Debate a Muslim

[sun rise]

I do have a followup question about the Quran to all the Muslims posting in this thread. I'd like feedback on the following.

Idres Shah asserted in "The Sufis" that the Quran has an esoteric meaning. Dr. Ali Duran in the short piece "Levels of Meaning in Holy Scripture: The Holy Qur'an" expanded this idea:

Ya Ali Madad:

Traditionally in the esoteric traditions, understanding of Quran is regarded from the perspective of the student, and is usually divided into 4 levels of understanding:

Shariat: Shariah is the exoteric level and is related to the level of quranic civil and religious law and literal understanding of the verses of Quran. this is the lever of the Zahir, or visible.

Tariqat: the "Path", is the beginning of the hidden or "batini" understanding of Quran. Sufi orders and Ismaili tariqat begin at this level. The hermeneutic interpretation, or "Tawil" (lit: to return to the first) of the Quran begins at this level. Understanding of the amthal, or metaphors and similies of the Quran on the physical, noetic and spiritual planes is stressed. The law is interpreted from this level and certain rules of the tariqa are established for the perfection of the postulant.

Maarifat: Maarifat is the station of "Irfan", or gnosis. Here the Arif (gnostic) understands the subtleties of the Quran and is inspired from the Malakut or angelic realms. Subtleties and indications of the Beloved are seen in the sensory and internal worlds.

Haqiqat: the fruit of maarifat, the arif becomes annihilated in al-Haqq, the Divine reality, and subsists only through the qudrat, or will of Allah. This is the station alluded to by the martyr Mansur al Hallaj when he was crucified and burned for saying, "ana il Haqq" I am the Truth. This is the Divine realm, the Sinai of Lovers where only the converse between the Lover and Beloved is undestood and the Quran is the point of the Bismillah, the Mole on the Cheek of the Beloved.

If I have erred in this brief discourse, the error is mine. In truth Allah knows best.

 

[Link]

@sun rise such ahadith all from the viewpoint that Quran has conditional Prophecies and the hadith is commenting on one such conditional prophecy, some conditional prophecies are more probable than others. For example, if things would go wrong, Imam Hussain (a) would be martyred. But it was not destined he martyred, in fact, according to hadiths it was written he be victorious till he was betrayed and people changed their minds. But Rasool (s) saw the outcome of his grandson being martyred, if dark warnings were to no avail and people follow track of those who disobeyed in the past.

The problem with interpreting the results as destined, it would make revelation and all it's warnings to not reach this stage, a vain thing.

Rather, there are many scenarios in Quran. And there are dark prophecies in Quran pertaining to those who live in luxury and ease and their leaders oppress as well. But none of these are set in stone.

 

[Link]

My experience with Quran is that it becomes clearer the more knowledge you gain of it till you wonder why you didn't see things properly the first time and you realize it was dark magic that kept the heart and mind from perceiving the most simplest, clearest and yet deepest of all words.

 

[Ghazaly]

What do you believe happens when you die?
Are you judged, do you go to heaven? Is their a time of penance?

- When you die the following happens:

