The Myth that Women have to "Obey" their Husbands
-
-
Peace Farida,
Maybe you think the women I've met are wierd, and I don't know you to judge you either. But many people aren't good at recognizing their own faults in general and women are not excluded from that. Many people walk in the world with their heads high always projecting, but they hardly ever turn inwards to know themselves, the good and the bad, and become okay with that and try to fix what they know is wrong.
Salaam brother Anwar
Thank you for your excellent detailed response, but before we go further let me correct you that the above response was not from me. As for me I have met many weird women AND men. I often find myself at a loss when I see them paying no attention to their own actions especially those who claim to be practicing Muslims. After all the Qur?an ask us again and again to investigate our own selvesAnd I believe godly men and women need to be given full respect
Exactly! But we must not forget that one cannot demand respect; one must earn it.
Man = rajl or Imru'un.
Men = rijaal.The root has to do with walking and foot/leg, but it came to mean man for some reason or another, as in adult male human being.
This is what I have been trying to understand; why God uses a word, to do with walking, for men.
I have come across studies on men suggesting that Modern men are denied their full potential in a modern working environment which has a detrimental effect on men. Nowadays males in general are locked in an office atmosphere and work with little use of their physical strength; do they really like it?
I have also heard that builders or plumbers or forest workers enjoy their jobs much more than highly paid office workers who often suffer from stress and frustrations. In UK last year a very highly paid successful lawyer was killed, by the police, in a gun fight.
He had all one could ask for but after a minor row with his wife he went berserk and started firing randomly at people in his neighbourhood. No one suspected that anything was wrong with him and questions were asked if it was work related stress but soon all discussions died down as no one wants to be politically incorrect.
My son complained a lot when he was doing office work in front of a computer and now he is working in China, in an atmosphere where he is, interacting with other people. When I asked him, just as I was writing this reply, why he used to moan a lot about his office work, his reply was I just like to be kept on the move. ....that I?ve always thought being in an office environment limits people?s capacity. Another rijaal in my household worked with horses and dreams of the day when he could resume that. Grooming and training horses was something he really enjoyed.
So, instead of blaming the opposite sex let us evaluate our present work system to see how it is working against us.(if you saw the movie ?fight club? you?ll remember this issue was addressed in it.)
In today?s world education has become a commodity We are encouraged to get educated so that we can cash on it later. In the past education was done to gain enlightenment now it is done to get better paying jobs and physical work is held in low regard these days. So men are not appreciating jobs for which they are physically specifically suited. The same goes for women who think it beneath them to waste their education on raising children and the word housewife has become demeaning, Everyone is eager to cash in on their education.These are the words for boys that I can remember. In the inheritance passages I see dhakar and unthaa used more, i.e. males and females, with no age distinction made.
This is interesting as you can see that role of being physical is not relevant here so God uses simple words for males and females.
As for when a boy becomes a man . . but in today's world we focus more on letting kids be kids instead of training them to be good adults.
I couldn?t agree with you more.
There is no such thing really as a 'real' man and a 'false' man. It's more along the lines of a responsible, sensible, prudent man
Yes it?s true, for both men and women, but often you will hear phrases call for men to act like men or calling women not ladylike so these phrases deal with our expectations from the opposite genders.
As for the word 'hit them' in the Quran. Hit doesn't mean beat up.....The Quran says that we are not to take our rage out on anyone, but to control our rage......We must stand for justice and what is right and best, and we cannot force the ungodly or the lost to find God or find their way. ....
I too believe that the verses deal more with controlling your anger and deal with it in stages, rather than lash out at the weaker sex. I am convinced that the verse deals with the issue of domestic violence, which often occurs after some provocation, resulting in a sudden loss of self control followed by violence, later regretted by both parties.
