Questions regarding dowry in quran
-
I do work, why because I believe in helping my family. But not every one lives by that standard, hence the various examples
.Oh thank God. I thought you was sitting home and tried to defend it lol . But yes thats what I mean. Both the male and the female has a responsibility to help the family.
So you would marry a man who says "I don't want to work and you need to take care of me, like your my mother. Dress me, feed me, please me and take care of the kids?" No way in hell, I can see you are an independent women and you would want someone to enhance your life not drain it.
lol I never heard any man saying that, did you rotfl But by the way, I dont think a woman has the right to say that she doesnt want to work as well. She is not his mother, and he is not her father. If we still need our parents, then we should properly move back home, no ? confused
Marriage is not about money to me, however this discussion is about DOWRY, which tends to have money involved.
indeed. Now the problem is, that many times women really dont need that dowry, and in other cases its the man who need the dowry most due to his financial hardship.
I don't care if you don't believe that Men are to be the maintainers and supports of Women. I did not state that.. GOD DID. You can take that up with him on Judgement day, I was just pointing it out.
sister I dont believe the almighty ever said it, and I believe the translation is wrong. In any case, in my country all women are maintaners and supporters of their sons, at least when the sons are young. So it doesnt make sense either.
There is nothing wrong with that, good for you. I am the same way. Even taking care of 2 young ones as a single mother for a few years. I am just saying if/when you marry I bet your husband will also want to support the family
My future husband and me will both support our family. And if I loose my job, I hope he would provide for me till I get a new job, and if he looses his job I would definately provide for him as well.
As far as me making a comment about what happened a thousand years ago, these people needed that guidance and the revelation was for them too. You don't have to have a dowry or ask for one, it is an option between 2 people to agree on.
Its not so black and white, sister. There were ancient societies where women were financial independend and could make their own money. In any case, I really dont care. And I believe Quran is timeless hence not more usefull in old times then now.
If a stay at home mother, which is not an easy "sit on your butt job" has an agreement with their spouse to take care of the kids while he is working, by all means that is between them. I have no right to tell them what to do with their family dynamic.
One of my old classmate is an australien male. But he recently told me, that he is tired of being treated as a working slave by his egyptian wife. She got pregnant each year, and was just sitting on her butt in home and demanded him to buy a lot of things for her. He is very sure, that the the reason for why she got pregnant all the time was that she just wanted to sitt home. That was a good excuse for not working. ''I am not her father'' As he said.
That was properly from his story that I gave an example. But I agree with you, that every couple got a right to choose for themselves. However, I am against home mothers sitting on walfare.What I am saying is to be taken care of
ad a man should not be taken care of?
The nature of a man is to want to provide, in normal circumstances
and a woman doesnt want to provide according to you?
Read about the male mentality. They are different from us in certain ways
You are stereotyping males. There is nothing called 'male mentality'. Each male is different from the other. And women and men are not more different from each other then what males are from other males and as how different some females are from other females.
We just think differently
no we dont. you are again stereotyping. Was you a sunni before?
I was not trying to upset you and make you feel angry. You stated I need to listen to myself, I suggest you do the same. You are extremely defensive and I am sorry if something I said hurt you, that was NEVER my intent. No one is saying you are wrong for your thoughts, we just all have opinions. Which is great because in this way we learn and grow and defeat our inner demons
No sister, I think we agree more then we disagree.
But I felt that you was looking down on poor males and I have lived some years in India with a large population of poor people. I dont think its fair you look down on the Indian males. Would you still marry your husband if he was poor?
And if you dont have a problem with a rich female taking dowry from a poor guy why do you then have a problem with a poor guy taking dowry from a rich lady ?
Personally, as I told you, I am financially independent. I dont think about marriage now and would problerly not do it till I find the one I love. I would marry the man I love, I dont care about whether he is rich or poor since I have my own money anyway. But I would rather marry a man, who hasnt food or shelter but has a lot of love to me in his heart, then a rich arrogant pig who thinks he can buy me with money. Just my thoughts.
-
Shalom Aleikhem,
Let me see if I can gather some scientific data on the subject. Men and Women are not identical in their abilities. Ofcourse you can find a women that can knock out another man with a one single punch , but hey...lets not generalize that. If I get time, I will try to gather data from scientific studies.
There is a reason why we are Females and Males. We would not be FEMALES and MALES if there were no differences that mattered.
By the way... did you guys discuss about the issue of pregnancy ? men are free from the disadvantages it may cause to a general women. Please share your views regarding it. )
Peace
--------------- Student of Allah -
Salaam Maha,
It is to be noted that while the women have the right to demand a dowry, they are not obligated to ask for one. The Qur?aan does not make it an obligation for women to ask for a dowry no matter what. It actually says that women may let go of the dowry if they so wish. If you don?t want to ask for a dowry when you are to marry, then don?t. The Qur?aan is not forcing you, as a woman, to ask for it. Simple.
