Marital Rape

PM #414

Since somehow my post did not went through, let me give you translation from Koran at least. So you withdraw from your first statement that this incidence is given in Koran. (and if you find please let me know). I will not discuss further sources. I hope you will find the rest of things which I discussed if you try.

``Allah has not put two hearts in a person`s body, nor HE has made those wives of yours whom you divorce by Zihar your mother, nor He has made your adopted sons your real sons.These are the things which you utter from your mouths, but Allah says that which is based on reality, and HE alone guides the right Way. Call your adopted sons after their father`s name:this is more just in the sight of Allah. And if you do not know who their fathers are, then they are brother`s in faith and your friends. There is no blame on you if you say something unintentionally, but you will surely be to blame for what you say with the intention of your hearts. Allah is forgiving and merciful.

Indeed the Prophet is preferable for the believers to their own selves, and the Prophet`s wives are their mothers. But according to the book of Allah, the blood relatives have a greater right on one another than the other believers and migrants. However you may do any good (you wish) to your friends. This is written in the Divine Book.`` 33:4-6

Now tell me Mr. PM where is the supposed incidence you mentioned is in Koran except that adopted sons are not real sons which I have already mentioned in my post.

Zahra #415

If you look at issue in correct context. Social structure, you will realize that whether there was Islam or christianity or Hinduism these things will happen the same way.

For example I realize that even in this society there are lot of bondings as far as true love (or whatever you can say) or relationship is concerned. For example not a good example but Bosses usually do favor for sex. That is a common things (and I have fought tooth and nail to eliminate my place of work of this) and people usually try to adopt themselves to the situation. The farther you go away from city where job opportunities are less the more it is (or at least this is my observation).

Considering a tribal society, and tribal culture, they will consider their custom as Islamic. See how the taking off of Purdah by my family members is not considered un-Islamic. And the famous saying that ``Purdah To Aankhon or Dil Ka Hota Hai`` etc.

They are a stage in society. To tell you I still meet the old generation of whites who lament on increasing ``Behayai`` unwed mothers, not taking care of children etc.

Although I donot condone it, but I see it as a social developmental stage.

The question is what is the solution. Without self-sufficiency, education and economic opportunity for our countries, it is not possible for the majority of population to come out of this cycle. A few like you and me will cross the barrier, but continuous generation of population in that enviornment will continue to produce the vicious cycle.

PM #414

I will not go to books for the simple reason, I am not interested in this debate with you.

I have read enough of this incident to bring me a half baked story by you from that great modern historian.

If you are interested, you can do it yourself.

If you want I can give you some links for translation of Koran by Picktall, Yusuf Ali etc.

If you need, I can give you link for Hadith also.

So! Bye Bye.

``In this matter recent court rulings in Pakistan substantiate this point that primary importance is wishes and decision of bride and groom even if it is against the wishes of guardian if it is within Islamic bounds (marriage to a Muslim Male)``


KRashid:

I will just focus on your above point. There are family laws and according to them certain things are written in black and white. In case of marriage, your social structure also kicks in. There are many cultural things that also get involved. So, we cannot take a bird`s eye view in this scenario. Islamically, a woman has the right of divorce. How many Pakistani Muslim men are comfortable granting that right to their wives ?
Peope wouldn`t even like to think about it. Why? When the religion[that is so well-practiced by the Holy Men of our country] allows a woman this right, who the hell are these men to NOT allow that very right to their wives ? I simply get amazed to read such hypocrisies.

I have just given an example of the prevalent discrepancies. Unfortunately, when I see and read such conflicts, I feel our society misuses religion for its convenience.

I remembered a junior, an engineer - who after her graduation started teaching somewhere in Peshawar - was to marry her father`s colleague. Can you believe that? In this day and age? I heard this few years back, and I was so disgusted that had no words.

Let`s pick the case of Pathans!!!Can their women go out and say that they would like to marry XYZ so they should be granted this right. Well, let`s wait for another century to pass!

re. #413

KRashid, you write...

``So it is not possible that prophet PBUH saw her first time.``

I did not say that it was the first time he saw her. I said he saw her half dressed, just out of the shower (so to speak). I also mentioned out that he was troubled that he found her so ummm... sexy. This is quite clear from the text in the Quran itself. (please don`t make me go find my (t)rusty Pickthall now :)). It is in this context that I find your speculation on the discord in Zayd`s marriage a little hard to believe.