But before we go down to stage of hitting it will be better if after discussing rijaal we discuss what is meant by as this comes straight after
Blessed are those who strive to honour their covenant to God.
peace -
Peace Farida,
Maybe you think the women I've met are wierd, and I don't know you to judge you either. But many people aren't good at recognizing their own faults in general and women are not excluded from that. Many people walk in the world with their heads high always projecting, but they hardly ever turn inwards to know themselves, the good and the bad, and become okay with that and try to fix what they know is wrong. And many people's egos are built on their insecurities and arrogances. Men and women. Many people know what they know and that's all they want to know. Men and women. But i've seen what I've seen and I've done my best to process everything as fairly as I can. And I've tried to observe as much as I can. I think most people are going to Hell anyway, but I definitely see some different trends among men and women. I think within those trends lie real strenghts and weaknesses. I don't believe in oppressing anyone, man or woman. And I believe godly men and women need to be given full respect. And I also see in the Quran that men should treat women with respect and it tells us how to best deal with the situations that present themselves and women need to treat men with respect and it lays out how they are to best do that. I'm not one for overly political-correct talk, nor do I clinge to cultural cliches or feel obligated to uphold cultural taboos, old-school or new-school. I do my best to just see it how it is. Many people will reject because of buzz words and phrases and mindsets that they believe are progress, and I think most people have got it wrong, even if they think they are civilized for what they believe......
I think this is the best of your posts,brother Anwar..it
s better than that one about the utopian Quranic society where girls have to keep their grades lower than boys at school and women not trying to apply for higher jobs than their husbands and not even for the same jobs!! and where friendship between girls and boys "isnt necessary"..its really not segregation..its something even weirder..
Theres nothing wrong in trying to find mercy and abominate prejudice..God knows better,all were trying to do is to "listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it." 3918
God doesnt order,encourage or acknowledge evil,or even the "slightest bit of it".. Progress and liberty are sought values,when we come to better understanding to ourselves and our world.. If humanity is marching from the Anthropocentric prejudice to an Ecocentric justice...its called progress..
When it marches from totalitarianism to individualism -a value the Quran asserts..thats progress.. When it marches from nationalism to globalization..thats progress..
When the time comes and we see women preaching in the religious institutions and leading prayers,more women as judges,prime ministers and country leaders,I`ll be happy with this progress.."I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire
-
Sa'dah,
I think this is the best of your posts,brother Anwar..it
s better than that one about the utopian Quranic society where girls have to keep their grades lower than boys at school and women not trying to apply for higher jobs than their husbands and not even for the same jobs!! and where friendship between girls and boys "isnt necessary"..its really not segregation..its something even weirder..Non o my posts said anythign about girls keepint their grades lower than boys or not trying to apply for higher jobs than their husbands or the same jobs. This really makes me angry that you completely miscontrued what I'm saying. So i'll keep it short, I never said that.
I do however believe that very close freindships between non-related boys and girls IS UNNECESSARILY. I've never taken that back. And nothing I've said has negated any of that.
Progress and liberty are sought values,when we come to better understanding to ourselves and our world..
Sure, I can agree with that.
If humanity is marching from the Anthropocentric prejudice to an Ecocentric justice...it`s called progress.
.Sure, I like that too. I read Eurocentric at first. I'm glad I read it again and was wrong. ) God does things best, and there is no subsitute for God's creation. We need to respect it and learn from it. It is what cultured us and took care of us so that we could become what we are. If we destroy it or give it no importance we destroy and give no importance to ourselves.
When it marches from totalitarianism to individualism -a value the Quran asserts..that`s progress.
Well . . . I think we have enough of this. The fact that we are individuals is just a fact. But there's no need to be individualistic. We need some more communal conscience, honestly. But personal responsibility is definitely a value the Quran asserts, not individualism. That word individualism conveys selfishness and self-centeredness.
When it marches from nationalism to globalization..that`s progress..
Hmmmm. Nationalism is negative, I do believe that. But globalization has alot of negative meanings as well. I can agree with the idea that we are citizens of the world, and were born into the world and humanity, hence all of that should be important to us instead of being overly occupied with ourselves. HOWEVER, with that said to function as a community a community must look out for itself and be exlusivist at the very least in its morals and values, not watering them down or accepting immorality or evil for the sake of not appearing to be nationalist, and trying to be globalists. But the Quran says the welfare of the people should still be a mission of ours, but we also need to prioritize. The Quran does not tell us to prefer non-believers over those who believe in the Quran.
When the time comes and we see women preaching in the religious institutions and leading prayers,more women as judges,prime ministers and country leaders,I`ll be happy with this progress..
Hmmmm. I agree and disagree with this. Women being able to address issues that matter to them and those they care about is important. Women being able to contribute their experience as women in decision making processes I think is also important. Women leading prayers? I don't think there is a need to 'lead' prayers, but if women want to call us to pray on something I have no problem with that. Women as leaders of nations? The Quran brings up Bilqis, but she had a close counsel of men to counteract her and I'm not sure how she got into power or how Abyssinian power in Saba worked. But she ended up pledging allegiance to Solomon (God bless him) which can be understood as a correction of that situation (the idol worship and a woman being in such a capacity in that land). I'm not too sure about that, but I'm throwing that out there as a real possibility.