If a woman loves a man, in your example that will be a wealthy woman being proposed by a poor man, then she will not ask for a dowry that will put a burden upon the man. She can simply say, I accept your proposal without a dowry.
If she insists on asking for outrageous amount of money as a dowry, then the man has the option of stepping down (no one is forcing him to marry such a woman, after all). Really, if the two love each other enough, then they?ll find a way to make it work.
By the way, it is quite judgemental of you to say the women just sit around at home.? Do you realise how difficult it is for a housewife to manage house chores? How painful it is to undergo childbirth? How emotionally and physically draining it is to raise kids? I have many relatives who don?t work professionally and chose to be housewives ? and let me tell you something, they have A LOT to do. They never stop. They?ll clean, they?ll cook, all while the kids are running around and screaming. You don?t realise that ?work? and ?contribution to the relationship? are not only measured by money/wealth, but also the time and efforts each takes to make the relationship work.
-
By the way, it is quite judgemental of you to say the women just sit around at home.? Do you realise how difficult it is for a housewife to manage house chores? How painful it is to undergo childbirth? How emotionally and physically draining it is to raise kids? I have many relatives who don?t work professionally and chose to be housewives ? and let me tell you something, they have A LOT to do. They never stop. They?ll clean, they?ll cook, all while the kids are running around and screaming. You don?t realise that ?work? and ?contribution to the relationship? are not only measured by money/wealth, but also the time and efforts each takes to make the relationship work.
Shalom Aleikhem,
Nice and wise words there. There is more to this relationship then earning money.
Peace
-------------- Student of Allah -
Salaam Maha,
It is to be noted that while the women have the right to demand a dowry, they are not obligated to ask for one. The Qur?aan does not make it an obligation for women to ask for a dowry no matter what. It actually says that women may let go of the dowry if they so wish. If you don?t want to ask for a dowry when you are to marry, then don?t. The Qur?aan is not forcing you, as a woman, to ask for it. Simple.
If a woman loves a man, in your example that will be a wealthy woman being proposed by a poor man, then she will not ask for a dowry that will put a burden upon the man. She can simply say, I accept your proposal without a dowry.
If she insists on asking for outrageous amount of money as a dowry, then the man has the option of stepping down (no one is forcing him to marry such a woman, after all). Really, if the two love each other enough, then they?ll find a way to make it work.
By the way, it is quite judgemental of you to say the women just sit around at home.? Do you realise how difficult it is for a housewife to manage house chores? How painful it is to undergo childbirth? How emotionally and physically draining it is to raise kids? I have many relatives who don?t work professionally and chose to be housewives ? and let me tell you something, they have A LOT to do. They never stop. They?ll clean, they?ll cook, all while the kids are running around and screaming. You don?t realise that ?work? and ?contribution to the relationship? are not only measured by money/wealth, but also the time and efforts each takes to make the relationship work.
This is very true, My mother and her mother work much harder than most men.
-
And I have a question that doesn't sound too bad but it's all up to the translations I guess
Could the verse mean the wife has the right to ask for goods from his husbands ( not limited to the day they're getting married ) ?
-
It is to be noted that while the women have the right to demand a dowry, they are not obligated to ask for one. The Qur?aan does not make it an obligation for women to ask for a dowry no matter what. It actually says that women may let go of the dowry if they so wish. If you don?t want to ask for a dowry when you are to marry, then don?t. The Qur?aan is not forcing you, as a woman, to ask for it. Simple.
If a woman loves a man, in your example that will be a wealthy woman being proposed by a poor man, then she will not ask for a dowry that will put a burden upon the man. She can simply say, I accept your proposal without a dowry.
If she insists on asking for outrageous amount of money as a dowry, then the man has the option of stepping down (no one is forcing him to marry such a woman, after all). Really, if the two love each other enough, then they?ll find a way to make it work.
indeed. Actually from where I come from, its not in our culture that any woman ask for dowry anyway. I think a man would find it quite weird if his wife demanded a dowry from him. Maybe he would suspect her of exploiting him. But people think different and have different lifestyles in different cultures. And dowry is only an option, not a obligation as you said. In every case, I would suggest that women dont force or put any kind of pressure on the men to give them dowry.
By the way, it is quite judgemental of you to say the women just sit around at home.? Do you realise how difficult it is for a housewife to manage house chores? How painful it is to undergo childbirth? How emotionally and physically draining it is to raise kids? I have many relatives who don?t work professionally and chose to be housewives ? and let me tell you something, they have A LOT to do. They never stop. They?ll clean, they?ll cook, all while the kids are running around and screaming. You don?t realise that ?work? and ?contribution to the relationship? are not only measured by money/wealth, but also the time and efforts each takes to make the relationship work.