1. Separation – Wafat : Azrael takes your soul out of your body.
2. Ascent – Su'ud : your soul is raised to Heaven's gate to meet her father, Adam.
3. Interrogation – Sual : your soul is interrogated regarding its fulfillment of the covenant.
4. Interstice – Barzakh : your soul is brought to the underworld (a bridge between the Seen World & Unseen World) to be accompanied by her deeds in their true form, good or bad.
5. Hour – Sa'a : Allah decides when the hour of reckoning is.
6. Trumpet – Nafkh : archangel Israfel is commanded to blow the Trumpet & all things cease to exist, except the 4 archangels.
7. Annihilation – Fanaa : Allah commands the angel of death Azrael to take the souls of the other archangels & his own.
8. Trumpet II – Nafkh II : Allah creates Israfel from anew & commands to blow the Trumpet & all things come to being.
9. Resurrection – Ba'th : humans are resurrected like plants from the earth.
10. Judgment Day – Hashr : humans assemple & await Allah's judgement for 50k years.
11. Intercession – Shafa'a : prophets intercede with Allah to lift the judgment.
12. Books – Kutub : deed registers are distributed among all.
13. Reckoning – Hisab : each & every animate being is judged accordingly.
14. Scale – Mizan : every one's deeds are weighed to see where it tips.
15. Bridge – Sirat : every one is made to cross the bridge over Hell, those with more bad deeds fall into hell, those with more good deeds make it to the other side, to Paradise.
16. Fate – Masir : those of Paradise enter it, & those Hell enter it.
17. Great Intercession – Shafa'a Kubra : every saved person intercedes on behalves of the damned to their Lord that they may be saved too.
18. Universal Praise – Alhamdu Lillahi Rabbi Alamin : all beings, all creatures, all dwellers of Paradise & all dwellers of Hell, & all angels, all Praise Allah.
19. Sight – Rueya : the greatest event of creation, the chosen ones get to see their Lord without veil.

What happens to non-Muslims when they die?

- We don't believe in collective salvation or collective damnation, according to the:

• Najat principle: awarded Paradise by the Grace of Allah, & rewarded in Paradise according to our deeds.
• Shafaa principle: anyone who professed in his heart upon death sincere recognition of Allah has a right to Intercession (shafa'a) [as in the Prophet (pbuh) & other beleivers may intercede on their behalf for forgiveness]. That is, 'salvation' in the Islamic view is not to be saved, it is to have a right to intercession with Allah to ask forgiveness, & Allah is Most-Forgiving.
• Hujja principle: accountability to Allah is established with reason, ability & recognition of message [people who have not received a message & have recognized the message of Allah are not accountable] [this message includes all divine revelations pre-Muhammed (pbuh), but only the Quran post-Muhammed (pbuh)]

 

[Ghazaly]

Personally, I see too many problems with belief in a monotheistic creator-god and "revealed" religion in general to worry about the specifics of Islam.

- Such as?

That answered my sufism questions but of course generated another. I know about Junayd, but I did not realize that the Junaidi school was still extant. Which other sufi schools trace themselves back to Junayd?

- Ahmed Zarruq or Ibn Ashir. Junaidi school (like Muhasibi, or Ghazali or Atai..) is a madhhab of tasawwuf, not a tariqa. Madhhab implies a methodology in interpreting scripture, tariqa entails suhba & wird...

What is there about Islam that you feel means Islam is the One True Religion instead of Christianity, Judaism, atheism (not really a religion, but, y'know), or any other religious position?

- The Quran is manifestly a true revelation, & the Prophet (pbuh) is manifestly a true prophet. No other book has been preserved such for its truth to even be ascertained.

 

[Ghazaly]

Hello Ghazaly... it's ok here.
I'm a Deist. That just means that (I think that) everything is a part of God, but all so vast and massive that the only Boss around here is Mother Nature.

Question: There are differing Muslims. I know of Shia, Sunny and Amadija (spelling?) Muslims. Which are you?

- I'm a traditional Muslim. I follow the Maliki madhhab of fiqh (school of jurisprudence), the Ashaari madhhab of aqeeda (school of theology), & the Junaidi madhhab of tasawwuf (school of sufism/spirituality).

 

[Ghazaly]

What do you believe is the minimum age for marriage in Islam?

- Marriage in Islam is a matter of contract when it comes to consent (ijab wal-qubul) & the granted stipulation thereof by Sharia; it's a matter of custom in everything else. That is, beyond the contract & its granted stipulation, local customs are binding. Therefore, minimum age of marriage is subject to local customs, & may be set at different ages in different times-places. However, it can not be set beyond the minimum set by Sharia -else deemed invalid (Zina), which is set at 9 years according to the Hanbali school – & at 'maturity' according to other schools.

I hope you agree that child marriage in our world today is wrong?

