to ascertain whether a lady is pregnant or not. It is to protect the lineage of the husband that she undergoes this wait. The words ‘فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ’ (no period of ‘Iddat have they for you which you can ask them to complete) of Surah Ahzab clearly point to the fact that if pregnancy is a possibility then observing the ‘Iddat is an obligation imposed on the wife from the husband. Consequently, if a lady is past her child bearing age or if it can be determined through scientific means that a lady is not pregnant she will not be required to observe the ‘Iddat. On these very grounds, the Qur’an has exempted newly married women who have not gone near their husbands from ‘Iddat:
يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نَكَحْتُمْ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِنْ قَبْلِ أَنْ تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا (49:33)
O you who believe! when you marry believing women, and then divorce them before you have touched them, no period of ‘Iddat have they for you which you can ask them to complete. (33:49)
Secondly, during ‘Iddat neither should a wife leave her house nor is the husband authorized to turn her out from her house. Living together might hopefully be beneficial for both and they might reconcile and thus save a family from breaking. The only exception to this is that if a wife is guilty of fornication in which case neither is it proper to demand from the husband to keep the wife in the house nor can the benefit be attained for which this directive had been given.
Thirdly, as far as the restrictions of ‘Iddat are concerned, all of them are based on protecting the lineage of the child that a widow or a divorced lady might be carrying. She can go out for any purpose which includes activities as austere as the Hajj and as light as an amusement park if she has made sure that this basic objective is not sacrificed.
Fourthly, for a widow, the ‘Iddat has its own sanctity and she should observe this period with solemnity and austerity. So natural is this observance that widows are not required to be told to dress and behave in accordance with the norms of the circumstances that face them.
http://www.renaissance.com.pk/Feb132y5.htm
Re: For your views
bro makberi,
Thank you for the link. It explains that the verse was revealed after the battle of uhud. It was Allah's decision.
Also I am hoping that brother feelgud's explanation will give you some context behind the practice of iddat.
Thank you for the link. It explains that the verse was revealed after the battle of uhud. It was Allah's decision.
Also I am hoping that brother feelgud's explanation will give you some context behind the practice of iddat.
Re: For your views
Thanks Bro anajami for pointing out my mistake ...ofcourse being a Quran ayat it was the word of Allah....n tahnks bro feelgud for ur inputs.....recently my aunty who lost her husband sat for iddat....she lived confined to her house for a period for 4 months n 10 days..n met with only a few designated relatives...she had all her house windows covered with white cloth..dint watch tv,....dint speak to anyone on the phone....etc.....being a working lady...this period was pretty difficult for her..considerin the loss of her husband..n the living in seclusion.......recently there was a fire in the neighbouring house n she was asked to evacuate her house for safety concerns....even for that she made her children call the aamil n clarify how she shud proceed....thus she left her hosue convered with a cloth....mind u in all this time...she dint even cme out to her balcony... i wud like to know is such strict compliance really required????
-
Hussain_KSA
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Aqua Moula Burhanuddin has special powers and authority over religious matters. Recently one person from Banswada expired in Saifi Hospital Bombay. Mr. Adnan Siporwala (Shaukat Bhai) was very close to kothar and used to pay all his wajebat personally every year. He has business here in Jeddah so he got well connection with badri Mahal. Juniour Moula Mufaddal bhai saheb did allow his wife to delay the period of Iddat for one and half month to complete all the paper works before moving to Dubai to observe Iddat Period. Same case was noted in Kuwait too.
So If some one has enough money for Salam or links in Kothar he or she might get some releif or discount in observing Iddat.
As far as Iddat period is concern that is surly for four months and 10 days but the tradition to observe it are innovation of recent (mostly 51st and 52nd) leadership. Even if you go through Daim Ul Islam you will not find it so strict as it is being observed now a days.
So If some one has enough money for Salam or links in Kothar he or she might get some releif or discount in observing Iddat.
As far as Iddat period is concern that is surly for four months and 10 days but the tradition to observe it are innovation of recent (mostly 51st and 52nd) leadership. Even if you go through Daim Ul Islam you will not find it so strict as it is being observed now a days.
-
like_minded
- Posts: 1260
- Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:01 am
Re: For your views
All our customs, traditions, rituals are just there to trap and narrow the minds of people. I personally find Iddat a ridiculous or rather an outrageous practice.
-
Hussain_KSA
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Brother LM
If you go through history of our religion and Daim Ul Islam you will find that everything was good till dawat shifted to India. Even in India many year everything was running smoothly. From the controversy of Suleimani and Alvi Bohras things started to changes. Innovations reached to ultimate at the period of Syedna Taher Safuddin while His son Mohammed Burhanuddin crossed all the limits. Period of Iddat has been stipulated in Quran so any furhter dicussion over the issue is out of question, however way of observing it can be a topic for us. In Arab world concept of Hijab and Mehram/Na Mehram is quite strong so it doesn't make any difference over there. In india the situation is contarary. I don't know why the concept of Mehram become so important for women in Bohra community when her husband dies. If they really mean it how come I have seen them talking to Aamil over telephones? Even Aamil doesn't have proper knowledge of their own athorities and privilages. Fiqah and Sharia was used to teach in past but recently when I asked on of the Jamea Passed Aamil that what he was asked at the time of final oral examination, His anwer was " Qasida of Aqua Moula Taher saifuddin and it's explanation". So my brother what do you expect from the present system? Where it is leading to you?
If you go through history of our religion and Daim Ul Islam you will find that everything was good till dawat shifted to India. Even in India many year everything was running smoothly. From the controversy of Suleimani and Alvi Bohras things started to changes. Innovations reached to ultimate at the period of Syedna Taher Safuddin while His son Mohammed Burhanuddin crossed all the limits. Period of Iddat has been stipulated in Quran so any furhter dicussion over the issue is out of question, however way of observing it can be a topic for us. In Arab world concept of Hijab and Mehram/Na Mehram is quite strong so it doesn't make any difference over there. In india the situation is contarary. I don't know why the concept of Mehram become so important for women in Bohra community when her husband dies. If they really mean it how come I have seen them talking to Aamil over telephones? Even Aamil doesn't have proper knowledge of their own athorities and privilages. Fiqah and Sharia was used to teach in past but recently when I asked on of the Jamea Passed Aamil that what he was asked at the time of final oral examination, His anwer was " Qasida of Aqua Moula Taher saifuddin and it's explanation". So my brother what do you expect from the present system? Where it is leading to you?
-
like_minded
- Posts: 1260
- Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Bro Hussain
I fully agree with you, The present system is as low as it can get. The innovations bought about by the 51st and 52nd Dai is only to shut the minds of the common folks.
Recently I watched a cd of my cousins marraige which was held in Calcutta about a year ago, There was this SHAADI NI MAJLIS in which I saw ladies crying and beating themselves crazy, After which I was really shocked. I mean there is just no logic in having these stupid Majlis on the occasion of marraige which is supposed to be a happy occasion. So, yeah these innovations are surely taking us back to stone age.
I fully agree with you, The present system is as low as it can get. The innovations bought about by the 51st and 52nd Dai is only to shut the minds of the common folks.
Recently I watched a cd of my cousins marraige which was held in Calcutta about a year ago, There was this SHAADI NI MAJLIS in which I saw ladies crying and beating themselves crazy, After which I was really shocked. I mean there is just no logic in having these stupid Majlis on the occasion of marraige which is supposed to be a happy occasion. So, yeah these innovations are surely taking us back to stone age.
