Are all Women Witches?
Farzana Versey June 28, 2005
#112 Posted by teshah on July 15, 2005 5:57:11 pm
Re: # 41
I am sorry you people got serious about an episode which in my view was more comic in nature than tragic. It was, as the story goes, first a mullah, then NGOs and finally the trial Session Court, which blew the matter out of proportion. Naturally the media also stepped in and made the best use of it adding fuel to the fire.
You know it was the alleged violation of ‘honour’ of a Mastoi woman which necessitated the holding of village Punchayat (Peoples’ Court). The Mai and her family seemed to be in a compromising situation and therefore wanted to apologize for the misconduct of her brother. Now there are two versions about what happened afterwards. May’s supporters say, the panchayat decided that as a matter of justice, Mai should be raped by Mastoi’s to avenge violation of their ‘honour’ violated by her brother. But according to the other party the Mai was not raped but married (nikahfied) to the brother of the Mastoi woman who was ‘dishonoured’ by Mai’s brother. No independent inquiry having been held in the matter there are as many stories as many mouths. But as the courts inquiry goes the proceedings and judgment of the Multan High Court still holds the ground which did not give any credence to the evidence in support of the accusation of rape of Mai. Do you think dear every body should sit in judgment over a case when one does not know even about the bare facts of the case? As you go, you want to dishonour Mai by insisting that she was raped when the court says there was no evidence to that effect.
Now what a display of ‘fecking honour’ was made in Mirwala when allegedly Mai was being dragged for ‘rape’ before the very eyes of her biraadari including her father and her young brother in compliance with the judgement of the Panchayat. I cannot imagine such a scene even in ‘that bazaar’. I can’t believe that people even of the lowest caste can be so devoid of any sense of `honour’ that they allow such a thing to happen without any demur. In fact no body stood up as there was perhaps no ground for standing up and it was only the suo moto action taken by the trial court after a number of days that such a halla gulla was raised by NGOs, etc., etc.
In fact I believe sex as such is not a matter falling in the domain of ethics or morals. It is purely a matter of culture. In Shariah if one accuses somebody of ‘Zina’ (irregular sex with a free person, other than one’s own slave) he is obliged to bring forth four valid eye witnesses of the crime otherwise he himself is liable to be penalized severely. As regards rape, you would have learnt about a ‘Fatwa’ issued recently by Deoband in case of a rape of a woman by her father-in-law in India. They held that in consequence of her alleged rape the woman has automatically become the wife of her father-in-law. In fact this is the adoption of a Judaistic law which makes the rapist accept the victim as his wife apparently to mitigate her dishonour. Now listen what the Wiseman of China, the great Confucius, says about rape. He advises that if you feel the rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy. I would personally act upon his advice if ever I were subjected to rape albeit by the opposite sex.
I envy Mukhtaran Mai that she is so lucky to have the best of the two, nay , rather three worlds and is so happy. Only the NGOs seem now to be feeling chillies in their hinds out of jealousy perhaps.
I am sorry you people got serious about an episode which in my view was more comic in nature than tragic. It was, as the story goes, first a mullah, then NGOs and finally the trial Session Court, which blew the matter out of proportion. Naturally the media also stepped in and made the best use of it adding fuel to the fire.
You know it was the alleged violation of ‘honour’ of a Mastoi woman which necessitated the holding of village Punchayat (Peoples’ Court). The Mai and her family seemed to be in a compromising situation and therefore wanted to apologize for the misconduct of her brother. Now there are two versions about what happened afterwards. May’s supporters say, the panchayat decided that as a matter of justice, Mai should be raped by Mastoi’s to avenge violation of their ‘honour’ violated by her brother. But according to the other party the Mai was not raped but married (nikahfied) to the brother of the Mastoi woman who was ‘dishonoured’ by Mai’s brother. No independent inquiry having been held in the matter there are as many stories as many mouths. But as the courts inquiry goes the proceedings and judgment of the Multan High Court still holds the ground which did not give any credence to the evidence in support of the accusation of rape of Mai. Do you think dear every body should sit in judgment over a case when one does not know even about the bare facts of the case? As you go, you want to dishonour Mai by insisting that she was raped when the court says there was no evidence to that effect.
Now what a display of ‘fecking honour’ was made in Mirwala when allegedly Mai was being dragged for ‘rape’ before the very eyes of her biraadari including her father and her young brother in compliance with the judgement of the Panchayat. I cannot imagine such a scene even in ‘that bazaar’. I can’t believe that people even of the lowest caste can be so devoid of any sense of `honour’ that they allow such a thing to happen without any demur. In fact no body stood up as there was perhaps no ground for standing up and it was only the suo moto action taken by the trial court after a number of days that such a halla gulla was raised by NGOs, etc., etc.
In fact I believe sex as such is not a matter falling in the domain of ethics or morals. It is purely a matter of culture. In Shariah if one accuses somebody of ‘Zina’ (irregular sex with a free person, other than one’s own slave) he is obliged to bring forth four valid eye witnesses of the crime otherwise he himself is liable to be penalized severely. As regards rape, you would have learnt about a ‘Fatwa’ issued recently by Deoband in case of a rape of a woman by her father-in-law in India. They held that in consequence of her alleged rape the woman has automatically become the wife of her father-in-law. In fact this is the adoption of a Judaistic law which makes the rapist accept the victim as his wife apparently to mitigate her dishonour. Now listen what the Wiseman of China, the great Confucius, says about rape. He advises that if you feel the rape is inevitable, relax and enjoy. I would personally act upon his advice if ever I were subjected to rape albeit by the opposite sex.
I envy Mukhtaran Mai that she is so lucky to have the best of the two, nay , rather three worlds and is so happy. Only the NGOs seem now to be feeling chillies in their hinds out of jealousy perhaps.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#111 Posted by Mike_Hunt on July 12, 2005 10:11:28 am
Speaking of witches, here is a joke about Scout.
Two sperms inside Scout were overheard saying:
Sperm #1 - I can`t wait till we get to the fallopian tubes.
Sperm #2 - Stupid, we are in her stomach. :)
Two sperms inside Scout were overheard saying:
Sperm #1 - I can`t wait till we get to the fallopian tubes.