- One: if you mean by child marriage below maturity, then I agree. If you mean by child marriage under 18, then that's nonsense. If your contention is about early marriage, then the more reason it must extend to early intercourse. The great irony, in the West, they allow early out-of-wedlock intercourse -kids as young as 8 years report sexual relations, yet they hasten to ban marriage at the first sight, under "ew" pretexts.

- Two: age or age difference are not a factor is the happiness or unhappiness of a marriage. Marriage hinges on affection, compassion, respect, commitment, sacrifice, understanding, family... regardless of age, if these qualities are established then that's a happy marriage; & regardless of age, if these qualities are absent, then that's an unhappy relationship.

Some muslims use Prophet Muhammad's marriage with Aisha as an exuse for child marriages (this happen in some islamic countries). And most likely the hadiths about Aisha's age when prophet Muhammad married her is false and fabricated. Many muslim scholars today has found much and good evidence that Aisha was much older when prophet Muhammad constumated the marriage with her.

- The hadith is not fabricated. It's reported by a number of narrators from Aisha (ra) & collected by great many scholars like Bukhari, Muslim, Nasai, Tarmithi... the encyclopedia Jam al-Jawami list 300 chains for the hadith. The age of Aisha is known amongst the people of hadith to be 9, & amongst the people of sirah to be 10. These attempts to argue against the age of Aisha at consummation are disingenuous. Maybe you don't wish to hear this, but consider the following factors:

• Aisha was to be betrothed to Adiy before the Prophet (pbuh) age 6.
• Aisha herself said: "she who reaches the age of nine and menstruates is a woman".
• Safya was 14 when she married the Prophet (pbuh), yet she was twice married prior.
• The Prophet (pbuh)'s own daughters married between 8 & 11 [Fatimah at 15]
• Marriage at around 10 was the norm in Arabia (& in much of the pre-postmodern world).
• The minimum age of consent was 10 in most US states a century ago & was 7 in Delaware, & there was no minimum age of marriage. Around that time, the minimum age of marriage in Scotland was 7.
• There is actually no set minimum age of marriage in some US states today (like California), & it's as low as 12 in the states in which it's set. The Prophet (pbuh)'s marriage with Aisha would be perfectly legal in the US today, given granted parental consent.

 

[Ghazaly]

Thanks for the offer.
I have some questions, and whether I have a problem will, I dare say, depend on the answers.
First, when a Muslim gentleman arrives in paradise and is presented with dozens of virgins for his pleasure ─
Where do the virgins come from? Are they volunteers, or press-ganged, or created for purpose?
Second, are there circumstances where ladies arrive in paradise and are presented with dozens of male virgins for their pleasure?
If not, why not?
`

- As is it described in the Quran & the Hadith, Jannah (Paradise) is not conceivable: 'that which no eye has seen, and no ear has heard, and has not inspired any soul of man'. As reported from the Prophet (pbuh), the last man in Paradise will be made lord of 10 times equivalent our world in this life, for his endless wishes only bound by his imagination.

 

[Ghazaly]

I read your statements. There were a lot of opinions and ifs and buts. I have a simple question:-
I am Muslim in a Muslim majority country who no longer think Quran is the word of God but Gita is. So I change my religion, construct a temple of Krishna and invite people for a religious celebration of my God Krishna during Holi. Am I allowed to do this or not if that country follows the ideal Quran and the ideal Sharia. If not why not? Please be concise and clear.
I am creating a specific case to study what you believe is right or wrong from your view of Islam.

- Under an actual Islamic rule (like the past caliphate), you can expect the following:

• To Allah, that's shirk & its fate is Hell, unless you repent.
• To the sufis, you're lost & must be shown love to repent.
• To the theologians, you're wrong & must be proven wrong in public.
• To the jurists, you're fine if it's on your own in your pursuit of truth, you're not once you start building that temple.
• To the political theorists, you're fine as long as you don't have followers, the moment you start having some, it's elimination –unless the state can use you otherwise.

