https://wikiislam.net/api.php?action=feedcontributions&user=Lehrasap&feedformat=atomWikiIslam - User contributions [en]2024-03-29T08:58:53ZUser contributionsMediaWiki 1.39.4https://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_2&diff=135215User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 22022-04-16T13:35:17Z<p>Lehrasap: Hijab vs Slave Women</p>
<hr />
<div>= Slave women vs Hijab vs Naked Breasts in Public =<br />
<br />
* Quran allowed ONLY the FREE Muslim women to take Hijab as a sign of Respect and Honour against the Slave Women.<br />
* If any slave woman took Hijab by mistake, then Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat her with a stick, and told them to not to resemble the Free Muslim Women by taking Hijab.<br />
* Moreover, the Breasts of slave women were also naked as their 'Awrah (nakedness) in Islamic sharia is only from navel till knees. And they were also sold in the Bazars of slavery in this semi-naked state, where the customers were also allowed to touch their private parts too, before purchasing them.<br />
<br />
It was an old practice in the pre-Islamic Arab, where they made the women of high-status, to veil themselves as a sign of 'honor', but prohibited the prostitutes and the slaves-women to veil themselves. <br />
{{Quote|https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_pre-Islamic_Arabia#Veiling|During pre-Islamic times, the Assyrian law clearly depicted within their written regulation who was allowed to veil. Those women who were family to "seigniors" had to veil as well as those who were previously prostitutes but now married. Laws on veiling were so strict that intolerable consequences were enacted for these women, some of which included beating or cutting their ears off. Prostitutes and slaves were prohibited from veiling.}}<br />
<br />
=== Hijab Verse was not about modesty but it was revealed only in order to differentiate between the free Muslim women and the salve women ===<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/33.59 Quran 33:59]|يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَٰجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَٰبِيبِهِنَّ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰٓ أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ ۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا<br />
</br>O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (Arabic: Jilbab) close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised (as Free Muslim women) and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.}}<br />
Under the commentary of this Verse, all Muslim Quran Muffassirin (commentators) unanimously recorded this incident that this verse was revealed while men of Madina used to sit on the side of the streets and used to molest the women who passed from there. But after the revelation of this verse, they stopped to molest the free women as they recognised them due to their Hijab. <br />
<br />
Names of 13 Sahaba (companions) and Tabaeen (successors) who reported it, are as under:<br />
<br />
# ٰIbn Abbas (ابن عبـاس): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Jarir]<br />
# Suddi ( السدي): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=7&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Kathir]<br />
# Abu Malik ( أبي مالك): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Abu Saleh (أبي صالح)ٰ: [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Jarir]<br />
# Zuhri (الزهري): [http://shiaonlinelibrary.com/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%AA%D8%A8/2507_%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%B3%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A-%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85-%D8%A7%D8%A8%D9%86-%D8%A3%D8%A8%D9%8A-%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B2%D9%8A-%D8%AC-%D9%A1%D9%A0/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%AD%D8%A9_14 Tafsir Ibn Abi Hatim, Hadith 17786]<br />
# Abu Qalabah (أبي قلابة): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Ibn Shahab (ابن شهاب): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Qatadah (قتادة): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Jarir]<br />
# Kalbi (الكلبي): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Muawiyyah bin Qurrah (معاوية بن قرة): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Hasan (حسن): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
# Mujahid (مجاهد): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Jarir]<br />
# Muhammad bin Ka'b al-Qarzi (محمد بن كعب القرظي): [https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=2&tTafsirNo=26&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Durr-e-Manthur]<br />
<br />
Some of these traditions are as under:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=7&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Commentary of Verse 33:59]|2=يقول تعالى آمراً رسوله صلى الله عليه وسلم تسليماً أن يأمر النساء المؤمنات ــــ خاصة أزواجه وبناته لشرفهن ــــ بأن يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن ليتميزن عن سمات نساء الجاهلية وسمات الإماء ... قال السدي في قوله تعالى { يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِيُّ قُل لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَآءِ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلاَبِيبِهِنَّ ذٰلِكَ أَدْنَىٰ أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلاَ يُؤْذَيْنَ } قال كان ناس من فساق أهل المدينة يخرجون بالليل حين يختلظ الظلام إلى طرق المدينة يتعرضون للنساء، وكانت مساكن أهل المدينة ضيقة، فإذا كان الليل، خرج النساء إلى الطرق يقضين حاجتهن، فكان أولئك الفساق يبتغون ذلك منهن، فإذا رأوا المرأة عليها جلباب، قالوا هذه حرة، فكفوا عنها، وإذا رأوا المرأة ليس عليها جلباب، قالوا هذه أمة، فوثبوا عليها، وقال مجاهد يتجلببن فيعلم أنهن حرائر، فلا يتعرض لهن فاسق بأذى ولا ريبة.<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
... (In this verse, Allah ordered the free women) to draw their Jilbabs over their bodies, so that they will be distinct in their appearance from the women of the Jahiliyyah and from slave women ...<br />
And Suddi said about the revelation of this verse 33:59 that the mischief-mongers among the people of Madīnah would come out on the streets at dusk and get after the women. The houses of the people of Madīnah [in those days] were very small in size and at nightfall the women would go out on these streets [making their way to the fields] to relieve themselves. These evil people would tease and molest these women. While if they saw a woman who would be wearing a Jilbab (cloak/outer garment), they would say she is a free woman [and not a slave] and would abstain [from molesting her] and if they saw a woman who would not be wearing a cloak, they would molest her by saying that she is a slave woman.<br />
And Mujahid said that those women would wear cloaks [in the way prescribed by the Qur'ān] so that it be known that they are free women and the mischief-mongers would not then harm or molest them.}}{{Quote|1=[https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=2&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir-e-Tabari, Verse 33:599]|2=حدثنا ابن حميد، قال: ثنا حكام، عن عنبسة، عمن حدثه، عن أبـي صالـح، قال: قدم النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم الـمدينة علـى غير منزل، فكان نساء النبـيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم وغيرهنّ إذا كان اللـيـل خرجن يقضين حوائجهنّ، وكان رجال يجلسون علـى الطريق للغزل، فأنزل الله: { يا أيُّها النَّبِـيُّ قُلْ لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَناتِكَ وَنِساءِ الـمُؤْمِنِـينَ يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ } يقنعن بـالـجلبـاب حتـى تعرف الأمة من الـحرّة. <br />
</br>Abu Saleh narrated: When the holy prophet came to Madina, he had no house in Medina. He and his wives and other women used to go outside at evening to relieve themselves. And men used to sit on the streets and used to recite poetry (to molest the women). Upon that Allah revealed the verse of Hijab (33:59) so that free women could be differentiated from the slave women.}}{{Quote|1=[https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=hLNKCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT122&lpg=PT122&dq=%D8%A5%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%A1+%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86%D8%A9+%D9%8A%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%84+%D9%84%D9%87%D9%86+%D9%83%D8%B0%D8%A7+%D9%88%D9%83%D8%B0%D8%A7+%D9%83%D9%86+%D9%8A%D8%AE%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%86+%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%B6+%D9%84%D9%87%D9%86+%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%81%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%A1+%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A4%D8%B0%D9%88%D9%87%D9%86&source=bl&ots=HBXT3tzkRn&sig=ACfU3U02Py5hmTr9dynN9qLJw4iVCGlQRw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjd1Iu06Y7hAhU68HMBHXy3AAAQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=%D8%A5%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%A1%20%D8%A8%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AF%D9%8A%D9%86%D8%A9%20%D9%8A%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%84%20%D9%84%D9%87%D9%86%20%D9%83%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D9%88%D9%83%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D9%83%D9%86%20%D9%8A%D8%AE%D8%B1%D8%AC%D9%86%20%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%AA%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%B6%20%D9%84%D9%87%D9%86%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%81%D9%87%D8%A7%D8%A1%20%D9%81%D9%8A%D8%A4%D8%B0%D9%88%D9%87%D9%86&f=false Tafsir Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani (d. 211 AH/826 CE)]|2=عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن الحسن قال كن إماء بالمدينة يقال لهن كذا وكذا كن يخرجن فيتعرض لهن السفهاء فيؤذوهن لأنه فكانت المرأة الحرة تخرج فيحسبون أنها أمة فيتعرضون لها ويؤذونها أخبرنا فأمر النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم المؤمنات أن يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن ذلك أدنى أن يعرفن من الإماء أنهن حرائر فلا يؤذين<br />
Translation:<br />
Al-Hassan al-Basri (died 110 Hijri year) said: Slave women in Medina used to be told certain things when they went outside. (One night) some foolish people accosted a group of women and bothered (hurt) them because they thought they were slave women, but they were actually free women. Because of this, the Prophet ordered the believing women to cast their Jilbabs (cloaks/outer garments) upon themselves, so they would be distinguished as free women, and known from the slave women, and not bothered.}}{{Quote|1=[https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=1&tTafsirNo=1&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=59&tDisplay=yes&Page=1&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Tafsir Ibn Jarir, verse 33:59]|2=حدثنـي مـحمد بن سعد، قال: ثنـي أبـي، قال: ثنـي عمي، قال: ثنـي أبـي، عن أبـيه، عن ابن عبـاس، قوله: { يا أيُّها النَّبِـيُّ قُلْ لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَناتِكَ وَنِساءِ الـمُؤْمِنِـينَ يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ }.... إلـى قوله: { وكانَ اللَّهُ غَفُوراً رَحِيـماً } قال: كانت الـحرّة تلبس لبـاس الأمة، فأمر الله نساء الـمؤمنـين أن يدنـين علـيهنّ من جلابـيبهنّ ، وأدنى الجلباب: أن تقنع، وتشده على جبينها.<br />
</br>Ibn Abbas said about the verse 33:59, the free (Muslim) women used to dress same as the slave women. Upon that Allah ordered them that they let down upon them their over-garments (Arabic: Jilbab), and letting the outer-garment means to cover their faces and to tie it on their foreheads.}}<blockquote></blockquote><blockquote></blockquote>From Mujahid (link):<blockquote>عن مـجاهد، قوله: { يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنَّ } يتـجلببن فـيُعلـم أنهنّ حوائر فلا يعرض لهنّ فـاسق بأذى من قول ولا ريبة.<br />
<br />
Mujahid said regarding verse 33:59, that women have to take Jilbab (outer garment) so that people know that they are free women, and no mischief-monger tease them either with his talk or by doubting about her (character).</blockquote>Ibn Kathir also wrote in his commentary under the verse 24:31 of Surah Nur (link):<blockquote>أن جابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري حدث أن أسماء بنت مرشدة كانت في محل لها في بني حارثة، فجعل النساء يدخلن عليها غير متأزرات، فيبدو ما في أرجلهن من الخلاخل، وتبدو صدورهن وذوائبهن، فقالت أسماء ما أقبح هذا فأنزل الله تعالى الآية۔۔۔ وقوله تعالى { وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ } يعني المقانع يعمل لها صنفات ضاربات على صدورهن لتواري ما تحتها من صدرها وترائبها ليخالفن شعار نساء أهل الجاهلية فإنهن لم يكن يفعلن ذلك، <br />
<br />
Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari narrated that Asma' bint Murshidah was in a house of hers in Bani Harithah, and the women started coming in to her without lower garments so that the anklets on their feet could be seen, along with their (bare) chests and forelocks. Asma' said: `How ugly this is!' Then Allah revealed: وَقُل لِّلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ (And tell the believing women to lower their gaze...).<nowiki>''</nowiki> ... And in the saying of Allah (verse 24:31) means that (free) Muslim women should take an outer garment upon their chests in order to hide their chests and neck ornaments under it, which is against the practice of women of time of ignorance, for they did not do that (i.e. to hide their chests and neck).</blockquote>Note:<br />
<br />
* Quran didn't use the word "mischief-mongers" (Arabic: Fasiq) for these men (who were actually the Companions of Muhammad).<br />
* And the Quran also didn't rebuke them in any way or threatened them with any punishment. <br />
* By showing this behaviour, actually Quran gave the "license" to these people to go ahead and keep on molesting the poor slave girls. <br />
<br />
It was indeed a strange thing to let the poor slave girls molested by the men, and for this no excuse could be presented. People wonder how could divine Allah not rebuke those people for molesting the slave girls.<br />
<br />
And we have to tell them that there existed no Divine Allah, but Muhammad created the character of Allah himself, and thus Muhammad ordered many more such strange things which are impossible from a Divine God. For example:<br />
<br />
* Muhammad (or his invented character of Allah) also allowed the Muslims to rape the slave girls without their consent. And then sell them to another master who again rapes her and this raping continues.<br />
* Muhammad (or his invented character of Allah) also allowed the Muslims to even rape the slave girls (prisoner girls) the same night, after killing their fathers/brothers/husbands/sons in the war. In case of prisoner women already having a husband, then Muslims were not allowed to penetrate their penis in them, but other than that they could enjoy other sexual acts like undressing them, kissing their naked bodies, compelling them to masturbate them etc. <br />
<br />
Is there anything more tyrant than this when the father/sons/brothers/husband are slaughtered of a woman, and she is compelled to have sex on the same night? <br />
<br />
== Hijab has nothing to do with Modesty, but it is the RESPECT of women and their choices which is counted as Modesty ==<br />
Unfortunately, 99% of common Muslims today themselves don’t know this bitter reality of Hijab and Islam. They are surprised when this truth is presented to them. While Mullahs (Islamic Scholars) try their best to hide this truth from them.<br />
<br />
Muslim claim that women have to take Hijab while it stops the men to become horny, and if there is not a wrapper on the candy, then flies will come blah blah blah.<br />
<br />
But it was Allah (i.e. Muhammad) himself who compelled thousands of slave women to move in the public without Hijab (i.e. without wrapper). So, the question is, did Muhammad thus make Sahaba horny and did Sahaba rape those naked slave women of other people?<br />
<br />
Reality: <br />
<br />
* ''Hijab has nothing to do with Modesty, but it is the RESPECT of women and their choices which is counted as Modesty.''<br />
* ''And Western world is the most modest, as it Respects the women's right the most.''<br />
* ''Hijab is not modesty, but it is the sign of worst discrimination against the poor slave women for 14 long centuries by Islam.''<br />
<br />
== Why didn't Allah/Muhammad punish the companions (i.e. men) who sexually molested the slave-women? ==<br />
Answer is this that Allah/Muhammad didn't allow the poor slave-women to give 'testimony' in the courts against any crime of any Muslim in the court. Their testimony was not even counted as 'half' but as 'ZERO'. That is why, a salve woman was not even allowed to go to the court, and to testify against the person who sexually molested her. For details, please read our article: Evils and Crimes against Humanity of Islamic Slavery.<br />
<br />
== Role of Umar Ibn Khattab ==<br />
It was difficult for Muhammad to reject Umar's wishes and suggestions, and throughout Muhammad's life, whenever Umar made any wish/suggestion, later Muhammad claimed of coming of revelation according to Umar's wish.<br />
<br />
Same thing happened in case of veiling of women too. It seems that basically it was Umar Ibn Khattab who initially wanted the free Muslim women to be veiled and he talked to Muhammad several times about it (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 146). Later, during the incident of molestation of women in Medina, Muhammad claimed the verses of veiling according to Umar's wish.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Umar was an extremist. It seems, he was not even satisfied from the ruling of veiling for women and wanted something even more than that. It becomes evident from the following incident between Umar and Sauda (one of Muhammad's wives), after the incident verses of veiling.<br />
<br />
Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4795:<blockquote>Narrated Aisha: Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She had a large frame and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So `Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, "O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sauda returned while Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! I went out to answer the call of nature and `Umar said to me so-and-so." Then Allah inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said (to Sauda), "You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs."</blockquote>Why should Sauda take more pain in thinking of new ways of hiding?<br />
<br />
Why should she take more pain from even more restrictions upon her than veiling?<br />
<br />
What was wrong if people still recognized her outside the house?<br />
<br />
On one side Umar was not even satisfied with Hafsa in the veil. But on the other hand, this same Umar used to beat the slave women for taking Hijab, and he took away the Jilbab (outer garment sheet) from them (as we will see it later in this article). <br />
<br />
== 2nd Caliph Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat the slave women with stick if they ever took Hijab ==<br />
According to authentic traditions, Umar Ibn Khattab used to beat those slave girls with a stick, who by mistake took the Jilbab and covered their bodies. He used to tell those slave girls, to not to try to become equal in status with the free Muslim women, by taking Jilbab/Muqna.<br />
<br />
Saudi grand hadith master SheikhAlbani recorded this authentic tradition (link):<blockquote>أخرجه ابن أبي شيبة في " المصنف " ( 2 / 82 / 1 ) : حدثنا وكيع قال : حدثنا شعبة عن قتادة عن أنس قال : " رأى عمر أمة لنا مقنعة فضربها وقال : لا تشبهين بالحرائر " . قلت : وهذا إسناد صحيح<br />
Imam Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded in his book al-Munsaf that Umar Ibn Khattab saw a slave girl who took a garment/sheet as Hijab and covered her body. Upon that Umar hit her and told her that she should not try to resemble the free Muslim women (by taking Jilbab/Muqna).”<br />
The chain of narration of this Hadith is “authentic/Sahih”<br />
This same tradition is also narrated by Ibn Qalabah (link).</blockquote>Abdur Razzak (d 211 Hijri year) recorded this narration (link):<blockquote>عبد الرزاق عن معمر عن أيوب عن نافع أن عمر رأى جارية خرجت من بيت حفصة متزينة عليها جلباب أو من بيت بعض أزواج النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فدخل عمر البيت فقال من هذه الجارية فقالوا أمة لنا – أو قالوا أمة لآل فلان – فتغيظ عليهم وقال أتخرجون إماءكم بزينتها تفتنون الناس<br />
Umar once saw a young girl leaving the house of Hafsa (his daughter), adorned with a jilbab — or, from one of the houses of the Prophet’s wives. Umar entered the house and said, “Who is this girl?” They said, “A slave of ours” — or, a slave of someone’s family. He became enraged at them and said, “Your slave girls left with their adornment, and created discord (by taking Jilbab) amongst the people (while they were unable to distinguish her from the free Muslim women).”</blockquote>Imam Shaybani (died 189 hijri year) wrote in his book al-Masoot (link):<blockquote>ولا ينبغي للرجل أن ينظر من أمة غيره إذا كانت بالغة أو تشتهي مثلها أو توطأ إلا ما ينظر إليه من ذوات المحرم ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى شعرها وإلى صدرها وإلى ثديها وعضدها وقدمها وساقها ولا ينظر إلى بطنها ولا إلى ظهرها ولا إلى ما بين السرة منها حتى يجاوز الركبة<br />
It is not permissible for a man to look at a slave woman other than his own, if she has reached puberty, or he has a desire for her, except what it is permissible to look at from his close relative women (maharam). So, there is no harm that he looks at her hair, her chest, her breasts, her arm, her foot, or leg. And he does not look at her stomach or back, or what is between the navel and the knees.</blockquote>And Saudi grand hadith master Sheikh Albani recorded this tradition (link):<blockquote>حدثنا على بن مسهر عن المختار بن فلفل عن أنس بن مالك قال: " دخلت على عمر بن الخطاب أمة قد كان يعرفها لبعض المهاجرين أو الأنصار , وعليها جلباب متقنعة به , فسألها: عتقت؟ قالت: لا: قال: فما بال الجلباب؟! ضعيه عن رأسك , إنما الجلباب على الحرائر من نساء المؤمنين , فتلكأت , فقام إليها بالدرة , فضرب بها رأسها حتى ألقته عن رأسها ".<br />
قلت: وهذا سند صحيح على شرط مسلم.<br />
Companion Anas bin Malik said: A slave girl of some Muhajir or Ansar came to Umar Ibn Khattab in a state that she was wearing a Jilbab (and she covered her breasts and body with it). Upon that Umar ordered her to take away the Jilbab from her head, while Jilbab is reserved only for the free (Muslim) woman. The slave girl hesitated, upon which Umar stood up and he started beating her with the stick. He hit her head, till the slave girl removed the Jilbab.<br />
Sheikh Albani said that his Hadith is “authentic (Sahih)” according to the standards of Imam Muslim.</blockquote>A Hijabi women was holding up Umar's biography not knowing he was the WORST when it came to degrading women in every possible way. He was not satisfied with Sauda even in Hijab and wanted her to not even to come out of her house. On the other hand, he would beat slaves for covering themselves. He wanted even more restrictions upon the women than veiling. He was the one who asked Muhammad that husbands should be allowed to beat their wives (link). He beat his wife and his sister. He beat his daughter when she complained about Muhammad having sex with the slave Maria. He also said to his own daughter that she isn't as beautiful as Aisha and that she could be gotten rid of with no problem at all. Imagine your own father belittling your looks and existence. His wife was unable to give him a child, upon that Umar insulted her by saying that she didn't even worth a straw in his house, and he kicked her out of his house by giving her divorce (Link). Umar should be condemned for the man he was, but instead of that he is praised by Muslims as a demi-god now.<br />
<br />
== Looking and touching the private parts of half-naked slave women in the Islamic Bazaars of Slavery ==<br />
The 1400 years of history of Islam also consists of this shameful act against humanity, where Muslims forced those women/girls to become half naked by exposing their breasts, and then forced them to stand in front of thousands of men in the Islamic Bazaars of slavery, who not only looked at them with lust, but they were also allowed to touch their private parts (as if they were sheep and goats).<br />
<br />
Imam Bayhiqi wrote in his book Sunan al-Kubra (link):<blockquote>عن نافع ، عن ابن عمر ” أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها و على عجزها<br />
Translation:<br />
Nafe’e narrated that whenever Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl, he would inspect her by analyzing her legs and placing his hands between her breasts and on her buttocks”<br />
Saudi grand hadith master Sheikh Albani declared this tradition to be “authentic” (link).</blockquote>Musanaf Abdul Razzaq recorded this tradition (link):<blockquote>عبد الرزاق ، عن الثوري ، عن جابر ، عن الشعبي قال : " إذا كان الرجل يبتاع الأمة ، فإنه ينظر إلى كلها إلا الفرج " .<br />
Shu’bi said: If any man has to buy a slave girl, then he can see whole of her body, except for her vagina</blockquote>Musanaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 4, page 289 Tradition 20241 (link):<blockquote>نا علي بن مسهر عن عبيدالله عن نافع عن ابن عمر أنه إذا أراد أن يشتري الجارية وضع يده على أليتيها وبين فخذيها وربما كشف عن ساقها<br />
‘Naf’e reported when Ibn Umar wanted to buy a slave-girl he would place his hand on her buttocks, between her thighs, and may uncover her legs’</blockquote>Musnaf Abdur Razak, Volume 7, page 286, Tradition 13204 (link):<blockquote>13204 عبد الرزاق ، عن ابن عيينة قال : وأخبرني ابن أبي نجيح ، عن مجاهد قال : " وضع ابن عمر يده بين ثدييها ، ثم هزها " .</blockquote><blockquote>‘Mujahid reported that ibn Umar placed his hand between (a slave-girl’s) breasts and shook them’</blockquote>Musanaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 4, page 289 Tradition 20241 (link):<blockquote>حدثنا جرير عن منصور عن مجاهد قال : كنت مع ابن عمر أمشي في السوق فإذا نحن بناس من النخاسين قد اجتمعوا على جارية يقلبونها ، فلما رأوا ابن عمر تنحوا وقالوا : ابن عمر قد جاء ، فدنا منها ابن عمر فلمس شيئا من جسدها وقال : أين أصحاب هذه الجارية ، إنما هي سلعة<br />
Mujahid said: ‘I was walking with ibn Umar in a slave market, then we saw some slave dealers gathered around one slave-girl and they were checking her, when they saw Ibn Umar, they stopped and said: ‘Ibn Umar has arrived’. Then ibn Umar came closer to the slave-girl, he touched some parts of her body and then said: ‘Who is the owner of this slave-girl, she is just a commodity!’</blockquote>Imam Shaybani (died 189 hijri year) wrote in his book al-Masoot (link):<blockquote>ولا ينبغي للرجل أن ينظر من أمة غيره إذا كانت بالغة أو تشتهي مثلها أو توطأ إلا ما ينظر إليه من ذوات المحرم ولا بأس بأن ينظر إلى شعرها وإلى صدرها وإلى ثديها وعضدها وقدمها وساقها ولا ينظر إلى بطنها ولا إلى ظهرها ولا إلى ما بين السرة منها حتى يجاوز الركبة<br />
It is not permissible for a man to look at a slave woman other than his own, if she has reached puberty, or he has a desire for her, except what it is permissible to look at from his close relative women (maharam). So, there is no harm that he looks at her hair, her chest, her breasts, her arm, her foot, or leg. And he does not look at her stomach or back, or what is between the navel and the knees.</blockquote>The slave-women of Umar Ibn Khattab used to server men with naked breasts. Imam Bayhiqi recorded this tradition and declared it "Sahih" in his book al-Sunan al-Kubra (link):<blockquote>ثم روى من طريق حماد بن سلمة قالت : حدثني ثمامة بن عبد الله بن أنس عن جده أنس بن مالك قال : " كن إماء عمر رضي الله عنه يخدمننا كاشفات عن شعورهن تضطرب ثديهن " . قلت : وإسناده جيد رجاله كلهم ثقات غير شيخ البيهقي أبي القاسم عبد الرحمن بن عبيد الله الحربي ( 1 ) وهو صدوق كما قال الخطيب ( 10 / 303 ) وقال البيهقي عقبه : " والاثار عن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه في ذلك صحيحة " .<br />
<br />
Anas bin Malik said: “The slaves of Omar, may God be pleased with him, served us, revealing their hair and their breasts.”<br />
<br />
Sheikh Albani also declared it "Sahih" (Link).</blockquote>This humiliation of the slave woman is the real “Islamic Modesty”, which is utter shameful. <br />
<br />
== All four Sunni Imams are unanimous that the nakedness (Awrah عورۃ) of a slave woman is from navel till knee ==<br />
Even when Islam was not selling the slave women in the Bazaars, still it forced them to move outside in front of thousands of men, with naked breasts, while Islam declared the intimate parts of slave women (‘Awrah) of slave women was from navel till knee only.<br />
<br />
Muhammad again took this law from the ignorant Arab society of that time, and he once again rejected the Laws of Moses which didn’t allow for the naked breasts of slave women.<br />
<br />
It is perhaps the “Biggest Contradiction” in Islam. On one side, Islam asked free Muslim women to take full body Hijab, but on the other side, Islam snatched away the right of Hijab from the slave women, and forced them to move outside with naked breasts.<br />
<br />
All the four Sunni Imams of Fiqh are unanimous that nakedness of a slave woman is only from navel till knee. <br />
<br />
=== Hanafi Fiqh: ===<br />
Hanafi Scholar Imam Jassas wrote (link):<blockquote>يَجُوزُ لِلْأَجْنَبِيِّ النَّظَرُ إلَى شَعْرِ الْأَمَةِ وَذِرَاعِهَا وَسَاقِهَا وَصَدْرِهَا وَثَدْيِهَا<br />
Translation:<br />
A man could see the hairs, arms, calves, chest and breasts of the slave woman of another person.</blockquote>According to Hanafi Fiqh book "Fatawa-a-Alamgiri" (which was written by 500 Islamic Scholars upon the order of Emperor Aurangzeb Alamgir (link):<blockquote>* It is allowed to see whole naked body of a slave woman of other person, except between her navel and the knees.<br />
* And all that is allowed to be seen, it is also allowed to be touched.</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Maliki Fiqh: ===<br />
And it is written in the Book "Al-Sharh al-Saghir" of Maliki Fiqh (link):<blockquote>فيرى الرجل من المرأة - إذا كانت أمة - أكثر مما ترى منه لأنها ترى منه الوجه والأطراف فقط، وهو يرى منها ما عدا ما بين السرة والركبة، لأن عورة الأمة مع كل واحد ما بين السرة والركبة<br />
A man could see more of the body of a slave woman as compared to what she could see of a man. She is allowed only to see his hands and feet, while a man is allowed to see her whole body naked except for the part between her navel and knees.</blockquote>The Maliki Scholar Imam Ibn Abi Zayd (died 386 Hijri) wrote in his book "al-Jameh" (link), and also see here:<blockquote>"He (i.e. al-Imam Malik ibn Anas) strongly disapproved of the behavior of the slave women of al-Madinah in going out uncovered above the lower garment (i.e with naked breasts). He said: "I have spoken to the Sultan about it, but I have not received a reply."</blockquote>Imam Qurtabi writes in his famous Tafsir of Quran, Verse 7:26 (Link):<blockquote>“وأما الأمة فالعورة منها ما تحت ثدييها ، ولها أن تبدي رأسها ومعصميها . وقيل : حكمها حكم الرجل”<br />
Translation:<br />
As far as slave woman is concerned, then here 'Awrah (i.e. Nakedness) is under her breasts, and she could expose her head and arms.</blockquote>Please also watch the video of Sheikh Hamza Yousuf (link) where he is telling that slave women used to walk outside with naked breasts during the era of prophet Muhammad.<br />
<br />
=== Shafi'i Fiqh: ===<br />
And it is also the same ruling in the Fiqh of Imam Shafii too. See the book "Al-Muhadab fi Fiqh al-Shafi'i, written by Shirazi (link):<blockquote>المذهب أن عورتها ما بين السرة والركبة<br />
Translation:<br />
The 'Awrah (of a slave woman) is between here navel and knees.</blockquote><br />
<br />
=== Hanbali Fiqh: ===<br />
Kitab al-Kafi fi Fiqh al-Imam Ahmed (link):<blockquote>وقال ابن حامد عورتها كعورة الرجل ، لما روى عمر بن شعيب عن أبيه عن جده أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : إذا زوج أحدكم أمته عبده أو أجيره فلا ينظر إلى شيء من عورته فإن ما تحت السرة إلى الركبة عورة يريد عورة الأمة ، رواه الدارقطني . ولأنه من لم يكن رأسه عورة لم يكن صدره عورة ،<br />
Translation:<br />
Ibn Hamid said that her 'awrah is the same as the 'awrah of the man, because of what is narrated by 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, from his father, from his grandfather, that the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa-sallam, said: "When one of you marries off his slave woman to his slave or hireling, let him not look at anything of her 'awrah, for whatever is below the navel until the knees is 'awrah." He meant the 'awrah of the slave woman. Narrated by ad-Daraqutni. Head is not included in the 'awrah of a slave woman as well as their breasts...</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Traditions about the 'Awrah (i.e. nakedness) of a slave woman: ==<br />
And Imam Abdul Razzaq recorded many traditions upon the 'Awrah (i.e. nakedness) of a slave woman in his books "al-Munsif". Some of these traditions are presented below (link):<blockquote>13206 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن جريج عن رجل عن ابن المسيب أنه قال: يحل له أن ينظر إلى كل شئ فيها، ما عدا فرجها.<br />
<br />
Said ibn al-Musayyib said if one wants to buy a slave girl, then he could see whole of her body except for her lower private part (link).<br />
<br />
13207 - عبد الرزاق عن الثوري عن جابر عن الشعبي قال: إذا كان الرجل يبتاع الأمة فإنه ينظر إلى كلها إلا الفرج.<br />
<br />
Shubi said if someone wanted to buy a slave girl, then he could see whole of her body naked except for lower private part (link).<br />
<br />
13208 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن جريج قال: أكل في.... (1) أصدق عمن سمع عليا يسأل عن الأمة تباع، أينظر إلى ساقها، وعجزها، وإلى بطنها؟ قال: لا بأس بذلك، لا حرمة لها، إنما وقفت لنساومها.<br />
<br />
Fourth Caliph 'Ali was asked about seeing the calves, stomach and back of a slave woman. Upon that he replied there is no harm in seeing them while a slave woman has no honour. She is standing in the slave market for exactly for this purpose that people could evaluate her price (by seeing and touching her) before buying her (link).<br />
<br />
1792 - ( روى أبو حفص بإسناده : " أن ابن عمر كان يضع يده بين ثدييها ( يعني الجارية ) وعلى عجزها من فوق الثياب ويكشف عن ساقها " ذكره في الوقع ) . صحيح . أخرجه البيهقي ( 5 / 329 ) من طريق عبيد الله بن عمر عن نافع عن ابن عمر : " أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها وعلى عجزها " . وفي آخره زيادة : " وكأنه كان يضعها عليها من وراء الثياب " . ولعلها من البيهقي أو من بعض رواته . والسند صحيح .<br />
<br />
There are many traditions about Abdullah Ibn Umar (A prominent companion and son of 2nd Caliph) which tell that whenever he had to buy a slave girl, then he used to uncover her back, stomach and calves. And he used to check her back and chest by putting his hands between her breasts. Saudi grand Mufti Albani declared this tradition to be "authentic" (link).<br />
<br />
13203 - عبد الرزاق عن ابن عيينة عن عمرو بن دينار عن مجاهد قال: كنت مع ابن عمر في السوق، فأبصر بجارية تباع، فكشف عن ساقها، وصك في صدرها، وقال: اشتروا، يريهم أنه لا بأس بذلك.<br />
<br />
Mujahid said that once Abdullah Ibn Umar came to a market where some traders wanted to buy a slave girl. Ibn Umar exposed her calves, then put his hands between her breasts and shook them. Afterwards he told the traders to buy that slave girl as there was no defect in her (link)</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Muslim claim: Hijab is indeed related to 'modesty' ==<br />
Muslims claim that prior of verse 33:59, Allah had already revealed verse 24:31, where Allah told the women to lower their gaze, and this is modesty. <br />
<br />
Quran 24:31:<blockquote>وَقُل لِّلْمُؤْمِنَٰتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَٰرِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا ۖ وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ ۖ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا لِبُعُولَتِهِنَّ أَوْ ءَابَآئِهِنَّ أَوْ ءَابَآءِ بُعُولَتِهِنَّ ...<br />
<br />
[Sahih International] And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision (i.e. to lower their gaze) and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers (i.e. Khimar خمار) over their chests (/neckline) (Arabic:جُيُوبِهِنَّ) and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, ۔۔۔۔</blockquote>First of all, please note the difference between "Jilbab" and "Khimar":<br />
<br />
* Jilbab was a big outer garment/sheet that is worn on the head, draped around the body and that totally covers the breasts and the body of the woman. While Muqna was also an outer garment sheet like Jilbab, but shorter than Jilbab. Both were put upon the head and used for hiding the naked breast and other parts of the body. In the verse of Hijab (Quran 33:59), the writer of Quran ordered free Muslim women to use this same Jilbab, to cover their breasts and bodies. While slave women were not allowed to use Jilbab to cover their breast and the body.<br />
* And “Khimar (Arabic: خمار)” is a small head scarf, which covers only the head and comes up to the shoulders. We see Arab men using this “Khimar” (Arabic head scarf) today. <br />
<br />
Sahih Muslim, Hadith 275:<blockquote>أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَسَحَ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَالْخِمَارِ <br />
<br />
Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wiped over the socks and Khimar (Arabic Scarf)</blockquote>Moreover, please also note that in the verse, the Arabic word جُيُوبِ (singular جَيْب) is used. Muslim translators translated as 'chest', which is wrong. The exact translation of (singular جَيْب) is 'neckline', where the ornament like necklace is placed. It does not cover the breasts of women, but only the upper part of chest and neck. Please see this exact translation at wiktionary(link). Chest is not a right translation, while the Arabic word for chest is "Sadar (صدر)". This verse is ordering the women to hide their ornaments like earrings and necklaces with part of their head scarfs. <br />
<br />
It is written in Tafsir Madarak al-Tanzil, under the verse 24:31 (link):<blockquote>كانت جيوبهن واسعة تبدو منها صدورهن وما حواليها وكن يسدلن الخمر من ورائهن فتبقى مكشوفة فأمرن بأن يسدلنها من أقدامهن حتى تغطيها<br />
<br />
(During the (pre-Islamic) time of ignorance, the custom among the Arab women was) their bosoms were naked due to which their chest and area around it was exposed. And women used to hang their head scarfs (Khimar) on the backside, due to which bosoms were exposed. They were ordered (in this verse) to hang their head scarfs on the front side, so that the bosoms are covered. </blockquote>And it is written in Tafsir-e-Mazhari, under the commentary of this verse 24:31 (link):s<blockquote>All the Scholars are 'Unanimous اجماع' that this verse is only for the free (Muslim) women ... Imam Malik, Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ahmad deemed the nakedness of a slave woman from navel till knees. While Imam Abu Hanifa considered her stomach and back to be a part of her nakedness too. </blockquote>This was the first order of Hijab, and the next order came in verse 33:59, where only the free Muslim women were demanded to take the Jilbab (big sheet of outer garment) over their heads, in oder to cover their naked breasts and the whole body. <br />
<br />
== 'Lowering the gazes' is not modesty, but only an Un-Natural restriction, which results in frustration: ==<br />
We absolutely don't agree with Muslim's claim of this so-called 'modesty' in name of 'lowering the gaze', while:<br />
<br />
* Keeping the necklines of slave women naked is not modesty, but it will become Double Standards and a Contradiction and Discrimination. <br />
* And prohibiting the slave women to take Hijab, and to compel them to move in the public with naked breasts is also not a modesty, but Double Standards and a Contradiction, and Discrimination. <br />
* And 'lowering of gazes' is also not modesty, but Un-Natural restriction upon the women (and men). <br />
* And not allowed the women to talk with men, or both of them to interact with each other is also not a modesty, but again an un-natural restriction. <br />
* These un-natural restrictions result only in form of extreme 'Frustrated' society. Please read out article Incest in Islamic Pakistan to see how these un-natural Islamic restrictions making Pakistani men sexually frustrated. <br />
* And in order to see the real destruction of these unnatural restrictions, please see the Incident of Ifk, where people put the howdah of 'Aisha on the camel, while they thought 'Aisha was present there. But 'Aisha was not present there. This happened while Islam prohibits interaction between men and women, and thus people didn't even say "hello" to 'Aisha. This led to such devastating results where 2 tribes of Muslims were about to kill each other, and Muhammad was close to divorce 'Aisha, and this whole drama lasted for a complete month. <br />
* And 'Love' is natural. But this lowering of gazes, and prohibition of interaction are unnatural, while they lead to the killing of the natural 'love' between a girl and a boy. No proof could be bigger than this LOVE. <br />
<br />
Once again, let us make it clear that: <br />
<br />
* ''It is the RESPECT of women and their choices which is counted as modesty.'' <br />
* And the western world is the most modest. It provided the women with protection by demanding the men to respect the women and their choices. <br />
<br />
== Slave women were standing in the mosques with naked breasts, during the prayers ==<br />
What more, slave women were offering their PRAYERS with naked breasts. Imam Ibn Hazm recorded in his book<br />
<br />
Al-Muhala, Kitab al-Rizaa, Volume 10 page 23 (link):<blockquote>لا يستحي من أن يطلق أن للمملوكة أن تصلي عريانة يرى الناس ثدييها وخاصرتها وان للحرة أن تتعمد أن تكشف من شفتي فرجها مقدار الدرهم البغلي تصلي كذلك ويراها الصادر والوارد بين الجماعة في المسجد<br />
“He (Abu Hanifa) was not shy to say that a slave woman can pray naked and the people can observe her breasts and waist. A free woman can purposely show the parts of her vagina during prayers and can be observed by whosoever enters and leaves the mosque.”</blockquote>Another Saudi grand Mufti Sheikh Uthaymeen gave this fatwa (link):<blockquote>الأَمَةُ - ولو بالغة - وهي المملوكة، فعورتها من السُّرَّة إلى الرُّكبة، فلو صلَّت الأَمَةُ مكشوفة البدن ما عدا ما بين السُّرَّة والرُّكبة، فصلاتها صحيحة، لأنَّها سترت ما يجب عليها سَتْرُه في الصَّلاة.<br />
The nackedness (‘Awrah) of a slave woman is from her navel till knees, even if she is an adult and belongs to someone. If she offers her prayers while her body is covered only from navel till knees, and rest of her body is naked, still her prayer is valid while she covered those parts of body, which needed to be covered in the prayer.</blockquote>It is also reported about Umar Ibn Khattab that his slave women used to serve the guests in this state of nakedness. It has been recorded in Sunan al-Kubra by Imam Bayhaqi, and has been authenticated by Albani (link):<blockquote>عن أنس بن مالك قال كن إماء عمر رضي الله عنه يخدمننا كاشفات عن شعورهن تضرب ثديهن<br />
<br />
Anas bin Malik said: ‘The slave-girls of Umar were serving us with uncovered hair and their breasts were shaking” </blockquote>This humiliation by hitting the slave girls for taking Hijab, is the real “Islamic Modesty”, which Muslims hide today.<br />
<br />
All this problem of nakedness of slave woman is present in Islam, while Muhammad rejected the laws of Judaism/Christianity, and took the laws of non-civilized Arabs as Islamic Sharia, while those laws were more beneficial for Muhammad and Muslims materialistically. <br />
<br />
== Prophet Muhammad used to walk in public with hands of another person's slave girl in his hand ==<br />
On one side Islam made life difficult for a woman in name of “Hijab and modesty”, and practically imprisoned her in her home, and cut her off from the outside world, she could not even talk with other person, and even if she has to talk, then she must talk in hard voice.<br />
<br />
But on the other hand, Prophet Muhammad used to walk in the public with hands of slave girl of other person in his hand.<blockquote>Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith 4177:<br />
<br />
<br />
“If a female slave among the people of Al-Madinah were to take the hand of the Messenger of Allah, he would not take his hand away from hers until she had taken him wherever she wanted in Al-Madinah so that her needs may be met.”<br />
<br />
Grade: Sahih (Darussalam)</blockquote>Please remember that this slave girl was there with naked breasts too, which makes things more complicated.<br />
<br />
Why prophet Muhammad needed to take her hand in his hand? Why were they not able to move into the city without taking each other’s hands?<br />
<br />
This same tradition is also present in Sahih Bukhari too.<blockquote>Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 6072:<br />
Anas bin Malik said, "Any of the female slaves of Medina could take hold of the hand of Allah's Apostle and take him wherever she wished."</blockquote><br />
<br />
== Why these two opposite Extremes? ==<br />
On one side, not only hairs, but the whole body of a free women is imprisoned in Jilbab. Or even worse, she is practically imprisoned in the 4 walls of the house. She is compelled to lead an unnatural life, where she is not even allowed to talk with men. <br />
<br />
But on the other side, even the breasts of the slave women were kept naked. And even customers could touch their private parts like sheep and cattle. And Muhammad was moving in hands in hands with the slave women of other people. <br />
<br />
Yes, these are the two opposite Extremes.<br />
<br />
This happens when no Allah is present above in the heavens, and a human with intellect level of Muhammad had to made the revelations at his own.<br />
<br />
== Video of selling of a slave-woman with naked breasts in Saudi Arabia in 1964 ==<br />
Even slavery was prohibited in Saudi Arabia due to the immense pressure by the Western countries in 962, but still Muslims kept on practicing it secretly later on. In 1964, some western journalists were able to save this crime in the camera. Please see this Video (at the end of the video, you could see how the slave-women were sold with naked breasts). <br />
<br />
== Original Photos of half-naked Muslim slave women ==<br />
We have seen complete reference above in this article, where it was prohibited for the slave women to take Hijab and to cover their breasts and body. They were compelled to move in this half naked state in public. But Muslims of today still unable to believe all these references. They could look at the following original Photos from camera.<br />
<br /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Asmith&diff=134569User talk:Asmith2022-02-06T10:04:28Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Possibly Admins don't get the Notifications */</p>
<hr />
<div>== score guide? ==<br />
Hello. Can you tell me if there is any score guide? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 10:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)<br />
:See the article scoring rubric here: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Template:QualityScore. Going to post this on your talk page as well. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 20:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Thanks ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for making me an editor here Alan. Can I create articles here now?-[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 17:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
No problem. Glad to have you on board. You can submit ideas for articles but we will need to see more contributions from you, and then we will grant you that privilege. --[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 22:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly incorrect permissions for new users ==<br />
<br />
Hey ASmith. We talked via email a week or two back.<br />
<br />
I'm getting around WikiIslam, and I noticed that the novice users page creation permissions appear to be set up incorrectly.<br />
<br />
Recall [[WikiIslam:Sandbox]],<br />
<br />
<blockquote>You can also create sandboxes under your username such as User:Your username/Sandbox 1 if you expect yourself to be the only editor of the page.</blockquote><br />
<br />
I go to [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]], which I cannot edit. If I go to https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1&action=edit , I get<br />
<br />
<blockquote> You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason:<br />
<br />
You do not have permission to create new pages.</blockquote><br />
<br />
The same applies for UNcreated (yet) Wiki sandbox pages such as [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Hello]]<br />
<br />
HOWEVER, this isn't the case for,<br />
* [[User_talk:Graves/Sandbox_1]] (user talk sandbox page - NOTICE, not the [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]] )<br />
* [[User_talk:Asmith/Sandbox_1]] (yours, not mine, user talk sandbox page)<br />
* [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Muslimské_statistiky]] (someone's written, <b>already created</b>, sandbox page)<br />
* [[User:Asmith]] (yes, I can edit your user-page page)<br />
<br />
I think this is a mis-confuration, so I let you know.<br />
<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
:Thanks for bringing this up. It needs to be fixed and I updated the public sandbox for now to make it clear that new users should request these pages to be made for them for now (once made, new users can edit these without admin approval). I made three of them for you at your preferred url: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_2, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_3<br />
:Let me know if you need anything else. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 18:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to upload image to WikiIslam ==<br />
<br />
I need to upload an image for an upcoming article. I cannot upload images directly to WikiIslam (no permissions), so I temporarily mirrored it here, https://ibb.co/KrPWJzm<br />
<br />
Can one of the admins upload it to WikiIslam? Thanks<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 09:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Done. The file name is Al-Bari-page.png . Do you have a link to the Discord? The Discord would be the best way to discuss such things imo.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 17:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<hr><br />
<br />
Hi ASmith. I'd be interested in joining the Discord server, but I don't have a link. Can you send one to the email address I registered with (to keep it discreet)? Thanks. <br />
<br />
And thanks for uploading the image.<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 18:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to create an article ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I would like to create an article on Spinning Wheel. Regarding the propaganda claim that Islamic science invented the spinning wheel. I have gathered many source that expose this claim. Can you start a blank article or a sandbox? I am also not able to make a sandbox. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 18:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hi [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]]. Thank you for your idea, but after discussion with out team we came to the conclusion that this does not fit our scope. Please see our page [[WikiIslam:Scope and Article Relevance]]. This is a subject that would be better discussed on our Discord I think, do you have a link?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 06:44, 8 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No I dont have any Discord link. Can you give it? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 20:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can you create an article for Historical Errors? There are many errors. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 08:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You can find the article here [[Historical Errors in the Qur'an]]. Thanks!--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 20:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:We actually already have a section on historical errors in the scientific errors in the Quran page, so in that case this would lead to a lot duplication. I think it has always worked well on the scientific errors page because people refer to it for all the strong Quranic factual errors in one convenient page (whether natural world or history). Regarding the one about the Kaaba as a place of safety that was deleted, I think you were probably in any case right to remove it for others reasons, which is that one of the verses quoted, Q. 5:97 says "Allah made the Ka'ba, the Sacred House, an asylum of security [haram, forbidden] for men, as also the Sacred Months". Of course, no-one would consider this as a prophecy that the sacred months would never be violated, since that was already happening, so similarly with the Kaaba, Muslims would just say this was one of its appointed purposes, not a promise of divine protection nor a prophecy.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 21:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I know it's there, but I think it might be useful to move it out to another page. That article is already big enough. I think the the best course is this: the historical errors should be summarized on the scientific errors page, and then a redirect should be placed to the historical errors page. That is the general Wikipedia standard operating procedure, I think it would fit here.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 00:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::Specifically I think we'd leave a few important examples of historical errors on the scientific errors page along w a summary of the section and then link at the top to the new page where we could proceed to list say dozens of historical errors. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Pending any other arguments I'll go ahead and implement this tomorrow. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::That sounds a good approach. If I may recommend which ones to move from (rather than having also on) the sci errors page to the new historical errors page, it'd be the less interesting or famous ones which a visitor on the fence might more easily rationalise away as a mere absense of evidence thing or alternative meaning apologetics: Samaritans in ancient Egypt, John the Baptist's original name; Supernatural destruction of cities; Humans lived hundreds of years, Ancient mosque in Jerusalem. That would leave ones that people often mention as effecting them plus one or two that are quite new and need good exposure: Wall of iron; Mary part of the trinity; Mary and Miriam (popular and significant, though somewhat divides academics); Ezra; David invented coats of mail (very strong but quite new, needs more exposure); crucifixions in ancient Egypt (ditto); Singular Pharaoh; The three Noah's flood sections (a major topic - possibly could become even more concise on this page. The oven boiled is a pretty strong new point that needs the exposure). It's so useful to be able to just share one link rather than two for all types of factual errors (only a small percentage of people would click through to the main historical errors page). I do so regularly, as do countless others, so I'm glad the historical stuff is not being moved completely.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 10:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::: Great points you made; implemented the change as you suggested. The pages can evolve on their own now and if we keep around 10 solid ones on the scientific errors page, that should suffice the sharing-one-link purpose. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 12:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Hadith templates guide==<br />
Hi, I replaced a couple of recent hard coded hadith refs with the templates. There is a page which details how to cite the various alternative hadith referencing systems available on quranx (such as the Dar-us-Salam system) using the templates. I can never remember which page it is at first so here's the link https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Source_Editing#Referencing_Hadith <br />
It seems there are lots of legacy al-Tirmidhi hard coded refs around the site (often with sunnah.com's erroneous book numbers) but it would take a long time to replace those with the templates. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 00:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thank you! Which pages had the hard-coded hadith references?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 01:12, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No prob :) It was [[Scientific_Errors_in_the_Hadith]] It had a couple of new direct links to quranx and sunnah.com in order to link Ibn Majah and an Abu Dawud hadith using the Dar-us-Salam ref system (since the default USC index only has half the hadiths for that collection). Both can be linked using the templates so I changed those to illustrate. There are a dozen or so links to al Tirmidhi hadiths on sunnah.com still on the page and more throughout the site, especially the QHS pages (probably other hadith collections too besides Tirmidhi). [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 01:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== New article ==<br />
<br />
You created a link in the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article to the Wikipedia article that has the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya for, "Maria the Copt" but I believe you can create an article here on wikiIslam itself using the Quotations in Arabic from that Wikipedia article. I also observed that the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article is not online yet. Please do the needful. Thanks! -[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 19:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
== Iddah article ==<br />
[https://www.iium.edu.my/deed/lawbase/risalah_maliki/book33.html This] may be interesting for you!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 21:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the link to the article @[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]]. The 'Iddah in Li'an is missing in our article. But I want to first write down a separate article upon Li'an, and then add the 'Iddah in Li'an in the 'Iddah article. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 09:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
== New article ==<br />
I want to create a new article, so please create a draft page I can use. Thanks!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 18:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
@ [[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]], I am also relatively new here. I have learnt that admins will soon create a separate sandbox with your name, where you could write your articles. Once you complete your article, then admins will create the new draft page and transfer your article there. In the meantime, you could create your article in the common [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Sandbox Sandbox] (as I did in my early days), and then notify the admins. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 20:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
:@[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]], It says, "There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page." I am unable to create any Sandbox, whatever the combination.[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 01:55, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
::[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] I have created a sandbox for you here [[User:Mushrik/Sandbox]]--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 03:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Thanks!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 17:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly Admins don't get the Notifications ==<br />
I completed the first drafts of two more articles, and want the feedback from the admins:</br><br />
1. [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1 Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce]</br><br />
2. [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3 Blasphemy laws and the insult of Non-Muslims in Quran/Hadith]</br><br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 10:03, 6 February 2022 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Asmith&diff=134568User talk:Asmith2022-02-06T10:03:41Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>== score guide? ==<br />
Hello. Can you tell me if there is any score guide? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 10:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)<br />
:See the article scoring rubric here: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Template:QualityScore. Going to post this on your talk page as well. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 20:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Thanks ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for making me an editor here Alan. Can I create articles here now?-[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 17:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
No problem. Glad to have you on board. You can submit ideas for articles but we will need to see more contributions from you, and then we will grant you that privilege. --[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 22:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly incorrect permissions for new users ==<br />
<br />
Hey ASmith. We talked via email a week or two back.<br />
<br />
I'm getting around WikiIslam, and I noticed that the novice users page creation permissions appear to be set up incorrectly.<br />
<br />
Recall [[WikiIslam:Sandbox]],<br />
<br />
<blockquote>You can also create sandboxes under your username such as User:Your username/Sandbox 1 if you expect yourself to be the only editor of the page.</blockquote><br />
<br />
I go to [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]], which I cannot edit. If I go to https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1&action=edit , I get<br />
<br />
<blockquote> You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason:<br />
<br />
You do not have permission to create new pages.</blockquote><br />
<br />
The same applies for UNcreated (yet) Wiki sandbox pages such as [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Hello]]<br />
<br />
HOWEVER, this isn't the case for,<br />
* [[User_talk:Graves/Sandbox_1]] (user talk sandbox page - NOTICE, not the [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]] )<br />
* [[User_talk:Asmith/Sandbox_1]] (yours, not mine, user talk sandbox page)<br />
* [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Muslimské_statistiky]] (someone's written, <b>already created</b>, sandbox page)<br />
* [[User:Asmith]] (yes, I can edit your user-page page)<br />
<br />
I think this is a mis-confuration, so I let you know.<br />
<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
:Thanks for bringing this up. It needs to be fixed and I updated the public sandbox for now to make it clear that new users should request these pages to be made for them for now (once made, new users can edit these without admin approval). I made three of them for you at your preferred url: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_2, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_3<br />
:Let me know if you need anything else. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 18:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to upload image to WikiIslam ==<br />
<br />
I need to upload an image for an upcoming article. I cannot upload images directly to WikiIslam (no permissions), so I temporarily mirrored it here, https://ibb.co/KrPWJzm<br />
<br />
Can one of the admins upload it to WikiIslam? Thanks<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 09:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Done. The file name is Al-Bari-page.png . Do you have a link to the Discord? The Discord would be the best way to discuss such things imo.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 17:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<hr><br />
<br />
Hi ASmith. I'd be interested in joining the Discord server, but I don't have a link. Can you send one to the email address I registered with (to keep it discreet)? Thanks. <br />
<br />
And thanks for uploading the image.<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 18:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to create an article ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I would like to create an article on Spinning Wheel. Regarding the propaganda claim that Islamic science invented the spinning wheel. I have gathered many source that expose this claim. Can you start a blank article or a sandbox? I am also not able to make a sandbox. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 18:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hi [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]]. Thank you for your idea, but after discussion with out team we came to the conclusion that this does not fit our scope. Please see our page [[WikiIslam:Scope and Article Relevance]]. This is a subject that would be better discussed on our Discord I think, do you have a link?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 06:44, 8 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No I dont have any Discord link. Can you give it? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 20:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can you create an article for Historical Errors? There are many errors. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 08:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You can find the article here [[Historical Errors in the Qur'an]]. Thanks!--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 20:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:We actually already have a section on historical errors in the scientific errors in the Quran page, so in that case this would lead to a lot duplication. I think it has always worked well on the scientific errors page because people refer to it for all the strong Quranic factual errors in one convenient page (whether natural world or history). Regarding the one about the Kaaba as a place of safety that was deleted, I think you were probably in any case right to remove it for others reasons, which is that one of the verses quoted, Q. 5:97 says "Allah made the Ka'ba, the Sacred House, an asylum of security [haram, forbidden] for men, as also the Sacred Months". Of course, no-one would consider this as a prophecy that the sacred months would never be violated, since that was already happening, so similarly with the Kaaba, Muslims would just say this was one of its appointed purposes, not a promise of divine protection nor a prophecy.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 21:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I know it's there, but I think it might be useful to move it out to another page. That article is already big enough. I think the the best course is this: the historical errors should be summarized on the scientific errors page, and then a redirect should be placed to the historical errors page. That is the general Wikipedia standard operating procedure, I think it would fit here.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 00:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::Specifically I think we'd leave a few important examples of historical errors on the scientific errors page along w a summary of the section and then link at the top to the new page where we could proceed to list say dozens of historical errors. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Pending any other arguments I'll go ahead and implement this tomorrow. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::That sounds a good approach. If I may recommend which ones to move from (rather than having also on) the sci errors page to the new historical errors page, it'd be the less interesting or famous ones which a visitor on the fence might more easily rationalise away as a mere absense of evidence thing or alternative meaning apologetics: Samaritans in ancient Egypt, John the Baptist's original name; Supernatural destruction of cities; Humans lived hundreds of years, Ancient mosque in Jerusalem. That would leave ones that people often mention as effecting them plus one or two that are quite new and need good exposure: Wall of iron; Mary part of the trinity; Mary and Miriam (popular and significant, though somewhat divides academics); Ezra; David invented coats of mail (very strong but quite new, needs more exposure); crucifixions in ancient Egypt (ditto); Singular Pharaoh; The three Noah's flood sections (a major topic - possibly could become even more concise on this page. The oven boiled is a pretty strong new point that needs the exposure). It's so useful to be able to just share one link rather than two for all types of factual errors (only a small percentage of people would click through to the main historical errors page). I do so regularly, as do countless others, so I'm glad the historical stuff is not being moved completely.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 10:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::: Great points you made; implemented the change as you suggested. The pages can evolve on their own now and if we keep around 10 solid ones on the scientific errors page, that should suffice the sharing-one-link purpose. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 12:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Hadith templates guide==<br />
Hi, I replaced a couple of recent hard coded hadith refs with the templates. There is a page which details how to cite the various alternative hadith referencing systems available on quranx (such as the Dar-us-Salam system) using the templates. I can never remember which page it is at first so here's the link https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Source_Editing#Referencing_Hadith <br />
It seems there are lots of legacy al-Tirmidhi hard coded refs around the site (often with sunnah.com's erroneous book numbers) but it would take a long time to replace those with the templates. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 00:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thank you! Which pages had the hard-coded hadith references?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 01:12, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No prob :) It was [[Scientific_Errors_in_the_Hadith]] It had a couple of new direct links to quranx and sunnah.com in order to link Ibn Majah and an Abu Dawud hadith using the Dar-us-Salam ref system (since the default USC index only has half the hadiths for that collection). Both can be linked using the templates so I changed those to illustrate. There are a dozen or so links to al Tirmidhi hadiths on sunnah.com still on the page and more throughout the site, especially the QHS pages (probably other hadith collections too besides Tirmidhi). [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 01:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== New article ==<br />
<br />
You created a link in the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article to the Wikipedia article that has the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya for, "Maria the Copt" but I believe you can create an article here on wikiIslam itself using the Quotations in Arabic from that Wikipedia article. I also observed that the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article is not online yet. Please do the needful. Thanks! -[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 19:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
== Iddah article ==<br />
[https://www.iium.edu.my/deed/lawbase/risalah_maliki/book33.html This] may be interesting for you!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 21:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the link to the article @[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]]. The 'Iddah in Li'an is missing in our article. But I want to first write down a separate article upon Li'an, and then add the 'Iddah in Li'an in the 'Iddah article. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 09:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
== New article ==<br />
I want to create a new article, so please create a draft page I can use. Thanks!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 18:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
@ [[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]], I am also relatively new here. I have learnt that admins will soon create a separate sandbox with your name, where you could write your articles. Once you complete your article, then admins will create the new draft page and transfer your article there. In the meantime, you could create your article in the common [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Sandbox Sandbox] (as I did in my early days), and then notify the admins. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 20:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
:@[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]], It says, "There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page." I am unable to create any Sandbox, whatever the combination.[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 01:55, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
::[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] I have created a sandbox for you here [[User:Mushrik/Sandbox]]--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 03:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Thanks!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 17:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly Admins don't get the Notifications ==<br />
I completed the first drafts of two more articles, and want the feedback from the admins:<br />
1. [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1 Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce]<br />
2. [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3 Blasphemy laws and the insult of Non-Muslims in Quran/Hadith]<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 10:03, 6 February 2022 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=Maria_the_Copt_(Mariyah_Al-Qibtiyyah)&diff=134374Maria the Copt (Mariyah Al-Qibtiyyah)2022-01-18T07:34:10Z<p>Lehrasap: Scandal of fornication of Maria and Maabur (the coptic slave)</p>
<hr />
<div>{{QualityScore|Lead=4|Structure=4|Content=4|Language=4|References=4}}<br />
[[File:Maria Al Qibtiyya.png|220px|right|thumb|Islamic seal of Mariyah as a "mother of the believers"]]<br />
Mary the Copt (Arabic: مارية القبطية Mariyah Al-Qibtiyah), also known as Maria Qubtiyya, was one of the concubines/sex slaves of the prophet Muhammad. Although she is considered an "umm al-mu'minin" أم ألمؤمنين she was never actually the wife of the prophet according to the accepted historical sources by orthodox Sunni Islam.<ref>{{Cite web| title = Maria, the Copt: Prophet Muhammad's Wife or Concubine? {{!}} ICRAA.org| author = | work = ICRAA.org| date = | access-date = 18 November 2021| url = https://www.icraa.org/maria-copt-muhammad-wife-concubine/| quote = }}</ref><ref name="seek_WasM">{{Cite web| title = Was Mariya al-Qibtiyya Ever a Wife of the Prophet Muhammad? - SeekersHub Answers| author = | work = SeekersHub Answers| date = | access-date = 3 March 2016| url = https://seekersguidance.org/answers/general-counsel/was-mariya-al-qibtiyya-ever-a-wife-of-the-prophet-muhammad/| quote = }}</ref> According to the [[sira]] she was sent to Muhammad as a gift from the Christian Patriarch of Egypt. According to the [[hadith]] and the [[sirah]] her beauty and Muhammad's lust for her incited the jealousy of Muhammad's wives, in particular Hafsa and [[Aisha]]. The jealousy they had of her and Muhammad's response was actually the [[Asbab al-Nuzul (Revelational Circumstances of the Quran)|cause]] of the "revelation" of several Qur'an verses according to the tradition. Although she converted to Islam and bore the prophet a son who later died, she remained a slave of the prophet until he died, according to most of the traditional scholars. The traditional sources compare her concubinage to that of Hajar to Ibrahim, and the son that Mariyah bore was named Ibrahim. According to classical Islamic sources, had her son Ibrahim lived, he too would have been a prophet. <br />
<br />
==Life Before Muhammad==<br />
<br />
Not much is known of Mariyah's life before she was gifted to the prophet as a sex slave. According to the traditional sources, she was the son of a certain Sham'un from the town of Hafn in the region of Ansina. According to the traditional sources, she was gifted to Muhammad with her sister Shirin; but since the shari'ah prohibits a man having concurrent sexual relations with a woman and her sister, Muhammad was forced to choose between the two, and chose Mariyah for her exceeding beauty, while giving her sister to the poet Hassan bin Thabit <ref name="Powers2011_1">{{cite book | author = David Powers | date = 15 March 2011 | title = Muhammad Is Not the Father of Any of Your Men: The Making of the Last Prophet | publisher = University of Pennsylvania Press | pages = 56| isbn = 978-0-8122-2149-7 | oclc = 1037937026 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OUxWN1VBnBEC}}</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Gifting to Muhammad and Conversion to Islam==<br />
According to the traditional sources, after the treaty of Hudaybiya, the prophet Muhammad sent letters to the heads of various Middle Eastern powers inviting them to convert to Islam. One of these letters went to a certain Al-Muqauqis, who is not immediately identifiable with any historical person but seems to be the Melkite Patriarch Cyril of Egypt.<ref name="Brill1954">{{cite book | date = 1954 |Öhrnberg, Kaj| title = The Encyclopaedia of Islam: Khe-Naz. Vol. 5-7 | publisher = Brill | pages = 511| isbn = 978-90-04-08112-3 | oclc = 1000117476 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=d5kQzQEACAAJ}}</ref> He did not, apparently, accept the [[Dawah|call]] to Islam but in response sent Mariyah and her sister Shirin as sex slaves to Muhammad. That a Christian patriarch in Egypt would send Christian girls as sex slaves to this strange, obscure, and previously unknown heretic in Arabia was a question that apparently never arose on any side; there is no confirmation of any part of this story in contemporary Muslim or non-Muslim accounts from the 7th century, and the narrative itself only appears in Muslim sirah, tafsir and hadith literature written over a hundred years after the fact. On the way to Medina, she converted to Islam. When she and her sister arrived in Medina, since Muhammad could not have concurrent sexual relations with both sisters as per Islamic law, Muhammad chose Mariyah for her exceeding beauty. The prophet did not wed her, but rather kept her as his jaariyah (جارية) or surriyah (سرية), that is his sex slave. The prophet was very stricken with her gave her a house in the upper portion of Medina, which purportedly still exists to this day.<ref name="BRILL1990">{{cite book | author = BRILL | date = 1990 |F. Buhl| title = The Encyclopedia of Islam, Volume 6, Fascicules 114a: Preliminary Matter and Binder | publisher = BRILL | pages =575 | isbn = 978-90-04-09358-4 | oclc = 753138826 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=hYlytQEACAAJ}}</ref><br />
<br />
==Scandal with Muhammad's Wives and Quranic Revelation==<br />
<br />
According to multiple tafsir and hadith traditions, the first 6 ayyaat (verses) of surat-at-tahriim (surah 66) were revealed to Muhammad in regards to a sexual scandal within his household. According to the traditional reading, the verses admonish Muhammad's wives and command him to fulfill his desires as Allah has allowed to him:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|66|1|6}}|<br />
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّبِىُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَآ أَحَلَّ ٱللَّهُ لَكَ ۖ تَبْتَغِى مَرْضَاتَ أَزْوَٰجِكَ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ<br />
قَدْ فَرَضَ ٱللَّهُ لَكُمْ تَحِلَّةَ أَيْمَٰنِكُمْ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ مَوْلَىٰكُمْ ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلْعَلِيمُ ٱلْحَكِيمُ<br />
وَإِذْ أَسَرَّ ٱلنَّبِىُّ إِلَىٰ بَعْضِ أَزْوَٰجِهِۦ حَدِيثًا فَلَمَّا نَبَّأَتْ بِهِۦ وَأَظْهَرَهُ ٱللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ عَرَّفَ بَعْضَهُۥ وَأَعْرَضَ عَنۢ بَعْضٍ ۖ فَلَمَّا نَبَّأَهَا بِهِۦ قَالَتْ مَنْ أَنۢبَأَكَ هَٰذَا ۖ قَالَ نَبَّأَنِىَ ٱلْعَلِيمُ ٱلْخَبِيرُ<br />
إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا ۖ وَإِن تَظَٰهَرَا عَلَيْهِ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ هُوَ مَوْلَىٰهُ وَجِبْرِيلُ وَصَٰلِحُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ ۖ وَٱلْمَلَٰٓئِكَةُ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ ظَهِيرٌ<br />
عَسَىٰ رَبُّهُۥٓ إِن طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَن يُبْدِلَهُۥٓ أَزْوَٰجًا خَيْرًا مِّنكُنَّ مُسْلِمَٰتٍ مُّؤْمِنَٰتٍ قَٰنِتَٰتٍ تَٰٓئِبَٰتٍ عَٰبِدَٰتٍ سَٰٓئِحَٰتٍ ثَيِّبَٰتٍ وَأَبْكَارًا<br />
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ قُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَهْلِيكُمْ نَارًا وَقُودُهَا ٱلنَّاسُ وَٱلْحِجَارَةُ عَلَيْهَا مَلَٰٓئِكَةٌ غِلَاظٌ شِدَادٌ لَّا يَعْصُونَ ٱللَّهَ مَآ أَمَرَهُمْ وَيَفْعَلُونَ مَا يُؤْمَرُونَ<br />
<br />
O Prophet, why do you prohibit [yourself from] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking the approval of your wives? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.<br />
Allah has already ordained for you [Muslims] the dissolution of your oaths. And Allah is your protector, and He is the Knowing, the Wise.<br />
And [remember] when the Prophet confided to one of his wives a statement; and when she informed [another] of it and Allah showed it to him, he made known part of it and ignored a part. And when he informed her about it, she said, "Who told you this?" He said, "I was informed by the Knowing, the Acquainted."<br />
If you two [wives] repent to Allah, [it is best], for your hearts have deviated. But if you cooperate against him - then indeed Allah is his protector, and Gabriel and the righteous of the believers and the angels, moreover, are [his] assistants.<br />
Perhaps his Lord, if he divorced you [all], would substitute for him wives better than you - submitting [to Allah], believing, devoutly obedient, repentant, worshipping, and traveling - [ones] previously married and virgins.<br />
O you who have believed, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones, over which are [appointed] angels, harsh and severe; they do not disobey Allah in what He commands them but do what they are commanded.}}<br />
<br />
The entire scandal of Muhammad sleeping with Aisha is explained in the tafsir of al-Jalalayn on surah 66 (at-tahrim) verse 1-3:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|Tafsir of Al-Jalalayn on Qur'an 66:1-3|<br />
يا أيّها النَّبِيّ لِمَ تُحَرِّم ما أحَلَّ اللَّه لَك﴾ مِن أمَتك مارِيَة القِبْطِيَّة لَمّا واقَعَها فِي بَيْت حَفْصَة وكانَتْ غائِبَة فَجاءَتْ وشَقَّ عَلَيْها كَوْن ذَلِكَ فِي بَيْتها وعَلى فِراشها حَيْثُ قُلْت: هِيَ حَرام عَلَيَّ ﴿تَبْتَغِي﴾ بِتَحْرِيمِها ﴿مَرْضاة أزْواجك﴾ أيْ رِضاهُنَّ ﴿واللَّه غَفُور رَحِيم﴾ غَفَرَ لَك هَذا التَّحْرِيم﴿<br />
قَدۡ فَرَضَ ٱللَّهُ لَكُمۡ تَحِلَّةَ أَیۡمَـٰنِكُمۡۚ وَٱللَّهُ مَوۡلَىٰكُمۡۖ وَهُوَ ٱلۡعَلِیمُ ٱلۡحَكِیمُ﴾ [التحريم ٢]﴿<br />
قَدْ فَرَضَ اللَّه﴾ شَرَعَ ﴿لَكُمْ تَحِلَّة أيْمانكُمْ﴾ تَحْلِيلها بِالكَفّارَةِ المَذْكُورَة فِي سُورَة "المائِدَة" ومِن الأَيْمان تَحْرِيم الأَمَة وهَلْ كَفَّرَ ﷺ ؟ قالَ مُقاتِل: أعْتَقَ رَقَبَة فِي تَحْرِيم مارِيَة وقالَ الحَسَن: لَمْ يُكَفِّر لِأَنَّهُ ﷺ مَغْفُور لَهُ ﴿واللَّه مَوْلاكُمْ﴾ ناصِركُمْ﴿<br />
وَإِذۡ أَسَرَّ ٱلنَّبِیُّ إِلَىٰ بَعۡضِ أَزۡوَ ٰجِهِۦ حَدِیثࣰا فَلَمَّا نَبَّأَتۡ بِهِۦ وَأَظۡهَرَهُ ٱللَّهُ عَلَیۡهِ عَرَّفَ بَعۡضَهُۥ وَأَعۡرَضَ عَنۢ بَعۡضࣲۖ فَلَمَّا نَبَّأَهَا بِهِۦ قَالَتۡ مَنۡ أَنۢبَأَكَ هَـٰذَاۖ قَالَ نَبَّأَنِیَ ٱلۡعَلِیمُ ٱلۡخَبِیرُ﴾ [التحريم ٣]﴿<br />
و﴾ اذْكُرْ ﴿إذْ أسَرَّ النَّبِيّ إلى بَعْض أزْواجه﴾ هِيَ حَفْصَة ﴿حَدِيثًا﴾ هُوَ تَحْرِيم مارِيَة وقالَ لَها لا تُفْشِيه ﴿فَلَمّا نَبَّأَتْ بِهِ﴾ عائِشَة ظَنًّا مِنها أنْ لا حَرَج فِي ذَلِكَ ﴿وأَظْهَرَهُ اللَّه﴾ أطْلَعَهُ ﴿عَلَيْهِ﴾ عَلى المُنَبَّأ بِهِ ﴿عَرَّفَ بَعْضه﴾ لِحَفْصَةَ ﴿وأَعْرَضَ عَنْ بَعْض﴾ تَكَرُّمًا مِنهُ ﴿فَلَمّا نَبَّأَها بِهِ قالَتْ مَن أنْبَأَك هَذا قالَ نَبَّأَنِي العَلِيم الخَبِير﴾ أيْ اللَّه<br />
<br />
<br />
"O Prophet! Why do you prohibit what God has made lawful for you, in terms of your Coptic handmaiden Māriya"— when he lay with her in the house of Hafsa, who had been away, but who upon returning [and finding out] became upset by the fact that this had taken place in her own house and on her own bed — by saying, ‘She is unlawful for me!’, seeking, by making her unlawful [for you], to please your wives? And God is Forgiving, Merciful, having forgiven you this prohibition.<br />
"Allah has already ordained for you [Muslims] the dissolution of your oaths. And Allah is your protector, and He is the Knowing, the Wise."<br />