Sperm #2 - Stupid, we are in her stomach. :)
#110 Posted by teshah on July 7, 2005 5:40:15 pm
Farzana
Woman is not a witch till she remains a woman but she may become a witch when she is no longer a woman, that is, she becomes sexless after menopause. She then becomes either a witch or just, what we call in Punjabi, a `Phunder`. She has to become a witch when she looses her charms to captivate the opposite sex. Man remains a man till his death but a woman remains a woman only temporarily. A cow or hen is slaughtered when it becomes a Phunder (unproductive) but a woman becomes a witch for her survival. The greatest witch Pkistan has produced is Mukhtaran Mai to match the Indian Phoolan Devi. Phoolan lynched her husband with the help of a dacoit paramour whereas Mai got the man who claimed to be her husband incarcerated with the help of NGOs. What a pity! All men seem to have turned feminist due to fear of witches or being captivated by their witchery.
Woman is not a witch till she remains a woman but she may become a witch when she is no longer a woman, that is, she becomes sexless after menopause. She then becomes either a witch or just, what we call in Punjabi, a `Phunder`. She has to become a witch when she looses her charms to captivate the opposite sex. Man remains a man till his death but a woman remains a woman only temporarily. A cow or hen is slaughtered when it becomes a Phunder (unproductive) but a woman becomes a witch for her survival. The greatest witch Pkistan has produced is Mukhtaran Mai to match the Indian Phoolan Devi. Phoolan lynched her husband with the help of a dacoit paramour whereas Mai got the man who claimed to be her husband incarcerated with the help of NGOs. What a pity! All men seem to have turned feminist due to fear of witches or being captivated by their witchery.
#109 Posted by vagabond78 on July 5, 2005 9:16:55 am
Re: # 108
I read this the day it was published and dropped it. I never saw your post #48 and rest. I did notice that your last post was reproduced but my point was why did you have to choose THAT article over others?
I may have jumped the gun about the article being inspired by Imrana, but this should only be expected since I`ve stopped caring about what I`m reading in your articles.
I read this the day it was published and dropped it. I never saw your post #48 and rest. I did notice that your last post was reproduced but my point was why did you have to choose THAT article over others?
I may have jumped the gun about the article being inspired by Imrana, but this should only be expected since I`ve stopped caring about what I`m reading in your articles.
#108 Posted by FarzanaVersey on July 5, 2005 6:16:39 am
Re: # 106
I have been regularly posting updates on the Imrana case...I did not have to go to the Arab News...it was reproduced in the Asian Age (it is clearly mentioned).
[Would you want us to believe that the said fatwa was never issued by Dar-ul-Uloom? This article you say was inspired by Imrana case but nowhere does it notes the prejudice in islam and muslims]
I would have thought you have not read my posts, but you have...and chosen to misinterpret. Nowhere have I said that THIS article has been inspired by Imrana (in fact I rbought in Imrana when someone else was discussing Mukhtaran Mai). This has been inspired by the Pusana devi declared a witch case...it is there in the article which you might not have read). As regards my opinion on the fatwa, I posted my letter that was published in The Asian Age. It is in post #48.
It is amazing how people jump the gun and then believe they are firing.
HP:
Why do you have to believe that? Imrana`s claim ought to be sufficient. All this propery dispute crap is just a ruse....
I have been regularly posting updates on the Imrana case...I did not have to go to the Arab News...it was reproduced in the Asian Age (it is clearly mentioned).
[Would you want us to believe that the said fatwa was never issued by Dar-ul-Uloom? This article you say was inspired by Imrana case but nowhere does it notes the prejudice in islam and muslims]
I would have thought you have not read my posts, but you have...and chosen to misinterpret. Nowhere have I said that THIS article has been inspired by Imrana (in fact I rbought in Imrana when someone else was discussing Mukhtaran Mai). This has been inspired by the Pusana devi declared a witch case...it is there in the article which you might not have read). As regards my opinion on the fatwa, I posted my letter that was published in The Asian Age. It is in post #48.
It is amazing how people jump the gun and then believe they are firing.
HP:
Why do you have to believe that? Imrana`s claim ought to be sufficient. All this propery dispute crap is just a ruse....
#107 Posted by ballukhan on July 5, 2005 5:53:21 am
``There is another twist to the Imrana story. Now the Fatwa body claims that there was no rape.
This clearly is not as simple as 1 2 3... ``
That is only a way to save the face of these illiterate maulavis......after that fantastic decision these idiots find themselves at the wrong end of public opinion.......so to save their face they have come up with another disgusting explanation by quoting out of context.............these idiots should be told to fukoff and not interfere with the criminal process!!!!
This clearly is not as simple as 1 2 3... ``
That is only a way to save the face of these illiterate maulavis......after that fantastic decision these idiots find themselves at the wrong end of public opinion.......so to save their face they have come up with another disgusting explanation by quoting out of context.............these idiots should be told to fukoff and not interfere with the criminal process!!!!
#106 Posted by vagabond78 on July 5, 2005 5:50:37 am
#101 by FarzanaVersey
Nice post Ms FV. When there`s so much written about Imrana everywhere do you have to go to that Arab News for an update? Would you want us to believe that the said fatwa was never issued by Dar-ul-Uloom? This article you say was inspired by Imrana case but nowhere does it notes the prejudice in islam and muslims.
I understand a writer`s desire to be read and respected. I also understand the importance of contrarian view and unique position of being a `fly in the soup`. But when its overdone people stop taking you seriously. For the same reasons I dont like Swaminathan Aiyar`s column in Times. But at least his columns can be accepted and appreciated as part of an academic discourse.
So while Mr Aiyar comes across as an academic trying to be oversmart and outwit others, your articles tend to be what they really are - rantings of high emotion and low quotient.
Nice post Ms FV. When there`s so much written about Imrana everywhere do you have to go to that Arab News for an update? Would you want us to believe that the said fatwa was never issued by Dar-ul-Uloom? This article you say was inspired by Imrana case but nowhere does it notes the prejudice in islam and muslims.
I understand a writer`s desire to be read and respected. I also understand the importance of contrarian view and unique position of being a `fly in the soup`. But when its overdone people stop taking you seriously. For the same reasons I dont like Swaminathan Aiyar`s column in Times. But at least his columns can be accepted and appreciated as part of an academic discourse.