I personally never known any house wife. Both my parents worked throughout my childhood and took care of us kids on turn. I feel myself very furtunate because I felt the love and attention of both parents in contradiction to one of my muslim classmates whos father was always absent because he waas the only one who was working in home hence was forced to work many hours each day in order to provide for his family. So her father was always absent, hence she never got that close attachment to her father as a child should have.
But I can imagine that sitting in the home as a house wife is also difficult. But she has herself choosed to be a housewife and give birth to so many children, so I cannot see any reason for feeling pity for her.Peace
-
Posted by Student of Allah
? on Yesterday at 063246 PM ?Insert QuoteShalom Aleikhem,
Let me see if I can gather some scientific data on the subject. Men and Women are not identical in their abilities. Ofcourse you can find a women that can knock out another man with a one single punch , but hey...lets not generalize that. If I get time, I will try to gather data from scientific studies.
peace brother. I am looking forward to see your scientific datas.
There is a reason why we are Females and Males. We would not be FEMALES and MALES if there were no differences that mattered.
there is a reason why some are short, some tall, some italian, some spanish, some american as well. Each human is unique. Judging people by their gender is absurd.
By the way... did you guys discuss about the issue of pregnancy ? men are free from the disadvantages it may cause to a general women. Please share your views regarding
come on brother. Is pregnancy really your best argument ? You know what, not all women get pregnant. I am a woman and I never got pregnant, and would maybe never be as I am not sure whether I want children at all. So in that sense I am pretty much like men. But yes males and females have each their own way in reproducing children which - when combined together - makes a compleate new human being. Males and females are supplement to each other in terms of reproducing.
May peace be upon you.
-
Household chores are not feminine, even if most women do it unpaid, it is not a feminine job. Men can do them too and in fact historically men have been household servant as much as women and paid for cleaning and servin in the homes, and are now so in restaurants and hotels etc. Household chores are not a feminine question and certainly to do it unpaid should be out of the question, unless those who do acquire fair rights to the wealth of those who benefit from their work.
On the other hand, pregnancy, delivery, suckling and and care and upkeep of the body which is required for that are feminine work. Those nobody can do instead of a woman and most women's lives are conditioned to whatever extent precisely by those expectations, the expectation that a woman will be mother. If she doesn0t become a mother, she has been all the same subject to those expectations, and may be subject to them to the end of her fertile period in life, and be involved in treatments and work to become mother, by her own desire or by that of the would be father or other.
So there are burdens which fall without failure on women and not on men, precisely those of reproduction. There is a completely unequal distribution of work in that sense. Women should be compensated duly for that. The ujur are justified. Whether it is at the level of husband to wife or at the social level of the whole of society to women, that is another question, but to ignore the burden of women and make their work in reproduction, whether fruitful or not, doen't matter, is pure and plain exploitation.
To on top of that take for granted that they do any household chore at all, that is pure and plain cheek.Salaam
-
Actually from where I come from, its not in our culture that any woman ask for dowry anyway. I think a man would find it quite weird if his wife demanded a dowry from him.
FYI, in some countries, it is actually the woman's family who is under pressure to give dowry to the man's family. Therefore it is not just the women who get to milk the cash from their (prospective) husbands. Anyway, that is a cultural practice, of course, and I am not an advocate for such a practice.
In every case, I would suggest that women dont force or put any kind of pressure on the men to give them dowry.
I doubt any woman will -force- any man to give her a dowry. I mean, if the woman is that materialistic, she'll dump him if he can't give all the dollar figures (or the man can step down, because a materialistic woman isn't worth it).
But I can imagine that sitting in the home as a house wife is also difficult. But she has herself choosed to be a housewife and give birth to so many children, so I cannot see any reason for feeling pity for her.
I don't ask you to feel PITY for housewives, just basically understanding that they don't have it as easy as you would like to think. I just want you to consider this (or any matter, really) in different perspectives, and not just confine it to your sphere of experience.
I was outlining why the dowry may be justified if both parties agree that the woman should be a housewife instead of being engaged in a workforce. The woman does not receive an income because assumes household responsibilities that the man may not be keen to undertake. Please note that I refer this as a mutual agreement, and not just based on what the woman's decision.
Not all women chose themselves to be housewives, most discuss it with their husbands before the marriage. Believe it or not, many men will actually prefer that the women stay at home instead. So it's not purely what the women want. Also, not all women chose to give birth to 'so many children', their husbands actually have a say on this too. Again, you are assuming that the relationship is a one-way where women have all the decisions, and you don't acknowledge that it may actually be opposite or a combination of both, in different parts of the world.
Both my parents worked throughout my childhood and took care of us kids on turn. I feel myself very furtunate because I felt the love and attention of both parents in contradiction to one of my muslim classmates whos father was always absent because he waas the only one who was working in home hence was forced to work many hours each day in order to provide for his family.