I really don't care too much (sorry to sound rude) if you'd be happy with that, seeing it as progress. But I respect your right to have an opinion. But I think you are fully biased and are not willing to really think on all of what I have said here.
By the way, thanks Farida for showing some objectivity and retrospection so far. As for the man, walking connection. I would not see this as a concept invented by the Quran. It is a classical Arabic concept which could be connected to what you are suspecting. But at the point that the word came to mean 'man' as well, that usage becomes cemented no matter what it might have been connected to (the etymology of the word). Singular is rajl and plural is rijaal(the word can also mean stately people or people of great reputation i.e. personalities. Rijaalaat is also used when this is meant). I see where you are coming from, but like I said etymology shows the thinking involved in how a word came to mean what it did but once it gains an established meaning you can't back step, unless you are using sound grammatical principles of the language. Like woman came from the german wife (of) man. And evolved into woman. But not every woman is the wife of a man. You see? We could probably go through the dictionary and get thousands of meanings like this. But I see your point, although I would never, ever try to apply that to the Quran or any usage of the word in Classical Arabic.
Godbless,
Anwar -
By the way, thanks Farida for showing some objectivity and retrospection so far. As for the man, walking connection. I would not see this as a concept invented by the Quran. It is a classical Arabic concept which could be connected to what you are suspecting. But at the point that the word came to mean 'man' as well, that usage becomes cemented no matter what it might have been connected to (the etymology of the word). Singular is rajl and plural is rijaal(the word can also mean stately people or people of great reputation i.e. personalities. Rijaalaat is also used when this is meant).
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam brother Anwar,
I too think that not all men are rijaal and this is a title suited only for those who live up to certain standards of Qawamoon.
I am still searching for a rijal whose life is devoted to doing his part as Qwamon for the oppressed and who understands his role in society and who would do all he can to lead a good example.
The only international figure of a rijal that I can think of is the one who spent thirty years in jail, fighting for the right of his people and while he was locked away his wife was a source of support for him. However when he came out he was saddened to see that his wife had betrayed his cause. This rajl simply seperated from his wife and I have not heard anyone who talks ill about him. I hope you can see who I am talking about.
peaceSalaam brother Anwar,
-
Peace,progod..
Sa'dah,
Non o my posts said anythign about girls keepint their grades lower than boys or not trying to apply for higher jobs than their husbands or the same jobs. This really makes me angry that you completely miscontrued what I'm saying. So i'll keep it short, I never said that.
No? then what did you mean by" But I don't believe that men and women in general but Quranic men and women in particular should be competing for the same jobs or competing against each other in the same schools,"?what else do you mean by "should not be competing"?
I do however believe that very close freindships between non-related boys and girls IS UNNECESSARILY. I've never taken that back.
Friendship is a feeling,and it
s an individual choice,you cannot tell someone that its unnecessary to feel like that towards someone,just because hes a man or shes a woman..all of us compete towards goodness"And the believing men and women, they are allies to one another. They order good and deter from evil, and they uphold the communion, and they contribute towards betterment and they obey God and His messenger. God will have mercy on them; God is Noble, Wise."(971)
"Contribute towards betterment" to me seems like a continuous work without any preferred types of segregation..Well . . . I think we have enough of this. The fact that we are individuals is just a fact. But there's no need to be individualistic. We need some more communal conscience, honestly. But personal responsibility is definitely a value the Quran asserts, not individualism. That word individualism conveys selfishness and self-centeredness.
Well,any so-called "movement" begins a label of one word or two to express its direction,and there are many reform movements that reach a fanatic stage..Every action has an equal and opposite reaction,and with time and experience,goodness survives..As in the negative aspects of globalization you mentioned,with time,it will become more human,and less savage..
Hmmmm. I agree and disagree with this. Women being able to address issues that matter to them and those they care about is important.
