Ghazali On Women In Islam

Hamidm # 262

I was expecting such a reply. The discussion that we are having about two apparently contradictory edicts is not new. A lot has been written in general, and edicts like 4:34 and 4:35 have been discussed in length at various places by various scholars- such as Ghazaali and Moudoodi.

I view the Holy Quran as a collection of speeches. Please bear in mind that the format of a speech, usually, is totally different from that a book or a thesis. One must also bear in mind that Mohammad (pbuh) was just a medium to deliver the divine word.

Now imagine yourself delivering a speech on Theory of Relativity to a bunch of five star hotel Chefs. Will they understand a word that you would say? Similarly, Mohammad (pbuh) had a myriad of audience with varying degree of intelligence and social background. On one hand his audience were Badoin who used to bury their newborn daughters alive (a common practice in those days) and on the other hand his audience were the Jewish scholars of Medina. Just imagine yourself reading a column written by Miss Manners to the first group of people. He also used to deliver his ‘speech’ to the Arab tribal warriors who used to take pride in chewing the hearts and livers of their dead enemies. Imagine yourself reading the clauses of Geneva Convention to them. So the principle of ‘gradual learning’ (b’tadreej) was adopted.

The Holy Quran is a book about MAN. In order to successfully deliver its message it must appeal to the commonsense of man. This book is a book of commonsense with a format, which is completely different from any other book that we have ever read, even Bible. The message is for all times. So we the present day people are Mohammad’s (pbuh) audience too. So here it is 4:35. The message is also for the people 1500 years from us too. So what do you think if 4:34 used to make sense to the people of 1000 years ago as 4:35 makes sense to us, then would there be anything that will make sense to the people of 1500 years from now? We don’t know because we are not there yet.

The common sense, that you seem to prefer to follow, suggests that before delivering a verdict on anything we should examine its merits and demerits as well. Have you done that? You can start doing that by reading at least the “How to Read this Book” part. Please use the link that is given at my post # 264 addressed to AH 2000 and experience the phenomenon of “Aha!”

Paraphrasing your post:

...... mian Hamidm, the problem with us good non-believers is that we think that the good Muslims try to read too much into their religion ..... somehow, we have been misled into believing that they know the answer for everything from how to brush their teeth to solving an nth order polynomial; and it lies in the koran .... it is a silly notion that gets us into trouble with our bet better senses and makes us the laughing stock of the civilized world .…..

..... there is nothing wrong with seeking spiritual peace and salvation and building up brownie points to get into the promised gardens with houris and hot and cold running milk and honey, but let`s not make wild assumptions that all Muslims let their religion interfere with ‘each and every’ aspect of their mortal lives i.e. from how to brush your teeth to solving an nth order polynomial ........ since Muslims don`t ride camels and subsist on a diet of dates and maize anymore, therefore they don’t beat up on their wives and ahmedis and enemies of god either .......... because they follow the edicts such as 4:35.

Rsaxena

I see that you have been so consumed with your anger that you have lost all possible signs of sanity....

Hope you get well soon

YLH

IMPOSSIBLE DEMANDS

Slink # 249

At my work, sometimes, I am invited to certain meetings where I do not understand one single sentence the other participants speak. They use a jargon, which can only be learned through years of learning. Despite my utter exasperation, I am required to attend those meetings. There usually are other people in the meeting too who share my feelings. While they prefer to take a nap, I ‘phase myself out’ of the meeting. I start thinking about sweet Sindhri mangoes, Jaleebi, the pakoras that my mom used to fry, my Vespa, girls, and their perfumed letters. Sometimes, after the meeting, people ask me, “how did the meeting go”. My reply always is, “useless discussion, as usual”.

I think I can share the feelings of Simmi when he calls the religious discussions as useless. Like it or not, not everybody is in search of ‘truth’. So why not leave them alone. Why do we expect all believers to have all the answers? Why do we expect all believers to know all the Ahadiths by heart with proper context and history? Why do we expect all believers to have read The Book, memorized it, interpreted it word by word? Why do we expect that every little step that a believer takes, takes after consulting the Book. These are all impossible demands. These demands do not reflect upon the character flaw of the believers, they reflect upon the lack of common sense, mean-spiritedness, and dishonesty of those who make those demand and expectations. If somehow everybody were able to meet those demands, then that would have rendered all religious scholars jobless. Wouldn’t it? :)

As far as your argument about ‘stripping oneself’ is concerned I share my point of view with AH 2000 #257, as to why bother re-inventing the wheel, and I also share it with PM#258 when he says that it is impossible.

