women

I was refering to Lilly btw. So if there isnt any such thing under sharee3ah, what Lilly talking about then when she said this: B]women can be part of juries and make decisions concerning their affairs, who said that they can't.. this is different from running a country![/B]

Anyway thanks, any good books you can refer me to, or articles or websites?

Not on this subject matter. I don't know of any to be honest. You said you want to learn about Islam, I suggest starting from the basics and reading Kitab al-Tawhid with its explanation from Abdul Rahman ibn Nasir a'Sa3di rahimahullah. You can get it at any DarusSalam or other bookstores depending on where you're at.
 
I think everyone should calm down. I hate when these discussions get so heated. The important thing is to accept the ruling on these issues and all other debatable subjects lets just leave those to the ulemma.
 
Asalaam O Alaikumm Sister Hawa...

Actually the brother was right when he said Ayesha (r.a) did repent and it is mentioned in the Tafsir of Maulana Maududi named, Tafheem Ul Quran...

and he also made it clear, that Muslims say that since Ayesha (r.a) lead an army in the Battle of Jamal, so it could be permissible to make Women leader of the Ummah...

But he mentions this Verse whenever Ayesha (R.a) used to recite ...

(33:33) And stay in your homes and do not go about displaying your allurements as in the former Time of Ignorance.



Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal has related in his Zawa id az-Zuhd and Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn Sa'd in their own books the tradition from Masruq, saying that when Hadrat `A'ishah (r.a) during her recitation of the Qur'an would reach this verse (wa qarna fi buyut-i kunna) i.e Stay in Your Homes , she would start crying involuntarily; so much so that her head-wrapper would become wet, for this reminded her of the error that she had committed in the Battle of the Camel. (Tafheem Ul Quran)


So she did repent, NOT only over her mistake of going outside the House and leading an army, BUT also leading an Army against the 4th Guided Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib (r.a)... He was the Caliph of his time, and that is why Muslims consider him the 4th Rightly guided Caliph.. Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan was a Governor of Syria at that Time, NOT an Ameer of the Ummah...

Salaam
 
[taken from a video lecture which I posted before]

There is no text in the Quran which says that women can't become head of state. But there are ahadith which say that she can't become head of state.

Lets analyze whether it is advisable for a woman to be head of state or not.


If a woman is a head of a State in an Islamic country, she may have to lead the congregational prayer. And if a woman leads the congregational prayer; in Islam we have adoptable postures like Qiyam, Rukoo, Sujud i.e standing, bowing and prostration. And if a lady is doing that in front of a gents’ congregation, this would surely cause disturbances in the prayer.


If she happens to be the head of a modern society like the one we have today, many a times the head of the state has to hold meetings with other head of states which are mainly gents, and many a times they have close door meetings in which no one is allowed. And this Islam does not permit because we know that if a man and a woman are alone together, the third one between them is Satan. Islam does not permit intermingling of sexes.

For a head of state, it is necessary to meet the common man, and if the head of state is woman, she might not be able to meet common man and try to solve his problem.

And science tells us that a woman, during her menstrual period, undergoes certain behaviors, mental and psychological changes due to the release of sex hormones. And these changes surely disturb her in making the right decisions if she is the head of state.

Science also tells us that a woman has more verbal and vocal skills as compared to a man. And man has more ability to imagine things, to imagine future, to imagine a future project. And this ability is very important for a head of a state. A woman has been given an edge over the verbal and vocal skills which are required for motherhood.

A woman may get pregnant and she surely may require few months rest, so who will look after the state at this time?

She may have children. Her duty as a mother is far more important! And it is more practicable for a man who can do both duties; of a father as well as a head of state as compared to a woman if she has children.

So for these reasons, a woman should not be a head of state. But this does not mean that she can’t take part in making decisions! Woman has a right to vote; she has a right in law making.

At the time of treaty of Hudaybiya, Umme Salam (r.a) supported and guided the Prophet at a time when the whole Muslim community was disturbed. So surely a woman can help the man in making decisions about the State!

And Allah knows best!

:wa:
 
Asalaam O Alaikumm Sister Hawa...