-
Hussain_KSA
- Posts: 874
- Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Oh! Now they have gone a step ahead. What I have seen is more instresting or rather you may term it shocking. It was Nikah function (I can't disclose the name of city but it is in Maharashtra) and bhai saheb told the attendees to do Matam in Memory of Imam Hussain. The colors on the faces of the host family and relatives were quite visible but other sheeps were doing purjosh matam. May Almighty Allah give them Guidance. Ameen
Re: For your views
Salaams
Our Dawoodi Bohra system of Iddaat is ridiculous,degrading,humiliating and punishing for the women who just lost her husband. (If I had a terminal disease and if I knew I do not have much time, to save my wife from these terrible experience, I will divorce her)
Question for all,MF and Anjami, the Sunni resident scholars, Porus and other can shade some light on the requirement of Iddat.
does a women who has already passed he child bearing age has to go thru iddat
For Bohras, if the wife has been seprated for long time but not divorced(as Kothar discourages Divorce) and the husband dies, why does woman who was tortured has to endure all these hardships?
Our Dawoodi Bohra system of Iddaat is ridiculous,degrading,humiliating and punishing for the women who just lost her husband. (If I had a terminal disease and if I knew I do not have much time, to save my wife from these terrible experience, I will divorce her)
Question for all,MF and Anjami, the Sunni resident scholars, Porus and other can shade some light on the requirement of Iddat.
does a women who has already passed he child bearing age has to go thru iddat
For Bohras, if the wife has been seprated for long time but not divorced(as Kothar discourages Divorce) and the husband dies, why does woman who was tortured has to endure all these hardships?
Re: For your views
Iddat periods are as follows:
For women whose marriages have been consummated and who have lived with or apart from their husbands for a long time - 4 months and 10 days (2:234). This is equivalent(?) to 3 menstrual cycles. (2:228)
For women whose marriages have not been consummated - none (33:49)
For menopausal women - none, but if there is a doubt about the onset of menopause - 3 months (65:4)
For pregnnat women or for those whose menstruation has ceased (maybe because they are pregnant) - until delivery (65:4)
Taking these commands together, it appears that the iddat, the word from which urdu word 'muddat' is also derived, is the length of time that must elapse before the woman could consider re-marriage.
Only the period is specified. What the woman does during this period depends on cultural and social conditions and sanctions.
In my experience, the majority of Bohra women who observe iddat are not much concerned about re-marriage. Hence most observe the waiting period, even if by default. Restrictions of their movements are not Quranic sanctions, but generally the most vociferous supporters of this practice are women themselves.
If women withdraw, and instead of spending the time in self-pity, meditate upon their slavery imposed upon them by bigoted religious males, iddat may have a positive value.
For women whose marriages have been consummated and who have lived with or apart from their husbands for a long time - 4 months and 10 days (2:234). This is equivalent(?) to 3 menstrual cycles. (2:228)
For women whose marriages have not been consummated - none (33:49)
For menopausal women - none, but if there is a doubt about the onset of menopause - 3 months (65:4)
For pregnnat women or for those whose menstruation has ceased (maybe because they are pregnant) - until delivery (65:4)
Taking these commands together, it appears that the iddat, the word from which urdu word 'muddat' is also derived, is the length of time that must elapse before the woman could consider re-marriage.
Only the period is specified. What the woman does during this period depends on cultural and social conditions and sanctions.
In my experience, the majority of Bohra women who observe iddat are not much concerned about re-marriage. Hence most observe the waiting period, even if by default. Restrictions of their movements are not Quranic sanctions, but generally the most vociferous supporters of this practice are women themselves.
If women withdraw, and instead of spending the time in self-pity, meditate upon their slavery imposed upon them by bigoted religious males, iddat may have a positive value.
Re: For your views
I could not find in the Quran any justification for the the common belief that Iddat is to make sure about the paternity of the child being carried by a pregnant widow or divorcee.
If anyone can find this reason in Quran, please indicate it here.
If anyone can find this reason in Quran, please indicate it here.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: For your views
.
Interpreted Translation and comments on2:234
(Warning: This is one man's opinion and not translation)
From Tafheem -Quran
(2:234) If those of you, who die, leave wives behind, they should abstain (from marriage) for four months and ten days. *259 Then when their waiting term expires, they are free to do whatever they choose for themselves, provided that it is decent; you shall not be answerable for this; Allah is fully aware of what you do.
*259. The waiting period owing to the death of the husband is obligatory even for a woman with whom consummation of marriage has not taken place. A pregnant woman, however, is exempted from this. Her waiting period expires the husband's death and the childbirth is less than the waiting period prescribed by Law.
'To observe a waiting period' does not mean merely that they should refrain from marrying, but also from self-adornment.
Hence we find categorical directives in the Hadith that a widow should neither wear colourful and showy dresses and jewellery, make use of henna, kohl, and perfumes, nor set her hair in an attractive style. There is disagreement, however, as to whether the widow may go out of her house during the waiting period. 'Umar, 'UthmaAn, Ibn 'Umar, Zayd ibn Thabit, Ibn Mas'uid, Ummn Salamah, Said ibn al-Musayyib, Ibrahim al-Nakha'i, Muhammad ibn Sirin and the founders of the four legal schools are of the opinion that during the waiting period a woman should stay in the house in which her husband died. During the daytime she may go out to do necessary errands, but her residence should be her own home. On contrary, 'A'ishah, Ibn 'Abbas, 'Ali, Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah. 'Ata'. Ta'us, Hasan al-Basri. 'Umar ibn'Abd al'Aziz and the Zahiris are of the opinion that a widow may spend her waiting period wherever she likes, and may even go on journeys.
.
Interpreted Translation and comments on2:234
(Warning: This is one man's opinion and not translation)
From Tafheem -Quran
(2:234) If those of you, who die, leave wives behind, they should abstain (from marriage) for four months and ten days. *259 Then when their waiting term expires, they are free to do whatever they choose for themselves, provided that it is decent; you shall not be answerable for this; Allah is fully aware of what you do.
*259. The waiting period owing to the death of the husband is obligatory even for a woman with whom consummation of marriage has not taken place. A pregnant woman, however, is exempted from this. Her waiting period expires the husband's death and the childbirth is less than the waiting period prescribed by Law.
'To observe a waiting period' does not mean merely that they should refrain from marrying, but also from self-adornment.
Hence we find categorical directives in the Hadith that a widow should neither wear colourful and showy dresses and jewellery, make use of henna, kohl, and perfumes, nor set her hair in an attractive style. There is disagreement, however, as to whether the widow may go out of her house during the waiting period. 'Umar, 'UthmaAn, Ibn 'Umar, Zayd ibn Thabit, Ibn Mas'uid, Ummn Salamah, Said ibn al-Musayyib, Ibrahim al-Nakha'i, Muhammad ibn Sirin and the founders of the four legal schools are of the opinion that during the waiting period a woman should stay in the house in which her husband died. During the daytime she may go out to do necessary errands, but her residence should be her own home. On contrary, 'A'ishah, Ibn 'Abbas, 'Ali, Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah. 'Ata'. Ta'us, Hasan al-Basri. 'Umar ibn'Abd al'Aziz and the Zahiris are of the opinion that a widow may spend her waiting period wherever she likes, and may even go on journeys.
.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: For your views
.
