She's Not Naked !!!
-
Women were actually helped, brought to the city of the Messenger probably to some refugee camp where they would get helped and could then marry a man if they agreed to it. But not have sex, they weren't simply given out to men, but men could ask for one if that man was reliable according to the Prophets judgment and if the woman wanted him as well.
?
It is only in the case of a real war where women who had husbands end up alone and have no means to support themselves. At that point the leader, takes them to his city and controls the captives until they find a way. It has nothing to do with men taking them and having sex with them. Wow!DisgustingYou have a very idolized view of history that unfortunately has little to do with reality.
"? He either forgets or ignores premodern Muslim contexts in which marketplaces were filled with naked women who were on display as slaves for sale. By purchasing women?s bodies, in accordance with ?classical Islamic tradition,? men obtained legally sanctioned sexual access to them. In this spiritually advanced past, ?slave rape? was unthinkable as a concept, because the slave?s right of consent was unthinkable (the same goes for marital rape). While it can be problematic to compare our standards of justice and equality to those of another historical setting, let?s just say that if we look closely, Yusuf?s spiritual tradition vs. degenerate modernity binary is a little more complicated than he wants it to be. ?"
http//www.vice.com/read/michael-muhammad-knight-vs-hamza-yusuf
-
It is mentioned that men should teach the believing women to throw the excess of their head coverings over their breast area.
?And you do this instead of teaching women to dress modestly? Lower their gaze? Cover their breasts using the excess scarf of her head which implies is to be covered as well. To not display their garments to people other than the ppl mentioned in the Quran? And to not stomp hard so as to shake the private parts of the body?
Instead of teaching them what you should, you tell them to feel free to dress any way they want?
Where are you getting the notion from that men should "teach" women how to dress properly? I'm an adult, I don't need another adult teaching me how to dress.
-
Fear of God is the Beginning of Wisdom..
2232 That . And whoever honors the SIGNS of Allah - indeed, it is from the inner fear of hearts.
With this Prophet Moses got greatest SIGN from GOD and telling Feron.
7919 And let me guide you to your Lord so you would fear.
Now to develop Inner Fear we have to seek help from GOD." Oh Lord increase us inner fear for you". Its indirectly asking "Oh Lord bless me with Wisdom". So Inner Fear of GOD and Wisdom both are combination. One can say its by Product.
So if inner fear is there men will not gaze women and women will not loiter in the streets particularly after evening. By this way the
society will be well safeguarded.Quran Reading Useless unless we implement the Ayath in Practical Life.
Last week I got angry over my child and I was shouting at her. She Quitely Said "Daddy, You are reading Quran but not implementing. You know very well shouting and getting angry is satanic act"... I was shocked. "Oh Lord make me to implement every Ayath in real life. I want your satisfaction and not to satisfy men". If I fear you, I no need to fear any one, otherwise I have to fear everything. Which is Better? Oh Lord increase us with Inner Fear and Totally submissive to Your Ayaths.
Now DrFazl has said about 3333, let us all practically implement this. Let us stay at home read Quran and we do not become wanderers.
Stay Peacefully at home and in fact we are the kings in our home. Let us live like a King. -
I disagree on your reading of those ayas of the Qur'an and above all on the conclusions you extract from those readings.
I very strongly desagree that hiding be always the best way to defend oneself for any length of time. I disagree that hiding in their homes is going to safeguard women from all evil. I does not and even if it did, at what price? And also it is not possible. Women do work, women are obliged to work outside the home, they have always worked and been obliged to work outside the home. Only the upper classes have been kept in the home.
When you say that women be kept in the homes, you are authorizing all the males to trample on them because the solution is in them, on the women, they the males, do not have to do anything whatsover.
Women are not necessarily safe in their homes nor are they necessarily in danger ouside their homes.
I am an old woman and I have never suffered any agression in spite of always having enjoyed complete freedom. And harassment I have only experienced in the very old days in Spain when the dirty men assumed that it was their good right to harass, and after that I have only experienced it in "muslim" countries, where in fact the men are lolled with the self complacent tirade that it is upon women to keep the male chaste, as if they were not already filthy to the core (those who cling to that ("morality".
Summing up, I disagree completely with your reading of those ayas. You are setting your own premise first and then try to accommodate the Qur'an to your premise.
