There is no need for an explanation.Few words will suffice,which are:
If every woman in the world took a male relative with her outside and never left her house except that she has a male relative with her,will the number of rapes that occur daily not fall down by a mile?
@Zafran, i am a little confusefd, are you saying all scholars and everyone agrees with the ruling about travelling alone, and its actually an enforcable law? or a recognised sin or what?
I really didnt think there was consensus?
- - - Updated - - -
where? quoting helps.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
The thread title, does Islam dissallow the woman to leave the house alone?
Nope but in certain journeys especially long voyages she should take precautions - one of them is going with somebody she trust/mahram - for obvious reasons.
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Nope but in certain journeys especially long voyages she should take precautions - one of them is going with somebody she trust/mahram - for obvious reasons.
So, there is no clear enforceable law agreed by all scholars/jurists, like in Saudi? but most agree its advised but women can travel freely if they choose?
So, there is no clear enforceable law agreed by all scholars/jurists, like in Saudi? but most agree its advised but women can travel freely if they choose?
No this has nothing to do with state unless the circumstances call for it. This is to do with a Qadi and Jurists, before the concept of the nation state people governed themselves as most states did not have the political or technological power like modern nation states - that have enormous power and can become tyrannical very easily.
What do you mean if the women chooses? can a man leave his wife for a long period of term because he chooses? can a child choose his/her own gender if she or he chooses? can a person choose to have pre marital sex or engage in public lewdness? what about smoking drugs or drinking alcohol - or is one going to try to be a God conscious person?
saudi and Iran, France, US are nation states and govern by whatever they see fit - have there own laws grounded in specific history, experience and place. One needs to take that in account.
Last edited by Zafran; 04-09-2018 at 01:01 AM.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Ok will try to put it another way, if there is no dispute with the family and no one has asked anyone in authority for help to track down and stop their wife or daughter or family member while travelling, is there any concencus any one else has the right to harras or infringe the rights of a woman traveling alone?
Ok will try to put it another way, if there is no dispute with the family and no one has asked anyone in authority for help to track down and stop their wife or daughter or family member while travelling, is there any concencus any one else has the right to harras or infringe the rights of a woman traveling alone?
what are you trying to get at here - if you want the answer to be that Islamic Jurist allowed women to travel in long distances for whatever the whims desired - the answer is no - the same applies to men - men could not leave there family behind for long periods of time unless circumstances allowed for it. For both sexes eg necessity or the journey was safe.
Your trying to enforce a liberal paradigm here by the way - that is why "choice" and "infringement" "rights of women" are called out here. Although these are not clearly defined.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
what are you trying to get at here - if you want the answer to be that Islamic Jurist allowed women to travel in long distances for whatever the whims desired - the answer is no - the same applies to men - men could not leave there family behind for long periods of time unless circumstances allowed for it. For both sexes eg necessity or the journey was safe.
Your trying to enforce a liberal paradigm here by the way - that is why "choice" and "infringement" "rights of women" are called out here. Although these are not clearly defined.
I am against enforcing anything, i really think its good sensible advice but no one should be able to dictate to anyone else how they travel, If i was to raise my Daughter to be Musilm or in the case of my wife, i would want her to be able to travel freely, with out being harrased by anyone in authority or the community just because she is travelling alone.
I am quite new to Islam and dont really know enough about it to declare in public i am Muslim, Its for this reason i question..
I my self have lived a nomadic life so know loads of women that travel alone, using their common sense they have little problem, but if for example my daughter wants to work and live abroad and not marry the first idiot she meets and wants to persue an independant life, i wouldnt want to support and promote an ideology or way of life that oppresses her for being a woman.
Call it liberal or what ever but to me oppression of any kind goes against Islam.
That is not true - there are plenty of things that you wouldn't want your son, daughter wife, family members, nation doing - maximizing freedom isnt the end goal itself. Being God conscious is.
format_quote Originally Posted by beleiver
i really think its good sensible advice but no one should be able to dictate to anyone else how they travel, If i was to raise my Daughter to be Musilm or in the case of my wife, i would want her to be able to travel freely, with out being harrased by anyone in authority or the community just because she is travelling alone.
Of course you should as stated before freedom in itself is not the end goal. If one is going to take an unsafe path that is not beneficial or in any way necessary then one will not just advice but enforce it. Going to a dangerous place, wasting ones life. As I stated before there is no God conscious here - its just maximizing choices with zero purpose. It entirely depends on the end goal and what is the purpose of travel.