(2:228) Divorced women must wait for three monthly courses. And it is not lawful for them to hide what Allah has created in their wombs, if they sincerely believe in Allah and the Last Day. Their husbands are best entitled to take
*248. That is, if a man has abandoned his wife on unreasonable grounds, he should not feel secure from the wrath of God for He is not unaware of the excesses that he may have committed.
*248 them back as their wives during this waiting period, if they desire reconciliation.
*249. Jurists disagree about the legal import of this verse. According to some, as long as a woman has not completed her third menstrual period repudiation will not have the effect of irrevocable divorce. This is the view of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Ali, Ibn 'Abbas, Abu Musa al-Ash'arl, Ibn Mas'ud and several distinguished Companions of the Prophet. This is also the accepted doctrine of the Hanafi jurists. On the other hand, another group of jurists is of the view that, as soon as the third monthly period of a woman begins, the husband ceases to have the right to revoke the divorce. This is the view of , 'A'ishah, Ibn 'Umar and Zayd ibn Thabit, and has been accepted by, the Shafi'i and Maliki jurists. It should be clear, however, that this injunction is applicable only when the husband has pronounced single or double divorce. In case of triple divorce, the husband ceases to have the right of revocation.
.
(2:228) Divorced women must wait for three monthly courses. And it is not lawful for them to hide what Allah has created in their wombs, if they sincerely believe in Allah and the Last Day. Their husbands are best entitled to take
*248. That is, if a man has abandoned his wife on unreasonable grounds, he should not feel secure from the wrath of God for He is not unaware of the excesses that he may have committed.
*248 them back as their wives during this waiting period, if they desire reconciliation.
*249. Jurists disagree about the legal import of this verse. According to some, as long as a woman has not completed her third menstrual period repudiation will not have the effect of irrevocable divorce. This is the view of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, 'Ali, Ibn 'Abbas, Abu Musa al-Ash'arl, Ibn Mas'ud and several distinguished Companions of the Prophet. This is also the accepted doctrine of the Hanafi jurists. On the other hand, another group of jurists is of the view that, as soon as the third monthly period of a woman begins, the husband ceases to have the right to revoke the divorce. This is the view of , 'A'ishah, Ibn 'Umar and Zayd ibn Thabit, and has been accepted by, the Shafi'i and Maliki jurists. It should be clear, however, that this injunction is applicable only when the husband has pronounced single or double divorce. In case of triple divorce, the husband ceases to have the right of revocation.
.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: For your views
.
(33:49) O you who have believed, when you marry the believing women, and then divorce them before you have touched them, *85 they do not have to fulfil a waiting term, whose completion you may demand of them; so provide them with something and send them off gracefully. *86
*85 This sentence is explicit that the word nikah here has been used for the contract of marriage only. The lexicographers have greatly disputed over the real meaning of the Arabic word nikah. One section of them says that as a word it is common both for intercourse and for the contract of marriage. The second section says that in its meaning it is common for both. The third section opines that its real meaning is the contract of marriage and for intercourse it is used only figuratively. And the fourth section expresses the opinion that its real meaning is intercourse and for the contract of marriage it is used only figuratively. Each section has cited Arabic poetry in support of its view. But Raghib Isfahani has emphatically asserted this: "The real meaning of the word nikah is contract of marriage; it has been used for intercourse metaphorically. It is impossible that its real meaning be intercourse and may have been used for the contract of marriage only metaphorically." The argument he gives is that alI the words that have been actually coined for intercourse in Arabic, or in other languages of the world, arc obscene and vulgar. No gentleman would like to utter them in a civilized gathering. Therefore, it is not possible that a society should use the word which has actually been coined for this act for marriage as a metaphor. For conveying this meaning only chaste words have been used in every language of the world and not obscene words.
As far as the Qur'an and Sunnah arc concerned, nikah is a term, which either implies only contract of marriage, or intercourse after the contract of marriage; but it has nowhere been used for intercourse outside marriage. This kind of intercourse has been called zina (adultery) by the Qur'an and Sunnah and not nikah.
*86 This is a unique verse which was sent down probably in the same period respecting some case of divorce, and so inserted in this context. This shows that it was sent down after the preceding and before the following discourse. Below is given a summary of the legal injunctions that have been derived from this verse:'
(1) Although the word "believing women" has been used, which apparently may give the impression that the law enunciated in this verse is not applicable to the women of the people of the Book, yet all scholars are agreed that this very injunction is applicable to them also. That is, in case a Muslim has married such a woman, all the injunctions relating to her divorce, dower, waiting-period ('iddat) and provision at divorce are the same as of marriage with 'a believing woman. The scholars arc also agreed that Allah's mentioning the believing women here in particular is actually meant to tell the Muslims that only the believing women are suitable for them. That is, although it is permissible for them to marry Jewish and Christian women, it is not proper and commendable. In other words, the Qur'an seems to impress that Allah expects that the believers would marry only the believing women.
(2) The word mas (to touch) here has been used for intercourse by implication. Thus, the verse apparently implies that if the husband has not had intercourse with the woman, even though he has had seclusion with her and has even touched her with the hand, she will riot have to observe the waiting-term ( iddat) in case of divorce. But the jurists, for the sake of precaution, have decreed that if they have had seclusion proper (i.e. seclusion during which intercourse could be possible), waiting-period will have to be observed if divorce is pronounced after it, and the waiting-period would be annulled only in case divorce was pronounced before they have had the seclusion.
(3) The annulment of the waiting-period in case of divorce before the event of seclusion means that in this case the man forfeits his right to take the woman back as his wife, and the woman becomes entitled to marry anyone she likes immediately after the divorce. But it should be borne in mind that this applies only to the divorce which is pronounced' before the event of the seclusion. If a woman's husband dies before having had seclusion, the waiting-period that has to be observed after death will not be annulled, but she will have to pass the same waiting-period of four months and ten days as is obligatory for a married woman in normal conditions. ( 'Iddat is the waiting-period before the expiry of which a divorced woman or a widow is forbidden to remarry).
(4) The words "they do not have to fulfil a waiting-period for you", show that the waiting-period is a right of the tnan on the woman. But it dces not mean that this is only the man's right. It, in fact, includes two other rights as well: the right of the children, and the right of AIlah or of the Law. The man's right is on the ground that he has the right to take the woman back as his wife during the period, and also on the ground that the proof of the parentage of his children, which depends on the woman's being pregnant or otherwise, becomes established in the waiting-period. The reason for including the right of the children is that the proof of a child's parentage is necessary for the establishment of his legal rights and his moral status also depends on this that his parentage should not be doubtful. The reason for including the right of Allah (or the right of the Law) is that even if the people and their children become heedless of their rights, the Divine Law requires that their rights should be protected. That is why even if a man gives a warrant to a woman that after his death or after obtaining divorce from him, there will be no waiting-period binding on her from him, the Divine Law will in no case annul it.
(5) "Provide them with something and send them away with kindness"; The intention of this injunction would be fulfilled by acting in either of the two ways: If the dower had been fixed at the time of marriage, and then divorce pronounced before the event of seclusion proper, payment of half of the dower will be obligatory, as enjoined in AI-Baqarah: 237. To give more than what is obligatory is not binding but certainly commendable. For instance, it is commendable that besides paying half of the dower the man should Iet the woman retain the bridal garments, or any other articles that he had sent her for the occasion of marriage. But if no dower had been fixed at the time of marriage, it is obligatory to pay her something before scnding her away, and this "something" should be according to the status and financial means of the man, as has been enjoined in AlBaqarah: 236. One section of the scholars hold that something in any case has to be paid in case of divorce as an obligation whether dower has been fixed or not.