So while Mr Aiyar comes across as an academic trying to be oversmart and outwit others, your articles tend to be what they really are - rantings of high emotion and low quotient.
#105 Posted by BeeJay on July 4, 2005 10:27:45 am
#101 Versey
It’s terrible! That’s all one ought to say.
Of course, the likes of FV and HP and all those countless variations of two lettered individuals (with corresponding quantities of smarts to match) will take a microscope and examine each and every paragraph, sentence, letter, and punctuation mark of that legendary fatwa – an oozy doozy, if you ask me (not that their ilk will ever dare to) – to “form” an opinion on the “merits” of that piece of crap, and half-heartedly console each other (while secretly crying their tears on the shoulders of each other), and completely miss sight of the very obvious faeces that plainly stare right into their faces – regarding which, unlike Pedki Devi, they DO have a choice of taking an unequivocal stand – and instead, will hum and haw (such phonies!)
The obvious FACT is – the whole thing stinks! The setup, the beards, the readers of the Book, and the religious figure(head)s! But the “intellectuals” come out looking the lousiest – like a thoroughly soaked cat with a crushed tail!
Keep on Meowing! I got to go see some fireworks!
Sincerely,
BeeJay.
#104 Posted by HP on July 4, 2005 9:54:52 am
There is another twist to the Imrana story. Now the Fatwa body claims that there was no rape.
This clearly is not as simple as 1 2 3...
``New Delhi, July 3: Giving a new twist to the Imrana case, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) on Sunday said the woman might not have been raped as has been claimed and allegation might have been influenced by a property dispute.
AIMPLB had sent a team to Muzaffarnagar to ascertain facts about the case which has kicked-off a major controversy in the country.
``A team conducted investigation and found no evidence of rape except for Imrana`s claim,`` the team leader and AIMPLB convenor S.Q.R. Ilyaas said on return.
He said the team felt that the allegation may have been influenced by a property dispute between father-in-law Ali Ahmed and Imrana and her husband Nur Ilahi.
Ali Ahmed apparently wanted to sell the house which was opposed by Imrana and her husband.
The woman Imrana’s brother, Imran, however, refuted the AIMPLB claim that her allegation was not true and could have stemmed from a property dispute with the father-in-law. Terming the Board’s claim as ‘baseless,’ Imran said in Muzaffarnagar that she has given statements about the alleged rape in the court of the judicial magistrate and also filed an application in the local Shariat court.
“She stands by her FIR,” he said but kept quiet when asked why she did not appear in the religious court on Friday. The court, which conventionally meets on the first Friday of every month, acknowledged that Imrana had filed an application but did not turn up to pursue the case.
Imrana’s alleged rape kicked up a controversy and made national headlines after an Islamic seminary ruled that she should separate from her husband following the incident.
#103 Posted by drlokraj on July 4, 2005 8:31:02 am
By Tavleen Singh
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/jul22005/panorama164941200571.asp
The Dar-ul-Uloom`s fatwa last week condemning Imrana to a marital life
of unmitigated hell and absolving her rapist father-in-law comes as no
surprise to me. It comes as no surprise because last year I had the
dubious pleasure of visiting the Dar-ul-Uloom in Deoband and seeing
for myself what this Islamic school that inspired the Taliban is
really like.
It was this inspiration that caused the Taliban to execute women in
Kabul`s infamous football field for crimes they often did not know
they had committed. It was this inspiration from Deoband`s
interpretation of the shariyat that caused the Taliban to ban
education for women and to punish them for such supposed misdemeanors
as wearing white socks and shoes that made a noise when they walked.
Now, Deoband rules that Imrana, a mother of five children, of
Charthawal village, district Muzaffarnagar, in UP is haraam for her
husband, Noor Ilahi because she dared protest publicly about being
raped by her father-in-law, Ali Mohammad.
It is typical of the Deobandi interpretation of the laws of Islam that
they have not condemned the rapist. And, if you were following the
story you would have noticed that the bearded maulvis who expounded on
the subject on television hinted that they did not believe she could
have been raped. ``Taali donon haathon sey bajti hai,`` said one bearded
monster with a smug smile on his face.
As a Muslim woman Imrana showed extraordinary courage in going public
at all because under Islamic law rape can only be punished if four
male witnesses exist. They never do. Her only hope now is that the
normal laws of the land are implemented and her father-in-law charged
and punished under them. Her personal life is ruined because her wimp
of a husband has already announced that he will obey the fatwa from
Deoband.
There are wider implications of Imrana`s story and they should concern
us all. What should concern us is that the Dar-ul-uloom will get away
with its outrageous interference in the law. What should concern us
even more is that the Dar-ul-uloom should exist at all on the soil of
India. If you are shocked that I can say something so politically
incorrect let me describe for you what this institution of Islamic
teaching looks like.
During the general election in May last year I happened to drive past
Deoband on my way to cover election stories in UP and since I had
heard of how the Taliban took their inspiration from the Dar-ul-Uloom
decided that it would be worth my while to stop and take a look at
this influential school.
Deoband is a shabby, little hick town with a dusty, disorderly
collection of half-built shops as its main bazaar and its shabbiness
makes the magnificence of the Dar-ul-Uloom even more startling. But, I
go too fast. I drove through the dusty bazaar, along a gutted road to
arrive at a pair of tall, black wrought iron gates. Beyond these gates
I could see several fine, white-washed Islamic buildings and beyond
them a magnificent mosque that seemed almost bigger than the town of
Deoband. At the entrance was a white-bearded gentleman in traditional
Islamic clothing — a long kurta over loose pajamas that barely reached
his calves. I asked him if I could meet the chief Maulana and after
several minutes on the telephone to someone to whom he conveyed my
request he said I could not meet him because a) I did not have an
appointment and b) I was not veiled.
This irritated me and I pointed out that this was India and not Saudi
Arabia and in any case I was not Muslim and that if the Maulana was so
keen on purdah then perhaps he should be in it.
At this point a group of bearded students walked by and asked what was
going on. When I explained they said I should go to the main office
and make an appointment to come back another time. Knowing that I
would never have any desire to come back to the Dar-ul-Uloom I decided
that as I was there I could at least look around the famed seminary.
