Jump to content
Maniac Muslim Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Siraaj

  • Rank
    The Improbable Unstoppable
  • Birthday 02/16/1978

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Interests
    Saving the world
  1. Check it out and offer your feedback, kthanx http://muslimbestlife.com/blog Siraaj
  2. Siraajoooowww-wahaaja!

  3. The reason we do anything in our religion is because Allah has commanded it. We recognize that: 1. Allah, as our Creator, knows best how he created us, and what roles we are best suited for, our strengths and weaknesses. 2. We also recognize that because Allah knows "everything", he knows how societies will be across generations, and in each generation, how each particular group will be. The reason two women are needed is not necessarily because they are intellectually deficient. In certain types of cases, the testimony of only one woman is required, and her testimony will actually overrule that of a man - why don't we argue that Islam claims men are of a lower intellectual status than women? In other types of cases, their witness and testimony are equal. Forget for a moment you live in the 21st century (which is still grappling with women's rights in the West) and step through each century, and each generation, and each culture in each generation - how often do women participate in the business world relative to men? Very rarely, and there's a reason for it - they've generally been homemakers. Business transactions are not their domain of expertise. Now, why would you want two women instead of one? Let's ask a different question - why do you have witnesses in your business transaction? Very simple - to deal with disputes. We're advised to write down our contracts, but let's keep in mind that having a literate scribe (some were illiterate, if you can imagine that) was a luxury, not a norm. The purpose of witnesses is to keep everyone honest. And even if a physical contract existed, the words used to write the contract could mean or be interpreted differently by different people, so the meaning behind the words can also be specified and witnessed. Now take a particular case - party A brings a witness M1 (male) to the contract signing, party B brings one witness F1 (female). A dispute breaks out and the witnesses are brought forward - now go back in time. Are women as confident then as they are now? They're not. Are they likely to waver or cave in if the other party stridently pushes for their own view or interpretation of the contract? So why the second female witness? If the second female witness believes party A is right, party A wins. If she says party B is right, then she and the other female witness can back one another up, provide support to one another, and stand strong together. And yes, to remind one another in case the other forgets, or wavers, or second guesses herself, or has some mad internal commentary going on that makes her doubt herself - girlfriend is there to support her. Generally speaking, this is how the world still works, with men in one way or another dominating over women. Yes, there's been much in the way of increasing women's rights, but if your view of the world is only the West, it's skewed - what about the rest of the world, now, and in the past, and as well going forward? Islam doesn't make rules for exceptions, it makes rules for the general case, and the exceptions are just that - exceptions. Is pork still forbidden today despite the safety regulations? Do unattractive women still have to wear hijab? There are many questions like this that come up, but before you decide on whether it makes sense or not, always ask yourself to understand how this rule is put into play across time and across cultures and groups in each time frame. When you look at each "inequality", you'll start to find that what appears to be something against women is in reality a protection for them from men. Finally, about women being more emotional than men - isn't that sort of obvious? I think that's sort of the consensus across time and culture Siraaj
  4. Mu'adh, great point - none of us should ever directly review the evidences and think we can derive fiqh from them - when gathering information, we should always look to the opinions of the scholars, and their explanation of such opinions. Siraaj
  5. Salaam alaykum Hamzah, When they say, "The strongest opinion," you may feel free to add the qualifier, "in my humble opinion," meaning, when reviewing the evidences for the issue, this is what the person believed was most correct in the end, but that they can still be wrong, or open to changing their minds. Following a madhab is great if you don't want to get into researching every detail of every fiqh issue, and your time and life is spent taking care of your family, working your job, etc. Not everyone can or should be a student of Islamic knowledge. For those pursuing that route, the traditional methodology is to start by teaching the opinions of madhab without evidences, then to teach the madhab and its evidences, and then to go into comparative fiqh with other madhabs. I think what's really interesting is when you realize within one madhab, there are differences of opinion and using the same usool, a madhab can come to vastly different conclusions (and then you're like, now what do I follow?). If you recently took Precious Provisions with YQ, he often says, "It APPEARS the strongest opinion is," but you're free to disagree with that and follow a legitimate opinion that makes more sense to you based on the desire to please Allah and striving for what Allah wants from you. It is a legitimate concern that people will gravitate towards easier opinions if they are given the option to pick and choose since, "they're all correct," (better stated as, "They are all legitimate to follow," perfection is for Allah, not us humans), but it is equally valid that not all people are the same and if you feel that you can handle it, then do it, but if not, then don't. Siraaj
  6. Well, again, I believe that's up to the woman, not the courts - it's out of their jurisdiction when no state contracts are signed. And I agree, we do have a problem of men taking advantage of sisters in these situations, and we also have examples of it working out - this is no different than monogamous marriage, in many respects, but just because of the many problems and rising divorce rates, we don't knock out monogamous marriage, do we? Siraaj