Verily God has prescribed, He has made lawful, for you [when necessary] the absolution of your oaths, to absolve them by expiation, as mentioned in the sūrat al-Mā’ida [Q. 5:89] and the forbidding of [sexual relations with] a handmaiden counts as an oath, so did the Prophet (s) expiate? Muqātil [b. Sulaymān] said, ‘He set free a slave [in expiation] for his prohibition of Māriya’; whereas al-Hasan [al-Basrī] said, ‘He never expiated, because the Prophet (s) has been forgiven [all errors]’. And God is your Protector, your Helper, and He is the Knower, the Wise.<br />
"And [remember] when the Prophet confided to one of his wives a statement; and when she informed [another] of it and Allah showed it to him, he made known part of it and ignored a part. And when he informed her about it, she said, 'Who told you this?' He said, 'I was informed by the Knowing, the Acquainted.'"<br />
And, mention, when the Prophet confided to one of his wives, namely, Hafsa, a certain matter, which was his prohibition of Māriya, telling her: ‘Do not reveal it!’; but when she divulged it, to ‘Ā’isha, reckoning there to be no blame in [doing] such a thing, and God apprised him, He informed him, of it, of what had been divulged, he announced part of it, to Hafsa, and passed over part, out of graciousness on his part. So when he told her about it, she said, ‘Who told you this?’ He said, ‘I was told by the Knower, the Aware’, namely, God. And, mention, when the Prophet confided to one of his wives, namely, Hafsa, a certain matter, which was his prohibition of Māriya, telling her: ‘Do not reveal it!’; but when she divulged it, to ‘Ā’isha, reckoning there to be no blame in [doing] such a thing, and God apprised him, He informed him, of it, of what had been divulged, he announced part of it, to Hafsa, and passed over part, out of graciousness on his part. So when he told her about it, she said, ‘Who told you this?’ He said, ‘I was told by the Knower, the Aware’, namely, God.}}<br />
<br />
As the above tafsir lays out, according to the story preserved over many hadith and tafsir traditions Muhammad was caught in flagrante delicto having sexual relations with Maria in the house of Hafsa. Muhammad told Hafsah he would not do this again and begged her not to tell Aishah, but she disobeyed his wish and told her anyway. Allah sent down Qur'an 66:1 in order to chastise Muhammad for forbidding himself Mariyah. Not satisfied with having allowed Muhammad to have sex with their servant in Hafsah's house, Allah further chastised his wives and threatend them with hell fire for disobeying them: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|Tafsir Al-Jalalayn on Qur'an 66:4-5|﴿إنْ تَتُوبا﴾ أيْ حَفْصَة وعائِشَة ﴿إلى اللَّه فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبكُما﴾ مالَتْ إلى تَحْرِيم مارِيَة أيْ سَرَّكُما ذَلِكَ مَعَ كَراهَة النَّبِيّ ﷺ لَهُ وذَلِكَ ذَنْب وجَواب الشَّرْط مَحْذُوف أيْ تَقَبُّلًا وأَطْلَقَ قُلُوب عَلى قَلْبَيْنِ ولَمْ يُعَبِّر بِهِ لِاسْتِثْقالِ الجَمْع بَيْن تَثْنِيَتَيْنِ فِيما هُوَ كالكَلِمَةِ الواحِدَة ﴿وإنْ تَظاهَرا﴾ بِإدْغامِ التّاء الثّانِيَة فِي الأَصْل فِي الظّاء وفِي قِراءَة بِدُونِها تَتَعاوَنا ﴿عَلَيْهِ﴾ أيْ النَّبِيّ فِيما يَكْرَههُ ﴿فَإنَّ اللَّه هُوَ﴾ فَصْل ﴿مَوْلاهُ﴾ ناصِره ﴿وجِبْرِيل وصالِح المُؤْمِنِينَ﴾ أبُو بَكْر وعُمَر رَضِيَ اللَّه عَنْهُما مَعْطُوف عَلى مَحَلّ اسْم إنْ فَيَكُونُونَ ناصِرِيهِ ﴿والمَلائِكَة بَعْد ذَلِكَ﴾ بَعْد نَصْر اللَّه والمَذْكُورِينَ ﴿ظَهِير﴾ ظُهَراء أعْوان لَهُ فِي نَصْره عَلَيْكُما<br />
﴿عَسَىٰ رَبُّهُۥۤ إِن طَلَّقَكُنَّ أَن یُبۡدِلَهُۥۤ أَزۡوَ ٰجًا خَیۡرࣰا مِّنكُنَّ مُسۡلِمَـٰتࣲ مُّؤۡمِنَـٰتࣲ قَـٰنِتَـٰتࣲ تَـٰۤىِٕبَـٰتٍ عَـٰبِدَ ٰتࣲ سَـٰۤىِٕحَـٰتࣲ ثَیِّبَـٰتࣲ وَأَبۡكَارࣰا﴾ [التحريم ٥]<br />
﴿عَسى رَبّه إنْ طَلَّقَكُنَّ﴾ أيْ طَلَّقَ النَّبِيّ أزْواجه ﴿أنْ يُبَدِّلهُ﴾ بِالتَّشْدِيدِ والتَّخْفِيف ﴿أزْواجًا خَيْرًا مِنكُنَّ﴾ خَبَر عَسى والجُمْلَة جَواب الشَّرْط ولَمْ يَقَع التَّبْدِيل لِعَدَمِ وُقُوع الشَّرْط ﴿مُسْلِمات﴾ مُقِرّات بِالإسْلامِ ﴿مُؤْمِنات﴾ مُخْلِصات ﴿قانِتات﴾ مُطِيعات ﴿تائِبات عابِدات سائِحات﴾ صائِمات أوْ مُهاجِرات <br />
<br />
"If you two [wives] repent to Allah, [it is best], for your hearts have deviated. But if you cooperate against him - then indeed Allah is his protector, and Gabriel and the righteous of the believers and the angels, moreover, are [his] assistants."<br />
If the two of you, namely, Hafsa and ‘Ā’isha, repent to God … for your hearts were certainly inclined, towards the prohibition of Māriya, that is to say, your keeping this secret despite [knowing] the Prophet’s (s) dislike of it, which is itself a sin (the response to the conditional [‘if the two of you repent to God’] has been omitted, to be understood as, ‘it will be accepted of both of you’; the use of [the plural] qulūb, ‘hearts’, instead of [the dual] qalbayn, ‘both [your] hearts’, is on account of the cumbersomeness of putting two duals together in what is effectively the same word); and if you support one another (tazzāharā: the original second tā’ [of tatazāharā] has been assimilated with the zā’; a variant reading has it without [this assimilation, tazāharā]) against him, that is, the Prophet, in what he is averse to, then [know that] God, He (huwa, [a pronoun] for separation) is indeed his Protector, His supporter, and Gabriel, and the righteous among the believers, Abū Bakr and ‘Umar, may God be pleased with both of them (wa-Jibrīlu wa-sālihu’l-mu’minīna is a supplement to the [syntactical] locus of the subject of inna [sc. ‘God’]), who will [also] be his supporters, and the angels furthermore, further to the support of God and those mentioned, are his supporters, assistants of his, in supporting him [to prevail] over both of you.<br />
"Perhaps his Lord, if he divorced you [all], would substitute for him wives better than you - submitting [to Allah], believing, devoutly obedient, repentant, worshipping, and traveling - [ones] previously married and virgins."<br />
It may be that, if he divorces you, that is, [if] the Prophet divorces his wives, his Lord will give him in [your] stead (read yubaddilahu or yubdilahu) wives better than you (azwājan khayran minkunna is the predicate of ‘asā, ‘it may be’, the sentence being the response to the conditional) — the replacement [of his wives by God] never took place because the condition [of his divorcing them] never arose — women submissive [to God], affirming Islam, believing, faithful, obedient, penitent, devout, given to fasting — or given to emigrating [in God’s way] — previously married and virgins.}}<br />
<br />
Ibn Kathir also recounts how Qur'an 66:1-6 were revealed to Muhammad by Allah because, in response to Hafsa and Aisha's complaints about Muhammad sleeping with Mariyah, Muhammad cut himself off sexually from Mariyah: <br />
{{Quote|Tafsir of ibn Kathir on Qur'an 66:1-3| أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ﷺ كَانَتْ لَهُ أَمَةٌ يَطَؤُهَا، فَلَمْ تَزَلْ بِهِ عَائِشَةُ وَحَفْصَةُ حَتَّى حَرَّمها، فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ، عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: ﴿يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ﴾ ؟ إِلَى آخِرِ الْآيَةِ(١) .<br />
وَقَالَ ابْنُ جَرِيرٍ...: أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ﷺ أَصَابَ أُمَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي بَيْتِ بَعْضِ نِسَائِهِ، فَقَالَتْ: أَيْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، فِي بَيْتِي وَعَلَى فِرَاشِي؟! فَجَعَلَهَا عَلَيْهِ حَرَامًا فَقَالَتْ: أيْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، كَيْفَ يَحْرُم عَلَيْكَ الْحَلَالُ؟ فَحَلَفَ لَهَا بِاللَّهِ لَا يُصِيبُهَا. فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ: ﴿يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ﴾ ؟ <br />
<br />
The messenger of Allah, peace and prayer of Allah be upon him, was having sexual relations with a female slave which he had, but Aisha and Hafsa would not cease to bother him about it until he forbid himself to continue it, until Allah praised and glorious brought down a verse saying "O prophet, why do you forbid to yourself what Allah has allowed" until the end of the verse. Ibn Jarir said...The messenger of Allah, peace and prayer of Allah be upon him had sex with Um Ibrahim (Mariyah Al-Qibtiyah) in the house of some of his women. Then she (Hafsah?) said "Hey messenger of Allah! In my house and upon my bed?!" Then the prophet made it forbidden (for him to have sex with her). Then she said "Hey messenger of Allah, how will you forbid what is allowed to you?" Then he swore not to have sex with her. Then Allah revealed "Oh prophet why do you forbid what Allah has made allowable to you?"}}The slave in this case is usually said to be Mariyah. In response, according to the tradition, Allah sent down surat-at-tahreem, the surah of making things off limits. Hafsa was highly aggrieved by this and told [[Aisha]] who also rebuked the prophet for his sexual appetite and cruelty to Hafsa. {{Quote|{{Al Nasai|26|4|36|3411}}|أَخْبَرَنِي إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ يُونُسَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَرَمِيٌّ - هُوَ لَقَبُهُ - قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبِي قَالَ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ ثَابِتٍ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَانَتْ لَهُ أَمَةٌ يَطَؤُهَا فَلَمْ تَزَلْ بِهِ عَائِشَةُ وَحَفْصَةُ حَتَّى حَرَّمَهَا عَلَى نَفْسِهِ فَأَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ { يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ مَا أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ } إِلَى آخِرِ الآيَةِ .<br />
<br />
It was narrated from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah had a female slave with whom he had intercourse, but 'Aishah and Hafsah would not leave him alone until he said that she was forbidden for him. Then Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, revealed:<br />
<br />
"O Prophet! Why do you forbid (for yourself) that which Allah has allowed to you.' until the end of the Verse.}}<br />
<br />
As the Encyclopedia of Islam states, other narratives exist around these verses, but considering how bad the original narrative looks for Muhammad it is unlikely that the any of the alternatives were the most primordial narrative; rather, the above narrative would appear to be the oldest, and the others were later fabrications meant to protect the reputation of the prophet<ref name="Brill">{{cite book | title = The Encyclopaedia of Islam: Mahk-Mid | publisher = Brill | pages = 575 | oclc = 399624 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=9lbIwAEACAAJ}}</ref>.<br />
<br />
== Scandal of fornication of Maria and Muhammad's order to kill the man without the trail ==<br />
After the death of [[Khadijah bint Khuwaylid|Khadijah]], Muhammad had about 16 (+/-) wives and slave-women, but he got no children from any of them. Then Maria was presented to Muhammad as a slave-woman, along with her cousin (a male-slave). After some time, Maria became pregnant. But it was rumoured that she became pregnant from her cousin, and not from Muhammad. When Muhammad heard those rumors, he ordered the killing of that man without any court trail. <br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim|50|68}}|Anas reported that a person (a coptic slave whose name was "Mabur" and he was the cousin of Maria al-Qibtiyya) was charged with fornication with the slavegirl of Allah's Messenger (i.e. Maria al-Qibtiyya). Thereupon Allah's Messenger said to 'Ali: Go and strike his neck. 'Ali came to him and he found him in a well making his body cool. 'Ali said to him: Come out, and as he took hold of his hand and brought him out, he found that his sexual organ had been cut. Hadrat 'Ali refrained from striking his neck. He came to Allah's Apostle and said: Allah's Messenger, he has not even the sexual organ with him}}{{Quote|1=[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010105134/https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&flag=1&bk_no=74&ID=6740 Al-Mustadrak 'ala al-Sahihayn (Arabic: المستدرك على الصحيحين) by Imam Hakim]|2=«عن عايشة قالت : اهديت مارية إلى رسول اللّه ومعها ابن عم لها . قالت : فوقع عليها وقعة فاستمرت حاملا . قالت : فعز لها عند ابن عمها . قالت : فقال اهل الافك والزور : «من حاجته إلى الولد ادعى ولد غيره» وكانت امّه قليلة اللبن فابتاعت له ضائنة لبون فكان يغذى بلبنها فحسن عليه لحمه . قالت عايشة : فدخل به علىّ النبى صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم ذات يوم فقال : «كيف ترين»؟ فقلت : من غذى بلحم الضأن يحسن لحمه . قال : «ولا الشبه» قالت : فحملنى ما يحمل النساء من الغيرة أن قلت : ما أرى شبها . قالت : وبلغ رسول اللّه ما يقول الناس فقال لعلى ... ». </br> Aisha said: " Maria" was presented to the prophet of Islam (as a slave woman) and her cousin (a coptic male slave) was with her. After a while Maria became pregnant. Upon that, the people started slandering that since he [the prophet of Islam] needed child, he related the son of that slave-man to himself. Since Maria, as a mother didn’t have enough breast milk, they fed him by sheep 's milk that’s why he (the son Ibrahim) was fat. 'Aisha said: Once the prophet brought him to me and asked what I thought about him, I replied, "everyone fed by sheep 's milk will get fat." The holy prophet said doesn’t he look like me? '''Aisha said, "I jealously said "No" ." and then the prophet heard of the untrue accusations of people to toward Maria. Upon that the prophet sent Ali to kill her cousin ...'''}}<br />
He was even doubtful after that too, and angel Jibrael had to come and confirm him that Ibrahim was indeed his child. <br />
{{Quote|[http://al-hakawati.net/Books/BookDetails/7518/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D8%B2%D8%A1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%85%D8%B3--%D9%85%D8%A7-%D8%A3%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D9%8A%D8%A8%D8%A9-%D8%A8%D9%88%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%87-%D8%B5%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87-%D9%88%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%85 Al-Badaya wa Al-Nahaya by Ibn Kathir]|عن أنس قال: لما ولدت مارية إبراهيم كاد أن يقع في النَّبيّ صلَّى الله عليه وسلَّم منه شيء حتَّى نزل جبريل عليه السلام فقال: ((السلام عليك يا أبا إبراهيم)). </br>Anas said, when Ibrahim was born to Maria, then Muhammad became doubtful if Ibrahim was really his son or not. Upon that angel Jibrael came to him and said: Peace be upon you, O the Father of Ibrahim (i.e. confirmed to him that Ibrahim was indeed his son).}}<br />
Muhammad is criticized here why he didn't give that coptic slave a fair chance for a fair trail in the court, and why didn't he ask the people (who were slandering) to bring the 4 eye witnesses for the fornication. Moreover, the punishment of fornication of slaves is half in Sharia (i.e. even the court could have punished him for maximum 50 lashes and not for death as Muhammad ordered it). <br />
<br />
Moreover, Muhammad is also criticized for not lashing those Sahaba (companions) with 80 lashes who made the false accusations of fornication against him and Maria. It is called حد القذف in Islam. Muhammad did the same in case of 'Aisha (i.e. he lashed all those Sahaba 80 times who made false accusation of fornication against 'Aisha) in the incident of IFK. <br />
<br />
==Son She Birthed to the Prophet==<br />
<br />
According to the sirah and hadith, Mariyah is an umm-walad أم ولد of the prophet, that is to say she bore him a male child. The son she bore him was named Ibrahim, after the prophet. The child died very young, within a year and a half of his birth, and the prophet is said to have shed tears over his death. According to the traditional sources he died during an eclipse, which combined with the fact that he died only 5 months before his father would put his death on the 10th of Shawwal 10 AH or the 27th of January 623 CE <ref name="Powers2011_2">{{cite book | author = David Powers | date = 15 March 2011 | title = Muhammad Is Not the Father of Any of Your Men: The Making of the Last Prophet | publisher = University of Pennsylvania Press | pages = 56| isbn = 978-0-8122-2149-7 | oclc = 1037937026 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OUxWN1VBnBEC}}</ref>. Multiple ahadith tell that he would have been a prophet had he grown to adulthood. The hadith also speak of his death being necessary due to Muhammad being خاتم النبيين"khaatam al-nabiyyin'" or the "seal of the prophets<ref name="Powers2011_3">ibid, 57</ref>." This is also in line with the famous Quranic verse surat-al-ahzab (surah 33) verse 40:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|33|40}}| <br />
مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَآ أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ وَلَٰكِن رَّسُولَ ٱللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ ٱلنَّبِيِّۦنَ ۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمًا<br />
<br />
Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and last of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.}}<br />
<br />
As such, according to this verse, Ibrahim could not have lived since Muhammad is not the father of any of the men of the believers.<br />
<br />
==Influence on Islamic Law and Society==<br />
<br />
The use of Mariyah sexually by the prophet, like every aspect of the prophet's life, provides an example for later Muslims and the religious justification for the sexual exploitation of slave women by Muslim men <ref name="GordonHain2017_1">{{cite book | editor1 = Matthew Gordon | editor2 = Kathryn A. Hain | date = 2017 | title = Concubines and Courtesans: Women and Slavery in Islamic History | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 327| isbn = 978-0-19-062218-3 | oclc = 1014474115 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=F3QzDwAAQBAJ}}</ref>. Her sexual exploitation by Muhammad was in continuity with the practice of the pagan Arabs and was continued by later Islamic empires and movements<ref name="Bosworth1989">{{cite book | author = Clifford Edmund Bosworth | date = 1 January 1989 | title = The Encyclopedia of Islam, Volume 6, Fascicules 107-108 | publisher = Brill Archive | pages = 575| isbn = 978-90-04-09082-8 | oclc = 60063572 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=tPsUAAAAIAAJ}}</ref>, up to the very current day with the ISIS terrorist organization taking Yazidi girls in Iraq as sex slaves on the prophetic model. Since Mariyah also bore Muhammad a son, and was this an umm-walad أم ولد or mother of a boy for the prophet, her story was integral to later Islamic discourse about the place of the sons of slave women in Islamic societies (although the classical jurists of the 4 traditional Sunni madhabs do not usually invoke her example as a "proof text")<ref name="GordonHain2017_2">{{cite book | editor1 = Matthew Gordon | editor2 = Kathryn A. Hain | date = 2017 | title = Concubines and Courtesans: Women and Slavery in Islamic History | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 225| isbn = 978-0-19-062218-3 | oclc = 1014474115 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=F3QzDwAAQBAJ}}</ref>. Since the raiding for sexual slaves formed a large part of the wealth-building enterprise undertaken by later Islamic caliphates and empires such as the Umayyads, Abbasids and many others the number of children born to slave women quickly proliferated in Islamic society. There were so many children of concubines in Islamic society that several contenders for the throne of the caliphate ended up being the children of slave women. The rightly guided-caliphs and the early Umayyads were all free-born Arab men, but in 740 Zayd bin Ali made an unsuccessful bid for the caliphate, and he was the mother of a slave women. His opponent used his lineage as the son of a sex slave to mock and belittle him, claiming that his birth to an un-free woman disqualified him from the throne<ref name="GordonHain2017">ibid, 238</ref>. Yet by 744, Yazid III became the first caliph born of a slave mother; thereafter, the next 3 Umayyad caliphs and most of the Abbasids caliphs were the sons of concubines. Zayd bin Ali in his arguments for why the son of a slave woman such as himself should be eligible for caliph made great reference to Isma'il and Hajar. Hajar's biography bears many resemblances to Mariyah's; both were from Egypt, both were the concubines of prophets, both suffered the jealousy of the rightful wife(wives) of the prophet, both bore sons for the prophet, with the name of the son of Mariyah being the name of the husband of Hajar. Later caliphs and other sons of concubines would invoke the legacy of Mariyah and her son Ibrahim, who might have been another prophet, to justify their place in Islamic society<ref>Ibid, 230</ref>. <br />
<br />
As Mariyah was an umm-walad of the prophet, and as the concept took on greater importance in Islamic society as the children of concubines, the example of Mariyah was used in Islamic discourse to discuss the rights, privileges and duties of an umm-walad and her offspring in Islamic societies. Although the umm-walad is elevated above the rank of the normal slave, she is still a slave. The husband has the right to avail himself of her sexually whenever he wants<ref name="Scribner1982">{{cite book | date = 1982 | title = Dictionary of the Middle Ages: Cabala-Crimea. Vol. 3 | publisher = Scribner | pages = 527| isbn = 978-0-684-16760-2 | oclc = 929425948 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=FSN2tAEACAAJ}}</ref>, as Muhammad continued to with Mariyah (and as Allah instructed him to do). There was some discussion in Islamic sources such as ibn Kathir as to whether the umm-walad must be freed <ref name="BosworthDonzel1998_1">{{cite book | editor1 = C. E. Bosworth | editor2 = E. Van Donzel | author1 = Hamilton Alexander Rosskeen Gibb | author2 = International Union of Academies | date = 1998 | title = The Encyclopaedia of Islam: Volume X Fascicule 163-164 | publisher = BRILL | pages = 857| isbn = 978-90-04-11056-4 | oclc = 164878157 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=Lc8OOQAACAAJ}}</ref>. There were ahadith to the affect that Muhammad freed Mariyah after she bore him Ibrahim; the conclusion of Islamic law is that this may or may not have happened but if it did this was done out of Muhammad's special love for Mariyah and is not applicable to slave women who bear children in general. The son of an umm-walad, though, was taken to be a free man, as Ibrahim would certainly have been free had he survived to adulthood<ref name="BosworthDonzel1998_2">ibid, 857</ref>. The umm-walad can also not be sold from her master or separated from her son. The prophetic example of Muhammad and Mariyah provides an example of the umm-walad in the biography of the prophet himself, and the exalted status of their son would prove a powerful rhetorical tool in the disputes over the places of the offspring of umm-walads in Islamic societies.<br />
<br />
==Historicity==<br />
<br />
As noted above, the story of Mariyah is deeply reflective of the story of Abraham (Ibrahim)'s concubine Hagar (Hajar) in the Bible. Like Hajar she is Egyptian, and the tradition associates a number of sayings of the prophet to Muhammad that the Muslims should treat the Copts of Egypt well based on the prophet's love of Mariyah; similar hadith traditions exist about Hajar. Like Hajar Mariyah provided a son to the otherwise son-less Muhammad. The fact that Muhammad had so many wives but so few children in an age when it was considered a sign of god's favor for a man to have many children must have caused suspicion to arise--which is likely why the Qur'an verse above specifically mentions Muhammad by name, which is unusual in the Qur'an, and states that he is not the father of any of the men of the believers (which has led to the theory that the verse itself is perhaps an interpolation into the text after the death of the prophet). Like Hajar Mariyah became a devout believer in the message of her prophet, and like Hajar Mariyah aroused the jealousy of the prophet's household due to her youth and her fertility in bearing a son for the prophet. These parallels, as well as the convenient connection of her to some otherwise hard-to-explain verses in the Qur'an, have led some scholars to conclude that Mariyah either never existed or her story was embellished beyond recognition by elements lifted wholesale from the Hajar narrative<ref name="GordonHain2017_4">{{cite book | editor1 = Matthew Gordon | editor2 = Kathryn A. Hain | date = 2017 | title = Concubines and Courtesans: Women and Slavery in Islamic History | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 228| isbn = 978-0-19-062218-3 | oclc = 1014474115 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=F3QzDwAAQBAJ}}</ref>. The constant pairing of Hajar and Mariyah in later Muslim debates about the concept of "umm-walad" in Islamic law underscore the close connection between these two figures. <br />
<br />
In addition to the biblical connections to Hajar, the tradition closely associated Muhammad with Ibrahim. In the sirah of Ibn Hisham/Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad is said to remark upon meeting Ibrahim that he is the person that most resembles himself<ref>{{Cite web| title = When Ibrahim (AS) Met Muhammad (SAW) {{!}} About Islam| author = | work = About Islam| date = | access-date = 24 November 2021| url = https://aboutislam.net/multimedia/videos/when-ibrahim-as-met-muhammad-saw/| quote = }}</ref>. In giving birth to "Ibrahim" Mariyah brings the entire circle around full in respect to the connection of her narrative to that of Ibrahim and Hajar. Even her name has antecedents--in the Shahnahmah (the epic poem describing the lives of the pre-Islamic shahs of Iran) the emperor Maurice (582-602 CE) gave his daughter Mariyah in marriage to the Persian shah Khusraw Parviz (590-628 CE). He ended up leaving her, though, for the love of his youth, Shirin. The royal antecedent for Mariyah is fitting, considering how at the time of the compilation of the Islamic narratives of the sirah and the hadith Muslim claimants to the throne of the caliph were claiming royal lineage through their slave mothers and citing the example of Mariyah<ref name="Öhrnberg1984">{{cite book | author = Kaj Öhrnberg | date = 1984 | title = Mariya Al-qibtiyya Unveiled | publisher = Finnish Oriental Society | pages = 298 | oclc = 28522109 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=s_ZSwQEACAAJ}}</ref>. In addition to all of the above, the death of young Ibrahim serves to underscore the status of Muhammad as "khaatim al-nabiyyin" خاتم النبيين or the "seal of the prophets.<ref name="Powers2011_5">{{cite book | author = David Powers | date = 15 March 2011 | title = Muhammad Is Not the Father of Any of Your Men: The Making of the Last Prophet | publisher = University of Pennsylvania Press | pages = 57| isbn = 978-0-8122-2149-7 | oclc = 1037937026 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=OUxWN1VBnBEC}}</ref>" Considering the literary and biblical allusions, it is quite likely that Mariyah in fact either never existed<ref name="Öhrnberg1984_2">{{cite book | author = Kaj Öhrnberg | date = 1984 | title = Mariya Al-qibtiyya Unveiled | publisher = Finnish Oriental Society | pages = 302 | oclc = 28522109 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=s_ZSwQEACAAJ}}</ref> or that the major details of her story were literary embellishments meant to strengthen the connection of Muhammad to Ibrahim, provide a link with Muhammad to the people of Egypt, justify the norms around the "umm-walad" in the Islamic shari'ah, underline the doctrine of the seal of the prophets and reinforce the idea that Muhammad "Is not the father of any of your men."<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134359User talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32022-01-15T14:28:19Z<p>Lehrasap: Created page with "==Blasphemy laws and the insult of Non-Muslims in Quran and Hadith== The first draft of this article has been completed. Please give your feedback on this issue. Thanks. ~~~~"</p>
<hr />
<div>==Blasphemy laws and the insult of Non-Muslims in Quran and Hadith== <br />
The first draft of this article has been completed. Please give your feedback on this issue. Thanks. <br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 14:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134358User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32022-01-15T14:24:59Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Insult of the opponents in Hadith */</p>
<hr />
<div>= <big>'''<u>Title: Blasphemy laws and the insult of Non-Muslims in Quran and Hadith</u>'''</big> =<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. Their arguments are as under: <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. According to the critics of blasphemy law:{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|'''(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment:''' If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims. If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. </br><br />
'''(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”:''' Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]</br><br />
'''(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”:''' Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad. While the Non-Muslims believe Muhammad to be a wrong-doer (who made false drama of prophethood and thus millions of people died due to it). And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such a wrong-doer (in their opinion) is "praised". Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, '''and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression''' and move on. Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. '''They have to bear this insult and move on'''.<br />
'''(4) Human Nature:''' It is normal according to the human nature that people may become angry during the discussions & debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. Even the writer of Quran showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran became angry and then he started cursing them several times in Quran, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents==<br />
Islam critics point out that the following Quranic Verses are insulting the opponents. {{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|89}}|Allah's '''curse''' is on (all) the unbelievers.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|161}}|Surely (all) those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the '''curse of Allah and the angels and men all''';}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|179}}|Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. '''These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|62|5}}|The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, '''is as the likeness of the ass (donkey)''' bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|171}}|And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; '''deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|5|60}}|Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, '''made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan''', will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|176}}|And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the '''parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue'''; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;}}{{Quote|{{Quran|47|12}}|Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the '''beasts''' eat, and the fire is their abode.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|74|51}}|What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. '''As they were frightened donkeys'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|166}}|Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: '''Be apes, despised and hated'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|98|6}}|The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; '''they are the worst of all creatures'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|99}}|We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the '''evil transgressors'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|9|28}}|O Believers, the pagans are '''filthy and unclean'''. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|8|55}}|Surely the '''vilest of animals''' in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|142}}|'''The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews)''' among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."}}Many Islam apologists don't consider these words of cursing Non-Muslims and resembling them with animals in Quran to be an insult. Nevertheless, when these same words of cursing and resembling to animals are used for Muhammad, then it is considered an insult and blasphemy by them. <br />
<br />
==Insult of the opponents in Hadith==<br />
<br />
=== (1) Abu Bakr saying to 'Urwa (Go and such the clitoris of your goddess al-Lat), and Muhammad making it the part of Shariah ===<br />
There is a tradition in Sahih Bukhari, where Abu Bakr abused the 'Urwa (the ambassador of Meccans) by saying: "Go and such the clitoris of your godess al-Laat".<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=1731&bk_no=52&idfrom=4966&idto=4967 Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 2583]|2=فقال عروة عند ذلك أي محمد أرأيت إن استأصلت أمر قومك هل سمعت بأحد من العرب اجتاح أهله قبلك وإن تكن الأخرى فإني والله لأرى وجوها وإني لأرى أوشابا من الناس خليقا أن يفروا ويدعوك '''فقال له أبو بكر الصديق امصص ببظر اللات''' </br><br />
… Then ‘Urwa said, “O Muhammad! Won’t you feel any scruple in extirpating your relations? Have you ever heard of any one amongst the Arabs extirpating his relatives before you? On the other hand, if the reverse should happen, (nobody will aid you, for) by Allah, I do not see (with you) dignified people, but people from various tribes who would run away leaving you alone.” Hearing that, Abu Bakr abused him by saying '''‘Go and suck the clitoris of your goddess al-Lat’ '''}}<br />
According to this tradition, Abu Bakr abused 'Urwa in the presence of Muhammad and he didn't stop Abu Bakr from it. According to the Islamic Standards, if prophet Muhammad kept quiet upon any action, then it means that that action was permissible and becomes a part of Islamic Sharia. It is known as "Taqriri Hadith<ref>[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336374711_PROPHETIC_SUNNAH Tacitly Approved Sunah (Taqriri)]</ref>" in Islam. <br />
Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani wrote:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20171020134752/http://qandabenefits.com/1984/explanation-of-hadith-of-abu-bakr Hadith of Abu Bakr abusing 'Urwa]|In this, there is proof for the permissibility of uttering repugnant words upon a person as a rebuke who deserve these words because of what he have uttered ... (As the Prophet(Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) was silent on saying of Abu Bakr and didn’t rebuke him, it shows the permissibility of using these words when the situation demands)}}<br />
<br />
'''Note:''' The two English translators of Sahih Bukhari (Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan and Aisha Bewley), both distorted the translation and they deleted the actual words of Abu Bakr in their English translations<ref>Distortion in English Translation of Sahih Bukhari, where Abu Bakr abused [https://web.archive.org/web/20220115134256/https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2020/02/09/bukhari-translators-embarrassed-by-abu-bakrs-potty-mouth/ 'Urwa by telling "Go and suck the clitoris of your goddess al-Lat".]</ref>. <br />
<br />
'Urwah said those words to Muhammad (i.e. he saw that Muslims would flee away leaving their prophet alone), while Muslims had already ran away in the battle of Uhud before, leaving Muhammad alone. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|3|153}}|[Remember] when you [fled and] climbed [the mountain] without looking aside at anyone while the Messenger was calling you from behind.}}<br />
<br />
=== (2) May Allah KILL the Jews ===<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||2236|darussalam}}|عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ عَامَ الْفَتْحِ، وَهُوَ بِمَكَّةَ " إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ حَرَّمَ بَيْعَ الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْتَةِ وَالْخِنْزِيرِ وَالأَصْنَامِ ". فَقِيلَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ، أَرَأَيْتَ شُحُومَ الْمَيْتَةِ فَإِنَّهَا يُطْلَى بِهَا السُّفُنُ، وَيُدْهَنُ بِهَا الْجُلُودُ، وَيَسْتَصْبِحُ بِهَا النَّاسُ. فَقَالَ " لاَ، هُوَ حَرَامٌ ". ثُمَّ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم عِنْدَ ذَلِكَ " '''قَاتَلَ اللَّهُ الْيَهُودَ'''، إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَمَّا حَرَّمَ شُحُومَهَا جَمَلُوهُ ثُمَّ بَاعُوهُ فَأَكَلُوا ثَمَنَهُ ".</br>Narrated Jabir bin `Abdullah: I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ), in the year of the Conquest of Mecca, saying, "Allah and His Apostle made illegal the trade of alcohol, dead animals, pigs and idols." The people asked, "O Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)! What about the fat of dead animals, for it was used for greasing the boats and the hides; and people use it for lights?" He said, "No, it is illegal." Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) further said, '''"May Allah KILL/DESTROY the Jews''', for Allah made the fat (of animals) illegal for them, yet they melted the fat and sold it and ate its price."}}<br />
'''Note''': The English translator of Sahih Bukhari, Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan again distorted the translation here<ref>English Translator of Sahih Bukhari distorted the Translation of Hadith where Muhammad wished that [https://web.archive.org/web/20201108003537/https://theislamissue.wordpress.com/2019/08/18/mass-distortion-in-bukharis-english-translation/ may Allah KILL/DESTROY the Jews.] </ref>. <br />
<br /><br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Lehrasap/Sanbox_Ifk&diff=134357User talk:Lehrasap/Sanbox Ifk2022-01-15T10:21:14Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>This page needs alot of rewriting, I have had the main page deleted so further renovations can be made here.<br />
<br />
==Tried to renovate it. Please guide precisely==<br />
Please check this new version and advice if it is according to the guidelines of Wiki? If not, then please guide more precisely. Thanks. <br />
<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 10:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sanbox_Ifk&diff=134356User:Lehrasap/Sanbox Ifk2022-01-15T10:17:54Z<p>Lehrasap: Rewritten in order to make things more simple and clear and according to the guidelines of Wiki.</p>
<hr />
<div>= Tٰitle: Incident of IFK + Ruling of 4 witnesses + Pure men have pure wives =<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. The name of the incident takes its name from the word "ifk" إفك meaning "slander", "lie", "calumny", or "falsehood." This word is specifically used in surat-an-nuur (Surah 24) verse 12. or "During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, where Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumors that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery spread in the wake of this incident. <br />
<br />
Inside the house, Muhammad also doubted 'Aisha, and he consulted people to divorce 'Aisha. But outside the house, Muhammad wanted to end these rumors, as they were affecting his claim of prophethood. Thus Muhammad ordered to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai for slandering 'Aisha in this case, but the tribe of 'Abdullah refused to obey Muhammad and they defended 'Abdullah. A war was about to begin between the two tribes of Muslims upon this issue. <br />
<br />
No revelation came about the innocence of 'Aisha initially despite the tense situation of war. Only after one month, Muhammad claimed the revelation of Quranic verses for the innocence of 'Aisha. It is doubted by Islam critics that the revelation was delayed for one month, while Muhammad wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant (i.e. if a woman gets her monthly menstrual blood, then it is a sign that she is not pregnant). Muhammad had many wives at that time, but he was unable to bear any children from all of them. Thus, if only 'Aisha would have become pregnant one month after being alone with Safwan, then people would have started doubting the revelation too for announcing the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
<br />
There were 3 Sahaba (companions), who made the slander of adultery against 'Aisha. At that time, Muhammad claimed the revelation of more Quranic verses, which not only stipulated the minimum number of witnesses to 4 in case of adultery, but they also stipulated that all the witnesses would be lashed 80 times if their number is less than 4 (even if they are telling the truth). <br />
<br />
==Details about the Incident of IFK==<br />
'Aisha provided the following details about the incident of IFK (recorded from 'Aisha through multiple chains of narration). <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
== Criticism: Why did Muhammad doubt 'Aisha and didn't immediately think well of 'Aisha? ==<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. {{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}But the Islam critics claim that Muhammad's own actions were against this Quranic Verse. According to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself didn't immediately thought well about 'Aisha, but he himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And instead of saying it to be a clear lie, Muhammad himself stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence to Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not accept her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' '''which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation'''. Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the '''Human Drama''' of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
==Criticism: Quranic claim that pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But the Islamic critics point out that this Quranic claim of pure men only having pure women goes against the human logic. The Qur'an itself gives the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure of heart, while Lut himself was a pure man. The Qur'an also gives the example of wife of Pharaoh; she was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not. Similarly with wife of Noah, who herself was not pure. This explanation thus seems to go against the known biographies of many of the Islamic prophets. And there are also common observation that many Muslim men do fornication in the western countries with the western women, but then go back to their country of origin, and wed the Muslim girls/women, who are pure according to the Islamic standards. <br />
<br />
==Criticism: Islamic Ruling of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of adultery==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk. This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering. And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' i.e. if there numbers are less than 4, then all the witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. {{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
The first one who made a slander of adultery against 'Aisha was 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. Muhammad firstly ordered his killing. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who also made the slander of adultery against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit (the famous poet)<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh (She was a sister of Zaynab, who was another wife of Muhammad)<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each, while their numbers were less than 4. <br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that this Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.''' This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. '''And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson'''. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and stipulated the numbers of witnesses to be 4, and to punish all if their numbers are less that 4, even if they are telling the truth. The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==Criticism: How did Muhammad know that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses about her innocence. And then surprisingly, only after one minute, he claimed that revelation came and it made 'Aisha free of those accusations.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that Muhammad could have only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished. And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
<br />
All the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures. Therefore, Muhammad once himself forgot that he had to sweat while claiming the descent of revelation, and instead of that, he slept and kept on snorting.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim||1180|reference}} and {{Bukhari|||1789|darussalam}}|A man said (to the Holy Prophet): What do you command me to do during my Umra? (It was at this juncture) that '''the revelation came to the Messenger of Allah''' (ﷺ) and he was covered with a cloth, and Ya'la said: Would that I see revelation coming to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Would it please you to see the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) receiving the revelations 'Umar lifted a corner of the cloth '''and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel'''. When he was relieved of this (revelation) he said: Where is he who asked about Umra? When the person came, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Wash out the trace of yellowness, or he said: the trace of perfume and put off the cloak and do in your 'Umra what you do in your Hajj.}}<br />
<br />
So, neither any hard condition overtook Muhammad, nor he sweat due to the heavy weight of the revelation, but this time he kept on sleeping and snorting comfortably while receiving the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Criticism: Why was the revelation delayed for the whole month?==<br />
No revelation came about the innocence of 'Aisha initially despite the tense situation of war between the two Muslim tribes. Only after one month, Muhammad claimed the revelation of Quranic verses for the innocence of 'Aisha. It is doubted by Islam critics that the revelation was delayed for one month, while Muhammad wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant (i.e. if a woman gets her monthly menstrual blood, then it is a sign that she is not pregnant). Muhammad had many wives at that time, but he was unable to bear any children from all of them. Thus, if only 'Aisha would have become pregnant one month after being alone with Safwan, then people would have started doubting the revelation for announcing the innocence of 'Aisha, and this would have destroyed his claim of prophethood completely. Therefore, although on one side Muhammad was trying to limit the slanders against 'Aisha, but on the other hand he let the door open to punish 'Aisha if she would have become pregnant later.<br />
<br />
==Criticism: Role of Hijab and Islamic Modesty in the incident of Ifk==<br />
The idea of 'Hijab' and 'Islamic Modesty' plays a role in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}The Islamic idea of hijab necessitates the wholesale separation of women from the society of all men, who are not in some way related to them. Even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'. Therefore, on this journey too, 'Aisha was made to hide from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Shariah, thus those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. Therefore, this whole incident happened only due to these restrictions upon the woman in name of Hijab and Islamic Modesty. <br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics claim that such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the 'Human '''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'. And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case. Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid, where they believe in such things which actually are not there.(Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status). Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha, and they didn't exchanged any words with each other.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask what wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation? Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity.<br />
<br />
PS: <br />
<br />
Muslims are divided on the issue if woman's 'face' should be veiled or not. Those who support the veiling of face too, they present this tradition as a proof, while here 'Aisha veiled her full face from Safwan. <br />
<br />
==Criticism: Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the pre-islamic Jahiliyyah period in Arabia, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but did bring their own wives for themselves, despite the extra burden this imposed on their army. <br />
<br />
Muhammad also followed the footsteps of these jahili dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=%27Iddah_(Female_Menstrual_Waiting_Period)&diff=134355'Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)2022-01-15T08:05:43Z<p>Lehrasap: Made things more easy and more clear with more References added.</p>
<hr />
<div> <br />
In Islamic [[Sharia]], '<nowiki/>''iddah'' or '''iddat'' (Arabic: العدة; ''period (of waiting)''), also spelled ''iddah'', ''idda'', or ''iddat'', is the period a woman must observe after the death of her husband or after a divorce, during which she has to face numbers of restrictions<ref name="Esposito2004">{{cite book | editor = John L. Esposito | date = 21 October 2004 | title = The Oxford Dictionary of Islam | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 131 | isbn = 978-0-19-975726-8 | oclc = 286438886 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=E324pQEEQQcC}}</ref>.<br />
<br />
These restrictions are criticized and it is claimed that: <br />
<br />
*Women have to "unilaterally" face these restrictions, which make their life difficult, while the husbands don't have to face any restriction.<br />
*Many of these restrictions are not reasonable, and also go against the modern science.<br />
*Muhammad took these restrictions of 'Iddah from the pre-Islamic Arab culture (which is known as "Time of Ignorance (i.e. jāhiliyyah)"<ref>[https://www.al-islam.org/man-and-ignorance/what-does-jahiliyah-mean What does Jahiliyah mean?]</ref>.<br />
<br />
But Muslim scholars defend these restrictions upon the women in 'Iddah. They claim that rulings of 'Iddah could neither be abolished, nor could they be changed as the rulings of the [[Shari'ah (Islamic Law)| Islamic Sharia]] are based upon wisdom, justice and the best interests of the women, and they protect the women against the gender oppression and misogyny, while the man made laws of the modern Western world lead to the sexual exploitation of the women<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/39286 Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website: Is it correct to think that fatwas may vary according to time and place?] </ref><ref>[https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/women-in-islamic-law-examining-five-prevalent-myths Women in Islamic Law: Examining Five Prevalent Myths]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==The different lengths of the waiting periods and their reasons==<br />
The length of 'iddah (waiting period) of different kind of women in Islam varies depending on her status: <br />
<br />
*'''A prisoner/slave woman''': The waiting period is becoming free from the blood of the first menstrual cycle<ref name=":3">[https://web.archive.org/web/20201219104233/https://www.iium.edu.my/deed/lawbase/risalah_maliki/book33.html 'Idda, Istibra' and Maintenance]</ref>. The reason is to determine the PARENTAGE of the child. Islam considers first menstrual cycle as enough to determine if a woman is pregnant or not.<br />
*'''A divorced woman''': The waiting period is 3 menstrual cycles. The reason is to give time to the couple to solve their dispute during this period<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":0">[https://brill.com/view/book/9789047426202/Bej.9789004172739.i-227_018.xml Reason for the waiting period]</ref>. <br />
*'''A widowed woman''': The waiting period is 4 months and 10 days. The reason is to give time to the woman to MOURN the death of her husband<ref name=":3" /><ref name=":0" />. <br />
*'''A pregnant woman''': The waiting period is up to 9 months (till the birth of the baby). The reason is to prevent that another man (as 2nd husband) could "water" the fetus from the previous husband<ref name=":3" /><ref>[https://quranx.com/Hadith/AbuDawud/DarusSalam/Hadith-2158/ Sunnan Abu Dawud, Hadith 2158]</ref>.<br />
<br />
==Other Restrictions (except for marrying another man) upon the women during her 'Iddah:==<br />
<br />
Islamic 'Iddah not only prohibits the women from remarriage with another man, but it also puts other restrictions upon them. <br />
<br />
===First Restriction: She has to undergo the 'Iddah even without any 'maintenance' money===<br />
According to the traditional rulings of Shari'ah, after the death and divorce of a woman's husband she is not entitled to any support from his family or estate. As the Dar-ul-Ifta says:{{Quote|[https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Dar-ul-Ifta]|The '''maintenance and providing of shelter for a woman observing the Iddat of Death are not the responsibility of her in-laws. She also does not have the right to take her maintenance out of the Estate of her deceased husband.'''}}A woman has no choice but to compulsorily undergo the 'Iddah of period of 4 months and 10 days (or up to 9 months in case of pregnancy), yet she has no right for maintenance money from the estate of her husband for this long period of time, and this in traditional cultures where women often rely upon men for their sustenance. In such cultures this stricture would be a huge financial burden upon the women, who often did not and do not even have any source of income in such cultures.<br />
<br />
===Second Restriction: She has to stay in the house of her ex-Husband during the entirety of the ‘Iddah===<br />
According to the ruling of traditional Islamic Sharia'h, if a woman's husband dies then she is allowed to stay ''only'' in the house of her husband during this whole period of 'Iddah. She is not allowed to spend this time of 'Iddah in any other place (like house of her parents or any other family members).<ref>Fatwas Website Islamqa.Org. [https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ Laws of Iddat].</ref><ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/10670/what-a-recently-widowed-woman-is-not-allowed-to-do Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website]</ref> Sunan Abu Dawud bears witness to this custom, and further clarifies that her need for financial support is not to be taken into consideration:<br />
====The woman has to stay in the husband’s house, even if it doesn’t belong to her husband, or even if he hasn’t left any maintenance money for the wife====<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2293|hasan}}|Furay'ah said that she came to the Messenger of Allah and asked him whether she could return to her people, Banu Khidrah, for her husband went out seeking his slaves who ran away. When they met him at al-Qudum, they murdered him.<br />
<br />
So I asked the Messenger of Allah: "Should I return to my people, '''for he did not leave any dwelling house of his own and maintenance for me'''?<br />
<br />
She said: The Messenger of Allah replied: Yes. She said: I came out, and when I was in the apartment or in the mosque, he called for me, or he commanded (someone to call me) and, therefore, I was called.<br />
<br />
He said: what did you say? So I repeated my story which I had already mentioned about my husband.<br />
<br />
'''Thereupon he said: Stay in your house till the term (of four months and 10 days) lapses.'''<br />
<br />
She said: So I passed my waiting period in it (her house) for four months and ten days. When Uthman ibn Affan became caliph, he sent for me and asked me about that; so I informed him, '''and he followed it and decided cases accordingly'''.}}<br />
<br />
Although this clearly serves the purpose of insuring that the next man who marries her does not inherit a son from the previous marriage or another man she had relations with during her 'Iddah, the wellbeing of the woman here is not considered at all; her need to either work to support herself or be with her own family for succor and support is not taken into account at all, and neither is her freedom of movement and intention.<br />
<br />
===Third Restriction: The Woman should not leave the house even for daily walks, or visit the relatives or attend any social gathering===<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211014113704/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45453/visiting-relatives-in-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]|'''Question''': Is a woman allowed to visit family members like her parents or sisters if she is observing iddat and use the excuse that she will be with her family so she doesn’t see the problem?</br> <br />
'''Answer''': A woman who has been divorced is not allowed to leave the confines of her home during the iddat for whatever reason, '''be it to visit friends or relatives or to attend the funeral of even her parents'''.}}<br />
Many Islamic fatawa (religious rulings) decree that Muslim women observing their 'iddah must not leave their (husband's) house even for a walk and certainly not for any type of social gathering ([https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114224/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/349861/woman-in-iddah-may-go-out-for-need Fatwa 1], [https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114300/https://idealwoman.org/2021/can-a-woman-go-out-for-a-walk-during-iddat/ Fatwa 2]). Although this makes sense from the perspective of insuring that her next husband does not inherit the baby of a man she had relations with during her 'iddah and that any pregnancy which comes about in the 'iddah can only be the work of her husband, it completely disregards her human rights. No consideration is given for the women's freedom of movement, freedom of choice, social or relationship needs. <br />
<br />
===Fourth Restriction: The woman should not even use collyrium/kohl on her eyes even for eye disease, since it beautifies her===<br />
Although a woman is allowed to take medical care during her ‘iddah, still she should not use collyrium/kohl as a cure even against any eye disease, since this substance can be used as a form of makeup to beautifie her. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari||68|81|in-book}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said, "No."}}<br />
<br />
===Fifth Restriction: Women are not allowed to use good clothes, jewelry, perfume, Henna and to comb their hair or to oil it===<br />
Women observing their 'Iddah are not allowed to wear good clothes, or jewelry, or use perfume or Henna. Even combing their hair and applying the oil to it is forbidden<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]</ref>. Washing the face with aloe is also forbidden.<br />
{{Quote|[https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3333 Mishkat al-Masabih 3333]|Umm Salama said: God’s Messenger came to visit me when Abu Salama died, and I had put the juice of aloes on myself. He asked me what it was, and I told him it was only the juice of aloes and contained no perfume, so he said, “It gives the face a glow, so apply it only at night and remove it in the daytime, and do not comb yourself with scent or henna, for it is a dye.” I asked God’s Messenger what I should use when combing myself, and he told me to use lote-tree leaves and smear my head copiously with them. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani declared this Hadith to be FAIR (حسن) (link).}}Although these strictures again work to keep the woman from having any intercourse or attracting any male attention during her 'iddah by keeping herself (relatively) unattractive, these laws once again completely disregard the happiness and freedom of the woman to whom they are applied. They also seem excessively harsh, as if she is truly keeping herself confined to her house the question arises as to who would see her with all of this makeup on even if she did apply it. <br />
<br />
==Pre-Islamic Influences on the Concept of ‘Iddah==<br />
According to the following hadith, the concept of 'iddah was taken from pre-Islamic Arabian culture:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5336|darussalam}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said,''' "No." Then Allah's Messenger added, "It is just a matter of four months and ten days. In the Pre-Islamic Period of ignorance a widow among you should throw a globe of dung when one year has elapsed (i.e. she had to stay in ‘Iddah for the whole one year)." '''}}Apparently women even at the time the hadith was created were complaining of the burdens of the 'iddah, but the hadith admonishes them that they ought to be thankful for Islam, since in the jahiliyyah (the pre-islamic time of "ignorance" before the coming of Islam in the Arab peninsula) the 'iddah lasted a whole year. That there were complaints, though, can be seen from the existence of the hadith in the first place, so even in the time of this hadith women were not happy with them; by comparison, modern secular culture imposes no such restrictions on women at all. <br />
<br />
==Waiting period for the captive/slave-women==<br />
The waiting period of captive/slave-women was as under:<br />
<br />
*If she was a virgin girl, then there was no waiting period necessary, and the Muslim owner was allowed to force her to provide him the sexual services the same night.<br />
*If she was married and had a husband, then the waiting period was to become free of the first menstrual blood. Even if this blood stopped the first night after the capture/purchase, the owner was allowed to force her to provide him the sexual services the same night.<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud|12|113}}|(Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said): ... it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captive woman till she is free from a menstrual course (i.e. her first menstrual blood).}}<br />
Imam Abdullah Ibn Abi Zayd (who is also knows as younger Imam Malik), writes in his Fiqh book Risalah:<br />
{{Quote|[http://web.archive.org/web/20160117184347/http://www.dhspriory.org/kenny/RISALA.htm Risalah by Imam Abdullah Ibn Abi Zayd]|واستبراء الامة في انتقال الملك حيضة انتقل الملك ببيع أو هبة أو سبي أو غير ذلك. ومن هي في حيازته قدحاضت عنده ثم إنه اشتراها فلا استبراء عليها إن لم تكن تخرج.</br><br />
The istibrā' (waiting) period for a slave concubine who changes ownership is one menstruation. Ownership may change by selling, giving away, capture, or any other way. If the woman menstruates after being taken possession of in advance by her new owner, and then he buys her, she does not have to go through a period of istibrā' (i.e. waiting period).}}<br />
Even if the first menstrual blood stopped the first night after becoming captive/purchase, the Muslim owner was allowed to have sex with her the same night. <br />
<br />
Saffiyyah (a Jewish captive woman) became free of her blood the next night after her father, brother and husband were killed in the war by Muslims. Thus Muhammad had sex with her the next night<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4211|darussalam}}|Narrated Anas bin Malik:<br />
<br />
We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, (then) the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet (ﷺ) selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba, (which is 14 miles away from Khaibar)' Safiya became clean from her menses then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) married her.}}<br />
<br />
==Criticism upon Islamic 'Iddah==<br />
<br />
===Criticism upon the 'Iddah of a widow===<br />
Islamic du'aah, shaykhs, and ulemaa' argue that the reason for the 4 month and 10 days long 'iddah of a widow is to ''''mourn'''<nowiki/>' the death of the husband.<ref name=":0" /><ref>Reason for 4 months 10 days long Iddah of a widow [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/88684/rights-of-a-deceased-husband-on-his-wife]</ref> Yet it should be noted that there is no obligation of any “mourning” upon a man if the wife dies. There is a clear a double standard vis-a-vis the same situation involving a man and a woman, as the Husband is totally free to marry a new wife the same night, without any waiting period in name of "mourning". And he is also totally free to have sex with his other wives and dozens of slave girls the same night as his divorce, and there is no restriction upon him in name of "mourning".<br />
<br />
Moreover, the 'iddah is even incumbent upon the widow in cases where she has never seen her husband after the marriage, and in cases where the marriage has not been consummated, and even if she is a minor child, or even if the marriage was abusive <ref>Widow has to observe 'Iddah even if she never saw the husband after the marriage, or even if she is a small child. [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/145179/the-waiting-period-of-an-old-woman-after-the-death-of-her-husband]</ref>. ''In all such cases, a widow has no emotional connection with the deceased husband, but still she has to undergo the restrictions of 'Iddah in name of mourning''. As such, feminist critics of the institution of the 'iddah have decried it as misogynist.<br />
<br />
===Criticism upon the 'Iddah of a pregnant woman===<br />
According to the Quran, the 'iddah of a pregnant woman is till the birth of a child ([https://quranx.com/65.4 Quran 65:4]).<br />
<br />
Muhammad in the hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud justifies the practice in this manner:<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2158|darussalam}}|رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ يَوْمَ حُنَيْنٍ قَالَ " لاَ يَحِلُّ لاِمْرِئٍ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ أَنْ يَسْقِيَ مَاءَهُ زَرْعَ غَيْرِهِ "<br />
<br />
<br />
The Messenger of Allah said: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day '''to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with a woman who is pregnant from her previous husband).'''}}<br />
This prohibition seems to imply some impurification of the fetus by the seed of the second man, but scientifically once the woman has been impregnated this is impossible, the DNA of the baby will not be affected by any other semen in the woman's body. This hadith thus seems to present an unscientific view of human gestation. Moreover, the man is under all circumstances able to take sexual pleasure from any other wife or sex slave that he possess immediately after the end of his marital bond, but it is only the woman who is not allowed to fulfil her natural need to have love and sex from any man. <br />
<br />
====Criticism upon the Islamic Ruling that a pregnant woman has to stay in the house of her ex-husband till the delivery====<br />
A pregnant woman has to stay in the house of her ex-husband: <br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20210512143740/https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Rules of Iddat]|If a woman is pregnant and her husband divorces her, she will have to remain in that house until she delivers her child.}}<br />
This ruling is criticized while a woman is alone in the house of her ex-husband, and she has to observe Purdah (Hijab) from him too<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210512143740/https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Staying in the house of ex-husband, but also doing Purdah (Hijab) from him.] </ref>. Living under one roof with the ex-husband is a cause of mental torture for a woman. <br />
<br />
As compared to the house of ex-husband, she could find a lot of love in house of her parents or relatives and live freely there and deliver the child without any mental tension. <br />
<br />
===Criticism upon 'Iddah in case of divorce===<br />
There are 2 procedures of giving 3 Talaqs in traditional Sunni Islam<ref name=":1">[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2373/giving-talaaq-divorce-three-times-at-once-is-bidah 3 Talaqs in one sitting and the Quranic way of giving divorce]</ref><ref name=":2">[https://tripakshalitigation.com/types-of-talaq-under-muslim-law/ Types of Talaqs under the Muslim Law]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, when husband pronounce 3 Talaqs in one sitting (known as Talaq al-Bidah).<br />
*Or husband gives each divorce after one menstrual cycle without touching her (known as Talaq al-Sunnah). This means, the process of 3 Talaqs takes 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
<br />
Both of these two procedures are criticized. <br />
<br />
====Criticism upon the 'Iddah in case of Talaq al-Bidah (i.e. Triple Talaqs in one sitting):====<br />
In the first case of triple Talaqs in one sitting, a woman has to go the restrictions of 'Iddah for 3 menstrual cycles before remarrying another man. But this ruling is criticized, while the parentage of the child could be determined only after the first menstrual cycle (as in case of the captive/slave woman). Therefore, logically the 'Iddah should be only one menstrual cycle long<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20220113121219/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/women/94-iddah-i-e-waiting-period-is-illogical-unnecessary-oppressive-injustice-against-the-women Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles in case of 3 Talaqs in one sitting]</ref>. There is no chance of reconciliation between the couple after the 3 Talaqs. <br />
<br />
Moreover, it is also claimed that in the present modern era, it is not necessary to wait even for one menstrual cycle, as the pregnancy could be determined right away through the medical tests. <br />
<br />
====Criticism upon the 'Iddah in case of Talaq al-Sunnah (i.e. Triple Talaqs in 3 different sittings) ====<br />
In case of Talaq al-Sunnah, '''the process of divorce''' itself takes the time of 3 menstrual cycles, during which husband is not allowed to touch the woman<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />. Therefore, this process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long) is itself enough to make sure if the woman is pregnant or not (as the husband has not touched her during this period). <br />
<br />
But according to the traditional Sunni Islam, a woman has to undergo 3 more menstrual cycles of 'Iddah (i.e. The whole process of Divorce + ‘Iddah lasts for at least 6 menstrual cycles for a divorced woman). <br />
{{Quote|[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12667/the-iddah-of-a-woman-divorced-by-talaaq The ‘iddah of a woman divorced by talaaq]|If the woman is not pregnant and she menstruates (is of child-bearing age), then her ‘iddah is three complete menstrual cycles after the divorce, i.e., her period comes then she becomes pure, then her period comes again and she becomes pure, then her period comes again and she becomes pure. That is three complete menstrual cycles, regardless of whether the time between them is long or short. Based on this, if he divorces her and she is breastfeeding and does not menstruate until two years later, then she remains in ‘iddah until she has had three menstrual cycles, so she may stay in this state for two years or more. The point is that she should go through three complete menstrual cycles whether the time involved is long or short, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): <br />
<br />
“And divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods”<br />
<br />
[al-Baqarah 2:228]}}<br />
<br />
==== Criticism upon the Islamic Ruling that in case of Divorce too, woman has to stay in the house of her ex-husband during the period of 'Iddah ====<br />
Not only the widow has to compulsorily stay in the house of deceased husband during 'Iddah, but in case of divorce too, a woman has to compulsorily stay in the house of ex-husband:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20210512143740/https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Rules of Iddat]|When the husband divorces his wife, she will have to spend her Iddat in the matrimonial home. She must not leave the house during the day nor at night, nor can she make nikah with anyone else ... This rule will apply irrespective of whether the man issued one two or three divorces, and irrespective of whether he issued a talaaqul baa-in (irrevocable divorce) or a talaaq-ur-raj’ee (revocable Talaaq). The same rule will apply in all cases ... If she is observing her ‘Iddat in the same house wherein the man who issued a talaaqul baain to her is also living, she will have to observe strict Purdah (Hijab) with him.}}<br />
The critics of this ruling points out that after the irrevocable triple talaq (either in one sitting or three different sittings), no reconciliation is possible (except that she marries another man and he also divorces her). So, what is the purpose to compel her to stay during the 'Iddah period in the house of her ex-husband, where she undergoes another hardship to observe the Purdah (Hijab) too even inside the house? <br />
<br />
===Implantation Bleeding Despite Being pregnant===<br />
Islamic du'aah and shaikhs claim that the Islamic 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles is correct, while some women have implantation bleeding despite being pregnant, and it is difficult for a woman to differentiate between the periods and the [https://www.healthline.com/health/how-long-does-spotting-last#implantation-spotting implantation bleeding]. Yet despite this rule, traditional Islamic law itself stipulates an 'Iddah of a prisoner/slave woman as only one menstrual cycle, in contradiction to this idea. If parentage were the main issue, the status of the woman (free or slave) should not matter. Also the 'Iddah of a free Muslim woman in the case of [[Khul']] is only one period.<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/5163/does-iddah-apply-in-the-case-of-khula 'Iddah in Khul' is one menstrual period]</ref> Even Muhammad himself slept with [[Safiyah]] the same night when her first menstrual blood stopped, after he had murdered her previous husband. Note that Safiyyah was not a slave, but a free woman when Muhammad took her as a wife: {{Quote|{{Muslim|16|99}}|He (the Holy Prophet) then granted Saffiyyah emancipation and married her. Thabit said to him: Abu Hamza, how much dower did he (the Holy Prophet) give to her? He said: He granted her freedom and then married her. On the way Umm Sulaim embellished her and then sent her to him (the Holy Prophet) at night.}}{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||2893|darussalam}}|Narrated Anas bin Malik: We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba,' '''Safiya became clean from her (first) menses then Allah's Apostle took her into his bed.'''}}<br />
<br />
There is no Sahih Hadith of the prophet in which he ever mentions the 'Iddah of 3 periods due to any implantation bleeding. Muhammad adopted the practice of 'Iddah from his native Arabian culture. It is in response to modern conceptions of biology and ideals about women's rights that these arguments about parentage have been formulated. But Muslims will fail, as contradictions in Islam will then occur (like Muslims having sex with prisoner/slave women and while Muhammad had himself sex with Safiyyah after only the first menstrual cycle. They are not based on the actual source material but rather on a desire to make the source material acceptable to a modern audience. <br />
<br />
===Why no waiting period in name of "mourning" for the captive/slave women?===<br />
In spite of the aforementioned claims of concern for the well-being of women, according to traditional [[Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence)]] Muslim men are allowed to derive sexual pleasures from the virgin girls taken as war booty during Jihad without giving them any 'waiting period' to mourn their dead family members. As far as the non-virgin slaves taken as war booty are concerned, if already have husbands, then vaginal coitus is not allowed till they become free of their first menstrual period, but the Muslim Mujhaahiduun (i.e. warriors) are allowed to undress them the same night and to take all kinds of other sexual pleasures and sexual favors from them aside from vaginal penetration.<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://web.archive.org/save/http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=4080&idto=4081&bk_no=52&ID=1404&idfrom=4523&idto=5022&bookid=18&startno=425 Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, in his book Fath-ul-Bari]|2=وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Atta said: ‘There is no harm to drive sexual pleasure from the body of the pregnant slave/(or prisoner) woman except from vagina’}}<br />
According to Islamic Scholars, the Fiqh (Jurisprudence) of Imam Bukhari lies in the “Headings of Chapters” of his Book. And Imam Bukhari gave this heading in his book Sahih Bukhari<ref>[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]</ref>:<blockquote>''Chapter: If one buys a slave woman, can he then take her along with him in a journey without her completing her waiting period?''</blockquote>Under this heading, Imam Bukhari writes:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]|2=ولم ير الحسن بأسا أن يقبلها أو يباشرها. وقال ابن عمر ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ إذا وهبت الوليدة التي توطأ أو بيعت أو عتقت فليستبرأ رحمها بحيضة، ولا تستبرأ العذراء. وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج.<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Hasan Basri finds nothing objectionable in kissing a woman or to having sex with her. And Ibn Umar said that such a slave woman who is given as a present, or who is sold, or who is made free, but sex had been done with her before that, then she had to undergo a waiting period. '''And Atta said if a slave woman had become pregnant (from the earlier owner/husband), then still pleasure could be derived from the whole of her body, except for her vagina.'''}}<br />
The sorrow and pain of such women are recorded in Tabari:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://books.google.de/books?id=4A-4ZC4l0dMC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=she+commanded+that+Safiyyah+should+be+kept+behind+him+and+that+the+Messenger+of+God+had+chosen+her+for+himself&source=bl&ots=pHDBKo-6Bv&sig=W8sWDq8ZJ4nLwFZpsA1obfYZJ48&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizjuC41L7bAhVHXRQKHSEhD7EQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=she%20commanded%20that%20Safiyyah%20should%20be%20kept%20behind%20him%20and%20that%20the%20Messenger%20of%20God%20had%20chosen%20her%20for%20himself&f=false History of Tabari, Volume 8, Page 112]|2=Ibn Ishaq said: After the Messenger of God conquered al-Qamus, Safiyyah bint Huyayy was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal (a companion), who was the one who brought them, led them past some of the slain Jews. When the woman who was with Safiyyah saw them, she cried out, struck her face, and poured dust on her head. When the Messenger of God saw her, he said, "Take this she-devil away from me!" ... The Messenger of God said to Bilal, when he saw the Jewish woman doing what he saw her do, "Are you devoid of mercy, Bilal, that you take two women past their slain men?"}} <br />
<br />
The clear disregard for the well-being of women presents a conundrum for modern day advocates of these Islamic laws and traditions. On one hand, Islamic law advocates claim that a Muslim woman is not allowed to be wed during 3 periods/months long 'Iddah while she is mentally under stress after the divorce. Yet on the flip side of the coin, by endorsing a tradition with such endorsements of sexual slavery, they ignore any such mental stress for the prisoner women and girls. Far away from the subject of divorce, even after killing all the men of their family, Muslim men are allowed their use sex objects the very same night that their slavery begins. They are provided with no 'waiting period' to come out of their mental stress.<br />
<br />
Contrary to Islam, even the laws of the Jewish Bible allowed the prisoner women to mourn their relatives for one complete month, during which men were not allowed to take any other sexual services from them. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021&version=NIV Bible, Deuteronomy, Chap 21]|2=יכִּֽי־תֵצֵ֥א לַמִּלְחָמָ֖ה עַל־אֹֽיְבֶ֑יךָ וּנְתָנ֞וֹ יְהֹוָ֧ה אֱלֹהֶ֛יךָ בְּיָדֶ֖ךָ וְשָׁבִ֥יתָ שִׁבְיֽוֹ:<br />
<br />
יאוְרָאִ֨יתָ֙ בַּשִּׁבְיָ֔ה אֵ֖שֶׁת יְפַת־תֹּ֑אַר וְחָֽשַׁקְתָּ֣ בָ֔הּ וְלָֽקַחְתָּ֥ לְךָ֖ לְאִשָּֽׁה:<br />
<br />
יבוַֽהֲבֵאתָ֖הּ אֶל־תּ֣וֹךְ בֵּיתֶ֑ךָ וְגִלְּחָה֙ אֶת־רֹאשָׁ֔הּ וְעָֽשְׂתָ֖ה אֶת־צִפָּֽרְנֶֽיהָ:<br />
<br />
יגוְהֵסִ֩ירָה֩ אֶת־שִׂמְלַ֨ת שִׁבְיָ֜הּ מֵֽעָלֶ֗יהָ וְיָֽשְׁבָה֙ בְּבֵיתֶ֔ךָ וּבָֽכְתָ֛ה אֶת־אָבִ֥יהָ וְאֶת־אִמָּ֖הּ יֶ֣רַח יָמִ֑ים וְאַ֨חַר כֵּ֜ן תָּב֤וֹא אֵלֶ֨יהָ֙ וּבְעַלְתָּ֔הּ וְהָֽיְתָ֥ה לְךָ֖ לְאִשָּֽׁה:<br />
<br />
ידוְהָיָ֞ה אִם־לֹ֧א חָפַ֣צְתָּ בָּ֗הּ וְשִׁלַּחְתָּהּ֙ לְנַפְשָׁ֔הּ וּמָכֹ֥ר לֹֽא־תִמְכְּרֶ֖נָּה בַּכָּ֑סֶף לֹֽא־תִתְעַמֵּ֣ר בָּ֔הּ תַּ֖חַת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עִנִּיתָֽהּ:<br />
<br />
'''Marrying a Captive Woman'''<br />
<br />
(10) When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives,<br />
<br />
(11) if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.<br />
<br />
(12) Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails<br />
<br />
(13) and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. '''After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month''', then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife.<br />
<br />
(14) If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.}}<br />
<br />
In creating these new rulings around taking the sexual pleasure of female sex slaves, Islamic law rejected the law of the Bible in this case, and more closely followed the laws of the pagan Arab society of the time of Muhammad, as it benefitted the Muslims financially and they were free to seek sexual pleasures through the prisoner women the same night.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=%27Iddah_(Female_Menstrual_Waiting_Period)&diff=134352'Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)2022-01-13T13:16:53Z<p>Lehrasap: Rewritten in order to make things simple to understand</p>
<hr />
<div> <br />
In Islamic [[Sharia]], '<nowiki/>''iddah'' or '''iddat'' (Arabic: العدة; ''period (of waiting)''), also spelled ''iddah'', ''idda'', or ''iddat'', is the period a woman must observe after the death of her husband or after a divorce, during which she has to face numbers of restrictions<ref name="Esposito2004">{{cite book | editor = John L. Esposito | date = 21 October 2004 | title = The Oxford Dictionary of Islam | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 131 | isbn = 978-0-19-975726-8 | oclc = 286438886 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=E324pQEEQQcC}}</ref>.<br />
<br />
These restrictions are criticized and it is claimed that: <br />
<br />
* Women have to "unilaterally" face these restrictions, which make their life difficult, while the husbands don't have to face any restriction. <br />
* Many of these restrictions are neither reasonable, nor logical, especially in the present modern era. <br />
* The reasons for the 'Iddah go against the modern science. <br />
* Muhammad took these restrictions of 'Iddah from the pre-Islamic Arab culture (which is known as "Time of Ignorance (i.e. jāhiliyyah)"<ref>[https://www.al-islam.org/man-and-ignorance/what-does-jahiliyah-mean What does Jahiliyah mean?]</ref>. <br />
<br />
But Muslim scholars defend these restrictions upon the women in 'Iddah. They claim that rulings of 'Iddah could neither be abolished, nor could they be changed as the rulings of the [[Shari'ah (Islamic Law)| Islamic Sharia]] are based upon wisdom, justice and the best interests of the women, and they protect the women against the gender oppression and misogyny, while the man made laws of the modern Western world lead to the sexual exploitation of the women<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/39286 Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website: Is it correct to think that fatwas may vary according to time and place?] </ref><ref>[https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/women-in-islamic-law-examining-five-prevalent-myths Women in Islamic Law: Examining Five Prevalent Myths]</ref>.<br />
<br />
The 'iddah (waiting period) of different kind of women in Islam varies depending on her status:<br />
<br />
*'''A prisoner/slave woman''': The waiting period is becoming free from the blood of the first menstrual cycle.<br />
*'''A divorced woman''': The waiting period is 3 menstrual cycles. <br />
*'''A widowed woman''': The waiting period is 4 months and 10 days.<br />
*'''A pregnant woman''': The waiting period is up to 9 months (till the birth of the baby).<br />
*'''Mut'ah marriage''': It is 2 menstrual cycles. <br />
<br />
== Reasons for the different lengths of the waiting periods: ==<br />
According to the Muslim Scholars, the reasons for the different lengths of the waiting periods is as following<ref name=":0">[https://brill.com/view/book/9789047426202/Bej.9789004172739.i-227_018.xml Reason for the waiting period]</ref>: <br />