So, despite the protests of the white bearded watchman I strolled onto
the grounds and found myself in a little bit of Saudi Arabia. All the
men I saw were bearded and in Islamic clothes, a small bazaar on the
campus sold books only in Urdu and Arabic and when I stopped to talk
to a group of young men they said (in Urdu) that they could not talk
to me because they spoke only Arabic and I had been rude about their
Maulana. I never found out what they considered rude but thought them
not just rude but nauseatingly fanatical.
The whole atmosphere was medieval and extremely unpleasant especially
if you happened to be a woman. In the forty minutes or so that I spent
in the Dar-ul-Uloom I saw only one other woman and she was so heavily
veiled that only her eyes and a bit of her nose were exposed. So you
see why the fatwa that punishes the victim and not the rapist comes as
no surprise to me.
Finally, two questions. Why is a seminary that can only breed Islamic
fanatics allowed to exist in India? Will the government of India take
action against the maulvis who issued that fatwa declaring Imrana
haraam for her husband? Both questions demand answers from `secular`
leaders like Sonia Gandhi and Mulayam Singh Yadav. And, if this is the
secular India they want to build then give me Hindutva any old time.
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/jul22005/panorama164941200571.asp
The Dar-ul-Uloom`s fatwa last week condemning Imrana to a marital life
of unmitigated hell and absolving her rapist father-in-law comes as no
surprise to me. It comes as no surprise because last year I had the
dubious pleasure of visiting the Dar-ul-Uloom in Deoband and seeing
for myself what this Islamic school that inspired the Taliban is
really like.
It was this inspiration that caused the Taliban to execute women in
Kabul`s infamous football field for crimes they often did not know
they had committed. It was this inspiration from Deoband`s
interpretation of the shariyat that caused the Taliban to ban
education for women and to punish them for such supposed misdemeanors
as wearing white socks and shoes that made a noise when they walked.
Now, Deoband rules that Imrana, a mother of five children, of
Charthawal village, district Muzaffarnagar, in UP is haraam for her
husband, Noor Ilahi because she dared protest publicly about being
raped by her father-in-law, Ali Mohammad.
It is typical of the Deobandi interpretation of the laws of Islam that
they have not condemned the rapist. And, if you were following the
story you would have noticed that the bearded maulvis who expounded on
the subject on television hinted that they did not believe she could
have been raped. ``Taali donon haathon sey bajti hai,`` said one bearded
monster with a smug smile on his face.
As a Muslim woman Imrana showed extraordinary courage in going public
at all because under Islamic law rape can only be punished if four
male witnesses exist. They never do. Her only hope now is that the
normal laws of the land are implemented and her father-in-law charged
and punished under them. Her personal life is ruined because her wimp
of a husband has already announced that he will obey the fatwa from
Deoband.
There are wider implications of Imrana`s story and they should concern
us all. What should concern us is that the Dar-ul-uloom will get away
with its outrageous interference in the law. What should concern us
even more is that the Dar-ul-uloom should exist at all on the soil of
India. If you are shocked that I can say something so politically
incorrect let me describe for you what this institution of Islamic
teaching looks like.
During the general election in May last year I happened to drive past
Deoband on my way to cover election stories in UP and since I had
heard of how the Taliban took their inspiration from the Dar-ul-Uloom
decided that it would be worth my while to stop and take a look at
this influential school.
Deoband is a shabby, little hick town with a dusty, disorderly
collection of half-built shops as its main bazaar and its shabbiness
makes the magnificence of the Dar-ul-Uloom even more startling. But, I
go too fast. I drove through the dusty bazaar, along a gutted road to
arrive at a pair of tall, black wrought iron gates. Beyond these gates
I could see several fine, white-washed Islamic buildings and beyond
them a magnificent mosque that seemed almost bigger than the town of
Deoband. At the entrance was a white-bearded gentleman in traditional
Islamic clothing — a long kurta over loose pajamas that barely reached
his calves. I asked him if I could meet the chief Maulana and after
several minutes on the telephone to someone to whom he conveyed my
request he said I could not meet him because a) I did not have an
appointment and b) I was not veiled.
This irritated me and I pointed out that this was India and not Saudi
Arabia and in any case I was not Muslim and that if the Maulana was so
keen on purdah then perhaps he should be in it.
At this point a group of bearded students walked by and asked what was
going on. When I explained they said I should go to the main office
and make an appointment to come back another time. Knowing that I
would never have any desire to come back to the Dar-ul-Uloom I decided
that as I was there I could at least look around the famed seminary.
So, despite the protests of the white bearded watchman I strolled onto
the grounds and found myself in a little bit of Saudi Arabia. All the
men I saw were bearded and in Islamic clothes, a small bazaar on the
campus sold books only in Urdu and Arabic and when I stopped to talk
to a group of young men they said (in Urdu) that they could not talk
to me because they spoke only Arabic and I had been rude about their
Maulana. I never found out what they considered rude but thought them
not just rude but nauseatingly fanatical.
The whole atmosphere was medieval and extremely unpleasant especially
if you happened to be a woman. In the forty minutes or so that I spent
in the Dar-ul-Uloom I saw only one other woman and she was so heavily
veiled that only her eyes and a bit of her nose were exposed. So you
see why the fatwa that punishes the victim and not the rapist comes as
no surprise to me.
Finally, two questions. Why is a seminary that can only breed Islamic
fanatics allowed to exist in India? Will the government of India take
action against the maulvis who issued that fatwa declaring Imrana
haraam for her husband? Both questions demand answers from `secular`
leaders like Sonia Gandhi and Mulayam Singh Yadav. And, if this is the
secular India they want to build then give me Hindutva any old time.
#102 Posted by drlokraj on July 4, 2005 8:30:06 am
By Tavleen Singh
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/jul22005/panorama164941200571.asp
The Dar-ul-Uloom`s fatwa last week condemning Imrana to a marital life
of unmitigated hell and absolving her rapist father-in-law comes as no
surprise to me. It comes as no surprise because last year I had the
dubious pleasure of visiting the Dar-ul-Uloom in Deoband and seeing
for myself what this Islamic school that inspired the Taliban is
really like.