I would also like to reciprocate the feelings of goodwill that you have extended to me. I appreciate that. However, I have never………uh I just shut up :)

Re: scout

``Grow up!``

Why? What`s wrong with taking juvenile pleasure in needling the bakra? The only downside is risking carpel-tunnel syndrome or whatever the hell it is called from scrolling through 50 posts when the bakra (bakri?) neh-nehs.

Out of curiosity, is the shuttle-c#ck burkha required or not?

chotu #255, ``Give up fine wines !!!! Perish the thought.``

Of course. Some men don`t have the strength or will power to give up ``gora`` culture concepts.

As Farangi-Kush would say, the ``massas`` are giving up their left over wastage to the desis.

More and more goras are giving up alcohol, while us desis are glorifying the beauty of wines.

``Modern`` desi man = slave of the West

But if cirrhosis of the liver and artificial intoxication of the mind pleases you, GO FOR IT.

hamidm #262, ``, the problem with us good muslims is that we try to read too much into our religion ..... somehow, we have been misled into believing that the answer for everything from how to brush your teeth to solving an nth order polynomial lies in the koran ....``

I would take the word ``good`` out of the above statement. ``Good`` Muslims don`t necessarily take the Koran word for word, nor do they look for ways to brush their teeth in the book.

Most of them just try to be good kind people with high moral standards.

Please stop generalizing Muslims into one fundamental/fanatical category. It`s like calling all Hindu Brahmins racist pigs. Or calling every Orthodox Jew a blood thirsty Zionist. And we know that`s not the case.

After reading the article and also the most interesting replies (raising important questions), things come to mind, why not have a religion or something(one) which is dynamic not static. Is it God afraid to send more ``Aik Lakh choobiz hazar paygumber`` to the more intelligent and reasonable homo sapiens?

Just some heretic thoughts...

INCONSISTENCIES ?

AH 2000 # 248

Someone once said that the success of a book is not indicated by the number of people, who have read it, but it is indicated by the number of people who haven’t and yet they claim that they have. What do you think about The Book now? We criticize it, we love it, we die for it, we write theses about it, we abhor it, we pass our judgements on it-but did we read it?

Do you remember reading a book in your life when you were bewitched by its spell? You lost sense of time and space; the book that took you into another realm; the book that made you to forget to eat your lunch, besides the yelling of your mom-Victor Hugo and Baano Qudsia did that to me. I always thought that the experience of reading those two authors was exhilarating until I read this ‘Introduction to the Book’. Yep, that’s right, I am talking about the ‘introduction’ and not the Book itself. Just the introduction of the Book took my breath away. Later I came to know that I am not the only one marveled by its awe, inspiration, and syllogism. The actual text, which is in Urdu, is magnum opus of prose and a benchmark in inspirational writing. I am talking about the ‘An Introduction to Quran’ written by Syed Abou Al ‘ala Moudoodi.

Stephen R. Covey writes:

“The word ‘paradigm’ comes from the Greek. It was originally a scientific term, and is more commonly used today to mean a model, theory, perception, assumption, or frame of reference. In the more general sense it is the way we see the world-not in terms of our visual sense of sight, but in terms of perceiving, understanding, and interpreting.”

“The term ‘paradigm shift’ was introduced by Thomas Kuhn in his highly influential landmark book, ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’. Kuhn shows how almost every significant break-through in the field of scientific endeavor is a first break with tradition, with old ways of thinking, with old paradigms.”

Covey gives an example to explain paradigm shift:

“Until the germ theory was developed, a high percentage of women and children died during childbirth, and no one could understand why………But as soon as the germ theory was developed, a whole new paradigm, a better, improved way of understanding what was happening made dramatic, significant medical improvement possible”.

Paraphrasing Covey:

“Perhaps the most important insight to be gained is in the area of paradigm shifting, what we might call the “Aha!” experience when someone finally “sees” ‘the picture’ in another way. The more bound a person is by the initial perception, the more powerful the “Aha!” experience is. It was though a light were suddenly turned on inside.”

Though I strongly recommend reading the ‘An Introduction to Holy Quran’ in Urdu, if possible, yet a good translation may also do the trick. Click the following link and you may experience a shift in your paradigm of looking at the book as a collection of “inconsistencies”. You might feel your “Aha!” experience too, so fasten your seat belt and click this:

http://www.iiu.edu.my/deed/quran/understand.html

BON VOYAGE

Thought some of you might find this interesting:

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/10/fisher.htm

F_K, cartwheels are NOT recommended at your age. :-)

urstruly correctly points out :

[an-Nisa` 4:35] And if ye fear a breach between them twain (the man and wife), appoint an arbiter from his folk and an arbiter from her folk. If they desire amendment Allah will make them of one mind. Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Aware.]