You write:

``It is more related to status. Zaid was a slave and later adopted son. She disliked it probably after marriage and there can be many reasons for initially marrying and later disliking.``

Maybe, but none are mentioned in either the Quran or any ahadith. Furthermore, there is no indication that SHE CHOSE to divorce Zaid and marry the Prophet. All we know in this regard is that Zaid offered her to `father`.

``The wording in Koran is mostly related to marrying the adopted son`s wife is allowed. The rest is deduced from other sources``

Actually, I`m quite sure that the incident of Mohammed walking home upset is mentioned in the Quran. Will have to look it up. And yes, the wording in the Quran is related to marying the adopted son`s wife, because in that age and place, there was little or no distinction between a biological and adopted child. Until that ayat was revealed, that is.

rgds,

PM

PM #412 and other posts.

As far as Zaid`s wife is concerned, I forgot the name of mother of believer. She was a near relative of Prophet PBUH himself from Mecca. So it is not possible that prophet PBUH saw her first time. It is more related to status. Zaid was a slave and later adopted son. She disliked it probably after marriage and there can be many reasons for initially marrying and later disliking.

The wording in Koran is mostly related to marrying the adopted son`s wife is allowed. The rest is deduced from other sources.

What incidence you are describing I have read probably from the same source you have read but I don`t think writer has any clue regarding the society and circumstances.

As for the matter of 6-9 year old. I have clearly stated that the position ultimately turns out like this that you cannot marry a person without her consent or force her to marry against her wishes even if it is done by Guardian. But that is a logical deduction. And widow or divorcee is free to choose if she likes. And same goes for a person able to make her decision.

So there is no contradiction at least I don`t see.

In this matter recent court rulings in Pakistan substantiate this point that primary importance is wishes and decision of bride and groom even if it is against the wishes of guardian if it is within Islamic bounds (marriage to a Muslim Male)

correction:

In my last post, I wrote:

``It appears from this case that wali consent is not even an issue, since `consent` implies a choice made by the woman/girl in the first place.``

`Implies` should be replaced with `presupposes`.

Krashid,

further to my last post...

Your post points out that there is no mention of Wali in any of the ayat. But that does not conclusively prove that wali-consent was or was not required. So perhaps we must look for clues in practices of the Prophet and his companions.

You say (to Solitude)... ``Either your mental capacity is very small, or you live in a place where you have not come in contact with humans and their behaviour. Otherwise, you don`t expect a 6 or 9 year old to take decision regarding her marriage.``

Maybe you don`t realize this but you just shot yourself in the foot. If marriage was permitted to a child who could not possibly be expected to show her dissent or understand what she was getting into, your case seems to be very shaky indeed. It appears from this case that wali consent is not even an issue, since `consent` implies a choice made by the woman/girl in the first place.

I trust you will give this some thought before again start hurling platitudes re. `Western masters` and Islam-bashing my way again :-)

rgds,

PM



P.S. Anyone wishing to point out a contradiction in my statement that a 6-9 yo cannot be expected to show dissent, and my oft-stated stance of adolescent sex rights... well, shoot!

Krashid #405:

Your relation of the circumstances under which The Prophet married Zaid`s wife is rather interesting, but I think inconsistent with what is related in the Quran itself.

You say ``His wife was not happy with him and wanted to marry prophet PBUH. But problem was that Zaid was foster son. And once that restriction was clarified, she married on her own with Prophet PBUH.``

Perhaps you could point to an ayat or sunnah stating Zaid`s wife`s discontent in her marriage? Because as I read it in the Quran itself, THe Prohet was struck by her beauty on seeing her half dressed, and reprimanded himself all the way home for looking upon his daughter-in-law in that way. Later, God reveals that it is all right for him (the Prophet) to wed his foster-son`s wife.

I`m sure you are aware of the rest of the story (Zaid offer her to the Prophet etc.). I am curious to know where it is related that she was not happy with Zaid, as I have not read that anywhere. Perhaps my understanding of the story is incomplete or inaccurate, in which case I hope you can bring me nearer to the truth.

rgds,

PM

KRashid,

Out of curiosity, why do you try and engage in debate with Solitude?. His mind has only one way of thinking. Everything about Islam is evil--period! Nothing anyone will say will make him think twice.

Your religion is between you & God. No matter what people like Solitude says, you have enough faith & pride in it to withstand anything he says. Every religion or holy book can be twisted to be insulting & blasphemous. And there will be people who do it all the time. Accepting that is a fair price to pay for the freedom of expression; whether it is in the US or in the cyberworld.

Maybe we should all learn to have a thicker skin if we have to share viewpoints on Chowk.

re. Solitude #402 &403

My statement regarding the wali-consent requirement in Islam was based on an article by Asma Jilani during the time Saima Waheed was in protective custody. She seemed to have claimed that there was nothing in the Quran to justify the tradition.