Why should it be confined to"the issues that matter to them and those they care about?" there are women who care about the whole community and the whole humanity..Women as leaders of nations? The Quran brings up Bilqis, but she had a close counsel of men to counteract her
I beg your pardon? a close council of men? who said they were only of men? the Quran says"She said ?O commanders, advise me in this matter of mine, for I will not take a decision until you give testimony. They said ?We are people of strength and mighty in power. But the decision is yours, so see what you will command.? The verses are talking about an advising council,who helped the democratic queen Bilqis making decisions,they said that "the decision was hers"! where`s the counteraction in that?????
and I'm not sure how she got into power or how Abyssinian power in Saba worked. But she ended up pledging allegiance to Solomon (God bless him) which can be understood as a correction of that situation (the idol worship and a woman being in such a capacity in that land). I'm not too sure about that, but I'm throwing that out there as a real possibility.
One thing for sure,the Quran doesn
t criticize the womanhood of Belqis,or wrong her rein.. The only criticism was her and her people prostrating to the sun"?Will they not prostrate to God who brings out what is hidden in the heavens and the Earth, and He knows what you hide and what you declare??.. And the Quran doesnt mention what happened after Belqis had believed in God and submitted to him-GOD-As for that story of Belqis surrendering her throne-because she wronged herself by being a queen nope,it`s a traditional story that has nothing to do with the Quran.. we hear it every day from the self appointed scholars..I really don't care too much (sorry to sound rude) if you'd be happy with that, seeing it as progress. But I respect your right to have an opinion. But I think you are fully biased and are not willing to really think on all of what I have said here.
I am biased,I`m a fanatic when it comes to the cause of freeing our minds from the mental barriers of sexism,racism,nationalism and sectarianism..
Peace,
-
I didn't really read your message. So if that is ignorant of me, sorry. But I do believe that women should obey their husbands. But overall they should obey God. And if the two contradict God comes first.
Ungodly, abusive men and ungodly, disobedient women cause dysfunctional marriages.
Godbless,
AnwarPeace,
Respectfully.I think you should definetely read the post above and keep it in mind because it speaks volumes.
It tells me that a man and a woman, husband and a wife, are equal and they shold obey their Creator, equally, which tells me that we are all humans and gender doesn't give you advantage.Human being, like everything and everyone else, should obey The Exalted God, The Most Powerful.
Titles such as wife, husband, sister, father, director, poet, construction worker, PR person, sales person, pesident, police officer,.... are just titles we came up with.
We should all obey The Exalted God The Most Wise.Peace.
-
Peace,
Alen and Sa'dah, I'm not going to spend hours trying to help you understand a position that you don't want to understand anyway. To you is your way and to me mine. I think all of my posts have said enough and if you take all of them into consideration you just might see where I am coming from. But I'm not going try to help you guys understand my point while you argue with me tooth and nail because you don't like the way I say things or just flat out disagree with me. To you your way and to me mine.
Farida,
That's fine. I believe in using the Arabic language in a strict way, just considering the literal meanings or other meanings connected to grammar, no more. I am not interested in interpreting words in a way that betrays their real meanings, linguistically and grammatically. To you your way and to me mine. By the way, I do know who your talking about. Nelson Mandela. Thanks for the fun quiz. I didn't see the point to it, but hey, it's all good.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Why should it be confined to"the issues that matter to them and those they care about?" there are women who care about the whole community and the whole humanity..
Yes. It is really remarcable how women figure prominently, sometimes exclusively or woverwhelmingly in assciations and organizations for welfare and help of people, but that as soon as these organisations become strong and important through their work, they are gradually taken over by men at the top posts who then become important and get more money for the work tht women did for much less and where they were not able to lift them, they won't have women manage them once the acquire a certain standing.
Of course there are some men also in relie and help. I am talking and about relative numbers and how we come to this gratuitous importance and ability of men to manage where it is rather a question of ability to throw women out once the hard work is done.
Salaam
-
Farida,
That's fine. I believe in using the Arabic language in a strict way, just considering the literal meanings or other meanings connected to grammar, no more. I am not interested in interpreting words in a way that betrays their real meanings, linguistically and grammatically. To you your way and to me mine. By the way, I do know who your talking about. Nelson Mandela. Thanks for the fun quiz. I didn't see the point to it, but hey, it's all good.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam
I am sorry brother Anwar you are contridicting your self; in your earlier posts you were selective about only the reasonable, godly men who should be obeyed. If all rijaal are all men then who are you to pick out the reasonable ones if God does not differenciate between rijalaan, unless not all men are rijal and this is something one has to earn with ones deeds just like Nelson Mendela, who has earned the respect of all and I mentioned him as I have yet to come across a muslim rijal like him.