(6) "scnding off gracefullly" does not only mean that the woman should be provided with something on divorce but this also that separation should be adopted in a gentlemanly way, without any kind of vilification. If a man does not happen to like a woman, or there has been some other cause of complaint due to which he dces not want to keep the woman, he should divorcc her like a gentleman and send her away. He should not start mentioning her faults and relating his complaints against her before the people so as to also prejudice them against her. This instruction of the Qur'an clearly shows that annexing the enforcement of divorce to the permission of a local council or court is wholly against the wisdom and spirit of the Divine Law, for in that case there remains no chance of `sending her away gracefully", but defamation, revilement and vilification do inevitably result even if the man dces not so will. Moreover, the words of the verse also do not admit that the power of the man to divorce should be bound up with the permission of a local council or court. The verse is clearly giving the married man the power of divorce and placing on him alone the responsibility that if he wants to release the woman before touching her he must pay her half the dower as an obligation, or something else according to his means. From this the object of the verse clearly seems to be that in order to prevent divorce from being taken lightly the man should be placed under the burden of a financial responsibility so that he himself uses his power of divorce with sense, and there is no chance of an external interference in the internal affairs of the two families.
(7) Ibn 'Abbas, Said bin al-Musayyib, Hasan Basri, 'AIi bin al-Husain (Zain al-'Abidin), Imam Shafe'i and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal have deduced from the words, 'when you marry...and then divorce ..." that divorce takes effect only when marriage has been contracted. Divorce before the contract of marriage ' is without effect. Therefore if a person says, "If I marry such and such a woman, or a woman of such and such a tribe or nation, or any other woman, she is divorced," it will be an absurd and meaningless thing; no divorce can take effect from this. The following Ahadith are presented in support of this view: "The son of Adam is not entitled to use his power of divorcc in respect of that which he dces not possess." (Ahmad, Abu Da'ud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah). And: "There is no divorcc before marriage." (Ibn Majah). But a great number of the jurists hold that this verse and these Ahadith apply in the case when a man says to a woman, who is not his wife, "You have divorce on you," or "I divorce you." Saying such a thing is no doubt absurd, and is of no legal consequence, but if he says, "If I marry you, you are divorced," this is not divorcing before the marriage, but the person is in fact declaring his intent that when the woman is married to him, she will stand divorced. Such a declaration cannot be absurd and without effect, but, as a matter of fact, whenever the woman is married to him, divorce will fall on her. The jurists who hold the view have further differed as to rite extent this kind of divorce will have effect.
Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Muhammad and Imam Zufar hold that divorce will take place in any case whether a person specifics a woman or a tribe or a nation, or talks generally so as to say. 'Any woman whom I marry is divorced." Abu Bakr al-Jassas has cited the same opinion also from Hadrat 'Umar, 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud, Ibrahim Nakha'i, Mujahid and 'Umar bin 'Abdul 'Aziz (may Allah show mercy to them aII). Sufyan Thauri and 'Uthman al-Batti say that divorce will take place only in case the person says, "If I marry such and such a woman, she is divorced." Hasan bin Salih, Laith bin Sa'd and 'Amir ash-Sha'bi, say that such a divorce will take place even if something is said in general terms provided that a particular class of the people has been mentioned; for instance, if the person has said. "If I marry a woman of such and such a family, or such and such a tribe, or such and such city or country or nation, she is divorced."
Ibn Abi Laila and Imam Malik, disputing the above opinion, have added a condition that the time limit also should be determined. For example, if the man Said. " If I marry within this year or the ncxt ten years such and such a woman or a woman from such and such a class, she is divorced," divorce will take place, otherwise not. Imam Malik also adds that if the time limit is so long that the man is not expected to outlive it, Iris declaration will have no effect.
.
(33:49) O you who have believed, when you marry the believing women, and then divorce them before you have touched them, *85 they do not have to fulfil a waiting term, whose completion you may demand of them; so provide them with something and send them off gracefully. *86
*85 This sentence is explicit that the word nikah here has been used for the contract of marriage only. The lexicographers have greatly disputed over the real meaning of the Arabic word nikah. One section of them says that as a word it is common both for intercourse and for the contract of marriage. The second section says that in its meaning it is common for both. The third section opines that its real meaning is the contract of marriage and for intercourse it is used only figuratively. And the fourth section expresses the opinion that its real meaning is intercourse and for the contract of marriage it is used only figuratively. Each section has cited Arabic poetry in support of its view. But Raghib Isfahani has emphatically asserted this: "The real meaning of the word nikah is contract of marriage; it has been used for intercourse metaphorically. It is impossible that its real meaning be intercourse and may have been used for the contract of marriage only metaphorically." The argument he gives is that alI the words that have been actually coined for intercourse in Arabic, or in other languages of the world, arc obscene and vulgar. No gentleman would like to utter them in a civilized gathering. Therefore, it is not possible that a society should use the word which has actually been coined for this act for marriage as a metaphor. For conveying this meaning only chaste words have been used in every language of the world and not obscene words.
As far as the Qur'an and Sunnah arc concerned, nikah is a term, which either implies only contract of marriage, or intercourse after the contract of marriage; but it has nowhere been used for intercourse outside marriage. This kind of intercourse has been called zina (adultery) by the Qur'an and Sunnah and not nikah.
*86 This is a unique verse which was sent down probably in the same period respecting some case of divorce, and so inserted in this context. This shows that it was sent down after the preceding and before the following discourse. Below is given a summary of the legal injunctions that have been derived from this verse:'
(1) Although the word "believing women" has been used, which apparently may give the impression that the law enunciated in this verse is not applicable to the women of the people of the Book, yet all scholars are agreed that this very injunction is applicable to them also. That is, in case a Muslim has married such a woman, all the injunctions relating to her divorce, dower, waiting-period ('iddat) and provision at divorce are the same as of marriage with 'a believing woman. The scholars arc also agreed that Allah's mentioning the believing women here in particular is actually meant to tell the Muslims that only the believing women are suitable for them. That is, although it is permissible for them to marry Jewish and Christian women, it is not proper and commendable. In other words, the Qur'an seems to impress that Allah expects that the believers would marry only the believing women.
(2) The word mas (to touch) here has been used for intercourse by implication. Thus, the verse apparently implies that if the husband has not had intercourse with the woman, even though he has had seclusion with her and has even touched her with the hand, she will riot have to observe the waiting-term ( iddat) in case of divorce. But the jurists, for the sake of precaution, have decreed that if they have had seclusion proper (i.e. seclusion during which intercourse could be possible), waiting-period will have to be observed if divorce is pronounced after it, and the waiting-period would be annulled only in case divorce was pronounced before they have had the seclusion.
(3) The annulment of the waiting-period in case of divorce before the event of seclusion means that in this case the man forfeits his right to take the woman back as his wife, and the woman becomes entitled to marry anyone she likes immediately after the divorce. But it should be borne in mind that this applies only to the divorce which is pronounced' before the event of the seclusion. If a woman's husband dies before having had seclusion, the waiting-period that has to be observed after death will not be annulled, but she will have to pass the same waiting-period of four months and ten days as is obligatory for a married woman in normal conditions. ( 'Iddat is the waiting-period before the expiry of which a divorced woman or a widow is forbidden to remarry).