Also I strongly disagree that males are necessarily evil. They are evil because with teachings such as the one I am contesting they are being convinced that there is nothing wrong with them imposing their exigencies on women and turning things upside down so that the onus is always on women. No, you might get here and there a woman who gets better with this injunctions you say, but you make all men downright rotten because you are saying it is somebody else that is resposnible for their virtue and they do not have to do anything to protect their women.
No, all males are not evil, and all males are not rotten, and with the kind of crap they are fed it is really a miracle. There are very good men who do not rely on women being subservient to their "weaknesses" and who respect women, because it is beatiful to respect women, because it is beautiful to talk with women, because women are beautiful and a gift of God to be able to have them as companions overall, just as it is a gift from God to wnjoy de company of kind, gentle men and even hadsome men, be they relatives, friends, acquaintances, the plumbers, airflight attendants or whatever.
In fact what I get from this thing of keeping women un der house arrest is a hate for women. Why, if you do not hate them would you like to have them imprisonned for life? I would rather die than be kept prisonner my whole life. It is so cruel... how can anybody come up with something like that?
When you get there, in fact all men become evil precisely because they refuse to protect women, protect their freedom, their integrity. They are apparently put in danger and the solution purported honest men come up with is to imprison women? Is that the attitude of real men, devoted men, courageous men? Excuse me, but that is the attitude of tyrants and cowards. What a disgusting lot would that be.
I am sorry but I cannot recognize anything of the Qur'an in that attitute and I am not used, and I do not want to get used, to consider cowardice as a manly virtue. Neither I like coward women. It is cowards who give cover to criminals and tyrants.
Many women sacrifice their freedom because of their children, but men who contribute to that will have to answer for such heinous thing.
Are all women of today so lucky that they all have a prophet as husband? That would be the only justification to pretend from them whatever it is that the aya is enjoining.
Those women who have virtuous men as fathers or husbands or brothers or sons, even if not prophets, do not have any problem in living in freedom. Good men protect their women and do not tolerate that the become the prey or the victims of disolute idiots.
A portion of the males do seem to have problems living in freedom since they misuse that freedom to offend others and imprison others. So all power to them? is that what the Qur'an enjoins? I do not have any trouble in answering that. No, those men have no place in any society least of all in a society of believers. Does not the Qur'an say that oppression is worse than murder. What you propound is oppresion of women and of virtuous men, making them subservient to disolute mongers.
Salaam
Salaam
excellent post, and thanks for sharing your experience handshake
btw As per current understanding you are totally right about verses 3328 - 3334, all the translations and tafsirs I read so far are very primitive, lack any logic, cheating, conjecturing, etc
Salaam,
Bender -
Peace Family of Believers,
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, these links are of men and women in bikinis,
appropriate in public? You decide.http//salestores.com/stores/images/images_747/G311B.jpg
http//24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1jg5wR8KZ1r1qh2co1_500.jpg
https//encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbnANd9GcRYohxXnXGODjKaUBhqPxV_vYB4zFqLal9fbeTdQCAMqFXkof5GkoFpTh0Di2c&usqp=CAE
https//encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbnANd9GcRBQfyQpPGt3Ve7gomc4kgAdGBZVTROYiRJN9C9iGG6ynYvgjUwWWpdYFk8av0&usqp=CAE
God bless
peace
-
Peace
huruf,3332 to 3359 are dismissed mostly and generally as pertaining to the Prophet's wives who were long gone for one and a half millennium. And the verses are misfits to today's living.
Your links do not address to anything but this.
Thus those ayats are irrelevant to the people of the Quran. While you have this kind of dismissal of the ayats in mind, how should Allah guide you towards understanding of the reading the said verses? Can you explain? Has Allah placed these ayats for no lessons or reason at all? Weird approach to Quran!
Peace Family of Believers,
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, these links are of men and women in bikinis,
appropriate in public?Very true. And voluminous lesson for the ayats.