Actually the brother was right when he said Ayesha (r.a) did repent and it is mentioned in the Tafsir of Maulana Maududi named, Tafheem Ul Quran...

and he also made it clear, that Muslims say that since Ayesha (r.a) lead an army in the Battle of Jamal, so it could be permissible to make Women leader of the Ummah...

But he mentions this Verse whenever Ayesha (R.a) used to recite ...

(33:33) And stay in your homes and do not go about displaying your allurements as in the former Time of Ignorance.



Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal has related in his Zawa id az-Zuhd and Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn Sa'd in their own books the tradition from Masruq, saying that when Hadrat `A'ishah (r.a) during her recitation of the Qur'an would reach this verse (wa qarna fi buyut-i kunna) i.e Stay in Your Homes , she would start crying involuntarily; so much so that her head-wrapper would become wet, for this reminded her of the error that she had committed in the Battle of the Camel. (Tafheem Ul Quran)


So she did repent, NOT only over her mistake of going outside the House and leading an army, BUT also leading an Army against the 4th Guided Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib (r.a)... He was the Caliph of his time, and that is why Muslims consider him the 4th Rightly guided Caliph.. Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan was a Governor of Syria at that Time, NOT an Ameer of the Ummah...

Salaam

jazakAllah for taking the time to provide proper evidence and proofs for what I told Hawa.
 
Asalaam O Alaikumm Sister Hawa...

Actually the brother was right when he said Ayesha (r.a) did repent and it is mentioned in the Tafsir of Maulana Maududi named, Tafheem Ul Quran...

and he also made it clear, that Muslims say that since Ayesha (r.a) lead an army in the Battle of Jamal, so it could be permissible to make Women leader of the Ummah...

But he mentions this Verse whenever Ayesha (R.a) used to recite ...

(33:33) And stay in your homes and do not go about displaying your allurements as in the former Time of Ignorance.



Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal has related in his Zawa id az-Zuhd and Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn Sa'd in their own books the tradition from Masruq, saying that when Hadrat `A'ishah (r.a) during her recitation of the Qur'an would reach this verse (wa qarna fi buyut-i kunna) i.e Stay in Your Homes , she would start crying involuntarily; so much so that her head-wrapper would become wet, for this reminded her of the error that she had committed in the Battle of the Camel. (Tafheem Ul Quran)


So she did repent, NOT only over her mistake of going outside the House and leading an army, BUT also leading an Army against the 4th Guided Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib (r.a)... He was the Caliph of his time, and that is why Muslims consider him the 4th Rightly guided Caliph.. Muawiya ibn Abu Sufyan was a Governor of Syria at that Time, NOT an Ameer of the Ummah...

Salaam

I never said it would be permissable for women to lead the ummah but jazakhallah for bringing actual proof in regards to her repenting for even leading the army in the first place.
 
Leaders don't raise themselves sis. A leader is raised because a mother stayed at home to raise him. She shaped his personality from which he extracted leadership qualities. It is because she 'looked after the house' that he is a leader today.

I agree 100% sister. If only we stuck to our roles that Allah Swt has given us, rather than trying to find loopholes. Approximately 124000 prophets sent by Allah, why not a single women?? Allah save us from the wisperings of shaitaan.
 
yea it cant mean "mental deficiency." probably more to do with judgment in regards to religious matters? I really dont know. Wallahu AAlim. I dont think hormonal changes really effect women's thinking at all! I mean female scientists, does their productivity decrease when they go through menses? I dont think so.

A scientist's job doesn't involve emotions, so hormones can't affect their job mentally. But women base most, if not all their decisions on emotions, and emotions are affected by hormonal changes. (see postnatal depression as one example)

As for women being mentally deficient... I've quit watching it now but anyone who's watched the Maury lie detector results show, will agree that many women are mentally deficient. The instant a man says, 'I won't do it again, baby' despite the lie detector result saying he cheated on her 50 times, the woman is like 'you promise, you promise?' :'( If that isn't lacking brains then what is??? :heated:


Such ignorance across the Muslim world is still strong and carried out.
And in the muslim world, more women than men follow innovations, pray to the dead, and follow others blindly.
 
Last edited:
I am like any other Muslims should be against forced marriages.