(4) The words "they do not have to fulfil a waiting-period for you", show that the waiting-period is a right of the tnan on the woman. But it dces not mean that this is only the man's right. It, in fact, includes two other rights as well: the right of the children, and the right of AIlah or of the Law. The man's right is on the ground that he has the right to take the woman back as his wife during the period, and also on the ground that the proof of the parentage of his children, which depends on the woman's being pregnant or otherwise, becomes established in the waiting-period. The reason for including the right of the children is that the proof of a child's parentage is necessary for the establishment of his legal rights and his moral status also depends on this that his parentage should not be doubtful. The reason for including the right of Allah (or the right of the Law) is that even if the people and their children become heedless of their rights, the Divine Law requires that their rights should be protected. That is why even if a man gives a warrant to a woman that after his death or after obtaining divorce from him, there will be no waiting-period binding on her from him, the Divine Law will in no case annul it.
(5) "Provide them with something and send them away with kindness"; The intention of this injunction would be fulfilled by acting in either of the two ways: If the dower had been fixed at the time of marriage, and then divorce pronounced before the event of seclusion proper, payment of half of the dower will be obligatory, as enjoined in AI-Baqarah: 237. To give more than what is obligatory is not binding but certainly commendable. For instance, it is commendable that besides paying half of the dower the man should Iet the woman retain the bridal garments, or any other articles that he had sent her for the occasion of marriage. But if no dower had been fixed at the time of marriage, it is obligatory to pay her something before scnding her away, and this "something" should be according to the status and financial means of the man, as has been enjoined in AlBaqarah: 236. One section of the scholars hold that something in any case has to be paid in case of divorce as an obligation whether dower has been fixed or not.
(6) "scnding off gracefullly" does not only mean that the woman should be provided with something on divorce but this also that separation should be adopted in a gentlemanly way, without any kind of vilification. If a man does not happen to like a woman, or there has been some other cause of complaint due to which he dces not want to keep the woman, he should divorcc her like a gentleman and send her away. He should not start mentioning her faults and relating his complaints against her before the people so as to also prejudice them against her. This instruction of the Qur'an clearly shows that annexing the enforcement of divorce to the permission of a local council or court is wholly against the wisdom and spirit of the Divine Law, for in that case there remains no chance of `sending her away gracefully", but defamation, revilement and vilification do inevitably result even if the man dces not so will. Moreover, the words of the verse also do not admit that the power of the man to divorce should be bound up with the permission of a local council or court. The verse is clearly giving the married man the power of divorce and placing on him alone the responsibility that if he wants to release the woman before touching her he must pay her half the dower as an obligation, or something else according to his means. From this the object of the verse clearly seems to be that in order to prevent divorce from being taken lightly the man should be placed under the burden of a financial responsibility so that he himself uses his power of divorce with sense, and there is no chance of an external interference in the internal affairs of the two families.
(7) Ibn 'Abbas, Said bin al-Musayyib, Hasan Basri, 'AIi bin al-Husain (Zain al-'Abidin), Imam Shafe'i and Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal have deduced from the words, 'when you marry...and then divorce ..." that divorce takes effect only when marriage has been contracted. Divorce before the contract of marriage ' is without effect. Therefore if a person says, "If I marry such and such a woman, or a woman of such and such a tribe or nation, or any other woman, she is divorced," it will be an absurd and meaningless thing; no divorce can take effect from this. The following Ahadith are presented in support of this view: "The son of Adam is not entitled to use his power of divorcc in respect of that which he dces not possess." (Ahmad, Abu Da'ud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah). And: "There is no divorcc before marriage." (Ibn Majah). But a great number of the jurists hold that this verse and these Ahadith apply in the case when a man says to a woman, who is not his wife, "You have divorce on you," or "I divorce you." Saying such a thing is no doubt absurd, and is of no legal consequence, but if he says, "If I marry you, you are divorced," this is not divorcing before the marriage, but the person is in fact declaring his intent that when the woman is married to him, she will stand divorced. Such a declaration cannot be absurd and without effect, but, as a matter of fact, whenever the woman is married to him, divorce will fall on her. The jurists who hold the view have further differed as to rite extent this kind of divorce will have effect.
Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Muhammad and Imam Zufar hold that divorce will take place in any case whether a person specifics a woman or a tribe or a nation, or talks generally so as to say. 'Any woman whom I marry is divorced." Abu Bakr al-Jassas has cited the same opinion also from Hadrat 'Umar, 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud, Ibrahim Nakha'i, Mujahid and 'Umar bin 'Abdul 'Aziz (may Allah show mercy to them aII). Sufyan Thauri and 'Uthman al-Batti say that divorce will take place only in case the person says, "If I marry such and such a woman, she is divorced." Hasan bin Salih, Laith bin Sa'd and 'Amir ash-Sha'bi, say that such a divorce will take place even if something is said in general terms provided that a particular class of the people has been mentioned; for instance, if the person has said. "If I marry a woman of such and such a family, or such and such a tribe, or such and such city or country or nation, she is divorced."
Ibn Abi Laila and Imam Malik, disputing the above opinion, have added a condition that the time limit also should be determined. For example, if the man Said. " If I marry within this year or the ncxt ten years such and such a woman or a woman from such and such a class, she is divorced," divorce will take place, otherwise not. Imam Malik also adds that if the time limit is so long that the man is not expected to outlive it, Iris declaration will have no effect.
.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: For your views
.
(65:4) And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation , (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, *12 and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. *13 As far as pragnant women, their period ends when they deliver the burden. *14 Whoever fears Allah, He makes his course easy for him.
*12 This is in respect of the women who no longer menstruation and have reached menopause because of age. Their waiting-period will be reckoned from the day divorce was pronounced on them and three months imply three lunar months. If divorce was pronounced at the commencement of the lunar month. it is agreed that the waiting-period will be reckoned with regard to the sighting of the new moon; and if it was pronounced somewhere in the middle of the month, according to Imam Abu Hanifah, three months will have to be completed reckoning each month of 30 days. (Badai' as-Sami ).
As for the women whose courses are irregular due to sonic reason, the jurists have held different opinions:
Hadrat Sa'id bin al-Musayyab says that Hadrat `Umar ruled: "If the woman who has been divorced stops having menses after having them once or twice after the divorce, she will wait for 9 months. If signs of pregnancy appear, well and good, otherwise after the passage of 9 months, she should observe the waiting-period of three additional months. Then she would be lawful for marriage to another person.
Ibn 'Abbas, Qatadah and `Ikrimah say that the waiting-period of the woman who has not menstruated for a year, is three months.
Ta'us says that the waiting-period of the woman who menstntates once in a year, is three mensturations. This very opinion has been reported from Hadrat 'Uthman, Hadrat 'Ali and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit.
Imam Malik relates that a person Habban by name divorced his wife during the period when she was suckling her child. A year passed on it, but she did not have the menses. Then the man died. The divorced wife laid claim to inheritance. The case came before Hadrat `Uthman. He consulted with Hadrat 'AIi and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit, and gave the decision that the woman was an heiress. The .argument given was that the woman was neither of those women a who might have desaired of menstruation, nor of those girls who may not have menstruated yet: therefore, up till the husband's death she was on the menses she had discharged last, and had still to pass her waiting-period.
The Hanafis say that the waiting-period of the woman, who no longer menstruates, which may not be on account of menopause so that there may be no hope of her having it later will either be reckoned from the menstnration if she has it in the future, or in accordance with the age at which women generally reach menopause, and after attaining that age she will pass three months of the waitingperiod in order to be released from the marriage bond. The same opinion is held by Imam Shafe'i. Imam Thauri and Imam Laith, and the same also is the view of Hadrat 'Umar Hadrat 'Uthman and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit.