peace -
Peace Farida,
Salaam
I am sorry brother Anwar you are contridicting your self; in your earlier posts you were selective about only the reasonable, godly men who should be obeyed.I'm sorry too. You misunderstood me. I repeatedly said in my past posts that a man/men are adult human males, and that does not figure into their prudence, godliness, responsibility or behavior. Being a man is a matter of biology and biological maturation. When the term rajl/rijaal is factored in there is no such term as 'real' men, or 'real' women. There is muruwah, which is manhood, and that might have some cultural attatchments that are connected to the definition. But this
real man' stuff is a cultural interpretation of what peolple expect of men (you even admited that) besides just being adult human males. As far as I have seen it does not apply to the word rajl and rijaal. I don't think we should mix cultural interpretations (which differ from culture to culture) with the plain, straightforward definitions of words.If all rijaal are all men then who are you to pick out the reasonable ones if God does not differenciate between rijalaan, unless not all men are rijal and this is something one has to earn with ones deeds just like Nelson Mendela, who has earned the respect of all and I mentioned him as I have yet to come across a muslim rijal like him
I totally disagree with this rijaal means more than biological man idea. Even the worse, most despicable of men are still rijaal. It is not something you earn it is something that an adult human male just IS. Instead of talking about rijaal you need to use other virtues that the Quran encourages. Just, godly, prudent, patient, perservering, forgiving. These are real virtues that are good for all of us to have but that do not define whether we are men (rijaal) or women (nisaa'. However they may define whether we are good men or good women.
I think I have made myself clear here. Number 1, rijaal is plural and it means men. So no one man can be a rijaal. Secondly, being a man has nothing to do with one's virtues as it concerns the word rajl, but everything to do with one's biological maturation as a male human being.
I hope I've explained myself well, and hence you can see that I have not been contradicting myself. You might consider nelson mandela to be a good man (rajl tayyib, jayyid, etc), or even an ideal man (rajl mithali) but his goodness has nothing to do with his being a man. Again rajl is the singular and rijaal is the plural.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Yes. It is really remarcable how women figure prominently, sometimes exclusively or woverwhelmingly in assciations and organizations for welfare and help of people, but that as soon as these organisations become strong and important through their work, they are gradually taken over by men at the top posts who then become important and get more money for the work tht women did for much less and where they were not able to lift them, they won't have women manage them once the acquire a certain standing.
Of course there are some men also in relie and help. I am talking and about relative numbers and how we come to this gratuitous importance and ability of men to manage where it is rather a question of ability to throw women out once the hard work is done.
Salaam
Peace,Huruf,
I dont know much about what youre saying about welfare organizations and associations,I know most of their founders are women,but I dont know about the gruesome things that happen to them,you must be experienced with this kind of work..I just began working with two of my best friends-a boy and a girl-in an animal welfare organization and theyre really both encouraging,and enlightening,Ive also learned about that great woman named "Ingrid Newkirk"the co-founder of PETA ,how that she was introduced to the animal rights concept by a man-Alex Pacheco-whom she founded the organization with,she grew very fast because of her good organization and sense of practicality where Pacheco was short,but they never tried to throw each other out.. I find her example a good one of passionate work and determination..and shes still there standing.. -
Salaam aleikum.
When you look around,women today,in colleges,for example,they make men bite the dust,when it comes to acchivements.
http//www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/education/09college.html?_r=1
It has always been put a lid on females expression of intellect,and capacity.You do it,when you say they shall obey their husband,and that they should only deal with affairs that are women affairs.What is not women affairs in this world today?
You also speak segregation,you must have lived long enough on the planet to see that segregation does not work,either it comes to race or women.In Norway,where I residence at the time,muslim men from very segregated muslim countries,is behind a large number of rapecases.While muslim men,from countries that have other traditions,is not on the list.
According to surveys in Egypt,62% of men say that they have harassed women sexually.82% of the Egyptian women,has experienced sexually harassment,and 98% of the female tourists.In many muslim countries,women are only sexual beings,and they carry the responsibility of mens sexuality.
You have taken your influence from this distorted picture of females.
-
Peace Farida,
I totally disagree with this rijaal means more than biological man idea. Even the worse, most despicable of men are still rijaal. It is not something you earn it is something that an adult human male just IS.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam brother Anwar,
If that is the case then even the worst most despicable men are qwamoon over women including the believing, chaste women of high status and intelligence. They can be the most stupid ones on earth, yet have the right to demand obedience from women, who may disobey them only at the peril of physical violence.