I also want to add that not everyone is able to obtain a part-time job. In many countries, it is difficult to get a full-time job, let alone a part-time one (due to the unstable economy and high competition). Hence, having the woman and the man both work full-time (when they have kids) is often not an option. Hence one has to assume the role of a breadwinner. If you and your partner can both work while not neglecting your kids for a single second(if you decide to have one or two), then do it. But do not think negatively upon others who choose different paths from you, because they may have already weighed out their options and opt for one that is deemed to be the best from them.
-
Bornagain
FYI, in some countries, it is actually the woman's family who is under pressure to give dowry to the man's family. Therefore it is not just the women who get to milk the cash from their (prospective) husbands. Anyway, that is a cultural practice, of course, and I am not an advocate for such a practice.
yes excately. In some countries its the man who pays dowry while in other countries its the woman who pays the dowry while in some other countries none of them pays the dowry. In any case I am against putting pressure on either the man or woman to pay dowry. Marriage is not a bussiness.
I doubt any woman will -force- any man to give her a dowry. I mean, if the woman is that materialistic, she'll dump him if he can't give all the dollar figures (or the man can step down, because a materialistic woman isn't worth it).
Many hadither men are actually on very high pressure to pay huge amounts to the woman and her family in dowry. In some arab golf countries the women demands millions of dollars in dowry, and since a lot of men are unable to pay that amount, the marriage age of the women in the arab gulf have increased. It seems like marriage is more a business in these countries, unfurtunately.
I was outlining why the dowry may be justified if both parties agree that the woman should be a housewife instead of being engaged in a workforce
you are right. That was also what I pointed out. The dowry is only justified when its given to women who dont have money. Its a common fact that house wives depend on their husbands money (or the welfare system which again is financed by working mothers). Perhaps thats why the divorce rate is lower for house wives. Its more difficult to leave an abusive husband if you need his money.
Please note that I refer this as a mutual agreement, and not just based on what the woman's decision.
sure the mutual agreement is always preferable. But there are also cases without mutual agreements, where its the woman who wants to sit home or cases where its the husband who wants her to sit home.
Not all women chose themselves to be housewives, most discuss it with their husbands before the marriage. Believe it or not, many men will actually prefer that the women stay at home instead
I never known any man who wanted his wife to sit home. But I also live in a Western country where almost all women work, and where its very common that the wife earns more then her husband. But I can imagine that there are other countries where some men would prefer the women to sit home. As long as he doesnt force her to do that, I dont have a problem with it. But personally if I had a husband who wanted me to sit home, I would definately divorce him. I can always get a new husband but I cannot get all my years in school back. Just imagine, I spend almost my entire life in school, high school and university, all these years of hard work in my studies just for in the end sitting home with a bunch of kids!!! NO WAY!! yuck Not for me at least!
I don't ask you to feel PITY for housewives, just basically understanding that they don't have it as easy as you would like to think. I just want you to consider this (or any matter, really) in different perspectives, and not just confine it to your sphere of experience.
Nothing is easy in life. Even sleeping, eating, walking etc. nothing is easy. But a woman sitting in her home with a bunch of kids and cleaning HER OWN home is not doing any favor on me or on anybody else. But a woman who works, does not only help her family, she also helps the society and her country.
Also, not all women chose to give birth to 'so many children', their husbands actually have a say on this too
yes indeed. some men consider their wives as birthmachines and cleaning maids. Unfurtunately.
Again, you are assuming that the relationship is a one-way where women have all the decisions, and you don't acknowledge that it may actually be opposite or a combination of both, in different parts of the world.
I dont believe that a woman should do anything she doesnt want. Her husband is not her father that she should obey him. Instead, they must come to mutual agreements. Healthy communication skills is definately the way.
also want to add that not everyone is able to obtain a part-time job.
lol how did you guessed it. Yes both my parents worked part-time and took care of us kids on turn. My mother worked in a kindergarten while my father was a school teacher. So it was very easy for them to obtain a part-time in their fields, at that time. But I know that now its been more difficult now, and in some fields its almost impossible to get part time jobs, like if you are a leader.
Hence, having the woman and the man both work full-time (when they have kids) is often not an option. Hence one has to assume the role of a breadwinner
yes i understand your point about people being in different situations where they have to cop in different ways. But guess what, there are also families, where its only the woman who was able to get a job. In these situations its the woman who became the breadwinner for her family and the husband stay-at-home-dad. You are very open for house wives, are you in the same way open for stay-at-home-dads?
If you and your partner can both work while not neglecting your kids for a single second(if you decide to have one or two), then do it. But do not think negatively upon others who choose different paths from you, because they may have already weighed out their options and opt for one that is deemed to be the best from them.