<br />
# Firstly, to determine the Parentage of the Child. Islam considers first menstrual cycle as enough to determine if a woman is pregnant or not (as is the case of waiting period of captive/slave women). <br />
# Secondly, in the event of a revocable divorce, it gives the husband the opportunity to return to his wife. Therefore, a woman has to undergo the waiting period of 3 menstrual cycle in case of normal divorce, so that the couple could get the chance to reconcile during this period. <br />
# Thirdly, asking the widow to "'''mourn"''' the death of her husband. Therefore, a widow is not allowed to remarry for 4 months and 10 days. <br />
# Fourthly, to prevent that another man could "water" the fetus from previous husband in case of a pregnant woman. <br />
<br />
==Other Restrictions (except for marrying another man) upon the women during her 'Iddah:==<br />
<br />
Islamic 'Iddah not only prohibits the women from remarriage with another man, but it also puts other restrictions upon them, which bring difficulties in their life. <br />
<br />
===First Restriction: She has to undergo the 'Iddah even without any 'maintenance' money===<br />
According to the traditional rulings of shari'ah, the after the death and divorce of a woman's husband she is not entitled to any support from his family or estate. As the Dar-ul-Ifta says:{{Quote|[https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Dar-ul-Ifta]|The '''maintenance and providing of shelter for a woman observing the Iddat of Death are not the responsibility of her in-laws. She also does not have the right to take her maintenance out of the Estate of her deceased husband.'''}}A woman has no choice but to compulsorily undergo the 'Iddah of period of 4 months and 10 days (or up to 9 months in case of pregnancy), yet she has no right for maintenance money from the estate of her husband for this long period of time, and this in traditional cultures where women often rely upon men for their sustenance. In such cultures this stricture would be a huge financial burden upon the women, who often did not and do not even have any source of income in such cultures.<br />
<br />
===Second Restriction: She has to stay in the house of her ex-Husband during the entirety of the ‘Iddah===<br />
According to the ruling of traditional Islamic Sharia'h, if a woman's husband dies then she is allowed to stay ''only'' in the house of her husband during this whole period of 'Iddah. She is not allowed to spend this time of 'Iddah in any other place (like house of her parents or any other family members).<ref>Fatwas Website Islamqa.Org. [https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ Laws of Iddat].</ref><ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/10670/what-a-recently-widowed-woman-is-not-allowed-to-do Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website]</ref> Sunan Abu Dawud bears witness to this custom, and further clarifies that her need for financial support is not to be taken into consideration:<br />
====The woman has to stay in the husband’s house, even if it doesn’t belong to her husband, or even if he hasn’t left any maintenance money for the wife====<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2293|hasan}}|Furay'ah said that she came to the Messenger of Allah and asked him whether she could return to her people, Banu Khidrah, for her husband went out seeking his slaves who ran away. When they met him at al-Qudum, they murdered him.<br />
<br />
So I asked the Messenger of Allah: "Should I return to my people, '''for he did not leave any dwelling house of his own and maintenance for me'''?<br />
<br />
She said: The Messenger of Allah replied: Yes. She said: I came out, and when I was in the apartment or in the mosque, he called for me, or he commanded (someone to call me) and, therefore, I was called.<br />
<br />
He said: what did you say? So I repeated my story which I had already mentioned about my husband.<br />
<br />
'''Thereupon he said: Stay in your house till the term (of four months and 10 days) lapses.'''<br />
<br />
She said: So I passed my waiting period in it (her house) for four months and ten days. When Uthman ibn Affan became caliph, he sent for me and asked me about that; so I informed him, '''and he followed it and decided cases accordingly'''.}}<br />
<br />
Although this clearly serves the purpose of insuring that the next man who marries her does not inherit a son from the previous marriage or another man she had relations with during her 'Iddah, the wellbeing of the woman here is not considered at all; her need to either work to support herself or be with her own family for succor and support is not taken into account at all, and neither is her freedom of movement and intention.<br />
<br />
===Third Restriction: The Woman should not leave the house even for daily walks, or visit the relatives or attend any social gathering===<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211014113704/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45453/visiting-relatives-in-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]|'''Question''': Is a woman allowed to visit family members like her parents or sisters if she is observing iddat and use the excuse that she will be with her family so she doesn’t see the problem?</br> <br />
'''Answer''': A woman who has been divorced is not allowed to leave the confines of her home during the iddat for whatever reason, '''be it to visit friends or relatives or to attend the funeral of even her parents'''.}}<br />
Many Islamic fatawa (religious rulings) decree that Muslim women observing their 'iddah must not leave their (husband's) house even for a walk and certainly not for any type of social gathering ([https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114224/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/349861/woman-in-iddah-may-go-out-for-need Fatwa 1], [https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114300/https://idealwoman.org/2021/can-a-woman-go-out-for-a-walk-during-iddat/ Fatwa 2]). Although this makes sense from the perspective of insuring that her next husband does not inherit the baby of a man she had relations with during her 'iddah and that any pregnancy which comes about in the 'iddah can only be the work of her husband, it completely disregards her human rights. No consideration is given for the women's freedom of movement, freedom of choice, social or relationship needs. <br />
<br />
===Fourth Restriction: The woman should not even use collyrium/kohl on her eyes even for eye disease, since it beautifies her===<br />
Although a woman is allowed to take medical care during her ‘iddah, still she should not use collyrium/kohl as a cure even against any eye disease, since this substance can be used as a form of makeup to beautifie her. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari||68|81|in-book}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said, "No."}}<br />
<br />
===Fifth Restriction: Women are not allowed to use good clothes, jewelry, perfume, Henna and to comb their hair or to oil it===<br />
Women observing their 'Iddah are not allowed to wear good clothes, or jewelry, or use perfume or Henna. Even combing their hair and applying the oil to it is forbidden<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]</ref>. Washing the face with aloe is also forbidden.<br />
{{Quote|[https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3333 Mishkat al-Masabih 3333]|Umm Salama said: God’s Messenger came to visit me when Abu Salama died, and I had put the juice of aloes on myself. He asked me what it was, and I told him it was only the juice of aloes and contained no perfume, so he said, “It gives the face a glow, so apply it only at night and remove it in the daytime, and do not comb yourself with scent or henna, for it is a dye.” I asked God’s Messenger what I should use when combing myself, and he told me to use lote-tree leaves and smear my head copiously with them. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani declared this Hadith to be FAIR (حسن) (link).}}Although these strictures again work to keep the woman from having any intercourse or attracting any male attention during her 'iddah by keeping herself (relatively) unattractive, these laws once again completely disregard the happiness and freedom of the woman to whom they are applied. They also seem excessively harsh, as if she is truly keeping herself confined to her house the question arises as to who would see her with all of this makeup on even if she did apply it. <br />
<br />
==Pre-Islamic Influences on the Concept of ‘Iddah==<br />
According to the following hadith, the concept of 'iddah was taken from pre-Islamic Arabian culture:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5336|darussalam}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said,''' "No." Then Allah's Messenger added, "It is just a matter of four months and ten days. In the Pre-Islamic Period of ignorance a widow among you should throw a globe of dung when one year has elapsed (i.e. she had to stay in ‘Iddah for the whole one year)." '''}}Apparently women even at the time the hadith was created were complaining of the burdens of the 'iddah, but the hadith admonishes them that they ought to be thankful for Islam, since in the jahiliyyah (the pre-islamic time of "ignorance" before the coming of Islam in the Arab peninsula) the 'iddah lasted a whole year. That there were complaints, though, can be seen from the existence of the hadith in the first place, so even in the time of this hadith women were not happy with them; by comparison, modern secular culture imposes no such restrictions on women at all. <br />
<br />
== Waiting period for the captive/slave-women ==<br />
The waiting period of captive/slave-women was as under:<br />
<br />
* If she was a virgin girl, then there was no waiting period necessary, and the Muslim owner was allowed to force her to provide him the sexual services the same night. <br />
* If she was married and had a husband, then the waiting period was to become free of the first menstrual blood. Even if this blood stopped the first night after the capture/purchase, the owner was allowed to force her to provide him the sexual services the same night. <br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud|12|113}}|(Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said): ... it is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the Last Day to have intercourse with a captive woman till she is free from a menstrual course (i.e. her first menstrual blood).}}<br />
Imam Abdullah Ibn Abi Zayd (who is also knows as younger Imam Malik), writes in his Fiqh book Risalah:<br />
{{Quote|[http://web.archive.org/web/20160117184347/http://www.dhspriory.org/kenny/RISALA.htm Risalah by Imam Abdullah Ibn Abi Zayd]|واستبراء الامة في انتقال الملك حيضة انتقل الملك ببيع أو هبة أو سبي أو غير ذلك. ومن هي في حيازته قدحاضت عنده ثم إنه اشتراها فلا استبراء عليها إن لم تكن تخرج.</br><br />
The istibrā' (waiting) period for a slave concubine who changes ownership is one menstruation. Ownership may change by selling, giving away, capture, or any other way. If the woman menstruates after being taken possession of in advance by her new owner, and then he buys her, she does not have to go through a period of istibrā' (i.e. waiting period).}}<br />
Even if the first menstrual blood stopped the first night after becoming captive/purchase, the Muslim owner was allowed to have sex with her the same night. <br />
<br />
Saffiyyah (a Jewish captive woman) became free of her blood the next night after her father, brother and husband were killed in the war by Muslims. Thus Muhammad had sex with her the next night<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4211|darussalam}}|Narrated Anas bin Malik:<br />
<br />
We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, (then) the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet (ﷺ) selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba, (which is 14 miles away from Khaibar)' Safiya became clean from her menses then Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) married her.}}<br />
<br />
== Criticism upon Islamic 'Iddah ==<br />
<br />
===Criticism upon the 'Iddah of a widow===<br />
Islamic du'aah, shaykhs, and ulemaa' argue that the reason for the 4 month and 10 days long 'iddah of a widow is to ''''mourn'''<nowiki/>' the death of the husband.<ref name=":0" /><ref>Reason for 4 months 10 days long Iddah of a widow [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/88684/rights-of-a-deceased-husband-on-his-wife]</ref> Yet it should be noted that there is no obligation of any “mourning” upon a man if the wife dies. There is a clear a double standard vis-a-vis the same situation involving a man and a woman, as the Husband is totally free to marry a new wife the same night, without any waiting period in name of "mourning". And he is also totally free to have sex with his other wives and dozens of slave girls the same night as his divorce, and there is no restriction upon him in name of "mourning". <br />
<br />
Moreover, the 'iddah is even incumbent upon the widow in cases where she has never seen her husband after the marriage, and in cases where the marriage has not been consummated, and even if she is a minor child, or even if the marriage was abusive <ref>Widow has to observe 'Iddah even if she never saw the husband after the marriage, or even if she is a small child. [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/145179/the-waiting-period-of-an-old-woman-after-the-death-of-her-husband]</ref>. In all such cases, a widow has no emotional connection with the deceased husband, but still she has to undergo the 'Iddah. Logically, "mourning" is attached with the "emotional connection". As such, feminist critics of the institution of the 'iddah have decried it as misogynist.<br />
<br />
===Islamic Reason for the 'Iddah of a pregnant woman is against the science===<br />
According to the Quran, the 'iddah of a pregnant woman is till the birth of a child ([https://quranx.com/65.4 Quran 65:4]).<br />
<br />
Muhammad in the hadith of Sunan Abu Dawud justifies the practice in this manner:<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2158|darussalam}}|رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ يَوْمَ حُنَيْنٍ قَالَ " لاَ يَحِلُّ لاِمْرِئٍ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ أَنْ يَسْقِيَ مَاءَهُ زَرْعَ غَيْرِهِ "<br />
<br />
<br />
The Messenger of Allah said: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day '''to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with a woman who is pregnant from her previous husband).'''}}<br />
This prohibition seems to imply some impurification of the fetus by the seed of the second man, but scientifically once the woman has been impregnated this is impossible, the DNA of the baby will not be affected by any other semen in the woman's body. This hadith thus seems to present an unscientific view of human gestation. Moreover, the man is under all circumstances able to take sexual pleasure from any other wife or sex slave that he possess immediately after the end of his marital bond, but it is only the woman who is not allowed to fulfil her natural need to have love and sex from any man. <br />
<br />
=== Compelling a pregnant woman to stay in house of her ex-husband till the delivery is also illogical: ===<br />
A pregnant woman has to stay in the house of her ex-husband: <br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20210512143740/https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Rules of Iddat]|If a woman is pregnant and her husband divorces her, she will have to remain in that house until she delivers her child.}}<br />
This ruling is criticized while a woman is alone in the house of her ex-husband. She could find a lot of love in house of her parents or relatives. <br />
<br />
===Criticism upon 'Iddah in case of divorce===<br />
There are 2 procedures of giving 3 Talaqs in traditional Sunni Islam<ref name=":1">[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2373/giving-talaaq-divorce-three-times-at-once-is-bidah 3 Talaqs in one sitting and the Quranic way of giving divorce]</ref><ref name=":2">[https://tripakshalitigation.com/types-of-talaq-under-muslim-law/ Types of Talaqs under the Muslim Law]</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Firstly, when husband pronounce 3 Talaqs in one sitting (known as Talaq al-Bidah). <br />
* Or husband gives each divorce after one menstrual cycle without touching her (known as Talaq al-Sunnah). This means, the process of 3 Talaqs takes 3 menstrual cycles. <br />
<br />
Both of these two procedures are criticized. <br />
<br />
==== 3 menstrual cycles long 'iddah is ILLOGICAL in case of 3 Talaqs in one sitting (Talaq al-Bidah): ====<br />
In the first case of triple Talaqs in one sitting, a woman has to go the restrictions of 'Iddah for 3 menstrual cycles before remarrying another man. <br />
<br />
But this ruling is criticized, while<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20220113121219/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/women/94-iddah-i-e-waiting-period-is-illogical-unnecessary-oppressive-injustice-against-the-women Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles in case of 3 Talaqs in one sitting]</ref>: <br />
<br />
* The parentage of the child could be determined only after the first menstrual cycle (as in case of the captive/slave woman). Therefore, the 'Iddah should be only one menstrual cycle long. Therefore, this ruling is blamed to be ILLOGICAL. as it is putting the hardships of 'iddah upon the woman unnecessarily for the 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
* There is no chance of reconciliation between the couple after the 3 Talaqs. So, why then to let the woman face the hardships of 'Iddah for 3 menstrual cycles? <br />
* Moreover, it is also claimed that in the present modern era, even it is not necessary to wait for even the one menstrual cycle, as the pregnancy could be determined right away through the medical tests. <br />
<br />
==== Extra 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles is ILLOGICAL in case of Talaq al-Sunnah: ====<br />
In case of Talaq al-Sunnah, the process of divorce itself takes the time of 3 menstrual cycles, during which husband is not allowed to touch the woman<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />. But according to the traditional Sunni Islam, a woman has to undergo 3 more menstrual cycles of 'Iddah (i.e. The whole process of Divorce + ‘Iddah lasts for at least 6 menstrual cycles for a divorced woman). <br />
{{Quote|[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12667/the-iddah-of-a-woman-divorced-by-talaaq The ‘iddah of a woman divorced by talaaq]|If the woman is not pregnant and she menstruates (is of child-bearing age), then her ‘iddah is three complete menstrual cycles after the divorce, i.e., her period comes then she becomes pure, then her period comes again and she becomes pure, then her period comes again and she becomes pure. That is three complete menstrual cycles, regardless of whether the time between them is long or short. Based on this, if he divorces her and she is breastfeeding and does not menstruate until two years later, then she remains in ‘iddah until she has had three menstrual cycles, so she may stay in this state for two years or more. The point is that she should go through three complete menstrual cycles whether the time involved is long or short, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): <br />
<br />
“And divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods”<br />
<br />
[al-Baqarah 2:228]}}<br />
<br />
===Implantation Bleeding Despite Being pregnant===<br />
Islamic du'aah and shaikhs claim that the Islamic 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles is correct, while some women have implantation bleeding despite being pregnant, and it is difficult for a woman to differentiate between the periods and the [https://www.healthline.com/health/how-long-does-spotting-last#implantation-spotting implantation bleeding]. Yet despite this rule, traditional Islamic law itself stipulates an 'Iddah of a prisoner/slave woman as only one menstrual cycle, in contradiction to this idea. If parentage were the main issue, the status of the woman (free or slave) should not matter. Also the 'Iddah of a free Muslim woman in the case of [[Khul']] is only one period.<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/5163/does-iddah-apply-in-the-case-of-khula 'Iddah in Khul' is one menstrual period]</ref> Even Muhammad himself slept with [[Safiyah]] the same night when her first menstrual blood stopped, after he had murdered her previous husband. Note that Safiyyah was not a slave, but a free woman when Muhammad took her as a wife: {{Quote|{{Muslim|16|99}}|He (the Holy Prophet) then granted Saffiyyah emancipation and married her. Thabit said to him: Abu Hamza, how much dower did he (the Holy Prophet) give to her? He said: He granted her freedom and then married her. On the way Umm Sulaim embellished her and then sent her to him (the Holy Prophet) at night.}}{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||2893|darussalam}}|Narrated Anas bin Malik: We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba,' '''Safiya became clean from her (first) menses then Allah's Apostle took her into his bed.'''}}<br />
<br />
There is no Sahih Hadith of the prophet in which he ever mentions the 'Iddah of 3 periods due to any implantation bleeding. Muhammad adopted the practice of 'Iddah from his native Arabian culture. It is in response to modern conceptions of biology and ideals about women's rights that these arguments about parentage have been formulated. But Muslims will fail, as contradictions in Islam will then occur (like Muslims having sex with prisoner/slave women and while Muhammad had himself sex with Safiyyah after only the first menstrual cycle. They are not based on the actual source material but rather on a desire to make the source material acceptable to a modern audience. <br />
<br />
===Why no waiting period in name of "mourning" for the captive/slave women?===<br />
In spite of the aforementioned claims of concern for the well-being of women, according to traditional [[Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence)]] Muslim men are allowed to derive sexual pleasures from the virgin girls taken as war booty during Jihad without giving them any 'waiting period' to mourn their dead family members. As far as the non-virgin slaves taken as war booty are concerned, if already have husbands, then vaginal coitus is not allowed till they become free of their first menstrual period, but theMuslim mujhaahiduun are allowed to undress them the same night and to take all kinds of other sexual pleasures and sexual favors from them aside from vaginal penetration.<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://web.archive.org/save/http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=4080&idto=4081&bk_no=52&ID=1404&idfrom=4523&idto=5022&bookid=18&startno=425 Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, in his book Fath-ul-Bari]|2=وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Atta said: ‘There is no harm to drive sexual pleasure from the body of the pregnant slave/(or prisoner) woman except from vagina’}}<br />
According to Islamic Scholars, the Fiqh (Jurisprudence) of Imam Bukhari lies in the “Headings of Chapters” of his Book. And Imam Bukhari gave this heading in his book Sahih Bukhari<ref>[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]</ref>:<blockquote>''Chapter: If one buys a slave woman, can he then take her along with him in a journey without her completing her waiting period?''</blockquote>Under this heading, Imam Bukhari writes:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]|2=ولم ير الحسن بأسا أن يقبلها أو يباشرها. وقال ابن عمر ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ إذا وهبت الوليدة التي توطأ أو بيعت أو عتقت فليستبرأ رحمها بحيضة، ولا تستبرأ العذراء. وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج.<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Hasan Basri finds nothing objectionable in kissing a woman or to having sex with her. And Ibn Umar said that such a slave woman who is given as a present, or who is sold, or who is made free, but sex had been done with her before that, then she had to undergo a waiting period. '''And Atta said if a slave woman had become pregnant (from the earlier owner/husband), then still pleasure could be derived from the whole of her body, except for her vagina.'''}}<br />
The sorrow and pain of such women are recorded in Tabari:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://books.google.de/books?id=4A-4ZC4l0dMC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=she+commanded+that+Safiyyah+should+be+kept+behind+him+and+that+the+Messenger+of+God+had+chosen+her+for+himself&source=bl&ots=pHDBKo-6Bv&sig=W8sWDq8ZJ4nLwFZpsA1obfYZJ48&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizjuC41L7bAhVHXRQKHSEhD7EQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=she%20commanded%20that%20Safiyyah%20should%20be%20kept%20behind%20him%20and%20that%20the%20Messenger%20of%20God%20had%20chosen%20her%20for%20himself&f=false History of Tabari, Volume 8, Page 112]|2=Ibn Ishaq said: After the Messenger of God conquered al-Qamus, Safiyyah bint Huyayy was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal (a companion), who was the one who brought them, led them past some of the slain Jews. When the woman who was with Safiyyah saw them, she cried out, struck her face, and poured dust on her head. When the Messenger of God saw her, he said, "Take this she-devil away from me!" ... The Messenger of God said to Bilal, when he saw the Jewish woman doing what he saw her do, "Are you devoid of mercy, Bilal, that you take two women past their slain men?"}} <br />
<br />
The clear disregard for the well-being of women presents a conundrum for modern day advocates of these Islamic laws and traditions. On one hand, Islamic law advocates claim that a Muslim woman is not allowed to be wed during 3 periods/months long 'Iddah while she is mentally under stress after the divorce. Yet on the flip side of the coin, by endorsing a tradition with such endorsements of sexual slavery, they ignore any such mental stress for the prisoner women and girls. Far away from the subject of divorce, even after killing all the men of their family, Muslim men are allowed their use sex objects the very same night that their slavery begins. They are provided with no 'waiting period' to come out of their mental stress.<br />
<br />
Contrary to Islam, even the laws of the Jewish Bible allowed the prisoner women to mourn their relatives for one complete month, during which men were not allowed to take any other sexual services from them. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021&version=NIV Bible, Deuteronomy, Chap 21]|2=יכִּֽי־תֵצֵ֥א לַמִּלְחָמָ֖ה עַל־אֹֽיְבֶ֑יךָ וּנְתָנ֞וֹ יְהֹוָ֧ה אֱלֹהֶ֛יךָ בְּיָדֶ֖ךָ וְשָׁבִ֥יתָ שִׁבְיֽוֹ:<br />
<br />
יאוְרָאִ֨יתָ֙ בַּשִּׁבְיָ֔ה אֵ֖שֶׁת יְפַת־תֹּ֑אַר וְחָֽשַׁקְתָּ֣ בָ֔הּ וְלָֽקַחְתָּ֥ לְךָ֖ לְאִשָּֽׁה:<br />
<br />
יבוַֽהֲבֵאתָ֖הּ אֶל־תּ֣וֹךְ בֵּיתֶ֑ךָ וְגִלְּחָה֙ אֶת־רֹאשָׁ֔הּ וְעָֽשְׂתָ֖ה אֶת־צִפָּֽרְנֶֽיהָ:<br />
<br />
יגוְהֵסִ֩ירָה֩ אֶת־שִׂמְלַ֨ת שִׁבְיָ֜הּ מֵֽעָלֶ֗יהָ וְיָֽשְׁבָה֙ בְּבֵיתֶ֔ךָ וּבָֽכְתָ֛ה אֶת־אָבִ֥יהָ וְאֶת־אִמָּ֖הּ יֶ֣רַח יָמִ֑ים וְאַ֨חַר כֵּ֜ן תָּב֤וֹא אֵלֶ֨יהָ֙ וּבְעַלְתָּ֔הּ וְהָֽיְתָ֥ה לְךָ֖ לְאִשָּֽׁה:<br />
<br />
ידוְהָיָ֞ה אִם־לֹ֧א חָפַ֣צְתָּ בָּ֗הּ וְשִׁלַּחְתָּהּ֙ לְנַפְשָׁ֔הּ וּמָכֹ֥ר לֹֽא־תִמְכְּרֶ֖נָּה בַּכָּ֑סֶף לֹֽא־תִתְעַמֵּ֣ר בָּ֔הּ תַּ֖חַת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עִנִּיתָֽהּ:<br />
<br />
'''Marrying a Captive Woman'''<br />
<br />
(10) When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives,<br />
<br />
(11) if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.<br />
<br />
(12) Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails<br />
<br />
(13) and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. '''After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month''', then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife.<br />
<br />
(14) If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.}}<br />
<br />
In creating these new rulings around taking the sexual pleasure of female sex slaves, Islamic law rejected the law of the Bible in this case, and more closely followed the laws of the pagan Arab society of the time of Muhammad, as it benefitted the Muslims financially and they were free to seek sexual pleasures through the prisoner women the same night.<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134224User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T16:36:47Z<p>Lehrasap: Blasphemy as Criminal Offence (First Draft Completed)</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy as a Criminal Offence</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. Their arguments are as under: <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. According to the critics of blasphemy law:{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|'''(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment:''' If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims. If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. </br><br />
'''(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”:''' Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]</br><br />
'''(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”:''' Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad. While the Non-Muslims believe Muhammad to be a wrong-doer (who made false drama of prophethood and thus millions of people died due to it). And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such a wrong-doer (in their opinion) is "praised". Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, '''and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression''' and move on. Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. '''They have to bear this insult and move on'''.<br />
'''(4) Human Nature:''' It is normal according to the human nature that people may become angry during the discussions & debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. Even the writer of Quran showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran became angry and then he started cursing them several times in Quran, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents==<br />
Islam critics point out that the following Quranic Verses are insulting the opponents. {{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|89}}|Allah's '''curse''' is on (all) the unbelievers.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|161}}|Surely (all) those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the '''curse of Allah and the angels and men all''';}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|179}}|Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. '''These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|62|5}}|The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, '''is as the likeness of the ass (donkey)''' bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|171}}|And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; '''deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|5|60}}|Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, '''made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan''', will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|176}}|And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the '''parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue'''; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;}}{{Quote|{{Quran|47|12}}|Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the '''beasts''' eat, and the fire is their abode.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|74|51}}|What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. '''As they were frightened donkeys'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|166}}|Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: '''Be apes, despised and hated'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|98|6}}|The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; '''they are the worst of all creatures'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|99}}|We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the '''evil transgressors'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|9|28}}|O Believers, the pagans are '''filthy and unclean'''. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|8|55}}|Surely the '''vilest of animals''' in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|142}}|'''The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews)''' among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."}}<br />
<br />
==Insult of the opponents in Hadith==<br />
Islam critics point the following incident:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|There is a tradition in [http://sunnah.com/bukhari/54/19 Sahih al-Bukhari 2731, 2732] when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying:''' “Go and suck the clitoris of your goddess Laat”''', then Prophet Muhammad didn't stop Abu Bakr from this blasphemy, but supported him by keeping quiet (known as [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hazriah-Hasan/publication/336374711_PROPHETIC_SUNNAH/links/5d9ef1e0a6fdcc04fac678ad/PROPHETIC-SUNNAH.pdf Taqriri Hadith]. [Note: The Muslim english translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate the exact words of Abu Bakr, which constitutes to "Distortion"]. Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which mean (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the clitoris of goddess Laat”)}}<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134223User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T16:22:58Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Insult of the opponents in Hadith */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of the Opponents by Quran and Muhammad</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. Their arguments are as under: <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. According to the critics of blasphemy law:{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|'''(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment:''' If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims. If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. </br><br />
'''(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”:''' Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]</br><br />
'''(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”:''' Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad. While the Non-Muslims believe Muhammad to be a wrong-doer (who made false drama of prophethood and thus millions of people died due to it). And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such a wrong-doer (in their opinion) is "praised". Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, '''and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression''' and move on. Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. '''They have to bear this insult and move on'''.<br />
'''(4) Human Nature:''' It is normal according to the human nature that people may become angry during the discussions & debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. Even the writer of Quran showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran became angry and then he started cursing them several times in Quran, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents==<br />
Islam critics point out that the following Quranic Verses are insulting the opponents. {{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|89}}|Allah's '''curse''' is on (all) the unbelievers.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|161}}|Surely (all) those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the '''curse of Allah and the angels and men all''';}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|179}}|Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. '''These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|62|5}}|The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, '''is as the likeness of the ass (donkey)''' bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|171}}|And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; '''deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|5|60}}|Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, '''made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan''', will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|176}}|And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the '''parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue'''; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;}}{{Quote|{{Quran|47|12}}|Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the '''beasts''' eat, and the fire is their abode.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|74|51}}|What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. '''As they were frightened donkeys'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|166}}|Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: '''Be apes, despised and hated'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|98|6}}|The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; '''they are the worst of all creatures'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|99}}|We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the '''evil transgressors'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|9|28}}|O Believers, the pagans are '''filthy and unclean'''. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|8|55}}|Surely the '''vilest of animals''' in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|142}}|'''The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews)''' among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."}}<br />
<br />
==Insult of the opponents in Hadith==<br />
Islam critics point the following incident:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|There is a tradition in [http://sunnah.com/bukhari/54/19 Sahih al-Bukhari 2731, 2732] when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and suck the clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad didn't stop Abu Bakr from this blasphemy, but supported him by keeping quiet (known as [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hazriah-Hasan/publication/336374711_PROPHETIC_SUNNAH/links/5d9ef1e0a6fdcc04fac678ad/PROPHETIC-SUNNAH.pdf Taqriri Hadith]. [Note: The Muslim english translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate the exact words of Abu Bakr, which constitutes to "Distortion"]. Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which mean (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the clitoris of goddess Laat”)}}<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134222User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T15:23:27Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of the Opponents by Quran and Muhammad</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. Their arguments are as under: <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. According to the critics of blasphemy law:{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|'''(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment:''' If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims. If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. </br><br />
'''(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”:''' Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]</br><br />
'''(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”:''' Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad. While the Non-Muslims believe Muhammad to be a wrong-doer (who made false drama of prophethood and thus millions of people died due to it). And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such a wrong-doer (in their opinion) is "praised". Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, '''and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression''' and move on. Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. '''They have to bear this insult and move on'''.<br />
'''(4) Human Nature:''' It is normal according to the human nature that people may become angry during the discussions & debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. Even the writer of Quran showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran became angry and then he started cursing them several times in Quran, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents==<br />
Islam critics point out that the following Quranic Verses are insulting the opponents. {{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|89}}|Allah's '''curse''' is on (all) the unbelievers.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|161}}|Surely (all) those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the '''curse of Allah and the angels and men all''';}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|179}}|Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. '''These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|62|5}}|The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, '''is as the likeness of the ass (donkey)''' bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|171}}|And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; '''deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|5|60}}|Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, '''made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan''', will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|176}}|And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the '''parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue'''; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;}}{{Quote|{{Quran|47|12}}|Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the '''beasts''' eat, and the fire is their abode.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|74|51}}|What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. '''As they were frightened donkeys'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|166}}|Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: '''Be apes, despised and hated'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|98|6}}|The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; '''they are the worst of all creatures'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|99}}|We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the '''evil transgressors'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|9|28}}|O Believers, the pagans are '''filthy and unclean'''. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|8|55}}|Surely the '''vilest of animals''' in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|142}}|'''The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews)''' among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."}}<br />
<br />
== Insult of the opponents in Hadith ==<br />
Islam critics point the following incident:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211010160706/https://atheism-vs-islam.com/index.php/miscellaneous-articles/5-why-western-laws-about-blasphemy-are-fully-justified-and-according-to-the-human-nature atheism-vs-islam.com]|There is a tradition in [http://sunnah.com/bukhari/54/19 Sahih al-Bukhari 2731, 2732] when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and suck the clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad didn't stop Abu Bakr from this blasphemy, but supported him by keeping quiet (known as [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hazriah-Hasan/publication/336374711_PROPHETIC_SUNNAH/links/5d9ef1e0a6fdcc04fac678ad/PROPHETIC-SUNNAH.pdf Taqriri Hadith]. [Note: The Muslim english translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translated the exact words of Abu Bakr, which constitutes to "Distortion"]. Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which mean (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the clitoris of goddess Laat”)}}<br />
<br />
<br />
== References: ==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sanbox_Ifk&diff=134221User:Lehrasap/Sanbox Ifk2021-12-27T07:46:49Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. The name of the incident takes its name from the word "ifk" إفك meaning "slander", "lie", "calumny", or "falsehood." This word is specifically used in surat-an-nuur (Surah 24) verse 12. or "During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, where Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumors that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery spread in the wake of this incident. <br />
<br />
Later, Quranic verses (Surah Nur) were revealed about the innocence of 'Aisha against those slanders. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam critics point out that there are 'human errors' present in the revelation: <br />
<br />
#Firstly Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] questioned the people why they doubted 'Aisha's innocence and why didn't they immediately deny those slanders at their own. But Islam critics point out that there is contradiction in Quranic revelation and Muhammad's own behavior. It was Muhammad himself who doubted 'Aisha, and he even wanted to divorce her, and thus those verses should have condemned Muhammad first instead of those companions.<br />
#Then Quran came up with this argument that 'Aisha should had been considered free of doubts as pure men could have only the pure women, and she was wed with Muhammad, who was a pure man. But Islam critics point out that this Quranic argument shows a human error, as there is no guarantee that pure men will always get pur women (or vice-versa).<br />
#Then the revelation came up with entirely new ruling that number of witnesses should be 4 in case of slandering. And another new ruling was this if number of witnesses is 3 (or less), then all of them will be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. But Islam critics consider this ruling too to be a 'human error' and illogical to punish the witnesses even if they are telling the truth.<br />
#Then Islam critics point out that this whole drama of Ifk, which continued for one month, happened only due to the '''unnatural restrictions''' of Islam in the name of 'Islamic Modesty', where it forbids any interaction between the men and the women. <br />
<br />
==Contradiction between the Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to quiet all of those voices and thus he ordered the killing of `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but this was not possible as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
Muhammad was extremely mad at the group of people who were slandering his wife, and greatly disturbed by the things they were saying. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself created this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening '''inside the house''' during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence to Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not accept her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
*Outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' '''which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation'''.<br />
*Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad. If this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad first before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie.<br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
The Qur'an itself though gives the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure of heart, while Lut himself was a pure man. The Qur'an also gives the example of wife of Pharaoh; she was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not. Similarly with wife of Noah, who herself was not pure. This explanation thus seems to go against the known biographies of many of the Islamic prophets, and appears here somewhat contrived for this particular incident. <br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
*This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering.<br />
*And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are 3 (or less), then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''.<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit (the famous poet)<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh (She was a sister of Zaynab, who was another wife of Muhammad)<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each, while their numbers were less than 4. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.'''<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. '''And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson'''. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and stipulated the numbers of witnesses to be 4, and to punish all if their numbers are less that 4, even if they are telling the truth.<br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==How did Muhammad know that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses about her innocence. And then surprisingly, only after one minute, he claimed that revelation came and it made 'Aisha free of those accusations.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished.<br />
*And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
<br />
And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures.<br />
<br />
Therefore, Muhammad once himself forgot that he had to sweat while claiming the descent of revelation, and instead of that, he slept and kept on snorting. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim||1180|reference}} and {{Bukhari|||1789|darussalam}}|A man said (to the Holy Prophet): What do you command me to do during my Umra? (It was at this juncture) that '''the revelation came to the Messenger of Allah''' (ﷺ) and he was covered with a cloth, and Ya'la said: Would that I see revelation coming to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Would it please you to see the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) receiving the revelations 'Umar lifted a corner of the cloth '''and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel'''. When he was relieved of this (revelation) he said: Where is he who asked about Umra? When the person came, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Wash out the trace of yellowness, or he said: the trace of perfume and put off the cloak and do in your 'Umra what you do in your Hajj.}}<br />
<br />
So, neither any hard condition overtook Muhammad, nor he sweat due to the heavy weigt of the revelation, but this time he forgot it and kept on sleeping and snorting comfortably while receiving the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Why was the revelation delayed for the whole month?==<br />
If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier? The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could have also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness. So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month?<br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. And one of the doubt is that it might be that Muhammad waited for complete one month, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant''' (Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant). <br />
<br />
Had Muhammad announced the innocence of 'Aisha through revelation earlier, and later 'Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have totally destroyed his claim of prophethood and revelation. That is why, although outside the house, Muhammad was strongly defending 'Aisha, but still he didn't use the revelation for this defense for complete one month. <br />
<br />
==Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk==<br />
The idea of 'Islamic Modesty' plays a role in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Some of the unique culture presumptions of Islam come to play in this incident:<br />
<br />
#The Islamic idea of hijab necessitates the wholesale separation of women from the society of all men not in some way related to them.<br />
#Even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'; this goes back to the ancient Arab idea that a man and women when left alone for any period of time would most certainly engage in sexual relations.<br />
<br />
Therefore, on this journey too, 'Aisha was made hide from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Shariah and under traditional Arab society, those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The results here were quite dire:<br />
<br />
*'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he showed no kindness towards her.<br />
*It split the Muslims into two camps ready to kill one another<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'.<br />
*And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case.<br />
*Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
*Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women in name of 'Islamic Modesty'. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
*How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word?<br />
*What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation?<br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
PS: <br />
<br />
Muslims are divided on the issue if woman's 'face' should be veiled or not. Those who support the veiling of face too, they present this tradition as a proof, while here 'Aisha veiled her full face from Safwan. <br />
<br />
==Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the pre-islamic Jahiliyyah period in Arabia, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but did bring their own wives for themselves, despite the extra burden this imposed on their army. <br />
<br />
Muhammad also followed the footsteps of these jahili dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134220User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T05:08:01Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents */</p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of the Opponents by Quran and Muhammad</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times.<br />
<br />
===(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment===<br />
Critics of blasphemy laws consider the modern Secular laws of the western countries to be in accordance with the Justice, where indeed the punishment of oral insult is present, but this punishment is not "physical", but also "oral". <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims.</br><br />
If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. }}<br />
===(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”===<br />
<br />
Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]. <br />
<br />
===(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”===<br />
Critics of the blasphemy laws explains it as under:<br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad.<br />
<br />
While there are Non-Muslims who believe Muhammad to be an evil person, and millions of people were killed due to his false drama of prophethood. And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such an evil person (in their opinion) is "praised".<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression and move on.<br />
<br />
Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. They have to bear this insult and move on.}}<br />
<br />
===(4) Western Secular Laws are in accordance with the Human Nature:===<br />
Critics of the blasphemy laws explain it as under:<br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|It is normal for human nature that people may become angry during the debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. It understands the humans and their shortcomings. </br><br />
<br />
Even the writer of Quran and Muhammad showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran and Muhammad became angry and then they started cursing them several times in Quran and Hadith, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents==<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|89}}|Allah's '''curse''' is on (all) the unbelievers.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|161}}|Surely (all) those who disbelieve and die while they are disbelievers, these it is on whom is the '''curse of Allah and the angels and men all''';}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|179}}|Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. '''These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|62|5}}|The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, '''is as the likeness of the ass (donkey)''' bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|171}}|And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; '''deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|5|60}}|Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, '''made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan''', will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|176}}|And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the '''parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue'''; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;}}{{Quote|{{Quran|47|12}}|Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the '''beasts''' eat, and the fire is their abode.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|74|51}}|What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. '''As they were frightened donkeys'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|7|166}}|Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: '''Be apes, despised and hated'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|98|6}}|The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; '''they are the worst of all creatures'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|99}}|We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the '''evil transgressors'''.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|9|28}}|O Believers, the pagans are '''filthy and unclean'''. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.}}{{Quote|{{Quran|8|55}}|Surely the '''vilest of animals''' in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve}}{{Quote|{{Quran|2|142}}|'''The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews)''' among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."}}<blockquote><br />
<br />
</blockquote>And then we have the tradition from Sahih Bukhari (link) when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and such the stinky clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad supported Abu Bakr in saying it by keeping quiet (known as “Hadith-e-Taqriri” in Islamic Sharia).<br />
<br />
Note:<br />
<br />
The words of Abu Bakr were so dirty that the English Translator of Sahih Bukhari “distorted (تحریف)” the translation and hid the actual abusive words of Abu Bakr: This is pure “dishonesty” to do such distortion.<br />
<br />
Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which means (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the stinky clitoris of goddess Laat”)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134219User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T04:38:57Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of the Opponents by Quran and Muhammad</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. <br />
<br />
===(1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
===(2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should also be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times.<br />
<br />
===(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment===<br />
Critics of blasphemy laws consider the modern Secular laws of the western countries to be in accordance with the Justice, where indeed the punishment of oral insult is present, but this punishment is not "physical", but also "oral". <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims.</br><br />
If someone is cursing you, then the western laws allow you too to curse him back orally, but they don't allow you become physical. }}<br />
===(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”===<br />
<br />
Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]. <br />
<br />
===(3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”===<br />
Critics of the blasphemy laws explains it as under:<br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad.<br />
<br />
While there are Non-Muslims who believe Muhammad to be an evil person, and millions of people were killed due to his false drama of prophethood. And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such an evil person (in their opinion) is "praised".<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression and move on.<br />
<br />
Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. They have to bear this insult and move on.}}<br />
<br />
=== (4) Western Secular Laws are in accordance with the Human Nature: ===<br />
Critics of the blasphemy laws explain it as under:<br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit/ExMuslim]|It is normal for human nature that people may become angry during the debates due to the difference of opinions and use harsh words in anger for the opponent. And the western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. It understands the humans and their shortcomings. </br><br />
<br />
Even the writer of Quran and Muhammad showed this exact human nature. When the opponent's didn't accept the prophethood of Muhammad, then the writer of Quran and Muhammad became angry and then they started cursing them several times in Quran and Hadith, and insulting them by equating them to the Donkey, Dogs and the worst of animals and the worst of creatures, and for being filthy, and calling them names (like Abu Jahl) and “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) and fools and deaf and blind and Kafir.}}<br />
<br />
== Quranic Verses which are insulting the opponents ==<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran-range|68|10|13}}|Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that,''' base-born (bastard),-'''}}{{Quote|{{Quran|111|1}}|May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish!}}{{Quote||}}<blockquote><br />
<br />
<br />
(Quran Surah al-Lahab) May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish! … He will suffer in a blazing fire, and so too will his wife. Around her neck will be a rope of palm fibre.<br />
<br />
(Quran 2:89) فَلَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ<br />
<br />
Allah's curse is on the unbelievers.<br />
<br />
(Quran 2:161) نَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَمَاتُوا وَهُمْ كُفَّارٌ أُولَـٰئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ<br />
<br />
Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting,- on them is Allah's curse, and the curse of angels, and of all mankind;<br />
<br />
(Quran 7:179) لَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الْجِنِّ وَالْإِنسِ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَّا يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لَّا يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ آذَانٌ لَّا يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ<br />
<br />
Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle<br />
<br />
(Quran 62:5) مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوْرَاةَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا بِئْسَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِ اللَّـهِ وَاللَّـهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ<br />
<br />
The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass (donkey) bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.<br />
<br />
(Quran 2:171) وَمَثَلُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا كَمَثَلِ الَّذِي يَنْعِقُ بِمَا لَا يَسْمَعُ إِلَّا دُعَاءً وَنِدَاءً صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ<br />
<br />
And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand.<br />
<br />
(Quran 5:60) قُلْ هَلْ أُنَبِّئُكُم بِشَرٍّ مِّن ذَٰلِكَ مَثُوبَةً عِندَ اللَّـهِ مَن لَّعَنَهُ اللَّـهُ وَغَضِبَ عَلَيْهِ وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ وَعَبَدَ الطَّاغُوتَ أُولَـٰئِكَ شَرٌّ مَّكَانًا وَأَضَلُّ عَن سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ<br />
<br />
Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan, will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."<br />
<br />
(Quran 7:176) وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَـٰكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاه فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِن تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَث ذَّٰلِكَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا فَاقْصُصِ الْقَصَصَ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ <br />
<br />
And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;<br />
<br />
(Quran 47:12) إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يُدْخِلُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا يَتَمَتَّعُونَ وَيَأْكُلُونَ كَمَا تَأْكُلُ الْأَنْعَامُ وَالنَّارُ مَثْوًى لَّهُمْ<br />
<br />
Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the beasts eat, and the fire is their abode.<br />
<br />
(Quran 74:51) فَمَا لَهُمْ عَنِ التَّذْكِرَةِ مُعْرِضِينَ كَأَنَّهُمْ حُمُرٌ مُّسْتَنفِرَةٌ <br />
<br />
What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. As they were frightened donkeys.<br />
<br />
(Quran 7:166) فَلَمَّا عَتَوْا عَن مَّا نُهُوا عَنْهُ قُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ<br />
<br />
Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: Be apes, despised and hated.<br />
<br />
(Quran 98:6) إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ فِي نَارِ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمْ شَرُّ الْبَرِيَّةِ<br />
<br />
The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; they are the worst of all creatures.<br />
<br />
(Quran 2:99) وَلَقَدْ أَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ وَمَا يَكْفُرُ بِهَا إِلَّا الْفَاسِقُونَ <br />
<br />
We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the evil transgressors.<br />
<br />
(Quran 9:28) يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ فَلاَ يَقْرَبُواْ الْمَسْجِدَ الْحَرَامَ بَعْدَ عَامِهِمْ<br />
<br />
O Believers, the pagans are filthy and unclean. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.<br />
<br />
(Quran 8:55) إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ<br />
<br />
Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve<br />
<br />
(Quran 2:142) سَيَقُولُ السُّفَهَاءُ مِنَ النَّاسِ مَا وَلاَّهُمْ عَن قِبْلَتِهِمُ الَّتِي كَانُواْ عَلَيْهَا قُل لِّلّهِ الْمَشْرِقُ وَالْمَغْرِبُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ<br />
<br />
The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews) among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way."</blockquote>And then we have the tradition from Sahih Bukhari (link) when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and such the stinky clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad supported Abu Bakr in saying it by keeping quiet (known as “Hadith-e-Taqriri” in Islamic Sharia).<br />
<br />
Note:<br />
<br />
The words of Abu Bakr were so dirty that the English Translator of Sahih Bukhari “distorted (تحریف)” the translation and hid the actual abusive words of Abu Bakr: This is pure “dishonesty” to do such distortion.<br />
<br />
Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which means (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the stinky clitoris of goddess Laat”)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134218User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-27T03:13:49Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of Non-Muslims in Quran and Hadith</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
==Perspective of the Supporters of Blasphemy law==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. There is a campaign now to make it also a criminal offence in the western secular world too. <br />
<br />
=== (1) Insulting Muhammad causes unbearable emotional harm to those who love him ===<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts that insult Prophet Muhammad:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
<br />
=== (2) Negative comment on Muhammad should be a considered a criminal offense like Holocaust ===<br />
It is a criminal offence in some European countries to make a negative comment about Holocaust<ref>[https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf EU: Holocaust denial in criminal law]</ref>. Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan arguments that negative comment on Muhammad should be considered a criminal offence like Holocaust. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
==Response from the Critics of Blasphemy law==<br />
<br />
===(1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment===<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, under which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. The reason is that punishment of the any "oral" insult could not be any "physical" punishment. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit]|If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims.}}<br />
Critics of blasphemy laws consider the modern Secular laws of the western countries to be in accordance with the Justice, where the punishment of oral insult is only the oral insult in reply. <br />
<br />
===(2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”===<br />
<br />
Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand in the western secular law. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Western Secular laws provide with full freedom to preach your religion/ideology, which comes under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-thought-conscience-and-religion_en Freedom of Religion]. At the same time, they also provide full freedom to criticise any religion/ideology under the right of [https://ec.europa.eu/info/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights/your-rights-eu/know-your-rights/freedoms/freedom-expression-and-information_en Freedom of Expression]. <br />
<br />
=== (3) Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult” ===<br />
Critics of blasphemy explains it as under:<br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit]|Muslims consider Muhammad to be the best of mankind. Thus they could highly "praise" Muhammad.<br />
<br />
While there are Non-Muslims who believe Muhammad to be an evil person, and millions of people were killed due to his false drama of prophethood. And they are hurt and feel emotional harmed when such an evil person (in their opinion) is "praised".<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, the western secular system fully allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want, while the Non-Muslims could not stop them from praising Muhammad, and they have to bear this praise in name of Freedom of Expression and move on.<br />
<br />
Similarly, even if Muslims claim they are hurt when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. They have to bear this insult and move on.}}<br />
<br />
(4) <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
===Western Law is totally in accordance with Human Nature:===<br />
Anger is a part of human nature. It is a normal that people may become angry during debates due to the difference of opinions. And in anger, they may use harsh word for the opponents, or even curse or abuse them. And western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. It understand humans and their shortcomings. <br />
<br />
Even the writer of Quran also showed exactly this human nature in Quran. When opponents didn't accept prophethood of Muhammad, then writer of Quran becomes "angry" and then he starts cursing and abusing the opponents in Quran. <br />
<br />
*Allah is himself cursing the non-Muslims in Quran at many places<br />
*Allah is calling them to be similar like Donkeys and Dog and worst of the Creation in Quran.<br />
*And Allah called Walid bin Mughira to be a “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) in this Quran<br />
*And Allah called his opponent as Abu Jahl (father of ignorance).<br />
*And Allah cursed Abu Lahab and his wife in Quran.<br />
*While “Authentic Tradition” in Sahih Bukhari (link) tells that Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of pagans by telling him to go and suck the clitoris of his goddess (named al-Laat). Muhammad was also present there and he kept silent and thus made such abusing of gods of non-Muslims to be Halal (permissible) in Shariah.<br />
<br />
We are non-Muslims and according to our understanding there existed no Allah in the heavens, but it was Muhammad himself who was doing this drama of revelation. Thus we could understand when writer of Quran (i.e. Muhammad) showed this "human behaviour" when he became angry just like humans, and started cursing/abusing the opponents.<br />
<br />
Muslims claim divine Allah has divine MORALS. Then question arises: ''"When even "Divine Allah" is not able to control upon his anger and he could cursing and abusing the opponents, how then could we expect from a "normal human being" to have full control upon his anger, and to show "better Morals" then even divine Allah?"'' <br />
<br />
===Muslim Claim: Islam indeed allows "criticism", but it should be in "Limits"===<br />
'''Answer:''' "But what are these so-called "Limits"? Again divine Allah has divine morals. Still, this same Allah is saying "Bastard" to opponent in Quran (Verse 68:13), this same Allah is "Cursing" the opponents everywhere in Quran, this same Allah is saying "Donkey" and "Dogs" and "Worst of Creatures" to the opponents in this same Quran.<br />
<br />
And Quran claims that Muhammad had the "'''Best Moral Character'''" (Quran 68:4 انک لعلی خلق عظیم ). Still this same Muhammad supported Abu Bakr when he abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: "Go and suck the CLITORIS of your goddess Laat" (Sahih Bukhari).<br />
<br />
''Therefore, even if there exist any limits, still these limits of criticism/insults should also at least stand there, where Allah and Muhammad were standing (i.e. if Allah/Muhammad were allowed to curse/abuse, then normal people should also be allowed to do it).'' <br />
<br />
How could you expect from "Normal Humans" to show better "Morals" than Allah/Muhammad? And when divine Allah and Muhammad were unable to stay in those limits, how could you then expect from normal human beings to stay within these limits? <br />
<br />
These are absolute double standards by Muslims when Allah/Muhammad curse/abuse then it is ok for them. But when non-Muslims curse/abuse, then they start crying "blasphemy" and then start killing the humans. <br />
<br />
==Quranic Verses where Allah cursed and abused the Non-Muslims==<br />
<blockquote>(Quran 68:10-13) Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that, '''base-born (bastard)''',-</blockquote>Quran used all these bad words for Walid bin al-Mughirah. He didn’t accept that Muhammad was any prophet, but he said that Muhammad had lost his senses. Upon that Quran called him all these names including “bastard”.<br />
<br />
And then writer of Quran (i.e. Muhammad) abused Abu Lahab in these words:<blockquote>(Quran Surah al-Lahab) May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish! … He will suffer in a blazing fire, and so too will his wife. Around her neck will be a rope of palm fibre.</blockquote>And then Muhammad changed the name of “Amr Ibn Hisham” in order to abuse him and started calling him “Abu Jahl (i.e. Father of Ignorance)”. This Amr Ibn Hisham was a very wise person, and Quraysh used to call him “Abu Hakam (i.e. Father of Wisdom)”. But he opposed Muhammad, thus Muhammad started abusing him by calling him “Abu Jahl”.<br />
<br />
And then Allah:<br />
<br />
*Calls Non-Muslims to be Kafirs in Quran<br />
*CURSES them everywhere in Quran<br />
*Abuses them by calling them “animals” (and at some places call them “worst than animals”)<br />
*Abuses them by calling them “donkeys” and “dogs”<br />
*Abuses them by calling them “worst of creatures”<br />
*Calls them deaf and blind<br />
*Calls them Fasiq (evil transgressors)<br />
*Calls them Filthy and Unclean<br />
*Calls them Fools for questioning illogical decision of Allah<br />
<br />
Here are these Quranic Verses.<blockquote>(Quran 2:89) فَلَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ<br />
Allah's curse is on the unbelievers.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:161) نَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَمَاتُوا وَهُمْ كُفَّارٌ أُولَـٰئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ<br />
Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting,- on them is Allah's curse, and the curse of angels, and of all mankind;</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:179) لَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الْجِنِّ وَالْإِنسِ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَّا يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لَّا يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ آذَانٌ لَّا يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ<br />
Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 62:5) مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوْرَاةَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا بِئْسَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِ اللَّـهِ وَاللَّـهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ<br />
The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass (donkey) bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:171) وَمَثَلُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا كَمَثَلِ الَّذِي يَنْعِقُ بِمَا لَا يَسْمَعُ إِلَّا دُعَاءً وَنِدَاءً صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ<br />
And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand.<br />
(Quran 5:60) قُلْ هَلْ أُنَبِّئُكُم بِشَرٍّ مِّن ذَٰلِكَ مَثُوبَةً عِندَ اللَّـهِ مَن لَّعَنَهُ اللَّـهُ وَغَضِبَ عَلَيْهِ وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ وَعَبَدَ الطَّاغُوتَ أُولَـٰئِكَ شَرٌّ مَّكَانًا وَأَضَلُّ عَن سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ<br />
<br />
Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan, will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:176) وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَـٰكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاه فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِن تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَث ذَّٰلِكَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا فَاقْصُصِ الْقَصَصَ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ <br />
And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 47:12) إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يُدْخِلُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا يَتَمَتَّعُونَ وَيَأْكُلُونَ كَمَا تَأْكُلُ الْأَنْعَامُ وَالنَّارُ مَثْوًى لَّهُمْ<br />
Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the beasts eat, and the fire is their abode.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 74:51) فَمَا لَهُمْ عَنِ التَّذْكِرَةِ مُعْرِضِينَ كَأَنَّهُمْ حُمُرٌ مُّسْتَنفِرَةٌ <br />
What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. As they were frightened donkeys.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:166) فَلَمَّا عَتَوْا عَن مَّا نُهُوا عَنْهُ قُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ<br />
Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: Be apes, despised and hated.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 98:6) إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ فِي نَارِ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمْ شَرُّ الْبَرِيَّةِ<br />
The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; they are the worst of all creatures.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:99) وَلَقَدْ أَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ وَمَا يَكْفُرُ بِهَا إِلَّا الْفَاسِقُونَ <br />
We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the evil transgressors.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 9:28) يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ فَلاَ يَقْرَبُواْ الْمَسْجِدَ الْحَرَامَ بَعْدَ عَامِهِمْ<br />
O Believers, the pagans are filthy and unclean. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 8:55) إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ<br />
Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:142) سَيَقُولُ السُّفَهَاءُ مِنَ النَّاسِ مَا وَلاَّهُمْ عَن قِبْلَتِهِمُ الَّتِي كَانُواْ عَلَيْهَا قُل لِّلّهِ الْمَشْرِقُ وَالْمَغْرِبُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ<br />
<br />
The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews) among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way." </blockquote>And then we have the tradition from Sahih Bukhari (link) when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and such the stinky clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad supported Abu Bakr in saying it by keeping quiet (known as “Hadith-e-Taqriri” in Islamic Sharia).<br />
<br />
Note:<br />
<br />
The words of Abu Bakr were so dirty that the English Translator of Sahih Bukhari “distorted (تحریف)” the translation and hid the actual abusive words of Abu Bakr: This is pure “dishonesty” to do such distortion.<br />
<br />
Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which means (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the stinky clitoris of goddess Laat”)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134217User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-26T15:06:30Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><big>'''<u>Blasphemy Laws and the Insult of Non-Muslims in Quran and Hadith</u>'''</big><br />
<br />
Those among Muslims, who support the blasphemy laws, brings the argument that blasphemy laws are necessary against insulting prophet Muhammad while it hurts the feeling of billions of Muslims and bring emotional harm to them<ref>[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]</ref>. <br />
<br />
While critics bring the counter arguments why freedom to criticise, critique and mock religion is in accordance with the human nature, and has been fundamental to human progress<ref>[https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2021/07/naz-shahs-argument-on-blasphemy-should-be-rejected Why mocking religion is necessary for human progress! Secularism.Org.]</ref><ref>[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reasons why criticizing and even hating and insulting Muhammad is fully justified]</ref>. They point out, even Quran and Hadith themselves contain insult and blasphemy against the Non-Muslims. <br />
<br />
== Argument of the Supporters of Blasphemy law ==<br />
In many Islamic countries, insulting Islam or prophet Muhammad is already a crime with severe punishments, including killing<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Muslim-majority_countries Punishment of insulting Islam/Muhammad in the Islamic Countries]</ref>. Now the supporters of blasphemy laws want to make it a criminal act in the Non-Muslim countries too. <br />
<br />
UK Parliament Naz Shah urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad and gave the following argument for this:<br />
{{Quote|[https://ummid.com/news/2021/july/08.07.2021/uk-parliament-urged-to-criminalise-all-acts-insulting-to-prophet-muhammad.html UK Parliament urged to criminalise all acts insulting to Prophet Muhammad]|“It is because Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is the leader for two billion Muslims who commemorate Him in their hearts, honour Him in their lives ... But when bigots and racist defame, slander or abuse our Prophet (PBUH), ... the emotional harm caused upon our hearts is unbearable”}}<br />
Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan also brought the same argument of hurting the feelings of billions of Muslims and added that it should be made criminal as Holocaust is. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.dawn.com/news/1618885 Pakistan PM calls for West to criminalise blasphemy against Islam]|My message to extremists abroad who indulge in Islamophobia & racist slurs to hurt & cause pain to 1.3 bn Muslims across the globe: We Muslims have the greatest love & respect for our Prophet PBUH who lives in our hearts. We cannot tolerate any such disrespect & abuse.</br><br />
I call on Western govts who have outlawed any negative comment on the holocaust to use the same standards to penalise those deliberately spreading their message of hate against Muslims by abusing our Prophet.}}<br />
<br />
== Response from the Critics of Blasphemy law ==<br />
<br />
=== (1) Punishment of an "Oral" Insult could not be any "Physical" Punishment ===<br />
There is a campaign for repealing the blasphemy laws<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law#Campaigns_for_repeal Campaign for repealing the Blasphemy Laws]</ref>, und which many Western countries have already abolished the blasphemy laws completely in the recent times. The reason is that punishment of the any "oral" insult could not be any "physical" punishment. <br />
{{Quote|[https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim/comments/rolct3/reasons_why_criticizing_and_even_hating_and_even/ Reddit]|If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt from the oral insult of prophet, then the Secular Western Laws also allow these 1.5 billion Muslims to orally insult that person and hurt his feelings too in the reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims.}}<br />
Critics of blasphemy laws consider the modern Secular laws of the western countries to be in accordance with the Justice. <br />
<br />