Peace
-
Peace Hawk,
Peace Family of Believers,
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, these links are of men and women in bikinis,
appropriate in public? You decide.http//salestores.com/stores/images/images_747/G311B.jpg
http//24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m1jg5wR8KZ1r1qh2co1_500.jpg
https//encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbnANd9GcRYohxXnXGODjKaUBhqPxV_vYB4zFqLal9fbeTdQCAMqFXkof5GkoFpTh0Di2c&usqp=CAE
https//encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/shopping?q=tbnANd9GcRBQfyQpPGt3Ve7gomc4kgAdGBZVTROYiRJN9C9iGG6ynYvgjUwWWpdYFk8av0&usqp=CAE
God bless
peace
I think you're missing the point there is nothing wrong with these pictures and if anyone sees anything "indecent" with them then that is an issue for them and they need to control their nafs. I mean, never mind that I don't want to be confronted with a great big phallus (or small, for that matter) in my face (metaphorically, speaking, of course)-I just need to try harder to control "my nafs". After all lust and desire exist in order to purify the soul.
-
Peace Hawk,
I think you're missing the point there is nothing wrong with these pictures and if anyone sees anything "indecent" with them then that is an issue for them and they need to control their nafs. I mean, never mind that I don't want to be confronted with a great big phallus (or small, for that matter) in my face (metaphorically, speaking, of course)-I just need to try harder to control "my nafs". After all lust and desire exist in order to purify the soul.
Peace es,
I am not making a point, only putting out a visual for members to see and comment.
Like I said in the post "you decide".God bless you
peace
-
Peace
huruf,3332 to 3359 are dismissed mostly and generally as pertaining to the Prophet's wives who were long gone for one and a half millennium. And the verses are misfits to today's living.
Your links do not address to anything but this.
Thus those ayats are irrelevant to the people of the Quran. While you have this kind of dismissal of the ayats in mind, how should Allah guide you towards understanding of the reading the said verses? Can you explain? Has Allah placed these ayats for no lessons or reason at all? Weird approach to Quran!
Very true. And voluminous lesson for the ayats.
Peace
My, my my! So those ayas were irrelevant to the people to whom the Qur'an was transmitted in the first place... Talking about weird... You dumbfind me.
So according to that very reasonable reading of yours, the prohibition for the wives of the prophet to marry after his death was not meant for them but for today's women, And the Qur'an needs mora than a millenium to have us guess that when it speaks about the wives of the prophet, in fact it is talking to the wives of anybody, be they prophets or spies or computer operators. And all this so that the women in this century don't wear bikinis. So why does it address the prophet's wives if it is irrelevant and not address instead the women in general? Are the Prophet's wives going to have a second coming now these days, these very days you say are meant, -not those days back then-, to teach us women whatever you want them to teach us? Talking about weird.
This is getting too funny. I am sorry but I can't help but feel once again that mysoginy is really a pandemia, a vere severe and damaging one, and there is nothing I can do for mysoginists, except pity them. They miss a lot, A LOT, A LOT, and they shrink the Divine Munificence awfully and the seek to shrink us all to their narrowness. It makes me too sad.
Bear well in mind, Sir, I DO NOT DISMISS ANY AYAS IN THE QUR'AN. Do not ressort to such mean dialectics as to accuse of dismissing the Qur'an those who disagree with YOUR ideas. YOU ARE NOT THE QUR'AN. Thank God the Qur'an is safe from that kind of manipulation. In older times, when people learnt the Qur'an by hearsay, taking what other people thought the Qur'an should say, and not directly from the Qur'an itself you might make your words stick. Fortunately, at least in this forum, we have the God given gift of accessing the Qur'an without intermediaries. If you want to convince, give good reasons. If your reasons are not good enough to convince, don't take that as a licence to throw wild acussations. You are not the Qur'an, what you say for me is hearsay for lack of proper grounding.
And you did not give an answer to a question a asked concerning this. But you keep stating the same thing over and over and not refuting at all my statements based on the text.
You spoke about an interesting exchange, but there is no exchange. Either one agrees with you or you do what you have done, that is, accuse of dismissing the ayas of the Qur'an those who dare disagree with your opinions and the translations you put forth, which I cannot recognize even as decent ones as acknowledged by most users. A wastepaper basked would be a useful object.
Salaam
-
Salaam
excellent post, and thanks for sharing your experience handshake
btw As per current understanding you are totally right about verses 3328 - 3334, all the translations and tafsirs I read so far are very primitive, lack any logic, cheating, conjecturing, etc
Salaam,
BenderThanks, Bender, I try.