It doesnt change the fact I just pointed out earlier, that a house wife and a full-time working husband means an absent father for the kids which is VERY unhealthy for the children. Money cannot replace a father. A study conducted by Dr. Kyle D. Pruett found that infants between 7 and 30 months respond more favorably to being picked up by their fathers. Pruett also found that a father's parenting style is beneficial for a child's physical, cognitive, emotional and behavioral development. Mothers reassure toddlers when they become frustrated while fathers encourage them to manage their frustration. This helps the children learn to deal with stress and frustration. A long-term study Pruett conducted proved that a father's active involvement with his children, from birth to adolescence, promotes greater emotional balance, stronger curiosity and a stronger sense of self-assurance in the child.
Personally I can also add that if it was not for all the time I spend with my father in my childhood, all the love, attention and caring I got from him - I would not have been the same person as I am today.
A child definately needs both his mother and father beside him.Perhaps the problem is, that our modern society is not so beneficial for families, especially as the job situation is right now.
Its singles and couples without children who benefit from our society most right now, unfurtunately.Peace
-
Salaam,
Many hadither men are actually on very high pressure to pay huge amounts to the woman and her family in dowry.
With all due respect, please do not refer to traditional muslims as ?hadithers?. It is insulting. Just like how you do not want to be labelled as ?a Jew?, or ?a Christian? or ?a Muslim?, I am certain those people do want to be called ?hadithers?. You are not above everyone else.
In some arab golf countries the women demands millions of dollars in dowry, and since a lot of men are unable to pay that amount, the marriage age of the women in the arab gulf have increased.
Well, I suppose they reap what they sow. The women choose themselves to demand incredulous amount of dowry, which in turn, leads them to being unmarried. On that note, you cannot fault the Qur?aanic verse that gives the right for women to ask for a dowry. As I have previously stated, the Qur?aan never makes it an obligation for the women to demand a dowry, let alone demand a ridiculous amount of money. What the Arab women and whatnot is irrelevant to the Qur?aan. Blame not the System for what people do to abuse it.
Perhaps thats why the divorce rate is lower for house wives. Its more difficult to leave an abusive husband if you need his money.
Oh please, you have never experienced being in an abusive family to make that statement, have you? The difficulty of getting a divorce is not due to financial constraint, but more about social and cultural implications that will arise. E.g. being a shame of the society, failure, etc.
I never known any man who wanted his wife to sit home. But I also live in a Western country where almost all women work, and where its very common that the wife earns more then her husband.
Your lack of interaction with men who prefer their wives to sit at home do not validate your argument. I know many men who have expressed that they would prefer their women to care for the family. Please note I use the term ?care for the family? instead of ?sit at home?.
Just imagine, I spend almost my entire life in school, high school and university, all these years of hard work in my studies just for in the end sitting home with a bunch of kids!!! NO WAY!!
See, this is why you would consider working as a housewife to be such a negative thing. I gather that you see your past experience, be it academic or social ones, to serve only as financial/professional investment. You think that all your education only functions to get you a successful career, and really, that?s not all there is.
I too shared similar sentiment to you in regards to being a housewife, but I have come to a realisation that I was wrong ? because I insisted on perceiving things in my own limited sphere of understanding. I know many intelligent women who have decided with their husbands, that they should become housewives. Why, you ask? Because most women have the instinct to nurture their kids. Have you not heard that the greatest love there is, is a mother?s love towards her child? That love cannot be substituted by any amount of money.
This is where I will challenge your views. Providing love and committing to raise children is not an easy task. Imagine sacrificing your own ideals and ambitions for the best of your children. It?s an idea that you do not understand, not yet. Because let?s face it, you have only been a kid. You have never become a mother to understand that.
On that note, I did ask my female friends why they would even consider being housewives when they have undertaken advanced stages of education. Why would they waste it? Guess what. The education is never wasted. They use their knowledge to educate their children, to be the best they can be. They may not earn any income (which so far, I see to be your measure of ?contribution?), but they contribute to shaping a better generation.
?Sitting with a bunch of kids? is not as useless as you would love to think. It is actually much more rewarding than that.
But a woman sitting in her home with a bunch of kids and cleaning HER OWN home is not doing any favor on me or on anybody else. But a woman who works, does not only help her family, she also helps the society and her country.
Yes, she is. She is helping to shape a better generation. Just because she ain?t giving you any money, it does not mean she does not contribute the society. You never know, that little girl who smiles and greets you politely, or that boy who offers his help to you, may have been raised by a housewife whom you have rendered as useless. Do not use wealth and materialism as the only measure of contribution, please.
I dont believe that a woman should do anything she doesnt want. Her husband is not her father that she should obey him. Instead, they must come to mutual agreements. Healthy communication skills is definately the way.