You have a point on that Islam cannot be seen minus the fiqh when it suits followers, so long as the doors if ijtema are kept shut, anyway. I guess we shall just have to define exactly what we mean by Islam in these interacts.

But surely, are you not overstating the influence of the sources you quoted? Can Muslims not reject them and still be consistent with the essential tenets of Islam?

Having said that, it is intersting to wonder whether Ylh`s `Islamic culture` is more a reflection of the fiqhs, since he seems to be opposed to the literal following of the Word in matters of the State/law. I sense little contradiction... or wanting to have it both ways...

don`t quite know

rgds,

PM

krashid #404 Zahra #405 I have found it impossible to engage Solitude in a rational dialogue. You will have more luck with a robot. I would only add one more thing to what krashid writes: It is also written in the Quran that you cannot take a woman against her wishes.

Solitude and Zahra#

For your benefit I am presenting translation.

I find no evidence for Wali any where. Even in regards to orphan under guardianship, it is the property and not marriage which is recorded so I was even mistaken on that in my previous post.

``Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three months period. Nor it is lawful for them to hide what Allah hath created in their wombs, if they have faith in Allah and Last day. And their husbands have a better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. 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.`` Baqara 2:228

I don`t see any Wali here.

``If any of you die and leave widows behind, THEY SHALL WAIT CONCERNING THEMSELVES four months and ten days: When they have fulfilled their term, there is no blame on you if THEY DISPOSE OF THEMSELVES in a just and reasonable manner.`` 2:234

``When you divorce women, and they fulfil the term of their ``Iddat`` either take them back on equitable terms or set them FREE on equitable terms; but do not take them back to injure them (or) to take undue advantage; if anyone does that he wrongs his own soul`` 2:231

These Ayah clearly show the right of women to choose or decide and Wali has no role to play as decider.(Although in different socio-economic circumstances it may take different form and also as long as our Mullahs are alive they will find some way to circumvent this like marriage with Quran etc)

Solitude:

I cannot resist telling you that you are really out of your mind. Please read KRashid`s post carefully.

KRashid:

ditto! Good One!

Solitude #402

Initially I thought you have some understanding of Islam and Koran.

But after reading your various posts, I reached the impression that whatever you find regarding Islam bashing you will put it (or more appropriately utilizing some site as a source of your Intellectualism)

For example you are trying to equate Fiqh with Islam. While Fiqh or interpretation of Islam is related to the time period in which it was written.

For example, you are saying that Even a widow or divorcee needs the permission of Wali.

In Koran (either for Divorcee or widow or both) it is said that They should wait till Iddat is completed for remarriage, there is no mention of Wali in this regard. Moreover, it is even allowed to propose them (in some form) during that period and there is no mention of Wali in this regard also..

In fact the only place I remember where the Wali or guardian is mentioned is regarding foster care. And in that also Wali is urged not to transgress the limit.

Also if you know Islamic rituals, it asks permission of both boy and girl before marriage can be legal.(But how can you) And if anyone of them refuses the contract is not valid.

As far as guardian is concerned, he is allowed to take decision regarding marriage, but not without the permission of bride or groom. This is the correct position as far as I know.

As far as the question, that can bride and groom marry against the wishes of parents. Since you gave example of Aisha (to which you are very fond of). I will give you the example of Zaid. His wife was not happy with him and wanted to marry prophet PBUH. But problem was that Zaid was foster son. And once that restriction was clarified, she married on her own with Prophet PBUH. Either your mental capacity is very small, or you live in a place where you have not come in contact with humans and their behaviour. Otherwise, you don`t expect a 6 or 9 year old to take decision regarding her marriage.

As far as your quote from Ibn-Timia (and I am pretty sure they are partial but who knows you are also just cutting and pasting), there are many writings among Muslim Ulema who take the position opposite of Shafaee etc.

``Why should news this surprise anyone? Islam, after all, clearly states that a woman cannot be forced into a marriage without consent. `` #394

How can you say this even after countless tragedies like those of Saima Waheed ? The concept of forcing your daughter to get married (and the concept of ``Wali``) is part of an Islamic concept (imported and alien to us). It is not part of Pakistani culture. Yet even today thousands of underage girls are sold to Arabs (while the Arabs wage their sectarian proxy wars on our subcontinent) and Pakistani parents kidnap their own daughters on a daily basis from Europe and America so that they may be forcefully married and imprisoned in Pakistan.

How it is supported by Islam read onto the next post #402