 

[Ghazaly]

I believe in Sunnah but believe it's to be taken as insights to Quran and help you perceive insights to Quran. Where Quran is implicit, Sunnah is explicit, where sometimes Sunnah is implicit Quran is explicit, but in no case should Ilmel Rijaal factor in by methodology of reputation of men.

- I don't understand the last part. You seem to be from Shia, what Sunnah are you intending? Are you Zaydi?

What is the problem with it? Do you judge it based on the list of contents or...? All religions (that people are interested in) are taught in many universities in the world, but people have to choose to go there. No one really cares about it.
However, I don't think it would be useful to offer studies on Hinduism in every university in a Muslim country. Do you?

- Why are you quoting my statements if you haven't read the context. The point was about the fact that Western secular system does not allow for any alternative or competing worldview, yet western secularist complain about Islam..

 

[Meow Mix]

I don't hold such studies reliable. They mostly seem to be intented to unnecessarily console one of the two sexes. Also one would have to analyse them deeply to get any kind of a definitive answer, if there was one. As they state exactly what they measured and when, you see most of the tests are restricted to certain things, situations and circumstances.

Nevertheless, a quick Google search gives you a ton of studies that claim one of the sexes to be better at this or that.

I believe Allah knows best.

The methodologies are available within the papers (though sometimes they are behind paywalls, I have access through my university). For instance when you say "the tests are restricted to certain things, situations and circumstances," that's typical of science to limit extenuating factors.

For studies that claim one of the sexes are better at this or that, that's true -- these exist -- with the caveat that they also find these demographic factors are social in origin; and that even when they are, there is often so much overlap (e.g. where men can be good at what women are supposed to be good at, and vice versa) that the differences are meaningless.

For instance, I'm curious what you think about these overlaps even where there are demographic differences (by this I mean where sex-based cognitive differences exist because of social factors, such as how girls and boys are raised differently). Do you think that women can never be as good at mathematics and logic, or just that there are fewer? Do you think that men can never be as nurturing as women (such as in a nurse role), or just that there are fewer? When overlaps occur do you think the "fish out of water" is as good at what they're doing as their peers, or do you think they're just tolerated?

 

[Meow Mix]

- It strictly does. Obligatory duty is within stated benefits, anything else is not obligatory by Sharia. Obligation entails sin upon failure to uphold. There are 5 types rulings in Sharia:

• Wajib – obligatory = reward upon commission & sin upon omission.
• Mandub – recommended = reward upon commission.
• Mubah – permissible = no reward & no sin.
• Makruh – discouraged = reward upon omission.
• Mahdhur – prohibited = sin upon commission & reward upon omission.

- Beyond stated benefits, the duties conforming to the rules I mentioned would fall under Mandub (recommended), as in the wife is rewarded in doing them but does not sin if she does not do them.


- Yes, but not necessary immediately, for obvious reasons. Something between 40 days & 4 months being the legal limit according to different opinions on the matter.


- This is a question of Muaashara – intimacy. The Prophet (pbuh) had enjoyed affection, compassion, forebearence, love, patience, kindness, compromise & sacrifice among couples. What I mentioned in the previous post are matters pertain to legal rights & legal recourse. Beyond that, what's good in life is also good in marriage.


- Because it is, & ultimately because Allah (swt) says so in the Quran: "And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of them [i.e., the women] errs, then the other can remind her." (2:282). The Quran is the primary source of legislation in Sharia, followed by the Sunnah, Ijma (consensus), Qiyas (analogical reasoning), Aql (reason) & Istihsan (good customs).