Same applies to men.
format_quote Originally Posted by beleiver
I my self have lived a nomadic life so know loads of women that travel alone, using their common sense they have little problem, but if for example my daughter wants to work and live abroad and not marry the first idiot she meets and wants to persue an independent life, i wouldnt want to support and promote an ideology or way of life that oppresses her for being a woman.
"Independent life" like changing her Gender? having a nefarious occupation? hanging around with gangsters and thugs. The whole point you linking "oppression" with anyone that stops a man and women doing something that they want is a liberal definition. A man and women are responsible to the creator of the world and the people around them - "independence" and "freedom" itself is not the end goal.
Your also claim its because shes a women - Men and women are restricted in Islam (as any worldview) - they cant drink alcohol, pre martial sex, leave there family for no reason. Men and women have certain rights and responsibility because of the clear and apparent differences. Equity needs to be taken in consideration as well.
Islam is also not an ideology, unlike Liberalism of course which has no purpose to it at all expect to maximize freedom.
what about the Universal law that you always talk about - is that not meant to be enforced - is it not a law? what is the point of it at all if your just going to follow Liberal paradigms anyway - especially when the "universal law" contradicts the liberal goals of maximizing freedom?
Last edited by Zafran; 04-09-2018 at 03:35 AM.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
Be sure to read this paragraph copied from islamqa.info. With regard to a woman going out of her house, according to sharee’ah it is not conditional upon her being accompanied by her husband or mahram as long as she is trustworthy and she goes to places where there is no fear for her, and the route she takes is safe. The presence of a mahram is a condition when she is travelling, but she does not have to be accompanied by a mahram everywhere she goes in the city – unless there is some evil or fitnah (temptation, tribulation) involved in her going even a short distance, in which case a woman should not go out on her own. Then it is better to be on the safe side and not go out unless she is with her husband or someone who can protect her and take care of her.
Dude, a women couldnt leave her house or go on long journeys alone for obvs safety reasons. Whilst the ruling still applies today, we have more security now.
In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,
Generally, it is impermissible for a woman to travel the distance of three days (equivalent to 48 miles) without her husband or a Mahram (unmarriageable kin) accompanying her.
There are many clear narrations of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) in this regard.
1) Sayyiduna Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “Let no woman travel for more than three days unless her husband or a Mahram is with her.” (Sahih Muslim)
2) Sayyiduna Abd Allah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “A woman must not travel for three days except with a Mahram.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 1036 & Sahih Muslim)
3) Sayyiduna Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “It is unlawful for a woman who believes in Allah and the last day that she travels the distance of one day and one night without a Mahram accompanying her.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 1038)
4) Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) said: “’A woman must not travel except with a Mahram and a man must not enter upon her except if she has a Mahram.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 1763)
Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) states in his monumental commentary of Sahih Muslim:
“There are many such narrations that assert the impermissibility of a woman travelling without a Mahram. These narrations vary in their wordings. The narration of Ibn Abbas in Sahih al-Bukhari says that a woman must not travel without a Mahram, but it adds nothing else. However, the other narrations, in Sahih al-Bukhari and elsewhere, mention lengths of journeys for which a Mahram is required – some of the narrations specify three days, some two, some one, and some even less.”
Imam Nawawi (Allah have mercy on him) also mentions that the difference found in these narrations is due to the different questioners and the places wherein the answers were given to them. al-Bayhaqi said: “It is as though the messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) was asked regarding travelling for three days without a Mahram, and he refused. He was then asked about her travelling for two days, and regarding one day, etc and each narrator related from him what he heard.” (See: Commentary of Sahih Muslim by Imam Nawawi, 1015)
According to the Hanafi Ijtihad, the distance that is considered here is three days and three nights, for the narrations mentioning three days & three nights have reached the level of certainty. All the Companions who narrated other than three days also narrate the distance of three days and three nights. The narrations that mention two or one day will be restricted to specific circumstances, such as the fear of more fitna. Hence, they (Hanafi School) considers the narrations that mention three days & three nights as the basis of prohibition. (Zafar Ahmad al-Tahanawi, I’la al-Sunan, V. 10, P. 11)
It must be remarked here that this refers to the distance usually covered by walking or on an animal in three days & three nights (with the usual breaks for resting and eating). Therefore, the restriction of travelling with a Mahram applies if the distance of the journey exceeds this, even if the journey itself is accomplished in a shorter time.