=== (2) Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism” ===<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
'''Muslim Argument :''' ''Penalty of blasphemy is death while it hurts the feelings of 1.5 billion Muslims''<br />
<br />
'''Answer: '''''If 1.5 billion Muslims are hurt, then these 1.5 billion Muslims are also allowed to insult that person and hurt his feelings too in reply. And if oral insult has any influence, then that person would surely die due the curses and insults of these 1.5 Billion Muslims.'' This is the only punishment of oral insult, and no one is allowed to inflict any “physical harm” to others for any oral insult. These are those principles of Justice, which Muslims could not change by using the lame excuse of blasphemy.<br />
<br />
=== '''Where there is “Preaching”, there is also “Criticism”:''' ===<br />
Both preaching and criticism go hand in hand. Everyone is allowed to preach his religion/ideology, but then other is also fully allowed to differ and criticise. Unfortunately, Islamic System in Muslim countries show “Double Standards”, where they neither allow non-Muslims to criticise Islam, nor they allow them to preach to Muslims about their religion/ideologies, nor they allow Muslims to leave Islam. Therefore, instead of blaming others, Muslims should ponder upon their Double Standards. The rule is simple, where there is preaching, there is also criticism. <br />
<br />
=== '''Where there is “Praise”, there is also “Insult”:''' ===<br />
Western System allows Muslims to praise Muhammad as much as they want if they consider him to be a good human being. And even if non-Muslims believe that Muhammad was doing a false drama of Prophethood, and he was a cruel person who killed thousands for his false prophethood, and they are hurt when someone praises such tyrant, still they are not allowed to stop Muslims from praising Muhammad. They have to bear this praise of Muhammad and move on.<br />
<br />
Similarly, even if Muslims claim they love Muhammad more than their life and it hurt them when someone insults Muhammad, still they could not stop non-Muslims from orally insulting Muhammad. They have to bear this insult and move on. <br />
<br />
The rule is simple, where there is a "praise", there is also an "insult". But when Muslims want the right to praise Muhammad for themselves, but at the same time want to take the rights of others to insult him, then these are the double standards. <br />
<br />
=== Western Law is totally in accordance with Human Nature: ===<br />
Anger is a part of human nature. It is a normal that people may become angry during debates due to the difference of opinions. And in anger, they may use harsh word for the opponents, or even curse or abuse them. And western law is thus based upon this exact human nature. It understand humans and their shortcomings. <br />
<br />
Even the writer of Quran also showed exactly this human nature in Quran. When opponents didn't accept prophethood of Muhammad, then writer of Quran becomes "angry" and then he starts cursing and abusing the opponents in Quran. <br />
<br />
* Allah is himself cursing the non-Muslims in Quran at many places<br />
* Allah is calling them to be similar like Donkeys and Dog and worst of the Creation in Quran.<br />
* And Allah called Walid bin Mughira to be a “bastard” (Arabic: زنیم) in this Quran<br />
* And Allah called his opponent as Abu Jahl (father of ignorance).<br />
* And Allah cursed Abu Lahab and his wife in Quran.<br />
* While “Authentic Tradition” in Sahih Bukhari (link) tells that Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of pagans by telling him to go and suck the clitoris of his goddess (named al-Laat). Muhammad was also present there and he kept silent and thus made such abusing of gods of non-Muslims to be Halal (permissible) in Shariah.<br />
<br />
We are non-Muslims and according to our understanding there existed no Allah in the heavens, but it was Muhammad himself who was doing this drama of revelation. Thus we could understand when writer of Quran (i.e. Muhammad) showed this "human behaviour" when he became angry just like humans, and started cursing/abusing the opponents.<br />
<br />
Muslims claim divine Allah has divine MORALS. Then question arises: ''"When even "Divine Allah" is not able to control upon his anger and he could cursing and abusing the opponents, how then could we expect from a "normal human being" to have full control upon his anger, and to show "better Morals" then even divine Allah?"'' <br />
<br />
=== Muslim Claim: Islam indeed allows "criticism", but it should be in "Limits" ===<br />
'''Answer:''' "But what are these so-called "Limits"? Again divine Allah has divine morals. Still, this same Allah is saying "Bastard" to opponent in Quran (Verse 68:13), this same Allah is "Cursing" the opponents everywhere in Quran, this same Allah is saying "Donkey" and "Dogs" and "Worst of Creatures" to the opponents in this same Quran.<br />
<br />
And Quran claims that Muhammad had the "'''Best Moral Character'''" (Quran 68:4 انک لعلی خلق عظیم ). Still this same Muhammad supported Abu Bakr when he abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: "Go and suck the CLITORIS of your goddess Laat" (Sahih Bukhari).<br />
<br />
''Therefore, even if there exist any limits, still these limits of criticism/insults should also at least stand there, where Allah and Muhammad were standing (i.e. if Allah/Muhammad were allowed to curse/abuse, then normal people should also be allowed to do it).'' <br />
<br />
How could you expect from "Normal Humans" to show better "Morals" than Allah/Muhammad? And when divine Allah and Muhammad were unable to stay in those limits, how could you then expect from normal human beings to stay within these limits? <br />
<br />
These are absolute double standards by Muslims when Allah/Muhammad curse/abuse then it is ok for them. But when non-Muslims curse/abuse, then they start crying "blasphemy" and then start killing the humans. <br />
<br />
== Quranic Verses where Allah cursed and abused the Non-Muslims ==<br />
<blockquote>(Quran 68:10-13) Heed not the type of despicable men,- ready with oaths, A slanderer, going about with calumnies, (Habitually) hindering (all) good, transgressing beyond bounds, deep in sin, Violent (and cruel),- with all that, '''base-born (bastard)''',-</blockquote>Quran used all these bad words for Walid bin al-Mughirah. He didn’t accept that Muhammad was any prophet, but he said that Muhammad had lost his senses. Upon that Quran called him all these names including “bastard”.<br />
<br />
And then writer of Quran (i.e. Muhammad) abused Abu Lahab in these words:<blockquote>(Quran Surah al-Lahab) May the hands of Abu Lahab perish! May he too perish! … He will suffer in a blazing fire, and so too will his wife. Around her neck will be a rope of palm fibre.</blockquote>And then Muhammad changed the name of “Amr Ibn Hisham” in order to abuse him and started calling him “Abu Jahl (i.e. Father of Ignorance)”. This Amr Ibn Hisham was a very wise person, and Quraysh used to call him “Abu Hakam (i.e. Father of Wisdom)”. But he opposed Muhammad, thus Muhammad started abusing him by calling him “Abu Jahl”.<br />
<br />
And then Allah:<br />
<br />
* Calls Non-Muslims to be Kafirs in Quran<br />
* CURSES them everywhere in Quran<br />
* Abuses them by calling them “animals” (and at some places call them “worst than animals”)<br />
* Abuses them by calling them “donkeys” and “dogs”<br />
* Abuses them by calling them “worst of creatures”<br />
* Calls them deaf and blind<br />
* Calls them Fasiq (evil transgressors)<br />
* Calls them Filthy and Unclean<br />
* Calls them Fools for questioning illogical decision of Allah<br />
<br />
Here are these Quranic Verses.<blockquote>(Quran 2:89) فَلَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ<br />
Allah's curse is on the unbelievers.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:161) نَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا وَمَاتُوا وَهُمْ كُفَّارٌ أُولَـٰئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَعْنَةُ اللَّـهِ وَالْمَلَائِكَةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ<br />
Those who reject Faith, and die rejecting,- on them is Allah's curse, and the curse of angels, and of all mankind;</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:179) لَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الْجِنِّ وَالْإِنسِ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَّا يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لَّا يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ آذَانٌ لَّا يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ<br />
Already have We urged unto hell many of the jinn and humankind, having hearts wherewith they understand not, and having eyes wherewith they see not, and having ears wherewith they hear not. These are as the cattle - nay, but they are worse than cattle</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 62:5) مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوْرَاةَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا بِئْسَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِ اللَّـهِ وَاللَّـهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ<br />
The likeness of those who were charged with the Taurat, then they did not observe it, is as the likeness of the ass (donkey) bearing books, evil is the likeness of the people who reject the communications of Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:171) وَمَثَلُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا كَمَثَلِ الَّذِي يَنْعِقُ بِمَا لَا يَسْمَعُ إِلَّا دُعَاءً وَنِدَاءً صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْيٌ فَهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ<br />
And the parable of those who disbelieve is as the parable of one who calls out to that which hears no more than a call and a cry; deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they do not understand.<br />
(Quran 5:60) قُلْ هَلْ أُنَبِّئُكُم بِشَرٍّ مِّن ذَٰلِكَ مَثُوبَةً عِندَ اللَّـهِ مَن لَّعَنَهُ اللَّـهُ وَغَضِبَ عَلَيْهِ وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ وَعَبَدَ الطَّاغُوتَ أُولَـٰئِكَ شَرٌّ مَّكَانًا وَأَضَلُّ عَن سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ<br />
Say, "Should I tell you who will receive the worst punishment from God? Those whom God has condemned, afflicted with His anger, made apes out of them, swine and worshippers of Satan, will have the worst dwelling and will wander far away from the right path."</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:176) وَلَوْ شِئْنَا لَرَفَعْنَاهُ بِهَا وَلَـٰكِنَّهُ أَخْلَدَ إِلَى الْأَرْضِ وَاتَّبَعَ هَوَاه فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِن تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَث ذَّٰلِكَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا فَاقْصُصِ الْقَصَصَ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ <br />
And if We had pleased, We would certainly have exalted him thereby; but he clung to the earth and followed his low desire, so his parable is as the parable of the dog; if you attack him he lolls out his tongue; and if you leave him alone he lolls out his tongue; this is the parable of the people who reject Our communications;</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 47:12) إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يُدْخِلُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ وَالَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا يَتَمَتَّعُونَ وَيَأْكُلُونَ كَمَا تَأْكُلُ الْأَنْعَامُ وَالنَّارُ مَثْوًى لَّهُمْ<br />
Surely Allah will make those who believe and do good enter gardens beneath which rivers flow; and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the beasts eat, and the fire is their abode.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 74:51) فَمَا لَهُمْ عَنِ التَّذْكِرَةِ مُعْرِضِينَ كَأَنَّهُمْ حُمُرٌ مُّسْتَنفِرَةٌ <br />
What is then the matter with them (Kuffar), that they turn away from the admonition. As they were frightened donkeys.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 7:166) فَلَمَّا عَتَوْا عَن مَّا نُهُوا عَنْهُ قُلْنَا لَهُمْ كُونُوا قِرَدَةً خَاسِئِينَ<br />
Therefore when they revoltingly persisted in what they had been forbidden, We said to them: Be apes, despised and hated.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 98:6) إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ فِي نَارِ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أُولَـٰئِكَ هُمْ شَرُّ الْبَرِيَّةِ<br />
The disbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans will dwell forever in hell; they are the worst of all creatures.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:99) وَلَقَدْ أَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ آيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ وَمَا يَكْفُرُ بِهَا إِلَّا الْفَاسِقُونَ <br />
We have sent down to you clear revelations: no one can deny them except the evil transgressors.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 9:28) يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ فَلاَ يَقْرَبُواْ الْمَسْجِدَ الْحَرَامَ بَعْدَ عَامِهِمْ<br />
O Believers, the pagans are filthy and unclean. Do not let them come near to the Sacred Mosque after this year.</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 8:55) إِنَّ شَرَّ الدَّوَابِّ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فَهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ<br />
Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve</blockquote><blockquote>(Quran 2:142) سَيَقُولُ السُّفَهَاءُ مِنَ النَّاسِ مَا وَلاَّهُمْ عَن قِبْلَتِهِمُ الَّتِي كَانُواْ عَلَيْهَا قُل لِّلّهِ الْمَشْرِقُ وَالْمَغْرِبُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ<br />
<br />
The fools (pagans, hypocrites, and Jews) among the people will say, "What has turned them (Muslims) from their Qiblah [prayer direction (towards Jerusalem)] to which they were used to face in prayer." Say, (O Muhammad SAW) "To Allah belong both, east and the west. He guides whom He wills to a Straight Way." </blockquote>And then we have the tradition from Sahih Bukhari (link) when Abu Bakr abused the ambassador of Quraysh by saying: “Go and such the stinky clitoris of your goddess Laat”, then Prophet Muhammad supported Abu Bakr in saying it by keeping quiet (known as “Hadith-e-Taqriri” in Islamic Sharia).<br />
<br />
Note:<br />
<br />
The words of Abu Bakr were so dirty that the English Translator of Sahih Bukhari “distorted (تحریف)” the translation and hid the actual abusive words of Abu Bakr: This is pure “dishonesty” to do such distortion.<br />
<br />
Arabic words of Abu Bakr are: فَقَالَ لَهُ أَبُو بَكْرٍ امْصُصْ بَظْرَ اللاَّتِ , which means (Abu Bakr said: “Go and suck the stinky clitoris of goddess Laat”)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134215User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-25T11:48:52Z<p>Lehrasap: Halala Article rewritten.</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
According to Islam, if a man divorces his wife thrice, then he could not directly remarry her. But if the divorced woman marries another man, and he divorces her or dies, after that she is allowed to remarry her first husband. This ruling has been directly mentioned in Quran. {{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}This affects the whole family, but especially women and the children are affected from it.<br />
<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time of Ignorance, and Islam adopted it from there (along with the other related practices like only husband had the right to divorce, and the system of 3 divorces etc). <br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. <br />
==This was the practice of the pre-Islamic era Arabs==<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time. <br />
<br />
Actually, the whole "system" of pre-Islamic era consisted of<ref>[https://religion.asianindexing.com/index.php?title=Al-Idah/%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8_%D8%B9%DB%81%D8%AF_%D8%AC%D8%A7%DB%81%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%AA_%D9%85%DB%8C%DA%BA_%E2%80%99%E2%80%99%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%E2%80%98%E2%80%98_%DA%A9%D8%A7_%D8%AA%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1:_%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%82%DB%8C%D9%82%DB%8C_%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B2%DB%81&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop Divorce during the pre-Islamic era of Arab.]</ref>:<br />
<br />
#Only husband had the right to give divorce, while the women didn't have this right.<br />
#The 3 Talaqs (divorces) system<ref>[https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Women_in_Islamic_Law#Triple-talaq Triple-Talaq]</ref> i.e. Husband was allowed to take his wife back till 2 divorces. But after the 3rd divorce, he was not allowed to take her back.<br />
#But if he desired her even after the 3rd Talaq, then she had to first marry another man, and after the divorce from the 2nd husband, she could return to her former husband.<br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. {{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Later, Islam also adopted whole of this system of the pre-Islamic era (i.e. only husband having the right to divorce + 3 Divorces + the ruling of wife having to marry another man before returning to the 1st husband). <br />
<br />
Islam added another extra condition to this pre-Islamic era practice i.e. no contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage with the 2nd man<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9I3RzrTPfxEJ:https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx%3FQuestionId%3D2813+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de No contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage in Islam.] </ref>. This means, if the 2nd husband likes her, then he could keep her for himself. It was intended to make the punishment even more "severe". <br />
<br />
The logic was to compel the husband to think more carefully before giving the 3rd divorce, and it was also a warning for a woman to solve the dispute, and to make her husband happy before he divorces her the 3rd time. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, this extra condition brought even more miseries upon the Muslim women as compared to the women of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance. Also, the children were also more affected. <br />
<br />
==The time period for solving the disputes in the Islamic 3 Talaqs System==<br />
There are 2 ways of giving 3 Talaqs in Islam. <br />
<br />
#A husband gives 3 Talaqs (i.e. divorces) to his wife in one sitting i.e. if he says "Talaq, Talaq, Talaq" (i.e. 3 times Talaq) to his wife at the same time<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/44814/three-divorces-in-one-sitting/ Three Talaqs in one sitting.] </ref>, then the final irrevocable divorce takes place within seconds.<br />
#A husband gives the 1st Talaq (divorce) after the wife becomes free of her monthly bleeding. Then he gives the 2nd after the 2nd menstrual bleeding. These first 2 Talaqs (divorces) are reversible and he could took her back. But if he also divorces her the 3rd time after the third menstrual bleeding, then it becomes the irrevocable divorce<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Quranic way of giving divorce.]</ref>. This procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time.<br />
<br />
In the first case, if a husband pronounces 3 divorces at once in anger, then there is absolutely no time left to solve the disputes. The whole family is destroyed within seconds. <br />
<br />
In the 2nd case, the procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time. '''Nevertheless, still there is no guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months.''' Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months. <br />
<br />
==Why a divorced Muslim couple still wants to reunite?==<br />
===First Reason: The couple still love each other, despite the temporary anger and dispute===<br />
A divorce may occur due to many reasons (like temporary anger, inexperience of the young couple to solve their disputes, or family pressure, or financial situation etc.). <br />
<br />
But all these factors could change with time, and they may be able to solve their dispute later. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, problem occurs for the divorced Muslim couples that they don't have any chance to correct their mistake later, and to reunite due to this Islamic ruling. <br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of irrevocable divorce, both the partners have to live separately, and thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother. <br />
<br />
In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
<br />
Therefore, for the sake of their children, the divorced couples often wish to reunite later.<br />
<br />
But again, due to this Islamic Ruling, the divorced couple get's no chance to correct their mistake and to reunite for the sake of their children. <br />
<br />
==Women especially feel themselves compelled to reunite with their ex-husbands==<br />
Another Islamic Ruling stipulates that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belongs to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the financial support from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place. They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the following options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children. But then they could not marry another man, and they have to give away their natural need of being loved by a man, and the financial support of a man, which is very much needed in an Islamic society.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support and love of a man, and children will also not be separated from her. Even if the she does not love the first husband, still getting the "financial support" from him along with the option of separation from her children is enough reason for her to wish to reunite with the former husband.<br />
<br />
This is one of the main reason why Muslim women are very harshly and unilaterally hit by divorce, and they may feel themselves strongly compelled to return to their first husband (even if these women were totally innocent, and it was the fault of their husbands to divorce them). This is the "Only Chance" available for a Muslim woman in Islam to have a complete family life (which includes husband and her children). <br />
<br />
==Combination of This Ruling + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
This Islamic Ruling does not affect the woman's life alone, but it works in combination of two other Islamic ruling (i..e Wife beating + A wife does not have the right to take divorce). <br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}<br />
<br />
===Why this Sahabaia lady (i.e. female companion) made false slander of impotency against her 2nd husband?===<br />
From the Hadith of wife of Rifa`a, it is clear that either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
<br />
Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, while her 2nd husband already had 2 sons from another wife.<br />
<br />
So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? <br />
<br />
Answer is, in case of impotency, she had a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
<br />
===Risks involved for the Muslim woman in the 2nd marriage:===<br />
This hadith of the wife of Rifa`a also makes clear about the huge risks and the severe consequences that a woman could face in case of marriage with the 2nd husband. <br />
<br />
Even if a woman marries with the intention of divorce to the 2nd man, still there is a huge risk for her that the 2nd husband would not grant her freedom by giving her divorce as it is solely his right according to Islam. A Muslim woman could not get her freedom even through [[Khul']] in Islam, as Khul' is also the right of the husband in Islam and no Islamic court could compel him to set her free. <br />
<br />
Even more risk is involved for her that Islam also allows the 2nd husband to beat her severely in order to make her submissive, so that she provides him with the sex-services properly. <br />
<br />
This beating could be so severe that she could even get the bruises all over her body. Even 'Aisha was complaining and testifying that the women in the pre-Islamic era were not beaten so brutally, as the Muslim women were being beaten by their Muslim husbands. <br />
<br />
===Love and desire to reunite with the first husband is "natural" despite the irrevocable divorce===<br />
This hadith of wife of Rifa`a also proves that love is natural, and desire to return to him is also natural and no irrevocable divorce could end this love and desire. <br />
<br />
And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
===Two houses and two families are going to be destroyed due to the restriction upon the love===<br />
This hadith of wife of Rifa`a also proves if religion is going to curb the love, and even succeeds in compelling her to marry another man, then still two families are going to be destroyed. <br />
<br />
The house of first husband is going to be destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is going to be destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating of the woman.<br />
<br />
Therefore, it is not only the woman, but the children and the whole two families are going to pay the price of this restriction.<br />
<br />
==Halala (Tahleel Marriage)==<br />
In Halala (or Tahleel Marriage), the 2nd marriage tooks place with the intention of later giving divorce to the woman, so that she could become lawful (Halal) for her former husband to marry her again. <br />
<br />
There is a difference of opinion in different Fiqhs regarding the 2nd marriage with the intention of divorce<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Intention of Divorce makes Tahleel Marriage invalid. Islamqa.com]</ref> <br />
<br />
* Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
* While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, practically all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134214User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-25T10:36:24Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
According to Islam, if a man divorces his wife thrice, then he could not directly remarry her. But if the divorced woman marries another man, and he divorces her or dies, after that she is allowed to remarry her first husband. This ruling has been directly mentioned in Quran. {{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}This affects the whole family, but especially women and the children are affected from it.<br />
<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time of Ignorance, and Islam adopted it from there (along with the other related practices like only husband had the right to divorce, and the system of 3 divorces etc). <br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. <br />
==This was the practice of the pre-Islamic era Arabs==<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time. <br />
<br />
Actually, the whole "system" of pre-Islamic era consisted of<ref>[https://religion.asianindexing.com/index.php?title=Al-Idah/%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8_%D8%B9%DB%81%D8%AF_%D8%AC%D8%A7%DB%81%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%AA_%D9%85%DB%8C%DA%BA_%E2%80%99%E2%80%99%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%E2%80%98%E2%80%98_%DA%A9%D8%A7_%D8%AA%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1:_%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%82%DB%8C%D9%82%DB%8C_%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B2%DB%81&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop Divorce during the pre-Islamic era of Arab.]</ref>:<br />
<br />
#Only husband had the right to give divorce, while the women didn't have this right.<br />
#The 3 Talaqs (divorces) system<ref>[https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Women_in_Islamic_Law#Triple-talaq Triple-Talaq]</ref> i.e. Husband was allowed to take his wife back till 2 divorces. But after the 3rd divorce, he was not allowed to take her back.<br />
#But if he desired her even after the 3rd Talaq, then she had to first marry another man, and after the divorce from the 2nd husband, she could return to her former husband.<br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. {{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Later, Islam also adopted whole of this system of the pre-Islamic era (i.e. only husband having the right to divorce + 3 Divorces + the ruling of wife having to marry another man before returning to the 1st husband). <br />
<br />
Islam added another extra condition to this pre-Islamic era practice i.e. no contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage with the 2nd man<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9I3RzrTPfxEJ:https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx%3FQuestionId%3D2813+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de No contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage in Islam.] </ref>. This means, if the 2nd husband likes her, then he could keep her for himself. It was intended to make the punishment even more "severe". <br />
<br />
The logic was to compel the husband to think more carefully before giving the 3rd divorce, and it was also a warning for a woman to solve the dispute, and to make her husband happy before he divorces her the 3rd time. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, this extra condition brought even more miseries upon the Muslim women as compared to the women of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance. Also, the children were also more affected. <br />
<br />
==The time period for solving the disputes in the Islamic 3 Talaqs System==<br />
There are 2 ways of giving 3 Talaqs in Islam. <br />
<br />
#A husband gives 3 Talaqs (i.e. divorces) to his wife in one sitting i.e. if he says "Talaq, Talaq, Talaq" (i.e. 3 times Talaq) to his wife at the same time<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/44814/three-divorces-in-one-sitting/ Three Talaqs in one sitting.] </ref>, then the final irrevocable divorce takes place within seconds.<br />
#A husband gives the 1st Talaq (divorce) after the wife becomes free of her monthly bleeding. Then he gives the 2nd after the 2nd menstrual bleeding. These first 2 Talaqs (divorces) are reversible and he could took her back. But if he also divorces her the 3rd time after the third menstrual bleeding, then it becomes the irrevocable divorce<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Quranic way of giving divorce.]</ref>. This procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time.<br />
<br />
In the first case, if a husband pronounces 3 divorces at once in anger, then there is absolutely no time left to solve the disputes. The whole family is destroyed within seconds. <br />
<br />
In the 2nd case, the procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time. '''Nevertheless, still there is no guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months.''' Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months. <br />
<br />
==Why a divorced Muslim couple still wants to reunite?==<br />
===First Reason: The couple still love each other, despite the temporary anger and dispute===<br />
A divorce may occur due to many reasons (like temporary anger, inexperience of the young couple to solve their disputes, or family pressure, or financial situation etc.). <br />
<br />
But all these factors could change with time, and they may be able to solve their dispute later. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, problem occurs for the divorced Muslim couples that they don't have any chance to correct their mistake later, and to reunite due to this Islamic ruling. <br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of irrevocable divorce, both the partners have to live separately, and thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother. <br />
<br />
In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
<br />
Therefore, for the sake of their children, the divorced couples often wish to reunite later.<br />
<br />
But again, due to this Islamic Ruling, the divorced couple get's no chance to correct their mistake and to reunite for the sake of their children. <br />
<br />
==Women especially feel themselves compelled to reunite with their ex-husbands==<br />
Another Islamic Ruling stipulates that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belongs to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the financial support from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place. They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the following options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children. But then they could not marry another man, and they have to give away their natural need of being loved by a man, and the financial support of a man, which is very much needed in an Islamic society.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support and love of a man, and children will also not be separated from her. Even if the she does not love the first husband, still getting the "financial support" from him along with the option of separation from her children is enough reason for her to wish to reunite with the former husband.<br />
<br />
This is one of the main reason why Muslim women are very harshly and unilaterally hit by divorce, and they may feel themselves strongly compelled to return to their first husband (even if these women were totally innocent, and it was the fault of their husbands to divorce them). This is the "Only Chance" available for a Muslim woman in Islam to have a complete family life (which includes husband and her children). <br />
<br />
==Combination of This Ruling + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
This Islamic Ruling does not affect the woman's life alone, but it works in combination of two other Islamic ruling (i..e Wife beating + A wife does not have the right to take divorce). <br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}<br />
<br />
=== Why this Sahabaia lady (i.e. female companion) made false slander of impotency against her 2nd husband? ===<br />
From the Hadith of wife of Rifa`a, it is clear that either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
<br />
Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, while her 2nd husband already had 2 sons from another wife.<br />
<br />
So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? <br />
<br />
Answer is, in case of impotency, she had a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
<br />
=== Risks involved for the Muslim woman in the 2nd marriage: ===<br />
This hadith of the wife of Rifa`a also makes clear about the huge risks and the severe consequences that a woman could face in case of marriage with the 2nd husband. <br />
<br />
Even if a woman marries with the intention of divorce to the 2nd man, still there is a huge risk for her that the 2nd husband would not grant her freedom by giving her divorce as it is solely his right according to Islam. A Muslim woman could not get her freedom even through [[Khul']] in Islam, as Khul' is also the right of the husband in Islam and no Islamic court could compel him to set her free. <br />
<br />
Even more risk is involved for her that Islam also allows the 2nd husband to beat her severely in order to make her submissive, so that she provides him with the sex-services properly. <br />
<br />
This beating could be so severe that she could even get the bruises all over her body. Even 'Aisha was complaining and testifying that the women in the pre-Islamic era were not beaten so brutally, as the Muslim women were being beaten by their Muslim husbands. <br />
<br />
=== Love and desire to reunite with the first husband is "natural" despite the irrevocable divorce ===<br />
This hadith of wife of Rifa`a also proves that love is natural, and desire to return to him is also natural and no irrevocable divorce could end this love and desire. <br />
<br />
And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
=== Two houses and two families are going to be destroyed due to the restriction upon the love ===<br />
This hadith of wife of Rifa`a also proves if religion is going to curb the love, and even succeeds in compelling her to marry another man, then still two families are going to be destroyed. <br />
<br />
The house of first husband is going to be destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is going to be destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating of the woman.<br />
<br />
Therefore, it is not only the woman, but the children and the whole two families are going to pay the price of this restriction.<br />
<br />
== Fiqh differences regarding the 2nd Marriage with the intention of Divorce ==<br />
There is a Fiqh difference among Muslims upon the issue of marrying the 2nd man with the intention of divorce. <br />
<br />
Present day Salafists deny the marriage with the intention of divorce<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Intention of Divorce makes Tahleel Marriage invalid. Islamqa.com]</ref> and thus people should not wish to . But this goes against the "human nature" as the Hadith of the wife of Rifa`a proves<br />
<br /><br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134213User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-25T05:52:19Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
According to Islam, if a man divorces his wife thrice, then he could not directly remarry her. But if the divorced woman marries another man, and he divorces her or dies, after that she is allowed to remarry her first husband. This ruling has been directly mentioned in Quran. {{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}This affects the whole family, but especially women and the children are affected from it.<br />
<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time of Ignorance, and Islam adopted it from there (along with the other related practices like only husband had the right to divorce, and the system of 3 divorces etc). <br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. <br />
==This was the practice of the pre-Islamic era Arabs==<br />
This was a practice of the Arab society of the pre-Islamic time. <br />
<br />
Actually, the whole "system" of pre-Islamic era consisted of<ref>[https://religion.asianindexing.com/index.php?title=Al-Idah/%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8_%D8%B9%DB%81%D8%AF_%D8%AC%D8%A7%DB%81%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%AA_%D9%85%DB%8C%DA%BA_%E2%80%99%E2%80%99%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%E2%80%98%E2%80%98_%DA%A9%D8%A7_%D8%AA%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1:_%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%82%DB%8C%D9%82%DB%8C_%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B2%DB%81&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop Divorce during the pre-Islamic era of Arab.]</ref>:<br />
<br />
# Only husband had the right to give divorce, while the women didn't have this right.<br />
# The 3 Talaqs (divorces) system<ref>[https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Women_in_Islamic_Law#Triple-talaq Triple-Talaq]</ref> i.e. Husband was allowed to take his wife back till 2 divorces. But after the 3rd divorce, he was not allowed to take her back.<br />
# But if he desired her even after the 3rd Talaq, then she had to first marry another man, and after the divorce from the 2nd husband, she could return to her former husband. <br />
<br />
The logic behind this ruling was to "punish" the husband for divorcing his wife thrice. Nevertheless, this custom didn't take into consideration the miseries that it brought upon the woman and she was also punished even if she was innocent and didn't make a mistake. {{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Later, Islam also adopted whole of this system of the pre-Islamic era (i.e. only husband having the right to divorce + 3 Divorces + the ruling of wife having to marry another man before returning to the 1st husband). <br />
<br />
Islam added another extra condition to this pre-Islamic era practice i.e. no contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage with the 2nd man<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9I3RzrTPfxEJ:https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx%3FQuestionId%3D2813+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de No contract of divorce could be made at the time of marriage in Islam.] </ref>. This means, if the 2nd husband likes her, then he could keep her for himself. It was intended to make the punishment even more "severe". <br />
<br />
The logic was to compel the husband to think more carefully before giving the 3rd divorce, and it was also a warning for a woman to solve the dispute, and to make her husband happy before he divorces her the 3rd time. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, this extra condition brought even more miseries upon the Muslim women as compared to the women of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance. Also, the children were also more affected. <br />
<br />
== The time period for solving the disputes in the Islamic 3 Talaqs System ==<br />
There are 2 ways of giving 3 Talaqs in Islam. <br />
<br />
# A husband gives 3 Talaqs (i.e. divorces) to his wife in one sitting i.e. if he says "Talaq, Talaq, Talaq" (i.e. 3 times Talaq) to his wife at the same time<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/44814/three-divorces-in-one-sitting/ Three Talaqs in one sitting.] </ref>, then the final irrevocable divorce takes place within seconds. <br />
# A husband gives the 1st Talaq (divorce) after the wife becomes free of her monthly bleeding. Then he gives the 2nd after the 2nd menstrual bleeding. These first 2 Talaqs (divorces) are reversible and he could took her back. But if he also divorces her the 3rd time after the third menstrual bleeding, then it becomes the irrevocable divorce<ref>[https://www.thefatwa.com/urdu/questionID/4437 Quranic way of giving divorce.]</ref>. This procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time. <br />
<br />
In the first case, if a husband pronounces 3 divorces at once in anger, then there is absolutely no time left to solve the disputes. The whole family is destroyed within seconds. <br />
<br />
In the 2nd case, the procedure of Talaq takes about 3 months time. Nevertheless, still there is no guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
<br />
==Why a divorced Muslim couple still wants to reunite? ==<br />
===First Reason: The couple still love each other, despite the temporary anger and dispute===<br />
A divorce may occur due to many reasons (like temporary anger, inexperience of the young couple to solve their disputes, or family pressure, or financial situation etc.). <br />
<br />
But all these factors could change with time, and they may be able to solve their dispute later. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, problem occurs for the divorced Muslim couples that they don't have any chance to correct their mistake later, and to reunite due to this Islamic ruling. <br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of irrevocable divorce, both the partners have to live separately, and thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother. <br />
<br />
In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
<br />
Therefore, for the sake of their children, the divorced couples often wish to reunite later.<br />
<br />
But again, due to this Islamic Ruling, the divorced couple get's no chance to correct their mistake and to reunite for the sake of their children. <br />
<br />
== Women especially feel themselves compelled to reunite with their ex-husbands ==<br />
Another Islamic Ruling stipulates that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belongs to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the financial support from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place. They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the following options below:<br />
<br />
# Their first option is to choose to stay with their children. But then they could not marry another man, and they have to give away their natural need of being loved by a man, and the financial support of a man, which is very much needed in an Islamic society. <br />
# Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
# Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support and love of a man, and children will also not be separated from her. Even if the she does not love the first husband, still getting the "financial support" from him along with the option of separation from her children is enough reason for her to wish to reunite with the former husband. <br />
<br />
This is one of the main reason why Muslim women are very harshly and unilaterally hit by divorce, and they may feel themselves strongly compelled to return to their first husband (even if these women were totally innocent, and it was the fault of their husbands to divorce them). This is the "Only Chance" available for a Muslim woman in Islam to have a complete family life (which includes husband and her children). <br />
<br />
==Combination of This Ruling + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
This Islamic Ruling does not affect the woman's life alone, but it works in combination of two other Islamic ruling (i..e Wife beating + A wife does not have the right to take divorce). <br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
==Defences of Halala by Islam advocates==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134206User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-23T13:40:43Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Remarriage to Ex-Spouse after the Divorce</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
According to Islam, if a man divorces his wife thrice, then he could not directly remarry her. But if the divorced woman marries another man, and he divorces her or dies, after that she is allowed to remarry her first husband. This ruling has been directly mentioned in Quran. {{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}This affects the whole family, but especially women and the children are affected from it.<br />
<br />
Islam critics deem this practice to be illogical.<br />
<br />
<br />
* It takes away the chance from the couple to reconcile later, and to correct their mistake. <br />
* And it is the woman and the children, who have to suffer mainly. <br />
* It combines with another Islamic Ruling of Talaq in Islam i.e. if a divorced woman marries another man, then all her children will be taken away from her immediately. <br />
* Therefore, every divorced Muslim woman is compelled to choose between the two options i.e. either she should give her right to remarry another man, or she should giver her right to have children. In both these cases, a family life of divorced Muslim woman (i.e. to have a husband and children at the same time) is broken. <br />
* The only way for a divorced Muslim woman to enjoy the love and financial support of a man, and at the same time to keep her children, is to remarry her first husband. But again this door has also been shut for her due the Islamic Ruling that she could not remarry her ex-husband directly. <br />
* Children will also certainly loose either their father, or their mother in this case. <br />
<br />
==This Islamic Ruling was taken from the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance==<br />
ٰIslam took the following practices of the era of Ignorance of the Arab society<ref>[https://religion.asianindexing.com/index.php?title=Al-Idah/%D8%B9%D8%B1%D8%A8_%D8%B9%DB%81%D8%AF_%D8%AC%D8%A7%DB%81%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%AA_%D9%85%DB%8C%DA%BA_%E2%80%99%E2%80%99%D8%B7%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%82%E2%80%98%E2%80%98_%DA%A9%D8%A7_%D8%AA%D8%B5%D9%88%D8%B1:_%D8%AA%D8%AD%D9%82%DB%8C%D9%82%DB%8C_%D8%AC%D8%A7%D8%A6%D8%B2%DB%81&mobileaction=toggle_view_desktop Divorce during the pre-Islamic era of Arab.]</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Talaq was only the right of husband, while women din't have this right.<br />
* The 3 Talaqs system was also a practice of pre-Islamic era. <br />
* A Husbands was allowed to take his wife back up till after the 2 Talaqs.<br />
* But after the 3 Talaqs, the wife became prohibited for him, till the time she married another person, who later divorced her. Only after that, the former husband could have married her ex-wife back. <br />
<br />
For the people of time of ignorance, it should serve as a punishment for the husband that any other man also tasted his wife (i.e. had intercourse with her). But they didn't consult the women, if they wanted to be used in such a way or not, while women had a lower rank and they were not worthy of consultation. <br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Later, Islam also made it a part of Islamic Sharia too. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam made it more difficult for the couple to reunite, by putting a condition that no contract could be made with the 2nd husband at the time of marriage, that he would later divorce her. This practically ended (or severely limited) the chance of reunion between the the first husband and the wife. <br />
<br />
==Why Muslim women still wish or even feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands?==<br />
Many divorced Muslim women wish, or even feel themselves compelled, to reunite with their ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: The couple still love each other, despite the temporary anger and dispute===<br />
A divorce may occur due to many reasons (like temporary anger, inexperience of the young couple to solve their dispute, or family pressure, or financial situation etc.). <br />
<br />
But all these factors could change with time, and they may be able to solve their dispute later. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, problem occurs for the divorced Muslim couples that they don't have any chance to correct their mistake, and to reunite due to this Islamic Ruling.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, the divorced couples may wish to reunite later.<br />
<br />
But again, due to this Islamic Ruling, the divorced couple get's no chance to correct their mistake and to reunite for the sake of their children. <br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Another Islamic Ruling stipulates that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belongs to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
*Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". <br />
*They either have to deny the financial support and their wish to have love and attention from another husband, or to deny her children. <br />
*Only option for such divorced Muslim mothers to have a complete family life (along with love from any man and children), is to return to her former husband. <br />
<br />
This is one of the main reason why Muslim women are very harshly and unilaterally hit by divorce, and they may feel themselves strongly compelled to return to their first husband (even if these women were totally innocent, and it was the fault of their husbands to divorce them). This is the "Only Chance" available for a Muslim woman in Islam to have a complete family life (which includes husband and her children). <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, this "Only Chance" has also been usurped by religion from her. Even if she wishes to reunite with her ex-husband for the sake of family life and her children, still she has to take many "risks". <br />
<br />
==Combination of This Ruling + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
This Islamic Ruling does not affect the woman's life alone, but it works in combination of two other Islamic ruling (i..e Wife beating + A wife does not have the right to take divorce). <br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
==Defences of Halala by Islam advocates==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134155User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T21:53:15Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman marries another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also tastes her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
The controversy is, if Islamic Halala brings any benefit to the couple and their children, or it brings harm to them.<br />
<br />
==Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance==<br />
Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Thus Muhammad also continued this practice of Halala after the arrival of Islam too. <br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref name=":1">[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
==Muslim women still feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands==<br />
Many divorced Muslim women wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the process of Halala in order to reunite with their ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
*Humans have both love and anger in their nature.<br />
*And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger.<br />
*What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger?<br />
*Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake?<br />
*Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them?<br />
*According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce.<br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
*Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
*Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later.<br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish.<br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
==Defences of Halala by Islam advocates==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134154User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T21:50:33Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman marries another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also tastes her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
The controversy is, if Islamic Halala brings any benefit to the couple and their children, or it brings harm to them.<br />
<br />
==Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance==<br />
Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Thus Muhammad also continued this practice of Halala after the arrival of Islam too. <br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref name=":1">[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
==Muslim women still feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the humiliation and risky process of Halala==<br />
The process of Halala brings a lot of shame and humiliation and risks for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergoes the Halala process. But many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the humiliation of the process of Halala in order to reunite with their ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
*Humans have both love and anger in their nature.<br />
*And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger.<br />
*What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger?<br />
*Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake?<br />
*Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them?<br />
*According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce.<br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
*Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
*Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later.<br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish.<br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
==Defences of Halala by Islam advocates==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134153User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T21:39:39Z<p>Lehrasap: /* 4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs) */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Many kinds of problems and situations could occur during Halala, where the woman has to pay the price. For example:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the woman, who has to suffer, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*And even if she is ready to undergo all these sufferings of Halala, still there is no guarantee that the 2nd husband is going to give her freedom by giving her a divorce later. In this case, she is stuck for her whole life with her 2nd husband and not able to reunite with her children and the family and the former husband. Thus, Halala comes with extreme risk factor for the women.<br />
<br />
==Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance==<br />
Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Thus Muhammad also continued this practice of Halala after the arrival of Islam too. <br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref name=":1">[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
==Muslim women still feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the humiliation and risky process of Halala==<br />
The process of Halala brings a lot of shame and humiliation and risks for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergoes the Halala process. But many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the humiliation of the process of Halala in order to reunite with their ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
*Humans have both love and anger in their nature.<br />
*And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger.<br />
*What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger?<br />
*Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake?<br />
*Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them?<br />
*According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce.<br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
*Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
*Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later.<br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish.<br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
==Defences of Halala by Islam advocates==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
*Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>.<br />
*And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh.<br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed.<br />
*But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
*In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her.<br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
*Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh).<br />
*The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming.<br />
*If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life.<br />
*But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case.<br />
*And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult.<br />
*Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
===4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs)===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period.<br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting.<br />
*These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam.<br />
*Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world.<br />
*And even without Triple Talaqs, still a lot of divorces take place in Islamic world, which follow the Quranic procedure of 3 menstrual cycles, but still many divorced women wish to return to their former ex-husbands. <br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134152User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T21:35:54Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Many kinds of problems and situations could occur during Halala, where the woman has to pay the price. For example:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the woman, who has to suffer, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*And even if she is ready to undergo all these sufferings of Halala, still there is no guarantee that the 2nd husband is going to give her freedom by giving her a divorce later. In this case, she is stuck for her whole life with her 2nd husband and not able to reunite with her children and the family and the former husband. Thus, Halala comes with extreme risk factor for the women.<br />
<br />
==Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance==<br />
Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Thus Muhammad also continued this practice of Halala after the arrival of Islam too. <br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref name=":1">[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
==Muslim women still feel themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the humiliation and risky process of Halala==<br />
The process of Halala brings a lot of shame and humiliation and risks for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergoes the Halala process. But many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the humiliation of the process of Halala in order to reunite with their ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
*Humans have both love and anger in their nature.<br />
*And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger.<br />
*What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger?<br />
*Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake?<br />
*Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them?<br />
*According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce.<br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
*Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
*Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later.<br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish.<br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Islam has been severely attacked on the issue of Halala, and questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
== Defences of Halala by Islam advocates ==<br />
Here are the defences, that have been made by Islam advocates today. <br />
<br />
===First Defence: Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man<br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)?<br />
<br />
===Second Defence: Halala was introduced so that the men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closes this door of reunification and it causes a lot of damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
=== 3rd Defence: It is only the Hanafi Fiqh Ruling (i.e. marrying with the intention of divorce and Halala Centers), which gives bad name to the Islamic Halala ===<br />
Modern Islam advocates (basically Salafists) also criticise Hanafi Fiqh and claim that:<br />
<br />
* Islam does not allow to marry the 2nd husband with the intention of divorce. And prophet Muhammad cursed those who hire a 2nd husband with the precondition of divorce later<ref>Largest Salafi Fatwa Website [https://islamqa.info/en/answers/222367/what-is-tahleel-marriage Islam Question Answer]</ref>. <br />
* And if there are Halala Centers present in some Islamic and the western countries, then these are not due to Islam, but only due to the Hanafi Fiqh. <br />
<br />
This argument triggers a response by two parties. <br />
<br />
First one are the Hanafis, who say that<ref>[https://islamqa.org/hanafi/muftisays/9587/halala/ Hanafi Fatwa Website]</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Any such "precondition" at the time of Nikah is prohibited and such people are cursed. <br />
* But if no such precondition is stipulated, and people are only "intended" in their hearts, then such Nikah does not become void only due to the intention.<br />
* In the Hadith of Bukhari (which has been mentioned above), the female companion (i.e. the ex-wife of Rifa`a) married that other man (i.e. `AbdurRahman) with the intention of divorce later. But prophet Muhammad didn't invalidate that marriage due to her intention, and only put this condition that she could only return to her first husband after her 2nd husband had sexual intercourse with her. <br />
<br />
And the second party is of Islam critics, who counter this by claiming:<br />
<br />
* Halala is in it's EVERY form oppressing the woman and the children (either it is Hanafi Fiqh, or if it is Hanbali/Maliki Fiqh). <br />
* The only difference is one is MORE harming, while the other is little bit LESS harming. <br />
* If we accept the Hanafi Fiqh as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is allowed), then it brings less harm to the woman and the children and they have indeed a chance to save their family life. <br />
* But if we accept the Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs as a true Islam (i.e. marrying another person with the intention of marriage is not allowed), then it brings EVEN MORE harm to the woman, while in this case all the doors have been shut upon the woman to rejoin with his ex-husband. And her children will be separated from her, in any case, which is a biggest punishment for a mother. And children will also be greatly affected as they will loose their family life in this case. <br />
* And as far as the presence of "Halala Centers" is concerned in the few Islamic and the western countries is concerned, then it may be a stupidity, but still desirable as they indeed help the poor woman and the children in order to get back to their complete family life. The absence of such Halala Centers will only make their lives more difficult. <br />
* Thus, when the modern Islam apologists bring this argument that marriage with the intention of divorce with the 2nd man is not allowed, then it does not serve as a DEFENCE for Islam, and it does not relieve it from this oppression and illogical ruling of Halala, but it proves only this that this Islamic Ruling is even more illogical and even more oppressing.<br />
<br />
=== 4th Defence: The emergence of Nikah Tahleel (Halala) is only a consequence of an incorrect form of divorce known as “Triple Talaaq” (which is common in Hanafi and other Fiqhs) ===<br />
Modern Salafi Islam advocates claim that<ref>[https://www.abuaminaelias.com/triple-talaq-nikah-halala/ Website of Abu Amina Elias]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if even after that 3 months, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
*And the emergence of Nikah Tahleel is only the consequence of wrong Fiqh rulings about 3 divorces in one sitting<ref>[https://www.muslimink.com/society/family/tahleel-marriage-and-triple-talaaq/ Nikah Tahleel and 3 Talaqs in one sitting.]</ref>. For that, these Fiqhs are responsible and not Islam. <br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than the 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This Islamic process of divorce is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons, especially not for the husbands who are allowed to enjoy the other women and slave-women during whole period. <br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
* Triple Talaqs is not limited to the Hanafi Fiqh only, but all the 4 Sunni Fiqhs accepts that divorce does take place in case of Triple Talaqs in one sitting. <br />
* These are only later coming few Zahiri scholars, who denied the Triple Talaq in Islam. <br />
* Thus, for the last 1400 years of history of Islam, the triple Talaq and the resulting Halala is happening all over the Muslim world. <br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134143User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T17:28:42Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Many kinds of problems and situations could occur during Halala, where the woman has to pay the price. For example:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the woman, who has to suffer, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*And even if she is ready to undergo all these sufferings of Halala, still there is no guarantee that the 2nd husband is going to give her freedom by giving her a divorce later. In this case, she is stuck for her whole life with her 2nd husband and not able to reunite with her children and the family and the former husband. Thus, Halala comes with extreme risk factor for the women.<br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist ever denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref name=":1">[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
== Halala was a practice of the pre-Islamic era of Ignorance ==<br />
Dr. Jawad Ali wrote:<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211219162614/https://al-maktaba.org/book/7299/3369 Dr. Jawad Ali, in his book "Detailed in the history of the Arabs before Islam" كتاب المفصل فى تاريخ العرب قبل الإسلام [جواد علي] ]|ويظهر أن الجاهليين كانوا قد أوجدوا حلًّا لهذا الطلاق الشاذ، فأباحوا للزوج أن يرجع زوجه إليه بعد الطلاق الثالث، ولكن بشرط أن تتزوج بعد وقوع الطلاق الثالث من رجل غريب، على أن يطلقها بعد اقترانها به، وعندئذ يجوز للزوج الأول أن يعود إليها بزوج جديد.</br>It is apparent that the people from the era of Ignorance found a way to make their wives permissible (Halal) for them even after 3 divorces. Therefore, if the husband wanted to take her back, then that woman had to marry a stranger man on the condition that he would divorce her later. After this process had been completed (i.e. the divorce from the stranger), then the first husband was allowed to remarry her.}}<br />
Thus:<br />
<br />
* Muhammad also continued with this practice of Halala after the arrival of Islam, <br />
* But he introduced one exception i.e. "the precondition at the time of Nikah to later giving her divorce" was prohibited by Muhammad. <br />
* This means, if the other man now wishes, then he could refuse to divorce her and keep her for himself. <br />
* All 4 Sunni Fiqhs are unanimous that such a precondition of later giving divorce, at the time of Nikah with other man is void. <br />
* Although, such precondition is not allowed, but Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow to marry with the "intention" of divorce later (without putting any pre-condition)<ref name=":1" />. <br />
<br />
==Muslim women still feeling themselves compelled to go back to their ex-husbands despite the shameful and risky process of Halala==<br />
The process of Halala brings a lot of shame and risk for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergo the Halala process. But still many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the shameful process of Halala and to reunite with the ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
===First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
*Humans have both love and anger in their nature.<br />
*And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger.<br />
*What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger?<br />
*Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake?<br />
*Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them?<br />
*According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce.<br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
*Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
*Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
===Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
*Both partners have to live separately,<br />
*And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother.<br />
*In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed.<br />
*Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later.<br />
<br />
===Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband)===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
*Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person.<br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
#Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
#Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children.<br />
#Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish.<br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their true desires.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as her 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife?<br />
*And how Halala is going to secure the interests of the children?<br />
<br />
Islam advocates give the following logic behind Halala. <br />
<br />
===(1) Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other man <br />
*Then she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil abusive person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life, and she is never going to be reunited with her children. <br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)? <br />
<br />
===(2) Halala was introduced in order that men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*What if the husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her in anger, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the family life of the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again in the evening. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closed this door of reunification and it caused a damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===(3) The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs===<br />
Islam advocates claim that:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but a blunder. Some people, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. In this case, one partner learns the lesson due to the separation of the children, while the other partner learns the lesson when he/she has to look after the children alone. But in an Islamic system of divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. This is sometimes not enough for them to learn their lessons. <br />
*Human logic guides us that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes and learn the lesson. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and made her Halal for him as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each other's mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134142User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-19T14:02:06Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran */</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Many kinds of problems and situations could occur during Halala, where the woman has to pay the price. For example:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the woman, who has to suffer, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*And even if she is ready to undergo all these sufferings of Halala, still there is no guarantee that the 2nd husband is going to give her freedom by giving her a divorce later. In this case, she is stuck for her whole life with her 2nd husband and not able to reunite with her children and the family and the former husband. Thus, Halala comes with extreme risk factor for the women.<br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in the secondary issue, i.e.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20211015212018/https://www.aliftaa.jo/QuestionEn.aspx?QuestionId=28134%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, we see 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband.<br />
<br />
== Why do the many divorced Muslim woman still feel themselves compelled to undergo the shameful process of Halala? ==<br />
The process of Halala brings a lot of shame for a Muslim woman in an Islamic society, and people don't look good at the women who undergo the Halala process. But still many divorced Muslim women still wish (or even feel themselves compelled) to undergo the shameful process of Halala and to reunite with the ex-husband. <br />
<br />
The reasons are as under. <br />
<br />
=== First Reason: She still loves her ex-husband despite the temporary anger ===<br />
According to the human nature:<br />
<br />
* Humans have both love and anger in their nature. <br />
* And humans are prone to make 'temporary' mistakes in their anger. <br />
* What if a husband pronounces 3 times Talaq to his wife in the state of anger? <br />
* Will the husband now get no chance to correct his temporary mistake? <br />
* Does this temporary mistake really ends all the love between them? <br />
* According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce. <br />
<br />
The point of view of the Islam critics is: <br />
<br />
* Their "mutual love" and "mutual consent" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry.<br />
* Actually, if they are willing to reunite, then they must be strongly "encouraged and supported", while this is more beneficial for their children too, otherwise the family life of the children is destroyed. <br />
* And any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature, and illogical and brings only unnecessary hardships in their lives and in the lives of their children.<br />
<br />
=== Second Reason: Preserving the family life for their children ===<br />
In case of divorce:<br />
<br />
* Both partners have to live separately, <br />
* And thus the children are also separated either from the father or from the mother. <br />
* In both cases, the family life of the children is destroyed. <br />
* Therefore, for the sake of their children, and in order to provide them with the love of their fathers in a family life under one roof, many divorced Muslim women wish to return to their ex-husbands later. <br />
<br />
=== Third Reason: Islamic Ruling that a all the children will be separated from the mother, if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband) ===<br />
Halala Ruling does not effect the life of a divorced woman alone, but it works with another Islamic Ruling which says that<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>:<br />
<br />
* A woman will loose all of her children and they are separated from her if she marries any other man (except for her ex-husband).<br />
* Islamic Logic is that all the time of the wife (except of the prayers) belong to the new husband. He could call her for sexual enjoyment at any time. But if children from the first husband are still there, then it hampers the right of 2nd husband to enjoy her. Thus, the children should be separated from her if she decides to remarry another person. <br />
<br />
Thus, all the divorced Muslim mothers are badly affected and they are in a hard rock and hard place due to the "combination" of these 2 "Islamic Rulings". They are practically "compelled" to choose one of the lesser evil from the 3 options below:<br />
<br />
# Their first option is to choose to stay with their children, but the evil for them is that they have to give away their right to remarry any other man. In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man.<br />
# Their second option is to marry another man of their choice, in order to get the financial support and love from him. But the evil for them in this option is that all their children will be separated from them. And it is one of the most horrible thing for any mother to loose any or all of her children. <br />
# Their third option is to remarry their ex-husband. In this case, they will get the financial support of a man, and children will also not be separated from them, and actually the it is best in the interest of a the children to stay under one roof in a family life with their mother and father. That is why, many divorced Muslim mothers feel themselves compelled to desire for Halala, despite it being a shameful process for them to allow other man to play with their bodies against their wish. <br />
<br />
==Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
#Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul'. (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details).<br />
#Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? '''Note:''' Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
#Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband already had sex with her, then certainly it lowers her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former).Th us, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband.<br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone. In another combination, it affects the women as under:<br />
<br />
#Halala<br />
#Wife Beating<br />
#And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way.<br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating).<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala.<br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as his 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only.<br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent.<br />
*Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife.<br />
*So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
*But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment.<br />
*And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their desires.<br />
<br />
==What is the LOGIC behind Halala?==<br />
Questions are asked:<br />
<br />
*What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife and secure their children and proves to be positive in children's interest?<br />
<br />
Islam advocates give the following logic behind Halala. <br />
<br />
===(1) Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
*In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce.<br />
*Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger.<br />
*That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper.<br />
*It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
*It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation.<br />
*Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other maThen she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah.<br />
*And if the 2nd husband is an evil person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life.<br />
*And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman.<br />
*And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her.<br />
*And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)? Why do they have to see their mother with another person except for their real father?<br />
<br />
===(2) Halala was introduced in order that men don't take divorce lightly===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
*Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her.<br />
*In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening.<br />
*Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children.<br />
*If husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the children.<br />
*She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life.<br />
*Muslim men are bad tempered, while Islam usurped this right from the women to get their freedom if their Muslim husbands are not behaving sensibly. And then Islam gave the unilateral right to the husbands to beat their wives too.<br />
*If the women would have also got the right to get the divorce in case of their husband's show non-sensible behaviour and in case of abusing and beating them, then Muslim men would have automatically shown a careful behaviour right from the beginning.<br />
*And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closed this door of reuniting and it caused a damage to the women and the children.<br />
<br />
===(3) The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs===<br />
Islam advocates claim that:<br />
<br />
*Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles.<br />
*This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce.<br />
*And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but this is a blunder. Somepeople, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than 3 months.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in an Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. But if they live separately, and wife has to stay at home of her parents/brothers, and father has to live without his children (or to look after them alone in case the children stay with him), then chances of learning lesson from both the parties become better.<br />
*Human logic guides that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each others mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
==Secular Western Laws vs Halala==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
*Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce.<br />
*They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive.<br />
*They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa).<br />
*They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent.<br />
*They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile.<br />
<br />
==References:==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134112User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-17T23:51:52Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Many kinds of problems and situations could occur during Halala, where the woman has to pay the price. For example:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the woman, who has to suffer, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*And even if she is ready to undergo all these sufferings of Halala, still there is no guarantee that the 2nd husband is going to give her freedom by giving her a divorce later. In this case, she is stuck for her whole life with her 2nd husband and not able to reunite with her children and the family and the former husband. Thus, Halala comes with extreme risk factor for the women. <br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in secondary details that<ref>[https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%AD_%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] (If a woman could marry to another man with the intention of divorce later)</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, you will see lot of 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. In this case, all the doors are shut for a woman to reunite her children and the former husband. <br />