  7. A woman may choose whatever she considers "adequate" - why are you so intent on limiting the choice? Each woman has her own situation, and the shari'ah is flexible enough to allow her to choose to be in the relationship or not - it's not like a gun is put to her head. Also, you seem to be thinking of this from the perspective of "the West", but after her husband passes on, she has the right to her inheritance, and that's for the Muslim community and her husband to take care of. She can make sure, before marriage, that his will includes her, and her children, and THAT can be legally done, even with the state - there are no limitations on who gets what when you pass away, provided you first pay back your debts. Siraaj
  8. As I wrote earlier: 1. A man is responsible for what he provides, not what the state provides. He is responsible for money and time, not western, secular rights (many of which contravene the rights in the qur'aan and sunnah). 2. A woman entering marriage as a second wife does have risks, and that's for her to decide if she wants to take them. Many unmarried people only see themselves in the picture, but they miss out on divorcees and widows who would rather risk a marriage contract than remain lonely. Siraaj
  9. A man is required to provide from himself, not from the state. What the state provides and allows is one matter, what you are required to provide is something else entirely - a man is not required to give a woman rights that are not hers - an Islamic contract has its own way of dealing with divorce and parental rights. Now, what if the guy is a jerk and doesn't want to comply? That's a risk a second wife takes upon herself, and she ultimately must decide if the person she's dealing with is trustworthy or not to warrant that trust, but to say it blocks one from marrying again is incorrect. Siraaj
  10. I read the discussion, and I bet I can answer all questions really fast without even quoting everyone (because I've seen the discussion so many times): Ayah 4:3 - It's all about marrying widows and orphans 1. It's only talking about orphans. 2. The ayah doesn't even make sense when you say it's only about orphans. If you feel you'll be unjust with them, marry two, three, or four of them? How does that make sense? Read the ayah again: If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, three, or four, but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one This was related to a specific problem in which a man in charge of an orphan would eventually marry her, and he was the caretaker of her wealth and property, and would take her wealth and mix it with his own, or give her back partial wealth and inferior quality property. This ayaah was addressing this situation, stating if you fear INJUSTICE in dealing with the orphans, MARRY WOMEN OF YOUR CHOICE (this means any woman), 2, 3, or 4, and then it goes on to state, IF YOU FEAR IN JUSTICE AMONG MULTIPLE WIVES, then just 1. You can never be just with them... Ah, don't just quote one line from the ayaah, quote the ayaah and the ayaahs around it: 127 They ask your legal instruction concerning women, say: Allah instructs you about them, and about what is recited unto you in the Book concerning the orphan girls whom you give not the prescribed portions (as regards Mahr and inheritance) and yet whom you desire to marry, and (concerning) the children who are weak and oppressed, and that you stand firm for justice to orphans. And whatever good you do, Allah is Ever All­Aware of it. 128 And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part, there is no sin on them both if they make terms of peace between themselves; and making peace is better. And human inner-selves are swayed by greed. But if you do good and keep away from evil, verily, Allah is Ever Well-­Acquainted with what you do. 129 You will never be able to do perfect justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire, so do not incline too much to one of them (by giving her more of your time and provision) so as to leave the other hanging (i.e. neither divorced nor married). And if you do justice, and do all that is right and fear Allah by keeping away from all that is wrong, then Allah is Ever Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful. 130 But if they separate (by divorce), Allah will provide abundance for everyone of them from His Bounty. And Allah is Ever All­Sufficient for His creatures' need, All­Wise. Perfect Justice, as the ayaah indicates, would be to be able to not only give materially, but emotionally as well. But we are not perfect, we are flawed, and therefore the justice required of us is financial and time, not emotional. Even the Prophet couldn't accomplish this and asked Allah to forgive him for it. In the West, It's Against the Law There are two types of marriage contracts, the one which is recognized by Allah, and the one recognized by the state. It is possible for two people to be married and have their marriage recognized through a shar'i contract, yet not deal with the state (and get the benefits). If you did that, the state would not consider you legally married. Western law prohibits you from taking on two state contracts for marriage - it does not prohibit a man from taking two shar'i contracts. In fact, what you do and recognize religiously, the state could care less about. Try to get two state contracts, THAT is what's illegal. Did I miss anything? Siraaj
  11. Both Abu Bakr and 'Umar had multiple wives. I'm not sure about Uthmaan after Umm Kulthoom's passing, nor am I sure of 'Ali after Fatimah's passing. Siraaj
  12. If you want to know if you've truly found your soulmate, it's when you're able to do this in front of each other and have a good laugh about it Siraaj
  13. miss bee and theenglishhumza have it straight, jazakallaahu khayran. I had hoped that simply calling it a cheat sheet, and not thesis / book / manual, the drift would have been caught. If anyone wants to read my thoughts about the verses quoted by flowers and the rest of the discussion, you can read it in the comments section of my blog, insha'allah. Finally, Miss Bee, jazakallaah khayr for reading the blog, I do hope you keep reading, insha'Allah. Siraaj
  14. I agree, people make mistakes, and I'd be happy to offer corrections to my article since I like to think of myself as an erring human (though some may consider me inhuman for my article) - if you could please point them out, I'd be much obliged. Siraaj
  • Create New...