It was this inspiration that caused the Taliban to execute women in
Kabul`s infamous football field for crimes they often did not know
they had committed. It was this inspiration from Deoband`s
interpretation of the shariyat that caused the Taliban to ban
education for women and to punish them for such supposed misdemeanors
as wearing white socks and shoes that made a noise when they walked.
Now, Deoband rules that Imrana, a mother of five children, of
Charthawal village, district Muzaffarnagar, in UP is haraam for her
husband, Noor Ilahi because she dared protest publicly about being
raped by her father-in-law, Ali Mohammad.
It is typical of the Deobandi interpretation of the laws of Islam that
they have not condemned the rapist. And, if you were following the
story you would have noticed that the bearded maulvis who expounded on
the subject on television hinted that they did not believe she could
have been raped. ``Taali donon haathon sey bajti hai,`` said one bearded
monster with a smug smile on his face.
As a Muslim woman Imrana showed extraordinary courage in going public
at all because under Islamic law rape can only be punished if four
male witnesses exist. They never do. Her only hope now is that the
normal laws of the land are implemented and her father-in-law charged
and punished under them. Her personal life is ruined because her wimp
of a husband has already announced that he will obey the fatwa from
Deoband.
There are wider implications of Imrana`s story and they should concern
us all. What should concern us is that the Dar-ul-uloom will get away
with its outrageous interference in the law. What should concern us
even more is that the Dar-ul-uloom should exist at all on the soil of
India. If you are shocked that I can say something so politically
incorrect let me describe for you what this institution of Islamic
teaching looks like.
During the general election in May last year I happened to drive past
Deoband on my way to cover election stories in UP and since I had
heard of how the Taliban took their inspiration from the Dar-ul-Uloom
decided that it would be worth my while to stop and take a look at
this influential school.
Deoband is a shabby, little hick town with a dusty, disorderly
collection of half-built shops as its main bazaar and its shabbiness
makes the magnificence of the Dar-ul-Uloom even more startling. But, I
go too fast. I drove through the dusty bazaar, along a gutted road to
arrive at a pair of tall, black wrought iron gates. Beyond these gates
I could see several fine, white-washed Islamic buildings and beyond
them a magnificent mosque that seemed almost bigger than the town of
Deoband. At the entrance was a white-bearded gentleman in traditional
Islamic clothing — a long kurta over loose pajamas that barely reached
his calves. I asked him if I could meet the chief Maulana and after
several minutes on the telephone to someone to whom he conveyed my
request he said I could not meet him because a) I did not have an
appointment and b) I was not veiled.
This irritated me and I pointed out that this was India and not Saudi
Arabia and in any case I was not Muslim and that if the Maulana was so
keen on purdah then perhaps he should be in it.
At this point a group of bearded students walked by and asked what was
going on. When I explained they said I should go to the main office
and make an appointment to come back another time. Knowing that I
would never have any desire to come back to the Dar-ul-Uloom I decided
that as I was there I could at least look around the famed seminary.
So, despite the protests of the white bearded watchman I strolled onto
the grounds and found myself in a little bit of Saudi Arabia. All the
men I saw were bearded and in Islamic clothes, a small bazaar on the
campus sold books only in Urdu and Arabic and when I stopped to talk
to a group of young men they said (in Urdu) that they could not talk
to me because they spoke only Arabic and I had been rude about their
Maulana. I never found out what they considered rude but thought them
not just rude but nauseatingly fanatical.
The whole atmosphere was medieval and extremely unpleasant especially
if you happened to be a woman. In the forty minutes or so that I spent
in the Dar-ul-Uloom I saw only one other woman and she was so heavily
veiled that only her eyes and a bit of her nose were exposed. So you
see why the fatwa that punishes the victim and not the rapist comes as
no surprise to me.
Finally, two questions. Why is a seminary that can only breed Islamic
fanatics allowed to exist in India? Will the government of India take
action against the maulvis who issued that fatwa declaring Imrana
haraam for her husband? Both questions demand answers from `secular`
leaders like Sonia Gandhi and Mulayam Singh Yadav. And, if this is the
secular India they want to build then give me Hindutva any old time.
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/jul22005/panorama164941200571.asp
The Dar-ul-Uloom`s fatwa last week condemning Imrana to a marital life
of unmitigated hell and absolving her rapist father-in-law comes as no
surprise to me. It comes as no surprise because last year I had the
dubious pleasure of visiting the Dar-ul-Uloom in Deoband and seeing
for myself what this Islamic school that inspired the Taliban is
really like.
It was this inspiration that caused the Taliban to execute women in
Kabul`s infamous football field for crimes they often did not know
they had committed. It was this inspiration from Deoband`s
interpretation of the shariyat that caused the Taliban to ban
education for women and to punish them for such supposed misdemeanors
as wearing white socks and shoes that made a noise when they walked.
Now, Deoband rules that Imrana, a mother of five children, of
Charthawal village, district Muzaffarnagar, in UP is haraam for her
husband, Noor Ilahi because she dared protest publicly about being
raped by her father-in-law, Ali Mohammad.
It is typical of the Deobandi interpretation of the laws of Islam that
they have not condemned the rapist. And, if you were following the
story you would have noticed that the bearded maulvis who expounded on
the subject on television hinted that they did not believe she could
have been raped. ``Taali donon haathon sey bajti hai,`` said one bearded
monster with a smug smile on his face.
As a Muslim woman Imrana showed extraordinary courage in going public
at all because under Islamic law rape can only be punished if four
male witnesses exist. They never do. Her only hope now is that the
normal laws of the land are implemented and her father-in-law charged
and punished under them. Her personal life is ruined because her wimp
of a husband has already announced that he will obey the fatwa from
Deoband.
There are wider implications of Imrana`s story and they should concern
us all. What should concern us is that the Dar-ul-uloom will get away
with its outrageous interference in the law. What should concern us
even more is that the Dar-ul-uloom should exist at all on the soil of
India. If you are shocked that I can say something so politically
incorrect let me describe for you what this institution of Islamic
teaching looks like.
During the general election in May last year I happened to drive past
Deoband on my way to cover election stories in UP and since I had
heard of how the Taliban took their inspiration from the Dar-ul-Uloom
decided that it would be worth my while to stop and take a look at
this influential school.