<br />
== Only option for a Muslim woman to save the family life for her children is to undergo the Halala process ==<br />
According to the human nature, it is certainly possible for a woman to still love her ex-husband and vice versa despite the divorce. Thus, according to the Islam critics, "love" should be the reason enough to allow them to remarry, and any prohibition upon their reuniting is against the human nature. <br />
<br />
And it is not only the love of husband, but it may be also the love of her children, which makes her to strongly desire/wish to reunite with her ex-husband. <br />
<br />
In an Islamic society, it is very difficult for a woman to survive alone. She has to face a lot of restrictions (like taking Hijab and not to make interaction with men). Thus, her life becomes really difficult to go outside of house, and then to find a good job, and then to work whole day there, and at the same time to look after her small children at home too. <br />
<br />
Thus, the easiest way for a divorced woman to survive in an Islamic society, is to remarry and get the support of another man. <br />
<br />
But here occurs another problem. If she remarries, then she will loose the custody of all of her children immediately, and she could not take her children along with her in the house of the 2nd husband<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20210606140409/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/182019/why-a-wife-loses-custody-of-her-children-in-case-she-remarries Woman looses the custody of children if she remarries. www.Islamweb.net Fatwa Site.] </ref>. <br />
<br />
Thus, the only option for a divorced Muslim woman to:<br />
<br />
* not to be alone, and to have the financial support, and to have love and care from a man, and to enjoy the sexual life,<br />
* but at the same time to have her children around her,<br />
<br />
is to reunite with her ex-husband, in order to save the family life for her and her children. But for this, she has to sacrifice, and undergo the process of Halala. <br />
<br />
== Risks, that are involved in Halala for a woman ==<br />
There are three big risks involved in Halala for a woman.<br />
<br />
# Firstly, what if the 2nd husband decides not to giver her a divorce? In Islamic Sharia, a woman has neither a right of divorce, nor of Khul' (Remember, Khul' is also a right of husband. If he does not agree on Khul', then no Islamic Court could provide that woman her freedom. Islamic court could separate them only in case if husband is not paying the maintenance money to her, or if he is impotent. Please read the [[Khul']] article regarding the details). <br />
# Secondly, what if the 2nd husband not only wants to keep her as his wife, but he also becomes abusive and starts beating her, so that she becomes submissive and starts providing sex services to him properly? Note: Islamic Sharia allows the husband to severely beat the wife (even with bruises) if she is not providing him with the sex services properly. No Islamic court could provide her with freedom even in case of such abusive husband, except that he breaks any part of her body (like bones etc)<ref>[[Khul'|Khul' Article.]] </ref>.<br />
# Third big risk for a woman is the so-called [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah] of the 1st husband. After the 2nd husband has sex with her, then certainly it would lower her status and value in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when men in an Islamic society become extremely emotional and unsensible in name of ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة), which means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former). Thus, the whole Muslim society think bad about such woman, who undergoes the process of Halala in order to reunite with her ex-husband and the children. And it is not only the hatred from the whole Islamic society, but risk is there that 1st husband will deny to remarry her in name of Ghayrah, even after she takes the divorce from the 2nd husband. <br />
<br />
==Combination of Halala + Wife Beating + Wife not having the right to get her freedom through divorce==<br />
Halala does not come alone, but it is the combination of 3 Islamic Rulings which affect the women. They are:<br />
<br />
# Halala<br />
# Wife Beating<br />
# And a wife does not have any right to get her freedom from an abusive husband in any way. <br />
<br />
The combination of all three of them in action is found in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''." Then the Prophet (ﷺ) saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"}}Therefore:<br />
<br />
*Firstly, according to this hadith, the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green (she got bruises), but she was still unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. Even the Islamic courts are also not allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating). <br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam does not allow the woman to get rid of him. She is compelled to live whole of her life with him (if he wishes so).<br />
*And 'Aisha testified that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see that the Lady loved her first husband and she wanted to reunite with him through Halala, as Islam didn't permit her to directly wed he ex-husband without Halala. <br />
*And the risks of Halala became true for that lady, as his 2nd husband turned out to be an abusive person. He didn't give her divorce, despite knowing this fact very well that she didn't love him, but she loved her ex-husband only. <br />
*And in such cases, not only one family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed, while the children are without the mother. And the house of 2nd husband is destroyed while there is no peace there and this house becomes the the center of beating for the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this way.<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of first divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women) or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is free to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
* Either this Sahabia lady (i.e. female companion) was telling a lie about the impotency of her husband (and that too in front of Prophet Muhammad himself), or her 2nd husband was telling a lie when he claimed to not to be impotent. <br />
* Muhammad later declared that female companion to be a lair, due to 2 sons of that man from another wife. <br />
* So, what compelled that female companion to come up with this lie of impotency of her husband? Answer is, in this rare case of impotency, she has a chance to get her freedom through an Islamic court. Here you could read about these rare cases, where an Islamic court could give freedom to the women through [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Khul%27#Faskh_.D9.81.D8.B3.D8.AE_.28i.e._dissolution_of_marriage.29.2C_and_the_unilateral_women.27s_sufferings: Faskh (i.e. dissolution of marriage)].<br />
* But such false charges and disputes are only going to destroy the peace in the house, and no one could live happily in such an environment. <br />
* And if a Sahabia (female companion) lady was unable to control over her love and desire for the 1st husband, and if she was ready to come up with false slanders to achieve her desire, then it could not be expected from the women of today to not to love their ex-husbands and not to make such false moves in order to achieve their desires. <br />
<br />
== What is the LOGIC behind Halala? ==<br />
Questions are asked:<br />
<br />
* What is the logic behind Halala?<br />
<br />
* And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife and secure their children and proves to be positive in children's interest? <br />
<br />
Islam advocates give the following logic behind Halala. <br />
<br />
=== (1) Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband for his bad temper ===<br />
Islam advocate gives the following reason<ref>[https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-logic-behind-Nikah-Halala-which-makes-the-reunion-of-a-divorced-couple-so-difficult Logic behind Halala. Quora.com.]</ref>. <br />
<br />
* In Islam, only husband has the right to give divorce. <br />
* Thus, if a husband wants to remarry his ex-wife, it means that he made a mistake and divorced her in anger. <br />
* That is why, Halala is a punishment for the 1st husband of his bad temper. <br />
* It is a severe punishment for him to share his wife with another person.<br />
<br />
But problem with this logic is that the wife and the children have also been suffering severely due to Halala, despite being innocent:<br />
<br />
* It is the wife, who has to first face the hardships of process of divorce (which is 3 menstrual cycles long). In this period, she has to stay in the house of husband, but he would neither touch her, not show her any love. She is in a solitary confinement like situation. <br />
* Then after the divorce, she again has to suffer alone the difficulties of 'Iddah for 3 more menstrual cycles, where she is again in a solitary confinement like situation, and could not fulfill her sexual desires, or to get the love and attention of any other maThen she has to go through the hardships of marrying another man, and let him play with her body against her wish. And then comes again the 6 months long process of 2nd Talaq and 2nd 'Iddah. <br />
* And if the 2nd husband is an evil person, and he wants to keep her against her wishes, then he is going to beat her whole of her life and keep on playing with her body against her will for the rest of her life. <br />
* And despite being innocent, she also has to face the hatred of whole Islamic society, which deems Halala to be against the modesty of a woman. <br />
* And it also lowers the status of the innocent woman in the eyes of her 1st husband, and he might not love her as before, or even deny to remarry her. <br />
* And what about the children? Why do they have to bear the hardships of being separated from their mother (when she goes to the house of 2nd husband according to the Islamic law)? Why do they have to see their mother with another person except for their real father? <br />
<br />
=== (2) Halala was introduced in order that men don't take divorce lightly ===<br />
Another Islam advocate claims that<ref>[https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:C7qreKMHxGcJ:https://www.facebook.com/habibullah.009/posts/%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25DA%25A9%25DB%258C-%25D8%25AD%25DA%25A9%25D9%2585%25D8%25AA%25D8%25A2%25D8%25AC-%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B3%25D9%2588%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584-%25D9%2586%25D9%2585%25D8%25A8%25D8%25B1-%25DB%25B1%25DB%25B4%25DB%25B2%25DB%25B5%25D8%25B4%25D8%25B1%25DB%258C%25D8%25B9%25D8%25AA-%25D9%2585%25DB%258C%25DA%25BA-%25D8%25AD%25D9%2584%25D8%25A7%25D9%2584%25DB%2581-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25A7%25DA%25AF%25D8%25B1-%25D8%25AB%25D8%25A7%25D8%25A8%25D8%25AA-%25DB%2581%25DB%2592-%25D8%25AA%25D9%2588-%25D8%25A7%25D8%25B3%25DA%25A9%25D8%25A7-%25D8%25B5%25D8%25AD%25DB%258C/2159873084297679/+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de شیخ الحدیث حبیب اللہ القاسمی] </ref>:<br />
<br />
* Halala was a warning for the husband to think carefully before divorcing her. <br />
* In the pre-Islamic days, people used to divorce in the morning, and then take the wives back in the evening. <br />
* Therefore, the logic behind Halala is that men don't take the divorce lightly.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
* Halala is still a big risk for the woman and the children. <br />
* If husband does not think carefully, and still divorces her, then it is she who has to suffer a lot of hardships and her life is going to be ruined, along with the children. <br />
* She either has to separate herself from her children, or to give up her right of fulfilling her sexual desires and have love and attention of a man in her life. <br />
* Muslim men are bad tempered, while Islam usurped this right from the women to get their freedom if their Muslim husbands are not behaving sensibly. And then Islam gave the unilateral right to the husbands to beat their wives too. <br />
* If the women would have also got the right to get the divorce in case of their husband's show non-sensible behaviour and in case of abusing and beating them, then Muslim men would have automatically shown a careful behaviour right from the beginning. <br />
* And what is wrong if the husband divorces her in the morning, and then takes her back in the evening with the mutual consent. Let them divorce each other thousands of times and then reuniting with each other's mutual consent again and again. Such a reuniting is not harming anyone. But Halala closed this door of reuniting and it caused a damage to the women and the children. <br />
<br />
=== (3) The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs ===<br />
Islam advocates claim that:<br />
<br />
* Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles. <br />
* This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences in case of divorce. <br />
* And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for it.<br />
<br />
But the problem with this logic is:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife '''is going to be over within 3 months'''?<br />
*Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? So, what could be done in this case? In simple words, limiting this problem within 3 menstrual cycles is not a wisdom, but this is a blunder. Somepeople, sometimes need some more time to learn their lessons than 3 months. <br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in an Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long), along with their children. But if they live separately, and wife has to stay at home of her parents/brothers, and father has to live without his children (or to look after them alone in case the children stay with him), then chances of learning lesson from both the parties become better. <br />
*Human logic guides that the pair should be given as much longer time as they wish/need to overcome their disputes. This is always a much better option than any permanent separation in name of Halala. <br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes==<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam allows a Muslim owner to do sex with his slave-woman, and after fulfilling his sexual lust in temporary sexual relationship, he could forcefully marry her to any of his slave-man.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wishes for her later, then Islam allows him fully to break the slave's family, and take her back again to have sex with her. <br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could take her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}('''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it.)<br />
<br />
This becomes a sort of 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there is a free man and a free woman, who want to again begin their family life along with their children, with each others mutual consent, but this door is closed upon them in name of Halala.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a slave-woman, who wants to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but she is forced against her will, to leave her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
== Secular Western Laws vs Halala ==<br />
Secular western laws are totally opposite to Halala:<br />
<br />
* Secular western countries have given equal rights to the women in case of divorce. <br />
* They have also provided full protection to the women in case if their husband turn abusive. <br />
* They accept it as a part of human nature that a wife could still love her ex-husband, despite the divorce (and vice versa). <br />
* They value the mutual consent of both the parties the most. Thus they give the option of resolving the conflict between the husband and the wife internally, with their mutual consent. <br />
* They give this opportunity to the pair to decide themselves, how long do they need to solve their disputes and to reconcile. <br />
<br />
== References: ==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=Child_Marriage_in_the_Qur%27an&diff=134111Child Marriage in the Qur'an2021-12-17T17:54:29Z<p>Lehrasap: /* The Qur'an prohibits marriage to pre-pubescent females */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{QualityScore|Lead=1|Structure=1|Content=2|Language=2|References=2}}<br />
The Prophet [[Muhammad]] married [[Aisha]] when she was [[Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Aisha#Aisha.27s_Age_at_Consummation_and_Marriage|six]], and had [[sex|sexual intercourse]] with her while she still remained pre-pubescent at the age of nine [[Islamic Lunar Calendar|lunar years]]. This fact has been recorded many times in [[Sahih]] [[Hadith|ahadith]]. In addition, the Qur'an in verse 33:49 that states that no 'Iddah is prescribed for a woman who has ''not'' had intimate contact with her husband, but goes on to stipulate the 'Iddah for pre-pubescent girls in verse 65:4, has been interpreted to mean that the[[Qur'an]] supports marrying and having sex with prepubescent girls. Despite the discomfort that this causes for modern readers, the conclusion seems to be that the Qur'an endorses sexual intercourse (as a part of Islamic marriage) with pre-pubescent girls. <br />
[[File:Women protesters.jpg|right|thumb|300px|March 23, 2010: Women protesters hold up copies of the Qur'an outside parliament in Sanaa while stating that a proposed law banning marriages under the age of 17 in Yemen is un-Islamic<ref>[http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589 YEMEN: Deep divisions over child brides] - IRIN, March 28, 2010</ref>]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
<br />
The Qur'an has stipulated a waiting period which women must observe before they can remarry. This waiting period must be observed after they are divorced, or if their husbands have died. In the Qur'an, this is called '<nowiki/>''Iddah'' or '''Iddat'' (العدة). However, there is one exception to this requirement in Qur'an 33:49:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|33|49}}| {{right|<br />
ياايها الذين امنوا اذا نكحتم المؤمنات ثم طلقتموهن من قبل ان تمسوهن فمالكم عليهن من عدة تعتدونهافمتعوهن وسرحوهن سراحا جميلا<br />
}}<br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo itha nakahtumu almuminati thumma tallaqtumoohunna min qabli an tamassoohunna fama lakum AAalayhinna min AAiddatin taAAtaddoonaha famattiAAoohunna wasarrihoohunna sarahan jameelan''<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' O ye who believe! If ye wed believing women and divorce them before ye have touched them, then there is no period that ye should reckon. But content them and release them handsomely.}}<br />
<br />
From the verse above it is understood that 'Iddah (stipulated waiting period) is required if sexual contact has occurred within the marriage. If a woman is not touched by her husband, she should not have to observe any waiting period at all.<br />
<br />
After the mention of women who have not had their marriage consummated, the Qur'an goes further - discussing the women who need to observe the 'iddah, and the span of time required. We see in Qur'an 65.4: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|65|4}}|{{right|<br />
واللائي يئسن من المحيض من نسائكم ان ارتبتم فعدتهن ثلاثة اشهر واللائي لم يحضن واولات الاحمال اجلهن ان يضعن حملهن ومن يتق الله يجعل له من امره يسرا<br />
}} <br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Waalla-ee ya-isna mina almaheedi min nisa-ikum ini irtabtum faAAiddatuhunna thalathatu ashhurin waalla-ee lam yahidna waolatu al-ahmali ajaluhunna an yadaAAna hamlahunna waman yattaqi Allaha yajAAal lahu min amrihi yusran''<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.}}<br />
<br />
Here the 'Iddah is prescribed to three categories of women:<br />
<br />
#First the phrase: “Yaisna min al-maheedhi” which means “those women who are desperate of menses” is an indication to women who reached the stage of menstruation but do not menstruate and of those who reached menopause. Desperate of menses underlines that it concerns women who though reached the age, fail to menstruate too. Their 'Iddah period is three months.<br />
#Next comes, “Wallaee Lam yahidhna” which means “those who have not menstruated yet” This group of females are pre-pubescent girls who have not yet menstruated. Here the 'Iddah prescribed for them is equal to the previous group of women (ie. three months).<br />
#Lastly, the women who are pregnant - their prescribed 'iddah is until they have given birth.<br />
<br />
The above translation of the verse masks the real meaning, so the verse has to be studied in [[Arabic]]. The actual meaning of this verse and its implications are explicitly endorsed by [[tafsir]]s as will be shown below.<br />
<br />
==Analysis of Verse in Arabic==<br />
<br />
The Qur'an says in Arabic:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=GALALEEN&nType=1&nSora=65&nAya=4 Quran 65:4]<BR>Tafsir from al-Islam.com<br />
|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي لم يحضن" فعدتهن ثلاثة أشهر <br />
}}<br />
<br />
"and those who never had menses" (because they are underage)}} <br />
<br />
The transliteration of the verse and the meaning of each portion of the verse is given below:<br />
<br />
''Wa Al-Lā'ī Lam Yaĥiđna'' <br />
<br />
''wa'' ( <font size="4">وَ</font> ) = and<br />
<br />
''Al-Lā'ī'' ( <font size="4">وَاللَّائِي</font> ) = for those who<br />
<br />
''Lam'' ( <font size="4">لَمْ </font>) = did not (negation in past tense) <ref name="EB">Elabbas Benmamoun, Arabic morphology: The central role of the imperfective, Lingua 108 (1999) 175-201</ref> <br />
<br />
''Yaĥiđna'' ( <font size="4">يَحِضْنَ</font> ) = menstruate. <br />
<br />
''Yaĥiđna'' comes from the verbal root H-Y-D ( <font size="4">حيض</font> ) which means "to menstruate". <br />
<br />
The addition of prefix "Ya" and suffix "na" to the root "HYD" shows that the word is used in used in third person, feminine gender, plural, imperfective aspect.<ref>[[w:Arabic grammar|Arabic grammar]] - Wikipedia</ref><br />
<br />
The imperfective aspect, by itself lacks any tense feature. <ref name="EB" /> The tensed negatives like ''lam'' ( <font size="3">لَمْ </font> ) (negation in past tense), ''lan'' ( <font size="3">لن</font> ) (negation in future tense), ''laa'' ( <font size="3">لَ</font> ) (negation in present tense) combined with imperfectives decide the tense in this case. <br />
<br />
Thus ''lam Yadrus'' = He did not study. <br />
<br />
In the verse 65:4, '''''Lam Yaĥiđna'' = 'those who did not menstruate'.''' <br />
<br />
Further the imperfective verb in the context of ''lam'' ( <font size="3">لَمْ </font> ) (past tensed negatives) is in the [[w:Grammatical mood#Jussive|Jussive]] mood. <ref name="EB" /> <br />
<br />
{{Quote||'''The mood is similar to the cohortative mood, in that it expresses plea, insistence, imploring, self-encouragement, wish, desire, intent, command, purpose or consequence.''' In some languages, the two are distinguished in that cohortative occurs in the first person and the jussive in the second or third. It is found in Arabic, where it is called the مجزوم, majzum. The rules governing the jussive in Arabic are somewhat complex. <ref>[[w:Grammatical mood#Jussive|Jussive]] - Wikipedia</ref>|}} <br />
<br />
Supporting these meanings, from Lane's lexicon, ''Lam'' ({{arabic|ل}}) means 'not':<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=Lane's Lexicon for ''Lam''|2=Lam = ل<br />
<br />lam = Negative particle giving to the present the sense of the perfect; not.<ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/13_LAM.htm Lam = ل] - StudyQuran</ref>}}<br />
<br />
From the Lexicon, Arabic word for Menstruate is 'Haiz' ({{arabic|حيض}}):<br />
{{Quote|1= Lane's Lexicon for ''Haa''|2=Ha-Ya-Dad (Ha-Alif-Dad) = To have her courses, menstruate; Her blood flowed from her womb, to attain the age of menstruation, to make a thing flow.<br />
<br />
hada vb. (1) impf. act. 65:4<br />
<br />
mahid n.m. 2:222<br /><br />
Lane's Lexicon, Volume 2, page: 322, 323<ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/9_HAA.htm ح = Ha] - StudyQuran</ref>}}<br />
<br />
Conclusion:<br />
<br />
*It is clear the verse 65:4 is given as a command to be followed (Jussive mood).<br />
*The verse itself refers to those women who did not menstruate(in all of past time until the present time), which can include children or girls before puberty or attainment of [[w:menarche|menarche]] (first period).<br />
<br />
Therefore, the exact translation of this portion of {{Quran|65|4}} is ''"Not menstruated yet"'' ( <font size="4">لَمْ يَحِضْنَ</font> ). In Arabic, the menstruating process is called HAIDH ( <font size="4">حيض</font> ). It is possible to turn this noun into its verb form. Like we do it with menstruation, "menstruate" is YAHIDH ( <font size="4">يَحِض</font> ). But it is LAM ( <font size="4">لَمْ </font> ) that appears before YAHIDH and the NA ( <font size="4">نَ</font> ) associated with YAHIDH and this puts Islamic apologists in a quandary because it cannot have any other meaning than ''“Not menstruated yet”''. This is the appropriate English translation.<br />
<br />
This verse 65:4 should be read as a continuation of Qur'an 33:49. If a woman who has not been used for sex should not have to observe any Iddah at all, as mentioned in 33:49, what is the reason for the prescribed Iddah for those women who have not yet menstruated? This is a clear indication marrying pre-pubescent girls and having sex with them is sanctioned by the Qur'an.<br />
<br />
The phrase found in Qur'an 65:4 as "Wallaee Lam Yahidhna" is sometimes mistranslated by [[apologists]]. Exact meaning of the phrase is available in Tafsirs (Quran interpretations).<br />
<br />
==Tafsirs of the Verse==<br />
<br />
Only the relevant parts from the Tafsirs will be quoted, because quoting the tafsir's for the verse in their entirety will be space consuming and a waste of effort. What needs to be confirmed will be extracted from Tafsirs. If anyone doubts whether these have been quoted out of context, the reference is given on each tafsir so it can be verified by checking original sources.<br />
<br />
===Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=65 Commentary on Qur'an Chapter 65:4]<BR>Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, Tafhim al-Qur'an|2= Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Quran the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consummation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, '''making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her.''' Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Quran has held as permissible.}}<br />
<br />
Note here what Maududi mentions on giving pre-pubescent girls in marriage and consummating the marriage with them. The interpreter affirms it is permitted by the Qur'an and no Muslims can question or forbid it.<br />
<br />
===Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen===<br />
<br />
{{quote |Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen, Majmoo’at As’ilah tahumm al-Usrah al-Muslimah, p. 61-63|Surah al-Talaaq 65:4: <br />
If a woman does not menstruate, either because she is very young or old and past menopause, then her ‘iddah is three months, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise.<ref>[http://www.islamqa.com/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&QR=12667 The ‘iddah of a woman divorced by talaaq] - Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 12667</ref>}}<br />
<br />
The reason for bringing two more recent scholars is to show that ''nothing has changed'' in the Islamic tenets on marrying and having sex with pre-pubescent girls, even in this modern era.<br />
<br />
==='Ibn Kathir===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54196 The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses (Qur'an 65:4)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir |2= The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. [see 2:228] '''The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation.''' Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause. This is the meaning of His saying.}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Jalalayn===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2= And [as for] those of your women who (read allā'ī or allā'i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] '''those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months''' - both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.}}<br />
<br />
===Ibn Abbas===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Abbas|2= (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! '''"What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months."''' Another man asked: “what is the waiting period for those women who are pregnant?” (And for those with child) i.e. those who are pregnant, (their period) their waiting period (shall be till they bring forth their burden) their child. (And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah) and whoever fears Allah regarding what he commands him, (He maketh his course easy for him) He makes his matter easy; and it is also said this means: He will help him to worship Him well.}} <br />
<br />
===Al-Wahidi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Wahidi, Asbab al-nuzul|2= (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, '''what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet?''' And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ '''And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”.''' Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan> Abu’l-Azhar> Asbat ibn Muhammad> Mutarrif> Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: '''Those who are too young [such that they have not started menstruating yet]''', those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Tabari===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|Tafsir Al-Tabari, 14/142|The interpretation of the verse "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; '''and for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise". He said: The same applies to the 'idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.'''}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Zamakhshari===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=2&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Zamakhshari, Al-Kashshaaf|2= {{right|<br />
روي أن ناساً قالوا: قد عرفنا عدة ذوات الأقراء، فما عدة اللائي لا يحضن؛ فنزلت: فمعنى إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ }: إن أشكل عليكم حكمهن وجهلتم كيف يعتددن فهذا حكمهنّ، وقيل: إن ارتبتم في ذم البالغات مبلغ اليأس وقد قدروه بستين سنة وبخمس وخمسين، أهو دم حيض أو استحاضة؟ { فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ } وإذا كانت هذه عدة المرتاب بها، فغير المرتاب بها أولى بذلك '''{ وَٱلَّٰۤئى لَمْ يَحِضْنَ }''' هن الصغائر''' }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold text means “Those who have not menstruated” are young girls.<br />
<br />
===Tabrasi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=3&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&Page=7&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tabrasi|2= {{right|<br />
{ واللآئي لم يحضن } تقديره واللآئي لم يحضن إن ارتبتم فعدتهن أيضاً ثلاثة أشهر وحذف لدلالة الكلام الأول عليه وهن اللواتي '''لم يبلغن''' المحيض ومثلهن تحيض على ما مرَّ بيانه.}} }}<br />
<br />
The bold text translates as “They are those who haven’t reached the age of menstruation”. Tabrasi comments on the phrase “Wallaee Lam yahidhna” = “Those who have not menstruated yet” in the verse.<br />
<br />
===Al-Shawkani===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=9&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&Page=3&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Shoukani, Fath al-Qadir|2= {{right|<br />
{ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ '''وَٱللاَّئِى لَمْ يَحِضْنَ } لصغرهن، وعدم بلوغهن سن المحيض،''' أي: فعدتهن ثلاثة أشهر }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold part translated as: “Those who have not menstruated yet” are young girls who have not reached the age of menstruation.<br />
<br />
===Abu-Hayyan===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=19&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Abu-Hayyan|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي '''لم يحضن''' } ، فالعدة هذه، فتلخص في قوله: { إن ارتبتم } قولان: أحدهما، أنه على ظاهر مفهوم اللغة فيه، وهو حصول الشك؛ والآخر، أن معناه التيقن للإياس؛ والقول الأول معناه: إن ارتبتم في دمها، أهو دم حيض أو دم علة؟ أو إن ارتبتم في علوق بحمل أم لا؛ أو إن ارتبتم: أي جهلتم عدتهن، أقوال. والظاهر أن قوله: واللائي '''لم يحضن''' } يشمل من لم يحض لصغر، }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold: “Those who have not menstruated yet” denotes those not menstruated because of being young.<br />
<br />
==Evidence from the Hadith==<br />
<br />
From Imam Bukhari in his book of Tafsir and hadith collections:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://bewley.virtualave.net/bukhari33.html Sahih Al-Bukhari, Chapter 68: Book of Tafsir]|'''CCCLXXXIV: The Tafsir of Surat at-Talaq'''<BR><BR>Mujahid said that "if you have any doubt" (65:4) means if you do not know whether she menstruates or not. Those who do not longer menstruate and '''those who have not yet menstruated, their 'idda is three months'''.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{cite web quotebox|url= http://archive.org/download/SahihAl-bukhari9Vol.Set/SahihAl-bukhariVol.7-Ahadith5063-5969.pdf|title= The Translation of the Meanings of Sahih Al-Bukhari|publisher= Dar-us-Salam Publications|isbn= 9960-717-38-0|author= Al-Bukhari (au.), Muhammad M. Khan (tr.)|date= June 1, 1997|series=vol. 7, book 67, ch. 39|page= 57|archiveurl= http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchive.org%2Fdownload%2FSahihAl-bukhari9Vol.Set%2FSahihAl-bukhariVol.7-Ahadith5063-5969.pdf&date=2013-08-13|deadurl=no}}|'''(39) CHAPTER. Giving one's young children in marriage (is permissible).''' <br />
<br />
By virtue of the Statement of Allah : "...and for those who have no (monthly) <br />
courses (i.e. they are still immature).. (V.65:4) And the 'Idda for the girl before puberty is <br />
three months (in the above Verse). <br />
<br />
'''5133.''' Narrated 'Aishah; that the Prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).}}<br />
<br />
From Sahih Muslim:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|Capter heading for {{Muslim|8|3309}} to {{Muslim|8|3311}}|Chapter 10: It is permissible for the father to give the hand of his daughter in marriage '''even when she is not fully grown''' up.}}<br />
<br />
The following Muwatta hadith shows it's permissible to marry girls who have not reached puberty:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Muwatta|29|33|108|}}|<br />
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, visited Umm Salama while she was in mourning for Abu Salama and she had put aloes on her eyes. He said, "What is this, Umm Salama?" She said, "It is only aloes, Messenger of Allah." He said, "Put it on at night and wipe it off in the daytime."<br />
<br />
'''Malik said, "The mourning of a young girl who has not yet had a menstrual period takes the same form as the mourning of one who has had a period. She avoids what a mature woman avoids if her husband dies." '''<br />
<br />
Malik said, "A slave-girl mourns her husband when he dies for two months and five nights like her idda.''<br />
<br />
Malik said, "An umm walad does not have to mourn when her master dies, and a slave-girl does not have to mourn when her master dies. Mourning is for those with husbands."}}<br />
<br />
The following is from Fath al-Bari, the most authoritative commentary on Sahih Al-Bukhari:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي لم يحضن , فجعل عدتها ثلاثة أشهر قبل البلوغ ) أي فدل على أن نكاحها قبل البلوغ جائز <br />
}}<br />
<br />
"and those who never had menses, their prescribed period is three months before puberty, which indicates that giving her into marriage before puberty is permissible."<ref>[http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=7644 Al-Islam (Arabic text)]</ref><ref>[http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=9381&idto=9382&bk_no=52&ID=2847 IslamWeb (Arabic text)]</ref>}}<br />
<br />
==Recent Fatwas==<br />
<br />
IslamOnline.net is the sixth most popular Islamic website on the internet, according to Wikipedia. The following excerpt is taken from a December 2010 fatwa.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.islamonline.net%2Far%2FIOLCounsel_C%2F1278406761316%2F1278406720653%2F%D9%87%D9%84-%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%B3%D9%86-%D8%B2%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AC-%D9%84%D9%84%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%9F-&date=2011-02-03 Is it permissible to restrict the age at which girls can marry?]<BR>Submitted by Ahmad, IslamOnline, December 24, 2010|2=The Noble Qur'an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: "And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women - if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated" [Qur'an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, '''we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl'''. The Qur'an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. '''It is true that the prophet (PBUH) entered into a marriage contract with A'isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old''', according to al-Bukhari.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.webcitation.org/61C5nBLpe <!-- original URL http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=88089 -->Child marriage in Islam]<BR>Islamweb, Fatwa No. 88089, June 24, 2004|2='''Getting married at an early age is something that is confirmed by the book of Allah''', the Sunnah of his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam), the consensus of the scholars and the actions of the companions, and the Muslims who came after them. <br />
<br />
Moreover, the interest of Shariah proves it. So the claim that this was abrogated is not correct. And the Hadith did not include that meaning; it just states that a virgin woman is not to be married until consulted. <br />
<br />
The evidence from the Qur'an is: <br />
<br />
1. The saying of Allah: "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death]". (At-Talaq 65:4)<br />
<br />
So, '''Allah set rulings of marriage, divorce and waiting period for the women who have not yet had menses, i.e. the young girls'''.<br />
<br />
The Iddah (waiting period) does not take place except after marriage.}}<br />
<br />
==Modern Views and Perspectives==<br />
<br />
===The Qur'an prohibits marriage to pre-pubescent females===<br />
<br />
Modern apologists who reject the tafsirs and the ahadith often wish to present Qur'an 65:4 as having been 'mistranslated' or 'misunderstood' throughout the ages by all of their own Islamic scholars. Instead they wish to re-translate 65:4 in a less harmful way, and then point to other verses in the Qur'an in an attempt to show that Allah did not allow Muslim men to marry pre-pubescent females. The favourite verse for this is usually Qur'an 4:6:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Qtt|4|6}}|<br />
{{right|وابتلوا اليتامى حتى اذا بلغوا النكاح فان انستم منهم رشدا فادفعوا اليهم اموالهم ولاتاكلوها اسرافا وبدارا ان يكبروا ومن كان غنيا فليستعفف ومن كان فقيرا فلياكل بالمعروف فاذا دفعتم اليهم اموالهم فاشهدوا عليهم وكفى بالله حسيبا<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Transliteration:''' Waibtaloo alyatama hatta itha balaghoo aln'''nikaha''' fa-in anastum minhum rushdan faidfaAAoo ilayhim amwalahum wala ta/kulooha israfan wabidaran an yakbaroo waman kana ghaniyyan falyastaAAfif waman kana faqeeran falya/kul bialmaAAroofi fa-itha dafaAAtum ilayhim amwalahum faashhidoo AAalayhim wakafa biAllahi haseeban<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them; but consume it not wastefully, nor in haste against their growing up. If the guardian is well-off, Let him claim no remuneration, but if he is poor, let him have for himself what is just and reasonable. When ye release their property to them, take witnesses in their presence: But all-sufficient is Allah in taking account. <br />
<br />
'''Pickthal:''' Prove orphans till they reach the marriageable age; then, if ye find them of sound judgment, deliver over unto them their fortune; and devour it not by squandering and in haste lest they should grow up Whoso (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain generously (from taking of the property of orphans); and whoso is poor let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship). And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans, have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence. Allah sufficeth as a Reckoner.<br />
<br />
'''Shakir:''' And test the orphans until they attain puberty; then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make over to them their property, and do not consume it extravagantly and hastily, lest they attain to full age; and whoever is rich, let him abstain altogether, and whoever is poor, let him eat reasonably; then when you make over to them their property, call witnesses in their presence; and Allah is enough as a Reckoner.}}<br />
<br />
Please note that the word [[Nikah]] has double meaning in Arabic language:<br />
<br />
#According to the Islamic Sharia, "Nikah" is a terminology, whose Shar'i meaning is "marriage". Actually, ''Zuwaj'' <ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/28_ZAY.htm Lane's Lexicon - Zay-Waw-Jiim]</ref> is the correct word for marriage in Arabic, but the Qur'an uses both words in reference to marrying women; Nikah for human females and Zuwaj for the Houris.<br />
#While the literal meaning of "Nikah" in Arabic language is "[[Nikah (Sexual Consummation of Marriage)|Fuck/Sexual Intercourse]]"<br />
<br />
Few Modern Islam advocates use this word "Nikah" in this verse as "marriage" (i.e. till they (the orphans) reach the age of marriage). Their argument is that this verse links the age of "Nikah" with "becoming sound in Judgement to take care of the property", and thus a child's Nikah is impossible while a child does not have the sound judgement to take care of his/her property. <br />
<br />
But contrary to these few modern Islam advocates, the traditional view of Muslim Ulama of the last 1400 years was that word "Nikah" had been used in it's literal meaning here (i.e. reaching the age where they are able to do the sexual intercourse). And their arguments are as under:<br />
<br />
Firstly, this verse is talking about the "male orphans" and not about the "female orphans". It becomes evident from the Arabic word بَلَغُوا (balaghū) in this verse, and the Arabic grammar used in it is (3rd person '''masculine''' plural perfect verb). This Arabic grammar could be seen at the [https://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=6 Corpus Quran Website]. <br />
<br />
Thus the exact translation of this verse becomes: "''And test the ('''male''') orphans until they reach the age of (doing) the '''sexual intercourse (i.e. Nikah)'''. Then if you perceive in them sound judgement, release their property to them ...''."<br />
<br />
Secondly, it becomes even more evident from another verse of Quran 17:34:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|17|34}}|وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ مَالَ ٱلْيَتِيمِ إِلَّا بِٱلَّتِى هِىَ أَحْسَنُ حَتَّىٰ يَبْلُغَ '''أَشُدَّهُۥ''' ۚ </br><br />
Come not nigh to the orphan's property except to improve it, until he attains the age of '''full strength'''}}<br />
<br />
The word أَشُدَّهُ (full strength) in this verse means the age when a young boy starts feeling the desire/strength of doing sexual intercourse. <br />
<br />
And the Arabic grammar in the word يَبْلُغَ in this verse is '''"3rd person masculine singular imperfect verb"''', which again points out that this verse is talking about the "male orphans" only. This Arabic grammar could be again seen at the [https://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=17&verse=34 Corpus Quran Website].<br />
<br />
Thirdly, please note that:<br />
<br />
*As far as Shar'i Nikah (marriage) is concerned, then there is no condition present in it of reaching the أَشُدَّهُ (i.e. Strength to do the intercourse).<br />
*And the proof is that Muhammad himself did the Shar'i Nikah with 'Aisha, when she was only 6 years old.<br />
*And no one tests a 6 years old child for handing over his/her property to him/her, as 6 years old child has neither أَشُدَّهُ (Strength/Desire) nor he/she has any kind of "sound judgement" to look after his/her property.<br />
<br />
Thus, the Shar'i Nikah has nothing to do with the أَشُدَّهُ (strength), as Muhammad did this Shar'i Nikah with 6 years 'Aisha. <br />
<br />
Actually, even at the age of 9, when 'Aisha finally came to the house of Muhammad for the consummation of marriage, still she was not mentally sound enough to look after any property or business. It is evident from the following hadith:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||6130|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.}}<br />
<br />
Fourtly, according to Islamic Sharia:<br />
<br />
*When a girl reaches puberty, then she herself gets the right to give her consent for the marriage, or to deny the marriage.<br />
*But if she is a minor or prepubescent girl, then her father/guardian could wed her to anyone even without her consent<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12708/is-it-acceptable-to-marry-a-girl-who-has-not-yet-started-her-menses The scholars are unanimously agreed that a father may marry off his young daughter without consulting her. Fatwa Website Islam Q&A.] </ref>.<br />
*And if she is a prepubescent and also an orphan, then her guardian has the right to wed her with himself (even without her consent), in order to get her property and the wealth.<br />
<br />
It is evident from the following hadith: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5064|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Urwa:<br />
<br />
that he asked `Aisha about the Statement of Allah: 'If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (the captives) that your right hands possess. That will be nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.' (4.3) `Aisha said, "O my nephew! '''(This Verse has been revealed in connection with) an orphan girl under the guardianship of her guardian who is attracted by her wealth and beauty and intends to marry her with a Mahr less than what other women of her standard deserve. So they (such guardians) have been forbidden to marry them unless they do justice to them and give them their full Mahr''', and they are ordered to marry other women instead of them."}}<br />
<br />
And it is also evident from the following Quranic Verse: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|4|127}}|You also read them (the guardians) in the Book concerning orphaned women (in your charge) '''to whom you deny their ordained rights and yet wish to take them in marriage''', as well as in respect of helpless children, that you should be just in the matter of orphans." The good you do is known to God.}}<br />
<br />
Thus a prepubescent girl is practically at the mercy of her guardian, and he could marry her to himself, even without her consent, and even for very little Mahr price. <br />
<br />
The Tafsir's agree with this understanding of 4:6:<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=10463 Giving Back the Property of the Orphans When They Reach Adulthood (Qur'an 4:6)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir|2=<br />
'''Giving Back the Property of the Orphans When They Reach Adulthood'''<br />
<br />
Allah said,<br />
{{right|<br />
[وَابْتَلُواْ الْيَتَـمَى]<br />
}}<br />
(And test orphans) meaning, test their intelligence, as Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, As-Suddi and Muqatil bin Hayyan stated.<br />
{{right|<br />
[حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ]<br />
}}<br />
(until they reach the age of marriage), the age of puberty, according to Mujahid. The age of puberty according to the majority of scholars comes when the child has a wet dream. In his Sunan, Abu Dawud recorded that `Ali said, "I memorized these words from the Messenger of Allah ,<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا يُتْمَ بَعْدَ احْتِلَامٍ، وَلَا صُمَاتَ يَوْمٍ إِلَى اللَّيْل»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no orphan after the age of puberty nor vowing to be silent throughout the day to the night.) In another Hadith, `A'ishah and other Companions said that the Prophet said,<br />
{{right|<br />
«رُفِعَ الْقَلَمُ عَنْ ثَلَاثَةٍ، عَنِ الصَّبِيِّ حَتَّى يَحْتَلِمَ، وَعَنِ النَّائِمِ حَتَّى يَسْتَيْقِظَ، وَعَنِ الْمَجْنُونِ حَتَّى يُفِيق»<br />
}}<br />
s(The pen does not record the deeds of three persons: the child until the age of puberty, the sleeping person until waking up, and the senile until sane.) Or, the age of fifteen is considered the age of adolescence. In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that Ibn `Umar said, "I was presented in front of the Prophet on the eve of the battle of Uhud, while I was fourteen years of age, and he did not allow me to take part in that battle. But I was presented in front of him on the eve of the battle of Al-Khandaq (The Trench) when I was fifteen years old, and he allowed me (to join that battle).'' `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz commented when this Hadith reached him, "This is the difference between a child and an adult.'' There is a difference of opinion over whether pubic hair is considered a sign of adulthood, and the correct opinion is that it is. The Sunnah supports this view, according to a Hadith collected by Imam Ahmad from `Atiyah Al-Qurazi who said, We were presented to the Prophet on the day of Qurizah, whoever had pubic hair was killed, whoever did not was left free to go, I was one of those who did not, so I was left free.'' The Four Sunan compilers also recorded similar to it. At-Tirmidhi said, "Hasan Sahih.'' Allah's statement,<br />
{{right|<br />
[فَإِنْ ءَانَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَادْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَلَهُمْ]<br />
}}<br />
(if then you find sound judgment in them, release their property to them,) Sa`id bin Jubayr said that this portion of the Ayah means, when you find them to be good in the religion and wise with their money. Similar was reported from Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and others among the Imams. The scholars of Fiqh stated that when the child becomes good in the religion and wise concerning with money, then the money that his caretaker was keeping for him should be surrendered to him.}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
Try, test, well the orphans, before reaching maturity with regard [the duties of] religion and [before] they can [legally] manage their own affairs, until they reach the age of marrying, that is, until they have become eligible for it through puberty or [legal] age, which, according to al-Shāfi‘ī, is the completion of fifteen years; then, if you perceive in them maturity, that is, right [judgement] in matters of religion and their property, deliver their property to them; consume it not, O guardians, wastefully, without due merit, and in haste, that is, hastening to expend it, fearing, lest they should grow up, and become mature, at which time you will be obliged to hand it over to them. If any man, who is a guardian, is rich, let him be abstinent, that is, let him abstain from the orphan’s property and refrain from consuming it; if he is poor, let him consume, of it, honourably, that is, in line with the wage for his work. And when you deliver to them, the orphans, their property, take witnesses over them, that they have received it and that you are absolved [of the obligation], so that if any dispute occurs, you are able to refer to a clear proof: this is a command [intended] for guidance. God suffices as a reckoner, as a guardian of His creatures’ deeds and as a reckoner of these [deeds] (the bā’ [in bi’Llāhi] is extra).}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Tafsîr Ibn Abbas|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
(Prove orphans) test the intelligence of orphans (till they reach the marriageable age) the age of puberty; (then, if ye find them of) if you see that they possess (sound judgement) righteousness in Religion and a tendency to protect their wealth, (deliver over unto them their fortune) then give their wealth which is with you; (and devour it not squandering) it in transgression and unlawfully (and in haste) in haste lest the orphan grows older and consumes it little by little (lest they should grow up) for fear that they grow older and stop you from devouring their wealth. (Whoso (of the guardians) is rich) and needs not the orphan's wealth, (let him abstain generously) because of his richness from taking of the property of orphans, nor should he diminish anything from their wealth; (and whoso is poor) and needy (let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship)) in measure, such that he is not in need for the wealth of orphans; it is also said that this means: he should take from the wealth of orphans in proportion with the measure of his work regarding this wealth; and it is also said that this means: he can take from the wealth of orphans as a loan to be paid back. (And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans) when they reach the legal age, (have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence) when you deliver it to them. (Allah sufficeth as a Reckoner) Allah suffices as a witness. This verse was revealed about Thabit Ibn Rifa'ah al-Ansari.}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Al-Wahidi, Asbab Al-Nuzul|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
(Prove orphans…) [4:6]. This was revealed about Thabit ibn Rifa‘ah and his uncle. Rifa‘ah died when his son Thabit was very young. The uncle of Thabit went to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, and said: “The son of my brother is an orphan under my care, what is lawful for me from his wealth? And when should I give him back his wealth?” And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse.}}<br />
<br />
===The Arabic word “Nisa” does not refer to young females===<br />
<br />
Apologists claim that the Qur'an only uses the word ''Nisa'' to refer to mature, adult women, therefore 65:4 cannot be talking about pre-pubescent females. This is indeed a weak argument, which we can refute using the Qur'an itself. Here are some verses that use the word ''"nisa"'':<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|2|49}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith najjaynakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi yuthabbihoona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' And remember, We delivered you from the people of Pharaoh: They set you hard tasks and punishments, slaughtered your sons and let your women-folk live; therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|7|127}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waqala almalao min qawmi firawna atatharu moosa waqawmahu liyufsidoo fee alardi wayatharaka waalihataka qala sanuqattilu abnaahum wanastahyee '''Nisa'''ahum wainna fawqahum qahiroona'' <BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Said the chiefs of Pharaoh’s people: “Wilt thou leave Moses and his people, to spread mischief in the land, and to abandon thee and thy gods?” He said: “Their male children will we slay; (only) their females will we save alive; and we have over them (power) irresistible."}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|7|141}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith anjaynakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi yuqattiloona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' And remember we rescued you from Pharaoh’s people, who afflicted you with the worst of penalties, who slew your male children and saved alive your females: in that was a momentous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|14|6}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith qala moosa liqawmihi othkuroo niAAmata Allahi AAalaykum ith anjakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi wayuthabbihoona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Remember! Moses said to his people: “Call to mind the favour of Allah to you when He delivered you from the people of Pharaoh: they set you hard tasks and punishments, slaughtered your sons, and let your females live: therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|40|25}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Falamma jaahum bialhaqqi min AAindina qaloo oqtuloo abnaa allatheena amanoo maAAahu waistahyoo '''Nisa'''ahum wama kaydu alkafireena illa fee dalalin''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Now, when he came to them in Truth, from Us, they said, "Slay the sons of those who believe with him, and keep alive their females," but the plots of Unbelievers (end) in nothing but errors (and delusions)!...}}<br />
<br />
In the above verses, the word ''"Nisa"'' is referring to female infants. To understand this clearly, we must look to the Exodus account, because these verses were plagiarized from the Bible.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201:15-16;&version=49; Exodus 1:15-16]|2=<br />
<br />
''"And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of whom the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah; and he said: ‘When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, ye shall look upon the birthstool: if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.’''}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201:22;&version=49; Exodus 1:22]|2=<br />
''And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying: ‘Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.''}}<br />
<br />
Moreover the Quran itself clarifies “Who the ''Nisa'' are”. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{qtt|4|127}}|{{right|<br />
ويستفتونك في النساء قل الله يفتيكم فيهن ومايتلى عليكم في الكتاب في يتامى النساء اللاتي لاتؤتونهن ماكتب لهن وترغبون ان تنكحوهن والمستضعفين من الولدان وان تقوموا لليتامى بالقسط وماتفعلوا من خير فان الله كان به عليما }}<br />
<br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Wayastaftoonaka fee alnnisa-i quli Allahu yufteekum feehinna wama yutla AAalaykum fee alkitabi fee yatama alnnisa-i allatee la tu/toonahunna ma kutiba lahunna watarghaboona an tankihoohunna waalmustadAAafeena mina alwildani waan taqoomoo lilyatama bialqisti wama tafAAaloo min khayrin fa-inna Allaha kana bihi AAaleeman'' <br />
<br />
'''Literal:''' And they ask for your opinion/clarification in the women, say: "God decreed/clarifies in them (F), and what is read/recited on you in The Book in the women orphans/minors that lose their father, those who (F) you did not give them (F) what was written/dictated to them (F), and you desire that you marry them (F), and the weakened from the children/new borns, and that you take care of to the orphans/minors that lose their father with the just/equitable; and what you make/do from goodness, so that God was/is with it knowledgeable."<ref>[{{Reference archive|1=http://iknowledge.islamicnature.com/quran/surah/4/lang/englishliteral/|2=2011-11-27}} 4. An-Nisa - Women (سورة النساء) - Revealed in Madinah (English: Literal)] - IslamicNature, accessed November 27, 2011</ref>}}<br />
<br />
In summary, when Muslims asked Muhammad who the "Nisa" were, he said they were the:<br />
<br />
#Orphans<br />
#Female wards<br />
#Those you desire to marry<br />
#The weakened from the children or new born.<br />
<br />
===This verse applies to married teenagers===<br />
<br />
{{quote || There is an alternative interpretation that does not involve pederasty, which is sexual activity between young girls and boys, i.e. early teenage years when menstruation may not have begun (or become regular) among girls, who are married to boys similar in age. This type of marriage was not uncommon in Semitic cultures, for example some scholars suggest that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was somewhere between the ages of twelve and fourteen when she married Joseph (although it should be noted that non-canonical gospels suggest Joseph was a mature man, possibly as old as ninety<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm St. Joseph] - New Advent</ref>).<br />
<br />
Given that sexual activity among teenagers is common among many cultures, including Western ones, this appears to be the most reasonable interpretation. }}<br />
<br />
Given the evidence from the Islamic texts themselves, this interpretation is not the 'most reasonable' as asserted. We have ample [[Aisha's Age|evidence]] that Muhammad (who is considered the [[Uswa Hasana|uswa hasana]] - perfect example) married and had sex with a pre-pubescent Aisha, we have evidence that [[Child Marriage and Muhammad's Companions|Muhammad's companions also did it]] and that [[Child Marriage in the Muslim World|Muslims to this very day]] are marrying pre-pubescent females and having intercourse with them. In none of these cases are the husbands comparable in age to the wife. So even though this is a ''possible'' interpretation, it is by no means the ''only reason'' that Muhammad revealed this verse - as evidenced also in the tafsir's provided above. Simply put, Muhammad did not specify an 'iddah for those whom menstruation was not present, so one had to be sent regarding these 3 groups of women. Nowhere in the Qur'an or the ahadith does it discuss teenagers marrying teenagers (ie. to 'explain' this verse) and all the evidence that we have points to [much] older men marrying and having sexual relations with pre-pubescent females.<br />
<br />
===65.4 talks only of the 'Iddah and not of sexual activity===<br />
<br />
Often pointed out is the fact that 65.4 does not explicitly discuss consummation or other sexual activity in regards to any of the females discussed in the verse; it merely sets the prescribed 'Iddah required for each. The 'iddah (prescribed waiting period) for females is required after a divorce or widowing, so that a child's father can be correctly identified. This is established in Qur'an 33:49. The verse is quoted above. <br />
<br />
Here are some tafsirs on this ayah:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1841&Itemid=89#1 A Gift and no (Iddah) for Women Who are divorced before Consummation of the Marriage (Qur'an 33:49)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir|2= {{right|<br />
(يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)}}<br />
<br />
49. O you who believe! When you marry believing women, and then divorce them before you have sexual intercourse with them, no `Iddah have you to count in respect of them. So, give them a present, and set them free in a handsome manner.)<br />
<br />
This Ayah contains many rulings, including the use of the word Nikah for the marriage contract alone. There is no other Ayah in the Qur'an that is clearer than this on this point. It also indicates that it is permissible to divorce a woman before consummating the marriage with her.<br />
{{right|<br />
(الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ)<br />
}}<br />
(believing women)<br />
This refers to what is usually the case, although there is no difference between a believing (Muslim) woman and a woman of the People of the Book in this regard, according to scholarly consensus. Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, Sa`id bin Al-Musayyib, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, `Ali bin Al-Husayn Zayn-ul-`Abidin and a group of the Salaf took this Ayah as evidence that divorce cannot occur unless it has been preceded by marriage, because Allah says,<br />
{{right|<br />
(إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(When you marry believing women, and then divorce them) <br />
<br />
The marriage contract here is followed by divorce, which indicates that the divorce cannot be valid if it comes first. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "If someone were to say, `every woman I marry will ipso facto be divorced,' this does not mean anything, because Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(O you who believe! When you marry believing women, and then divorce them....).'' It was also reported that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "Allah said,<br />
{{right|<br />
(إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(When you marry believing women, and then divorce them.) Do you not see that divorce comes after marriage'' A Hadith to the same effect was recorded from `Amr bin Shu`ayb from his father from his grandfather, who said: "The Messenger of Allah said:<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا طَلَاقَ لِابْنِ آدَمَ فِيمَا لَا يَمْلِك»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no divorce for the son of Adam with regard to that which he does not possess.) This was recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah. At-Tirmidhi said, "This is a Hasan Hadith, and it is the best thing that has been narrated on this matter.'' It was also recorded by Ibn Majah from `Ali and Al-Miswar bin Makhramah, may Allah be pleased with them, that the Messenger of Allah said:<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا طَلَاقَ قَبْلَ نِكَاح»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no divorce before marriage.)<br />
{{right|<br />
(فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا)<br />
}}<br />
(no `Iddah have you to count in respect of them.) This is a command on which the scholars are agreed, that if a woman is divorced before the marriage is consummated, she does not have to observe the `Iddah (prescribed period for divorce) and she may go and get married immediately to whomever she wishes. The only exception in this regard is a woman whose husband died, in which case she has to observe an `Iddah of four months and ten days even if the marriage was not consummated. This is also according to the consensus of the scholars.<br />
{{right|<br />
(فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
(So, give them a present, and set them free in a handsome manner.) The present here refers to something more general than half of the named dowery or a special gift that has not been named. Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(وَإِن طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ وَقَدْ فَرَضْتُمْ لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً فَنِصْفُ مَا فَرَضْتُمْ)<br />
}}<br />
(And if you divorce them before you have touched (had a sexual relation with) them, and you have fixed unto them their due (dowery) then pay half of that) (2:237). And Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(لاَّ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِن طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَآءَ مَا لَمْ تَمَسُّوهُنَّ أَوْ تَفْرِضُواْ لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ عَلَى الْمُوسِعِ قَدَرُهُ وَعَلَى الْمُقْتِرِ قَدْرُهُ مَتَـعاً بِالْمَعْرُوفِ حَقًّا عَلَى الْمُحْسِنِينَ)<br />
}}<br />
(There is no sin on you, if you divorce women while yet you have not touched them, nor fixed unto them their due (dowery). But bestow on them gift, the rich according to his means, and the poor according to his means, a gift of reasonable amount is a duty on the doers of good.) (2:236) pIn Sahih Al-Bukhari, it was recorded that Sahl bin Sa`d and Abu Usayd, may Allah be pleased with them both, said, "The Messenger of Allah married Umaymah bint Sharahil, and when she entered upon him he reached out his hand towards her, and it was as if she did not like that, so he told Abu Usayd to give her two garments.'' `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said "If the dowery had been named, she would not be entitled to more than half, but if the dowery is not been named, he should give her a gift according to his means, and this is the "handsome manner.''}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 33:49]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2= {{right|<br />
(يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُوۤاْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
O you who believe if you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have touched them (read tamassūhunna or tumāsūhunna) that is, before you have copulated with them, there shall be no [waiting] period for you to reckon against them, [no] waiting period [needed to preclude pregnancy] or otherwise. But provide for them, give them what they can use for [securing] comforts, in cases where no dowry has been fixed for them; otherwise theirs is to retain half of what was fixed, but no more — this is what Ibn ‘Abbās said and it is [the opinion] followed by al-Shāfi‘ī’; and release them in a gracious manner, leave them be without [the intention to cause them any] harm.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 33:49]<BR>Tafsir 'Ibn Abbas|2= {{right|<br />
(يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُوۤاْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
(O ye who believe! If ye wed believing women) without naming the amount of their dowry (and divorce them before ye have touched them) before you had sexual intercourse with them, (then there is no period that ye should reckon) by counting the months or the periods of menstruation. (But content them) as is due by divorce by giving them at least a scarf or shawl (and release them handsomely) divorce them without any harm done to them.}}<br />
<br />
This verse effectively removes the apologist's objection to Qur'an 65.4 as we see clearly that if a man has not consummated his marriage with his wife then she does not need to observe an 'iddah. If Qur'an 65.4 specifies that pre-pubescent females must observe a 3 month 'iddah then clearly sexual intercourse is halal to Allah.<br />
<br />
===This verse is only talking about adult women who don't know if they are pregnant===<br />
<br />
The very reason 65:4 was revealed in the first place, was as a clarification to an existing revelation by Allah. Allah had already revealed that women must wait 3 menstrual periods before they can end the 'iddat and be free to marry again. This is in Qur'an 2:228:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Quran|2|228}}|'''And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for three courses; and it is not lawful for them that they should conceal what Allah has created in their wombs''', if they believe in Allah and the last day; and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation; and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise. }}<br />
<br />
However, after this, Muslim men went to Muhammad to ask about those who did not presently have their menses - how do they measure the 'iddat in those cases? It is in this circumstance that Allah sent down the clarification (65:4) for the three groups of women that did not have menstruation, therefore they could not wait the '3 menstrual cycles' as mandated by Qur'an 2:228.<br />
<br />
Those Muslims who make this claim are ignoring what all of their own scholars have said about 65:4; that it is referring to the peri-menopausal and post menopausal women, the pre-pubescent girls and the pregnant women. The women who are currently menstruating are told in Qur'an 2:228 that they must wait 3 menstrual cycles, therefore this apologetic is also debunked.<br />
<br />
===This verse is applied to unconsummated widows===<br />
<br />
Another claim is that Qur'an 65.4 doesn't necessarily mean that Muslim men can have sex with pre-pubescent females because there may be cases where a man has married a pre-pubescent female, but while waiting for her to attain menstruation before consummating the marriage, he died. The 'iddah could be referring to a situation such as this. This claim is invalid because the Qur'an specifies the 'iddah for ''all'' widows to be 4 months and 10 days; in Qur'an 2:234:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|2|234}}|And (as for) those of you who die and leave wives behind, they should keep themselves in waiting for four months and ten days; then when they have fully attained their term, there is no blame on you for what they do for themselves in a lawful manner; and Allah is aware of what you do.}}<br />
<br />
This verse clearly contradicts this particular apologist claim, since the 'Iddah specified in Qur'an 65.4 is for a different amount of time, therefore the verses are referring to different situations.<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
<br />
*[[Child Marriage in the Muslim World]]<br />
<br />
{{Translation-links-english|[[Pedophilie_dans_le_Coran|French]]}}<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
<br />
*[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Versions/065.004.html Marriage to Minors: Surah At-Talaq (65:4)] - ''Answering Islam''<br />
<br />
The following links show that girls as young as 8 months have been able to menstruate. This does not mean it is acceptable to have sex with them:<br />
<br />
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina Lina Medina, The youngest mother in history]<br />
*[http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2610353 Puberty Hitting Girls as Young as 4 Years Old]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{Reflist|30em}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Qur'an]]<br />
[[Category:Shariah (Islamic Law)]]<br />
[[Category:Child Marriage]]<br />
[[Category:Human rights]]<br />
[[Category:Marriage]]<br />
[[Category:Women]]<br />
[[Category:Criticism of Islam]]<br />
[[Category:Apologetics]]<br />
[[Category:Tafsir]]</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=Child_Marriage_in_the_Qur%27an&diff=134110Child Marriage in the Qur'an2021-12-17T17:46:22Z<p>Lehrasap: /* The Qur'an prohibits marriage to pre-pubescent females */</p>
<hr />
<div>{{QualityScore|Lead=1|Structure=1|Content=2|Language=2|References=2}}<br />
The Prophet [[Muhammad]] married [[Aisha]] when she was [[Qur'an,_Hadith_and_Scholars:Aisha#Aisha.27s_Age_at_Consummation_and_Marriage|six]], and had [[sex|sexual intercourse]] with her while she still remained pre-pubescent at the age of nine [[Islamic Lunar Calendar|lunar years]]. This fact has been recorded many times in [[Sahih]] [[Hadith|ahadith]]. In addition, the Qur'an in verse 33:49 that states that no 'Iddah is prescribed for a woman who has ''not'' had intimate contact with her husband, but goes on to stipulate the 'Iddah for pre-pubescent girls in verse 65:4, has been interpreted to mean that the[[Qur'an]] supports marrying and having sex with prepubescent girls. Despite the discomfort that this causes for modern readers, the conclusion seems to be that the Qur'an endorses sexual intercourse (as a part of Islamic marriage) with pre-pubescent girls. <br />
[[File:Women protesters.jpg|right|thumb|300px|March 23, 2010: Women protesters hold up copies of the Qur'an outside parliament in Sanaa while stating that a proposed law banning marriages under the age of 17 in Yemen is un-Islamic<ref>[http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=88589 YEMEN: Deep divisions over child brides] - IRIN, March 28, 2010</ref>]] <br />
==Introduction==<br />
<br />
The Qur'an has stipulated a waiting period which women must observe before they can remarry. This waiting period must be observed after they are divorced, or if their husbands have died. In the Qur'an, this is called '<nowiki/>''Iddah'' or '''Iddat'' (العدة). However, there is one exception to this requirement in Qur'an 33:49:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|33|49}}| {{right|<br />
ياايها الذين امنوا اذا نكحتم المؤمنات ثم طلقتموهن من قبل ان تمسوهن فمالكم عليهن من عدة تعتدونهافمتعوهن وسرحوهن سراحا جميلا<br />
}}<br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo itha nakahtumu almuminati thumma tallaqtumoohunna min qabli an tamassoohunna fama lakum AAalayhinna min AAiddatin taAAtaddoonaha famattiAAoohunna wasarrihoohunna sarahan jameelan''<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' O ye who believe! If ye wed believing women and divorce them before ye have touched them, then there is no period that ye should reckon. But content them and release them handsomely.}}<br />
<br />
From the verse above it is understood that 'Iddah (stipulated waiting period) is required if sexual contact has occurred within the marriage. If a woman is not touched by her husband, she should not have to observe any waiting period at all.<br />
<br />
After the mention of women who have not had their marriage consummated, the Qur'an goes further - discussing the women who need to observe the 'iddah, and the span of time required. We see in Qur'an 65.4: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|65|4}}|{{right|<br />
واللائي يئسن من المحيض من نسائكم ان ارتبتم فعدتهن ثلاثة اشهر واللائي لم يحضن واولات الاحمال اجلهن ان يضعن حملهن ومن يتق الله يجعل له من امره يسرا<br />
}} <br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Waalla-ee ya-isna mina almaheedi min nisa-ikum ini irtabtum faAAiddatuhunna thalathatu ashhurin waalla-ee lam yahidna waolatu al-ahmali ajaluhunna an yadaAAna hamlahunna waman yattaqi Allaha yajAAal lahu min amrihi yusran''<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Such of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if ye have any doubts, is three months, and for those who have no courses (it is the same): for those who carry (life within their wombs), their period is until they deliver their burdens: and for those who fear Allah, He will make their path easy.}}<br />
<br />
Here the 'Iddah is prescribed to three categories of women:<br />
<br />
#First the phrase: “Yaisna min al-maheedhi” which means “those women who are desperate of menses” is an indication to women who reached the stage of menstruation but do not menstruate and of those who reached menopause. Desperate of menses underlines that it concerns women who though reached the age, fail to menstruate too. Their 'Iddah period is three months.<br />
#Next comes, “Wallaee Lam yahidhna” which means “those who have not menstruated yet” This group of females are pre-pubescent girls who have not yet menstruated. Here the 'Iddah prescribed for them is equal to the previous group of women (ie. three months).<br />
#Lastly, the women who are pregnant - their prescribed 'iddah is until they have given birth.<br />
<br />
The above translation of the verse masks the real meaning, so the verse has to be studied in [[Arabic]]. The actual meaning of this verse and its implications are explicitly endorsed by [[tafsir]]s as will be shown below.<br />
<br />
==Analysis of Verse in Arabic==<br />
<br />
The Qur'an says in Arabic:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=GALALEEN&nType=1&nSora=65&nAya=4 Quran 65:4]<BR>Tafsir from al-Islam.com<br />
|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي لم يحضن" فعدتهن ثلاثة أشهر <br />
}}<br />
<br />
"and those who never had menses" (because they are underage)}} <br />
<br />
The transliteration of the verse and the meaning of each portion of the verse is given below:<br />
<br />
''Wa Al-Lā'ī Lam Yaĥiđna'' <br />
<br />
''wa'' ( <font size="4">وَ</font> ) = and<br />
<br />
''Al-Lā'ī'' ( <font size="4">وَاللَّائِي</font> ) = for those who<br />
<br />
''Lam'' ( <font size="4">لَمْ </font>) = did not (negation in past tense) <ref name="EB">Elabbas Benmamoun, Arabic morphology: The central role of the imperfective, Lingua 108 (1999) 175-201</ref> <br />
<br />
''Yaĥiđna'' ( <font size="4">يَحِضْنَ</font> ) = menstruate. <br />
<br />
''Yaĥiđna'' comes from the verbal root H-Y-D ( <font size="4">حيض</font> ) which means "to menstruate". <br />
<br />
The addition of prefix "Ya" and suffix "na" to the root "HYD" shows that the word is used in used in third person, feminine gender, plural, imperfective aspect.<ref>[[w:Arabic grammar|Arabic grammar]] - Wikipedia</ref><br />
<br />
The imperfective aspect, by itself lacks any tense feature. <ref name="EB" /> The tensed negatives like ''lam'' ( <font size="3">لَمْ </font> ) (negation in past tense), ''lan'' ( <font size="3">لن</font> ) (negation in future tense), ''laa'' ( <font size="3">لَ</font> ) (negation in present tense) combined with imperfectives decide the tense in this case. <br />
<br />
Thus ''lam Yadrus'' = He did not study. <br />
<br />
In the verse 65:4, '''''Lam Yaĥiđna'' = 'those who did not menstruate'.''' <br />
<br />
Further the imperfective verb in the context of ''lam'' ( <font size="3">لَمْ </font> ) (past tensed negatives) is in the [[w:Grammatical mood#Jussive|Jussive]] mood. <ref name="EB" /> <br />
<br />
{{Quote||'''The mood is similar to the cohortative mood, in that it expresses plea, insistence, imploring, self-encouragement, wish, desire, intent, command, purpose or consequence.''' In some languages, the two are distinguished in that cohortative occurs in the first person and the jussive in the second or third. It is found in Arabic, where it is called the مجزوم, majzum. The rules governing the jussive in Arabic are somewhat complex. <ref>[[w:Grammatical mood#Jussive|Jussive]] - Wikipedia</ref>|}} <br />
<br />
Supporting these meanings, from Lane's lexicon, ''Lam'' ({{arabic|ل}}) means 'not':<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=Lane's Lexicon for ''Lam''|2=Lam = ل<br />
<br />lam = Negative particle giving to the present the sense of the perfect; not.<ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/13_LAM.htm Lam = ل] - StudyQuran</ref>}}<br />
<br />
From the Lexicon, Arabic word for Menstruate is 'Haiz' ({{arabic|حيض}}):<br />
{{Quote|1= Lane's Lexicon for ''Haa''|2=Ha-Ya-Dad (Ha-Alif-Dad) = To have her courses, menstruate; Her blood flowed from her womb, to attain the age of menstruation, to make a thing flow.<br />
<br />
hada vb. (1) impf. act. 65:4<br />
<br />
mahid n.m. 2:222<br /><br />
Lane's Lexicon, Volume 2, page: 322, 323<ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/9_HAA.htm ح = Ha] - StudyQuran</ref>}}<br />
<br />
Conclusion:<br />
<br />
*It is clear the verse 65:4 is given as a command to be followed (Jussive mood).<br />
*The verse itself refers to those women who did not menstruate(in all of past time until the present time), which can include children or girls before puberty or attainment of [[w:menarche|menarche]] (first period).<br />
<br />
Therefore, the exact translation of this portion of {{Quran|65|4}} is ''"Not menstruated yet"'' ( <font size="4">لَمْ يَحِضْنَ</font> ). In Arabic, the menstruating process is called HAIDH ( <font size="4">حيض</font> ). It is possible to turn this noun into its verb form. Like we do it with menstruation, "menstruate" is YAHIDH ( <font size="4">يَحِض</font> ). But it is LAM ( <font size="4">لَمْ </font> ) that appears before YAHIDH and the NA ( <font size="4">نَ</font> ) associated with YAHIDH and this puts Islamic apologists in a quandary because it cannot have any other meaning than ''“Not menstruated yet”''. This is the appropriate English translation.<br />
<br />
This verse 65:4 should be read as a continuation of Qur'an 33:49. If a woman who has not been used for sex should not have to observe any Iddah at all, as mentioned in 33:49, what is the reason for the prescribed Iddah for those women who have not yet menstruated? This is a clear indication marrying pre-pubescent girls and having sex with them is sanctioned by the Qur'an.<br />
<br />
The phrase found in Qur'an 65:4 as "Wallaee Lam Yahidhna" is sometimes mistranslated by [[apologists]]. Exact meaning of the phrase is available in Tafsirs (Quran interpretations).<br />
<br />
==Tafsirs of the Verse==<br />
<br />
Only the relevant parts from the Tafsirs will be quoted, because quoting the tafsir's for the verse in their entirety will be space consuming and a waste of effort. What needs to be confirmed will be extracted from Tafsirs. If anyone doubts whether these have been quoted out of context, the reference is given on each tafsir so it can be verified by checking original sources.<br />
<br />
===Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=65 Commentary on Qur'an Chapter 65:4]<BR>Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, Tafhim al-Qur'an|2= Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Quran the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consummation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, '''making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her.''' Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Quran has held as permissible.}}<br />
<br />
Note here what Maududi mentions on giving pre-pubescent girls in marriage and consummating the marriage with them. The interpreter affirms it is permitted by the Qur'an and no Muslims can question or forbid it.<br />
<br />
===Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen===<br />
<br />
{{quote |Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen, Majmoo’at As’ilah tahumm al-Usrah al-Muslimah, p. 61-63|Surah al-Talaaq 65:4: <br />
If a woman does not menstruate, either because she is very young or old and past menopause, then her ‘iddah is three months, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; and for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise.<ref>[http://www.islamqa.com/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&QR=12667 The ‘iddah of a woman divorced by talaaq] - Islam Q&A, Fatwa No. 12667</ref>}}<br />