Imam Malik has adopted the view of Hadrat 'Umar and Hadrat 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas and it is this: The woman will first pass nine months. If she dces not have her menses during thin period, she will pass three months of the waiting-period like like the woman who has despaired of menstruation, Ibn al-Qasim explaining the viewpoint of Imam Malik says: The period of nine months will be reckoned from the day she became free from the previous menstrual discharge and not from the day divorce was pronounced on her. (AlI these have been taken from al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur'an and al-Kasani, Badai as-Sana`i).
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal says that if the woman whose waiting-period started from menstnration despairs of menstnration during the waiting-period, she will be required to pass the waiting-period of the menopausal woman and not of the women who menstruate regularly. And if she stops menstruating and the cause of the cessation is unknown, she will first pass nine months in the doubt of pregnancy, and then will have to complete three months of the waiting-period, And if the cause of the cessation of the menses becomes known, e.g. a disease, or suckling, or some other cause, she will lie in the waiting-period till the tithe that either she starts having the menses again so that the waiting-period may be reckoned in accordance with the courses, or she reaches menopause and may pass the waiting-period of the menopausal woman. (Al-Insaf).
*13 They may not have menstruated as yet either because of young age, or delayed menstrual discharge as it happens in the case of some women, or because of no discharge at aII throughout life which, though rare, may also be the case. In any case, the waiting-period of such a woman is the same as of the woman, who has stopped menstruation, that is three months from the time divorce was pronounced.
Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Qur'an the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consumation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also pemssible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur'an has held as permissible.
The girl who is divorced in the state when she has not yet menstruated and then she starts having the menses during the waiting-period, will reckon her waiting-period from the same mentruation and her waiting-period will be reckoned just like the woman who menstruates regularly.
*14 The consensus of scholarly opinion is that the waiting-period of the pregnant divorced woman is till child birth. But a difference of opinion has occurred about whether the same also applies to the woman whose husband may die during her pregnancy. The dispute has arisen because in Al-Baqarah: 234 the waiting-period of the woman whose husband dies has been laid down as four months and ten days, and there is no mention whatever whether this injunction applies to all widows generally or only to those who are not pregnant,
Hadrat 'Ali and Hadrat `Abdullah bin 'Abbas, reading both these verses together, have drawn the rule that the waiting-period of the pregnant divorced woman is till child-birth, but that of the pregnant widow is the longer of the two periods, whether it be of the divorced woman or of the pregnant woman. For example, if delivery takes place before four months and ten days, she will have to observe a waiting period of four months and ten days, and if it dces not take place till then, her waiting period will come to an end at delivery. The same is the viewpoint of the Imamiah sect of the Shi'as.
Hadrat 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud says that this verse of Surrah At-Talaq was sent down after the verse of Surah Al-Baqarah; therefore, the later injunction has made the earlier injunction particularly applicable to the non pregnant widow, and has laid down the waiting-period of every pregnant woman as till child birth, whether she is divorced or widowed, Accordingly, whether delivery takes place immediately after the husband's death, or takes longer than four months and ten days, the woman's waiting-period in any case will come to an end at the birth of the child. This view is supported by this tradition of Hadrat Ubayy bin Ka'b. He says, "When this verse of Surah At Talaq came down, I asked the Holy Prophet 1 upon whom be AIIah 's peace): Is it both for the divorced woman and for the widow?" The Holy Prophet replied: "Yes." In another tradition the Holy Prophet further explained it thus: "The waiting period of every pregnant woman is till child-birth." (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu Hatim. Ibn Hajar says that although its reliability is questionable, yet as it has been related through several chains of transmitters, one has to admit that it has some basis). More than that, it is further confirmed by the incident concerning Subai'ah-i Aslamiyyah which occurred in the sacred time of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) himself. She became a widow during her pregnancy and a few days after her husband's death (according to some traditions 20 days, according to others 23 days. 25 days, 40 days or 35 days) she delivered her burden. The Holy Prophet was asked for his ruling concerning her and Ire permitted her to re-marry. This incident has been related by Bukhari and Muslim in different ways on the authority of Hadrat Umm Salamah. This same incident has been related by Bukhari Muslim, Imam Ahmed Abu Da'ud, Nasa`i and Ibn Majah with different chains of transmitters on the authority of Hadrat Miswar bin Makhramah also. Muslim has cited this statement of Subai'ah-i Aslamiyyah herself: 'I was the wife of Hadrat Sa'd bin Khawalah. He died during the Farewell Pilgrimage when I was pregnant. A few days after his death I gave birth to a child. A man told me that I could not remarry before the expiry of four months and ten days. I went and asked the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) and he gave the verdict: You have become lawful as soon as you gave birth to the child: you can re-marry if you so like'." This tradition has been related briefly by Bukhari also.
This same viewpoint has been reported from a large number of the Companions. Imam Malik, Imam Shafe'i, 'Abdur Razzaq, Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn al-Mundhir have related that when Hadrat `Abdullah bin `Umar was asked concerning the pregnant widow, he replied that her waiting-period is till childbirth. At this a man from among the Ansar confirmed, saying: "Hadrat `Umar had said that even if the deceased husband had not yet been buried,and his body still lay on bed in the house and his wife gave birth to a child, she would become pure and lawful for remarriage." The same opinion was held by Hadrat Abu Hurairah, Hadrat Abu Mansur Badri and Hadrat `A'ishah, and the same has been adopted by the four Sunni Imams and the other early jurists.
The Shafe`is say that if the pregnant woman has more children than one in her womb, her waiting-period will come to an end at the -birth of the last child; even if it is still born, the waiting-period will expire at its birth. In case of abortion, if the mid-wives, on the basis of their knowledge and experience, state that it was not merely a piece of flesh but had human form, or that it was not a tumour but a human embryo, their statement will be admitted and the waiting period will expire. (Mughni, al-Muhtaj). The viewpoint of the Hanbalis and the Hanafis is also very close to it. But in case of abortion, their viewpoint is that unless the human form is clearly visible, the mid-wives' statement that it is human embryo, will not be admitted and this will not bring the waiting-period to an end. (Bade ias-Sane i; AI-Insaf). But in the modem times by means of medical investigation it can be easily ascertained whether what has been expelled from the womb was actually something of the nature of human foetus or a kind of tumour or congealed blood. Therefore, whenever it is possible to obtain expert medical opinion, it can be easily decided whether what is described as abortion, was really abortion or not, and whether it has brought the waiting-period to an end or not. However, in cases when such medical investigation is not possible, the viewpoint of the Hanbalis and the Hanafis itself is preferable and it is not fit to rely on the ignorant mid-wives.
.
(65:4) And if you are in doubt about those of your women who have despaired of menstruation , (you should know that) their waiting period is three months, *12 and the same applies to those who have not menstruated as yet. *13 As far as pragnant women, their period ends when they deliver the burden. *14 Whoever fears Allah, He makes his course easy for him.
*12 This is in respect of the women who no longer menstruation and have reached menopause because of age. Their waiting-period will be reckoned from the day divorce was pronounced on them and three months imply three lunar months. If divorce was pronounced at the commencement of the lunar month. it is agreed that the waiting-period will be reckoned with regard to the sighting of the new moon; and if it was pronounced somewhere in the middle of the month, according to Imam Abu Hanifah, three months will have to be completed reckoning each month of 30 days. (Badai' as-Sami ).