Well? What I was trying to convey is that your previous argument/complaint was based on an one-way scenario. If the man and the woman have both agreed upon the relationship arrangement, will you still criticise it because it does not fit in with your personal preference?
Yes both my parents worked part-time and took care of us kids on turn. My mother worked in a kindergarten while my father was a school teacher. So it was very easy for them to obtain a part-time in their fields, at that time. But I know that now its been more difficult now, and in some fields its almost impossible to get part time jobs, like if you are a leader.
Hence, having both of them work at the same time may not be as practical as you would like to think. In many countries, it?s either you work full time or you don?t work at all. So do not judge a woman if she becomes a housewife, because for all you know, she may not easily get a part-time job.
You are very open for house wives, are you in the same way open for stay-at-home-dads?
Yes, I am. If they have decided that it has been agreed upon. I personally will not mind if I have to assume to role of the breadwinner, provided that my partner uses his time appropriately to raise the kids, and strive to be active in community works.
It needs to be noted that the first year following childbirth, it will be better if the woman stays at home so she can breastfeed the child.It doesnt change the fact I just pointed out earlier, that a house wife and a full-time working husband means an absent father for the kids which is VERY unhealthy for the children. Money cannot replace a father.
What will be even unhealthier is having BOTH of your parents absent for the children. I know some people whose parents both work full-time (no, they can?t get part-time job), and the impact is damaging.
You see, you cannot paint it in black and white. There are many factors contributing to relationship, and child development. Don?t simply use your experience and use it as a base model to be projected upon others.
-
I do not want to be involved in useless polemics, but I must point out that the Qur'an does not impose on women any household chores, no even forces suckling on them. But that in spite of that it does impose on men to give "Ujur" to the women they marry. It is not the usage of this or that country. It is in the Qur'an. And since it does not impose not even mentions chousehold chores or any other job, and since no male can be pregnant not a second, not nine months, cannot deliver, cannot suckle, cannot upkeep an organism which does all those functions, by elimination, the only reason for the time being unmovable reason, why a male should pay a female who will or may become his children's mother is precise that her job as reproducer.
I see that there are women quite ready to give up that right on her part. That is their business, but that does not deduct even a little bit of the duty imposed on husbands by God to give those ujur. It is the God given right of women and it is the God imposed duty of men.
It is an acknowledgment of a fact, not some fancy invention.
To each person and couple to look in conscience what they contract, but please, no diluting of the limmits set out by God, because in that case, why not have children haphazardly no matter who the father is, and let them sort out who they are fathering. Let them have all the good parts of reproducing and let the women put up with all the burdens and not even acknowlege that fact, as has been the case during ages.
Salaam
-
With all due respect, please do not refer to traditional muslims as ?hadithers?. It is insulting. Just like how you do not want to be labelled as ?a Jew?, or ?a Christian? or ?a Muslim?, I am certain those people do want to be called ?hadithers?. You are not above everyone else.
Why is it insulting? A hadither is a person who follows ahadith. How is it insulting to call a spade for a spade? I dont have a problem with someone calling me a jew or a christian or muslim, but I do not consider my self one who follow any particular 'reigion' so I would be wondering why someone would call me that. But hadither themselves say that they follow hadith, so how can that be an insult?
Well, I suppose they reap what they sow. The women choose themselves to demand incredulous amount of dowry, which in turn, leads them to being unmarried. On that note, you cannot fault the Qur?aanic verse that gives the right for women to ask for a dowry. As I have previously stated, the Qur?aan never makes it an obligation for the women to demand a dowry, let alone demand a ridiculous amount of money. What the Arab women and whatnot is irrelevant to the Qur?aan. Blame not the System for what people do to abuse it.
You are right that its the woman who chooses (and many times her family) to demand a high dowry. With all due respect I cannot see anywhere in the glorious Quran that gives a woman any particular right to ask for dowry. But what the husband and wife decide as a mutual agreement is a different matter. They have the right to do so. Like a husband also can demand a dowry in India if the woman wants to pay it.
And I have never blamed the quran for anything. So dont put words in my mouth.Oh please, you have never experienced being in an abusive family to make that statement, have you? The difficulty of getting a divorce is not due to financial constraint, but more about social and cultural implications that will arise. E.g. being a shame of the society, failure, etc
Its only logical that a woman who needs her husbands money would not ask for a divorce if he is abusive. I have also witnessed that when I was in India. But yes other factors also plays a role like you mentioned. But the best way to come out of an abusive relationship is definately to become financial independed.
Your lack of interaction with men who prefer their wives to sit at home do not validate your argument. I know many men who have expressed that they would prefer their women to care for the family. Please note I use the term ?care for the family? instead of ?sit at home?.
Personally I have never experienced a man saying that he wants his wife to sit home. You define sitting home as 'caring for the family' but it doesnt change the fact that she is sitting in home.
