A R C H I V E S
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
| Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 05/27/02 at 12:24:22 |
| Question #10089: Husband asking his wife how she disposed of the mahr Does the husband have the right to question his wife and ask her how she spent the mahr that belongs to her? My husband is asking about every part of my mahr, great and small, because he divided the mahr into two parts, one part for me and the other to prepare for marriage and buy clothes. Answer Praise be to Allaah. It is not permissible for a husband to question his wife about the mahr which he gave to her, because this is her right and a debt on him which he has to give to her. In return for this small amount of money which Allaah has granted to the woman, the right of qiwaamah (being in charge, being the protector and maintainer) is taken from her and given to her husband. So his spending on her is in return for something very precious and the mahr and spending on her is in return for that qiwaamah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means” [al-Nisa’ 4:34] Imam al-Tabari (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Men are the ones who are in charge of their womenfolk, disciplining them and making them fulfil their obligations towards Allaah and towards themselves. ‘Because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other’ means, because Allaah has given men an advantage over their wives because of the mahr which they give to them, and because they spend on them from their own money, and they take care of them. This is the way in which Allaah has caused them to excel them. Hence they are in charge of them and women are expected to obey their husbands. Tafseer al-Tabari, 5/57 So the mahr is the woman’s right, just as qiwaamah is the man’s right. Just as she should not disobey him because of that qiwaamah, so he should give her her rights. Men must fear Allaah with regard to their wives’ mahr and give them their mahrs. For women are weak, so men should give them their rights. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “O you who believe! Fulfil (your) obligations” [al-Maa'idah 5:1] And indeed the marriage contract is one of the most important contracts which the Muslims are obliged to fulfil. It was narrated that ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The conditions which most deserve to be fulfilled are those by means of which intimacy becomes permissible to you.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2520; Muslim, 2542) So long as a woman has taken possession of this money in this manner, her husband has no right to force her to spend it in a particular way, unless she is spending it on something haraam, in which case he has the right to stop her from spending it in haraam ways. Our advice to you is to deal with your husband gently and calmly when he questions you about the mahr, lest a dispute concerning this matter be the cause of letting the Shaytaan come between you, especially when you are at the beginning of your married life, which should be based on harmony and tolerance on both sides towards any shortcomings or transgressions on the other side. We ask Allaah to decree for you a happy life filled with obedience to Allaah and following his laws. And Allaah knows best. http://www.islam-qa.com |
| NS |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/27/02 at 13:20:45 |
| big sigh. ok, brother kashif, i'm going to have to ask you to address some quite, um, troubling phrases in here. (remember that my only exposure to islam is through individuals, what i can find to read, and how i observe people in public. i have been in the home of devout muslims once only. i have been in the homes of variably practicing muslims numbers of times....) these things sound not right to me, at best very questionable. i need to you to exert your greatest patience with me to respond, and i think you know that i mean no harm, but i need to understand these ideas. (i think you know i'm looking for reference only to the absolute human condition of personal interaction - i'm not at all interested in how these things may or may not be practiced in other religions. that is irrelevant to me.) i'm sorry if i'm putting you on the spot here. i've become aware of my conscious choice not to put people on the spot, so as to avoid getting answers that don't answer, and leaving all the, um, troublesome question answering to those i "harass" more regularly, outside here. but if i'm going to spend time here, i need to make better use (more serious use) of that time to get everything out of being here that i can. here we go (eeeeekkkk!): because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other, > the explanation offered here is vague and unsatisfactory. an explanation of a use of language can't be completely in terms of that use, or it's only a, um, circular endeavor. disciplining them > unless this is intended as a mutual disciplining, i can't see how it's honorable. in fact, i can't even imagine an instance in which any male would ever in his mind think that he had a "right" to discipline not just ANY female, but his beloved and precious wife. it goes against the grain of how people wedded to each other would treat each other in their respect for one another. For women are weak > ok, this is too ridiculous for me to even say anything about, i'll just let you explain it to me. men can't "give" women their rights. women HAVE their rights in a just world exactly as men have their rights, and EVERYBODY has their rights. i'm really most interested in how you would explain this personally, how you see rights of people in the world, why ithis would suggest that unless those men (husbands) "gave" their wives rights, they would have none. ok, that's enough - i'm not even going to see if there's anything else..... mwishka (considering going incognito here to ask such questions in the future... :( ) |
| 05/27/02 at 23:32:30 |
| mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 05/27/02 at 19:19:24 |
| assalaamu alaikum Right lets see what you've got here... Re: One of them to excel the other. I'm certain that there have been numerous discussions about this verse on the board before, so perhaps someone can help me in finding them? Also, please refer to Dr Jamal Badawi's discussion on Gender Equity in Islam at: http://www.jannah.org/genderequity/ One of the explanations i've been given is that (and i'm assuming here the traditional family structure, i.e. the husband being the bread-winner) that it refers to the rights and obligations that members of the family unit have upon each other. There are basic guidelines laid down in the Qur'an and the Sunnah as to what rights everyone receives from each other, and then there are other rights that are specific to a particular relationship, e.g. husband-wife, parent-child, etc. Now, the greater a responsibility that is shouldered by a person, the hmmm... how shall i put it ... the more are the rights they get. Now, in the traditional family unit, the maintainer and protector of the family unit is the husband. Thus, this gives him a superiority with regards to rights that he is entitled to from the other members because of the duties he discharges for the benefit of the rest of the family. Similarly, the wife/mother has a superiority over the children. She is the one who carries them for 9 months, gives birth to them, feeds them, is the most concerned for their welfare and is their first school, and as a result she is entitled to receiveing a superior level of rights from the children above and beyond what are given to other humans. Am i making sense? Re: disciplining You may have jumped the gun here. In Islam there is a system of 'disciplining' and it has three levels. (NB the examples i'll provide here assume the woman as the person at fault - but this doesn't mean that men are never at fault; probably, they're more often at fault than their wives). 1) An admonition. In the Qur'an, we find: "As to those women on whose part you find ill-conduct, admonish them." [Qur'an 4:34] Lets say that the wife does something disrespectful of the husband. He may admonish her saying "Darling, Allah requires the husband and wife to be respectful of each other, so please keep your duty to Him and be respectful." Perhaps one of the married people can give a more real-life dialogue. *smile* In addition, Muslim scholars state that it is to be an admonition that is gentle, mild, and heart-softening which replaces "estrangement with love, closeness, compassion, mercy and togetherness." 