As for the women whose courses are irregular due to sonic reason, the jurists have held different opinions:
Hadrat Sa'id bin al-Musayyab says that Hadrat `Umar ruled: "If the woman who has been divorced stops having menses after having them once or twice after the divorce, she will wait for 9 months. If signs of pregnancy appear, well and good, otherwise after the passage of 9 months, she should observe the waiting-period of three additional months. Then she would be lawful for marriage to another person.
Ibn 'Abbas, Qatadah and `Ikrimah say that the waiting-period of the woman who has not menstruated for a year, is three months.
Ta'us says that the waiting-period of the woman who menstntates once in a year, is three mensturations. This very opinion has been reported from Hadrat 'Uthman, Hadrat 'Ali and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit.
Imam Malik relates that a person Habban by name divorced his wife during the period when she was suckling her child. A year passed on it, but she did not have the menses. Then the man died. The divorced wife laid claim to inheritance. The case came before Hadrat `Uthman. He consulted with Hadrat 'AIi and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit, and gave the decision that the woman was an heiress. The .argument given was that the woman was neither of those women a who might have desaired of menstruation, nor of those girls who may not have menstruated yet: therefore, up till the husband's death she was on the menses she had discharged last, and had still to pass her waiting-period.
The Hanafis say that the waiting-period of the woman, who no longer menstruates, which may not be on account of menopause so that there may be no hope of her having it later will either be reckoned from the menstnration if she has it in the future, or in accordance with the age at which women generally reach menopause, and after attaining that age she will pass three months of the waitingperiod in order to be released from the marriage bond. The same opinion is held by Imam Shafe'i. Imam Thauri and Imam Laith, and the same also is the view of Hadrat 'Umar Hadrat 'Uthman and Hadrat Zaid bin Thabit.
Imam Malik has adopted the view of Hadrat 'Umar and Hadrat 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas and it is this: The woman will first pass nine months. If she dces not have her menses during thin period, she will pass three months of the waiting-period like like the woman who has despaired of menstruation, Ibn al-Qasim explaining the viewpoint of Imam Malik says: The period of nine months will be reckoned from the day she became free from the previous menstrual discharge and not from the day divorce was pronounced on her. (AlI these have been taken from al-Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur'an and al-Kasani, Badai as-Sana`i).
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal says that if the woman whose waiting-period started from menstnration despairs of menstnration during the waiting-period, she will be required to pass the waiting-period of the menopausal woman and not of the women who menstruate regularly. And if she stops menstruating and the cause of the cessation is unknown, she will first pass nine months in the doubt of pregnancy, and then will have to complete three months of the waiting-period, And if the cause of the cessation of the menses becomes known, e.g. a disease, or suckling, or some other cause, she will lie in the waiting-period till the tithe that either she starts having the menses again so that the waiting-period may be reckoned in accordance with the courses, or she reaches menopause and may pass the waiting-period of the menopausal woman. (Al-Insaf).
*13 They may not have menstruated as yet either because of young age, or delayed menstrual discharge as it happens in the case of some women, or because of no discharge at aII throughout life which, though rare, may also be the case. In any case, the waiting-period of such a woman is the same as of the woman, who has stopped menstruation, that is three months from the time divorce was pronounced.
Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Qur'an the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consumation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also pemssible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur'an has held as permissible.
The girl who is divorced in the state when she has not yet menstruated and then she starts having the menses during the waiting-period, will reckon her waiting-period from the same mentruation and her waiting-period will be reckoned just like the woman who menstruates regularly.
*14 The consensus of scholarly opinion is that the waiting-period of the pregnant divorced woman is till child birth. But a difference of opinion has occurred about whether the same also applies to the woman whose husband may die during her pregnancy. The dispute has arisen because in Al-Baqarah: 234 the waiting-period of the woman whose husband dies has been laid down as four months and ten days, and there is no mention whatever whether this injunction applies to all widows generally or only to those who are not pregnant,
Hadrat 'Ali and Hadrat `Abdullah bin 'Abbas, reading both these verses together, have drawn the rule that the waiting-period of the pregnant divorced woman is till child-birth, but that of the pregnant widow is the longer of the two periods, whether it be of the divorced woman or of the pregnant woman. For example, if delivery takes place before four months and ten days, she will have to observe a waiting period of four months and ten days, and if it dces not take place till then, her waiting period will come to an end at delivery. The same is the viewpoint of the Imamiah sect of the Shi'as.
Hadrat 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud says that this verse of Surrah At-Talaq was sent down after the verse of Surah Al-Baqarah; therefore, the later injunction has made the earlier injunction particularly applicable to the non pregnant widow, and has laid down the waiting-period of every pregnant woman as till child birth, whether she is divorced or widowed, Accordingly, whether delivery takes place immediately after the husband's death, or takes longer than four months and ten days, the woman's waiting-period in any case will come to an end at the birth of the child. This view is supported by this tradition of Hadrat Ubayy bin Ka'b. He says, "When this verse of Surah At Talaq came down, I asked the Holy Prophet 1 upon whom be AIIah 's peace): Is it both for the divorced woman and for the widow?" The Holy Prophet replied: "Yes." In another tradition the Holy Prophet further explained it thus: "The waiting period of every pregnant woman is till child-birth." (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu Hatim. Ibn Hajar says that although its reliability is questionable, yet as it has been related through several chains of transmitters, one has to admit that it has some basis). More than that, it is further confirmed by the incident concerning Subai'ah-i Aslamiyyah which occurred in the sacred time of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) himself. She became a widow during her pregnancy and a few days after her husband's death (according to some traditions 20 days, according to others 23 days. 25 days, 40 days or 35 days) she delivered her burden. The Holy Prophet was asked for his ruling concerning her and Ire permitted her to re-marry. This incident has been related by Bukhari and Muslim in different ways on the authority of Hadrat Umm Salamah. This same incident has been related by Bukhari Muslim, Imam Ahmed Abu Da'ud, Nasa`i and Ibn Majah with different chains of transmitters on the authority of Hadrat Miswar bin Makhramah also. Muslim has cited this statement of Subai'ah-i Aslamiyyah herself: 'I was the wife of Hadrat Sa'd bin Khawalah. He died during the Farewell Pilgrimage when I was pregnant. A few days after his death I gave birth to a child. A man told me that I could not remarry before the expiry of four months and ten days. I went and asked the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) and he gave the verdict: You have become lawful as soon as you gave birth to the child: you can re-marry if you so like'." This tradition has been related briefly by Bukhari also.
This same viewpoint has been reported from a large number of the Companions. Imam Malik, Imam Shafe'i, 'Abdur Razzaq, Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn al-Mundhir have related that when Hadrat `Abdullah bin `Umar was asked concerning the pregnant widow, he replied that her waiting-period is till childbirth. At this a man from among the Ansar confirmed, saying: "Hadrat `Umar had said that even if the deceased husband had not yet been buried,and his body still lay on bed in the house and his wife gave birth to a child, she would become pure and lawful for remarriage." The same opinion was held by Hadrat Abu Hurairah, Hadrat Abu Mansur Badri and Hadrat `A'ishah, and the same has been adopted by the four Sunni Imams and the other early jurists.