This would contradict the teaching of the Qur?an that judges people only on their conduct, not on their gender status. I don?t think that there was a shortage of words for men in Arabic that God should chose the word rajl/rijaal which could mean in your words
Man = rajl or Imru'un.
Men = rijaal.The root has to do with walking and foot/leg, but it came to mean man for some reason or another, ... Singular is rajl and plural is rijaal(the word can also mean stately people or people of great reputation i.e. personalities. Rijaalaat is also used when this is meant).
Or it is that men in the past did not sit at home taking their anger out on women, but ventured out; first keeping an eye on the vulnerable who needed their support. Having put their house in order they then went out into the wider world conquering country after country and doing all they could to live up to the reputation of people of great repute.
Maybe that is why the Qur?an reminds the wives to guard whatever is entrusted to them which would include the management of the house and the children and themselves while their men are afoot in the wider world. The atmosphere in its context is one of mutual cooperation ?The Believers, men and women, are protectors, one of another; they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil??So instead of blaming women for men becoming men-children and trying to create segregation in a Quranic community you should go out of your comfort zones and perform the duties entrusted on you. Living in a ghetto disconnecting with the rest of the world, is not the right way forward. We are supposed to live integrated with other communities and leave a positive impression on others so that they would join Islam too, as was the pattern in the past.
In the past few hundred years Muslim men got an easy ride by depriving women of education and making them dependant on them for everything in life which made men feel like man. I think that was one reason for our downfall as uneducated mothers were ill equipped to raise rijal who could handle their duty as qwamoon.
Instead we got good for nothing men with inflated egos unable to think beyond controlling women and asserting their authority. In that process the concept of rijal as a qwamoon was lost.
I think it would benefit all men to question why God chose the word rajl for them and whether or not they are living up to the required standards. You posted yesterday a YouTube video asking where are the Muslims (rijaal) while their orphans are left at the mercy of Christian missionaries?
peace -
Salaam sister Farida
If that is the case then even the worst most despicable men are qwamoon over women including the believing, chaste women of high status and intelligence. They can be the most stupid ones on earth, yet have the right to demand obedience from women, who may disobey them only at the peril of physical violence.
This would contradict the teaching of the Qur?an that judges people only on their conduct, not on their gender status. I don?t think that there was a shortage of words for men in Arabic that God should chose the word rajl/rijaal which could mean in your wordsWell, the Quran is not stating a fact here. Because not all men are qawaamoona. This is an order and not the statement of a fact. You should read that as 'Men are to be the Qawaamoona' to avoid confusion. If I'm delegating responsiblity I can say grammatically correctly to the person I WANT to be leader 'You are the leader.' I'm not talking about anyting innate, I'm telling him what to do and this is what the Quran is doing. Now it's intersting how words like wali, saahib and qawwam seem to take authoritive meanings when they have to do more with caring and supportive relationships. I think this has to do with a brother's (or sister's) keeper attitude among friends and family in the development of Classical Arabic. But again this is an order on how men are SUPPOSED to be if they are to follow God's words, not what they innately are.
I looked in the dictionary to double check myself and maybe I wasn't clear. But only the word rijaalaat = great, important men, leading personalities, men of distinction. NOT rajl and rijaal (the plural of rajl). These last two only mean man and men. If I confused you I apologize for that.
Or it is that men in the past did not sit at home taking their anger out on women, but ventured out; first keeping an eye on the vulnerable who needed their support. Having put their house in order they then went out into the wider world conquering country after country and doing all they could to live up to the reputation of people of great repute.
As I said, only the word rijaalaat implies greatness, and the passage mentioning qawwaamoona is an order, just like the passage saying that women are dutiful/obedient and preserve what God would have them preserve in the absence of their men. It's an order for believing women and the passage saying that men are to be qawwaamoon is also a command.
Maybe that is why the Qur?an reminds the wives to guard whatever is entrusted to them which would include the management of the house and the children and themselves while their men are afoot in the wider world. The atmosphere in its context is one of mutual cooperation ?The Believers, men and women, are protectors, one of another; they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil??
All of the Quran encourages mutual respect between men and women but it doesn't try to imply that men and women are exact equals (in duty) and should be doing exactly the same things, but it does of course encourage mutual respect, caring for each other and taking each other into consideration.