The scholars have differed on the length of this distance. Many scholars are of the opinion that it is 16 Farsakh, and each Farsakh equals three miles, thus totalling to 48 miles. (See: Faydh al-Bari ala Sahih al-Bukhari, 2/397) http://islamqa.org/hanafi/daruliftaa/7865
That is not true - there are plenty of things that you wouldn't want your son, daughter wife, family members, nation doing - maximizing freedom isnt the end goal itself. Being God conscious is.
As long as she is not harming herself or others nor putting hers self in a stupid dangerous situation , i could not oppress my own dughter, certainly not in the name of Allaha, He blessed us with freedom of choice, ears to hear, eyes to see, and heart to feel, may He guide her.
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
Of course you should as stated before freedom in itself is not the end goal. If one is going to take an unsafe path that is not beneficial or in any way necessary then one will not just advice but enforce it. Going to a dangerous place, wasting ones life. As I stated before there is no God conscious here - its just maximizing choices with zero purpose. It entirely depends on the end goal and what is the purpose of travel.
Same applies to men.
Inshalla , she will be conscious of Allaha, But for an imaginary example, say she gets a place in a foreign university say in Barcalona, in my experience (i am fairly well travelled) she would be safer being driven to the airport then getting a Taxi, bus or what ever to her digs and going about her bussiness than say if she lived in a british city like say Birmingham and walked across town at night by her self...The most dangerous situation is allowed in whats called 'Islam' but not the other..Cant you see the problem with ruling, its not universal law for all people for all time, every situation is different there is a reason such a law is created by stupid men not by Allaha. There is a reason why he gifted us with eyes to see, ears to hear and a heart and mind to be guided by His conscioussness for each and every situation.
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
"Independent life" like changing her Gender? having a nefarious occupation? hanging around with gangsters and thugs. The whole point you linking "oppression" with anyone that stops a man and women doing something that they want is a liberal definition. A man and women are responsible to the creator of the world and the people around them - "independence" and "freedom" itself is not the end goal.
Your also claim its because shes a women - Men and women are restricted in Islam (as any worldview) - they cant drink alcohol, pre martial sex, leave there family for no reason. Men and women have certain rights and responsibility because of the clear and apparent differences. Equity needs to be taken in consideration as well.
Islam is also not an ideology, unlike Liberalism of course which has no purpose to it at all expect to maximize freedom.
The debate is becomming foggy here, i am not sure what mental health issues have with the disccusion?
But my understanding and i think a message lost from the Quran and True Islam is if its causing no harm or loss to any one , it none of their bussines.
If someone sins, advise against it by all means but dont transgress and be forcing your will on others, thats the action of those gone astray and actually comparable with gangsters and thugs whether they have the monopoly of force or not.
"Part of the perfection of one’s Islam is his leaving that which does not concern him.” Mohamed (pbuh)
And if they deny thee, say: Unto me my work, and unto you your work. Ye are innocent of what I do, and I am innocent of what ye do.
The preceding and following ayats to this are a beauty regarding Allhas sovereignty and why a believer need to worry of the ations of fools and Kafir.
format_quote Originally Posted by Zafran
what about the Universal law that you always talk about - is that not meant to be enforced - is it not a law? what is the point of it at all if your just going to follow Liberal paradigms anyway - especially when the "universal law" contradicts the liberal goals of maximizing freedom?
If you want drink strong drink all day every day there will be reaction to that action as sure as night follows day..I believe people should be free to choose, i beleive Allah to be the sovereign and best punisher.
يا قافلة الخير "The Persian aggression against Iraq was a result of the arrogant, racialist and evil attitudes of the ruling clique in Iran."
-Saddam Hussein Abd al-Majid at-Tikriti - العراق جمجمة العرب ورمح الله في الأرض
I can testify He can hear prayers in non Arabic, not even translations, the prayers i used before i learned Islamic ones i taught my wife , her first time she had been contemplaiting selling her house, literally the next day while she was out the front,(rare chance) a guy pulled up and asked if there were any houses for sale on the street...Now what are the chances for that?
I laways felt He could hear and give al-rahim even if i dindt know its name.