2) Boycotting or avoidance. In the Qur'an we find: "...refuse to share their beds." [Qur'an 4:34] Lets say that the admonition doesn't work, then one can move to this next step. And it is "the husband not sleeping in the same bed with his wife, and his not speaking to her for less than three days, or his not having any contact or dealing with her whatsoever." It may take the form of them sharing the bed, but him avoiding her whilst there. Or it may take te form of him not talking to her. A further note is that it is avoidance in the bed, and not avoidance in the house or in front of the family, children, etc. Again this is only to be practised as a form of disciplining the wife if she falls short of her duties, whether that is to her family or to Allah. That is, people read stuff like this and assume that the Muslim men are ingrained to 'discipline' their wives if they don't cook what they told her to. But its not like that at all. He may undertake this type of disciplining because she stopped praying. 3) A light 'beating'. This may just be a bad translation, but it seems to me that the beating is a thing more symbolic than anything else. It is a non-violent beating that leaves no marks, or any injury or anything like that. And my book actually says that the tools with which to perform the beating should be something like a handkerchief or a siwaak (a toothstick - have you seen one of those?) or something like that. Unless you've learnt how to use these in a deadly form in Wing-Chun classes, i don't know what else to add to this section. *smile* Re: Women being weak To tell you the truth, i don't know exactly what is meant by this. But my guess is that women - by themselves - may exhibit some weakness with regards to being able to demand their rights. Lets say that the man wants his wife to do something for him, and she refuses to. It may be something big, it may be something small. If she refuses, the man due to his different nature, and stronger physical build may force her to do it whether she likes it or not. He may even be petty enough to hit her over it - which is unislamic of course. Now, lets consider the opposite. What if the wife sets her mahr to $2000, and the man doesn't give it. What will she do? Will she beat him up? Take him to court (which she c/should do in an Islamic society)? She might not be able to do anything even if she wants to, or she might even say "what the hell, let him keep it." In the early days of this board, there were numerous women who posted reports of this happening in their relationships and they took the latter course. And i don't think the above is specific to Muslim relationships either, it applies to all relationships regardless of religion or any other distinction. Re: Rights The way the text has been written assumes some background information dealing with the essence of rights in the Islamic religion and where they come from. It hasn't been included otherwise it would make that particular fatwa just too long to read. In Islam, rights are accorded by Allah alone. It is He who has accorded the husband certain rights, the wife certain rights, parents certain rights, children certain rights, even rights for animals and the environment, etc/ So when the text says "so he should give her her rights" it means that He should give her her rights which Allah has accorded her and made an obligation upon him! The unspoken message here is that if he does not give her the rights that he is obligedto, then she will be accorded a reward out of his own store of good deeds on the D/Judgment as a recompense for not fulfilling her right. But the essence of the message with regards to rights is that you really only claim a right as something you are owed when Allah has accorded you that right. I hope my replies make sense. *smile* Kashif Wa Salaam "Having a woman doesn't make you a husband, because anyone can get a woman. Looking after your woman is what makes you a husband." -- Malcolm X |
| NS |
| 05/27/02 at 19:30:49 |
| Kashif |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| BroHanif |
| 05/27/02 at 19:28:15 |
| [slm] [quote]in fact, i can't even imagine an instance in which any male would ever in his mind think that he had a "right" to discipline not just ANY female, but his beloved and precious wife. [/quote] In Islam the man is the head of the house, he is responsible for the correct tarbiayh and education for his wife, his children and himself. And if the wife needs to be disciplined then so be it. The discipline would be in the accordance of the prophet [saw] who was the most merciful of men to walk this earth. However, this does not mean that the woman can't check the same action for the man. She too has an Islamic duty to generate a house that is based upon the values of Islam and if he errs he needs to be corrected and educated as well. [quote]For women are weak > ok, this is too ridiculous for me to even say anything about, i'll just let you explain it to me. men can't "give" women their rights. women HAVE their rights in a just world exactly as men have their rights, and EVERYBODY has their rights. i'm really most interested in how you would explain this personally, how you see rights of people in the world, why ithis would suggest that unless those men (husbands) "gave" their wives rights, they would have none. [/quote] mwishka, first let me say this world is not just. How can it be just when the ideals of women are presented in a way that they are liberated when they are clearly not and the otherside of the coin is that they are oppressed if they wear the hijaab. Going back a couple of months, Premier Blair and Bush got on the high horse and started to defend the rights of women in Afghanistan saying that the regime was oppressive against women, like they had to be veiled, no jobs were available, education was barred etc etc etc lies were said. However, just recently Premier Blair has just accepted money from a Porn Baron, and you know what the sickening thing is, Blarir said that its ok with his Christian ideas to accept money from a porno baron. A porno baron who deems women as mere sex objects, as mere cattles of sexual pursuits who not only endanger society with his ill tabloid but a whole generation is brought up on vice and illegal sexual activities. Before the arrival of Islam women had few rights if any, it was only during the arrival and the conduct of the beloved prophet [saw] that the rights of women were lifted and placed on higher ground. Insha-allah I will add more soon. Salaams Hanif |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Abu_Hamza |
| 05/27/02 at 22:20:48 |
| Let me take a stab at some of what's bothering you ... [quote author=mwishka link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=0#1 date=05/27/02 at 13:20:45] because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other, > the explanation offered here is vague and unsatisfactory. an explanation of a use of language can't be completely in terms of that use, or it's only a, um, circular endeavor.[/quote] Before I answer your question directly, let me state the verse in question from the Qur'an again. This time though, I'm gonna use the Yusuf Ali translation: "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. " (Surah 4, verse 34). "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women ..." Islam is a very [i]systematic[/i] religion. It creates a system for just about everything! It creates a political system, a judicial system, a moral system, an economic system .. systems within systems! It even builds a clear hierarchy of the society. The human society built from different nations. Different nations built from different communities. Different communities built from different families. And different families built from different individuals. The basic building block of the Islamic society is thus the individual. What this verse is focusing on, however, is the second step up in the hierarchy. And that is .. the building block of a community --- the family! The Islamic view of the family is that of a team, each member of which has certain tasks and responsibilities. Islam encourages the team-members to fulfill their assigned tasks by giving those tasks the rank of "worship!" Thus if the husband does what he's assigned to do, it's considered worship from him. And he is rewarded as such. The same goes for the wife and the children. Now, since the family is looked upon as a team, there has to be someone to coordinate the team - the teamleader. The teamleader does not necessarily have to be the perfect team-member. He just has to be the best among the team-members at running the team, looking after their affairs, and making sure the team is always ready and excited for what it's supposed to be doing. What the Qur'an is saying in this verse is that it is the *man* who is the team-leader of the family. He is given the responsibility by Allah (swt) to maintain, protect and look after the family. The responsibility to make sure that the family's needs are taken care of, that they are well on their way to achieving the purpose of life (uboodiyyah of Allah), and have every resource at their disposal for doing so (livelihood, shelter, basic knowledge, understanding, motivation, etc). But the Qur'an doesn't stop at the appointment of men for this task. It goes a step ahead and explains *why* it has given this daunting responsibility to the man and not to the