<br />
The reason for bringing two more recent scholars is to show that ''nothing has changed'' in the Islamic tenets on marrying and having sex with pre-pubescent girls, even in this modern era.<br />
<br />
==='Ibn Kathir===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=65&tid=54196 The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses (Qur'an 65:4)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir |2= The `Iddah of Those in Menopause and Those Who do not have Menses Allah the Exalted clarifies the waiting period of the woman in menopause. And that is the one whose menstruation has stopped due to her older age. Her `Iddah is three months instead of the three monthly cycles for those who menstruate, which is based upon the Ayah in (Surat) Al-Baqarah. [see 2:228] '''The same for the young, who have not reached the years of menstruation.''' Their `Iddah is three months like those in menopause. This is the meaning of His saying.}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Jalalayn===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2= And [as for] those of your women who (read allā'ī or allā'i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] '''those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months''' - both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.}}<br />
<br />
===Ibn Abbas===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Abbas|2= (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! '''"What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months."''' Another man asked: “what is the waiting period for those women who are pregnant?” (And for those with child) i.e. those who are pregnant, (their period) their waiting period (shall be till they bring forth their burden) their child. (And whosoever keepeth his duty to Allah) and whoever fears Allah regarding what he commands him, (He maketh his course easy for him) He makes his matter easy; and it is also said this means: He will help him to worship Him well.}} <br />
<br />
===Al-Wahidi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Wahidi, Asbab al-nuzul|2= (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) [65:4]. Said Muqatil: “When the verse (Women who are divorced shall wait, keeping themselves apart…), Kallad ibn al-Nu‘man ibn Qays al-Ansari said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, '''what is the waiting period of the woman who does not menstruate and the woman who has not menstruated yet?''' And what is the waiting period of the pregnant woman?’ '''And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse”.''' Abu Ishaq al-Muqri’ informed us> Muhammad ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Hamdun> Makki ibn ‘Abdan> Abu’l-Azhar> Asbat ibn Muhammad> Mutarrif> Abu ‘Uthman ‘Amr ibn Salim who said: “When the waiting period for divorced and widowed women was mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, some women of Medina are saying: there are other women who have not been mentioned!’ He asked him: ‘And who are they?’ He said: '''Those who are too young [such that they have not started menstruating yet]''', those who are too old [whose menstruation has stopped] and those who are pregnant’. And so this verse (And for such of your women as despair of menstruation…) was revealed”.}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Tabari===<br />
<br />
{{Quote|Tafsir Al-Tabari, 14/142|The interpretation of the verse "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubt (about their periods), is three months; '''and for those who have no courses (i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise". He said: The same applies to the 'idaah for girls who do not menstruate because they are too young, if their husbands divorce them after consummating the marriage with them.'''}}<br />
<br />
===Al-Zamakhshari===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=2&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Zamakhshari, Al-Kashshaaf|2= {{right|<br />
روي أن ناساً قالوا: قد عرفنا عدة ذوات الأقراء، فما عدة اللائي لا يحضن؛ فنزلت: فمعنى إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ }: إن أشكل عليكم حكمهن وجهلتم كيف يعتددن فهذا حكمهنّ، وقيل: إن ارتبتم في ذم البالغات مبلغ اليأس وقد قدروه بستين سنة وبخمس وخمسين، أهو دم حيض أو استحاضة؟ { فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ } وإذا كانت هذه عدة المرتاب بها، فغير المرتاب بها أولى بذلك '''{ وَٱلَّٰۤئى لَمْ يَحِضْنَ }''' هن الصغائر''' }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold text means “Those who have not menstruated” are young girls.<br />
<br />
===Tabrasi===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=3&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&Page=7&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Tabrasi|2= {{right|<br />
{ واللآئي لم يحضن } تقديره واللآئي لم يحضن إن ارتبتم فعدتهن أيضاً ثلاثة أشهر وحذف لدلالة الكلام الأول عليه وهن اللواتي '''لم يبلغن''' المحيض ومثلهن تحيض على ما مرَّ بيانه.}} }}<br />
<br />
The bold text translates as “They are those who haven’t reached the age of menstruation”. Tabrasi comments on the phrase “Wallaee Lam yahidhna” = “Those who have not menstruated yet” in the verse.<br />
<br />
===Al-Shawkani===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=9&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&Page=3&Size=1&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Al-Shoukani, Fath al-Qadir|2= {{right|<br />
{ فَعِدَّتُهُنَّ ثَلَـٰثَةُ أَشْهُرٍ '''وَٱللاَّئِى لَمْ يَحِضْنَ } لصغرهن، وعدم بلوغهن سن المحيض،''' أي: فعدتهن ثلاثة أشهر }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold part translated as: “Those who have not menstruated yet” are young girls who have not reached the age of menstruation.<br />
<br />
===Abu-Hayyan===<br />
<br />
{{quote |1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=19&tSoraNo=65&tAyahNo=4&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=1 Qur'an 65:4]<BR>Abu-Hayyan|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي '''لم يحضن''' } ، فالعدة هذه، فتلخص في قوله: { إن ارتبتم } قولان: أحدهما، أنه على ظاهر مفهوم اللغة فيه، وهو حصول الشك؛ والآخر، أن معناه التيقن للإياس؛ والقول الأول معناه: إن ارتبتم في دمها، أهو دم حيض أو دم علة؟ أو إن ارتبتم في علوق بحمل أم لا؛ أو إن ارتبتم: أي جهلتم عدتهن، أقوال. والظاهر أن قوله: واللائي '''لم يحضن''' } يشمل من لم يحض لصغر، }} }}<br />
<br />
The bold: “Those who have not menstruated yet” denotes those not menstruated because of being young.<br />
<br />
==Evidence from the Hadith==<br />
<br />
From Imam Bukhari in his book of Tafsir and hadith collections:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://bewley.virtualave.net/bukhari33.html Sahih Al-Bukhari, Chapter 68: Book of Tafsir]|'''CCCLXXXIV: The Tafsir of Surat at-Talaq'''<BR><BR>Mujahid said that "if you have any doubt" (65:4) means if you do not know whether she menstruates or not. Those who do not longer menstruate and '''those who have not yet menstruated, their 'idda is three months'''.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{cite web quotebox|url= http://archive.org/download/SahihAl-bukhari9Vol.Set/SahihAl-bukhariVol.7-Ahadith5063-5969.pdf|title= The Translation of the Meanings of Sahih Al-Bukhari|publisher= Dar-us-Salam Publications|isbn= 9960-717-38-0|author= Al-Bukhari (au.), Muhammad M. Khan (tr.)|date= June 1, 1997|series=vol. 7, book 67, ch. 39|page= 57|archiveurl= http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Farchive.org%2Fdownload%2FSahihAl-bukhari9Vol.Set%2FSahihAl-bukhariVol.7-Ahadith5063-5969.pdf&date=2013-08-13|deadurl=no}}|'''(39) CHAPTER. Giving one's young children in marriage (is permissible).''' <br />
<br />
By virtue of the Statement of Allah : "...and for those who have no (monthly) <br />
courses (i.e. they are still immature).. (V.65:4) And the 'Idda for the girl before puberty is <br />
three months (in the above Verse). <br />
<br />
'''5133.''' Narrated 'Aishah; that the Prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).}}<br />
<br />
From Sahih Muslim:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|Capter heading for {{Muslim|8|3309}} to {{Muslim|8|3311}}|Chapter 10: It is permissible for the father to give the hand of his daughter in marriage '''even when she is not fully grown''' up.}}<br />
<br />
The following Muwatta hadith shows it's permissible to marry girls who have not reached puberty:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Muwatta|29|33|108|}}|<br />
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, visited Umm Salama while she was in mourning for Abu Salama and she had put aloes on her eyes. He said, "What is this, Umm Salama?" She said, "It is only aloes, Messenger of Allah." He said, "Put it on at night and wipe it off in the daytime."<br />
<br />
'''Malik said, "The mourning of a young girl who has not yet had a menstrual period takes the same form as the mourning of one who has had a period. She avoids what a mature woman avoids if her husband dies." '''<br />
<br />
Malik said, "A slave-girl mourns her husband when he dies for two months and five nights like her idda.''<br />
<br />
Malik said, "An umm walad does not have to mourn when her master dies, and a slave-girl does not have to mourn when her master dies. Mourning is for those with husbands."}}<br />
<br />
The following is from Fath al-Bari, the most authoritative commentary on Sahih Al-Bukhari:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=|2= {{right|<br />
واللائي لم يحضن , فجعل عدتها ثلاثة أشهر قبل البلوغ ) أي فدل على أن نكاحها قبل البلوغ جائز <br />
}}<br />
<br />
"and those who never had menses, their prescribed period is three months before puberty, which indicates that giving her into marriage before puberty is permissible."<ref>[http://hadith.al-islam.com/display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=7644 Al-Islam (Arabic text)]</ref><ref>[http://www.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=9381&idto=9382&bk_no=52&ID=2847 IslamWeb (Arabic text)]</ref>}}<br />
<br />
==Recent Fatwas==<br />
<br />
IslamOnline.net is the sixth most popular Islamic website on the internet, according to Wikipedia. The following excerpt is taken from a December 2010 fatwa.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.islamonline.net%2Far%2FIOLCounsel_C%2F1278406761316%2F1278406720653%2F%D9%87%D9%84-%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%AA%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%B3%D9%86-%D8%B2%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%AC-%D9%84%D9%84%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%9F-&date=2011-02-03 Is it permissible to restrict the age at which girls can marry?]<BR>Submitted by Ahmad, IslamOnline, December 24, 2010|2=The Noble Qur'an has also mentioned the waiting period [i.e. for a divorced wife to remarry] for the wife who has not yet menstruated, saying: "And those who no longer expect menstruation among your women - if you doubt, then their period is three months, and [also for] those who have not menstruated" [Qur'an 65:4]. Since this is not negated later, '''we can take from this verse that it is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a prepubescent girl'''. The Qur'an is not like the books of jurisprudence which mention what the implications of things are, even if they are prohibited. '''It is true that the prophet (PBUH) entered into a marriage contract with A'isha when she was six years old, however he did not have sex with her until she was nine years old''', according to al-Bukhari.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.webcitation.org/61C5nBLpe <!-- original URL http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=88089 -->Child marriage in Islam]<BR>Islamweb, Fatwa No. 88089, June 24, 2004|2='''Getting married at an early age is something that is confirmed by the book of Allah''', the Sunnah of his Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam), the consensus of the scholars and the actions of the companions, and the Muslims who came after them. <br />
<br />
Moreover, the interest of Shariah proves it. So the claim that this was abrogated is not correct. And the Hadith did not include that meaning; it just states that a virgin woman is not to be married until consulted. <br />
<br />
The evidence from the Qur'an is: <br />
<br />
1. The saying of Allah: "And those of your women as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the 'Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their 'Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death]". (At-Talaq 65:4)<br />
<br />
So, '''Allah set rulings of marriage, divorce and waiting period for the women who have not yet had menses, i.e. the young girls'''.<br />
<br />
The Iddah (waiting period) does not take place except after marriage.}}<br />
<br />
==Modern Views and Perspectives==<br />
<br />
===The Qur'an prohibits marriage to pre-pubescent females===<br />
<br />
Modern apologists who reject the tafsirs and the ahadith often wish to present Qur'an 65:4 as having been 'mistranslated' or 'misunderstood' throughout the ages by all of their own Islamic scholars. Instead they wish to re-translate 65:4 in a less harmful way, and then point to other verses in the Qur'an in an attempt to show that Allah did not allow Muslim men to marry pre-pubescent females. The favourite verse for this is usually Qur'an 4:6:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Qtt|4|6}}|<br />
{{right|وابتلوا اليتامى حتى اذا بلغوا النكاح فان انستم منهم رشدا فادفعوا اليهم اموالهم ولاتاكلوها اسرافا وبدارا ان يكبروا ومن كان غنيا فليستعفف ومن كان فقيرا فلياكل بالمعروف فاذا دفعتم اليهم اموالهم فاشهدوا عليهم وكفى بالله حسيبا<br />
}}<br />
<br />
'''Transliteration:''' Waibtaloo alyatama hatta itha balaghoo aln'''nikaha''' fa-in anastum minhum rushdan faidfaAAoo ilayhim amwalahum wala ta/kulooha israfan wabidaran an yakbaroo waman kana ghaniyyan falyastaAAfif waman kana faqeeran falya/kul bialmaAAroofi fa-itha dafaAAtum ilayhim amwalahum faashhidoo AAalayhim wakafa biAllahi haseeban<br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Make trial of orphans until they reach the age of marriage; if then ye find sound judgment in them, release their property to them; but consume it not wastefully, nor in haste against their growing up. If the guardian is well-off, Let him claim no remuneration, but if he is poor, let him have for himself what is just and reasonable. When ye release their property to them, take witnesses in their presence: But all-sufficient is Allah in taking account. <br />
<br />
'''Pickthal:''' Prove orphans till they reach the marriageable age; then, if ye find them of sound judgment, deliver over unto them their fortune; and devour it not by squandering and in haste lest they should grow up Whoso (of the guardians) is rich, let him abstain generously (from taking of the property of orphans); and whoso is poor let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship). And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans, have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence. Allah sufficeth as a Reckoner.<br />
<br />
'''Shakir:''' And test the orphans until they attain puberty; then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make over to them their property, and do not consume it extravagantly and hastily, lest they attain to full age; and whoever is rich, let him abstain altogether, and whoever is poor, let him eat reasonably; then when you make over to them their property, call witnesses in their presence; and Allah is enough as a Reckoner.}}<br />
<br />
Please note that the word [[Nikah]] has double meaning in Arabic language:<br />
<br />
# According to the Islamic Sharia, "Nikah" is a terminology, whose Shar'i meaning is "marriage". Actually, ''Zuwaj'' <ref>[http://www.studyquran.co.uk/28_ZAY.htm Lane's Lexicon - Zay-Waw-Jiim]</ref> is the correct word for marriage in Arabic, but the Qur'an uses both words in reference to marrying women; Nikah for human females and Zuwaj for the Houris.<br />
# While the literal meaning of "Nikah" in Arabic language is "[[Nikah (Sexual Consummation of Marriage)|Fuck/Sexual Intercourse]]"<br />
<br />
Few Modern Islam advocates use this word "Nikah" in this verse as "marriage" (i.e. till they (the orphans) reach the age of marriage). Their argument is that this verse links the age of "Nikah" with "becoming sound in Judgement to take care of the property", and thus a child's Nikah is impossible while a child does not have the sound judgement to take care of his/her property. <br />
<br />
But contrary to these few modern Islam advocates, the traditional view of Muslim Ulama of the last 1400 years was that word "Nikah" had been used in it's literal meaning here (i.e. reaching the age where they are able to do the sexual intercourse). And their arguments are as under:<br />
<br />
Firstly, this verse is talking about the "male orphans" and not about the "female orphans". It becomes evident from the Arabic word بَلَغُوا (balaghū) in this verse, and the Arabic grammar used in it is (3rd person '''masculine''' plural perfect verb). This Arabic grammar could be seen at the [https://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=6 Corpus Quran Website]. <br />
<br />
Thus the exact translation of this verse becomes: "''And test the ('''male''') orphans until they reach the age of (doing) the '''sexual intercourse (i.e. Nikah)'''. Then if you perceive in them sound judgement, release their property to them ...''."<br />
<br />
Secondly, it becomes even more evident from another verse of Quran 17:34:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|17|34}}|وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ مَالَ ٱلْيَتِيمِ إِلَّا بِٱلَّتِى هِىَ أَحْسَنُ حَتَّىٰ يَبْلُغَ '''أَشُدَّهُۥ''' ۚ </br><br />
Come not nigh to the orphan's property except to improve it, until he attains the age of '''full strength'''}}<br />
<br />
The word أَشُدَّهُ (full strength) in this verse means the age when a young boy starts feeling the desire/strength of doing sexual intercourse. <br />
<br />
And the Arabic grammar in the word يَبْلُغَ in this verse is '''"3rd person masculine singular imperfect verb"''', which again points out that this verse is talking about the "male orphans" only. This Arabic grammar could be again seen at the [https://corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=17&verse=34 Corpus Quran Website].<br />
<br />
Thirdly, please note that:<br />
<br />
* As far as Shar'i Nikah (marriage) is concerned, then there is no condition present in it of reaching the أَشُدَّهُ (i.e. Strength to do the intercourse). <br />
* And the proof is that Muhammad himself did the Shar'i Nikah with 'Aisha, when she was only 6 years old. <br />
* And no one tests a 6 years old child for handing over his/her property to him/her, as 6 years old child has neither أَشُدَّهُ (Strength/Desire) nor he/she has any kind of "sound judgement" to look after his/her property. <br />
<br />
Thus, the Shar'i Nikah has nothing to do with the أَشُدَّهُ (strength), as Muhammad did this Shar'i Nikah with 6 years 'Aisha. <br />
<br />
Actually, even at the age of 9, when 'Aisha finally came to the house of Muhammad for the consummation of marriage, still she was not mentally sound enough to look after any property or business. It is evident from the following hadith:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||6130|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.}}<br />
<br />
Fourtly, according to Islamic Sharia:<br />
<br />
* When a girl reaches puberty, then she herself gets the right to give her consent for the marriage, or to deny the marriage. <br />
* But if she is a minor or prepubescent girl, then her father/guardian could wed her to anyone even without her consent<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12708/is-it-acceptable-to-marry-a-girl-who-has-not-yet-started-her-menses The scholars are unanimously agreed that a father may marry off his young daughter without consulting her. Fatwa Website Islam Q&A.] </ref>. <br />
* And if she is a prepubescent and also an orphan, then her guardian has the right to wed her with himself (even without her consent), in order to get her property and the wealth. <br />
<br />
It is evident from the following hadith: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5064|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Urwa:<br />
<br />
that he asked `Aisha about the Statement of Allah: 'If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls, then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one, or (the captives) that your right hands possess. That will be nearer to prevent you from doing injustice.' (4.3) `Aisha said, "O my nephew! '''(This Verse has been revealed in connection with) an orphan girl under the guardianship of her guardian who is attracted by her wealth and beauty and intends to marry her with a Mahr less than what other women of her standard deserve. So they (such guardians) have been forbidden to marry them unless they do justice to them and give them their full Mahr''', and they are ordered to marry other women instead of them."}}<br />
<br />
Thus a prepubescent girl is practically at the mercy of her guardian, and he could marry her to himself, even without her consent, and even for very little Mahr price. <br />
<br />
The Tafsir's agree with this understanding of 4:6:<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=10463 Giving Back the Property of the Orphans When They Reach Adulthood (Qur'an 4:6)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir|2=<br />
'''Giving Back the Property of the Orphans When They Reach Adulthood'''<br />
<br />
Allah said,<br />
{{right|<br />
[وَابْتَلُواْ الْيَتَـمَى]<br />
}}<br />
(And test orphans) meaning, test their intelligence, as Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, As-Suddi and Muqatil bin Hayyan stated.<br />
{{right|<br />
[حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ]<br />
}}<br />
(until they reach the age of marriage), the age of puberty, according to Mujahid. The age of puberty according to the majority of scholars comes when the child has a wet dream. In his Sunan, Abu Dawud recorded that `Ali said, "I memorized these words from the Messenger of Allah ,<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا يُتْمَ بَعْدَ احْتِلَامٍ، وَلَا صُمَاتَ يَوْمٍ إِلَى اللَّيْل»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no orphan after the age of puberty nor vowing to be silent throughout the day to the night.) In another Hadith, `A'ishah and other Companions said that the Prophet said,<br />
{{right|<br />
«رُفِعَ الْقَلَمُ عَنْ ثَلَاثَةٍ، عَنِ الصَّبِيِّ حَتَّى يَحْتَلِمَ، وَعَنِ النَّائِمِ حَتَّى يَسْتَيْقِظَ، وَعَنِ الْمَجْنُونِ حَتَّى يُفِيق»<br />
}}<br />
s(The pen does not record the deeds of three persons: the child until the age of puberty, the sleeping person until waking up, and the senile until sane.) Or, the age of fifteen is considered the age of adolescence. In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that Ibn `Umar said, "I was presented in front of the Prophet on the eve of the battle of Uhud, while I was fourteen years of age, and he did not allow me to take part in that battle. But I was presented in front of him on the eve of the battle of Al-Khandaq (The Trench) when I was fifteen years old, and he allowed me (to join that battle).'' `Umar bin `Abdul-`Aziz commented when this Hadith reached him, "This is the difference between a child and an adult.'' There is a difference of opinion over whether pubic hair is considered a sign of adulthood, and the correct opinion is that it is. The Sunnah supports this view, according to a Hadith collected by Imam Ahmad from `Atiyah Al-Qurazi who said, We were presented to the Prophet on the day of Qurizah, whoever had pubic hair was killed, whoever did not was left free to go, I was one of those who did not, so I was left free.'' The Four Sunan compilers also recorded similar to it. At-Tirmidhi said, "Hasan Sahih.'' Allah's statement,<br />
{{right|<br />
[فَإِنْ ءَانَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَادْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَلَهُمْ]<br />
}}<br />
(if then you find sound judgment in them, release their property to them,) Sa`id bin Jubayr said that this portion of the Ayah means, when you find them to be good in the religion and wise with their money. Similar was reported from Ibn `Abbas, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and others among the Imams. The scholars of Fiqh stated that when the child becomes good in the religion and wise concerning with money, then the money that his caretaker was keeping for him should be surrendered to him.}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
Try, test, well the orphans, before reaching maturity with regard [the duties of] religion and [before] they can [legally] manage their own affairs, until they reach the age of marrying, that is, until they have become eligible for it through puberty or [legal] age, which, according to al-Shāfi‘ī, is the completion of fifteen years; then, if you perceive in them maturity, that is, right [judgement] in matters of religion and their property, deliver their property to them; consume it not, O guardians, wastefully, without due merit, and in haste, that is, hastening to expend it, fearing, lest they should grow up, and become mature, at which time you will be obliged to hand it over to them. If any man, who is a guardian, is rich, let him be abstinent, that is, let him abstain from the orphan’s property and refrain from consuming it; if he is poor, let him consume, of it, honourably, that is, in line with the wage for his work. And when you deliver to them, the orphans, their property, take witnesses over them, that they have received it and that you are absolved [of the obligation], so that if any dispute occurs, you are able to refer to a clear proof: this is a command [intended] for guidance. God suffices as a reckoner, as a guardian of His creatures’ deeds and as a reckoner of these [deeds] (the bā’ [in bi’Llāhi] is extra).}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Tafsîr Ibn Abbas|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
(Prove orphans) test the intelligence of orphans (till they reach the marriageable age) the age of puberty; (then, if ye find them of) if you see that they possess (sound judgement) righteousness in Religion and a tendency to protect their wealth, (deliver over unto them their fortune) then give their wealth which is with you; (and devour it not squandering) it in transgression and unlawfully (and in haste) in haste lest the orphan grows older and consumes it little by little (lest they should grow up) for fear that they grow older and stop you from devouring their wealth. (Whoso (of the guardians) is rich) and needs not the orphan's wealth, (let him abstain generously) because of his richness from taking of the property of orphans, nor should he diminish anything from their wealth; (and whoso is poor) and needy (let him take thereof in reason (for his guardianship)) in measure, such that he is not in need for the wealth of orphans; it is also said that this means: he should take from the wealth of orphans in proportion with the measure of his work regarding this wealth; and it is also said that this means: he can take from the wealth of orphans as a loan to be paid back. (And when ye deliver up their fortune unto orphans) when they reach the legal age, (have (the transaction) witnessed in their presence) when you deliver it to them. (Allah sufficeth as a Reckoner) Allah suffices as a witness. This verse was revealed about Thabit Ibn Rifa'ah al-Ansari.}}<br />
<br />
{{quote|1=[http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=6&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2 Qur'an 4:6]<BR>Al-Wahidi, Asbab Al-Nuzul|2=<br />
{{right|<br />
{ وَٱبْتَلُواْ ٱلْيَتَامَىٰ حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغُواْ النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِّنْهُمْ رُشْداً فَٱدْفَعُواْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ وَلاَ تَأْكُلُوهَآ إِسْرَافاً وَبِدَاراً أَن يَكْبَرُواْ وَمَن كَانَ غَنِيّاً فَلْيَسْتَعْفِفْ وَمَن كَانَ فَقِيراً فَلْيَأْكُلْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ فَإِذَا دَفَعْتُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ فَأَشْهِدُواْ عَلَيْهِمْ وَكَفَىٰ بِٱللَّهِ حَسِيباً }<br />
}}<br />
(Prove orphans…) [4:6]. This was revealed about Thabit ibn Rifa‘ah and his uncle. Rifa‘ah died when his son Thabit was very young. The uncle of Thabit went to the Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, and said: “The son of my brother is an orphan under my care, what is lawful for me from his wealth? And when should I give him back his wealth?” And so Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse.}}<br />
<br />
===The Arabic word “Nisa” does not refer to young females===<br />
<br />
Apologists claim that the Qur'an only uses the word ''Nisa'' to refer to mature, adult women, therefore 65:4 cannot be talking about pre-pubescent females. This is indeed a weak argument, which we can refute using the Qur'an itself. Here are some verses that use the word ''"nisa"'':<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|2|49}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith najjaynakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi yuthabbihoona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' And remember, We delivered you from the people of Pharaoh: They set you hard tasks and punishments, slaughtered your sons and let your women-folk live; therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|7|127}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waqala almalao min qawmi firawna atatharu moosa waqawmahu liyufsidoo fee alardi wayatharaka waalihataka qala sanuqattilu abnaahum wanastahyee '''Nisa'''ahum wainna fawqahum qahiroona'' <BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Said the chiefs of Pharaoh’s people: “Wilt thou leave Moses and his people, to spread mischief in the land, and to abandon thee and thy gods?” He said: “Their male children will we slay; (only) their females will we save alive; and we have over them (power) irresistible."}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|7|141}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith anjaynakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi yuqattiloona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' And remember we rescued you from Pharaoh’s people, who afflicted you with the worst of penalties, who slew your male children and saved alive your females: in that was a momentous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|14|6}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Waith qala moosa liqawmihi othkuroo niAAmata Allahi AAalaykum ith anjakum min ali firawna yasoomoonakum sooa alAAathabi wayuthabbihoona abnaakum wayastahyoona '''Nisa'''akum wafee thalikum balaon min rabbikum AAatheemun''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Remember! Moses said to his people: “Call to mind the favour of Allah to you when He delivered you from the people of Pharaoh: they set you hard tasks and punishments, slaughtered your sons, and let your females live: therein was a tremendous trial from your Lord.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Qtt|40|25}}|'''Transliteration:''' ''Falamma jaahum bialhaqqi min AAindina qaloo oqtuloo abnaa allatheena amanoo maAAahu waistahyoo '''Nisa'''ahum wama kaydu alkafireena illa fee dalalin''<BR><BR><br />
<br />
'''Yusuf Ali:''' Now, when he came to them in Truth, from Us, they said, "Slay the sons of those who believe with him, and keep alive their females," but the plots of Unbelievers (end) in nothing but errors (and delusions)!...}}<br />
<br />
In the above verses, the word ''"Nisa"'' is referring to female infants. To understand this clearly, we must look to the Exodus account, because these verses were plagiarized from the Bible.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201:15-16;&version=49; Exodus 1:15-16]|2=<br />
<br />
''"And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives, of whom the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah; and he said: ‘When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, ye shall look upon the birthstool: if it be a son, then ye shall kill him; but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.’''}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201:22;&version=49; Exodus 1:22]|2=<br />
''And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying: ‘Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.''}}<br />
<br />
Moreover the Quran itself clarifies “Who the ''Nisa'' are”. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{qtt|4|127}}|{{right|<br />
ويستفتونك في النساء قل الله يفتيكم فيهن ومايتلى عليكم في الكتاب في يتامى النساء اللاتي لاتؤتونهن ماكتب لهن وترغبون ان تنكحوهن والمستضعفين من الولدان وان تقوموا لليتامى بالقسط وماتفعلوا من خير فان الله كان به عليما }}<br />
<br />
'''Transliteration:''' ''Wayastaftoonaka fee alnnisa-i quli Allahu yufteekum feehinna wama yutla AAalaykum fee alkitabi fee yatama alnnisa-i allatee la tu/toonahunna ma kutiba lahunna watarghaboona an tankihoohunna waalmustadAAafeena mina alwildani waan taqoomoo lilyatama bialqisti wama tafAAaloo min khayrin fa-inna Allaha kana bihi AAaleeman'' <br />
<br />
'''Literal:''' And they ask for your opinion/clarification in the women, say: "God decreed/clarifies in them (F), and what is read/recited on you in The Book in the women orphans/minors that lose their father, those who (F) you did not give them (F) what was written/dictated to them (F), and you desire that you marry them (F), and the weakened from the children/new borns, and that you take care of to the orphans/minors that lose their father with the just/equitable; and what you make/do from goodness, so that God was/is with it knowledgeable."<ref>[{{Reference archive|1=http://iknowledge.islamicnature.com/quran/surah/4/lang/englishliteral/|2=2011-11-27}} 4. An-Nisa - Women (سورة النساء) - Revealed in Madinah (English: Literal)] - IslamicNature, accessed November 27, 2011</ref>}}<br />
<br />
In summary, when Muslims asked Muhammad who the "Nisa" were, he said they were the:<br />
<br />
#Orphans<br />
#Female wards<br />
#Those you desire to marry<br />
#The weakened from the children or new born.<br />
<br />
===This verse applies to married teenagers===<br />
<br />
{{quote || There is an alternative interpretation that does not involve pederasty, which is sexual activity between young girls and boys, i.e. early teenage years when menstruation may not have begun (or become regular) among girls, who are married to boys similar in age. This type of marriage was not uncommon in Semitic cultures, for example some scholars suggest that Mary (the mother of Jesus) was somewhere between the ages of twelve and fourteen when she married Joseph (although it should be noted that non-canonical gospels suggest Joseph was a mature man, possibly as old as ninety<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08504a.htm St. Joseph] - New Advent</ref>).<br />
<br />
Given that sexual activity among teenagers is common among many cultures, including Western ones, this appears to be the most reasonable interpretation. }}<br />
<br />
Given the evidence from the Islamic texts themselves, this interpretation is not the 'most reasonable' as asserted. We have ample [[Aisha's Age|evidence]] that Muhammad (who is considered the [[Uswa Hasana|uswa hasana]] - perfect example) married and had sex with a pre-pubescent Aisha, we have evidence that [[Child Marriage and Muhammad's Companions|Muhammad's companions also did it]] and that [[Child Marriage in the Muslim World|Muslims to this very day]] are marrying pre-pubescent females and having intercourse with them. In none of these cases are the husbands comparable in age to the wife. So even though this is a ''possible'' interpretation, it is by no means the ''only reason'' that Muhammad revealed this verse - as evidenced also in the tafsir's provided above. Simply put, Muhammad did not specify an 'iddah for those whom menstruation was not present, so one had to be sent regarding these 3 groups of women. Nowhere in the Qur'an or the ahadith does it discuss teenagers marrying teenagers (ie. to 'explain' this verse) and all the evidence that we have points to [much] older men marrying and having sexual relations with pre-pubescent females.<br />
<br />
===65.4 talks only of the 'Iddah and not of sexual activity===<br />
<br />
Often pointed out is the fact that 65.4 does not explicitly discuss consummation or other sexual activity in regards to any of the females discussed in the verse; it merely sets the prescribed 'Iddah required for each. The 'iddah (prescribed waiting period) for females is required after a divorce or widowing, so that a child's father can be correctly identified. This is established in Qur'an 33:49. The verse is quoted above. <br />
<br />
Here are some tafsirs on this ayah:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1841&Itemid=89#1 A Gift and no (Iddah) for Women Who are divorced before Consummation of the Marriage (Qur'an 33:49)]<BR>Tafsir Ibn Kathir|2= {{right|<br />
(يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)}}<br />
<br />
49. O you who believe! When you marry believing women, and then divorce them before you have sexual intercourse with them, no `Iddah have you to count in respect of them. So, give them a present, and set them free in a handsome manner.)<br />
<br />
This Ayah contains many rulings, including the use of the word Nikah for the marriage contract alone. There is no other Ayah in the Qur'an that is clearer than this on this point. It also indicates that it is permissible to divorce a woman before consummating the marriage with her.<br />
{{right|<br />
(الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ)<br />
}}<br />
(believing women)<br />
This refers to what is usually the case, although there is no difference between a believing (Muslim) woman and a woman of the People of the Book in this regard, according to scholarly consensus. Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, Sa`id bin Al-Musayyib, Al-Hasan Al-Basri, `Ali bin Al-Husayn Zayn-ul-`Abidin and a group of the Salaf took this Ayah as evidence that divorce cannot occur unless it has been preceded by marriage, because Allah says,<br />
{{right|<br />
(إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(When you marry believing women, and then divorce them) <br />
<br />
The marriage contract here is followed by divorce, which indicates that the divorce cannot be valid if it comes first. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "If someone were to say, `every woman I marry will ipso facto be divorced,' this does not mean anything, because Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(يأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(O you who believe! When you marry believing women, and then divorce them....).'' It was also reported that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: "Allah said,<br />
{{right|<br />
(إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَـتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ)<br />
}}<br />
(When you marry believing women, and then divorce them.) Do you not see that divorce comes after marriage'' A Hadith to the same effect was recorded from `Amr bin Shu`ayb from his father from his grandfather, who said: "The Messenger of Allah said:<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا طَلَاقَ لِابْنِ آدَمَ فِيمَا لَا يَمْلِك»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no divorce for the son of Adam with regard to that which he does not possess.) This was recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah. At-Tirmidhi said, "This is a Hasan Hadith, and it is the best thing that has been narrated on this matter.'' It was also recorded by Ibn Majah from `Ali and Al-Miswar bin Makhramah, may Allah be pleased with them, that the Messenger of Allah said:<br />
{{right|<br />
«لَا طَلَاقَ قَبْلَ نِكَاح»<br />
}}<br />
(There is no divorce before marriage.)<br />
{{right|<br />
(فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا)<br />
}}<br />
(no `Iddah have you to count in respect of them.) This is a command on which the scholars are agreed, that if a woman is divorced before the marriage is consummated, she does not have to observe the `Iddah (prescribed period for divorce) and she may go and get married immediately to whomever she wishes. The only exception in this regard is a woman whose husband died, in which case she has to observe an `Iddah of four months and ten days even if the marriage was not consummated. This is also according to the consensus of the scholars.<br />
{{right|<br />
(فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
(So, give them a present, and set them free in a handsome manner.) The present here refers to something more general than half of the named dowery or a special gift that has not been named. Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(وَإِن طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ وَقَدْ فَرَضْتُمْ لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً فَنِصْفُ مَا فَرَضْتُمْ)<br />
}}<br />
(And if you divorce them before you have touched (had a sexual relation with) them, and you have fixed unto them their due (dowery) then pay half of that) (2:237). And Allah says:<br />
{{right|<br />
(لاَّ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِن طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَآءَ مَا لَمْ تَمَسُّوهُنَّ أَوْ تَفْرِضُواْ لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ عَلَى الْمُوسِعِ قَدَرُهُ وَعَلَى الْمُقْتِرِ قَدْرُهُ مَتَـعاً بِالْمَعْرُوفِ حَقًّا عَلَى الْمُحْسِنِينَ)<br />
}}<br />
(There is no sin on you, if you divorce women while yet you have not touched them, nor fixed unto them their due (dowery). But bestow on them gift, the rich according to his means, and the poor according to his means, a gift of reasonable amount is a duty on the doers of good.) (2:236) pIn Sahih Al-Bukhari, it was recorded that Sahl bin Sa`d and Abu Usayd, may Allah be pleased with them both, said, "The Messenger of Allah married Umaymah bint Sharahil, and when she entered upon him he reached out his hand towards her, and it was as if she did not like that, so he told Abu Usayd to give her two garments.'' `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said "If the dowery had been named, she would not be entitled to more than half, but if the dowery is not been named, he should give her a gift according to his means, and this is the "handsome manner.''}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 33:49]<BR>Tafsir al-Jalalayn|2= {{right|<br />
(يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُوۤاْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
O you who believe if you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have touched them (read tamassūhunna or tumāsūhunna) that is, before you have copulated with them, there shall be no [waiting] period for you to reckon against them, [no] waiting period [needed to preclude pregnancy] or otherwise. But provide for them, give them what they can use for [securing] comforts, in cases where no dowry has been fixed for them; otherwise theirs is to retain half of what was fixed, but no more — this is what Ibn ‘Abbās said and it is [the opinion] followed by al-Shāfi‘ī’; and release them in a gracious manner, leave them be without [the intention to cause them any] harm.}}<br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=33&tAyahNo=49&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0 Qur'an 33:49]<BR>Tafsir 'Ibn Abbas|2= {{right|<br />
(يٰأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ آمَنُوۤاْ إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ ٱلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحاً جَمِيلاً)<br />
}}<br />
(O ye who believe! If ye wed believing women) without naming the amount of their dowry (and divorce them before ye have touched them) before you had sexual intercourse with them, (then there is no period that ye should reckon) by counting the months or the periods of menstruation. (But content them) as is due by divorce by giving them at least a scarf or shawl (and release them handsomely) divorce them without any harm done to them.}}<br />
<br />
This verse effectively removes the apologist's objection to Qur'an 65.4 as we see clearly that if a man has not consummated his marriage with his wife then she does not need to observe an 'iddah. If Qur'an 65.4 specifies that pre-pubescent females must observe a 3 month 'iddah then clearly sexual intercourse is halal to Allah.<br />
<br />
===This verse is only talking about adult women who don't know if they are pregnant===<br />
<br />
The very reason 65:4 was revealed in the first place, was as a clarification to an existing revelation by Allah. Allah had already revealed that women must wait 3 menstrual periods before they can end the 'iddat and be free to marry again. This is in Qur'an 2:228:<br />
<br />
{{quote|{{Quran|2|228}}|'''And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for three courses; and it is not lawful for them that they should conceal what Allah has created in their wombs''', if they believe in Allah and the last day; and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation; and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise. }}<br />
<br />
However, after this, Muslim men went to Muhammad to ask about those who did not presently have their menses - how do they measure the 'iddat in those cases? It is in this circumstance that Allah sent down the clarification (65:4) for the three groups of women that did not have menstruation, therefore they could not wait the '3 menstrual cycles' as mandated by Qur'an 2:228.<br />
<br />
Those Muslims who make this claim are ignoring what all of their own scholars have said about 65:4; that it is referring to the peri-menopausal and post menopausal women, the pre-pubescent girls and the pregnant women. The women who are currently menstruating are told in Qur'an 2:228 that they must wait 3 menstrual cycles, therefore this apologetic is also debunked.<br />
<br />
===This verse is applied to unconsummated widows===<br />
<br />
Another claim is that Qur'an 65.4 doesn't necessarily mean that Muslim men can have sex with pre-pubescent females because there may be cases where a man has married a pre-pubescent female, but while waiting for her to attain menstruation before consummating the marriage, he died. The 'iddah could be referring to a situation such as this. This claim is invalid because the Qur'an specifies the 'iddah for ''all'' widows to be 4 months and 10 days; in Qur'an 2:234:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|2|234}}|And (as for) those of you who die and leave wives behind, they should keep themselves in waiting for four months and ten days; then when they have fully attained their term, there is no blame on you for what they do for themselves in a lawful manner; and Allah is aware of what you do.}}<br />
<br />
This verse clearly contradicts this particular apologist claim, since the 'Iddah specified in Qur'an 65.4 is for a different amount of time, therefore the verses are referring to different situations.<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<br />
==See Also==<br />
<br />
*[[Child Marriage in the Muslim World]]<br />
<br />
{{Translation-links-english|[[Pedophilie_dans_le_Coran|French]]}}<br />
<br />
==External Links==<br />
<br />
*[http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Versions/065.004.html Marriage to Minors: Surah At-Talaq (65:4)] - ''Answering Islam''<br />
<br />
The following links show that girls as young as 8 months have been able to menstruate. This does not mean it is acceptable to have sex with them:<br />
<br />
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lina_Medina Lina Medina, The youngest mother in history]<br />
*[http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2610353 Puberty Hitting Girls as Young as 4 Years Old]<br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{Reflist|30em}}<br />
<br />
[[Category:Qur'an]]<br />
[[Category:Shariah (Islamic Law)]]<br />
[[Category:Child Marriage]]<br />
[[Category:Human rights]]<br />
[[Category:Marriage]]<br />
[[Category:Women]]<br />
[[Category:Criticism of Islam]]<br />
[[Category:Apologetics]]<br />
[[Category:Tafsir]]</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Asmith&diff=134100User talk:Asmith2021-12-15T20:34:54Z<p>Lehrasap: /* New article */</p>
<hr />
<div>== score guide? ==<br />
Hello. Can you tell me if there is any score guide? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 10:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)<br />
:See the article scoring rubric here: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Template:QualityScore. Going to post this on your talk page as well. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 20:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Thanks ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for making me an editor here Alan. Can I create articles here now?-[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 17:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
No problem. Glad to have you on board. You can submit ideas for articles but we will need to see more contributions from you, and then we will grant you that privilege. --[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 22:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly incorrect permissions for new users ==<br />
<br />
Hey ASmith. We talked via email a week or two back.<br />
<br />
I'm getting around WikiIslam, and I noticed that the novice users page creation permissions appear to be set up incorrectly.<br />
<br />
Recall [[WikiIslam:Sandbox]],<br />
<br />
<blockquote>You can also create sandboxes under your username such as User:Your username/Sandbox 1 if you expect yourself to be the only editor of the page.</blockquote><br />
<br />
I go to [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]], which I cannot edit. If I go to https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1&action=edit , I get<br />
<br />
<blockquote> You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason:<br />
<br />
You do not have permission to create new pages.</blockquote><br />
<br />
The same applies for UNcreated (yet) Wiki sandbox pages such as [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Hello]]<br />
<br />
HOWEVER, this isn't the case for,<br />
* [[User_talk:Graves/Sandbox_1]] (user talk sandbox page - NOTICE, not the [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]] )<br />
* [[User_talk:Asmith/Sandbox_1]] (yours, not mine, user talk sandbox page)<br />
* [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Muslimské_statistiky]] (someone's written, <b>already created</b>, sandbox page)<br />
* [[User:Asmith]] (yes, I can edit your user-page page)<br />
<br />
I think this is a mis-confuration, so I let you know.<br />
<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
:Thanks for bringing this up. It needs to be fixed and I updated the public sandbox for now to make it clear that new users should request these pages to be made for them for now (once made, new users can edit these without admin approval). I made three of them for you at your preferred url: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_2, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_3<br />
:Let me know if you need anything else. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 18:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to upload image to WikiIslam ==<br />
<br />
I need to upload an image for an upcoming article. I cannot upload images directly to WikiIslam (no permissions), so I temporarily mirrored it here, https://ibb.co/KrPWJzm<br />
<br />
Can one of the admins upload it to WikiIslam? Thanks<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 09:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Done. The file name is Al-Bari-page.png . Do you have a link to the Discord? The Discord would be the best way to discuss such things imo.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 17:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<hr><br />
<br />
Hi ASmith. I'd be interested in joining the Discord server, but I don't have a link. Can you send one to the email address I registered with (to keep it discreet)? Thanks. <br />
<br />
And thanks for uploading the image.<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 18:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to create an article ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I would like to create an article on Spinning Wheel. Regarding the propaganda claim that Islamic science invented the spinning wheel. I have gathered many source that expose this claim. Can you start a blank article or a sandbox? I am also not able to make a sandbox. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 18:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hi [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]]. Thank you for your idea, but after discussion with out team we came to the conclusion that this does not fit our scope. Please see our page [[WikiIslam:Scope and Article Relevance]]. This is a subject that would be better discussed on our Discord I think, do you have a link?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 06:44, 8 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No I dont have any Discord link. Can you give it? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 20:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can you create an article for Historical Errors? There are many errors. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 08:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You can find the article here [[Historical Errors in the Qur'an]]. Thanks!--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 20:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:We actually already have a section on historical errors in the scientific errors in the Quran page, so in that case this would lead to a lot duplication. I think it has always worked well on the scientific errors page because people refer to it for all the strong Quranic factual errors in one convenient page (whether natural world or history). Regarding the one about the Kaaba as a place of safety that was deleted, I think you were probably in any case right to remove it for others reasons, which is that one of the verses quoted, Q. 5:97 says "Allah made the Ka'ba, the Sacred House, an asylum of security [haram, forbidden] for men, as also the Sacred Months". Of course, no-one would consider this as a prophecy that the sacred months would never be violated, since that was already happening, so similarly with the Kaaba, Muslims would just say this was one of its appointed purposes, not a promise of divine protection nor a prophecy.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 21:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I know it's there, but I think it might be useful to move it out to another page. That article is already big enough. I think the the best course is this: the historical errors should be summarized on the scientific errors page, and then a redirect should be placed to the historical errors page. That is the general Wikipedia standard operating procedure, I think it would fit here.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 00:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::Specifically I think we'd leave a few important examples of historical errors on the scientific errors page along w a summary of the section and then link at the top to the new page where we could proceed to list say dozens of historical errors. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Pending any other arguments I'll go ahead and implement this tomorrow. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::That sounds a good approach. If I may recommend which ones to move from (rather than having also on) the sci errors page to the new historical errors page, it'd be the less interesting or famous ones which a visitor on the fence might more easily rationalise away as a mere absense of evidence thing or alternative meaning apologetics: Samaritans in ancient Egypt, John the Baptist's original name; Supernatural destruction of cities; Humans lived hundreds of years, Ancient mosque in Jerusalem. That would leave ones that people often mention as effecting them plus one or two that are quite new and need good exposure: Wall of iron; Mary part of the trinity; Mary and Miriam (popular and significant, though somewhat divides academics); Ezra; David invented coats of mail (very strong but quite new, needs more exposure); crucifixions in ancient Egypt (ditto); Singular Pharaoh; The three Noah's flood sections (a major topic - possibly could become even more concise on this page. The oven boiled is a pretty strong new point that needs the exposure). It's so useful to be able to just share one link rather than two for all types of factual errors (only a small percentage of people would click through to the main historical errors page). I do so regularly, as do countless others, so I'm glad the historical stuff is not being moved completely.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 10:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::: Great points you made; implemented the change as you suggested. The pages can evolve on their own now and if we keep around 10 solid ones on the scientific errors page, that should suffice the sharing-one-link purpose. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 12:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Hadith templates guide==<br />
Hi, I replaced a couple of recent hard coded hadith refs with the templates. There is a page which details how to cite the various alternative hadith referencing systems available on quranx (such as the Dar-us-Salam system) using the templates. I can never remember which page it is at first so here's the link https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Source_Editing#Referencing_Hadith <br />
It seems there are lots of legacy al-Tirmidhi hard coded refs around the site (often with sunnah.com's erroneous book numbers) but it would take a long time to replace those with the templates. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 00:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thank you! Which pages had the hard-coded hadith references?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 01:12, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No prob :) It was [[Scientific_Errors_in_the_Hadith]] It had a couple of new direct links to quranx and sunnah.com in order to link Ibn Majah and an Abu Dawud hadith using the Dar-us-Salam ref system (since the default USC index only has half the hadiths for that collection). Both can be linked using the templates so I changed those to illustrate. There are a dozen or so links to al Tirmidhi hadiths on sunnah.com still on the page and more throughout the site, especially the QHS pages (probably other hadith collections too besides Tirmidhi). [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 01:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== New article ==<br />
<br />
You created a link in the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article to the Wikipedia article that has the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya for, "Maria the Copt" but I believe you can create an article here on wikiIslam itself using the Quotations in Arabic from that Wikipedia article. I also observed that the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article is not online yet. Please do the needful. Thanks! -[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 19:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
== Iddah article ==<br />
[https://www.iium.edu.my/deed/lawbase/risalah_maliki/book33.html This] may be interesting for you!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 21:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the link to the article @[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]]. The 'Iddah in Li'an is missing in our article. But I want to first write down a separate article upon Li'an, and then add the 'Iddah in Li'an in the 'Iddah article. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 09:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
== New article ==<br />
I want to create a new article, so please create a draft page I can use. Thanks!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 18:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
@ [[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]], I am also relatively new here. I have learnt that admins will soon create a separate sandbox with your name, where you could write your articles. Once you complete your article, then admins will create the new draft page and transfer your article there. In the meantime, you could create your article in the common [https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Sandbox Sandbox] (as I did in my early days), and then notify the admins. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 20:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_3&diff=134099User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 32021-12-15T20:33:30Z<p>Lehrasap: Blanked the page</p>
<hr />
<div></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134091User talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-13T21:02:48Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Ifk Article completed */</p>
<hr />
<div>==Khul' Article completed==<br />
This is an article about Khul'خلع Ruling in Islam. Please read it, and if you find it beneficial, then transfer it to the new Page at wiki (so that I get my Sandbox 1 free for the next article). Thanks. <br />
<br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Asmith|Asmith]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]]</br> <br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 15:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
=='Iddah article completed in my Sandbox1==<br />
Your feedback is requested (with all the problems in this article, so that they could be corrected). Thanks. <br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Exmoose|Exmoose]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 20:15, 28 November 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Ifk Article completed==<br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Exmoose|Exmoose]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] <br />
[[User:Asmith|Asmith]]<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 18:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Halala Article completed==<br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Exmoose|Exmoose]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] <br />
[[User:Asmith|Asmith]]<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 21:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134090User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-13T20:59:25Z<p>Lehrasap: Halala Article</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Islam critics objects that:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the poor woman, who has to pay the cost of this illogical ruling, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*For the love and sake of her children and family, if she wishes to remarry the husband, then Allah snatches away this option from her, and forces her to be 'raped' first from another husband in name of 'Halala'.<br />
*Thus, Islamic Halala is against the human logic and wisdom. Thus it could never be from a divine being, who is claimed to be "All-Wisest".<br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in secondary details that<ref>[https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%AD_%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] (If a woman could marry to another man with the intention of divorce later)</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, you will see lot of 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq.<br />
<br />
==Combination of 3 Islamic Rulings against the women in Halala==<br />
Islam critics point out that Halala does not come alone, but it is the combination of 3 Islamic Rulings which make life miserable for a woman. These are:<br />
<br />
'''(1) Halala:'''<br />
<br />
Halala is nothing, except this that Islam is forcing woman to let herself get raped by another person in order to fulfil her wish to start her family life with her children and husband again.<br />
<br />
'''(2) Divorce (or even Khul' خلع) is not the right of the women:'''<br />
<br />
In Islam, a woman has not right to get her freedom in any case (either through divorce, or even through Khul').<br />
<br />
Yes, even Khul' is also not a right of woman, but again it is the right of the man. In Islamic Khul', a woman tries to get her freedom by offering ransom money to her husband. If the husband agrees, then he takes the ransom money and divorces her. But if he rejects the offer of the ransom money, then woman has absolutely no possibility to get her freedom.<br />
<br />
Please read out full article upon [[Khul']] for more details.<br />
<br />
'''(3) Husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives brutally in every matter'''<br />
<br />
Third problem is that Islam allows the husbands to beat the wives brutally, even with bruises, but still the wives are not allowed to get divorce or [[Khul']] through the Islamic courts. Wives could only divorce through the Islamic courts, if husband breaks any part of their body (like bones) during the beating.<br />
<br />
In Halala, all these 3 Islamic Rulings combine with each other and make the life of the women miserable.<br />
<br />
You could see the combination of all three of them in action in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''."}}The Islam critics point out that this tradition presents the combined oppression of these 3 Islamic Rulings at the same time.<br />
<br />
*Firstly, you could see in this hadith the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green, but she was unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. No Islamic court is allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating). And [[Khul']] is also the right of the husband in Islam, and not of the wife.<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam gives no chance to the woman to get rid of him and save herself from such beating. Islam compels the woman to live whole of her life with this abusive husband.<br />
*And 'Aisha was herself testifying that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see Halala in action in this hadith too, where that Lady loved her first husband (or perhaps she wanted to go back to him for the sake of her children), but Islamic Halala prohibits it and snatches away this right from her.<br />
*And the woman is in great risk and danger, if the 2nd husband proves to be an evil person, that he will abuse and beat her for rest of her life, and will never giver her freedom through divorce. He will rape her against her will, and if she shows some laziness in providing the sex services to him, then he has the full right to start beating her like a wild beast and make her skin green and full of bruises.<br />
*And here not only family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed and the children are without the mother. While the house of 2nd husband is the center of beating of the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this brutal way.<br />
*And after the 2nd husband has sex with her, then certainly it will lower her status and value in the eyes of the 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when Islam has also done this brainwashing too in the name of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah]. ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة) means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former). Whole Muslim society think bad about such Halala women.<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife? Therefore, the reasons (due to which they separated) are not automatically going to be solved due to Halala. Why then to make the life difficult for the husband and the wife and their children by imposing Halala upon the wife?<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women, or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is totally free to enjoy his other wives and slave-women and he does not have to face a single difficulty.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics say that:<br />
<br />
*How could then it be said that Allah 'justly' gave rights to the women too as compared to the men, and he has not done injustice against the women?<br />
*And thanks to the western non-Islamic countries, who gave equal rights to the woman.<br />
*And thanks to the West, who called the beating of wife by the husband to be a "Crime" and an "Abusive Marriage", otherwise Muhammad legalised the "abusive marriage" and made it the part of Islamic Sharaih, which is against the humanity.<br />
<br />
==Islam advocates: The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs==<br />
Islam advocates claim that Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles. This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences. And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for Halala.<br />
<br />
While the Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months? Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? Now tell us, what could be done in this case? In simple words, if Allah/Muhammad are limiting this problem within 3 months, then Allah/Muhammad are not showing any wisdom, but this is a mistake and a blunder.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long).<br />
*Next Islamic injustice against the women is this Islam ruling if she remarries, then all the children will be taken away from her, and the first husband will automatically get the custody of all them<ref name=":0" />.<br />
*And what if the wife is totally innocent, and the whole mistake was of the husband, and he still divorced her? (Note: Wife could neither divorce in Islam nor take [[Khul']]) But the wife still loves her husband, and her children from him, and want to return to him? What is the logic of Islam to close this door for her and to force her to undergo the shame of Halala in order to fulfill her wish? It is totally 'natural' for a woman to wish to return to her first husband/love, and when Islam forbids it, and makes the life miserable for the wife (even if she is innocent), then Islam is not a religion of Nature, but it is against the Nature.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Islam allowed the Muslim owners to rape the slave-women, and after fulfilling their sexual lust in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_mut%27ah Mut'ah] type temporary sexual relationship, they forcefully married her (against her will) to any of their slave-men.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wished for her, then Islam fully allowed him to break the slave's family, and take her back again to rape her at any time.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could taker her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}'''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it, but he neglected it.<br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that Islam is showing 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there are free man and woman, who want to again begin their life with their mutual consent, but Allah/Muhammad close this door upon them and their children and their family without any logic and wisdom.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a poor slave-woman, who want to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but against her will she is forced to do Halala by leaving her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that "Humanity" within us guides us clearly that:<br />
<br />
*Halala is illogical.<br />
*It is against the human nature.<br />
*This is not justice with the woman, but a great injustice against her.<br />
*A woman is not getting any protection through this ruling of Halala, but contrary to it, she is loosing her protection.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics claim that:<br />
<br />
*Western Secular countries never claimed to be 100% PERFECT like Allah, but still they have tried to give women the "equal rights", and to do justice with them, and not to oppress them in any case.<br />
*Western laws are providing full 'protection' to the women from any injustices.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134089User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-13T20:59:01Z<p>Lehrasap: Halala Article</p>
<hr />
<div><br />
<br />
<br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Islam critics objects that:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the poor woman, who has to pay the cost of this illogical ruling, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*For the love and sake of her children and family, if she wishes to remarry the husband, then Allah snatches away this option from her, and forces her to be 'raped' first from another husband in name of 'Halala'.<br />
*Thus, Islamic Halala is against the human logic and wisdom. Thus it could never be from a divine being, who is claimed to be "All-Wisest".<br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in secondary details that<ref>[https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%AD_%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] (If a woman could marry to another man with the intention of divorce later)</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, you will see lot of 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq.<br />
<br />
==Combination of 3 Islamic Rulings against the women in Halala==<br />
Islam critics point out that Halala does not come alone, but it is the combination of 3 Islamic Rulings which make life miserable for a woman. These are:<br />
<br />
'''(1) Halala:'''<br />
<br />
Halala is nothing, except this that Islam is forcing woman to let herself get raped by another person in order to fulfil her wish to start her family life with her children and husband again.<br />
<br />
'''(2) Divorce (or even Khul' خلع) is not the right of the women:'''<br />
<br />
In Islam, a woman has not right to get her freedom in any case (either through divorce, or even through Khul').<br />
<br />
Yes, even Khul' is also not a right of woman, but again it is the right of the man. In Islamic Khul', a woman tries to get her freedom by offering ransom money to her husband. If the husband agrees, then he takes the ransom money and divorces her. But if he rejects the offer of the ransom money, then woman has absolutely no possibility to get her freedom.<br />
<br />
Please read out full article upon [[Khul']] for more details.<br />
<br />
'''(3) Husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives brutally in every matter'''<br />
<br />
Third problem is that Islam allows the husbands to beat the wives brutally, even with bruises, but still the wives are not allowed to get divorce or [[Khul']] through the Islamic courts. Wives could only divorce through the Islamic courts, if husband breaks any part of their body (like bones) during the beating.<br />
<br />
In Halala, all these 3 Islamic Rulings combine with each other and make the life of the women miserable.<br />
<br />
You could see the combination of all three of them in action in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''."}}The Islam critics point out that this tradition presents the combined oppression of these 3 Islamic Rulings at the same time.<br />
<br />
*Firstly, you could see in this hadith the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green, but she was unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. No Islamic court is allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating). And [[Khul']] is also the right of the husband in Islam, and not of the wife.<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam gives no chance to the woman to get rid of him and save herself from such beating. Islam compels the woman to live whole of her life with this abusive husband.<br />
*And 'Aisha was herself testifying that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see Halala in action in this hadith too, where that Lady loved her first husband (or perhaps she wanted to go back to him for the sake of her children), but Islamic Halala prohibits it and snatches away this right from her.<br />
*And the woman is in great risk and danger, if the 2nd husband proves to be an evil person, that he will abuse and beat her for rest of her life, and will never giver her freedom through divorce. He will rape her against her will, and if she shows some laziness in providing the sex services to him, then he has the full right to start beating her like a wild beast and make her skin green and full of bruises.<br />
*And here not only family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed and the children are without the mother. While the house of 2nd husband is the center of beating of the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this brutal way.<br />
*And after the 2nd husband has sex with her, then certainly it will lower her status and value in the eyes of the 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when Islam has also done this brainwashing too in the name of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah]. ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة) means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former). Whole Muslim society think bad about such Halala women.<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife? Therefore, the reasons (due to which they separated) are not automatically going to be solved due to Halala. Why then to make the life difficult for the husband and the wife and their children by imposing Halala upon the wife?<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women, or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is totally free to enjoy his other wives and slave-women and he does not have to face a single difficulty.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics say that:<br />
<br />
*How could then it be said that Allah 'justly' gave rights to the women too as compared to the men, and he has not done injustice against the women?<br />
*And thanks to the western non-Islamic countries, who gave equal rights to the woman.<br />
*And thanks to the West, who called the beating of wife by the husband to be a "Crime" and an "Abusive Marriage", otherwise Muhammad legalised the "abusive marriage" and made it the part of Islamic Sharaih, which is against the humanity.<br />
<br />
==Islam advocates: The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs==<br />
Islam advocates claim that Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles. This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences. And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for Halala.<br />
<br />
While the Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months? Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? Now tell us, what could be done in this case? In simple words, if Allah/Muhammad are limiting this problem within 3 months, then Allah/Muhammad are not showing any wisdom, but this is a mistake and a blunder.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long).<br />
*Next Islamic injustice against the women is this Islam ruling if she remarries, then all the children will be taken away from her, and the first husband will automatically get the custody of all them<ref name=":0" />.<br />
*And what if the wife is totally innocent, and the whole mistake was of the husband, and he still divorced her? (Note: Wife could neither divorce in Islam nor take [[Khul']]) But the wife still loves her husband, and her children from him, and want to return to him? What is the logic of Islam to close this door for her and to force her to undergo the shame of Halala in order to fulfill her wish? It is totally 'natural' for a woman to wish to return to her first husband/love, and when Islam forbids it, and makes the life miserable for the wife (even if she is innocent), then Islam is not a religion of Nature, but it is against the Nature.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Islam allowed the Muslim owners to rape the slave-women, and after fulfilling their sexual lust in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_mut%27ah Mut'ah] type temporary sexual relationship, they forcefully married her (against her will) to any of their slave-men.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wished for her, then Islam fully allowed him to break the slave's family, and take her back again to rape her at any time.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could taker her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}'''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it, but he neglected it.<br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that Islam is showing 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there are free man and woman, who want to again begin their life with their mutual consent, but Allah/Muhammad close this door upon them and their children and their family without any logic and wisdom.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a poor slave-woman, who want to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but against her will she is forced to do Halala by leaving her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that "Humanity" within us guides us clearly that:<br />
<br />
*Halala is illogical.<br />
*It is against the human nature.<br />
*This is not justice with the woman, but a great injustice against her.<br />
*A woman is not getting any protection through this ruling of Halala, but contrary to it, she is loosing her protection.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics claim that:<br />
<br />
*Western Secular countries never claimed to be 100% PERFECT like Allah, but still they have tried to give women the "equal rights", and to do justice with them, and not to oppress them in any case.<br />
*Western laws are providing full 'protection' to the women from any injustices.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134088User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-13T20:58:30Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div><br />
<br />
'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again.<br />
*Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />:<br />
<br />
#the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
#And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
#And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband.<br />
<br />
Islam critics objects that:<br />
<br />
*If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second.<br />
*And it is the poor woman, who has to pay the cost of this illogical ruling, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband.<br />
*For the love and sake of her children and family, if she wishes to remarry the husband, then Allah snatches away this option from her, and forces her to be 'raped' first from another husband in name of 'Halala'.<br />
*Thus, Islamic Halala is against the human logic and wisdom. Thus it could never be from a divine being, who is claimed to be "All-Wisest".<br />
<br />
==Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in secondary details that<ref>[https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%AD_%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] (If a woman could marry to another man with the intention of divorce later)</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, you will see lot of 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides.<br />
*While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq.<br />
<br />
==Combination of 3 Islamic Rulings against the women in Halala==<br />
Islam critics point out that Halala does not come alone, but it is the combination of 3 Islamic Rulings which make life miserable for a woman. These are:<br />
<br />
'''(1) Halala:'''<br />
<br />
Halala is nothing, except this that Islam is forcing woman to let herself get raped by another person in order to fulfil her wish to start her family life with her children and husband again.<br />
<br />
'''(2) Divorce (or even Khul' خلع) is not the right of the women:'''<br />
<br />
In Islam, a woman has not right to get her freedom in any case (either through divorce, or even through Khul').<br />
<br />
Yes, even Khul' is also not a right of woman, but again it is the right of the man. In Islamic Khul', a woman tries to get her freedom by offering ransom money to her husband. If the husband agrees, then he takes the ransom money and divorces her. But if he rejects the offer of the ransom money, then woman has absolutely no possibility to get her freedom.<br />
<br />
Please read out full article upon [[Khul']] for more details.<br />
<br />
'''(3) Husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives brutally in every matter'''<br />
<br />
Third problem is that Islam allows the husbands to beat the wives brutally, even with bruises, but still the wives are not allowed to get divorce or [[Khul']] through the Islamic courts. Wives could only divorce through the Islamic courts, if husband breaks any part of their body (like bones) during the beating.<br />
<br />
In Halala, all these 3 Islamic Rulings combine with each other and make the life of the women miserable.<br />