Deoband is a shabby, little hick town with a dusty, disorderly
collection of half-built shops as its main bazaar and its shabbiness
makes the magnificence of the Dar-ul-Uloom even more startling. But, I
go too fast. I drove through the dusty bazaar, along a gutted road to
arrive at a pair of tall, black wrought iron gates. Beyond these gates
I could see several fine, white-washed Islamic buildings and beyond
them a magnificent mosque that seemed almost bigger than the town of
Deoband. At the entrance was a white-bearded gentleman in traditional
Islamic clothing — a long kurta over loose pajamas that barely reached
his calves. I asked him if I could meet the chief Maulana and after
several minutes on the telephone to someone to whom he conveyed my
request he said I could not meet him because a) I did not have an
appointment and b) I was not veiled.
This irritated me and I pointed out that this was India and not Saudi
Arabia and in any case I was not Muslim and that if the Maulana was so
keen on purdah then perhaps he should be in it.
At this point a group of bearded students walked by and asked what was
going on. When I explained they said I should go to the main office
and make an appointment to come back another time. Knowing that I
would never have any desire to come back to the Dar-ul-Uloom I decided
that as I was there I could at least look around the famed seminary.
So, despite the protests of the white bearded watchman I strolled onto
the grounds and found myself in a little bit of Saudi Arabia. All the
men I saw were bearded and in Islamic clothes, a small bazaar on the
campus sold books only in Urdu and Arabic and when I stopped to talk
to a group of young men they said (in Urdu) that they could not talk
to me because they spoke only Arabic and I had been rude about their
Maulana. I never found out what they considered rude but thought them
not just rude but nauseatingly fanatical.
The whole atmosphere was medieval and extremely unpleasant especially
if you happened to be a woman. In the forty minutes or so that I spent
in the Dar-ul-Uloom I saw only one other woman and she was so heavily
veiled that only her eyes and a bit of her nose were exposed. So you
see why the fatwa that punishes the victim and not the rapist comes as
no surprise to me.
Finally, two questions. Why is a seminary that can only breed Islamic
fanatics allowed to exist in India? Will the government of India take
action against the maulvis who issued that fatwa declaring Imrana
haraam for her husband? Both questions demand answers from `secular`
leaders like Sonia Gandhi and Mulayam Singh Yadav. And, if this is the
secular India they want to build then give me Hindutva any old time.
#101 Posted by FarzanaVersey on July 4, 2005 1:59:05 am
Imrana ‘fatwa’ is absurd, infuriating (the print edition of The Asian Age mentions that the writer is Religion Editor of Arab News)
- By Adil Salahi
Imrana Ilahi, an ordinary Muslim Indian woman, recently found her name mentioned in countless articles, news despatches, email messages and angry reports going in all directions. Many people would love to be famous, and some know how to use such sudden fame to advantage. But not so Imrana, whose newly acquired fame is for the wrong reasons, and for nothing she had done or contemplated. Poor Imrana has been the target of several wrong actions by the wrong people.
To start with, Imrana was the victim of rape by none other than her father-in-law, who, according to news reports, is now in prison awaiting trial. She was, secondly, the victim of a fatwa issued by certain people who ruled that she can no longer remain married to her husband; rather, she should treat him like her own son. Thirdly, Imrana was further victimised by the local authorities who said that they endorse the fatwa since it has been issued by a recognised institute. Fourth, she has been the victim of many self-appointed defenders who took up her case and are trying to bring pressure to bear on her, her family and the authorities to reverse this fatwa. Finally, according to some reports, Imrana has been told to move in with her rapist as she can be married to him now instead of his son, her own husband.
In the midst of all this furore, Imrana feels like one in a whirlwind of confusion. After her personal tragedy, her only desire is to continue her simple life, abiding by Islamic teachings and looking after her children. Needless to say, the case has provided new ammunition to those who are always on the lookout for anything to use in order to attack Islam and Muslims.
Looking at a reported fatwa:
Unfortunately, when the media takes up such a case, the truth is often forgotten and we are rarely able to establish the simple facts of the case. In all news agency reports I have seen, very little is written about the basis of the fatwa. A couple of quotations attributed to spokespersons at Darul-Uloom at Deoband are often mentioned, but we cannot determine who actually said what. Nevertheless, it is important to make clear the Islamic standpoint on such cases. It is the standard practice of Islamic scholarship that the views of any school of thought should be taken from books written by its own scholars. Thus, if we see a reference to, say, a Hanafi viewpoint in the writings of a highly reputable scholar known for his accuracy and scholarly achievement but is not a Hanafi, we cannot rely on his reporting of the viewpoint and accept it as the standard Hanafi view. We must go back to references and scholars of the Hanafi school and consult them. Only when they confirm the same viewpoint as reported by that scholar, can we accept it as a Hanafi view.
Therefore, without having seen the fatwa as issued by Darul-Uloom and reviewing its basis and the evidence cited in support of it, I cannot comment on the fatwa itself. What I propose to do is to discuss the reports I have seen, and then I will look at the case of a woman raped by her father-in-law and the effect of such a situation on her marriage.
Basis of the fatwa
The reports mention that the fatwa is based on the fact that the rape was a conjugal, sexual relation between Imrana and her father-in-law, and this makes it forbidden for her to be married to her husband. The reports quote certain spokespersons as saying that it does not matter that the relationship was by consent or compulsion.
If the reports are accurate, then we say that those who issued the fatwa must have taken as their basis Verse 22 of Surah 4 of the Quran, entitled Women, which may be translated as follows: ``Do not marry women whom your fathers have previously married, unless it be a thing of the past. Surely, that is an indecent, abominable and evil practice.`` (Verse 22.) It has to be said, however, that the Arabic word nakaha, which is used in the verse for marriage, is nowadays more often used in spoken Arabic to refer to sex, rather than marriage, but in official documents it continues to signify marriage. However, Quranic statements must be understood and interpreted according to the common usage by native Arabic speakers during the Prophet’s lifetime. We know for certain that this word was used in spoken and written Arabic to refer to marriage. In all other instances in the Quran, it is only used to mean marriage. Therefore, it must be treated as such, and we say that the verse refers only to marital relations.
Thus, all Muslim schools of thought are unanimous that a man cannot marry his father’s former wife. There is no question about this. Scholars, however, differ as to whether a man can marry a woman with whom his father had committed adultery, but this is not relevant to the present case.