So instead of blaming women for men becoming men-children
I never blamed women. Get it right. I blamed modern societal trends.
a
nd trying to create segregation in a Quranic communityAgain I'm not trying to create any type of segregation just pointing out that male-female distance when the two are not family, factors into the Quran. And even factors into social cohesion. It's not about forced segregation or treating anyone like they are less. In the eyes of God and in our potential to do good and bad we are all equal. It's a matter of appropriateness and has nothing to do with enforcing any type of segregation.
you should go out of your comfort zones and perform the duties entrusted on you. Living in a ghetto disconnecting with the rest of the world, is not the right way forward. We are supposed to live integrated with other communities and leave a positive impression on others so that they would join Islam too, as was the pattern in the past.
I've been out of my comfort zone for so long I don't think I even have one anymore. And what are you talking about by living in a ghetto? Do I live in a ghetto? Is that what you're implying? Am I disconnecting from the rest of the world by living in my supposed ghetto? What are you talking about?
In the past few hundred years Muslim men got an easy ride by depriving women of education and making them dependant on them for everything in life which made men feel like man. I think that was one reason for our downfall as uneducated mothers were ill equipped to raise rijal who could handle their duty as qwamoon.
An easy ride? I don't know. We have to judge men by their particular, individual situations, I'm sure alot of men have had it tough according to what God chose to dish out to them, just as there are women who have had it easy in all ages. As for Muslim men depriving women of education and making them dependent, I agree. I was shocked to find out how in many Middle Eastern countries women got the right to vote in the 1900's and such, when the Quran gave women this right (and even according to the hadeeth they were given the right) to vote when the last prophet (God bless him) was sent to Arabia with the Quran. So I can definitely say that Muslim men, and the Muslim societies on a whole have been pretty backwards and that is due to the fact that they abandoned the Quran for pre-islamic, local and (in some cases) modern traditions. So I can't argue with you that there are men who have blocked women's education and their ability to raise sound childen. But not all men have been like this and different Muslim societies operated differently, we can't blanket stereotype.
Instead we got good for nothing men with inflated egos unable to think beyond controlling women and asserting their authority. In that process the concept of rijal as a qwamoon was lost.
Many muslims have lost site of their duties as they have lost site of the Quran. But let's not turn this into man bashing. Just as there are good men there are good women as well as bad men and bad women. It is unfortunate that Muslim communities, of all people, forgot the Quran and grabbed onto ingorance in the name of Islam. Or in some cases like now they abandon their backward concepts of Islam to follow other misguided ways and then trash the Quran and their forms of Islam and act like the two are equal. Look at Irshad Manji and Hirsi Ali, two individuals who show they don't know doodee squat about the Quran and lump the Quran and non-Quranic cultures that claim Islam in one. I know I just mentioned two women but there are men like this too. I read an article by a humanist who unfortunately went by the name Anwar, who was a former Muslim. Everything he had to say about the Quran in order to justify his disbelief in it was pure trash and his deficiency in understanding Arabic well was flagrant.
I think it would benefit all men to question why God chose the word rajl for them and whether or not they are living up to the required standards. You posted yesterday a YouTube video asking where are the Muslims (rijaal) while their orphans are left at the mercy of Christian missionaries?
That video had nothing to do with rijaal. You seem to be obsessed with this word and your understanding is a total misunderstanding of Arabic and the Quran. That verse is telling men what to do, and not telling them who they innately are. Overall it is telling men WHO BELIEVE in the Quran what to do. Now we know that many Muslims have abandoned the Quran, and yet still hold the book up high as a grand symbol while they don't read it or seriously follow it. That video was talking about Muslim society as a whole, NOT just men. ANd it is unfortunate that Muslim men AND women have totally abandoned our fellow Muslims and orphaned Muslims in need, and don't help them establish infrastructure that sustains them. This, when taking care of orphans is a top topic in the Quran. But I don't blame people, becuz in this modern age we are all sheep and we have no clue what real independence is or how to help other people establish it, especially the poor Muslims among us.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Salaam sister Farida
Well, the Quran is not stating a fact here. Because not all men are qawaamoona. This is an order and not the statement of a fact. ..Now it's intersting how words like wali, saahib and qawwam seem to take authoritive meanings when they have to do more with caring and supportive relationships.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam brothe Anwar,
I am glad to see that we are now coming to a common understanding of the role of men and their duty towards nisaa, due to a degree of an advantage they have. My understanding of the Arabic language is nowhere near as good as yours, but I too understood that the word Qwamoon is more to do with a safeguarding, supportive role, rather than an authoritative roleBut only the word rijaalaat = great, important men, leading personalities, men of distinction.