- If you're inquiring about the rationale not the impetus, then it's in the verse itself. To have more corroboration in testimony, for fear of lapses in memory – & not for anything relating to gender itself. To understand what this entails, we have to take a step back into the general structure of a Muslim society under Sharia. Women are believed to be morally efficient (ma'nawyyat) yet materially deficient (maddyyat), while men are believed to be material efficient & morally deficient. Therefore, Sharia materially compliments women (giving them priority rights), while it morally burdens them (with extra moral duties such as child rearing). Conversely for men. Thus, a woman has, by Sharia, a permanent right to material & physical security mandated onto her father, husband, son, brother...(if not, then the state). [& many other material rights not granted to the man]. Therefore, women, contrary to men, are never required by Sharia to work or provide. Thus they, hence contrary to men, can not be expected to be familiar with financial transactions. It follows, Ishhad, as a criteria of minimum testimony required for financial transactions, can only follow the norm of expectations, otherwise rendered less than reliable.

- As to specific cases where a woman is known to be familiar with said transactions & has a record of fulfilling them, then according to the rationale of the verse itself, their testimony is valid, for absence of the inattentiveness factor in the female witness offsets the need of another. This could also be thought of as 'expert testimony'. In case there were no men & only women present in the transaction, it does not necessarily entail the testimony is invalid, rather it entails a further step of verification by the judge. If the judge sees what satisfy a reliable testimony then it holds.


- Shahada is a conclusive testimony. & that's a powerful & dangerous thing. What it entails is once you have Shahada, there is no further need for supplementary evidence. It means the case is established, not even the judge can undo that. There is no equivalent notion in Western laws, that's why it's probably harder to perceive. Think about a murder, Shahada is a corroborated testimony by two reliable (trustworthy & judicious) unmotivated (by interest, or kinship, or bias... in the case) independent witnesses. After Shahada the court needs no further evidence to convicted the murderer, which is why the conditions on it are so stringent.

- The reason why women according to the majority opinion are not allowed to testify in penalties is not only because of the nature of the criminal acts (gory & unpleasant) or because of the significant outcome this testimony entails (execution or severing hand...) –which may induce empathy in the woman's heart, but also because verifying a female's reliability is unfeasible. For instance, men are obligated to pray in the mosque, if a man is found out to skip his mosque prayers, then his Shahada is rejected, for someone who does not fear God to uphold his religious obligations, can not be trusted to fear God while testifying. A woman, on the other hand, is not required to pray in the mosque, & there is no way we can verify her prayers at home.

Thanks for the information. One final thing; what about people that would not want to live with these sorts of rules; who would prefer a more egalitarian law in which men and women have the same duty to work out what responsibilities they're best at between themselves?

 

[Link]

- I don't understand the last part. You seem to be from Shia, what Sunnah are you intending? Are you Zaydi?

I think there is two different things Nubuwa (role of channeling scripture to humans) and Resalah (clear message) although people inverted these definitions, some of Resalah is in the Nubuwa and some of Nubuwa is Resali, but Resalah in Sunnah is clear proofs from Messenger in paraphrasing guidance from God in their hearts to humanity. Aside from Resalah both in Nubuwa and Sunnah, Nubuwa and Sunnah contain beyond the clear message and contain deep teachings.

Ulil-Amr (a) don't need to become each a Messenger if the people don't dispute and differ, as they been ordered not to, but rather obey God and Ahlulbayt (a). This is saying, God forbid you differ with respect to the commands of God and Messenger and Ulil-Amr from you, than refer it to God and the Messenger and this doesn't mean Quran and Sunnah, but rather, it really meant referring to Mohammad (s) at that time, and if people dispute after Mohammad (s), it would mean Ulil-Amr would become Messengers of their time.

God did something different with Mohammad (s). While in the past, the foundation of the blessed tree and it's twelve branches, would be followed with Anbiya, he put an end to that, and so God didn't continue revealing Surahs to become part of Quran at the end of Nabi (a) life. Rather through his wisdom, he put a seal to Nubuwa. And to me, it's obvious Islam would lose it's foundational prestige if we differed with what constituted Quran after Nabi (s). But this was a huge trial as well, as Mohammad (s) Sunnah and life was largely successful due to his Nubuwa (Quran) and God is not longer talking to humans. This is a huge trial.