woman: "... because Allah has given one more than the other, and beause they support them from their means." So the Qur'an gives two reasons for such an appointment: 1. "because Allah has given one (the man) more than the other (the woman)." Yusuf Ali explains what is meant by "more" in his paranthetical note (i.e. strength). That is partially what is meant. Man does have more physical strength than the woman, for example, and that is partially why he is given the task of maintaining the household. But physical strength is not the only reason. Another reason has to do with the man's psychology. The man is a more rational specie than the woman. The women tend to be more emotional, due primarily to their biological make-up. And the use of rationale over emotions is a really important quality for any type of leadership, especially family affairs (please do not see all this as an *insult* to the female gender. it is not meant to be that. these are simple psychological facts, and they, in no way, put the woman down. men are not perfect in any way! remember, we're talking about a specific task here, the task of maintaining the family. and thus we're only looking at those few qualities that are required for this task. there are definitely other qualities, which have nothing to do with maintaining a household, in which women clearly excel over men! but we'll leave that to another thread insha Allah). This is what the first part of the verse says, that men have been given more capabilities than the women to burden that responsibility of taking care of the family. The second part of the ayah gives another reason for the appointment ... 2. "because they (men) support them from their means." In other words, because they spend out from their wealth on the household. Here the ayah adds another responsibility on the shoulder of the man, and then makes it a reason for putting the burden of leadership on the man in the first place - the man *must* spend on the household from his income. In fact, the man must first seek an income for the household. He must win the bread outside. And then he must spend from that wealth on the family. That is made incumbent upon him. Not so on the wife. And thus, he is made the primary caretaker and maintainer of the family. (NB: the wife, in Islam, is allowed to earn an income, but is not required to spend from that income on the family. Although she may, if she wants to). As a footnote to all of the above discussion, it's interesting to note that the ayah is a conditional statement. In other words, the man has to *act* like [i]man[/i] in order to be given the task of qawaamah (caretaker) of the family. If he doesn't act like a man, if he's weak, lazy and a bum; if he gets too emotional too quickly, or doesn't analyze things properly; if he refuses to earn money for the household and be the bread winner for the family; then he's not a *man* in the Qur'anic sense of the word [i.e. rajul]. He's simply a male [dhakar]! And thus, he is *not* apt to be the protector/maintainer of the household. This is because Allah (swt) made this a conditional statement in the Qur'an ... "men are protectors/maintainers of women because Allah has given one more than the other." So if the premise is not there, then what follows the premise doesn't apply. And to put it as one of the famous daa'ees in this country puts it, what makes someone a [i]rajul[/i] (man) is not whether he can grow a beard or the production of testosterone in his body! It's a lot more than that! The rest at another time insha Allah. Gotta go right now. |
| 05/27/02 at 22:29:34 |
| Abu_Hamza |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/27/02 at 22:22:54 |
| oooookkkkkkkkkkkk.............instinct tells me i'd be better off going to my um other sources, of whose level of patience i'm more confident.....but i'll make the effort to stick it out here..... here're the things that are either not clear or i have some, um, uh problems with: they'll just be in the order the answers came back... Thus, this gives him a superiority with regards to rights that he is entitled to from the other members because of the duties he discharges for the benefit of the rest of the family. << ok, now i'm just reading this as a, um, human......is it even POSSIBLE that any individual human could EVER believe they have rights superior to another human?! eh oh. this is not the way i understood islam. i thought it was more similar to the way i look at the world, along the lines of absolute equality for all humans in all situations. hmmm..... guess i didn't understand correctly..... and the idea of rights connected to merit makes me feel pretty uneaaaassssyyy..... oh, two things i'll mention that i AM familiar with that you've mentioned, that i agree with: Before the arrival of Islam women had few rights if any, And because of the nobility of war in Islam, when fought for the sake of Allah (SubHana Wa Ta`ala), those who partake in war are given a very high status and back to my questions: Men possess certain qualities that women don't, and excel in certain qualities that women, in general, lack. <<< i have to honestly say that in my experience i haven't known men to generally excel women in anything except physical strength. (and perhaps beauty, on occasion :D ) women have more stamina, stronger immune systems, can endure more pain, have better analytical reasoning abilities, more patience, stronger nervous systems in general, better ability to organize and plan, ummmm...eh oh that's enough. no, i'm not making those up, just in case you thought i was. and i'm also not trying to be combative, i'm trying to approach this with reason. but i need to understand what it means to those who believe in it wholeheartedly and trust in it as a guiding principle in life. The husband makes sure that the house runs like a harmonious state. <<< abu hamza, i'm sure you realize that rare is the man who is actually the one maintaining harmony within his family. women seem to be ones with the greater skill in this as well. ok, i'll see how well this goes. don't worry if this just seems too bothersome or makes you uncomfortable... i can stick to keeping the difficult and annoying questions out of here..... mwishka |
| 05/27/02 at 22:57:17 |
| mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Abu_Hamza |
| 05/27/02 at 22:30:48 |
| mwishka, i just modified that post of mine for the nth time (hopefully the last time :)) please check to make sure you didn't read something that was not meant to be there ... |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/28/02 at 00:31:49 |
| ok, i'm wincing here, before i even write this... i just re-read all the replies. now i'm going to have to ask you a question that just sticks out in them, and is very obvious, but is neither easily asked nor easily answered, and i'm only asking because the answer i come up with is "no", but.....i don't want that to be the answer and i'm just really let down to find that it is so. but i'm wincing as much because i don't like the answer as because in its shortest one word answer it could be greatly abused----so i don't like to ask those kind of things here..... here goes, the question, the answer, and the opportunity for clarification of the answer: do a husband and wife have equal rights in islam?.....and how can you possibly be telling me that the answer is no!? you're telling me the answer is no, but they DIFFERENT levels of rights and DIFFERENT kinds of rights? ayyyyyyy..... ok, now i'm really really suffering on this one..... |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Abu_Hamza |
| 05/28/02 at 00:46:02 |
| Now I face the difficult choice of responding to the rest of your original post, or the new pionts that you have raised! I guess for the sake of keeping up with the current discussion, I'll skip the original post and discuss what you just wrote ... Before I say anything, it's unfortunate that everything you have quoted was there in my *original* post, which I took down and rewrote completely before putting it back up, and making 20 changes to it later :) So in essence, what I would request to you (again) is to go back and read my revised post and then see if it all makes sense. I admit that the first post was written in haste (it was getting close to maghrib time) and a lot of things that were said were not properly thought out. Even then, some of what you have said deserves a response ... [quote author=mwishka link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=0#5 date=05/27/02 at 22:22:54]Men possess certain qualities that women don't, and excel in certain qualities that women, in general, lack. <<< i have to honestly say that in my experience i haven't known men to generally excel women in anything except physical strength. [/quote] As you will see in my post above, I did not claim that men are superior to women *in all aspects.