<br />
You could see the combination of all three of them in action in the following Hadith:{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''."}}The Islam critics point out that this tradition presents the combined oppression of these 3 Islamic Rulings at the same time.<br />
<br />
*Firstly, you could see in this hadith the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green, but she was unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. No Islamic court is allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating). And [[Khul']] is also the right of the husband in Islam, and not of the wife.<br />
*Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam gives no chance to the woman to get rid of him and save herself from such beating. Islam compels the woman to live whole of her life with this abusive husband.<br />
*And 'Aisha was herself testifying that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them).<br />
*And we see Halala in action in this hadith too, where that Lady loved her first husband (or perhaps she wanted to go back to him for the sake of her children), but Islamic Halala prohibits it and snatches away this right from her.<br />
*And the woman is in great risk and danger, if the 2nd husband proves to be an evil person, that he will abuse and beat her for rest of her life, and will never giver her freedom through divorce. He will rape her against her will, and if she shows some laziness in providing the sex services to him, then he has the full right to start beating her like a wild beast and make her skin green and full of bruises.<br />
*And here not only family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed and the children are without the mother. While the house of 2nd husband is the center of beating of the woman.<br />
*The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this brutal way.<br />
*And after the 2nd husband has sex with her, then certainly it will lower her status and value in the eyes of the 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when Islam has also done this brainwashing too in the name of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah]. ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة) means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former). Whole Muslim society think bad about such Halala women.<br />
*And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife? Therefore, the reasons (due to which they separated) are not automatically going to be solved due to Halala. Why then to make the life difficult for the husband and the wife and their children by imposing Halala upon the wife?<br />
*And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women, or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is totally free to enjoy his other wives and slave-women and he does not have to face a single difficulty.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics say that:<br />
<br />
*How could then it be said that Allah 'justly' gave rights to the women too as compared to the men, and he has not done injustice against the women?<br />
*And thanks to the western non-Islamic countries, who gave equal rights to the woman.<br />
*And thanks to the West, who called the beating of wife by the husband to be a "Crime" and an "Abusive Marriage", otherwise Muhammad legalised the "abusive marriage" and made it the part of Islamic Sharaih, which is against the humanity.<br />
<br />
==Islam advocates: The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs==<br />
Islam advocates claim that Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles. This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences. And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for Halala.<br />
<br />
While the Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months? Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? Now tell us, what could be done in this case? In simple words, if Allah/Muhammad are limiting this problem within 3 months, then Allah/Muhammad are not showing any wisdom, but this is a mistake and a blunder.<br />
*Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long).<br />
*Next Islamic injustice against the women is this Islam ruling if she remarries, then all the children will be taken away from her, and the first husband will automatically get the custody of all them<ref name=":0" />.<br />
*And what if the wife is totally innocent, and the whole mistake was of the husband, and he still divorced her? (Note: Wife could neither divorce in Islam nor take [[Khul']]) But the wife still loves her husband, and her children from him, and want to return to him? What is the logic of Islam to close this door for her and to force her to undergo the shame of Halala in order to fulfill her wish? It is totally 'natural' for a woman to wish to return to her first husband/love, and when Islam forbids it, and makes the life miserable for the wife (even if she is innocent), then Islam is not a religion of Nature, but it is against the Nature.<br />
<br />
==A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Islam allowed the Muslim owners to rape the slave-women, and after fulfilling their sexual lust in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_mut%27ah Mut'ah] type temporary sexual relationship, they forcefully married her (against her will) to any of their slave-men.<br />
*But if the Muslim owner again wished for her, then Islam fully allowed him to break the slave's family, and take her back again to rape her at any time.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could taker her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}'''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it, but he neglected it.<br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that Islam is showing 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
*On one side, there are free man and woman, who want to again begin their life with their mutual consent, but Allah/Muhammad close this door upon them and their children and their family without any logic and wisdom.<br />
*While on the -other hand, there is a poor slave-woman, who want to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but against her will she is forced to do Halala by leaving her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that "Humanity" within us guides us clearly that:<br />
<br />
*Halala is illogical.<br />
*It is against the human nature.<br />
*This is not justice with the woman, but a great injustice against her.<br />
*A woman is not getting any protection through this ruling of Halala, but contrary to it, she is loosing her protection.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics claim that:<br />
<br />
*Western Secular countries never claimed to be 100% PERFECT like Allah, but still they have tried to give women the "equal rights", and to do justice with them, and not to oppress them in any case.<br />
*Western laws are providing full 'protection' to the women from any injustices.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /><br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_2&diff=134087User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 22021-12-13T20:56:52Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''<u><big>Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل)</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
Halala is a Sharia Ruling, according to which<ref name=":0">[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_halala Nikah Halala (Tahleel Marriage)]</ref>:<br />
<br />
* If a husband and a wife are separated through divorce, and later they reconcile and want to remarry, then Islam forbids such remarriage and does not allow them to come together again. <br />
* Islam stipulates, there is only one way for them to come together again, and that is Halala (Tahleel Marriage نكاح التحليل).<br />
<br />
In Islamic Halala itself<ref name=":0" />: <br />
<br />
# the woman first has to marry another man.<br />
# And then that 2nd husband also has to taste her (i.e to consummate the marriage).<br />
# And if that 2nd husband also divorces her, only then she becomes eligible to remarry her former husband. <br />
<br />
Islam critics objects that:<br />
<br />
* If a husband says 3 times Talaq to his wife in state of anger, then it destroys the whole family in one second. <br />
* And it is the poor woman, who has to pay the cost of this illogical ruling, even if she is totally innocent and the divorce was totally the fault of the husband. <br />
* For the love and sake of her children and family, if she wishes to remarry the husband, then Allah snatches away this option from her, and forces her to be 'raped' first from another husband in name of 'Halala'.<br />
* Thus, Islamic Halala is against the human logic and wisdom. Thus it could never be from a divine being, who is claimed to be "All-Wisest". <br />
<br />
== Halala Ruling didn't come from Hadith/Fiqh, but directly from Quran ==<br />
Halala is not a Hadith/Fiqh discussion, but a 'Unanimous Ruling', which came from the Quran directly:<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|2|230}}|If a man divorces her again (a third time), she becomes unlawful for him (and he cannot remarry her) until she has married another man. Then if he divorces her there is no harm if the two unite again (by remarrying)}}<br />
Therefore, no Muslim jurist every denied Halala. The only difference occurs in secondary details that<ref>[https://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DA%A9%D8%A7%D8%AD_%D8%AD%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%84%DB%81 Differences in Fiqh Rulings about Halala] (If a woman could marry to another man with the intention of divorce later)</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Hanafi and Shafi'i Fiqhs allow a woman to marry a 2nd man with the 'intention' of taking divorce later, and to remarry her first husband. That is why, you will see lot of 'Halala Centers' in the Islamic countries, and even in the western countries too where Muslim population resides. <br />
* While Hanbali and Maliki Fiqhs don't allow such marriage with the intention of later taking Talaq. <br />
<br />
== Combination of 3 Islamic Rulings against the women in Halala ==<br />
Islam critics point out that Halala does not come alone, but it is the combination of 3 Islamic Rulings which make life miserable for a woman. These are:<br />
<br />
'''(1) Halala:'''<br />
<br />
Halala is nothing, except this that Islam is forcing woman to let herself get raped by another person in order to fulfil her wish to start her family life with her children and husband again. <br />
<br />
'''(2) Divorce (or even Khul' خلع) is not the right of the women:'''<br />
<br />
In Islam, a woman has not right to get her freedom in any case (either through divorce, or even through Khul'). <br />
<br />
Yes, even Khul' is also not a right of woman, but again it is the right of the man. In Islamic Khul', a woman tries to get her freedom by offering ransom money to her husband. If the husband agrees, then he takes the ransom money and divorces her. But if he rejects the offer of the ransom money, then woman has absolutely no possibility to get her freedom. <br />
<br />
Please read out full article upon [[Khul']] for more details. <br />
<br />
'''(3) Husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives brutally in every matter'''<br />
<br />
Third problem is that Islam allows the husbands to beat the wives brutally, even with bruises, but still the wives are not allowed to get divorce or [[Khul']] through the Islamic courts. Wives could only divorce through the Islamic courts, if husband breaks any part of their body (like bones) during the beating.<br />
<br />
In Halala, all these 3 Islamic Rulings combine with each other and make the life of the women miserable. <br />
<br />
You could see the combination of all three of them in action in the following Hadith:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5825|darussalam}}|Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband '''and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by severe beating)'''. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, `Aisha said, ''' "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women (i.e. men were not beating their wives so brutally during the era of ignorance as they beat after Islam). Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" '''When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but '''he is impotent''' and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, `Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient '''and wants to go back to Rifa`a (i.e. the first husband)'''." Allah's Apostle said, to her,''' "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you'''."}}<br />
The Islam critics point out that this tradition presents the combined oppression of these 3 Islamic Rulings at the same time. <br />
<br />
* Firstly, you could see in this hadith the husband beat her so brutally that her skin became green, but she was unable to get freedom from him (through divorce or [[Khul']] or court or any other way), as husbands are fully allowed to beat their wives in Islam. No Islamic court is allowed to give her her freedom (except that any part of her body is broken during the beating). And [[Khul']] is also the right of the husband in Islam, and not of the wife.<br />
* Even if the sole mistake is of the husband himself, and even if he is an abusive bad-tempered person, still Islam gives no chance to the woman to get rid of him and save herself from such beating. Islam compels the woman to live whole of her life with this abusive husband. <br />
* And 'Aisha was herself testifying that after the arrival of Islam, the Muslim men used to beat the women much more brutally as compared to the pre Islamic period (i.e. Kafir husbands didn't beat their wives so brutally as Muslim husbands beat them). <br />
* And we see Halala in action in this hadith too, where that Lady loved her first husband (or perhaps she wanted to go back to him for the sake of her children), but Islamic Halala prohibits it and snatches away this right from her. <br />
* And the woman is in great risk and danger, if the 2nd husband proves to be an evil person, that he will abuse and beat her for rest of her life, and will never giver her freedom through divorce. He will rape her against her will, and if she shows some laziness in providing the sex services to him, then he has the full right to start beating her like a wild beast and make her skin green and full of bruises. <br />
* And here not only family is destroyed, but both the families are destroyed. The house of first husband is destroyed and the children are without the mother. While the house of 2nd husband is the center of beating of the woman. <br />
* The children from the first husband are certainly going to be disturbed to see their mother to be tortured in this brutal way. <br />
* And after the 2nd husband has sex with her, then certainly it will lower her status and value in the eyes of the 1st husband, and he could not love her as before. Especially, when Islam has also done this brainwashing too in the name of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghayrah Ghayrah]. ('''Ghayrah''' (Arabic: غَيْرَة) means a person's dislike of another's sharing in a right (which belongs to the former). Whole Muslim society think bad about such Halala women. <br />
* And how Halala is going to solve the problems between the husband and the wife? Therefore, the reasons (due to which they separated) are not automatically going to be solved due to Halala. Why then to make the life difficult for the husband and the wife and their children by imposing Halala upon the wife? <br />
* And it is only the woman who has to undergo and face all these difficulties alone. Either it is the period of 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce (where woman is alone in the house, but husband is allowed to enjoy his other wives and the slave-women, or it is the 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce, or it is marrying the 2nd husband, and then providing him the sex services, and then again going through the process of 2nd divorce and then 2nd Iddah. Please read the [['Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)|'Iddah]] article for more details. In this whole process, man is totally free to enjoy his other wives and slave-women and he does not have to face a single difficulty. <br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics say that:<br />
<br />
* How could then it be said that Allah 'justly' gave rights to the women too as compared to the men, and he has not done injustice against the women?<br />
* And thanks to the western non-Islamic countries, who gave equal rights to the woman.<br />
* And thanks to the West, who called the beating of wife by the husband to be a "Crime" and an "Abusive Marriage", otherwise Muhammad legalised the "abusive marriage" and made it the part of Islamic Sharaih, which is against the humanity. <br />
<br />
== Islam advocates: The husband and the wife had to think about the consequences during the process of 3 Talaqs ==<br />
Islam advocates claim that Quran stipulated the process of Talaq which consists of a period of 3 menstrual cycles. This period is enough for the husband and the wife to think about all the consequences. And if after that, they still proceed for the 3rd and the final divorce, then they are themselves responsible for Halala, and Islam should not be blamed for Halala. <br />
<br />
While the Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
* What is the guarantee that the dispute between the husband and the wife is going to be over within 3 months? Is it not possible that they need more time to learn their lesson? For example, what if the husband learns his lesson after 1 year that it was his mistake to divorce his wife? Now tell us, what could be done in this case? In simple words, if Allah/Muhammad are limiting this problem within 3 months, then Allah/Muhammad are not showing any wisdom, but this is a mistake and a blunder. <br />
* Moreover, it has been seen that the disputes are also solved if the couples don't stay under one roof, but take a break from each other. But in Islamic divorce, the wife is forced to stay in the house of her husband during the whole divorce process (which is about 3 months long). <br />
* Next Islamic injustice against the women is this Islam ruling if she remarries, then all the children will be taken away from her, and the first husband will automatically get the custody of all them<ref name=":0" />. <br />
* And what if the wife is totally innocent, and the whole mistake was of the husband, and he still divorced her? (Note: Wife could neither divorce in Islam nor take [[Khul']]) But the wife still loves her husband, and her children from him, and want to return to him? What is the logic of Islam to close this door for her and to force her to undergo the shame of Halala in order to fulfill her wish? It is totally 'natural' for a woman to wish to return to her first husband/love, and when Islam forbids it, and makes the life miserable for the wife (even if she is innocent), then Islam is not a religion of Nature, but it is against the Nature. <br />
<br />
== A Muslim Owner could destroy the family of his slave-woman and do Halala with her as many times as he wishes ==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
* Islam allowed the Muslim owners to rape the slave-women, and after fulfilling their sexual lust in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikah_mut%27ah Mut'ah] type temporary sexual relationship, they forcefully married her (against her will) to any of their slave-men. <br />
* But if the Muslim owner again wished for her, then Islam fully allowed him to break the slave's family, and take her back again to rape her at any time. <br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5105|darussalam}}|وَقَالَ أَنَسٌ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} ذَوَاتُ الأَزْوَاجِ الْحَرَائِرُ حَرَامٌ إِلاَّ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ لاَ يَرَى بَأْسًا أَنْ يَنْزِعَ الرَّجُلُ جَارِيَتَهُ مِنْ عَبْدِهِ. </br><br />
Translation:</br><br />
Anas said: The meaning of the Quranic verse: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ} (Suran Nisa) is this that if the slave-woman of any person is in the Nikah of his slave, '''then he could taker her back from his slave for himself (to have sex with her)'''}}<br />
'''Note''': There is a distortion in the English translation of Sahih Bukhari, as this tradition is present in the Arabic Sahih Bukhari, but the Muslim translator of Sahih Bukhari didn't translate it, but he neglected it. <br />
<br />
Islam critics claim that Islam is showing 'double standards' here:<br />
<br />
* On one side, there are free man and woman, who want to again begin their life with their mutual consent, but Allah/Muhammad close this door upon them and their children and their family without any logic and wisdom.<br />
* While on the -other hand, there is a poor slave-woman, who want to live in a family life modestly with her slave-husband, but against her will she is forced to do Halala by leaving her husband, and to to go to the owner, who rapes her again against her consent. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that "Humanity" within us guides us clearly that:<br />
<br />
* Halala is illogical. <br />
* It is against the human nature. <br />
* This is not justice with the woman, but a great injustice against her. <br />
* A woman is not getting any protection through this ruling of Halala, but contrary to it, she is loosing her protection. <br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics claim that:<br />
<br />
* Western Secular countries never claimed to be 100% PERFECT like Allah, but still they have tried to give women the "equal rights", and to do justice with them, and not to oppress them in any case. <br />
* Western laws are providing full 'protection' to the women from any injustices. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />'''<nowiki/>'''</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Asmith&diff=134086User talk:Asmith2021-12-13T09:38:30Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Iddah article */</p>
<hr />
<div>== score guide? ==<br />
Hello. Can you tell me if there is any score guide? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 10:38, 8 August 2020 (UTC)<br />
:See the article scoring rubric here: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Template:QualityScore. Going to post this on your talk page as well. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 20:27, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Thanks ==<br />
<br />
Thanks for making me an editor here Alan. Can I create articles here now?-[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 17:49, 26 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
No problem. Glad to have you on board. You can submit ideas for articles but we will need to see more contributions from you, and then we will grant you that privilege. --[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 22:08, 27 November 2020 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Possibly incorrect permissions for new users ==<br />
<br />
Hey ASmith. We talked via email a week or two back.<br />
<br />
I'm getting around WikiIslam, and I noticed that the novice users page creation permissions appear to be set up incorrectly.<br />
<br />
Recall [[WikiIslam:Sandbox]],<br />
<br />
<blockquote>You can also create sandboxes under your username such as User:Your username/Sandbox 1 if you expect yourself to be the only editor of the page.</blockquote><br />
<br />
I go to [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]], which I cannot edit. If I go to https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1&action=edit , I get<br />
<br />
<blockquote> You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason:<br />
<br />
You do not have permission to create new pages.</blockquote><br />
<br />
The same applies for UNcreated (yet) Wiki sandbox pages such as [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Hello]]<br />
<br />
HOWEVER, this isn't the case for,<br />
* [[User_talk:Graves/Sandbox_1]] (user talk sandbox page - NOTICE, not the [[User:Graves/Sandbox_1]] )<br />
* [[User_talk:Asmith/Sandbox_1]] (yours, not mine, user talk sandbox page)<br />
* [[WikiIslam:Sandbox/Muslimské_statistiky]] (someone's written, <b>already created</b>, sandbox page)<br />
* [[User:Asmith]] (yes, I can edit your user-page page)<br />
<br />
I think this is a mis-confuration, so I let you know.<br />
<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 17:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
:Thanks for bringing this up. It needs to be fixed and I updated the public sandbox for now to make it clear that new users should request these pages to be made for them for now (once made, new users can edit these without admin approval). I made three of them for you at your preferred url: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_1, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_2, https://wikiislam.net/wiki/User:Graves/Sandbox_3<br />
:Let me know if you need anything else. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 18:59, 2 June 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to upload image to WikiIslam ==<br />
<br />
I need to upload an image for an upcoming article. I cannot upload images directly to WikiIslam (no permissions), so I temporarily mirrored it here, https://ibb.co/KrPWJzm<br />
<br />
Can one of the admins upload it to WikiIslam? Thanks<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 09:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<br />
Done. The file name is Al-Bari-page.png . Do you have a link to the Discord? The Discord would be the best way to discuss such things imo.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 17:04, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
<hr><br />
<br />
Hi ASmith. I'd be interested in joining the Discord server, but I don't have a link. Can you send one to the email address I registered with (to keep it discreet)? Thanks. <br />
<br />
And thanks for uploading the image.<br />
[[User:Graves|Graves]] ([[User talk:Graves|talk]]) 18:13, 27 July 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== Request to create an article ==<br />
<br />
Hello. I would like to create an article on Spinning Wheel. Regarding the propaganda claim that Islamic science invented the spinning wheel. I have gathered many source that expose this claim. Can you start a blank article or a sandbox? I am also not able to make a sandbox. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 18:11, 4 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:Hi [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]]. Thank you for your idea, but after discussion with out team we came to the conclusion that this does not fit our scope. Please see our page [[WikiIslam:Scope and Article Relevance]]. This is a subject that would be better discussed on our Discord I think, do you have a link?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 06:44, 8 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No I dont have any Discord link. Can you give it? [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 20:40, 14 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Can you create an article for Historical Errors? There are many errors. [[User:Guillotino|Guillotino]] ([[User talk:Guillotino|talk]]) 08:59, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
You can find the article here [[Historical Errors in the Qur'an]]. Thanks!--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 20:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:We actually already have a section on historical errors in the scientific errors in the Quran page, so in that case this would lead to a lot duplication. I think it has always worked well on the scientific errors page because people refer to it for all the strong Quranic factual errors in one convenient page (whether natural world or history). Regarding the one about the Kaaba as a place of safety that was deleted, I think you were probably in any case right to remove it for others reasons, which is that one of the verses quoted, Q. 5:97 says "Allah made the Ka'ba, the Sacred House, an asylum of security [haram, forbidden] for men, as also the Sacred Months". Of course, no-one would consider this as a prophecy that the sacred months would never be violated, since that was already happening, so similarly with the Kaaba, Muslims would just say this was one of its appointed purposes, not a promise of divine protection nor a prophecy.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 21:48, 22 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
::I know it's there, but I think it might be useful to move it out to another page. That article is already big enough. I think the the best course is this: the historical errors should be summarized on the scientific errors page, and then a redirect should be placed to the historical errors page. That is the general Wikipedia standard operating procedure, I think it would fit here.--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 00:12, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
:::Specifically I think we'd leave a few important examples of historical errors on the scientific errors page along w a summary of the section and then link at the top to the new page where we could proceed to list say dozens of historical errors. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:17, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
:::Pending any other arguments I'll go ahead and implement this tomorrow. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 00:19, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::That sounds a good approach. If I may recommend which ones to move from (rather than having also on) the sci errors page to the new historical errors page, it'd be the less interesting or famous ones which a visitor on the fence might more easily rationalise away as a mere absense of evidence thing or alternative meaning apologetics: Samaritans in ancient Egypt, John the Baptist's original name; Supernatural destruction of cities; Humans lived hundreds of years, Ancient mosque in Jerusalem. That would leave ones that people often mention as effecting them plus one or two that are quite new and need good exposure: Wall of iron; Mary part of the trinity; Mary and Miriam (popular and significant, though somewhat divides academics); Ezra; David invented coats of mail (very strong but quite new, needs more exposure); crucifixions in ancient Egypt (ditto); Singular Pharaoh; The three Noah's flood sections (a major topic - possibly could become even more concise on this page. The oven boiled is a pretty strong new point that needs the exposure). It's so useful to be able to just share one link rather than two for all types of factual errors (only a small percentage of people would click through to the main historical errors page). I do so regularly, as do countless others, so I'm glad the historical stuff is not being moved completely.[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 10:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
::::: Great points you made; implemented the change as you suggested. The pages can evolve on their own now and if we keep around 10 solid ones on the scientific errors page, that should suffice the sharing-one-link purpose. [[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]] ([[User talk:IbnPinker|talk]]) 12:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Hadith templates guide==<br />
Hi, I replaced a couple of recent hard coded hadith refs with the templates. There is a page which details how to cite the various alternative hadith referencing systems available on quranx (such as the Dar-us-Salam system) using the templates. I can never remember which page it is at first so here's the link https://wikiislam.net/wiki/WikiIslam:Source_Editing#Referencing_Hadith <br />
It seems there are lots of legacy al-Tirmidhi hard coded refs around the site (often with sunnah.com's erroneous book numbers) but it would take a long time to replace those with the templates. [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 00:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thank you! Which pages had the hard-coded hadith references?--[[User:Asmith|Asmith]] ([[User talk:Asmith|talk]]) 01:12, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
:No prob :) It was [[Scientific_Errors_in_the_Hadith]] It had a couple of new direct links to quranx and sunnah.com in order to link Ibn Majah and an Abu Dawud hadith using the Dar-us-Salam ref system (since the default USC index only has half the hadiths for that collection). Both can be linked using the templates so I changed those to illustrate. There are a dozen or so links to al Tirmidhi hadiths on sunnah.com still on the page and more throughout the site, especially the QHS pages (probably other hadith collections too besides Tirmidhi). [[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] ([[User talk:Lightyears|talk]]) 01:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
== New article ==<br />
<br />
You created a link in the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article to the Wikipedia article that has the url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_al-Qibtiyya for, "Maria the Copt" but I believe you can create an article here on wikiIslam itself using the Quotations in Arabic from that Wikipedia article. I also observed that the [[Slavery in Islamic Law]] article is not online yet. Please do the needful. Thanks! -[[User:Raman|Raman]] ([[User talk:Raman|talk]]) 19:40, 27 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
== Iddah article ==<br />
[https://www.iium.edu.my/deed/lawbase/risalah_maliki/book33.html This] may be interesting for you!-[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]] ([[User talk:Mushrik|talk]]) 21:54, 10 December 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
Thanks for the link to the article @[[User:Mushrik|Mushrik]]. The 'Iddah in Li'an is missing in our article. But I want to first write down a separate article upon Li'an, and then add the 'Iddah in Li'an in the 'Iddah article. [[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 09:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134028User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-06T14:45:18Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''<u><big>The incident of Ifk + Ruling of 4 witnesses + Pure men could have only pure women</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Later, Quranic verses (Surah Nur) were revealed about the innocence of 'Aisha against those slanders. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam critics point out that there are 'human errors' present in the revelation: <br />
<br />
#Firstly Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] questioned the people why they doubted 'Aisha's innocence and why didn't they immediately denied those slanders at their own. But Islam critics point out that there is contradiction in Quranic revelation and Muhammad's own behaviour. It was Muhammad himself who doubted 'Aisha, and he even wanted to divorce her, and thus those verses should have condemned Muhammad first instead of those companions.<br />
#Then Quran came up with this argument that 'Aisha should had been considered free of doubts as pure men could have only the pure women, and she was wed with Muhammad, who was a pure man. But Islam critics point out that this Quranic argument shows a human error, as there is no guarantee that pure men will always get pur women (or vice-versa).<br />
#Then the revelation came up with entirely new ruling that number of witnesses should be 4 in case of slandering. And another new ruling was this if number of witnesses is 3 (or less), then all of them will be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. But Islam critics consider this ruling too to be a 'human error' and illogical to punish the witnesses even if they are telling the truth.<br />
#Then Islam critics point out that this whole drama of Ifk, which continued for one month, happened only due to the '''unnatural restrictions''' of Islam in the name of 'Islamic Modesty', where it forbids any interaction between the men and the women.<br />
<br />
==Contradiction between the Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and thus he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
At this stage, Islam critics point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening '''inside the house''' during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence to Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not accept her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
*Outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' '''which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation'''.<br />
*Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad. If this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad first before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie.<br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
*Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
*And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not.<br />
*Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure.<br />
*And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who haven't indulged in fornication before.<br />
<br />
Therefore, according to the Islam critics: <br />
<br />
*Human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women.<br />
*This proves only this that this revelation was not from any divine being, but it was only a human drama and Muhammad was himself making this revelation at his own, and that is why we see this human error in this revelation.<br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
*This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering.<br />
*And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are 3 (or less), then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''.<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit (the famous poet)<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh (She was a sister of Zaynab, who was another wife of Muhammad)<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each, while their numbers were less than 4. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.'''<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. '''And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson'''. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and stipulated the numbers of witnesses to be 4, and to punish all if their numbers are less that 4, even if they are telling the truth.<br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==How did Muhammad know that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses about her innocence. And then surprisingly, only after one minute, he claimed that revelation came and it made 'Aisha free of those accusations.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished.<br />
*And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
<br />
And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures.<br />
<br />
Therefore, Muhammad once himself forgot that he had to sweat while claiming the descent of revelation, and instead of that, he slept and kept on snorting. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim||1180|reference}} and {{Bukhari|||1789|darussalam}}|A man said (to the Holy Prophet): What do you command me to do during my Umra? (It was at this juncture) that '''the revelation came to the Messenger of Allah''' (ﷺ) and he was covered with a cloth, and Ya'la said: Would that I see revelation coming to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Would it please you to see the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) receiving the revelations 'Umar lifted a corner of the cloth '''and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel'''. When he was relieved of this (revelation) he said: Where is he who asked about Umra? When the person came, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Wash out the trace of yellowness, or he said: the trace of perfume and put off the cloak and do in your 'Umra what you do in your Hajj.}}<br />
<br />
So, neither any hard condition overtook Muhammad, nor he sweat due to the heavy weigt of the revelation, but this time he forgot it and kept on sleeping and snorting comfortably while receiving the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Why was the revelation delayed for the whole month?==<br />
Islam critics question here:<br />
<br />
*If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier?<br />
*The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could have also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai.<br />
*Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness.<br />
*So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month?<br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. And one of the doubt is that it might be that Muhammad waited for complete one month, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant''' (Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant). <br />
<br />
Had Muhammad announced the innocence of 'Aisha through revelation earlier, and later 'Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have totally destroyed his claim of prophethood and revelation. That is why, although outside the house, Muhammad was strongly defending 'Aisha, but still he didn't use the revelation for this defence for complete one month. <br />
<br />
==Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk==<br />
Let us look at the role of 'Islamic Modesty' in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that this incident of Ifk happened due to the following two reasons:<br />
<br />
#Firstly, Islam tried to make women disappear from the eyes of men, in name of Hijab.<br />
#And even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'.<br />
<br />
Therefore, in this journey too, 'Aisha was made to disappear herself from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Sharia, therefore those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The result of this Islamic modesty came in a form, where:<br />
<br />
*'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he showed no kindness towards her.<br />
*And the rivers of blood were about to flow as two tribes of Muslims were close to wage a war against each other.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'.<br />
*And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case.<br />
*Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
*Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women in name of 'Islamic Modesty'. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
*How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word?<br />
*What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation?<br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
PS: <br />
<br />
Muslims are divided on the issue if woman's 'face' should be veiled or not. Those who support the veiling of face too, they present this tradition as a proof, while here 'Aisha veiled her full face from Safwan. <br />
<br />
==Did Muhammad practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai?==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Punishment of making a false slander is not killing, but maximum 80 lashes (at it happened with Hassan bin Thabit and others who made the slander)<br />
*But in his personal case, Muhammad still ordered to kill 'Abdullah.<br />
*Nevertheless, Muhammad failed to incite 'Abdullah's tribe men to kill him.<br />
*After one month later, other 3 Sahaba were punished with 80 lashes, but again 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai didn't even get the punishment of those 80 lashes. Why?<br />
<br />
Doesn't it mean that Muhammad had to practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai? <br />
<br />
And what about companions being the best of generations and best of the believers when they neither killed 'Abdullah nor let him be lashed, despite the clear Quranic verse and the clear prophetic orders? <br />
<br />
==Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the time of ignorance, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but for themselves, they wanted to enjoy their wives during the battles too, although those wives had no role in the battle and they were only an extra load. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad also followed the footsteps of those dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
So, Islamic critics raise this question, why in the first place Muhammad started to follow the footsteps of those dictator kings of the time of ignorance?</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134027User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-06T10:58:48Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''<u><big>The incident of Ifk + Ruling of 4 witnesses + Pure men could have only pure women</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Later, Quranic verses (Surah Nur) were revealed about the innocence of 'Aisha against those slanders. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam critics point out that there are 'human errors' present in the revelation: <br />
<br />
#Firstly Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] questioned the people why they doubted 'Aisha's innocence and why didn't they immediately denied those slanders at their own. But Islam critics point out that there is contradiction in Quranic revelation and Muhammad's own behaviour. It was Muhammad himself who doubted 'Aisha, and he even wanted to divorce her, and thus those verses should have condemned Muhammad first instead of those companions.<br />
#Then Quran came up with this argument that 'Aisha should had been considered free of doubts as pure men could have only the pure women, and she was wed with Muhammad, who was a pure man. But Islam critics point out that this Quranic argument shows a human error, as there is no guarantee that pure men will always get pur women (or vice-versa).<br />
#Then the revelation came up with entirely new ruling that number of witnesses should be 4 in case of slandering. And another new ruling was this if number of witnesses is 3 (or less), then all of them will be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. But Islam critics consider this ruling too to be a 'human error' and illogical to punish the witnesses even if they are telling the truth.<br />
#Then Islam critics point out that this whole drama of Ifk, which continued for one month, happened only due to the '''unnatural restrictions''' of Islam in the name of 'Islamic Modesty', where it forbids any interaction between the men and the women.<br />
<br />
==Contradiction between the Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and thus he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
At this stage, Islam critics point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening '''inside the house''' during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence to Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not accept her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
*Outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' '''which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation'''.<br />
*Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad. If this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad first before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie.<br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
*Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
*And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not.<br />
*Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure.<br />
*And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who haven't indulged in fornication before.<br />
<br />
Therefore, according to the Islam critics: <br />
<br />
*Human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women.<br />
*This proves only this that this revelation was not from any divine being, but it was only a human drama and Muhammad was himself making this revelation at his own, and that is why we see this human error in this revelation.<br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
*This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering.<br />
*And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are 3 (or less), then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''.<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit (the famous poet)<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh (She was a sister of Zaynab, who was another wife of Muhammad)<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each, while their numbers were less than 4. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.'''<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. '''And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson'''. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and stipulated the numbers of witnesses to be 4, and to punish all if their numbers are less that 4, even if they are telling the truth.<br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==How did Muhammad know that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses about her innocence. And then surprisingly, only after one minute, he claimed that revelation came and it made 'Aisha free of those accusations.<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished.<br />
*And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
<br />
And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures.<br />
<br />
Therefore, Muhammad once himself forgot that he had to sweat while claiming the descent of revelation, and instead of that, he slept and kept on snorting. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim||1180|reference}} and {{Bukhari|||1789|darussalam}}|A man said (to the Holy Prophet): What do you command me to do during my Umra? (It was at this juncture) that '''the revelation came to the Messenger of Allah''' (ﷺ) and he was covered with a cloth, and Ya'la said: Would that I see revelation coming to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). He (Hadrat 'Umar) said: Would it please you to see the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) receiving the revelations 'Umar lifted a corner of the cloth '''and I looked at him and he was emitting a sound of snorting. He (the narrator) said: I thought it was the sound of a camel'''. When he was relieved of this (revelation) he said: Where is he who asked about Umra? When the person came, the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Wash out the trace of yellowness, or he said: the trace of perfume and put off the cloak and do in your 'Umra what you do in your Hajj.}}<br />
<br />
So, neither any hard condition overtook Muhammad, nor he sweat due to the heavy weigt of the revelation, but this time he forgot it and kept on sleeping and snorting comfortably while receiving the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Why was the revelation delayed for the whole month?==<br />
Islam critics question here:<br />
<br />
*If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier?<br />
*The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could have also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai.<br />
*Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness.<br />
*So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month?<br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. And one of the doubt is that it might be that Muhammad waited for complete one month, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant''' (Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant). <br />
<br />
Had Muhammad announced the innocence of 'Aisha through revelation earlier, and later 'Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have totally destroyed his claim of prophethood and revelation. That is why, although outside the house, Muhammad was strongly defending 'Aisha, but still he didn't use the revelation for this defence for complete one month. <br />
<br />
==Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk==<br />
Let us look at the role of 'Islamic Modesty' in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that this incident of Ifk happened due to the following two reasons:<br />
<br />
#Firstly, Islam tried to make women disappear from the eyes of men, in name of Hijab.<br />
#And even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'.<br />
<br />
Therefore, in this journey too, 'Aisha was made to disappear herself from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Sharia, therefore those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The result of this Islamic modesty came in a form, where:<br />
<br />
*'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he showed no kindness towards her.<br />
*And the rivers of blood were about to flow as two tribes of Muslims were close to wage a war against each other.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'.<br />
*And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case.<br />
*Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
*Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women in name of 'Islamic Modesty'. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled (even) my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
*How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word?<br />
*What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation?<br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
==Did Muhammad practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai?==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Punishment of making a false slander is not killing, but maximum 80 lashes (at it happened with Hassan bin Thabit and others who made the slander)<br />
*But in his personal case, Muhammad still ordered to kill 'Abdullah.<br />
*Nevertheless, Muhammad failed to incite 'Abdullah's tribe men to kill him.<br />
*After one month later, other 3 Sahaba were punished with 80 lashes, but again 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai didn't even get the punishment of those 80 lashes. Why?<br />
<br />
Doesn't it mean that Muhammad had to practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai? <br />
<br />
And what about companions being the best of generations and best of the believers when they neither killed 'Abdullah nor let him be lashed, despite the clear Quranic verse and the clear prophetic orders? <br />
<br />
==Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the time of ignorance, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but for themselves, they wanted to enjoy their wives during the battles too, although those wives had no role in the battle and they were only an extra load. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad also followed the footsteps of those dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
So, Islamic critics raise this question, why in the first place Muhammad started to follow the footsteps of those dictator kings of the time of ignorance?</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134026User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-06T08:25:36Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''<u><big>The incident of Ifk + Ruling of 4 witnesses + Pure men could have only pure women</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Later, Quranic verses (Surah Nur) were revealed about the innocence of 'Aisha against those slanders. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam critics point out that there are 'human errors' present in the revelation: <br />
<br />
#Firstly Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] questioned the people why they doubted 'Aisha's innocence and why didn't they immediately denied those slanders at their own. But Islam critics point out that there is contradiction in Quranic revelation and Muhammad's own behaviour. It was Muhammad himself who doubted 'Aisha, and he even wanted to divorce her, and thus those verses should have condemned Muhammad first instead of those companions.<br />
#Then Quran came up with this argument that 'Aisha should had been considered free of doubts as pure men could have only the pure women, and she was wed with Muhammad, who was a pure man. But Islam critics point out that this Quranic argument shows a human error, as there is no guarantee that pure men will always get pur women (or vice-versa).<br />
#Then the revelation came up with entirely new ruling that number of witnesses should be 4 in case of slandering. And another new ruling was this if number of witnesses is 3 (or less), then all of them will be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. But Islam critics consider this ruling too to be a 'human error' and illogical to punish the witnesses even if they are telling the truth. <br />
#Then Islam critics point out that this whole drama of Ifk, which continued for one month, happened only due to the '''unnatural restrictions''' of Islam in the name of 'Islamic Modesty', where it forbids any interaction between the men and the women.<br />
<br />
==Contradiction between the Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and thus he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
At this stage, Islam critics point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening '''inside the house''' during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence to Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not accept her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
*Outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' '''which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation'''.<br />
*Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad. If this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad first before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie.<br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
*Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
*And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not.<br />
*Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure.<br />
*And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who haven't indulged in fornication before.<br />
<br />
Therefore, according to the Islam critics: <br />
<br />
*Human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women.<br />
*This proves only this that this revelation was not from any divine being, but it was only a human drama and Muhammad was himself making this revelation at his own, and that is why we see this human error in this revelation.<br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
*This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering.<br />
*And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are 3 (or less), then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''.<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit (the famous poet)<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh (She was a sister of Zaynab, who was another wife of Muhammad)<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each, while their numbers were less than 4. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.'''<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. '''And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson'''. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and stipulated the numbers of witnesses to be 4, and to punish all if their numbers are less that 4, even if they are telling the truth. <br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==How did Muhammad know that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will ''''soon'''<nowiki/>' reveal the verses about her innocence. And then surprisingly, only after one minute, he claimed that revelation came and it made 'Aisha free of those accusations. <br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished.<br />
*And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
*And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures.<br />
<br />
==Why didn't the revelation come earlier for the whole month?==<br />
Islam critics question here:<br />
<br />
*If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier?<br />
*The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could have also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai.<br />
*Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness.<br />
*So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month?<br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. Since Islam critics don't believe in the prophethood of Muhammad, and consider all this to be his human drama, thus they doubt and say that it may be that Muhammad waited for complete one month before making the claim of revelation, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant''' (Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant). <br />
<br />
Had Muhammad announced the revelation earlier, and later 'Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have totally destroyed his claim of prophethood. That is why, although outside the house, Muhammad was strongly defending 'Aisha, but inside the house, he was himself keeping a distance from her and waiting patiently for one month before announcing the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk==<br />
Let us look at the role of 'Islamic Modesty' in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that this incident of Ifk happened due to the following two reasons:<br />
<br />
#Firstly, Islam tried to make women disappear from the eyes of men, in name of Hijab.<br />
#And even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'.<br />
<br />
Therefore, in this journey too, 'Aisha was made to disappear herself from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Sharia, therefore those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The result of this Islamic modesty came in a form, where:<br />
<br />
*'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he showed no kindness towards her.<br />
*And the rivers of blood were about to flow as two tribes of Muslims were close to wage a war against each other.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'.<br />
*And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case.<br />
*Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
*Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women in name of 'Islamic Modesty'. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled (even) my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
*How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word?<br />
*What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation?<br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
==Did Muhammad practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai?==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Punishment of making a false slander is not killing, but maximum 80 lashes (at it happened with Hassan bin Thabit and others who made the slander)<br />
*But in his personal case, Muhammad still ordered to kill 'Abdullah.<br />
*Nevertheless, Muhammad failed to incite 'Abdullah's tribe men to kill him.<br />
*After one month later, other 3 Sahaba were punished with 80 lashes, but again 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai didn't even get the punishment of those 80 lashes. Why?<br />
<br />
Doesn't it mean that Muhammad had to practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai? <br />
<br />
And what about companions being the best of generations and best of the believers when they neither killed 'Abdullah nor let him be lashed, despite the clear Quranic verse and the clear prophetic orders? <br />
<br />
==Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the time of ignorance, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but for themselves, they wanted to enjoy their wives during the battles too, although those wives had no role in the battle and they were only an extra load. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad also followed the footsteps of those dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
So, Islamic critics raise this question, why in the first place Muhammad started to follow the footsteps of those dictator kings of the time of ignorance?</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User_talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134024User talk:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-05T18:26:01Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>==Khul' Article completed==<br />
This is an article about Khul'خلع Ruling in Islam. Please read it, and if you find it beneficial, then transfer it to the new Page at wiki (so that I get my Sandbox 1 free for the next article). Thanks. <br />
<br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Asmith|Asmith]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]]</br> <br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 15:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
=='Iddah article completed in my Sandbox1==<br />
Your feedback is requested (with all the problems in this article, so that they could be corrected). Thanks. <br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Exmoose|Exmoose]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]]<br />
<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 20:15, 28 November 2021 (UTC)<br />
<br />
==Ifk Article completed==<br />
[[User:IbnPinker|IbnPinker]]<br />
[[User:Exmoose|Exmoose]]<br />
[[User:Lightyears|Lightyears]] <br />
[[User:Asmith|Asmith]]<br />
[[User:Lehrasap|Lehrasap]] ([[User talk:Lehrasap|talk]]) 18:26, 5 December 2021 (UTC)</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134023User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-05T18:22:52Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>'''<u><big>The incident of Ifk, and the human errors in the revelation</big></u>'''<br />
<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan (a companion of Muhammad) found her later. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Later, Quranic verses (Surah Nur) were revealed about the innocence of 'Aisha against those slanders. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Islam critics point out that there are 'human errors' present in the revelation: <br />
<br />
# Firstly Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] questioned the companions (i.e.Sahaba) why they doubted 'Aisha's innocence and why they didn't 'immediately' denied those slanders at their own. But Islam critics point out that it was Muhammad himself who doubted 'Aisha, and he even wanted to divorce her, and thus those verses should have condemned Muhammad first instead of those companions. <br />
# Then Quran came up with this argument that 'Aisha should had been considered free of doubts as pure men could have only the pure women, and Muhammad was a pure man. But Islam critics point out that this Quranic argument shows a human error too, as there is no guarantee that pure men will always get pur women (or vice-versa). <br />
# Then the revelation came up with entirely new ruling that number of witnesses should be 4 in case of slandering. And another new ruling was this if number of witnesses is 3 (or less), then all of them will be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''. But Islam critics consider this ruling too to be a 'human error' and illogical to punish the witnesses even if they are telling the truth. <br />
# Then Islam critics point out that this whole drama of Ifk, which continued for one month, happened only due to the '''unnatural restrictions''' of Islam, where it forbids any interaction between the men and the women. <br />
<br />
==Contradiction between the Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and thus he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing in the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
At this stage, Islam critics point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening '''inside the house''' during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being ill. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then he only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence in front of Muhammad, while she was of opinion that the slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not believe in her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to even go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
* Outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people from raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. '''But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too,''' which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation. <br />
* Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a revelation by any divine being, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad. If this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad first before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie. <br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same revelation of Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
*Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
*And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not.<br />
*Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure.<br />
*And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who haven't indulged in fornication before.<br />
<br />
Therefore, according to the Islam critics: <br />
<br />
*Human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women.<br />
*This proves only this that this revelation was not from any divine being, but it was only a human drama and Muhammad was himself making it, and that is why we see human error in this revelation.<br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
*This verse stipulated an '''entirely new condition''' of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering.<br />
*And it also stipulated '''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are 3 (or less), then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''.<br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad was extremely angry upon the people who were indirectly attacking his prophethood through slandering 'Aisha and he wanted to severely punish them for that. Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses '''even if they are telling the truth.'''<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was extremely angry upon those people who were putting his position of prophethood in danger by slandering 'Aisha. And Muhammad wanted to teach them the lesson. And for this reason he himself did this human drama of revelation, and that is why we see the colour of human error in this ruling.<br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by simply raising the number of witnesses to 5. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
==How did Muhammad know that Allah will 'soon' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month?==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will 'soon' reveal the verses about her innocence. <br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) '''when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time''' that he wished.<br />
*And it is strange that indeed the revelation came immediately after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation.<br />
*And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they play with the minds of others, and make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures.<br />
<br />
==Why didn't the revelation come earlier for the whole month?==<br />
Islam critics question here:<br />
<br />
*If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier?<br />
*The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could have also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai.<br />
*Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness.<br />
*So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month?<br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. Since Islam critics don't believe in the prophethood of Muhammad, and consider all this to be his human drama, thus they doubt and say that it may be that Muhammad waited for complete one month before making the claim of revelation, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha was not pregnant''' (Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant). <br />
<br />
Had Muhammad announced the revelation earlier, and later 'Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have totally destroyed his claim of prophethood. That is why, although outside the house, Muhammad was strongly defending 'Aisha, but inside the house, he was himself keeping a distance from her and waiting patiently for one month before announcing the revelation. <br />
<br />
==Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk==<br />
Let us look at the role of 'Islamic Modesty' in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that this incident of Ifk happened due to the following two reasons:<br />
<br />
#Firstly, Islam tried to make women disappear from the eyes of men, in name of Hijab.<br />
#And even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'.<br />
<br />
Therefore, in this journey too, 'Aisha was made to disappear herself from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Sharia, therefore those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah or not, by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The result of this Islamic modesty came in a form, where:<br />
<br />
*'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he showed no kindness towards her.<br />
*And the rivers of blood were about to flow as two tribes of Muslims were close to wage a war against each other.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'.<br />
*And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much paranoid and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case.<br />
*Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allahu 'Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
*Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts and paranoia.<br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women in name of 'Islamic Modesty'. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction between them when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled (even) my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
*How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word?<br />
*What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem why she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation?<br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from men (either they are male doctors or male teachers etc). So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless and unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
==Did Muhammad practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai?==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Punishment of making a false slander is not killing, but maximum 80 lashes (at it happened with Hassan bin Thabit and others who made the slander)<br />
*But in his personal case, Muhammad still ordered to kill 'Abdullah.<br />
*Nevertheless, Muhammad failed to incite 'Abdullah's tribe men to kill him.<br />
*After one month later, other 3 Sahaba were punished with 80 lashes, but again 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai didn't even get the punishment of those 80 lashes. Why?<br />
<br />
Doesn't it mean that Muhammad had to practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai? <br />
<br />
And what about companions being the best of generations and best of the believers when they neither killed 'Abdullah nor let him be lashed, despite the clear Quranic verse and the clear prophetic orders? <br />
<br />
==Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles?==<br />
In the time of ignorance, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but for themselves, they wanted to enjoy their wives during the battles too, although those wives had no role in the battle and they were only an extra load. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad also followed the footsteps of those dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
So, Islamic critics raise this question, why in the first place Muhammad started to follow the footsteps of those dictator kings of the time of ignorance?</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134022User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-05T17:21:00Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>=Muhammad's behaviour during the Incident of Ifk + Ruling of 4 eye-witnesses + Quranic claim of pure men have only the pure women=<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan ibn al-Mu‘attal found her. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Muhammad became extremely angry upon the people who were slandering 'Aisha, as it was not only hurting Muhammad personally, but it was also indirectly hurting the Muhammad's claim of prophethood too.<br />
<br />
After one month, Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] were revealed, which condemned that group of people who doubted the innocence of 'Aisha, and asked them why they didn't immediately thought good of 'Aisha and denied it completely as a falsehood and a lie.<br />
<br />
But Islam critics point out a contradiction here, while later 'Aisha also revealed the inside story at home, where Muhammad was himself doubting 'Aisha right from the beginning till even after one month. <br />
<br />
Thus Islam critics claim that these verses were human drama of revelation by Muhammad at his own, where he wanted to shut the outside voices against his household. But at the same time, Muhammad made a human mistake and forgot that he himself doubted 'Aisha and even thought of divorcing her. <br />
<br />
==Contradiction between Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further told that she went to her parents house and stayed there. And after one month) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not '''immediately''' believing the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
At this stage, Islam critics point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told the story, which was happening inside the house during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha<ref>Sahih Bukhari, Book of Military Expeditions. [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being sick. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and then she should repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him directly.<br />
*'Aisha even refused to testify her innocence in front of Muhammad, while she was of opinion that that slander had already been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he would not believe in her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, but 'Aisha was still so much upset with Muhammad's behaviour when her mother asked her to accompany Muhammad, then 'Aisha refused to go with him.<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people in raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too, which would put his own behaviour in direct contradiction to this revelation. <br />
<br />
Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a divine revelation, but it was only the human drama of Muhammad, while if this revelation was really from any divine being, then this revelation would have been threatening Muhammad before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie. <br />
<br />
==Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women==<br />
In this same Surah Nur, Quran also claimed that pure men have only the pure women. This Quranic claim should serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
Ibn Kathir wrote in his Tafsir under this verse 26 of Surah Nur:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|[http://m.qtafsir.com/Surah-An-Noor/The-Goodness-of-%60Aishah-becau--- Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Surah Nur 24:26]|"Evil women are for evil men and evil men are for evil women, and good women are for good men and good men are for good women.'' This also necessarily refers back to what they said, i.e., '''Allah would not have made `A'ishah the wife of His Messenger unless she had been good, because he is the best of the best of mankind. If she had been evil, she would not have been a suitable partner either according to His Laws or His decree'''.}}<br />
<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
*Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
*And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not.<br />
*Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure.<br />
*And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who haven't indulged in fornication before.<br />
<br />
Therefore, according to the Islam critics: <br />
<br />
* Human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women. <br />
* This proves only this that this revelation was not from any divine being, but it was only a human drama and Muhammad was himself making it, and that is why we see human mistake in this revelation. <br />
<br />
==Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in the case of slandering==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk: <br />
<br />
* This verse stipulated an entirely <nowiki>'''new condition'''</nowiki> of number of witnesses to be 4 in case of slandering. <br />
* And it also stipulated <nowiki>'''another entirely new condition''' if there numbers are less than 4, then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, '''even if they are telling the truth'''</nowiki>. <br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad was extremely angry upon the people who were indirectly attacking his prophethood through slandering 'Aisha and he wanted to severely punish them for that. Firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other Sahaba (companions) who were also talking against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
#Hassan bin Thabit<br />
#Mistah<br />
#Hamna bint Jahsh<br />
<br />
These 3 companions were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
*This Islamic ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses <nowiki>'''</nowiki>even if they are telling the truth<nowiki>'''</nowiki> only due to the reason that 4 eye-witnesses are not present.<br />
*This illogical ruling proves that no revelation was coming from any divine being, but it was Muhammad himself, who was doing this human drama of revelation, and that is why we see the colour of human mistake in this ruling. <br />
*The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number was 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 5 witnesses. And if the number of witnesses was 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses.<br />
<br />
== How did Muhammad know that Allah will 'soon' reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha after one month? ==<br />
No revelation came for 'Aisha's innocence for the whole month. Then Muhammad came to 'Aisha (who was staying in her parent's house at that time) and he claimed that Allah will 'soon' reveal the verses about her innocence. <br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case'''. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, '''then soon Allah will reveal your innocence''', and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance ...<br />
(Aisha said) 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me ... Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed ... But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him. The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) was over, '''he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!''''}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
* Muhammad could only make such claim (i.e. '''soon''' revelation will come for her innocence) when it was in his own hands to make the revelations at any time that he wished. <br />
* And it is strange that indeed the revelation came just after that as soon as Muhammad and 'Aisha finished their conversation. <br />
* And regarding Muhammad's sweating due to the revelation, then Islam critics point out that all the people who show magic tricks, they make many such dramas in order to convince the people that they are indeed talking with unseen creatures. <br />
<br />
== Why didn't the revelation come earlier for the whole month? ==<br />
Islam critics question here:<br />
<br />
* If at the end Allah had to reveal the verses of innocence of 'Aisha, why didn't then this revelation come earlier? <br />
* The incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and the group of people was also over just in the beginning. Therefore, if Allah wanted to reveal the verses about 4 witnesses and about pure men having only the pure women, then it could also be done immediately after the incident of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. <br />
* Nothing more happened during the remaining whole month, except that Muhammad never visited 'Aisha in her parent's house to show any kindness towards her in her illness. <br />
* So, why to torture 'Aisha for complete one month? <br />
<br />