Nonetheless, such matters are DOMESTIC and should NOT involve any arrogant, self-righteous, busybody government intervention. It should come down to parental prerogative because it is a domestic matter. It is NOT the state's business in the first place to either approve or disapprove of such practices when they are confined to the domestic realm. I am a staunch advocate of the traditional Patria Potestas model, and it also does say in the quran that one should obey their parents wishes. Therefore if hypothetically I ever happened to absolutely insist that my daughter or son married a certain individual that they objected to marrying then that is STILL my ultimate prerogative and they should obey my wishes. The quran does state that such forced marriages are usually unsuccessful, that is only logical, but nevertheless if the father so happens to override his daughter's or son's personal wishes then that is a matter for him and his offspring alone to deal with. It is none of anyone else's business. Governments should just keep out of all such matters.
 
Nonetheless, such matters are DOMESTIC and should NOT involve any arrogant, self-righteous, busybody government intervention. It should come down to parental prerogative because it is a domestic matter. It is NOT the state's business in the first place to either approve or disapprove of such practices when they are confined to the domestic realm. I am a staunch advocate of the traditional Patria Potestas model, and it also does say in the quran that one should obey their parents wishes. Therefore if hypothetically I ever happened to absolutely insist that my daughter or son married a certain individual that they objected to marrying then that is STILL my ultimate prerogative and they should obey my wishes. The quran does state that such forced marriages are usually unsuccessful, that is only logical, but nevertheless if the father so happens to override his daughter's or son's personal wishes then that is a matter for him and his offspring alone to deal with. It is none of anyone else's business. Governments should just keep out of all such matters.

Can the father even override his daughters or sons personal wishes when it comes to marriage? considering the following hadith

Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: "A virgin came to the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) and mentioned that her father had married her against her will, so the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) allowed her to exercise her choice. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 11, Number 2091)"



Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as having said: "A woman without a husband (or divorced or a widow) must not be married until she is consulted, and a virgin must not be married until her permission is sought. They asked the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him): How her (virgin's) consent can be solicited? He (the Holy Prophet) said: That she keeps silence. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3303)"

Doesn't that mean you can't marry her off without her consent?
 
Nonetheless, such matters are DOMESTIC and should NOT involve any arrogant, self-righteous, busybody government intervention. It should come down to parental prerogative because it is a domestic matter. It is NOT the state's business in the first place to either approve or disapprove of such practices when they are confined to the domestic realm. I am a staunch advocate of the traditional Patria Potestas model, and it also does say in the quran that one should obey their parents wishes. Therefore if hypothetically I ever happened to absolutely insist that my daughter or son married a certain individual that they objected to marrying then that is STILL my ultimate prerogative and they should obey my wishes. The quran does state that such forced marriages are usually unsuccessful, that is only logical, but nevertheless if the father so happens to override his daughter's or son's personal wishes then that is a matter for him and his offspring alone to deal with. It is none of anyone else's business. Governments should just keep out of all such matters.

The daugher/son is not sinful for disobeying their parents when they ask him to marry someone he doesn't want to.

It is definite that he should not obey them in the fifth case, which is where they force him to marry a girl whom they have chosen. This is not a matter in which he is obliged to obey them. Rather it is akin to food and drink: he may choose whatever he wants to eat and drink, and they have no right to control that.

Ibn Muflih al-Hanbali (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The parents have no right to force their son to marry someone he does not want. Shaykh Taqiy al-Deen (i.e., Ibn Taymiyah – may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Neither of the parents has the right to force their son to marry someone whom he does not want, and if he refuses then he is not sinning by disobeying them, because no one has the right to force him to eat food he finds off-putting when there is food that he wants to eat, and marriage is like that and more so. Food that one is forced to eat is unpleasant for a short while, but a forced marriage lasts for a long time, and it harms a person and he cannot leave it. End quote.

Al-Adaab al-Shar’iyyah (1/447)

full article here http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/98768/forced marriage
 
@ squiggle, That still doesn't stop the father from disowning his offspring though, does it? I would say that most would still choose to obey their parents wishes rather than being disowned. Perhaps it would be best advised if the offspring at least give the marriage a TRY and later on down the track if things are still "so bad" then they can divorce. At least this is a respectful way of showing to their parents that "at least I gave it a go".
 
Jazakallahu khaayr for responses.

@ Karl

And marriage meant to assist the individual to lower their gaze, how on earth can a forced marriage where the individual is not even attracted to the person on personally level and just married him or her for the sake of parent is going to assist them to lower their gaze?