See, this is why you would consider working as a housewife to be such a negative thing. I gather that you see your past experience, be it academic or social ones, to serve only as financial/professional investment. You think that all your education only functions to get you a successful career, and really, that?s not all there is
.A Succesfull career is a part of my education. And yes I consider it negative to sit home for myself when I have been studying so hard. Why should I sit home when I am more interested in a succesfull career where I can utilize my skills?
too shared similar sentiment to you in regards to being a housewife, but I have come to a realisation that I was wrong ? because I insisted on perceiving things in my own limited sphere of understanding
So you mean a woman who choose a successfull career is limited in understanding while a woman sitting home is has a lot of understanding?
know many intelligent women who have decided with their husbands, that they should become housewives. Why, you ask? Because most women have the instinct to nurture their kids. Have you not heard that the greatest love there is, is a mother?s love towards her child? That love cannot be substituted by any amount of money.
Careerwomen for sure are intelligent women otherwhise they would not achieve all what they got. Regarding nurture their kids, then working mothers also do that. And sitting home does not mean that you automaticallty nuture your kids. In fact you can also be a very bad mother even when you sit home. You must understand that there is nothing wrong with a mother earning her own money. Almost all mothers in my country work and I dont see any problems.
This is where I will challenge your views. Providing love and committing to raise children is not an easy task. Imagine sacrificing your own ideals and ambitions for the best of your children. It?s an idea that you do not understand, not yet. Because let?s face it, you have only been a kid. You have never become a mother to understand that.
So you think a mother sitting home is automatically loving and caring for her children? Children can be neglected even if her mother sits home. Yes I have never been a mother but nearly all mothers in my country work, so I think a whole population of mothers cannot be wrong.
On that note, I did ask my female friends why they would even consider being housewives when they have undertaken advanced stages of education. Why would they waste it? Guess what. The education is never wasted. They use their knowledge to educate their children, to be the best they can be. They may not earn any income (which so far, I see to be your measure of ?contribution?), but they contribute to shaping a better generation.
Can you please tell me how a woman who was studying business management can use her education with her kids?
Sitting with a bunch of kids? is not as useless as you would love to think. It is actually much more rewarding than that.
not for me or for almost all the women in my country
Yes, she is. She is helping to shape a better generation
how is she doing that?
because she ain?t giving you any money, it does not mean she does not contribute the society. You never know, that little girl who smiles and greets you politely, or that boy who offers his help to you, may have been raised by a housewife whom you have rendered as useless. Do not use wealth and materialism as the only measure of contribution, please.
Again we dont really have housewives in my country. Its only if the wife becomes ill she becomes a temporary house wife and the same with men who get ill become temporary stay-at-home dads. And how does a housewife contribute to the society???? We have polite children in our society but all their mothers are working.
Wealth and materialism is one major contribuion. Not to mention that women also work for other reasons then just money.
Well? What I was trying to convey is that your previous argument/complaint was based on an one-way scenario. If the man and the woman have both agreed upon the relationship arrangement, will you still criticise it because it does not fit in with your personal preference
You misunderstood me. If the wife and husband both want her to sit home, I dont have any problem or right to interfere. But yes I find it very hard to understand why an educated, modern woman would do that. But in the end, she has the right to choose for herself. Thats called freedom.
Hence, having both of them work at the same time may not be as practical as you would like to think. In many countries, it?s either you work full time or you don?t work at all. So do not judge a woman if she becomes a housewife, because for all you know, she may not easily get a part-time job.
Then whats wrong in working full time?
Yes, I am. If they have decided that it has been agreed upon. I personally will not mind if I have to assume to role of the breadwinner, provided that my partner uses his time appropriately to raise the kids, and strive to be active in community works.
It needs to be noted that the first year following childbirth, it will be better if the woman stays at home so she can breastfeed the childI dont have any problem with stay-at-home dads either. I have just provided scientific datas who shows how healthy it is for children to be raised by their father. But as I also mentioned earlier, as long as its a mutual agreement its perfectly fine with me. Sometimes the father or the mother could become ill and thats make them housewifes or stay-at-home dads. But personally, I would go for a career.
What will be even unhealthier is having BOTH of your parents absent for the children. I know some people whose parents both work full-time (no, they can?t get part-time job), and the impact is damaging.
I live in a western country where many work either parttime or full time. I have so far nto seen any damaging impact on the children. But as I told you, its very unhealthy to have an absent father. If the mother can contribute financially, then the father wont have a reason for being so absent leading to presence of both parents. But again, some couples dont have the possiblity to do so as you also said.
You see, you cannot paint it in black and white. There are many factors contributing to relationship, and child development. Don?t simply use your experience and use it as a base model to be projected upon others.