.... but that still does not take away from the fact that a man with four wives and a herd of concubines can ``beat`` his wife as per section 4:34 of the constitution ..... unless of course, the framers of the constitution meant to override 4:34 with 4:35 ...... i don`t think that there is any conclusive proof that these articles were promulgated in chronological order, and some even sugggest that since the final draft was approved in Osman`s time, there might have been some mishief done ( Anouzobillah!)...... regardless, since no one can read god`s mind, and he has decommissioned gadriel, it would be very difficult for a temporal court of law to protect the ``disobedient`` wife from an occassional beating because she might be contemplating ``desertation``........... unless ghazali, like those idiots on the florida supreme court, rewrote the constitution or gave a clear definition of when a disobedient person is contemplating desertion - i don`t think so !

...... mian urstruly, the problem with us good muslims is that we try to read too much into our religion ..... somehow, we have been misled into believing that the answer for everything from how to brush your teeth to solving an nth order polynomial lies in the koran .... it is a silly notion that gets us into trouble with our bet better senses and makes us the laughing stock of the civilized world ...and those horrid heathens who live on the wrong side of the border .... i am sure these juvenile arguments about which toothpaste is halal and which muslim is a muslim gives rsaxena and the horrible hordes a lot of comfort ...... and i hate that ! ( in my case hatred for indians is a pathological condition and not caused by religion! )

..... there is nothing wrong with seeking spiritual peace and salvation and building up brownie points to get into the promised gardens with houris and hot and cold running milk and honey, but let`s not let religion interfere with our mortal lives ........ since we don`t ride camels and subsist on a diet of dates and maize anymore, let`s not beat up on our wives and ahmedis and enemies of god either ..........

Ras Siddiqui: [Sir Syed`s ideas are a much more realistic path for Muslims to follow while not giving up on their identity.]

Why do Muslims specifically have to follow other Muslims? Aren`t there other good people and ideas that a Muslim can follow. Above all what about common sense! what about rationality and other knowledge we have access to? Why do we have to keep looking into the work of Islamic scholars of the past and present. Why not read Greek philosophers of the past and why not even look for answers from the famous Behari/ Nepali guy of 2500 years ago. This Behari fellow knew lot more about human psyche than 100s of Ghazalis, Sheikhs Bin Baz and Mullah Omars.

hamidm, slink and cheema:

Great replies! I am so tempted to cut and paste part of your posts into an article and choose another penname, after some great Mutzalli (free-thinker, rationalist). Unfortunately there are already too many Ibn Al-Rawandis, the most well-known Mutzalli (or Mut`azali?). People who have opted for this penname must be very smart individuals.

Just to make it clear, the statement was made not by religious motivation and after witnessing the pain and suffering of various communities in India including Kashmiris, Sikhs, Muslims, Christians, Tamils, people of Nagaland....

My attempt was to expose a fundamentalism of another kind... Brahminism which plagues India today ...

It gives me heartfelt contentment to know that I have gotten under your skin Rsaxena.... Mullah I am not ... but thank god I am not a Indian!

Dear Shandana,

Good, thought provoking stuff. But is stripping ourselves of ALL acquired accoutrements ever possible-- without risking insanity, that is?

My own thinking is that not all folks are cut out for this important task. The best that society can do is provide rules and doctrines that jibe with the `natural` flows of the mind`s wanderings and the heart`s yearnings.

On questioning, I agree with you...If God and religion are about truth and reality, why should one be afraid to question (assuming the neeyat is `saaf`)? Is it possible that, as I think AH2000 suggests, bad strictures can create bad neeyat?

btw, `you wiped the dust off that book on yer shelf as yet?

:-)

slink,

you say: ``you can teach a man to repeat that parrotlike after you, but that achieves nothing other than emphasizing the supremacy of man over the supremacy of God, because when people put pressure on you to be `on the right path` they`re doing it because they are concerned with your place in THEIR world.``

Now that`s a very penertrating insight. Never quite saw it that way. Who was it that said that God is exalted when man is Man exercises any/all faculties to the utmost? (Or am I ust making this up?:) )

As for denuding oneself before one can find garments to call one`s own, well, I used to think that way too, but then, must we re-invent the wheel? (maybe in matters of faith we DO need to -- I dunno) Or is there a distinction between knwoing whats out there and believing it?

And how much truth is there to the belief that we cannot `know` unless we believe -- with all the attendent risks of such leaps of faith?

I guess in the end the tree will be judged by the fruit it bears. And THAT`S another can of worms right there.