* There are *some* qualities which are enhanced in men and others that are enhanced in women. By the way, I take exception to what you have said, that the only thing in which men excel is their physical strength?? Please tell me you're joking here! [quote]women have more stamina, stronger immune systems, can endure more pain, [/quote] Agreed. But none of these things have anything to do with maintaining and taking care of a household, do they? Actually, to me they all sound like things that are needed during labor! :o [quote]have better analytical reasoning abilities,[/quote] Hmm. Based on what? My Intro to Psychology book seemed to say otherwise! [quote]more patience,[/quote] Hmm. Again, based on what? If you said forbearance or restraint, I would probably be more willing to agree. [quote]stronger nervous systems in general,[/quote] Hmm. Another quality that probably has more use during child labor than taking care of a household!? [quote]better ability to organize and plan,[/quote] This is very similar to having analytical reasoning capabilities. My response is also similar. Based on what? My Intro to Psychology book seems to say otherwise! Once again, this is not meant to be putting down women (although I should probably return the favor for what you said about us men :)), but just consider PMS for crying out loud. Analytical reasoning? Some women have periods that last a whole week. That's about a 4th of every month. I'm a biochemist, and in all honesty, I don't consider PMS a bad thing at all. It's actually pretty healthy for the woman's body, and very necessary for the role she's supposed to play in society. BUT, when it comes to holding the responsibility for running the family ... it puts a pretty big limitation on the woman. [quote]no, i'm not making those up, just in case you thought i was.[/quote] I'm sure you're not. Why would you be making something up to argue a point if you're here to learn? It's just odd because that's not what they taught us at college. And I'd like to see some evidence for these claims because I thought I went to a pretty presitgious university (regardless of what se7en thinks :P) [quote]The husband makes sure that the house runs like a harmonious state. <<< abu hamza, i'm sure you realize that rare is the man who is actually the one maintaining harmony within his family. women seem to be ones with the greater skill in this as well.[/quote] I *beg* to differ :) Women are the cause of discord in the household more often than not. Ask any person coming from the Eastern part of the world. I don't even need to elaborate on this! But I will anyway ... What you probably should have said is this ... "rare is the man who doesn't fall short of successfully maintaining harmony in his household." Yes, this is true. And more often than not, this happens because of two reasons. One, because of men who think they do not need to listen to what their wives have to say at all, who think they're always right and perfect. It happens because those men are not *real* men [rijaal], but just creatures who produce testosterone in their bodies [dhakar]. OR it happens because the women in the household *refuse* to accept the role that the men have been given in the family, and decide to forcefully take that role upon themselves. This unnaturally forced distribution of the tasks is the other cause of the disharmony that you're talking about. |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Abu_Hamza |
| 05/28/02 at 00:48:17 |
| sheesh, my last post was written before i saw your last post. just to let you know. |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Abu_Hamza |
| 05/28/02 at 00:54:20 |
| [quote author=mwishka link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=0#8 date=05/28/02 at 00:31:49]do a husband and wife have equal rights in islam?[/quote] What gave you the idea that the answer to this question is "no?" Can you elaborate a little bit? The answer to the question is a resounding yes, but with some explanation of course (which I wish you had also given with your resounding "no"). The rights of men and women are not the *same* in a marital relationship. The husband and the wife don't both have identical rights. It's the right of the women to be provided for by the husband, for example. Not so for the husband. It is the right of the man to take on more than one wife at a time. Not so for the wife. And so on. But the rights are equal. They are both to be respected as human beings, loved, cared for, and so on. They both have the basic human rights that anyone has. They both comprise a *team*, remember? And more important than anything else ... they are both equal in the sight of their Lord. Because the only thing that distinguishes us in His Sight is piety, as the Qur'an states pretty emphatically. Not our gender, our ethnicity, skin color, race, etc. |
| 05/28/02 at 00:56:08 |
| Abu_Hamza |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| jaihoon |
| 05/28/02 at 01:33:59 |
| [slm] :) Although not directly related to the topic, a complementary idea... In western culture, men and women are treated the same, WITHOUT considering their physilogical or psychological diffrences. Sich an 'equality' is disrespect for both the genders involved. However, in Islam the rights and DUTIES as well are assigned, wisely assigned, by the Wise Creator, taking into consideration the DIFFERENT nature of both the women. It is man's duty to earn for the family. But the women are the molders of future generation- enculturing the children who shape the future. Until this difference is understood well, confusion is bound to be there. But we should also keep in mind the fact that ''In the year 586 of tha Christian era, a conference was called in Europe to decide whether a woman possessed a soul or not. The conference, however, decided in a too liberal spirit that woman was a portion of humanity and as such possessed a soul. But her sole duty was to serve man'. |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/28/02 at 01:34:27 |
| dear abu hamza, i greatly appreciate the time and effort you've taken to reply to me. unfortunately right now it is so late i should be asleep. so i'll just say that i will get back to you at some point tomorrow. what i said was "i have to honestly say that in my experience i haven't known men to generally excel women in anything except physical strength." which means that on a practical level, in a general way, you can't assign excellence to either. but then i SHOULD have said, "AND ALSO blah blah blah desirable qualities found in women. i can't stay now to say anything more, but....... i do want to say that you made me laugh hysterically when i read this: Analytical reasoning? Some women have periods that last a whole week. :D :D :D i don't understand the connection here...... but i can continue this tomorrow.... (you're a biochemist? then you know that every single symptom of what's referred to as a syndrome is actually easily compensated for by supplementationor dietary correction of to certain nutrients and ions in one's system, and that the need for women to experience this is almost nil - except in the cases of true imbalances due to disease and in a very small number of cases of severe hormonal fluctuations.) ok, no, i do have to say just one last thing about harmony in families. i'm not referring to discord or accord between the spouses, i'm referring to maintaining a well-functioning family unit, including all its members. knowing intimately who is in what state, taking care of them in any states of distress, assuring that all are happy and functioning at their best, and managing the household on all practical levels. we may be referring to different kinds of harmony - i thought you meant keeping the entire function of the family harmonious. i apologize for not being able to adequately answer tonight. mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| AbdulBasir |
| 05/28/02 at 01:42:25 |