But whatever reason he sealed talking to humans is intertwined with the need of us obeying Ulil-Amr (a), and God forbid we differ about them or their teachings and issues in religion, Quran is saying you will have a Messenger to judge among you and clarify the truth and bring you back to truth.

This was the case, till the Mahdi (a) disappeared. Who and what would have solved our disputes is now hidden and society can no longer go to him in public.

I think however, the Imams (a) before him and him as well, left us with words of light that are insights to the Quran. I don't believe a insight from Mohammad (s) about Quran and guidance should be subject to man made rules of reputation of humans nor should any words contradicting Quran and guidance ever be verified and acknowledge by man made rules of reputation.

I believe all ahadith are good to study, Sunni, Shiite, Twelver, Zaidi, etc, but keeping in mind, the Quran contains all guidance and all hadiths are to be referred to Quran.

The Quran is no ordinary book, the way it's doors open up other doors, is unique and is the only reason why God sealed Nubuwa. Had anything not been contained in Quran in any time in any generation, he would have not put an end to Nubuwa.

But Resalah of the 12 Imams (a) as disputes occurred, and basic clear truths had to be reminded as was the case of Bani-Israel, are calculative words. They keep in mind Quran in all they say and calculate words of guidance to unlock sorcery from Iblis that put's locks on clear recitations as well they unveil subtle teachings of the Shariah and wisdom behind it.

I don't believe the words of Prophet (s), Fatima (a) and the Guides (a) should be subject to reputation of humans in the chains of their words. Rather insights are insights no matter who conveyed them, be we accuse him of being a liar/untrustworthy nor are words of misguidance to be followed through be we attribute purity/righteous to the narrators who narrated it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

- Marriage in Islam is a matter of contract when it comes to consent (ijab wal-qubul) & the granted stipulation thereof by Sharia; it's a matter of custom in everything else. That is, beyond the contract & its granted stipulation, local customs are binding. Therefore, minimum age of marriage is subject to local customs, & may be set at different ages in different times-places. However, it can not be set beyond the minimum set by Sharia -else deemed invalid (Zina), which is set at 9 years according to the Hanbali school – & at 'maturity' according to other schools.


- One: if you mean by child marriage below maturity, then I agree. If you mean by child marriage under 18, then that's nonsense. If your contention is about early marriage, then the more reason it must extend to early intercourse. The great irony, in the West, they allow early out-of-wedlock intercourse -kids as young as 8 years report sexual relations, yet they hasten to ban marriage at the first sight, under "ew" pretexts.

- Two: age or age difference are not a factor is the happiness or unhappiness of a marriage. Marriage hinges on affection, compassion, respect, commitment, sacrifice, understanding, family... regardless of age, if these qualities are established then that's a happy marriage; & regardless of age, if these qualities are absent, then that's an unhappy relationship.


- The hadith is not fabricated. It's reported by a number of narrators from Aisha (ra) & collected by great many scholars like Bukhari, Muslim, Nasai, Tarmithi... the encyclopedia Jam al-Jawami list 300 chains for the hadith. The age of Aisha is known amongst the people of hadith to be 9, & amongst the people of sirah to be 10. These attempts to argue against the age of Aisha at consummation are disingenuous. Maybe you don't wish to hear this, but consider the following factors:

• Aisha was to be betrothed to Adiy before the Prophet (pbuh) age 6.
• Aisha herself said: "she who reaches the age of nine and menstruates is a woman".
• Safya was 14 when she married the Prophet (pbuh), yet she was twice married prior.
• The Prophet (pbuh)'s own daughters married between 8 & 11 [Fatimah at 15]
• Marriage at around 10 was the norm in Arabia (& in much of the pre-postmodern world).
• The minimum age of consent was 10 in most US states a century ago & was 7 in Delaware, & there was no minimum age of marriage. Around that time, the minimum age of marriage in Scotland was 7.
• There is actually no set minimum age of marriage in some US states today (like California), & it's as low as 12 in the states in which it's set. The Prophet (pbuh)'s marriage with Aisha would be perfectly legal in the US today, given granted parental consent.

