Victim ordered to wed rapist

**YamahaR1** · 07-19-2005

Just wondering what my muslim friends think of this. I know many here don't read "western" news but this article was posted today and it certainly peaked my interest. From this story, it seems that the muslim world is divided. What are your thoughts?

***********************

Victim ordered to wed rapist
By Shaikh Azizur Rahman
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 19, 2005

BOMBAY -- Hard-line Islamic clerics in a northern Indian village have declared that a woman's 10-year-old marriage was nullified when her father-in-law raped her -- and ordered the mother of five to marry the rapist.
The fatwa, or religious edict, was issued by Darool Uloom Deoband, South Asia's most powerful Islamic theological school known for promoting a radical brand of Islam that is said to have inspired the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The decision has outraged both Muslim and Hindu leaders and prompted a fierce debate that has dominated the front pages of national newspapers across India.
The fatwa ordered Imrana Ilahi, 28, to separate from her husband and treat him as her son.
"She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law, and it nullifies her marriage," said Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric at the theological school. He said it made no difference whether -(censored)- . The village council then decreed that Mrs. Ilahi would have to marry her father-in-law.
Feminists and liberal Muslims reacted with fury, staging nationwide street protests.
But Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh on June 29 supported the fatwa, saying: "The decision of the Muslim religious leaders in the Imrana case must have been taken after a lot of thought. ... The religious leaders are all very learned and they understand the Muslim community and its sentiments."
The rape took place June 4 in the village of Charthawal in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, when Mrs. Ilahi's husband, Noor Ilahi, was away.
When Mr. Ilahi, a brick kiln laborer, learned of the attack, the village court instructed him to divorce his wife.
But Mr. Ilahi, 32, told his wife: "My father is dirty and you are clean. I still love you and I cannot desert you." Mrs. Ilahi, with her husband and five children, sneaked out of Charthawal and took shelter in Kukra, the village of her parents.
Mrs. Ilahi received another rude shock when the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the country's most influential Muslim umbrella organization, endorsed the punishment meted out by Darool Uloom Deoband.
"The fact that the woman was 'used' by her husband's blood relative makes her [unclean] for her husband and there is no way she can be allowed to live with him," the law board said.

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050...1059-2058r.htm

**Rose** · 07-21-2005

Originally Posted by YamahaR1

Just wondering what my muslim friends think of this. I know many here don't read "western" news but this article was posted today and it certainly peaked my interest. From this story, it seems that the muslim world is divided. What are your thoughts?

***********************

Victim ordered to wed rapist
By Shaikh Azizur Rahman
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 19, 2005

BOMBAY -- Hard-line Islamic clerics in a northern Indian village have declared that a woman's 10-year-old marriage was nullified when her father-in-law raped her -- and ordered the mother of five to marry the rapist.
The fatwa, or religious edict, was issued by Darool Uloom Deoband, South Asia's most powerful Islamic theological school known for promoting a radical brand of Islam that is said to have inspired the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The decision has outraged both Muslim and Hindu leaders and prompted a fierce debate that has dominated the front pages of national newspapers across India.
The fatwa ordered Imrana Ilahi, 28, to separate from her husband and treat him as her son.
"She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law, and it nullifies her marriage," said Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric at the theological school. He said it made no difference whether -(censored)- . The village council then decreed that Mrs. Ilahi would have to marry her father-in-law.
Feminists and liberal Muslims reacted with fury, staging nationwide street protests.
But Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh on June 29 supported the fatwa, saying: "The decision of the Muslim religious leaders in the Imrana case must have been taken after a lot of thought. ... The religious leaders are all very learned and they understand the Muslim community and its sentiments."
The rape took place June 4 in the village of Charthawal in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, when Mrs. Ilahi's husband, Noor Ilahi, was away.
When Mr. Ilahi, a brick kiln laborer, learned of the attack, the village court instructed him to divorce his wife.
But Mr. Ilahi, 32, told his wife: "My father is dirty and you are clean. I still love you and I cannot desert you." Mrs. Ilahi, with her husband and five children, sneaked out of Charthawal and took shelter in Kukra, the village of her parents.
Mrs. Ilahi received another rude shock when the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the country's most influential Muslim umbrella organization, endorsed the punishment meted out by Darool Uloom Deoband.
"The fact that the woman was 'used' by her husband's blood relative makes her [unclean] for her husband and there is no way she can be allowed to live with him," the law board said.

http://www.washtimes.com/world/20050...1059-2058r.htm

Lack of KNOWLEDGE is certainly very dangerous in the realm of law, justice and equity and if this article reflects what truely happened then my heart goes out to the victim and her family inchAllah.

Ok since when does the victim become unclean for being raped by a dirty old man astaghfirullah? If her father-in-law was a woman he would have been killed by now for shaming the honor of the family (which incidentally is haram). The law of hirabah is surely applicable in this case which I understand means the death penalty because it is a melicious attack on a happily married woman with a motive to harm and terrorise her in order to satisfy some dirty mans carnal desires. If the village council decreed that the victim marry her rapist then we should all be very worried about the kind of people who think they are qualified to issue willy nilly fatwas left right and centre and lead our ummah. As for preaching a radical brand of Islam, is not radicalism and extremism against the middle way recommended by the prophet sws???? Darool Uloom is clearly trying to take the law of almighty Allah into their own hands and subjective rulings of this nature both legitimise incest and mock our our just deen which will leave no one unaccounted for.