| [slm] What follows is my own understanding of some the issues raised and is only a response to the initial post by mwishka. [quote]because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other, the explanation offered here is vague and unsatisfactory. an explanation of a use of language can't be completely in terms of that use, or it's only a, um, circular endeavor. [/quote] The verse which is being referred to [4:34] has already been discussed to a point in some of the earlier posts. The concept of [i]qawaamah[/i] which is the phrase that could be roughly translated as "protectors and maintainers" according to the Yusuf Ali translation of the verse, has also been discussed many times in this board, as well as what exactly consitutes the component of leadership in the [i]qawaamah[/i]. There are a few threads in the past which come to mind, (paging sr. se7en for cross reference :) ) Here is [url=http://www.jannah.org/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl/YaBB.pl?board=sisters&action=display&num=2312]one.[/url] Briefly though, and to add to what has already been said, the man's role as [i]qawwam[/i] is a role of responsibility, not one of superiority. Entailed in the responsibility of [i]qawwamah[/i] is the obligation on the male to protect the interests, security and rights of all those in his family, his wife included, and the responsibility to look after his family. This responsibility is not simply a legal, economic or social one, but a fundamentally spiritual one, for the rewards/punishments in handling this responsibility will be utimately given in the afterlife. As the [i]qawwaam[/i] the man will be responsible [i]before Allah[/i] for all that happened in his family, and in the greater society. He will reap the benefits of the good of his family but he will also be punished for the evils of his family. As the [i]qawwam[/i], the man will be asked first by Allah on the Day of Judgement [i]and[/i] be held accountable first for any oppression, tyranny or ills in the family and greater society. And in actuality, the male role in the family unit as [i]qawwam[/i] does not entitle him to more rights, but rather increases the rights over him by his family. Now taking this into account, refer back to the verse in question (4:34) and Imam Tabari's explanation of the "excellence" in the first post. Now while his explanation may not be sufficient for you as you have stated, perhaps it would be helpful to add more of what Imam Tabari says in his commentary of the Qur'anic verses regarding the qawaamah. We shall, by the permission to Allah, refer to it in due course, but, first permit me to say a few things. At the time this verse was revealed, according to the standards of Muslim nobility and understanding of moral virtues at the time during the time of the Prophet [saw], it was naturally understood by the men that the [i]qawwamah[/i] was not referring to power or authority but rather according to the ideals of nobility and concepts of generosity and kindness. Kindness and generosity were understood to be the imperative quality which defined manhood to these righteous men at the time of the Prophet[saw]. The essence of [i]qawwamah[/i] lies in the ideals of kindness and generosity and these are the ideals which are expected, indeed obligated, by Islam. The actualization of these ideals on the part of the husband in the home helps facilitate the flowering of the family and helps nurture the blooming of the qualities in the wife which elevate and raise the family and greater society to a higher moral and spiritual level. The "excellence" attributed to men in this verse, therefore, is in reference to those ideals of kindness and generosity. Do men excel over women in kindness and generosity? Probably not now, and probably never ever. It could be even argued that these virtues are among those qualities more naturally reflected in women. Now, taking into account verse [4:34], let us refer to [2:228], where Allah says, [i]"And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them. And God is Exalted in Power, Wise.". [/i] This verse answers your earlier concern about a human having rights over another human. According to Islam, the position of humans are equal, except in matters of taqwa (lit. God-fearing, God-consciousness, refer to 49:13) and the basic human rights are equal for everyone. However, in certain situations, the rights are not identical. For example, Islamically, the host has certain rights not given to the guest, just as the guest has certain rights not given to the host. The host has in fact rights over the guest, but the guest has in turn rights over the host. So the rights are equitable, though not necessarily always identical. If one will examine Islamic law, one will see how the rights of the wife and the rights of the husband fall under the same idea. Now, the "degree" that men have over women in [2:228] has been understood and discussed in the same context as the "excellence" in [4:34]. And let us refer to at-Tabari now, for he explains the reason behind the statement about "excellence" in the first post. Yet he also adds to our understanding of this excellence in his discussion of [2:228]. It is explained that the "degree", as it was understood by the men at the time of the Prophet[saw] was in regards to the degree of generosity and kindness, just as the [i]qawwamah[/i] was understood. Moreover, according to at-Tabari, in reports from the companions of the Prophet[saw] themselves, these verses were not implemented and understood as factual or informative statements (i.e men categorically and naturally excel over women) but in reality as a motivation for men to ensure that they fufill their responsibilities of [i]qawwamah[/i], their responsibilities of kindness and generosity, in such a way that their kindness and generosity will exceed women. In other words, it is a motivation to the men to excel over women in kindness and generosity to each other. Reflecting on this changes the way we view this topic dramatically. It is not a case of saying literally and unconditionally that men excel over women. Such a statement is ridiculous to begin with, for we know from our common experiences, as well as the very statements of the Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad [saw] that some men and women have excelled over other men and women. For example we know that women such as Mary and Khadijah RA excelled over men in faith and moral virtues, women such as Aisha RA excelled over men in knowledge and jurisprudence, and women in all fields of human experience, economic, political and social have excelled over groups of men. So to say that men excel over women is an innacurate statement. Allah SWT says: [i]For Muslim men and women,- for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in Charity, for men and women who fast (and deny themselves), for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in God's praise,- for them has God prepared forgiveness and great reward. [/i] If one reflects on this verse [33:35], one will see clearly that the implication behind it is that men and women can both succeed and excel in meeting the moral goals encouraged in that verse. There is no condition or distinction made regarding men or women. And this not what is being said in [4:34] either. If one looks at at-Tabari's explanation in the first post, the excellence is derived from actions that the man does, it is conditional. So the verse is not stating something as an intrinsic fact. Men are to be true men and have been put in a position in all societies to be able to practice the ideals of kindness and generosity towards women (financial and social support is a manifestation of this), the same ideals which define their manhood; and they should in fact exceed women in the practicing of these virtues. So the message behind these verses is both a conditional statement as well as a motivational command to the men of the society. If one looks the Qur'an and the sayings of the Prophet[saw], one will find that the one who is negligent of his right will be the one who is reminded of it. Indeed, that is why laws partly exist in all societies, to remind and command those who deny and do not fulfill their responsibilities and do not establish justice to do those things. If those individuals naturally were reminded and fulfilled their responsibilities, they would automatically do it and be in no need of a laws ordering them to do it. It is for this reason that the commentators of the Qur'an state that there are verses which tell husbands to act better than their wives in virtue and self-sacrifice and verses which tell children to be kind to their parents because they can be on the average negligent in doing so. This is in contrast to wives excelling over their husbands in virtue and parents being kind to their children becuase this already is a natural reality and there is already an intrinsic motivation built in these parties; hence there is no need for explicit laws to be given to command wives and parents to act accordingly in these matters because they are already doing so; unlike with husbands and children. So to sum up, men have been entrusted with responsibility over their family and will be held accountable for them in this world and the next. They have been been put in a position to fulfill this responsibility and must fulfill it with the greatest actualization of the ideals of kindness and generosity intrinsic to these responsibilities. By the way, this is off the topic, but the motivation to the men to excel over the women in virtue is a concept that extends and applies to all humanity. Though we cannot distinguish amongst one another and are equal, all of us should try to excel over one another moral virtue in this world (see [5:51]: "and compete in virtue"). Doing this will bring distinction from Allah (the only one who can distinguish) in the afterlife (see 49:13). [quote]disciplining them > unless this is intended as a mutual disciplining, i can't see how it's honorable. in fact, i can't even imagine an instance in which any male would ever in his mind think that he had a "right" to discipline not just ANY