You state that the minimum age of marriage is a matter of custom as long as it isn't below the age of nine. What if a country set it at, say, the age of 10 even though current studies and scientific knowledge (here, for example) show us that this can cause extreme psychological and physiological harm to children? Would you be okay with such a marriage just because its being allowed was a matter of custom?

Several years ago in Yemen, for instance, an eight-year-old child bride died of physiological damage following marriage to an adult man. What are your thoughts on that and similar cases?

 

[Ghazaly]

And this means what regarding a given individual's principles as regards violence, do you think? Remember that individuals are the ones who may or may not wish to debate with you, and individuals are the ones who may or may not accept or believes claims you may make. Individuals are the ones you might attempt to convert to bolster your numbers. Not "westerners" or "Americans". And your entire "answer" here (if you can call it that) does absolutely nothing to assuage an individual's fears that Islam might propagate and/or prescribe violence against those who leave or question the faith. All you seem to be doing is to excuse such violence by pointing out that others commit (or have committed) violent acts. This is bad, bad business, in my opinion. And when it is you and I discussing, and you wanting to convince me (if you, indeed, do) then you are only going to turn me off from anything else you have to say with generalized non-answers like this.

- What are you even talking about?! I don't understand what you're saying.

It deserves to be repeated that even if "Americans" on the whole, or "westerners" commit violent acts - an individual coming to you with concerns that your ideology may promote violence definitely should not be satisfied with you pointing out that their countrymen commit violence. What if this individual is intent on seeking asylum from their "terrible" country? Is yours, with its major ideology a safe haven? Can you claim this? This is more to the point of the questions asked. Questions you seem entirely uncomfortable to answer straightly.

- You are assuming that Western history being violent implies non-Western history is equally or also violent. It's not. +50% of wars & +50% of death toll is instigated to the West.

Do you accept evolution? Namely, among other things, that we and pigs share a common ancestor?

- The evolutionary mythology is the sewer theory of history, the most imaginative & fantastic tale ever told by man. Anyone who subscribes to this myth is either naturalist-material-atheist seeking to find a mythology of life they can feel included with, or a beaten down mule from the absolute tyranny of fanatical evolutionists.

I am Swiss. Therefore, I come from a country which:

1) banned Halal (cruel thing to do to animals)
2) banned the construction of minarets (they just do not fit in the alps)
3) banned women to cover their faces like Batman in public (unless it is Fasnacht), on account of being symbols of woman oppression

what do you think of that?

- Nothing. A secular country secularing. Nothing less can be expected! What can I possibly say when you're proudly displaying the mediocrity of your system compared to the Islamic system. Secularism is among the worst form of government. It's disgusting.

Do you think religious tenets should always be allowed, independently from secular law, or what the majority believe (we have direct democracy here)?

- I think if this was 935, the religious minorities in Switzerland would've been allowed to practice their faiths, issue their laws, enact their policies...etc.

ciao

Tata

Unless you so happen to be one of Four Madhhabs, you are giving your personal interpretation and understanding of their teachings (which may be perfect and on point or not, I don't know that), but its definitely your understanding. You are writing to me and answering my question not them

- Not because things come out of your mouth would that somehow make them automatically true, or even coherent.

So to make a long story short. The Sharia, in essence, imposes gender roles. You could have thus answered the question with a simple yes and then offered the explanation as to what exactly are those roles, what leeway there is within them, and why you believe they should be followed. You are going to save yourself a lot of time and headache by taking a more forthright approach that sticks to the questions

.
- More nonsense. You could've just said this from the get go instead of asking me questions just to commit to begging the question again.

Trust me, I am a teacher. It's my job to explain and vulgarize complicated things.

- You're certainly good at the opposite of that.

 

[Shakeel]

- Why are you quoting my statements if you haven't read the context. The point was about the fact that Western secular system does not allow for any alternative or competing worldview, yet western secularist complain about Islam..