As long as she is not harming herself or others nor putting hers self in a stupid dangerous situation , i could not oppress my own dughter, certainly not in the name of Allaha, He blessed us with freedom of choice, ears to hear, eyes to see, and heart to feel, may He guide her.
Different places regard different things harmful. If one is following the sacred law then one would take heed at what the Jurist say about going far on ones own - men and women included.
format_quote Originally Posted by beleiver
Inshalla , she will be conscious of Allaha, But for an imaginary example, say she gets a place in a foreign university say in Barcalona, in my experience (i am fairly well travelled) she would be safer being driven to the airport then getting a Taxi, bus or what ever to her digs and going about her bussiness than say if she lived in a british city like say Birmingham and walked across town at night by her self...The most dangerous situation is allowed in whats called 'Islam' but not the other..Cant you see the problem with ruling, its not universal law for all people for all time, every situation is different there is a reason such a law is created by stupid men not by Allaha. There is a reason why he gifted us with eyes to see, ears to hear and a heart and mind to be guided by His conscioussness for each and every situation.
No if she lived in Barcelona she would have to follow the laws of Barcelona - if she went any other place you have to follow the laws of the land. If one follows the sacred law then one would take heed of its rulings and principles.
format_quote Originally Posted by beleiver
But my understanding and i think a message lost from the Quran and True Islam is if its causing no harm or loss to any one , it none of their bussines.
If someone sins, advise against it by all means but dont transgress and be forcing your will on others, thats the action of those gone astray and actually comparable with gangsters and thugs whether they have the monopoly of force or not.
Every nation enforces there laws for the protection of the community and the individual. That includes any worldview. Your endorsing Liberal individualism and not promoting Godly society here - which is what the Quran calls for. The sins can be from pre martial sex, adultery and drinking alcohol - As I said it seems there is a contradiction between Universal law and maximizing Individual freedom - which one is it.
format_quote Originally Posted by beleiver
If you want drink strong drink all day every day there will be reaction to that action as sure as night follows day..I believe people should be free to choose, i beleive Allah to be the sovereign and best punisher.
drinking alcohol, pre marital sex and adultery are harmful to society and not just the individual. Many societies ban hard drugs for this very reason. As I said you seem to think that enforcing these laws is Oppression - it isnt - its enjoining good and forbidding evil.
Going back to the thread men and women have Hududs (limits) they can range from personal transactions which there is no need to enforce as they up to the individual ) - but other transgressions like drugs, alcohol, or lewd behavior, safety - these have every right to be enforced. That is the whole point of a law.
You also seem to have split between God's Law and individual sins - they are all under the jurisdiction of God. The private and public. The public ones have to enforced by the authorities and the private are not - both will be Judged by God on the day of resurrection.
soon as one chooses to follow a worldview be it Communism, Christianity, Islam, Liberalism - then one should reasonably act within the worldviews bounds - otherwise whats the whole point of following the law?
Last edited by Zafran; 04-11-2018 at 03:44 AM.
Do you think the pious don't sin?
They merely:
Veiled themselves and didn't flaunt it
Sought forgiveness and didn't persist
Took ownership of it and don't justify it
And acted with excellence after they had erred - Ibn al-Qayyim
I think the point i am trying to make is enforcing a law that is wrong and not from Allaha wont work in real life..
Prhohibition for example doesnt work nor is it practicle, it causes more problems than its supposed to solve..
Look at the world, people have strayed far from the path and are suffering the Tyranny of one another, people have invented lies and others follow them and think they follow Allaha but they are astray, they are following partners..
No one can force their will on another unless there is a victim, that is a crime, that is what gangsters do..
Dont listen to Jurists unless an actual crime with a victim has been commited and a punishment is called for, fear and trust in Allaha and his warnings, if you do right be it for your soul if you do wrong be it against your soul, Allha is the best of Judges..And a clear repeated warning is dont invent lies, the Quran is complete, detailed guidance..
Surah 10 for example is clear on the revalation of Allha is not to be added to nor messed with. Read the whole verse, people have gone astray many a time before.
Surah ten ends beautifly.. Say: O mankind! Now hath the Truth from your Lord come unto you. So whosoever is guided, is guided only for (the food of) his soul, and whosoever erreth erreth only against it. And I am not a warder over you. And (O Muhammad) follow that which is inspired in thee, and forbear until Allah give judgment. And He is the Best of Judges.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
cinnamonrolls1 liked this post
-
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks