No Retreat

Re: # 63
I totally agree with Urstrulyhere. I just want to add in that there was a photo session of PM with Mukhtaran Mai just recently one wonder`s if same thing occur with the wives of PM or President then the will make that issue Public and do photo sessions in front of press, I feel that they are using Mukhtaran Mai as a ladder to move forwad which they the call modernism. I moved to West in my teen age since then i am waitting for that day when a rape case will be make public one wonders why this thing does not happen here where a women get rapped after each 20seconds. I listened Qazi Sahib views on marathon race he just said that he has no ojection on womens taking part in such activity but there should be seprate arrangements for each gender since Pakistan is an Islamic State.

Re: # 63
I totally agree with Urstruly here. I just want to add in that there was a photo session of PM with Mukhtaran Mai just recently one wonder`s if same thing occur with the wives of PM or President then the will make that issue Public and do photo sessions in front of press, I feel that they are using Mukhtaran Mai as a ladder to move forwad which they the call modernism. I moved to West in my teen age since then i am waitting for that day when a rape case will be make public one wonders why this thing does not happen here where a women get rapped after each 20seconds. I listened Qazi Sahib views on marathon race he just said that he has no ojection on womens taking part in such activity but there should be seprate arrangements for each gender since Pakistan is an Islamic State.

urstruly to romair ...

``Unlike you people, we Muslims infer jurisprudence from Qura`n and hadith.``

............ so romair is a kafir after all ! .......... and pray, who are ``we`` muslims ? ... are we talking about the murderous mullah brigade that is out to grab power by getting us all excited over bare legs and bosoms ? ............. the koran and the hadith are like das capital and the communist manifesto - divine documents to be exploited by wicked men ...........

Re: # 73

???...Indian female police wear uniform///pants////atleast in the metros///maybe in the towns and villages they wear saris////most of them are butch and with busty bosoms///they chew paan, cuss, swear, are gruff and show no mercy to anyone....especially men. Women in the armed forces are more genteel and well proportioned.Maybe, many of them are the progeny of armed forces personnel.

I`m kinda proud of our indian women......they`re cops, firefighters, weightlifters, construction workers, professionals of all disciplines, dancing girls......they span the whole spectrum of occupations.......way to go.......i got another pic pf weightlifter malleswari........cool..........

http://thatscricket.indiainfo.com/olympics/2000/image/indiaathletics.html

are bhau, please drive your santro to a nearby police station in amchi mumbai and you will see plenty of female cops in khakhi saris.

Gotta admit...saris do look rather majestic....as a formal uniform it`s at least striking and impressive albeit not very functional...

Urstruly #80: ``Unlike you people, we Muslims infer jurisprudence from Qura`n and hadith. Now please explain to me, is there an avenue open for women running among men here? You have posted the evidence yourself.``

As usual, you have not answered the question I asked. And are trying to divert the discussion. I asked you to point me to the, ``Islamic jurisprudence (as it is inferred from Qura`n and Hadith),`` which stated that it is legal for you to wear shorts. You did not point me to anything.

The last time we had a discussion, I had challenged you to explain how Hadith could be considered genuine, when they were orally passed, over 200 years, before being written. You stated that they were in written form in a museum in Turkey. I challenged you on that. And you refused to reply, other than the standard declaration of calling me an Ahmedi, or a non—Muslim etc.

You seem to have a habit of throwing around the term, “Quran and Hadith,” unnecessarily, thereby turning Islam into a joke. Apparently, very few people on this site have studied the subject, and thus, you try to bulldoze your ideas, over them. I have spent a lot of time studying Islam and the life of Muhammad. Two things I am quite fascinated by. Which is probably why I am not as turned off by Islam as many people and not as obsessed with it as many. In fact, other than my own profession, much of my book reading is on the history of Islam.

It is also why I can easily see the hollowness of so many arguments that you try to pass of, as if based in Islam. And I challenge you to prove them. And over my four years or more on Chowk, you have yet to prove one. Even though I tend to argue them in your own domain, i.e. Shariah.

Let me provide you with the truth: Under any Shariah, with a basis in hadith, it is banned for a Muslim male to expose any portion of his leg, between the navel and knee. This is what is widely acceptable, by, “scholars.” So wearing shorts is banned in Islam, not only for women, but for men, also. Because even the longest shorts expose something between the navel and knee. So they are banned according to Hadith.

In fact, according to Hadith (I can quote them to you, if you want); men are not wear pants going below the ankle. Do you wear pants? I assume you do. Do they go below your ankles? I assume they do. Then you are in violation of Shariah.

It is also illegal to wear tight pants. Once again, I am sure, you do that as well, if you wear jeans.

So your own dress code is in strict violation of Shariah, because, you wear shorts and pants. What will be the punishment for that? At the very least, don’t you think you should first apply the Shariah on yourself, before targeting women and other entities?

My aunt who is in her early forties, teaches at a local Medical College in Lahore. All her life she has been going to Lawrence gardens. Before she heads to lecture, she drops off her daughters at the Convent, and then goes to Lawrence Gardens, runs 3 miles in full shalwar kameez, sneakers and hijab. She normally does not wear hijab but while running in Lawrence Gardens, she always does wear it. She has kept herself in great shape due to this habit, as well as reaped stress lowering benefits in her hectic life. She is a religious and highly spiritual person, and I myself have prayed behind her as she led Maghrib prayer enmasse with her nieces and nephews at a picnic we had in Lawrence Gardens.

The air and the public spaces are not the property of the men, they belong to women equally.
The MMA plays upon the fears and insecurities of men while using the flag of Islam.

Urstruly #80: ``please explain to me, is there an avenue open for women running among men here?``

Now to answer your question (even though you will not answer mine). There is one avenue that springs to mind. And that is the tawaf around the Kaaba.

But to get to the gist of your question: Depends on what you are using for interpretation. If you are basing your interpretation on Hadith, then women are condemned to hell, regardless of what they do, since most of the people in hell will be women. They cannot even walk amongst men, much less run. Then again, there are stories of women fighting in wars amongst men. At the same time, according to the same interpretations of hadith, men cannot wear shorts or track suits (below their ankles). Or tight clothes (once again track suits). Which means, all sports of any kind are banned for any Muslim human being, unless he wears a dhoti; and that too above the ankles............and a very lose one at that...........So Muslims should not participate in sports, at all - men or women............if you want to follow hadith-based Shariah...........

However, if you interpret from the Quran, there is hardly any restriction on anything (barring a few issues). The Quran is far too abstract, and far too small to start putting restrictions on each and every thing. This, along with the fact that Islam bans the clergy (and pushes egalitarianism at its basic core), is why it has been quite successful over the years. In fact the success of Islam, will always be inversely proportional to the size of the clergy, at any time in history..........

In addition, the Quran requires a context in which it is to be interpreted. That is far too obvious. Since most parts of the Quran are interpreted within a context, already..........

For example, the timings for setting a fast are describe in verse 2:187, as:

``may eat and drink until the white thread of light becomes distinguishable from the dark thread of night at dawn.``

Now suppose I move to Yellowknife, in the Nothern part of Canada, where they have 24 hours of sunlight, at certain times. And 24 hours of darkness. When do I set my fast? And when do I open it?

If I follow the Quran strictly, I will die, if I fast in Yellowknife, because I will not be able to eat for weeks, because the sun will not have come out or set..........

So, maybe, just maybe, men wore dhotis while running in the local sporting events, during the time of Muhammad, because track suits had not been invented............If they had Adidas and Nike back then, they would have opted for for track suits............

check out ``his`` team ............


urstruly is third from the right

Romair #90

The reason that sometimes I do not dignify your pointless and meaningless diatribe is because that is what it is. I have a day job and I intend to keep it. The problem with you is that while writing a post you invent a premise; you assume that it is true without verifying it and build a whole castle around it. The only reason that I am dignifying this particular post of yours with a response is to see whether you are on some sort of drugs or not. You probably spent an hour or so writing your post and I am really taking a big stab in the dark assuming that you spent an hour or so in addition to that on figuring out the logic and the language etc. of the post. So, conservatively speaking you wasted 2 hours of your life building a case on a wrong premise.

Your basic premise in this post is that I somehow had provided wrong or false information in my previous post (#63) regarding the covered area. So here is the crux of your argument where you try to ``correct`` my error or right my wrong. You write `` Let me provide you with the truth: Under any Shariah, with a basis in hadith, it is banned for a Muslim male to expose any portion of his leg, between the navel and knee. This is what is widely acceptable, by, “scholars.”.

Now please explain to me in God`s good name how it is any different from your ``truth`` when I wrote in my post # 63 that For men the bare minimum (in jurists terminology it is called ``sattar`` meaning the `covered` or `hidden`.) is an area that starts right below the navel and goes up to right above the knee cap.

For crying out loud you provided the evidence with not one but two ahadith yourself in your post, writing:

1. Reported Muhammad Jahsh, ``The Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, passed by Ma`mar while his thighs were uncovered. He said, to him, `O Ma`mar, cover your thighs, for they are (part of the) `aurah.`` This is related by Ahmad, al-Hakim and al-Bukhari in Tareekh and in mu`allaq form in his Sahih.

2. Reported Jurhad, ``The Messenger of Allah passed by me when the cloak I was wearing did not cover my thighs . He said, `Cover your thigh, for it (is part of the) `aurah.`` This is related by Ahmad, Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi, who called it hassan, and by al-Bukhari in mu`allaq form in the Sahih.

Now had you bothered to read either of these ahadith that you posted you would have noticed that the keyword in both ahadith is the ``thigh``. Now please explain to me how one should define a thigh? Is the knee a part of thigh or the thigh ends from where the kneecap starts? And what exactly is the line from where the kneecap starts. Believe me, these trivial details were discussed by the ulema when defining the `sattar`. They have arbitrarily chosen an imaginary horizontal line passing through the center of the kneecap as a line of reference. The liberal group of ulema say that the sattar must be up to about two fingers above that centerline. That puts us approximately where the knee cap start from top. According to these ulema if a person is covered from navel to the two fingers above the kneecap he can offer his prayers. The conservative ulema on one hand do agree with the centerline concept but they contend that in order to be on the safe side the length of attire should be at least two fingers below the centerline. They contend that while sitting in the Namaz the attire slides up a bit and may exposes the area two fingers above the centerline therefore it is prudent to have a longer attire.

Coming back to me, yes I have worn shorts that were about three to four fingers above my knee cap. I admit that I am guilty of this obscenity of showing my knee cleavage, so sue me.

Now please explain to me how all the boxers and NFL players wear shorts that go well below their knees and perform in these games that require the most agility. From your post you are trying to convey a message that knee-long knickers are not only non-existent but impractical as well. The evidence below makes you false premise fall on its face yet again:

Re: # 92

urstruly,

......... is it also true that you have to keep a sheet between you and your partner while having sex ?.......... i am serious - this is what i learned in our compulsory islamiyat class at uet which was taught by the same genius who taught fluid mechanics .( i forget his name now) ......... needless to say the attendance in his islamiyat class far exceeded that in fluid mechanics ........... it was a source of immense mirth for the boys who wanted to get into the technical details of this maneuver ..............

.......... by the way, i think your shorts are at least six inches above the knee in your club picture ............

Re: # 93

Yes hamidm you are a genius and I am bored

romair,

....... i commend you for your efforts to stand up to maulana urstruly........... but don`t you realize the futility of fighting the hadith with the koran ?........... one is worse than the other when it comes to providing any meaningful guidance on anything that really matters ..........it is like looking for answers in the communist manifsto instead of das capital .............

.......... but, anyway, it was a good try ..........

I think the MMA should arrange a ``Burkha Only`` marathon for interested women. And preferably, it should be arrange in mid July or somewhere around that time. It could yet be a true moment of sporting genius from the bearded sages of wisdom. Just imagine people...a winner...nay even a participant who manages to run the complete 42 KM fully clad in a burkha in 40-45 degree heat...definitely would be a contender for the global crown....Paula Radcliffe be warned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....I think many interactors here have yet again failed to see the immense foresight that these men of god have over us mere mortals.