female, but his beloved and precious wife. it goes against the grain of how people wedded to each other would treat each other in their respect for one another. [/quote] I think some of the confusion here might stem from what the author of the fatwa in the first post is referring to in "discipline". Unfortunately he is not here to elaborate. But allow me to speculate that by "discipline" he is not referring to discipline in its definition associated with punishment but rather to discipline defined as the training that is done to correct, educate and perfect the mental faculties and moral virtues and character. This is indeed part of the responsibility of the husband to his wife, to educate and facilitate her efforts in perfecting her faith and actions. This is a form of discipline. Again, it should not have an connotation with superiority. It cannot have any connotation with superiority simply by the fact that the wife also in turn disciplines her husband since she also educates and facilitates his efforts in perfecting his faith and character. The Prophet[saw] said the greatest thing in this world is a "believing woman who helps her husband with is faith" (related in the collections of Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah). He[saw] is speaking of a woman who disciplines her husband, helping in his faith, just as he does to her. The sayings by the Prophet[saw] which speak of this mutual disciplining amongst spouses in the matters of the faith are extensive and numerous, and even talk about the smallest things, such as a wife getting up at night and sprinkling water in his face to wake him up for the night prayer. This is discipline. Indeed, this mutual discipline is among the major reasons why were are instructed to marry. The two join together for the sake of Allah to help one another in becoming better servants to Him. [quote]For women are weak > ok, this is too ridiculous for me to even say anything about, i'll just let you explain it to me. men can't "give" women their rights. women HAVE their rights in a just world exactly as men have their rights, and EVERYBODY has their rights. i'm really most interested in how you would explain this personally, how you see rights of people in the world, why ithis would suggest that unless those men (husbands) "gave" their wives rights, they would have none. [/quote] I think the confusion here lies in the language being used and I think too much is being read into it. Again, this is the language of the author of the fatwa in the first post, and he cannot elaborate for us. But, I think that you have partially answered this concern in your very own statement. Women do have their rights, exactly as men do. These rights are God-given and no one can dispute this. These God-given rights are comprehensively delineated and explained in the body of Islamic law. So women have their rights, just as men. Unfortunately, in human history, and even today, those rights are not fulfilled and enacted much of the time. Moreover, these rights are often transgressed upon by men. Men have not taken these rights away from women because these rights are inherently theirs and no one save Allah can "take" them from them. But men can transgress on them and impede women's ability to actualize those rights. The concept of the "weaker sex" is alien to Islamic thought. The weakness that is discussed in Islamic circles is in men's tendency to exploit and transgress against the rights of those people who [i]appear[/i] to be weak, even when those people are in fact the strength of the society. Historically, and unfortunately, men have been weak in that they have impeded women's ability to fulfill their God-given rights. And women have not, on the average, broken through the transgressions of men, to receive their rights. Men need to stop these transgressions and allow women to naturally actualize thier rights. I believe this is what the author in the first post is meaning. He is saying that women have not broken through the unjust barriers men have constructed between them and their God-given rights. The men must establish justice and break down those barriers they unlawfully put up. Allow a very crude analogy. It's like someone's car gets stolen. The car is that person's, legally and socially. No one would say that unless the thief decided to return the car to the person that person would not have a right to the car which he or she owns. That wouldn't makes sense. Moreover, if the thief realizes the errors of his ways and decides to return the car, no one would say that he "gave" the car to the owner. It was the owner's car to begin with! What the shaykh in the first post is saying basically to the brothers is to return the stolen car and avoid eternal punishment! :) ***I hope I didn't confuse things too much with this post. If so, please disregard it! The above is all my own personal understanding of the issues being discussed. Much of it is a weak attempt to relate some of the things I've heard from people and lectures. If it is wrong in any way, please forgive me and may Allah grant me the proper understanding. I think it is difficult to discuss all the issues here adequately, simply because you could write volumes and volumes on these issues. Fortunately there are some good threads in the past that should be helpful (paging se7en again) and good resources on jannah.org also. [slm] |
| 05/28/02 at 02:26:28 |
| AbdulBasir |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| eleanor |
| 05/28/02 at 04:16:39 |
| [slm] first off, I generally don't like to intrude in threads in this folder, but I heard about this thread and wanted to see what it was all about.. The only thing I'd like to add, to mwishka, is that back in the "olden days" I couldn't understand this concept either - believing as I did back then that men and women were equal in *every* facet, and that neither was superior over the other. The magic words that I learned on this board were "equal but not the same", meaning that both share equality, while having their own respective roles in society. The release that I felt as I read these words was immense. Having spent all the years of marriage resisting, trying to assert myself, to be someone that I didn't need to be; the relief that came with realising that I was perfectly allowed to take it easy on myself and to pass the responsiblity over was so sweet. So basically what I am trying to say, is that in Islam, the woman should take advantage of the fact that Allah in his wisdom, has created her differently to the man, and that he has ordained a place in society for the woman which is best suited to her needs and requirements. For the first time in my life I was perfectly content to be a woman, and not to continually strive to emulate a man. wasalaam eleanor |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| jaihoon |
| 05/28/02 at 04:36:26 |
| [quote] Having spent all the years of marriage resisting, trying to assert myself, to be someone that I didn't need to be; the relief that came with realising that I was perfectly allowed to take it easy on myself and to pass the responsiblity over was so sweet. For the first time in my life I was perfectly content to be a woman, and not to continually strive to emulate a man. [/quote] Well said sis eleanor! The whole point of gender clash is when the individual 'attempts to be someone that he/she didn't need to be'. It is unfortunate that today's ppl mold their lifestyle to conform the 'normalcy' level dictated by the materialistic world. Thus we have clashes/confusion when it comes to gender roles, eating out, fashion wear etc. Some time back I had witten an article (already posted on this board) about women's upliftment issue. And I think it eclipsed sis eleanor's point 'of the misconcept of emulating a man'. Uplifting the Female, without dumping her status Among the most intensely discussed issues of today is the upliftment of women. The issue has attracted attention from all walks of life, creating both controversies and emotional response. The basic problem facing this is the absence of an exact solution. Due to cultural variations in different parts of the world, each society requires a unique treatment of uplifting its womenfolk. From time immemorial, women have been subdued in one form or other by the society dominated by men. The Roman law, which was model for many modern European nations, gave woman no right in property. 