I did read it and I quoted you saying

For instance, I can not go into a university & offer a Sharia course & teach it, for that violates the 'secular' doctrine of the institution.

I don't know what you mean by that they don't allow a competing worldview. They don't allow or they don't adopt? Why would they and how could they?

 

[Starlight]

- Marriage in Islam is a matter of contract when it comes to consent (ijab wal-qubul) & the granted stipulation thereof by Sharia; it's a matter of custom in everything else. That is, beyond the contract & its granted stipulation, local customs are binding. Therefore, minimum age of marriage is subject to local customs, & may be set at different ages in different times-places. However, it can not be set beyond the minimum set by Sharia -else deemed invalid (Zina), which is set at 9 years according to the Hanbali school – & at 'maturity' according to other schools.


- One: if you mean by child marriage below maturity, then I agree. If you mean by child marriage under 18, then that's nonsense. If your contention is about early marriage, then the more reason it must extend to early intercourse. The great irony, in the West, they allow early out-of-wedlock intercourse -kids as young as 8 years report sexual relations, yet they hasten to ban marriage at the first sight, under "ew" pretexts.

- Two: age or age difference are not a factor is the happiness or unhappiness of a marriage. Marriage hinges on affection, compassion, respect, commitment, sacrifice, understanding, family... regardless of age, if these qualities are established then that's a happy marriage; & regardless of age, if these qualities are absent, then that's an unhappy relationship.


- The hadith is not fabricated. It's reported by a number of narrators from Aisha (ra) & collected by great many scholars like Bukhari, Muslim, Nasai, Tarmithi... the encyclopedia Jam al-Jawami list 300 chains for the hadith. The age of Aisha is known amongst the people of hadith to be 9, & amongst the people of sirah to be 10. These attempts to argue against the age of Aisha at consummation are disingenuous. Maybe you don't wish to hear this, but consider the following factors:

• Aisha was to be betrothed to Adiy before the Prophet (pbuh) age 6.
• Aisha herself said: "she who reaches the age of nine and menstruates is a woman".
• Safya was 14 when she married the Prophet (pbuh), yet she was twice married prior.
• The Prophet (pbuh)'s own daughters married between 8 & 11 [Fatimah at 15]
• Marriage at around 10 was the norm in Arabia (& in much of the pre-postmodern world).
• The minimum age of consent was 10 in most US states a century ago & was 7 in Delaware, & there was no minimum age of marriage. Around that time, the minimum age of marriage in Scotland was 7.
• There is actually no set minimum age of marriage in some US states today (like California), & it's as low as 12 in the states in which it's set. The Prophet (pbuh)'s marriage with Aisha would be perfectly legal in the US today, given granted parental consent.

Some cultures (also europe) allowed to constumate the marriage after the age of 12-13.

People in cultures before modern times did know that children under the age of 12-13 did not have strong and big enough bodies to handle child birth.

There is BIG difference between the body to a 9-10 years old compared to a 12-13 year old.

It has never been normal have sex with a 9-10 years old

 

[Shakeel]

For instance, I'm curious what you think about these overlaps even where there are demographic differences (by this I mean where sex-based cognitive differences exist because of social factors, such as how girls and boys are raised differently). Do you think that women can never be as good at mathematics and logic, or just that there are fewer? Do you think that men can never be as nurturing as women (such as in a nurse role), or just that there are fewer?

I think there are fewer.

When overlaps occur do you think the "fish out of water" is as good at what they're doing as their peers, or do you think they're just tolerated?

They can be as good or better.

 

[Shakeel]

It was NOT normal to have sex with a 9 years old in ancient times

You keep saying this, but I'm still waiting for a source. Such statements call for evidence.

 

[epronovost]

More nonsense. You could've just said this from the get go instead of asking me questions just to commit to begging the question again.

We asked you if, in your view, Islam condones gender roles between men and women and you gave a detailed explanation that essentially meant yes there are roles ascribed to people in marriage on the basis of their gender. Did you even knew what a "gender role" was?