I am not painting something black and white. Neither is there anything wrong in using an experience since we should learn from our experiences. And I always told you, that I dont have a personally problem with housewives neither stay-at-home dads, but personally I would go for a career, since I love working, I love contributing to the society and my country, and since I would love to share all the responsibilities with my husband and least but not last, because I have other important things in my life then just giving birth to children.
Peace
-
I do not want to be involved in useless polemics, but I must point out that the Qur'an does not impose on women any household chores, no even forces suckling on them. But that in spite of that it does impose on men to give "Ujur" to the women they marry. It is not the usage of this or that country. It is in the Qur'an. And since it does not impose not even mentions chousehold chores or any other job, and since no male can be pregnant not a second, not nine months, cannot deliver, cannot suckle, cannot upkeep an organism which does all those functions, by elimination, the only reason for the time being unmovable reason, why a male should pay a female who will or may become his children's mother is precise that her job as reproducer.
I see that there are women quite ready to give up that right on her part. That is their business, but that does not deduct even a little bit of the duty imposed on husbands by God to give those ujur. It is the God given right of women and it is the God imposed duty of men.
It is an acknowledgment of a fact, not some fancy invention.
To each person and couple to look in conscience what they contract, but please, no diluting of the limmits set out by God, because in that case, why not have children haphazardly no matter who the father is, and let them sort out who they are fathering. Let them have all the good parts of reproducing and let the women put up with all the burdens and not even acknowlege that fact, as has been the case during ages.
Salaam
I agree 100% with you.
Peace
-
And since it does not impose not even mentions chousehold chores or any other job, and since no male can be pregnant not a second, not nine months, cannot deliver, cannot suckle, cannot upkeep an organism which does all those functions, by elimination, the only reason for the time being unmovable reason, why a male should pay a female who will or may become his children's mother is precise that her job as reproducer.
This is confusing huruf, what if a woman is infertile? Does the ujur not come into play then? Or taken back? -
What if you marry a woman and next day she dies? Or youmarry a man and he becomes disfunctional, or invalid. Those are risks which do not undo the esential general rule, that a man ids not going to bear children and generally will be able to work, but he may be unable to work beyond his own will, it doesn't make it so, that if she will not bear children, instead of her his husband will bear them.
Rules are for the general rule, not for the exceptions, and even if she does not bear children, she hasn't refused to do so, but she is invalid, just like a soldier may be invalid, he is not required togfiht but he is still a soldier.
At any rate that eventuality, if it bothers the couple they should agree as to that and provide whatever the want to provide.
Salaam
-
Not having a chance at life or reproduction due to events out of her control is different from knowingly marrying a woman who is infertile, atm your explanation is heavily centered around that being the only reason for ujur so in a case like the above...the ujur would not be applicable.
There is also a difference in couples agreeing to whatever terms on their own and what is said in the quran. Like you say here
I see that there are women quite ready to give up that right on her part. That is their business, but that does not deduct even a little bit of the duty imposed on husbands by God to give those ujur. It is the God given right of women and it is the God imposed duty of men.
How can that duty be imposed on someone who is marrying a woman who cannot reproduce if that's the explanation for ujur? -
There are many mortagages imposed on women irrespective of them being fertile or not, like finding difficulty in employment because of perceived possibility of their being pregnant or becoming pregnant and being tied by children.
On the other hand if it is not that what is the reason? Not household chores, since they are not a prefixed duty of hers. And even if it were we know that where there are plenty of domestic service, wealthy women or wives of wealthy men do not need to do them and they are not exempted of paying ujur on that count. So what would be the reason then if not the liability of the woman on the reproduction aspect. Be she fertile or not, reproduction for her is a liability.
Salaam
And very few people know absolutely that they are not fertile. There is always the possibility or the hope that they might be fertile and in the Qur'an there instances of that.
A married women, from an emloyer point of view is a possible liability, not so a married man. Why would it be?
Salaam
-
I agree there are lots of issues in women's lives but tying ujur into the reproductive capacity of woman seems odd and would raise issues imo. I'm sure the rate of infertility is low but even so, cases like women having hysterectomies do exist and are more prevalent these days; the more we know about cervical cancer etc/medical advances...saving a woman but losing the capacity to procreate.
The issues you raise re difficulty in employment etc are things that should be classified under discrimination/bias/prejudice and the appropriate authorities should deal with them, like maternity leave in workplaces and so on and so forth. If we take the quran as universally applicable, then it would be even in a case where the society is ideal for women.
A man would be well within his rights to ask the woman to get medically examined with a certificate of 'yay i can have babies, ujar nao pls'. Besides, some I think it is paid upfront, in which case if she can't have any, a man can take it back? There is additional in 656 it seems like? Like you say, an independently wealthy woman wouldn't need the ujar even if they do get pregnant and have babies and raise them all by themselves, not working even.
I don't know what else it could be, but we get closer to the ballpark with what it couldn't be at times.