'In the year 586 of the Christian era, a conference was called in Europe to decide whether a woman possessed a soul or not. The conference, however, decided in a too liberal spirit that woman was a portion of humanity and as such possessed a soul. But her sole duty was to serve man'. In accordance with the victory of materialism, woman of the present is also utilized by the male-dominated world as an object of material gains only. As a person, she has not received the attention she deserves. To add to this problem, the modern media has contributed to her identity crisis. She is forced to take up the profession as dictated by the society. In the fight for equality, she has become close to man in independence with respect to income and living. But psychologically, she is still ruled by the dictates of a patriarchal world. Thus the issue of upliftment of women has taken serious turns, some of which that were never expected even by the feminist movement. The important question is whether the upliftment of women should be done regardless of her psycho-physiological nature or without any such considerations. Some countries provide special reservations to women in job opportunities. They also enjoy a certain provision in political institutions of the country. But despite such concessions, ladies produce little results. They are not actively involved in the decision making process, whether at home or office. Although women have maintained a better career track record in the West, very few top companies have female executives. This indirectly exposes the real nature of modern civilization. And in spite of the hue and cry about women's rights, the harassment at workplaces is on the rise. Therefore upliftment should not be a mere legislative exercise. It is in fact to teach 'Her' the real value of her own self as an individual. She herself has to discover her own position and honor. From the land of whims and fancies, she has to migrate to the land of action and spiritual awakening. Her upliftment lies inside her, not in the hands of governments and media. She should rise above the status of a mere 'object of desire' to a respected and honored individual. Material upliftment alone is not sufficient for this. A purified heart also plays a cruicial role. http://www.jaihoon.com/egoptics/uplift.htm |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Dawn |
| 05/28/02 at 15:20:10 |
| [quote author=mwishka link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=0#7 date=05/28/02 at 00:31:49]ok, i'm wincing here, before i even write this... i just re-read all the replies. now i'm going to have to ask you a question that just sticks out in them, and is very obvious, but is neither easily asked nor easily answered, and i'm only asking because the answer i come up with is "no", but.....i don't want that to be the answer and i'm just really let down to find that it is so. but i'm wincing as much because i don't like the answer as because in its shortest one word answer it could be greatly abused----so i don't like to ask those kind of things here..... here goes, the question, the answer, and the opportunity for clarification of the answer: do a husband and wife have equal rights in islam?.....and how can you possibly be telling me that the answer is no!? you're telling me the answer is no, but they DIFFERENT levels of rights and DIFFERENT kinds of rights? ayyyyyyy..... ok, now i'm really really suffering on this one..... [/quote]Please don't wince and please do keep asking!!!! You aren't the only one struggling with this!!!! (OK, there are at least two of us. I can't promise more.) Dawn |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/28/02 at 20:59:20 |
| wow wow wow i'm going to have to be really organized here, because i wouldn't want to see this turn into a tit for tat kind of discussion. i hope to feel i have complete answers to my questions and a better understanding of the things i asked about by the time this winds down. so i will do everything i can to see that things progress in that way... (poor brother kashif, look what i got you into the middle of, with your innocent article...... ;) ) ok let's see: (not in order of posts this time, sorry) 1. sis eleanor: i understand exactly what you're saying, but it's just kind of against my nature to take advantage of situations, even one such as that. it seems almost like an inappropriate luxury, to turn over very basic responsibilities and expect someone to carry them out for you..... i'll have to think about this idea some more. if it were instead a situation in which i could indulge my own desire (and tendency) to offer such luxury to one whom i had wed, perhaps i could permit the idea..... your take on this is somewhat intriguing, but still alien to me.. 2. abu hamza: But none of these things have anything to do with maintaining and taking care of a household, do they? Actually, to me they all sound like things that are needed during labor! hmmm.....you have a very biological take on the world, eh? actually, you are the person i least want to engage in a point by point duel (since you chose to view my comments so piece by piece), so i'm going to try to wrap up most of what i COULD reply to you in just a few statements. i realized that i just don't know what you mean by running a household. since you don't, for example, see having a strong immune system (meaning you will not get sick as much as other people, so you will be able to take care of them, especially your children, when they are sick) as critical to KEEPING a household running, i'm not sure we're even considering the same definition at all. i really don't want to get into comparing qualities. and, no bro, i'm not kidding - in my experience i have never known men who could do things "better" than me except things that involved muscular strength. are you saying that's unusual? or is it perhaps wrong, somehow to you? maybe if i thought hard i'd remember some other things, but they don't come readily to mind. i am NOT saying anything here about anybody being better than anyone else, so i hope you aren't mistakenly hearing that. the phrase said "excel", and that's what i found myself confused about. i can't see how women or men could be said to excel the other entire gender in things...... (p.s. textbooks in the humanities, including the social sciences, are quite variable. the textbook i used for an introductory psychology class was so riddled with false information, flawed studies, inaccurate interpretations of studies it discussed, and slanted views on things, that i wouldn't use it as a reference for much of anything except as a glossary. i'd guess yours is similar. the humanities are notorious for getting stuck on "seminal studies", especially ones connected to iconoclastic figures in a field, and they maintain these as quintessential long beyond their true functional lifespan.) wow, the time - uh oh have to run back to my lab. no proofreading happening here, and i'm not done, but will put this much up as is...... mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Dawn |
| 05/29/02 at 06:28:28 |
| [quote author=mwishka link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=15#17 date=05/28/02 at 20:59:20] 1. sis eleanor: i understand exactly what you're saying, but it's just kind of against my nature to take advantage of situations, even one such as that. it seems almost like an inappropriate luxury, to turn over very basic responsibilities and expect someone to carry them out for you..... i'll have to think about this idea some more. if it were instead a situation in which i could indulge my own desire (and tendency) to offer such luxury to one whom i had wed, perhaps i could permit the idea..... your take on this is somewhat intriguing, but still alien to me..[/quote]Yea, someone else who feels the same way! I thought I was alone in this! [quote] i really don't want to get into comparing qualities. and, no bro, i'm not kidding - in my experience i have never known men who could do things "better" than me except things that involved muscular strength. are you saying that's unusual? [/quote] I'll second mwishka on this one too, in general. And even on the strength thing, being quite tall and athletic myself, and having associated with many other such women, I can assure you that the differences in muscular strength are true only on average. (I have played b-ball with women who are far stronger than the average male. Granted, they are far from average for women, in terms of strength, but that does not change the fact that they are still women! ;)) And am I correct in assuming that the previous posts have been referring to the "average" or "typical" man or woman, if such personages can indeed be defined? Now, on a side note, [quote author=AbdulBasir link=board=bro;num=1022516662;start=15#13 date=05/28/02 at 01:42:20] Now, the "degree" that men have over women in [2:228] has been understood and discussed in the same context as the "excellence" in [4:34]. And let us refer to at-Tabari now, for he explains the reason behind the statement about "excellence" in the first post. Yet he also adds to our understanding of this excellence in his discussion of [2:228]. It is explained that the "degree", as it was understood by the men at the time of the Prophet [saw] was in regards to the degree of generosity and kindness, just as the qawwamah was understood. Moreover, according to at-Tabari, in reports from the companions of the Prophet [saw] themselves, these verses were not implemented and understood as factual or informative statements (i.e men categorically and naturally excel over women) but in reality as a motivation for men to ensure that they fufill their responsibilities of qawwamah, their responsibilities of kindness and generosity, in such a way that their kindness and generosity will exceed women. In other words, it is a motivation to the men to excel over women in kindness and generosity to each other. [/quote] Now this is the general type of explanation/background information I have been trying to find, and not just on this topic, but on all of the Qur'an. Is this author's material online? Have I just overlooked it somewhere? Does the author give similar insights for the rest of the Qur'anic material? And is it in English? |