Wa Allahu 'allam

:sister:

**Khattab** · 07-21-2005

Originally Posted by YamahaR1

My views do not necessitate that all religions are false. My views are that there is no religion that is "better" than another. From my stand point, as long as someone is living a life to the best of their ability in a way that God would be pleased, then that is good enough for me. I don't care if they call themselves a muslim, a buddhist, a christian, etc. I don't even think that someone has to be a subscriber to an organized religion to live a life that God would approve of. You can be a "good" person without being part of a particular religion. I know that prayer said 5 times a day is something that muslims participate in. I know that many Catholics say the rosary daily.

Hi Yahmaha,

With you being a christian, you say no religion is better than another. As muslims we beleive that the Torah and Gospel where books revealed by Allah (SWT) but have undergone changes by the hands of men, as for the Hindhu scriptures and Buddhist scriptures we cannot say yes they where books of God or no they werent books of God as we have not been informed regarding them.

But as a christian do you then accept people setting up partners with God? As the first commandmenet says "I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt not have other gods besides me." Or do you accept people making up images of God and worshipping them besides the Almighty "Thou shalt not make for thyself any graven image." Surley you must be going against the fundamentals of your christian beleifs if you accept and condone such things?

Originally Posted by YamahaR1

I've seen plenty of people who call themselves "religious"....they show up for church services, etc. and then walk right out and start sinning again.

Is this not got something to do with the christian doctrine though, where Jesus (PBUH) died for the sins? If they accept Jesus (PBUH) as there saviour then they are "saved". So they feel they can do what they like as they dont have anything to answer for.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1

Then, I've seen others who have never entered a church, who may not pray regularly, who bend over backwards to help their fellow man. They show love, not hate to those who are different. They are honest, law abiding citizens. I just don't buy that God does not look upon them with pride and love for the good works that they do simply because they do not follow some religious edict to the letter of the law. And, because I believe we are all God's children and that God is forgiving, I simply do not buy that God would ever turn away anyone simply because they were/were not part of organized religion in some form or fashion.

What good is there work if they deny Allah (SWT) and set partners up with him? It is the islamic beleif the people who after recieving the clear message of Islam ie oneness of God Almighty, he alone is to be worshipped without any partner, beleif in all the prophets and the last and final prophet Muhammed (SWH), and the revealed books and the Qur'an as the final and last message to mankind, if after the message they reject it and continue in disbeleif they will have no reward in the hereafter. If they do good deeds (ie helping people etc) after this they will only get there reward in this life, even after rejecting God Almighty they will still get there just reward as Allah (SWT) is just, but they will be among the losers in the hereafter.

God Almighty is most merciful and forgiving to those who repent and amend there ways but severe in punishment. But mostly he is just and not one soul will be dealt with unjustly on the Day Of Judgement, I may be wrong but your idea of God does not seem very just and fair, and seems to go against your own chrisitian beleifs and is what you want to beleive.

"Then seest thou such a one as takes as his god his own vain desire? Allah has, knowing (him as such), left him astray, and sealed his hearing and his heart (and understanding), and put a cover on his sight. Who, then, will guide him after Allah (has withdrawn Guidance)? Will ye not then receive admonition?"

Peace

**YamahaR1** · 07-21-2005

You're right....I do not speak for all christians in my belief set. I'm somewhat of an independent thinker in the political realm and the religious realm. For that reason, you can not read my opinions and think they are representative of all Christians.

The way I see it is that I need to be concerned with how I live my life and ensure that it is led in a way that God would be pleased. It is not my place to pass judgement or ensure that others are not doing the same.......other than my children, of course. It is my job as a parent to cultivate their morality.

I believe in the 10 commandments and in particular, "I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt not have other gods besides me." And, that is for me and my family. I simply do not apply that for others. You know the old saying, "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink." Well, I feel like that where religion is concerned. Accepting Jesus as your savior and beleiving in God is a very personal choice. I can not force someone to do that, nor would I attempt to. All I can do is live my life according to what God has commanded and help others along the way if I can.

We are all personally responsible for the choices we make in life and we should all have the freedom to make choices as long as those choices do not in any way infringe on someone else's freedoms or personal liberties.....this applies with religion as well as anything else from my standpoint.

**Ansar Al-'Adl** · 07-21-2005

Originally Posted by YamahaR1

My views do not necessitate that all religions are false. My views are that there is no religion that is "better" than another.

Isn't it obvious? When you say that no religion is "better" than another, that automatically means you believe that there is no true religion. because if one religion was true, then it would automatically be superior to all others because it is correct.

To say that all religions, with all their conflicting beliefs, are the same is to say they are all false. If you truly believe that Christianity is the true path of God, then that means Christian beliefs are true. If Christian beliefs are true, every belief that contradicts them is false. It is not possible to think that conflicting sets of beliefs can be true at the same time. Only one set is true.

There can only be ONE true religion. Its your task to find it.

Your other comments about what God desires touch on the purpose of life. If you wish to learn about the purpose of life, please listen to this fascinating audio clip of a New Muslim:
http://english.islamway.com/bindex.p...5&scholar_id=7

Listening to the above will greatly aid you in understanding why Muslims view the world in the way they do.

**Muezzin** · 07-21-2005

I think Yamaha was trying to get at the principle expounded by Joseph Campbell - 'All religions are true, but none of them are literal'

This does not necessarily represent my own view, I'm just trying to clarify.