The Shafe`is say that if the pregnant woman has more children than one in her womb, her waiting-period will come to an end at the -birth of the last child; even if it is still born, the waiting-period will expire at its birth. In case of abortion, if the mid-wives, on the basis of their knowledge and experience, state that it was not merely a piece of flesh but had human form, or that it was not a tumour but a human embryo, their statement will be admitted and the waiting period will expire. (Mughni, al-Muhtaj). The viewpoint of the Hanbalis and the Hanafis is also very close to it. But in case of abortion, their viewpoint is that unless the human form is clearly visible, the mid-wives' statement that it is human embryo, will not be admitted and this will not bring the waiting-period to an end. (Bade ias-Sane i; AI-Insaf). But in the modem times by means of medical investigation it can be easily ascertained whether what has been expelled from the womb was actually something of the nature of human foetus or a kind of tumour or congealed blood. Therefore, whenever it is possible to obtain expert medical opinion, it can be easily decided whether what is described as abortion, was really abortion or not, and whether it has brought the waiting-period to an end or not. However, in cases when such medical investigation is not possible, the viewpoint of the Hanbalis and the Hanafis itself is preferable and it is not fit to rely on the ignorant mid-wives.
.
-
accountability
- Posts: 1640
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Saifuddin bhai, so far as I have gone through fatmid history, independent historians have termed fatmid dynasty as somewhat secular, autocratic in nature,and self serving. Hakim's era was specially eratic. He is accused of desecrating chruches and sunni mosques.
One of the reason given by the crusaders to attack was hakim's action of desecrating churches.
King richard while signing a peace accord with salahdin ayubi put this condition, that he will make sure the safety of christians in egypt.
One of the reason given by the crusaders to attack was hakim's action of desecrating churches.
King richard while signing a peace accord with salahdin ayubi put this condition, that he will make sure the safety of christians in egypt.
-
Muslim First
- Posts: 6893
- Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am
Re: For your views
.
Br. AC
AS
Tsa---Tsa---Tsa; Do you know these independent historians lie about you infallable Imams!!.
You are not suppose to read all that stuff. If you want to know about Fatemi Raaj then go and see your resident Amil and take 'Sabak'.
Wasalaam
.
Br. AC
AS
Tsa---Tsa---Tsa; Do you know these independent historians lie about you infallable Imams!!.
You are not suppose to read all that stuff. If you want to know about Fatemi Raaj then go and see your resident Amil and take 'Sabak'.
Wasalaam
.
-
accountability
- Posts: 1640
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:01 am
Re: For your views
Brother MF
I am atleast honest about my views, what I read and know, i describe it without prejudice. But your wahabi version of islam is no better than or is worse than the fatmid dynasty's and imamat.
In afghanistan wahabi mullah umer and his cohorts had raped, killed desecrated hazara shias, their women and children. They did let relatives bury their deads.
I did describe what I read, I have no recourse to authenticate the pro and against versions of history. But you never mentioned atrocities by wahabiisation of a whole country afghanistan.
Your interpretation of islam is stagnant and without motion. you are not ready to adopt to a progressive interpretation.
one wahabi exhibit is taking place in jamae hafsa and lal masjid in islamabad. One wahabi mulla (so called alim e deen) was escaping behind burqa, that police caught him. He and his brother had no shame to put at stake thousands of young innocent lives.
I may assume that you and our pro administration people have many things in common. Actually you mentioned to have friendship with many shiekhs, i/c murtaza dahodwala. Birds of same flock, fly together.
I am atleast honest about my views, what I read and know, i describe it without prejudice. But your wahabi version of islam is no better than or is worse than the fatmid dynasty's and imamat.
In afghanistan wahabi mullah umer and his cohorts had raped, killed desecrated hazara shias, their women and children. They did let relatives bury their deads.
I did describe what I read, I have no recourse to authenticate the pro and against versions of history. But you never mentioned atrocities by wahabiisation of a whole country afghanistan.
Your interpretation of islam is stagnant and without motion. you are not ready to adopt to a progressive interpretation.
one wahabi exhibit is taking place in jamae hafsa and lal masjid in islamabad. One wahabi mulla (so called alim e deen) was escaping behind burqa, that police caught him. He and his brother had no shame to put at stake thousands of young innocent lives.
I may assume that you and our pro administration people have many things in common. Actually you mentioned to have friendship with many shiekhs, i/c murtaza dahodwala. Birds of same flock, fly together.
Re: For your views
accountability,
You probably read the "Orientalist" version of the Fatimid history, very biassed against anything Islamic, written by the agents of Crusaders.
Remember, there has always been tensions between rival Caliphates, and during the Fatimid times, there were conspiracy against the state. Hakim bi-Amrillah was beset with rivalry between the two camps in his army, the sa-called magharib and mashariq. Magharib were Berbers from Morocco, who helped establish the Fatimid rule. Mashariq were Iranoians, Turks, Syrians and Iraqis.
There is evidence that Jews and Christians took advantage of these rivalries to foment agitation against Hakim. Hakim never ordered destruction of churches and synagogues. Historical documents suggest that Fatimids had interpreted Egypt to be Dar-al-Islam and had temporarily prohibited building churches and synagogues in the country. However their existing properties wer untouched. There appears to be one instance of a church being destroyed by a mob because they objected to it being built. Christians said that they were not building a new church, but just reparing an existing one.
Fatimids, like other caliphates. did discriminate against Christains and Jews by imposing a ruling of ahle dhimmi against them. But that is a Muslim interpretation.
As to Salah ud Din, he came much later than Hakim. Fatimid dynasty continued with different Imams after Tayyib went into seclusion. It was after Tayyib that Salah ud Din abolished the Fatimid Caliphate. Bohras do not recognize any Fatimid Caliphs after Imam al_Amir, their last Imam who was also a Fatimid Caliph.
As to MF, one of our two resident Sunni bigots, it is best to ignore his posts. He has nothing useful to say anyway except pasting verbiage from Sunni sources, which Bohras will not much care about. His main objective is to be contemptuous about all Shia and Bohras in particular.
You probably read the "Orientalist" version of the Fatimid history, very biassed against anything Islamic, written by the agents of Crusaders.
Remember, there has always been tensions between rival Caliphates, and during the Fatimid times, there were conspiracy against the state. Hakim bi-Amrillah was beset with rivalry between the two camps in his army, the sa-called magharib and mashariq. Magharib were Berbers from Morocco, who helped establish the Fatimid rule. Mashariq were Iranoians, Turks, Syrians and Iraqis.
There is evidence that Jews and Christians took advantage of these rivalries to foment agitation against Hakim. Hakim never ordered destruction of churches and synagogues. Historical documents suggest that Fatimids had interpreted Egypt to be Dar-al-Islam and had temporarily prohibited building churches and synagogues in the country. However their existing properties wer untouched. There appears to be one instance of a church being destroyed by a mob because they objected to it being built. Christians said that they were not building a new church, but just reparing an existing one.
Fatimids, like other caliphates. did discriminate against Christains and Jews by imposing a ruling of ahle dhimmi against them. But that is a Muslim interpretation.
As to Salah ud Din, he came much later than Hakim. Fatimid dynasty continued with different Imams after Tayyib went into seclusion. It was after Tayyib that Salah ud Din abolished the Fatimid Caliphate. Bohras do not recognize any Fatimid Caliphs after Imam al_Amir, their last Imam who was also a Fatimid Caliph.
As to MF, one of our two resident Sunni bigots, it is best to ignore his posts. He has nothing useful to say anyway except pasting verbiage from Sunni sources, which Bohras will not much care about. His main objective is to be contemptuous about all Shia and Bohras in particular.