| 05/29/02 at 08:37:22 |
| Dawn |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| eleanor |
| 05/29/02 at 09:09:44 |
| [slm] Maybe I am bad at articulating myself.. but I think I didn't quite get across what I was trying to say ::) Basically, I haven't given away any sort of basic responsiblity. I currently work, as does my husband, our money goes into a joint account. The relief that I am talking about is kind of like a "back up" in case.. In case someday I decide I hate my job, or I would get more fulfillment staying at home. The way is free for me to pursue career if I want, the way is free for me to study if I want, the way is free for me to have a dozen kids and to raise them if I want - don't you see it? A muslim woman has no doors closed to her, because of financial problems, or because of "what society expects from a woman in the 21st century" --> ie. that she juggles kids and career and gets left behind in the process. Now we are back to the old question which has been discussed in the Akhwat section, the big "R" - responsibility - what does this mean and why does the husband get it all... Check out the other thread for details, and brothers are welcome to read it through too of course ;) [url=http://www.jannah.org/cgi-bin/madina/YaBB.pl?board=sis;action=display;num=1018978897] Man the head honcho??[/url] wasalaam eleanor |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 05/29/02 at 10:49:10 |
| ok, i kind of don't like the way this is going.......i had no intention of making anyone feel defensive, and i don't seem to be able to ask my questions or respond to people in a way that makes things perfectly harmonious and mere intellectual exchange, so i'm, um, headin for the hills at this point. thank you sis eleanor and sis dawn for joining in, and thank you to all the brothers who took their time to try to clear this up for me. brother abdul basir, your comments greatly helped. i've been reading here for a while, so i've read all the older threads referred to, and if they had answered my questions i wouldn't have brought them up here. i feel like i'm just beating my head against a brick wall, and i am certain that many of you are not at all convinced that it is the wall and not my head that's made of brick. ;) thanks for your efforts. mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Ruqayyah |
| 06/03/02 at 00:46:32 |
| [slm] On an interesting side note, women really are more emotional than men b/c of the simple fact that they have more estrogens than testosterone in their body. We learned in school that men and women who are transexual (astagfirallah) and who take hormones to change, feel the difference. The men who take estrogens cry more and the women who take testosterone don't cry nearly as much anymore. I know that I am definitely much more sensitive to things in that PMS stage, and will cry for no apparent reason- i think that's pretty common, and not only seen w/ women w/ severe hormonal imbalances. [wlm] Ruqayyah |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| mwishka |
| 06/03/02 at 12:49:47 |
| sis ruqayyah, oh no, i didn't say women don't experience the effects of these hormonal fluctuations in their pre-menstrual time period, what i said is that for these symptoms to be out of hand is almost always unnecessary. two little corrections will eliminate any extreme changes in almost all women: no salt for a week before, and 25mg of B6 for 3-5 days before. i've seen the difference myself, though mostly i don't have extreme reactions to the change in blood levels of the hormones. you will most likely be amazed at how "stable" you feel just from taking the B6, if you generally feel "unstable" then. you'll need to buy B6 separately, since B complexes don't have near this level included. but, i also want to say a tiny bit about crying: being able to cry is not a bad thing. NOT being able to cry, whether you are female or male, IS a bad thing. ok, so people who know me know i am indeed the "sensitive girl" i jokingly referred to myself as somewhere - yep i cry at pain, suffering, torture, cruelty, harm to animals, children and adults, sometimes more than other people. but it doesn't interfere with my life, and lets me know my heart isn't dead and that i'm able to feel for lots of people besides just my own little self. and i recall some story of a wise man - one of the sahib, maybe? someone will know - who was known to cry openly and often as he contemplated god. and this story was not written to say that this was bad or undesirable, it was written to say that the rest of us could only hope to be as sensitive as this man. so if you're a man, let yourself cry - be alive. if you're a woman and you don't want to have your crying or other reactions to your own body be out of your control, take action and put them under your control. and if you're a man OR a woman and you have male children, don't ever admonish them for crying - be a lot wiser and kinder and more just than that, figure out what they're reacting to, and they might be right in crying while you might be wrong in telling them not to. and if you somehow judge their crying (including female children) to be unreasonable, and decide that it's out of fear or anything else you would call a weakness, well, then that is your responsiblity as a parent. your children are entrusted to you and they should not have to feel fear unnecessarily - if they do you need to help them, go deep inside them and fix them up. make them strong through your love and example. don't let them be afraid. but don't teach them that dry eyes are the only good way for eyes to be, either. mwishka |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| humble_muslim |
| 06/05/02 at 12:34:35 |
| [slm] Mwishka, I'm very happy that you are trying to understand Islam, may Allah SWT guide you and bring you into our fold, you would be such an AWESOME resource for us ! I think you should look at the very first point in this thread. When a woman has money, it is hers 100%. No ifs, buts, etcs. When a man has money, he MUST spend it on his family or he will be sinful. Now as a married man, I know which one sounds better to me ! I was also reading somewhere that a man cannot go out to enjoy himself and leave his wife at home WITHOUT HER PERMISSION. Hmm, you guys who play soccer/cricket at the weekend, are you taking the permission ? What I'm trying to say is that men and women have different rights in different situations. Yes, the man is the head of the house, but not in a "dictatorial" way, but a consultative way. The concept of consultation is a VERY important aspect of Islam. When a decsion needs to be made about the house, family, etc., the man MUST consult his wife and, if necessary, even his children before the decision can be made. Hope this helps. |
| NS |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 06/05/02 at 12:57:17 |
| [quote]I was also reading somewhere that a man cannot go out to enjoy himself and leave his wife at home WITHOUT HER PERMISSION[/quote] Woah.. where did you read that? |
| NS |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| humble_muslim |
| 06/05/02 at 13:13:12 |
| [slm] Kashif, you sound scared!! Afraid to give up your freedom ? I think I saw it somewhere on islam-qa.com. |
| NS |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 06/05/02 at 17:55:59 |
| assalaamu alaikum Not a question of being scared, i don't believe its true. Unless you can prove otherwise.... Kashif Wa Salaam |
| NS |
| Re: Don't track her mahr |
|---|
| PeaceSeeker |
| 06/09/02 at 05:26:48 |
| [slm] In the past I've heard a lot of discussions on this very issue of equality of sexes in Islam. But I have to admit I've never read such wonderful views expressed on the issue. It's just amazing to see the level of understanding some have on the subject. Especially, AbdulBasir; yours was most wonderful. There is something I wish we need to keep in mind. In the Quran Allah has very cearly stated that in the sight of God no one is superior to another except in peity(righteousness). Gender, race, color, language etc have no importance, none whatsoever. So a righteous woman is SUPERIOR to a unrighteous man and vice versa. Righteousness is the only recognized superiority in islam. |
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board |