It is important also to look at the above Quranic verse and its construction in order to understand its full significance. The word nakahai, or marry, is used twice in the verse, but it is used first in the present tense, which in Arabic signifies the present and the future, while it is used in the past tense in the second instance. Thus it prohibits the initiation of marriage with a woman who was previously married to one’s father. In other words, the woman’s relationship with the father is over, either because she is divorced, or the father has died. In any case she remains unlawful for his son to marry.
Applicability to Imrana’s case
It cannot be overemphasised that the verse speaks about marital relations, and their initiation. As such, it is totally inapplicable to the case in hand, because Imrana was never in any sort of relationship with her father-in-law prior to her marriage. What happened between them came later, after she has been in a valid marital relationship with her husband to whom she has given five children. Therefore, there is no question about the validity of her marriage.
Moving in with the rapist
Most infuriating is the suggestion carried in news reports that some scholars are saying that Imrana should, or could move in with her father-in-law, or may marry him. I seriously doubt that this has been said by any scholar worthy of the name. The Quranic verse next to the one we have quoted above gives a list of the women Muslims are not allowed to marry in any circumstances. The list includes: ``The wives of your own begotten sons.`` (4:23) These are again totally forbidden for Muslims to marry in any circumstances. Is it possible that someone who has any knowledge of Islamic family law could suggest that now that the father-in-law has raped Imrana, he can marry her? Can it be true that anyone imagines that the crime of rape could nullify a ruling by God, stated in His book, the Quran? The Prophet says that no right can accrue as a result of an offence or wrongdoing. Here it is suggested that a prohibition by God Himself is set aside as a result of such wrongdoing. The fatwa is absurd.
- By Adil Salahi
Imrana Ilahi, an ordinary Muslim Indian woman, recently found her name mentioned in countless articles, news despatches, email messages and angry reports going in all directions. Many people would love to be famous, and some know how to use such sudden fame to advantage. But not so Imrana, whose newly acquired fame is for the wrong reasons, and for nothing she had done or contemplated. Poor Imrana has been the target of several wrong actions by the wrong people.
To start with, Imrana was the victim of rape by none other than her father-in-law, who, according to news reports, is now in prison awaiting trial. She was, secondly, the victim of a fatwa issued by certain people who ruled that she can no longer remain married to her husband; rather, she should treat him like her own son. Thirdly, Imrana was further victimised by the local authorities who said that they endorse the fatwa since it has been issued by a recognised institute. Fourth, she has been the victim of many self-appointed defenders who took up her case and are trying to bring pressure to bear on her, her family and the authorities to reverse this fatwa. Finally, according to some reports, Imrana has been told to move in with her rapist as she can be married to him now instead of his son, her own husband.
In the midst of all this furore, Imrana feels like one in a whirlwind of confusion. After her personal tragedy, her only desire is to continue her simple life, abiding by Islamic teachings and looking after her children. Needless to say, the case has provided new ammunition to those who are always on the lookout for anything to use in order to attack Islam and Muslims.
Looking at a reported fatwa:
Unfortunately, when the media takes up such a case, the truth is often forgotten and we are rarely able to establish the simple facts of the case. In all news agency reports I have seen, very little is written about the basis of the fatwa. A couple of quotations attributed to spokespersons at Darul-Uloom at Deoband are often mentioned, but we cannot determine who actually said what. Nevertheless, it is important to make clear the Islamic standpoint on such cases. It is the standard practice of Islamic scholarship that the views of any school of thought should be taken from books written by its own scholars. Thus, if we see a reference to, say, a Hanafi viewpoint in the writings of a highly reputable scholar known for his accuracy and scholarly achievement but is not a Hanafi, we cannot rely on his reporting of the viewpoint and accept it as the standard Hanafi view. We must go back to references and scholars of the Hanafi school and consult them. Only when they confirm the same viewpoint as reported by that scholar, can we accept it as a Hanafi view.
Therefore, without having seen the fatwa as issued by Darul-Uloom and reviewing its basis and the evidence cited in support of it, I cannot comment on the fatwa itself. What I propose to do is to discuss the reports I have seen, and then I will look at the case of a woman raped by her father-in-law and the effect of such a situation on her marriage.
Basis of the fatwa
The reports mention that the fatwa is based on the fact that the rape was a conjugal, sexual relation between Imrana and her father-in-law, and this makes it forbidden for her to be married to her husband. The reports quote certain spokespersons as saying that it does not matter that the relationship was by consent or compulsion.
If the reports are accurate, then we say that those who issued the fatwa must have taken as their basis Verse 22 of Surah 4 of the Quran, entitled Women, which may be translated as follows: ``Do not marry women whom your fathers have previously married, unless it be a thing of the past. Surely, that is an indecent, abominable and evil practice.`` (Verse 22.) It has to be said, however, that the Arabic word nakaha, which is used in the verse for marriage, is nowadays more often used in spoken Arabic to refer to sex, rather than marriage, but in official documents it continues to signify marriage. However, Quranic statements must be understood and interpreted according to the common usage by native Arabic speakers during the Prophet’s lifetime. We know for certain that this word was used in spoken and written Arabic to refer to marriage. In all other instances in the Quran, it is only used to mean marriage. Therefore, it must be treated as such, and we say that the verse refers only to marital relations.
Thus, all Muslim schools of thought are unanimous that a man cannot marry his father’s former wife. There is no question about this. Scholars, however, differ as to whether a man can marry a woman with whom his father had committed adultery, but this is not relevant to the present case.
It is important also to look at the above Quranic verse and its construction in order to understand its full significance. The word nakahai, or marry, is used twice in the verse, but it is used first in the present tense, which in Arabic signifies the present and the future, while it is used in the past tense in the second instance. Thus it prohibits the initiation of marriage with a woman who was previously married to one’s father. In other words, the woman’s relationship with the father is over, either because she is divorced, or the father has died. In any case she remains unlawful for his son to marry.
Applicability to Imrana’s case
It cannot be overemphasised that the verse speaks about marital relations, and their initiation. As such, it is totally inapplicable to the case in hand, because Imrana was never in any sort of relationship with her father-in-law prior to her marriage. What happened between them came later, after she has been in a valid marital relationship with her husband to whom she has given five children. Therefore, there is no question about the validity of her marriage.