There must have been a number of men who earned this title for men and I can only wish we have more rijaalaat in our communities rather than just rijal. prAs I said, only the word rijaalaat implies greatness, and the passage mentioning qawwaamoona is an order, just like the passage saying that women are dutiful/obedient and preserve what God would have them preserve in the absence of their men. It's an order for believing women and the passage saying that men are to be qawwaamoon is also a command
This sounds better but it?s debatable, so unless someone else give their understanding I would take your explanation and in the future I would mention this to men asserting their authority without being a Qwamoon.but it doesn't try to imply that men and women are exact equals (in duty) and should be doing exactly the same things, but it does of course encourage mutual respect, caring for each other and taking each other into consideration.
Yes of coure Men and women are equal in value but different in scope, as their respective genetic makeup is suited to different duties. If they go against that make up they may end up suffering from undue stress and imbalance. I am proud to be a woman and see no benefit for myself in acting like a man or trying to replacing men.I never blamed women. Get it right. I blamed modern societal trends.
Maybe you did not blame women but I got that impression sorry about that. However, like you, I too blame the modern social trend for many problems in our society.Again I'm not trying to create any type of segregation just pointing out that male-female distance when the two are not family, factors into the Quran
I think we got confused here; I was not talking about segregation between men and women. I was referring to the Quranic society which, to me, is like a ghetto. As for communicating with men outside my family I believe it should be done in an open atmosphere so that there is no secret relationship. I get on well with men and often have good discussions but always along with my husband or with his consent/knowledge, which include posting on the web or any emails to men outside my family.I've been out of my comfort zone for so long I don't think I even have one anymore. And what are you talking about by living in a ghetto? Do I live in a ghetto? Is that what you're implying? Am I disconnecting from the rest of the world by living in my supposed ghetto? What are you talking about?
I used the word You addressing all men, not to insult you or criticise you and, as for living in a ghetto, I have explained above that what I meant was an isolated Quranic community.But not all men have been like this and different Muslim societies operated differently, we can't blanket stereotype.
Of course I was not blanket stereotyping, rather I was talking about the majority who have done a lot of harm. I still have recollections of my grandfather who lived a simple but healthy life. He was considered mean when it came to spending on himself, but after he died several poor women knocked on our door asking for him as he had been supporting several families from the share of money he had received. Such men have left a very good impression on my childhood and I was expecting to see more of men like him in our generation (and I am sure there are some) but I have not come across any.Many muslims have lost site of their duties as they have lost site of the Quran. But let's not turn this into man bashing
Believe me I am not doing man bashing but I?m desperately trying to jog men to do their part as expected of them, which is directed at very precious men in my family as well.That video had nothing to do with rijaal. You seem to be obsessed with this word and your understanding is a total misunderstanding of Arabic and the Quran
You are right I may be obsessed with the role of rijaal and perhaps I have too high expectations from them. We are in a dire situation and as Allah promises that, unless we change what is within us, our state of affairs will not change. I believe its rijal who should be doing more outside their homes and women should make sure to do all they can to raise a good future generation, all looking after each other?s interest. That is the only way out of this terrible decline.
God bless you brother Anwar for replying to me in detail and, before I finish, let me reiterate that my anger is not directed at you but at the state of our whole community who is too self indulgent.
I leave an example of one such person herethe rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating
the rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating
the rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating
allah hu akbar
peace
-
Farida
If that is the case then even the worst most despicable men are qwamoon over women including the believing, chaste women of high status and intelligence. They can be the most stupid ones on earth, yet have the right to demand obedience from women, who may disobey them only at the peril of physical violence.
This would contradict the teaching of the Qur?an that judges people only on their conduct, not on their gender status. I don?t think that there was a shortage of words for men in Arabic that God should chose the word rajl/rijaal which could mean in yourYou are confusing two different things. In an organization some one has to be head, CEO, MD, similarly in a Family there must be a head for smooth functioning. Both men and women are told to fullfill some responsibilities and if they properly full fill them what are assigned by Allah then only men is head of the family. Over all a women can be a head of state.
We will talk on this in detail.