At the end of the day, it is not the parents that will spend their most of their lives with daughters’ and sons’ spouse. It is ultimately the daughter or son that would have to live with the person.
No parents that love their child would force their children to marry someone they do not want. No means no. The parent can choose to disown their child, but no still means no.

If someone is forced to marry, the marriage is invalid. And can be examine by the court, so it is absolutely the authority business.
 
And divorce is frowned upon and should be the last option. Why should the person put themselves in that position? Why should a person do something that frowned upon in Islam just because they married that person to make the parents’ happy?
 
@ squiggle, That still doesn't stop the father from disowning his offspring though, does it? I would say that most would still choose to obey their parents wishes rather than being disowned. Perhaps it would be best advised if the offspring at least give the marriage a TRY and later on down the track if things are still "so bad" then they can divorce. At least this is a respectful way of showing to their parents that "at least I gave it a go".

why do i have a feeling that you are a troll :hmm:
the quran does state that such forced marriages are usually unsuccessful, that is only logical, but nevertheless if the father so happens to override his daughter's or son's personal wishes then that is a matter for him and his offspring alone to deal with.
where does it state that :hmm: it seems like you are just making up half logical rubbish to support your claims :hmm:
 
@ squiggle, That still doesn't stop the father from disowning his offspring though, does it? I would say that most would still choose to obey their parents wishes rather than being disowned. Perhaps it would be best advised if the offspring at least give the marriage a TRY and later on down the track if things are still "so bad" then they can divorce. At least this is a respectful way of showing to their parents that "at least I gave it a go".

So the father would disown his daughter for doing something halal that Allah has given her full rights to do? Why would he disown her when in the sight of Allah she has not done anything wrong. Allah will not look at her in a bad way for refusing to marry a person she doesn't want to. So why does the father look at her badly? Is his knowledge greater than Allah's that he can say which actions are bad and should be looked down upon? of course not,

Allah has made it halal for a woman to refuse a marriage she doesn't want so why disown her for something that Allah has given her the right to do? if you do not agree with this law then you should pick a bone with Allah not the daughter because she is only exercising the right Allah gave her.

Akhi we should only look down upon and get angry over that which Allah has made haraam, because all the pure and good things have been made halal so why get angry at some one for doing something that Allah has made halal for them to do. In this case the daughter exercising her right to refuse marriage.

Allah gave her this right, why should the father disown own her for something that Allah gave her permission to do? does he not agree with the law of Allah? wil he disown her for exercising the rights that the creator gave her? to me that implies that the father is unhappy with the law of Allah and does not agree with it.

How can you disown someone and be angry at them as long as they stay in the halal. It doesn't make sense to me, if Allah is not angry with it why should I be angry. If it was a bad thing then Allah would be angry with it too and he would've made it haraam for a woman to refuse her parents in this area.

but we know the opposite is true that it is completely halal for a son/daughter to refuse their parents with regards to a potential marriage partner. This is the right given to them by Allah. If you don't like this then you should take it up with Allah and ask him why he gave this right to the child. But that would not be wise. Indeed Allah is all just to every single one of his slaves and does not transgress the rights of any individual in the shari'a allah hu akbar.
 
Last edited:
@ squiggle, That still doesn't stop the father from disowning his offspring though, does it? I would say that most would still choose to obey their parents wishes rather than being disowned. Perhaps it would be best advised if the offspring at least give the marriage a TRY and later on down the track if things are still "so bad" then they can divorce. At least this is a respectful way of showing to their parents that "at least I gave it a go".

what makes you think you won't be punished for disowning your child?? don't be to confident now!
 
That still doesn't stop the father from disowning his offspring though, does it?

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is not permissible for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three days.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6065. The sin is more serious if the forsaking for no reason involves a son, mother, brother or other relative, because in that case he is combining two sins: forsaking a Muslim and severing the ties of kinship.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The parents have no right to force their son to marry someone he does not want. If he refuses he is not being disobedient; it is like forcing him to eat something he does not want. al-Ikhtiyaaraat, p. 344

From: http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/22724/cutting off ties
 
Why would any loving parents disown their child for small reason like that! It not like they lost anything...
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top