Moving in with the rapist
Most infuriating is the suggestion carried in news reports that some scholars are saying that Imrana should, or could move in with her father-in-law, or may marry him. I seriously doubt that this has been said by any scholar worthy of the name. The Quranic verse next to the one we have quoted above gives a list of the women Muslims are not allowed to marry in any circumstances. The list includes: ``The wives of your own begotten sons.`` (4:23) These are again totally forbidden for Muslims to marry in any circumstances. Is it possible that someone who has any knowledge of Islamic family law could suggest that now that the father-in-law has raped Imrana, he can marry her? Can it be true that anyone imagines that the crime of rape could nullify a ruling by God, stated in His book, the Quran? The Prophet says that no right can accrue as a result of an offence or wrongdoing. Here it is suggested that a prohibition by God Himself is set aside as a result of such wrongdoing. The fatwa is absurd.
#100 Posted by googenschlaugen on July 2, 2005 10:35:12 am
{``the suffering witch can still feel the revolting smell of faeces in her mouth``}
Yup. That sounds like Semen Asha.
Yup. That sounds like Semen Asha.
#99 Posted by ballukhan on July 2, 2005 5:46:56 am
``Who are these Darul-Uloom Deoband, AIMWPLB and AIMPLB? Who selected/elected them? Are they the representative of muslims in india? Can someone answer this?
In u.s. the district attorney can start with prosecution even if the victim doesn`t file FIR, can it happen in india too?
By their actions indian muslims are just becoming a laughing stock.``
I do not understand why the press is going to these uneducated mullahs and getting their opinions and fatwas..........these ulemas have no authority at all........neither spiritual nor temporal..............they are just mullahs who want to attract some attention and then make some money by claiming themselves to be saviours of IMs.............and the press is also watching the fun.........it is just like some shankaracharya trying to become an alternate authority on Criminal Jurisprudence...............
In u.s. the district attorney can start with prosecution even if the victim doesn`t file FIR, can it happen in india too?
By their actions indian muslims are just becoming a laughing stock.``
I do not understand why the press is going to these uneducated mullahs and getting their opinions and fatwas..........these ulemas have no authority at all........neither spiritual nor temporal..............they are just mullahs who want to attract some attention and then make some money by claiming themselves to be saviours of IMs.............and the press is also watching the fun.........it is just like some shankaracharya trying to become an alternate authority on Criminal Jurisprudence...............
#98 Posted by cayenne on July 2, 2005 4:52:17 am
YES.YES.YES.ALL WOMEN ARE WITCHES.ENOUGH SAID.LET`S MOVE ON.
#97 Posted by cayenne on July 2, 2005 1:53:44 am
People in India are doing productive things , while the self-proclaimed `witch` who wrote this article is also , assumedly, indian.What a shame!.She behaves just like a pak.Why doesn`t she move there??...........
BBC News
Last Updated: Friday, 1 July, 2005, 16:28 GMT 17:28 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Delhi metro goes under the city
All set for Saturday`s inauguration
The first fully underground phase of Delhi`s Metro rail network is due to be launched on Saturday.
The 11km (seven-mile) line connects the heart of the capital with the old city.
Delhi`s hi-tech metro system was launched in 2002, with the first section using elevated tracks.
The system, which will eventually cover 60km, is seen as the answer to Delhi`s traffic problems and it is also hoped it will lower air pollution levels.
``This was the most difficult and formidable section to build because of the tunnelling involved in the construction,`` Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chief E Sreedharan told journalists.
A large part of the line is built under old Delhi, which contains buildings from the 17th century Mughal empire.
The entire line runs underground
Line 2 of the Delhi Metro connects the main government area with the commercial hub of Connaught Place before heading north to old Delhi and Delhi University.
The stretch, which has some of the city`s most congested streets, will be covered in 13 minutes.
Hi-tech system
Experts describe it as a remarkable engineering feat, built at a cost of 22 billion rupees ($506m).
The system is fully air-conditioned and the stations are equipped with computerised ticketing systems dispensing smart cards.
The next 32km stretch of the Metro - the system`s third line - is due to open in December.
There are plans are on to extend the network in time for the 2010 Commonwealth Games being hosted in the city.
BBC News
Last Updated: Friday, 1 July, 2005, 16:28 GMT 17:28 UK
E-mail this to a friend Printable version
Delhi metro goes under the city
All set for Saturday`s inauguration
The first fully underground phase of Delhi`s Metro rail network is due to be launched on Saturday.
The 11km (seven-mile) line connects the heart of the capital with the old city.
Delhi`s hi-tech metro system was launched in 2002, with the first section using elevated tracks.
The system, which will eventually cover 60km, is seen as the answer to Delhi`s traffic problems and it is also hoped it will lower air pollution levels.
``This was the most difficult and formidable section to build because of the tunnelling involved in the construction,`` Delhi Metro Rail Corporation chief E Sreedharan told journalists.
A large part of the line is built under old Delhi, which contains buildings from the 17th century Mughal empire.
The entire line runs underground
Line 2 of the Delhi Metro connects the main government area with the commercial hub of Connaught Place before heading north to old Delhi and Delhi University.
The stretch, which has some of the city`s most congested streets, will be covered in 13 minutes.
Hi-tech system
Experts describe it as a remarkable engineering feat, built at a cost of 22 billion rupees ($506m).
The system is fully air-conditioned and the stations are equipped with computerised ticketing systems dispensing smart cards.
The next 32km stretch of the Metro - the system`s third line - is due to open in December.
There are plans are on to extend the network in time for the 2010 Commonwealth Games being hosted in the city.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- Zeena: Re: # 112 Mantolives PS:... With Never a Lamentation
- Ras: Interesting take on this... A Ward of the
- MantoLives: Zeena darling, Thanks for... With Never a Lamentation
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 116 "Graduating... With Never a Lamentation
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 41 Laddu... 21st Century Terrorism and
- Zeena: Chowk staff I did not... With Never a Lamentation
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 40 Ladduraj........ 21st Century Terrorism and
- bhairav: Salman Rushdie on Pakistan... 21st Century Terrorism and