An intelligent investigator keeps all the doors of doubts open. Since Islam critics don<nowiki>'t believe in the prophethood of Muhammad, and consider all this to be his human drama, thus they doubt here that Muhammad waited for complete one month before making the claim of revelation, '''while he wanted to make sure that 'Aisha didn't become pregnant'''. Had Muhammad announced the revelation earlier, and later '</nowiki>Aisha would have become pregnant, then it would have destroyed his claim of prophethood. <br />
<br />
(Note: If woman doesn't bleed at time of her first period, then it is a sign that she has become pregnant)<br />
<br />
== Role of 'Islamic Modesty' in the incident of Ifk ==<br />
Let us look at the role of 'Islamic Modesty' in this incident:<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
... '''I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt)'''. So we went on till Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. '''(In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it'''...They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that this incident of Ifk happened due to the following two reasons:<br />
<br />
# Firstly, Islam tried to make women disappear from the eyes of men, in name of Hijab.<br />
# And even conversation, and any kind of interaction between men and women is considered vulgarity, and is against the 'Islamic Modesty'. <br />
<br />
Therefore, in this journey too, 'Aisha was made to disappear herself from the eyes of men behind the curtains of her howdah. And since men and women could not even 'greet' each other as it is also considered vulgar in Sharia, therefore those men (who were lifting her howdah) were unable to find out if she was present in the howdah by simply saying 'hello' to her. <br />
<br />
The result of this Islamic modesty came in form where:<br />
<br />
* 'Aisha was weeping whole night long for one complete month and she was in pain. And even she was innocent, but still even Muhammad planted this slander in his heart and he started counselling to divorce 'Aisha.<br />
* And the rivers of blood were about to flow as two tribes of Muslims were close to wage a war against each other. <br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
* Such 'restrictions' in name of 'Islamic Modesty' are against the ''''NATURE'''<nowiki/>'. <br />
* And these unnatural restrictions make the society so much untrusting and skeptic, that it becomes a 'psycho' case. <br />
* Muslims are unable to tell why these 2 companions (i.e. Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah) made a slander against 'Aisha. But the reason seems to be simple that these unnatural restrictions are making members of Islamic society paranoid and turning them into psycho cases, where they believe in such things which actually are not there. (Note: Muslims still use "Radhi Allaho Anhu" for these 2 companions and consider them to be the people of high status).<br />
* Even today, thousands of killings take place in Islamic societies, in name of ''''Honour Killing'''<nowiki/>', which are based merely upon doubts. <br />
<br />
The sole reason for this one month long drama was only this restriction upon the interaction of men and women. And this same thing is 'hunting' the Islamic society even today. Even today, a lot of misunderstandings are happening due to this and things go even to the 'killings'. <br />
<br />
Also see again this lack of interaction when Safwan found 'Asiha.<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated 'Aisha: <br />
... While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me '''as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me, '''I veiled (even) my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, we did not speak a single word''', and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics ask:<br />
<br />
* How could Islam be considered a 'religion of nature' when it has made it so difficult that even in emergencies men and women don't even exchange a single word? <br />
* What wrong could have happened if they would have greeted each other, and Safwan would have asked her about the problem and what happened that she was alone there, and if she needed some other kind of help too in that situation? <br />
<br />
Even today Muslim ladies and girls are unable to take help without any hesitation in each and every field from male doctors or male teachers etc. So much energy of the society is wasted in these unnatural restrictions, and half of the Islamic society (i.e. women) become practically useless unable to help with the productivity. <br />
<br />
== Did Muhammad practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai? ==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
* Punishment of making a false slander is not killing. <br />
* But in his personal case, Muhammad still ordered to kill 'Abdullah. <br />
<br />
Nevertheless, Muhammad failed to incite 'Abdullah's tribe men to kill him. <br />
<br />
Later Muhammad claimed the revelation of verse 24:2 of Surah Nur, which stipulated the punishment of 80 lashes if the number of witnesses doesn't reach to 4. <br />
<br />
These 3 other companions were not so influential, and thus they were lashed for 80 times. But again 'Abdullah ibn Ubai got no punishment of lashes too. <br />
<br />
Doesn't it mean that Muhammad had to practice Taqiyyah in case of 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai and leave him alone? <br />
<br />
And what about companions being the best of generation and best of the believers when they neither killed 'Abdullah nor let him be lashed, despite clear Quranic verse and clear prophetic orders? <br />
<br />
== Why did Muhammad use to take his wives during the battles? ==<br />
In the time of ignorance, the Kings acted like the dictators. They didn't allow their common soldiers to take their wives during the journeys, but for themselves, they wanted to enjoy their wives during the battles too, although those wives had no role in the battle and they were only an extra load. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad also followed the footsteps of those dictator kings. The incident of Ifk happened while Muhammad took 'Aisha with him in that journey. <br />
<br />
In this same Hadith about Ifk, 'Aisha narrated:<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat (in which the incident of Ifk happened) which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger (ﷺ).}}<br />
<br />
So, Islamic critics raise this question, why in the first place Muhammad started to follow the footsteps of those dictator kings of the time of ignorance?<br />
==References==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134011User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-03T23:26:53Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>=Muhammad's behaviour during the incident of IFK=<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan ibn al-Mu‘attal found her. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Muhammad became extremely angry upon the people who were slandering 'Aisha, as it was not only hurting Muhammad personally, but it was also indirectly hurting the Muhammad's claim of prophethood too.<br />
<br />
After one month, Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] were revealed, which condemned that group of people who doubted the innocence of 'Aisha, and asked them why they didn't immediately thought good of 'Aisha and denied it completely as a falsehood and a lie.<br />
<br />
But Islam critics point out a contradiction here, while later 'Aisha also revealed the inside story at home, where Muhammad was himself doubting 'Aisha right from the beginning till even after one month. <br />
<br />
Thus Islam critics claim that these verses were human drama of revelation by Muhammad at his own, where he wanted to shut the outside voices against his household. But at the same time, Muhammad made a human mistake and forgot that he himself doubted 'Aisha and even thought of divorcing her. <br />
<br />
==Contradiction between Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour==<br />
'Aisha narrated the incident of Ifk as following: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||4141|darussalam}}|Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further said) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.}}<br />
<br />
Thus, Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was also affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not immediately believing the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
Islam critics object here, and point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad during this incident. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
*immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan,<br />
*and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood<br />
*and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told what was happening inside the house during this period, where:<br />
<br />
*It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
*nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
*nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, according to 'Aisha<ref>Sahih Bukhari, Book of Military Expeditions. [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
*And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being sick. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then only greeted her, and then left.<br />
*Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house.<br />
*Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
*Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and then she should repent.<br />
*'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him.<br />
*'Aisha said, she would not say anything to testify her innocence in front of Muhammad, while this slander has been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he will not believe in her testimony.<br />
*'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she indeed committed a sin, then Muhammad was immediately going to believe it.<br />
*Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed.<br />
*Then Muhammad claimed divine revelation came to him which proved her innocence, and 'Aisha's mother wanted her to accompany Muhammad, but 'Aisha denied to go with him. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that outside the house, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people in raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah bin 'Ubai, but inside the house, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too. <br />
<br />
Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a divine revelation, but it was the human drama of Muhammad itself, while if this revelation was really divine, then Quran would have been threatening Muhammad before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie. <br />
<br />
== Quranic claim that Pure Men have only the pure Women ==<br />
Islam critics point out that at the same time, in this same Surah Nur, Muhammad also further claimed the revelation of verses which say that pure men have only pure women. This should also serve as an argument that 'Aisha was innocent, while she was wed to a pure man i.e. Muhammad.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.3?context=24 Surah Nur 4:3 and 4:26]|2=The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful to the believers ۔۔۔<br />
<br />
Women impure are for men impure, and men impure for women impure and women of purity are for men of purity, and men of purity are for women of purity: these are not affected by what people say: for them there is forgiveness, and a provision honourable.}}<br />
But Islam critics claim that this Quranic argument is against the human rationale and the history:<br />
<br />
* Quran itself gave the example of wife of Lut, who was not pure, while Lut himself was a pure man.<br />
* And Quran also gave the example of wife of Pharaoh. She was a pure woman, while Pharaoh was not. <br />
* Same is about the wife of Noah, who was not pure. <br />
* And thousands of Muslim men commit fornication with the western girls and become impure (according to Islam). Later these Muslim men get the citizenship and they divorce their western partners, and go to their Islamic lands and marry the so-called pure Muslim girls, who didn't indulge in fornication before. <br />
<br />
Thus according to the Islam critics, human rationale and history, both are denying this Quranic argument that pure men have only pure women. This proves only this that the revelation was Muhammad'd own human drama, and thus it was Muhammad who was making this human mistake. <br />
<br />
== Quranic order of 4 eye-witnesses in case of fornication ==<br />
Muhammad also claimed the revelation of verse 24 of Surah Nur at the same time of incident of Ifk, which not only stipulated the number of witnesses to be 4 in case of fornication/adultery, but it also stipulated if there numbers were less than 4, then all those witnesses should be lashed 80 times, even if they were telling the truth. <br />
{{Quote|[https://quranx.com/24.4 Surah Nur 24:2]|And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after.}}<br />
Islam critics also point out that firstly Muhammad tried to kill 'Abdullah Ibn Ubai. But he was an influential person and Muhammad failed to incite the Muslims from his tribe to kill him. <br />
<br />
Then there were 3 other people who also testified against 'Aisha. They were:<br />
<br />
# Hassan bin Thabit<br />
# Mistah<br />
# Hamna bint Jahsh<br />
<br />
These 3 Sahaba (companions) were not influential like 'Abdullah bin Ubai. Thus after the revelation of verse 24:4, those 3 got the punishment of 80 lashes each. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that human logic would always guide you that:<br />
<br />
* This Islamic Ruling is totally against human rationale to lash the witnesses even if they are telling the truth only due to the reason that 4 eye-witnesses were not present at the time of incident of fornication/adultery.<br />
* This proves that Muhammad was extremely angry and upset, and there was not divine revelation, but it was a human drama by Muhammad, where he was fabricating those verses himself in order to fulfil his purposes. <br />
* The number of those witnesses was 3. But if their number were 4, then Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 5 witnesses. And if the number of witnessed were 5, then still Muhammad would have still punished them by putting the condition of 6 witnesses. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
== References ==<br />
<references /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_2&diff=134010User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 22021-12-03T21:39:16Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
'''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''',...<br />
<br />
`Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers '''while I was unaware of anything of all that,''' '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... <br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me ...''' <br />
<br />
(Muhammad also asked Barira, the maid-servant) and Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man (i.e. Safwan) about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.<br />
<br />
' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. <br />
<br />
... ('Aisha further said) Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. '''He had never sat with me since that day of the slander.''' '''A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case.''' Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-and so about you; '''if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.'''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said) Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me.''' By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' '''Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed;''' ...<br />
<br />
('Aisha further said after that immediately revelation started coming to Muhammad and he said to her) 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, '''<nowiki/>'By Allah, I will not go to him,''' and I praise none but Allah.</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_2&diff=134009User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 22021-12-03T21:17:38Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger after Allah's order of veiling (the women) had been revealed. I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt). So we went on till Allah's Messenger had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. '''I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing'''. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. (In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it. In those days women were light in weight for they did not get fat, and flesh did not cover their bodies in abundance as they used to eat only a little food. Those people therefore, disregarded the lightness of the howdah while lifting and carrying it; and at that time I was still a young girl. They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone. Then I came to their camping place to find no call maker of them, nor one who would respond to the call. So I intended to go to the place where I used to stay, thinking that they would miss me and come back to me (in my search). While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. '''Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)'''. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me. I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, '''we did not speak a single word,''' and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday while they were at a halt (taking a rest). '''(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."''' (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except '''Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge''', but they were a group as Allah said. It is said that the one who carried most of the slander was `Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul." `Urwa added, "`Aisha disliked to have Hassan abused in her presence and she used to say, 'It was he who said: My father and his (i.e. my father's) father and my honor are all for the protection of Muhammad's honor from you."). `Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers while I was unaware of anything of all that, '''but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave'''. ... ('Aisha said, after becoming aware of the slanders against her, when) Allah's Messenger came to me, and after greeting me, said, 'How is that (lady)?' I said, 'Will you allow me to go to my parents?' as I wanted to be sure about the news through them. Allah's Apostle allowed me ... I ('Aisha) kept on weeping that night till dawn I could neither stop weeping nor sleep then in the morning again, I kept on weeping. When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, '''Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me'''. Usama bin Zaid said what he knew of my innocence, and the respect he preserved in himself for me. Usama said, '(O Allah's Messenger !) She is your wife and we do not know anything except good about her.' `Ali bin Abi Talib said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! Allah does not put you in difficulty and there are plenty of women other than she, yet, ask the maid-servant who will tell you the truth.' On that Allah's Messenger called Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) and said, 'O Barira! Did you ever see anything which aroused your suspicion?' Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, ''''O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?''' By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. All that day I kept on weeping with my tears never ceasing, and I could never sleep. In the morning my parents were with me and I wept for two nights and a day with my tears never ceasing and I could never sleep till I thought that my liver would burst from weeping. So, while my parents were sitting with me and I was weeping, an Ansari woman asked me to grant her admittance. I allowed her to come in, and when she came in, she sat down and started weeping with me. While we were in this state, Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.' (continued...) (continuing... 1): -5.462:... ... When Allah's Messenger finished his speech, my tears ceased flowing completely that I no longer felt a single drop of tear flowing. I said to my father, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' My father said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me. By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed; and Allah knew then that I was innocent and hoped that Allah would reveal my innocence. But, by Allah, I never thought that Allah would reveal about my case, Divine Inspiration, that would be recited (forever) as I considered myself too unworthy to be talked of by Allah with something of my concern, but I hoped that Allah's Messenger might have a dream in which Allah would prove my innocence. But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger . So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him, (when he used to be inspired Divinely). The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger was over, he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, 'By Allah, I will not go to him, and I praise none but Allah. So Allah revealed the ten Verses:- - "Verily! They who spread the slander Are a gang, among you............." (24.11-20) Allah revealed those Qur'anic Verses to declare my innocence. Abu Bakr As-Siddiq who used to disburse money for Mistah bin Uthatha because of his relationship to him and his poverty, said, 'By Allah, I will never give to Mistah bin Uthatha anything after what he has said about Aisha.' Then Allah revealed:-- "And let not those among you who are good and wealthy swear not to give (any sort of help) to their kinsmen, those in need, and those who have left their homes for Allah's cause, let them pardon and forgive. Do you not love that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is oft-Forgiving Most Merciful." (24.22) Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said, 'Yes, by Allah, I would like that Allah forgive me.' and went on giving Mistah the money he used to give him before. He also added, 'By Allah, I will never deprive him of it at all.' Aisha further said:." Allah's Messenger also asked Zainab bint Jahsh (i.e. his wife) about my case. He said to Zainab, 'What do you know and what did you see?" She replied, "O Allah's Messenger ! I refrain from claiming falsely that I have heard or seen anything. By Allah, I know nothing except good (about `Aisha).' From amongst the wives of the Prophet Zainab was my peer (in beauty and in the love she received from the Prophet) but Allah saved her from that evil because of her piety. Her sister Hamna, started struggling on her behalf and she was destroyed along with those who were destroyed. The man who was blamed said, 'Subhan-Allah! By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I have never uncovered the cover (i.e. veil) of any female.' Later on the man was martyred in Allah's Cause."</div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=User:Lehrasap/Sandbox_1&diff=134008User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 12021-12-03T21:17:01Z<p>Lehrasap: </p>
<hr />
<div>= Muhammad's behaviour during the incident of IFK =<br />
In the [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141 incident of Ifk], an accusation of adultery was levied against ‘Aisha. During an expedition, the Muslim caravan accidentally departed without ‘Aisha. She remained at the camp, when Safwan ibn al-Mu‘attal found her. They stayed there at night, and the next day, he brought 'Aisha back to Muhammad. Rumours that Aisha and Safwan had committed adultery were spread. <br />
<br />
Muhammad became extremely angry upon the people who were slandering 'Aisha, as it was not only hurting Muhammad personally, but it was also indirectly hurting the Muhammad's claim of prophethood too.<br />
<br />
After one month, Quranic verses [https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 24:12-16 of Surah Nur] were revealed, which condemned that group of people who doubted the innocence of 'Aisha, and asked them why they didn't immediately thought good of 'Aisha and denied it completely as a falsehood and a lie.<br />
<br />
But Islam critics point out a contradiction here, while later 'Aisha also revealed the inside story at home, where Muhammad was himself doubting 'Aisha right from the beginning till even after one month. <br />
<br />
Thus Islam critics claim that these verses were human drama of revelation by Muhammad at his own, where he wanted to shut the outside voices against his household. But at the same time, Muhammad made a human mistake and forgot that he himself doubted 'Aisha and even thought of divorcing her. <br />
<br />
== Contradiction between Quranic revelation and Muhammad's behaviour ==<br />
Muhammad was extremely angry upon `Abdullah bin Ubai and the group of people who were hurting Muhammad's reputation, while slandering 'Aisha was also affecting the claim of Muhammad's prophethood too indirectly. Thus Muhammad wanted to shut all those voices and he ordered to kill `Abdullah bin Ubai for that, but he failed as Muslims of `Abdullah's tribe defended him. <br />
<br />
After one month, Muhammad claimed that divine revelation came to him, which condemned that group of people for not immediately believing the innocence of 'Aisha. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/24.12?context=4 Quran 24:12-16]|2=Why did the faithful men and women '''not think well of their people (i.e. 'Aisha and Safwan)''' when they heard this, and said: '''"This is a clear lie?"''' ... Why did you not say when you heard it: '''"It is not for us to speak of it? God preserve us, it is a great lie!"'''}}<br />
Islam critics object here, and point out that there is a contradiction between this Quranic revelation and the behaviour of Muhammad during this incident. <br />
<br />
They claim that Muhammad was extremely mad upon that group of people. Thus in order to teach them a lesson, he himself did this drama of revelation after one month. And in these verses, he himself put those conditions i.e.: <br />
<br />
* immediately thinking good about 'Aisha and Safwan, <br />
* and immediately denying it as an obvious falsehood <br />
* and immediately considering it to be a great lie.<br />
<br />
But the problem occurred when later 'Aisha also told what was happening internally in the house during this period, where:<br />
<br />
* It was also Muhammad himself who neither immediately thought good about 'Aisha,<br />
* nor Muhammad immediately denied it as an obvious falsehood,<br />
* nor Muhammad completely rejected it immediately by saying it to be a big lie.<br />
<br />
But contrary to this, 'Aisha later also disclosed the story, which was happening inside the house too. According to 'Aisha<ref>Sahih Bukhari, Book of Military Expeditions. [https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4141]</ref>:<br />
<br />
* Muhammad himself started doubting 'Aisha.<br />
* And Muhammad stopped showing KINDNESS towards 'Aisha, despite her being sick. Even if he came to 'Aisha, then only greeted her, and then left. <br />
* Then Muhammad also started investigating about the character of 'Aisha from Ali and Zayd (the adopted son), and Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) inside the house. <br />
* Then Muhammad also consulted them regarding giving "Divorce" to 'Aisha.<br />
* Even after one month, Muhammad was still doubting 'Aisha and he asked 'Aisha if she had committed a sin, then she should confess it and then she should repent. <br />
* 'Aisha said, she was so much disappointed with this behaviour of Muhammad, that she refused to even talk to him.<br />
* 'Aisha said, she would not say anything to testify her innocence in front of Muhammad, while this slander has been planted in the heart of Muhammad, and he will not believe in her testimony. <br />
* 'Aisha further said, but if she falsely confess that she committed a sin, then Muhammad is immediately going to believe in it. <br />
* Then 'Aisha turned her face from Muhammad, and laid on the other side of bed. <br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that externally, Muhammad was trying hard to keep the mouths shut of people in raising doubts in this incident, by even giving orders to kill 'Abdullah, but internally, he was himself doubting 'Aisha. But as a human being, he made a mistake and didn't anticipate that later his own behaviour would be disclosed by 'Aisha too. <br />
<br />
Thus it is enough to understand that this was not a divine revelation, but it was the human drama of Muhammad itself, while if this revelation was really divine, then Quran would have been threatening Muhammad before threatening that group of outside people for doubting 'Aisha and not immediately rejecting it completely as a big lie. <br />
<br />
== Details of Incident of Ifk, as has been narrated by 'Aisha ==<br />
Details of this incident are present in lengthy narrations of 'Aisha in Sahih Bukhari and other books. <br />
<br />
Narrated `Aisha:<br />
<br />
Whenever Allah's Messenger intended to go on a journey, he used to draw lots amongst his wives, and Allah's Messenger used to take with him the one on whom lot fell. He drew lots amongst us during one of the Ghazwat which he fought. The lot fell on me and so I proceeded with Allah's Messenger after Allah's order of veiling (the women) had been revealed. I was carried (on the back of a camel) in my howdah and carried down while still in it (when we came to a halt). So we went on till Allah's Messenger had finished from that Ghazwa of his and returned. When we approached the city of Medina he announced at night that it was time for departure. So when they announced the news of departure, I got up and went away from the army camps, and after finishing from the call of nature, I came back to my riding animal. <nowiki>'''</nowiki>I touched my chest to find that my necklace which was made of Zifar beads (i.e. Yemenite beads partly black and partly white) was missing<nowiki>'''</nowiki>. So I returned to look for my necklace and my search for it detained me. (In the meanwhile) the people who used to carry me on my camel, came and took my howdah and put it on the back of my camel on which I used to ride, as they considered that I was in it. In those days women were light in weight for they did not get fat, and flesh did not cover their bodies in abundance as they used to eat only a little food. Those people therefore, disregarded the lightness of the howdah while lifting and carrying it; and at that time I was still a young girl. They made the camel rise and all of them left (along with it). I found my necklace after the army had gone. Then I came to their camping place to find no call maker of them, nor one who would respond to the call. So I intended to go to the place where I used to stay, thinking that they would miss me and come back to me (in my search). While I was sitting in my resting place, I was overwhelmed by sleep and slept. <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me as he had seen me before the order of compulsory veiling (was prescribed)<nowiki>'''</nowiki>. So I woke up when he recited Istirja' (i.e. "Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji'un") as soon as he recognized me. I veiled my face with my head cover at once, and by Allah, <nowiki>'''</nowiki>we did not speak a single word,<nowiki>'''</nowiki> and I did not hear him saying any word besides his Istirja'. He dismounted from his camel and made it kneel down, putting his leg on its front legs and then I got up and rode on it. Then he set out leading the camel that was carrying me till we overtook the army in the extreme heat of midday while they were at a halt (taking a rest). <nowiki>'''</nowiki>(Because of the event) some people brought destruction upon themselves and the one who spread the Ifk (i.e. slander) more, was `Abdullah bin Ubai Ibn Salul."<nowiki>'''</nowiki> (Urwa said, "The people propagated the slander and talked about it in his (i.e. `Abdullah's) presence and he confirmed it and listened to it and asked about it to let it prevail." `Urwa also added, "None was mentioned as members of the slanderous group besides (`Abdullah) except <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Hassan bin Thabit and Mistah bin Uthatha and Hamna bint Jahsh along with others about whom I have no knowledge<nowiki>'''</nowiki>, but they were a group as Allah said. It is said that the one who carried most of the slander was `Abdullah bin Ubai bin Salul." `Urwa added, "`Aisha disliked to have Hassan abused in her presence and she used to say, 'It was he who said: My father and his (i.e. my father's) father and my honor are all for the protection of Muhammad's honor from you."). `Aisha added, "After we returned to Medina, I became ill for a month. The people were propagating the forged statements of the slanderers while I was unaware of anything of all that, <nowiki>'''</nowiki>but I felt that in my present ailment, I was not receiving the same kindness from Allah's Messenger as I used to receive when I got sick. (But now) Allah's Messenger would only come, greet me and say,' How is that (lady)?' and leave<nowiki>'''</nowiki>. ... ('Aisha said, after becoming aware of the slanders against her, when) Allah's Messenger came to me, and after greeting me, said, 'How is that (lady)?' I said, 'Will you allow me to go to my parents?' as I wanted to be sure about the news through them. Allah's Apostle allowed me ... I ('Aisha) kept on weeping that night till dawn I could neither stop weeping nor sleep then in the morning again, I kept on weeping. When the Divine Inspiration was delayed, <nowiki>'''</nowiki>Allah's Messenger called `Ali bin Abi Talib and Usama bin Zaid to ask and consult them about divorcing me<nowiki>'''</nowiki>. Usama bin Zaid said what he knew of my innocence, and the respect he preserved in himself for me. Usama said, '(O Allah's Messenger !) She is your wife and we do not know anything except good about her.' `Ali bin Abi Talib said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! Allah does not put you in difficulty and there are plenty of women other than she, yet, ask the maid-servant who will tell you the truth.' On that Allah's Messenger called Barira (i.e. the maid-servant) and said, 'O Barira! Did you ever see anything which aroused your suspicion?' Barira said to him, 'By Him Who has sent you with the Truth. I have never seen anything in her (i.e. Aisha) which I would conceal, except that she is a young girl who sleeps leaving the dough of her family exposed so that the domestic goats come and eat it.' So, on that day, Allah's Messenger got up on the pulpit and complained about `Abdullah bin Ubai (bin Salul) before his companions, saying, '<nowiki>'''</nowiki>O you Muslims! Who will relieve me from that man who has hurt me with his evil statement about my family?<nowiki>'''</nowiki> By Allah, I know nothing except good about my family and they have blamed a man about whom I know nothing except good and he used never to enter my home except with me.' Sa`d bin Mu`adh the brother of Banu `Abd Al-Ashhal got up and said, 'O Allah's Messenger ! I will relieve you from him; if he is from the tribe of Al-Aus, then I will chop his head off, and if he is from our brothers, i.e. Al-Khazraj, then order us, and we will fulfill your order.' On that, a man from Al-Khazraj got up. Um Hassan, his cousin, was from his branch tribe, and he was Sa`d bin Ubada, chief of Al-Khazraj. Before this incident, he was a pious man, but his love for his tribe goaded him into saying to Sa`d (bin Mu`adh). 'By Allah, you have told a lie; you shall not and cannot kill him. If he belonged to your people, you would not wish him to be killed.' On that, Usaid bin Hudair who was the cousin of Sa`d (bin Mu`adh) got up and said to Sa`d bin 'Ubada, 'By Allah! You are a liar! We will surely kill him, and you are a hypocrite arguing on the behalf of hypocrites.' On this, the two tribes of Al-Aus and Al Khazraj got so much excited that they were about to fight while Allah's Messenger was standing on the pulpit. Allah's Messenger kept on quietening them till they became silent and so did he. All that day I kept on weeping with my tears never ceasing, and I could never sleep. In the morning my parents were with me and I wept for two nights and a day with my tears never ceasing and I could never sleep till I thought that my liver would burst from weeping. So, while my parents were sitting with me and I was weeping, an Ansari woman asked me to grant her admittance. I allowed her to come in, and when she came in, she sat down and started weeping with me. While we were in this state, Allah's Messenger came, greeted us and sat down. He had never sat with me since that day of the slander. A month had elapsed and no Divine Inspiration came to him about my case. Allah's Apostle then recited Tashah-hud and then said, 'Amma Badu, O `Aisha! I have been informed so-andso about you; if you are innocent, then soon Allah will reveal your innocence, and if you have committed a sin, then repent to Allah and ask Him for forgiveness for when a slave confesses his sins and asks Allah for forgiveness, Allah accepts his repentance.' (continued...) (continuing... 1): -5.462:... ... When Allah's Messenger finished his speech, my tears ceased flowing completely that I no longer felt a single drop of tear flowing. I said to my father, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' My father said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' Then I said to my mother, 'Reply to Allah's Messenger on my behalf concerning what he has said.' She said, 'By Allah, I do not know what to say to Allah's Messenger .' In spite of the fact that I was a young girl and had a little knowledge of Qur'an, I said, 'By Allah, no doubt I know that you heard this (slanderous) speech so that it has been planted in your hearts (i.e. minds) and you have taken it as a truth. Now if I tell you that I am innocent, you will not believe me, and if confess to you about it, and Allah knows that I am innocent, you will surely believe me. By Allah, I find no similitude for me and you except that of Joseph's father when he said, '(For me) patience in the most fitting against that which you assert; it is Allah (Alone) Whose Help can be sought.' Then I turned to the other side and lay on my bed; and Allah knew then that I was innocent and hoped that Allah would reveal my innocence. But, by Allah, I never thought that Allah would reveal about my case, Divine Inspiration, that would be recited (forever) as I considered myself too unworthy to be talked of by Allah with something of my concern, but I hoped that Allah's Messenger might have a dream in which Allah would prove my innocence. But, by Allah, before Allah's Messenger left his seat and before any of the household left, the Divine inspiration came to Allah's Messenger . So there overtook him the same hard condition which used to overtake him, (when he used to be inspired Divinely). The sweat was dropping from his body like pearls though it was a wintry day and that was because of the weighty statement which was being revealed to him. When that state of Allah's Messenger was over, he got up smiling, and the first word he said was, 'O `Aisha! Allah has declared your innocence!' Then my Mother said to me, 'Get up and go to him (i.e. Allah's Messenger ). I replied, 'By Allah, I will not go to him, and I praise none but Allah. So Allah revealed the ten Verses:- - "Verily! They who spread the slander Are a gang, among you............." (24.11-20) Allah revealed those Qur'anic Verses to declare my innocence. Abu Bakr As-Siddiq who used to disburse money for Mistah bin Uthatha because of his relationship to him and his poverty, said, 'By Allah, I will never give to Mistah bin Uthatha anything after what he has said about Aisha.' Then Allah revealed:-- "And let not those among you who are good and wealthy swear not to give (any sort of help) to their kinsmen, those in need, and those who have left their homes for Allah's cause, let them pardon and forgive. Do you not love that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is oft-Forgiving Most Merciful." (24.22) Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said, 'Yes, by Allah, I would like that Allah forgive me.' and went on giving Mistah the money he used to give him before. He also added, 'By Allah, I will never deprive him of it at all.' Aisha further said:." Allah's Messenger also asked Zainab bint Jahsh (i.e. his wife) about my case. He said to Zainab, 'What do you know and what did you see?" She replied, "O Allah's Messenger ! I refrain from claiming falsely that I have heard or seen anything. By Allah, I know nothing except good (about `Aisha).' From amongst the wives of the Prophet Zainab was my peer (in beauty and in the love she received from the Prophet) but Allah saved her from that evil because of her piety. Her sister Hamna, started struggling on her behalf and she was destroyed along with those who were destroyed. The man who was blamed said, 'Subhan-Allah! By Him in Whose Hand my soul is, I have never uncovered the cover (i.e. veil) of any female.' Later on the man was martyred in Allah's Cause."<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br /></div>Lehrasaphttps://wikiislam.net/index.php?title=%27Iddah_(Female_Menstrual_Waiting_Period)&diff=133959'Iddah (Female Menstrual Waiting Period)2021-11-30T07:51:19Z<p>Lehrasap: /* Reason for 'iddah of a widow */</p>
<hr />
<div> <br />
In Islam, 'iddah or 'iddat (Arabic: العدة; ''period (of waiting)'') is the period a woman must observe after the death of her husband or after a divorce, during which she may not marry another man.<ref name="Esposito2004">{{cite book | editor = John L. Esposito | date = 21 October 2004 | title = The Oxford Dictionary of Islam | publisher = Oxford University Press | pages = 131 | isbn = 978-0-19-975726-8 | oclc = 286438886 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=E324pQEEQQcC}}</ref> The 'iddah (waiting period) of different kind of women in Islam varies depending on her status:<br />
<br />
*'''A widowed woman''': The waiting period is 4 months and 10 days<br />
*'''A pregnant woman''': The waiting period is up to 9 months (till the birth of the baby)<br />
*'''A divorced woman''': The waiting period is 3 menstrual cycles. (However, Islam critics point out that actually she would not get the attention and love and emotional help from any man for 6 menstrual cycles. The first 3 menstrual cycles are the process of Divorce, in which she could not leave the husband's house, and her husband does not touch her. And after the divorce, again she has to stay in the "waiting period" of 3 more menstrual cycles with many restrictions. She practically has to stay under these strict restrictions for about 6 months).<br />
<br />
Muslim Scholars claim that rulings of 'Iddah could neither be abolished, nor could be changed as the rulings of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia Islamic Sharia] are based upon wisdom, justice and the best interests of the women, and they protect the women against the gender oppression and misogyny, while the man made laws of the modern Western world lead to the sexual exploitation of the women<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/39286 Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website: Is it correct to think that fatwas may vary according to time and place?] </ref><ref>[https://yaqeeninstitute.org/read/paper/women-in-islamic-law-examining-five-prevalent-myths Women in Islamic Law: Examining Five Prevalent Myths]</ref>.<br />
<br />
While Islam critics claim that: <br />
<br />
*'Iddah rulings are illogical, and thus they have contradictions.<br />
*And all these restrictions of 'Iddah are only targeting the women and only women have to suffer unilaterally, while men are totally free to enjoy their life.<br />
<br />
==‘Iddah and the ‘parentage’ of the child==<br />
Islam advocates claim that ‘Iddah is necessary in order to keep the ‘parentage’ of the child safe.<br />
<br />
But the Islam critics object ,and present the following arguments:<br />
<br />
*Becoming free of blood of the first menstrual cycle is enough to know if the woman is pregnant or not, and about the “parentage” of the child.<br />
*That is why Islam itself stipulated the ‘Iddah (waiting period) of only one menstrual cycle for the prisoner/slave woman<ref>[https://sunnah.com/abudawud:2158 Sunnan Abu Dawud: 2158]</ref>, and also of a free Muslim woman who takes divorce through [[Khul']]<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/5163/does-iddah-apply-in-the-case-of-khula Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website]</ref>.<br />
*After this first menstrual cycle, Muslim men are allowed to have sex with them.<br />
*Muhammad himself had sex with Saffiyah the same night, when in the day her father, brother and husband was killed, while she became free from blood of her first menstrual cycle the same day<ref>[https://sunnah.com/bukhari/64/251 Sahih Bukhari:2158]</ref>. Muhammad married her as a free woman.<br />
*Thus 3 monthly cycle 'Iddah of divorced woman, or 4 months 10 days 'Iddah of a widow, or the birth of child in case of pregnant woman has nothing to do with the parentage of the child.<br />
<br />
==Restrictions upon the women during 'Iddah:==<br />
<br />
===First Restriction: She has to undergo the 'Iddah even without any 'maintenance' money===<br />
{{Quote|[https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf Dar-ul-Ifta]|The '''maintenance and providing of shelter for a woman observing the Iddat of Death are not the responsibility of her in-laws. She also does not have the right to take her maintenance out of the Estate of her deceased husband.'''}}<br />
Thus Islam Critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*A woman has no choice, but to compulsorily undergo the 'Iddah of period of 4 months and 10 days (or up to 9 months in case of pregnancy), but she has no right for maintenance money from the estate of her husband for this long period of time.<br />
*This is a huge financial burden upon the women, who often don't even have any source of income in the Islamic countries.<br />
<br />
===Second Restriction: She has to obligatorily stay only in the house of Husband during the ‘Iddah===<br />
According to the Islamic Sharia'h, If the husband dies:<br />
<br />
*then a woman has to stay ONLY in the house of her husband during this whole period of 'Iddah.<br />
*She is not allowed to spend this time of 'Iddah in any other place (like house of her parents or any other family members)<ref>Fatwas Website Islamqa.Org. [https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ Laws of Iddat].</ref><ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/10670/what-a-recently-widowed-woman-is-not-allowed-to-do Islam Question Answer Fatwa Website]</ref>.<br />
<br />
Islam critics object here that: <br />
<br />
*What does that have to do with the ‘parentage’ of the child where she stays after the death of her husband?<br />
*Why could she not spend the waiting period in the house of her parents, where she feels comfortable and where she is among the people who love her? This could help her immensely to come out of the sorrow of the death of her husband.<br />
*And in the house of her husband, she could be all alone, and she has to live like she is in a 'solitary confinement' like situation, while she is not allowed to leave the house, and she could not come in contact with any man.<br />
*Moreover, it could be a huge mental torture for many women to live for 4 long months (or upto 9 months in case of pregnancy) in the house where their husbands died.<br />
<br />
===She has to stay in the husband’s house, even if it doesn’t belong to her husband, or even if he hasn’t left any maintenance money for the wife===<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2293|hasan}}|Furay'ah said that she came to the Messenger of Allah and asked him whether she could return to her people, Banu Khidrah, for her husband went out seeking his slaves who ran away. When they met him at al-Qudum, they murdered him.<br />
<br />
So I asked the Messenger of Allah: "Should I return to my people, '''for he did not leave any dwelling house of his own and maintenance for me'''?<br />
<br />
She said: The Messenger of Allah replied: Yes. She said: I came out, and when I was in the apartment or in the mosque, he called for me, or he commanded (someone to call me) and, therefore, I was called.<br />
<br />
He said: what did you say? So I repeated my story which I had already mentioned about my husband.<br />
<br />
'''Thereupon he said: Stay in your house till the term (of four months and 10 days) lapses.'''<br />
<br />
She said: So I passed my waiting period in it (her house) for four months and ten days. When Uthman ibn Affan became caliph, he sent for me and asked me about that; so I informed him, '''and he followed it and decided cases accordingly'''.}}<br />
<br />
Thus Islam Critics raise the objections that:<br />
<br />
*How is it a 'justice' with a woman that firstly she is compelled to live in that house, and secondly then also to pay for the rent?<br />
*Why is she compelled to bear the expenses of her daily needs at her own, while her family could have taken care of her easily if she would have stayed in the house of her parents/brothers/sisters.<br />
<br />
===Third Restriction: She could not leave the house even for daily walks, or visit the relatives or attend any social gathering===<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20211014113704/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45453/visiting-relatives-in-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]|'''Question''': Is a woman allowed to visit family members like her parents or sisters if she is observing iddat and use the excuse that she will be with her family so she doesn’t see the problem?</br> <br />
'''Answer''': A woman who has been divorced is not allowed to leave the confines of her home during the iddat for whatever reason, '''be it to visit friends or relatives or to attend the funeral of even her parents'''.}}<br />
She could also not go outside for daily walks, as they are not a necessity ([https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114224/https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/349861/woman-in-iddah-may-go-out-for-need Fatwa 1], [https://web.archive.org/web/20211014114300/https://idealwoman.org/2021/can-a-woman-go-out-for-a-walk-during-iddat/ Fatwa 2]). <br />
<br />
Islam Critics object that: <br />
<br />
*Women are also human beings. They thus also need to entertain themselves by going out in the parks, and daily walks, and shopping, and eating in restaurants, attending the parties, sleeping at her parents house, visiting her relatives etc.<br />
*All these restrictions are non-Natural and against the human nature.<br />
*And putting these restrictions 'unilaterally' only upon the women does not constitute to 'doing Justice with the women'.<br />
*These restrictions are draconian, and practically putting a woman in a 'solitary confinement' like situation.<br />
<br />
===Fourth Restriction: She could not even use collyrium/kohl in eyes despite eye disease, while it beautifies her===<br />
Although a woman is allowed to take medical care during ‘Iddah, still she should not use collyrium/kohl as a cure even against any eye disease, while it beautifies her. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari||68|81|in-book}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said, "No."}}<br />
<br />
===Fifth Restriction: Women are not allowed to use good clothes, jewelry, perfume, Henna and to comb the hairs or to oil them===<br />
Women in 'Iddah are not allowed to wear good clothes, or jewelry, or use perfume or Henna. Even combing hairs and applying the oil to them is also forbidden<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20211028112250/https://islamqa.org/hanafi/askmufti/45291/laws-of-the-iddat/ IslamQA Fatwa Website]</ref>. And even washing the face with aloe is also forbidden.<br />
{{Quote|[https://sunnah.com/mishkat:3333 Mishkat al-Masabih 3333]|Umm Salama said: God’s Messenger came to visit me when Abu Salama died, and I had put the juice of aloes on myself. He asked me what it was, and I told him it was only the juice of aloes and contained no perfume, so he said, “It gives the face a glow, so apply it only at night and remove it in the daytime, and do not comb yourself with scent or henna, for it is a dye.” I asked God’s Messenger what I should use when combing myself, and he told me to use lote-tree leaves and smear my head copiously with them. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani declared this Hadith to be FAIR (حسن) (link).}}Islam critics question here the Islamic logic, that:<br />
<br />
*A woman is not coming in any kind of contact with any man during the 'iddah, as she is not allowed to let any non-Mahram man to enter her house, and she is herself not allowed to leave the house.<br />
*So, what is wrong if she wear good clothes, and jewelry, and use perfume, and use henna and comb her hairs with oil, and wash her face with aloe in the house, where she is alone, or at maximum with other women?<br />
*At maximum, the usage of perfume could be restricted in case if she had to leave the house in urgent situation.<br />
<br />
===Sixth Restriction: She should give up her Natural needs of getting any emotional support and attention and love from any other partner during the ‘Iddah===<br />
Islam critics point out that: <br />
<br />
*Need of sex is not only limited to men, but it is a natural need of woman too. But Islam does not recognise this right and natural need of a woman, and it has limited it to the man only. Thus, a woman is not allowed to have sex with any partner for this long period of time of ‘Iddah.<br />
*But sex is not the only problem, while divorce or death of husband also comes with extreme emotional stress for the woman. This is exactly the time when some of them may need emotional support and attention from a caring partner the most, who could talk with them and give them love and attention, so that they feel themselves “secure” in the partner's arms.<br />
*On the other hand, Muslim men are allowed to have sex with other wives and dozens of slave-girls the same night. There is absolutely no restrictions upon them to even control themselves for even for a single day.<br />
<br />
===Seventh Restriction: She could not secure herself and her children financially through relationship with any other partner in the ‘Iddah===<br />
Islam critics object here that the Hadith of Furay'ah (which has already been mentioned above) proves that a woman has to stay in the waiting period in the house of her deceased husband, even though he left no maintenance money for her.<br />
<br />
*And women in Islamic society are poorly educated.<br />
*And Islamic society also does not provide women with job opportunities too, but she has to face so many hurdles in doing a job outside.<br />
*Thus, the best bet for such a divorced/widow Muslim woman (even if she is pregnant) is to get another partner and get herself and her children financially secured in this way.<br />
*But Islam has also completely blocked this opportunity for the woman too. Neither other men are allowed to see her, nor to meet her and decide if they could come into the relationship, nor they could make any proposal to them.<br />
*She is all alone during the ‘Iddah period to financially secure herself and her children.<br /><br />
<br />
===Islam Advocates: Strict 'restrictions' are placed upon the divorced woman during the 'Iddah due to the danger of her indulging in a SIN===<br />
But Islam critics don't agree with this excuse, while:<br />
<br />
*If normal Muslim women (or even the virgin Muslim girls) are allowed to go outside to entertain themselves in the Parks, and for picnic, and attend the social gatherings, and visit their relatives, and sleep in their parent's home, and attend the funerals of their parents and they don't indulge into sin, why then a widow or a divorced woman will indulge in the sin for doing these same things?<br />
*And if normal Muslim women (or even the virgin Muslim girls) are allowed to use the Kohl in their eyes, and parfum, and comb their hairs, and use the jewelry, and to wear good clothes, and use henna, or to wash their faces with Aloe, and still they don't indulge into sin, why then a divorced woman or a widow will indulge in the sin for doing the same thing?<br />
<br />
===Did Muhammad copy this practice of ‘Iddah from the pre-Islamic period of Ignorance?===<br />
Islam critics claim that:<br />
<br />
*Muhammad copied this ‘Iddah from the culture of people of Pre-Islam period of ignorance.<br />
*And when Muslim women protested upon it, then Muhammad told the women to happily accept all these Islamic restriction of waiting period without questioning them, as they last only for 4 months and 10 days, and while they had to stay in 'Iddah for complete one year in the pre-Islamic days.<br />
<br />
And as a proof, Islam critics quote the following hadith: <br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||5336|darussalam}}|Um Salama said that a woman came to Allah's Messenger and said, "O Allah's Messenger ! The husband of my daughter has died and she is suffering from an eye disease. Can she apply collyrium/kohl to her eye?" Allah's Messenger replied, "No," twice or thrice. (Every time she repeated her question) he said,''' "No." Then Allah's Messenger added, "It is just a matter of four months and ten days. In the Pre-Islamic Period of ignorance a widow among you should throw a globe of dung when one year has elapsed (i.e. she had to stay in ‘Iddah for the whole one year)." '''}}Islam critics object that this reason (which was given by Muhammad in the above mentioned hadith) is illogical. An oppression does not become legal while it is on smaller scale than the previous larger scale oppression. <br />
<br />
==Reason for 'iddah of a widow==<br />
Islam advocates claim that reason for the 4 month and 10 days long 'iddah of a widow is to ''''mourn'''<nowiki/>' the death of the husband<ref>Reason for 4 months 10 days long Iddah of a widow [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/88684/rights-of-a-deceased-husband-on-his-wife]</ref>.<br />
<br />
While Islam critics object upon it while:<br />
<br />
*There is no obligation of any “mourning” upon a man if the wife dies. This makes it a double standard situation against the women.<br />
*Husband is totally free to marry a new wife the same night.<br />
*And he is also totally free to have sex with his other wives and dozens of slave girls the same night, and there is no restriction upon him in name of ‘mourning’.<br />
*Only the woman is compelled to ‘mourn’ the death of her husband.<br />
*Only she is deprived of her natural needs of having love with any partner in the name of ‘mourning’, and only she has to undergo the strickt restrictions of 'Iddah.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islamic critics also criticise Islamic Sharia, while it says that a widow has also to observe 'Iddah, even if <ref>Widow has to observe 'Iddah even if she never saw the husband after the marriage, or even if she is a small child. [https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/145179/the-waiting-period-of-an-old-woman-after-the-death-of-her-husband]</ref>:<br />
<br />
*She has never seen her husband after the marriage.<br />
*Or even if the marriage has not been consummated.<br />
*Or even if she is a minor child.<br />
*Islam critics thus question why should she mourn if she has no emotional connection and love for him in her heart?<br />
*What if the husband was abusive and he tortured her when he was alive, and thus she HATED him? This is cruel to still compel a woman for such a long obligatorily waiting period, with so many restrictions.<br />
<br />
Therefore, Islam critics point out that Islam could have left it upon the woman:<br />
<br />
*That she could decide for herself if she loved her deceased husband or not.<br />
*That she decides herself to mourn his death or not.<br />
*That she decides how long she wants to mourn, and when she is ready for the new relationship.<br />
*That she decides if living in her deceased husband’s house is causing her unnecessary mental stress or not.<br />
*That she decides for herself if she needs the help and love of her parents and family or not by staying with them.<br />
*Woman is not a “'''Brainless Creature'''”, who is unable to even decide for the matters which are only related to her and her personal life?<br />
<br />
==Reason for the 'Iddah of a pregnant woman==<br />
According to the Quran, the waiting period of a pregnant woman is till the birth of a child ([https://quranx.com/65.4 Quran 65:4]).<br />
<br />
And then Muhammad further told the '''Scientific LOGIC''' behind this Quranic order:<br />
{{Quote|{{Abudawud||2158|darussalam}}|The Messenger of Allah said: It is not lawful for a man who believes in Allah and the last day '''to water what another has sown with his water (meaning intercourse with a woman who is pregnant from her previous husband).'''}}<br />
Islam critics objects that this is a scientific mistake, while:<br />
<br />
*Science is very clear if woman has already become pregnant, then other man could do as much sex as possible, but his sperms are not going to have any effects upon the fetus (i.e. he is not going to water the fetus from previous man). No DNA changes are going to take place in the fetus due to the sex. These were the concepts of times of ignorance, and Muhammad took this concept from them.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics also points out that once again the pregnant woman has to bear the consequences of this practice unilaterally. <br />
<br />
*The pregnant woman is alone after the death of her husband, and she is financially very weak.<br />
*What if the deceased husband left no money for her and the baby?<br />
*And it is impossible for her to go to the work outside while carrying the baby in her belly.<br />
*A woman is in a state of extreme emotion during the pregnancy. This is exactly the time when she needs emotional support the most from a partner, who could take care of her, or of her father/mother/family, but she is compelled to stay at the husband's house.<br />
*She is compelled to face all these difficulties 'alone' till the birth of the baby.<br />
<br />
Moreover, Islam critics also point out that in principle:<br />
<br />
*A pregnant woman should not go for ‘Iddah of even a single day, while the parentage of the child is already known due to her pregnancy.<br />
*If husband could divorce such a pregnant woman and then start having sex with dozens of other slave girls and wives, why then should the pregnant woman be deprived of the emotional support and love and attention and care of the new partner, in a hard time when she needs these things the most?<br />
<br />
==Reasons for the 'Iddah in case of divorce==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*The whole process of Divorce + ‘Iddah lasts for 6 menstrual cycles for a divorced woman.<br />
*If Muslim husband decides to give her a divorce, then woman is still compelled to stay for the next 3 menstrual cycles with him in his house<ref>Woman has to stay for 3 menstrual cycles at home of husband during the process of [https://abukhadeejah.com/divorce-talaq-iddah-remarriage-khula/ Talaq] </ref>.<br />
*During these 3 months, wife is not allowed to come in contact with any man. And her husband also does not touch her. She is again in a 'solitary confinement' like situation in the house of her husband.<br />
*But the husband is free to have sex with other wives and slave girls during all this time.<br />
*And after the divorce, she again has to undergo a waiting period of 3 more menstrual cycles<ref>'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles after the divorce.[https://www.islamic-sharia.org/downloads/talaq/]</ref>. But why? There is no issue of parentage of the child either, while her husband didn’t touch her for the last 3 menstrual cycles. And there is no option of reunion of both of them after the divorce, till the time she undergoes the Quranic Halala. So, why is the woman then still forced to undergo solitary confinement like situation for the next 3 more months in the name of ‘Iddah?<br />
<br />
===Islam Advocates: She has to observe 'Iddah while she was 'alone' with a man under one roof===<br />
Islam advocates say, even if the husband has not touched her for the last 3 menstrual cycles, still she has to observe restrictions of 'Iddah of 3 more months, while<ref>Privacy under one roof causes women to observe 'Iddah of 3 months. [https://daruliftaa.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/rules_of_iddat-1.pdf]</ref>: <br />
<br />
*She was ‘alone’ with her previous husband under one roof in privacy during the process of 3 Talaqs.<br />
*And the WITNESSES of man and woman are not accepted in Islam that they didn’t have sex during this period.<br />
*Therefore, restrictions of 'Iddah of 3 more menstrual cycles will safeguard the parentage of the child in case she became pregnant from the previous husband.<br />
<br />
But the Islam critics object and point out that:<br />
<br />
*If the witness of ONLY man is accepted in the process of Talaq (i.e. he didn’t touch her for the last 3 menstrual cycles), and he gets her divorced on the bases of his single witness, why then the witnesses of BOTH the Man and Woman are rejected when they testify that they didn’t have the sex for the last 3 menstrual cycles, and thus she is not pregnant, and thus she does not need any further ‘Iddah in name of parentage of the child?<br />
*As compared to the rejection of witnesses of these 2 Free Adult Muslim Man and Woman, Islam allows the man to start having sex with the slave woman of another person, on the bases of ''''singular testimony'''<nowiki/>' of the slave-girl alone, that she is not pregnant, and her owner made her Halal for him to use her as a sex object.<br />
{{Quote|[https://web.archive.org/web/20201101155533/http://www.shiapen.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/fatwa_alamgiri_v3_p268.jpg Fatawa Alamgiri, vol 3, page 268, Urdu edition]|A Singular Report is enough in the religious issues. Therefore, if a slave woman comes to any person and tells him that her master has gifted her to him, then that person could trust the testimony of that slave-girl and have sex with her.}}<br />
<br />
*And lastly, even one menstrual cycle is enough to know if she is pregnant or not (just like the prisoner/slave woman). Why then she still has to undergo the 3 menstrual cycles long waiting period? This again makes no sense.<br />
*And why should she not use perfume and make-up and make herself attractive to other men, as there is no option of returning to previous husband without the Halala?<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*A wife who hasn't seen her husband for years, should also undergo the sufferings of 'Iddah in case of divorce. But why? There are no chances of her being pregnant.<br />
*A minor girl (who has not started to menstruate), why then does she also has to undergo the waiting period of 3 months in case of divorce, as she couldn't even get pregnant?<br />
*Similarly, an old woman could also not get pregnant, why does then she also has to undergo the solitary confinement like restrictions of ‘Iddah in case of divorce?<br />
<br />
===Islam Advocates: 'Iddah is necessary while a women is emotionally disturbed after the divorce===<br />
An Islam advocate wrote: <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/q8lp7y/comment/hgr5oij/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3 Reddit]|2="The last thing on a woman's mind after she has got divorced is intimacy. She is mentally disturbed and needs time to come out of this shock"}}<br />
While Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*The answer is simple, i.e. to let the women decide for themselves. If they don't have wish, then no one should force them into any relationship. And what to talk about 3 menstrual cycles of 'Iddah, they could stay out of any new relationship for an year or longer as they wish.<br />
*But if they wish otherwise, and decide to enter into a new relationship just after the divorce (or even in case of becoming a widow), then no one should stop them. There could be many women for whom divorce is not a mental shock, but divorce is a form of freedom for them and it is a ''''mental relief'''<nowiki/>' for them to come out of an abusive relationship.<br />
*Why then religion want to forcefully imposes itself upon the masses, killing the wishes and the right of self-determination of millions of women.<br />
*It would become double standards if the religion considers that men are not mentally disturbed from Talaq, and thus have the right to decide for themselves to have sex with multiple other slave women or wives the same night, or to take marry another wife same night, but only women are unable to decide for themselves.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam itself allowed the pregnant woman to deliver a child after divorce or becoming a widow (be it only few hours), and then immediately wed to another man. This proves that Islam itself doesn't consider that all women are necessarily mentally stressed, or emotionally attached with the previous husbands despite the divorce.<br />
*Muhammad himself married Saffiyah the same night, when in the day her husband was killed, and Muhammad didn't care if she was mentally stressed or emotionally attached with her previous husband. <br />
<br />
==Islam Critics: The process of Divorce in Islam is again UNJUST towards the women==<br />
Islam advocates claim that a woman has to stay in the house of husband for 3 menstrual cycles during the process of divorce, while this could provide them with the chance to reconcile<ref>Staying in husband's home during the process of divorce.[https://abukhadeejah.com/divorce-talaq-iddah-remarriage-khula/]</ref>.<br />
<br />
But Islam critics object to this process of divorce, and ask:<br />
<br />
*But what if the husband is an abusive evil person? What if he tortures her all this period without any reason? What if he beats her so wildly that she gets bruises all over her body? Why they still she has to still stay with such an abusive husband for 3 months? (Please read the [[Khul']] article, that woman could not get her freedom through Khul', even if the husband is abusive and tortures her. Only if he breaks any part of her body, in that case she could get her freedom through the court)<br />
*Only the woman is forced to sacrifice in the name of so-called “reconcilement” in this Islamic Talaq process, while husband has to bring no sacrifice. He is free to have sex with all other wives and slave girls during this whole period of 3 months.<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Is there any guarantee that this dispute between husband and wife is going to resolve in 3 months time of Talaq process?<br />
*Is it not possible that it may take more than 3 months that both of them come back in their senses and end the dispute after this period? For example, a man comes back to his senses after 1 years, and realises that it was a mistake to divorce his wife and she was totally innocent. Then what are the options available there to undo this mistake? The answer is, there are NO more options available, while she could not return to him without undergoing the process of Halala, which is considered as a shameful process. So, what then is the 'Divine Wisdom' in this ruling, which limits this reconcilationary period to only 3 menstrual cycles?<br />
<br />
Moreover:<br />
<br />
*Islam compels the woman to stay in the house of husband during the process of Talaq. While it has been seen that in cases of disputes, it could also be helpful that both parties take a break from each other and live separately for some period of time.<br />
*This provides both parties with chance to ponder upon, and to learn from their mistakes in a better way and they realise their mistakes in a better way.<br />
*When wife has to face the difficulties in living in house of her parents or brothers/sisters, then she realises quickly the importance of house of her husband. And when husband has to do all the work in the house alone, and has to take care of the children alone too, then he also realises his mistake quickly.<br />
*But Islam closed this option for them by ordering the woman for not leaving the husband's house even in case of serious disputes.<br />
<br />
===Islam Critics: Pronouncing 3 Divorces in one sitting is also illogical and an Injustice towards the woman===<br />
Islam advocates say that Islam also allows pronouncing 3 divorces in one sitting, which will spare the woman of 3 months restrictions of divorce process. But Islam critics again object upon it and point out that: <br />
<br />
*Only may is allowed to give Talaq in this way. Why these double standards? Is woman a 'brainless emotional creature', who could not take decisions about her own life.<br />
*And this divorce becomes valid even if the wife was totally innocent, and he only pronounced 3 divorces in '''ANGER'''. This proves that blaming only women for being emotionally unstable is not correct, but men could also become totally emotionally unstable, especially in the state of Anger and they are capable of doing every kind of stupid things, including killing others.<br />
*What type of '''Divine Wisdom''' is this, then to give right to such emotionally unstable men in anger to divorce their wives in 3 seconds, by saying 3 times Talaq Talaq Talaq?<br />
*The consequences of such 3 times Talaq in anger has to be bear by the poor innocent wife, where her whole family is destroyed and she may loose her children too.<br />
*And despite being totally innocent, again only she is forced to undergo the shameful process of Halala too, if she wishes to reunite with here family (i.e. husband and the children).<br />
*Is it really that giving rights with Justice to the woman by Islam?<br />
<br />
==Islam Critics: Blackmailing the women in name of ‘reconcilement & settlement’ in the Divorce Process==<br />
Islam critics claim while only the woman suffers during the long process of Islamic Talaq, thus it works as a weapon in hands of an abusive husband, to blackmail her unjustly, and to usurp her rights by compelling her to give up her rights. <br />
{{Quote|1=[https://quranx.com/4.128?context=3 Quran 4:128-129]|2=And if a woman fears from her husband contempt or evasion, there is no sin upon them if they make terms of '''settlement''' between them (i.e. woman agrees upon leaving some of her rights) … And you will never be able to do '''Justice (Arabic: تَعْدِلُوْا)''' between wives, even if you should strive [to do so].}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that here occurs a contradiction in Islamic Sharia, while earlier at time of allowing 4 wives, the writer of Quran stipulated the condition of "Justice (Adl عدل)":<br />
<br />
{{Quote|{{Quran|4|3}}|If ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, Marry women of your choice, Two or three or four; but if ye fear that ye shall not be able to deal '''JUSTLY (Arabic: تَعْدِلُوا۟)''' with them, then only one, or (a captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice.}}<br />
<br />
But later the writer of Quran allowed the husband to blackmail the wife by threatening her with divorce, and showing contempt and evasion and thus compelling her to give away her rights in the name of settlement. Thus, the condition of Justice was abrogated for the so-called settlement which is always going in favor of the husband while he controls the right of giving divorce.<br />
<br />
Muhammad himself threatened his wife Sawdah with Talaq (while she was older in age as compared to the other wives of Muhammad). Thus, Sawadah started weeping and she came to ‘Aisha’s house and told Muhammad that she was ready to give her TURN To ‘Aisaha, but Muhammad should not make her homeless by divorcing her in that old age. Sawdah served Muhammad the longest, and in the most difficult times, and she did nothing wrong. Still she had to suffer, and to give up her right in name of so-called 'settlement'. <br />
<br />
==Islam Advocates: Some women have Implantation Bleeding despite being pregnant==<br />
Islam advocates that Islamic 'Iddah of 3 menstrual cycles is correct, while some women have implantation bleeding despite being pregnant, and it is difficult for a woman to differentiate between he periods and the [https://www.healthline.com/health/how-long-does-spotting-last#implantation-spotting implantation bleeding]. <br />
<br />
While Islam critics say that:<br />
<br />
*Laws and rules are made on the bases of "Generality", and not on the bases of "Exceptions".<br />
*Islam itself does not accepts this "exceptional" incidents for making the "general laws".<br />
*Therefore, Islam itself made a law that the 'Iddah of a prisoner/slave woman is only one menstrual cycle.<br />
<br />
Islam advocates reply it by saying that the ''''status'''<nowiki/>' of a slave woman is not equal to the the status of a free woman, and thus Islam is correct to extend the 'Iddah of free woman to 3 months in case of divorce.<br />
<br />
But Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*This issue is not about the '<nowiki/>'''status'''<nowiki/>' of a slave woman or a free woman, but the issue is about the ''''parentage'''<nowiki/>' of the child, which stays the same in both the cases.<br />
*And even the 'Iddah of free Muslim woman in Islam in case of Khul' is only one period<ref>[https://islamqa.info/en/answers/5163/does-iddah-apply-in-the-case-of-khula 'Iddah in Khul' is one menstrual period]</ref>.<br />
*And Muhammad himself slept with Saffiyyah the same night when her first menstrual blood stopped. Note that Saffiyyah was not a slave, but a free woman when Muhammad took her as a wife.<br />
{{Quote|{{Muslim|16|99}}|He (the Holy Prophet) then granted Saffiyyah emancipation and married her. Thabit said to him: Abu Hamza, how much dower did he (the Holy Prophet) give to her? He said: He granted her freedom and then married her. On the way Umm Sulaim embellished her and then sent her to him (the Holy Prophet) at night.}}{{Quote|{{Bukhari|||2893|darussalam}}|Narrated Anas bin Malik: We arrived at Khaibar, and when Allah helped His Apostle to open the fort, the beauty of Safiya bint Huyai bin Akhtaq whose husband had been killed while she was a bride, was mentioned to Allah's Apostle. The Prophet selected her for himself, and set out with her, and when we reached a place called Sidd-as-Sahba,' '''Safiya became clean from her (first) menses then Allah's Apostle took her into his bed.'''}}<br />
<br />
Thus Islam critics claim that: <br />
<br />
*There is no Hadith of Muhammad present, in which he ever mentioned 'Iddah of 3 periods due to any Implantation bleeding.<br />
*Muhammad adopted the practice of 'Iddah, while it was the tradition of that era, and Muhammad was a part of that society.<br />
*But in the modern era, when science discovered these facts, then Muslims now try to present these scientific discoveries as miracles of Islam.<br />
*But Muslims will fail, as contradictions in Islam will then occur (like Muslims having sex with prisoner/slave women and while Muhammad had himself sex with Saffiyyah after only the first menstrual cycle.<br />
*And what about a minor girl wife (who does not menstruate yet), or an old lady (who could not bear any children), or a woman who hasn't seen her husband for years? Muhammad ordered them too to observe the 'Iddah of 3 periods (or 3 months) too. But why? Certainly not due to the implantation bleeding in them, but while it was a tradition of that era.<br />
<br />
==Islam Critics:Why no 'Iddah in name of 'mourning' for the Prisoner/Slave women?==<br />
Islam critics point out that:<br />
<br />
*Muslim are allowed to drive sexual pleasures from the prisoner virgin girls with ‘penetration’ the same night, without giving them any 'waiting period' to mourn their dead family members.<br />
*And as far as the prisoner women are concerned, who already have husbands, then penetration in their vaginas is not allowed till they become free of their first menstrual period. But still Muslims are allowed to undress them the same night and to take all kind of other sexual pleasures and sex services with their naked bodies except for penetration.<br />
{{Quote|1=[http://web.archive.org/save/http://library.islamweb.net/newlibrary/display_book.php?idfrom=4080&idto=4081&bk_no=52&ID=1404&idfrom=4523&idto=5022&bookid=18&startno=425 Imam Ibn Hajar al-Asqallani, in his book Fath-ul-Bari]|2=وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Atta said: ‘There is no harm to drive sexual pleasure from the body of the pregnant slave/(or prisoner) woman except from vagina’}}<br />
According to Islamic Scholars, the Fiqh (Jurisprudence) of Imam Bukhari lies in the “Headings of Chapters” of his Book. And Imam Bukhari gave this heading in his book Sahih Bukhari<ref>[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]</ref>:<blockquote>''Chapter: If one buys a slave woman, can he then take her along with him in a journey without her completing her waiting period?''</blockquote>Under this heading, Imam Bukhari writes:<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://islamweb.net/ar/library/index.php?page=bookcontents&ID=4081&bk_no=52&flag=1 Sahih Bukhari]|2=ولم ير الحسن بأسا أن يقبلها أو يباشرها. وقال ابن عمر ـ رضى الله عنهما ـ إذا وهبت الوليدة التي توطأ أو بيعت أو عتقت فليستبرأ رحمها بحيضة، ولا تستبرأ العذراء. وقال عطاء لا بأس أن يصيب من جاريته الحامل ما دون الفرج.<br />
<br />
Translation:<br />
<br />
Hasan Basri finds nothing objectionable in kissing a woman or to having sex with her. And Ibn Umar said that such a slave woman who is given as a present, or who is sold, or who is made free, but sex had been done with her before that, then she had to undergo a waiting period. '''And Atta said if a slave woman had become pregnant (from the earlier owner/husband), then still pleasure could be derived from the whole of her body, except for her vagina.'''}}<br />
In order to understand the trauma of those captive women due to the killing of their relatives, please see the following tradition.<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://books.google.de/books?id=4A-4ZC4l0dMC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=she+commanded+that+Safiyyah+should+be+kept+behind+him+and+that+the+Messenger+of+God+had+chosen+her+for+himself&source=bl&ots=pHDBKo-6Bv&sig=W8sWDq8ZJ4nLwFZpsA1obfYZJ48&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwizjuC41L7bAhVHXRQKHSEhD7EQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=she%20commanded%20that%20Safiyyah%20should%20be%20kept%20behind%20him%20and%20that%20the%20Messenger%20of%20God%20had%20chosen%20her%20for%20himself&f=false History of Tabari, Volume 8, Page 112]|2=Ibn Ishaq said: After the Messenger of God conquered al-Qamus, Safiyyah bint Huyayy was brought to him, and another woman with her. Bilal (a companion), who was the one who brought them, led them past some of the slain Jews. When the woman who was with Safiyyah saw them, she cried out, struck her face, and poured dust on her head. When the Messenger of God saw her, he said, "Take this she-devil away from me!" ... The Messenger of God said to Bilal, when he saw the Jewish woman doing what he saw her do, "Are you devoid of mercy, Bilal, that you take two women past their slain men?"}}<br />
Islam critics thus question the double standards here: <br />
<br />
*On one side, Islam advocates claim that a Muslim woman is not allowed to be wed during 3 periods/months long 'Iddah while she is mentally under stress after the divorce.<br />
*But on the other side, they deny any such mental stress for the prisoner women and girls. And what to talk about divorce, but even after killing all the men of their family, Muslim men use them as sex object the same night. They are provided with no 'waiting period' to come out of their mental stress.<br />
<br />
Contrary to Islam, the Judaism and the Christianity allowed the prisoner women to mourn their relatives for one complete month, during which men were not allowed to take any other sexual services from them. <br />
<br />
{{Quote|1=[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021&version=NIV Bible, Deuteronomy, Chap 21]|2='''Marrying a Captive Woman'''<br />
<br />
(10) When you go to war against your enemies and the Lord your God delivers them into your hands and you take captives,<br />
<br />
(11) if you notice among the captives a beautiful woman and are attracted to her, you may take her as your wife.<br />
<br />
(12) Bring her into your home and have her shave her head, trim her nails<br />
<br />
(13) and put aside the clothes she was wearing when captured. '''After she has lived in your house and mourned her father and mother for a full month''', then you may go to her and be her husband and she shall be your wife.<br />
<br />
(14) If you are not pleased with her, let her go wherever she wishes. You must not sell her or treat her as a slave, since you have dishonored her.}}<br />
<br />
Islam critics point out that Muhammad rejected the Sharia of Moses in this case, and he followed the laws of the pagan Arab society of that time, as it benefitted him and the Muslims financially and they were free to seek sexual pleasures through the prisoner women the same night. <br />
<br />
==References==<br />
{{reflist}}</div>Lehrasap