Salaam
-
Peace,
Peace es,
I am not making a point, only putting out a visual for members to see and comment.
Like I said in the post "you decide".God bless you
peace
My dear Hawk,
I do not want to be exposed to any flesh in public -or in private.
I think I will just go about my daily life with my eyes closed.
Salaam.
Sajda.
-
Peace,
My dear Hawk,
I do not want to be exposed to any flesh in public -or in private.
I think I will just go about my daily life with my eyes closed.
Salaam.
Sajda.
Peace Sajda,
Please don't do that! You could bump into, fall into, slip into, danger. Besides I would miss your humor.
God bless
peace
-
Ah, I am sure there are plenty of my fellow country folk who would be more than happy to take my place and indulge you with the facetious, dry wit which is so characteristic of our nation.
Signing off....
"Rule Britannia", "God save the Queen" and all of that nonsense.
-
My fiance and i are going to hawaii so we can spent lovely time together but she want to wear a bikini but she thinks is haram and she is going to hell for it i tell her is okay go ahead and wear it but she thinks it isnt right but she also want to wear it but feel like is not right for her to do so. and to be honest i want to be at the beach in hawaii with her so do you think is wrong for her to wear it do you think God himself is going to punish her for doing that i myself dont see anything wrong with that she's not naked for God sake
He thus duped them with lies. As soon as they tasted the tree, their bodies became visible to them, and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise. Their Lord called upon them "Did I not enjoin you from that tree, and warn you that the devil is your most ardent enemy?"
-
So according to that very reasonable reading of yours, the prohibition for the wives of the prophet to marry after his death was not meant for them but for today's women. And all this so that the women in this century don't wear bikinis. So why does it address the prophet's wives if it is irrelevant and not address instead the women in general? Are the Prophet's wives going to have a second coming now these days, these very days you say are meant, -not those days back then-, to teach us women whatever you want them to teach us? Talking about weird.
And you did not give an answer to a question a asked concerning this. And there is nothing I can do for mysoginists, except pity them. Do not ressort to such mean dialectics as to accuse of dismissing the Qur'an those who disagree with YOUR ideas.
You spoke about an interesting exchange, but there is no exchange.
Peace,
- O followers of the Book! indeed Our Apostle has come to you making clear to you much of what you dismissed of the Book and passing over much; indeed, there has come to you light and a clear Book from Allah.
So the apostles are right here with you in multiple numbers in as many existing lingua spread all over the world. You shall identify them as your kin, only if you have individual understanding of the ayats without borrowing and believing hearsay but only when you pay attention only to what Allah says.
Do you see now it is pertinent to say you cannot marry your Mothers who would always be there as the apostles are always there, till the end of the world? What is now your question to which I was dodging? Would you still dismiss the ayats? Is it a mean dialectic still though I did not mean to be mean?
-
Now the prophets (nabi) become apostles and they are anonymous and we have to go around picking the mothers of those who will teach just us women whatever you say?
Well, if it is a question about picking apostles, do not worry, I am well served with apostles, men and women, who teach virtue and not senseless principles of injustice like what you expound on this thread. It is a pity that what you write reflects the women=sin obssession that threatens to turn all muslim societies into ugly environments hostile to women, common sense and divine light. Real apostles do not teach such hopelessness.
Marry our mothers? No man, I am not going to marry my mothers. An d there are in the very Qur'an women who teach without having to have a prophet husband and wives of prophets that were not called mothers of the believers, indeed all except the ones meant in that aya. If anything, the Qur'an teaches that each person, man or woman, is responsible for him or herself, their association, as spouse or lack of it does not change anything. The wives of the prophet are given to choose. And they did choose. it is their choice, not the fact that they are anybody's wives what makes them mothers of the believers, believen men and believing women. And no command whatsover, none at all is given to them to be more mother of one sex than the other. They are mothers, because when they did have to choose, chose God. That we have to do, males and females and there is no difference whatsoever. "Muslim" men sick obssession with women and with punishing women for their own failures is not from God but from Shaytan. It is males who must be cured and get rid of the obsession and not females who must be shackled because of that Shaytanic obssession. They are blind and those who uphold their obssession and their blindness are cowards who are not up to the task of struggling for justice, who support opression and do not make any effort for the sake of their women, but who sacrifice their women rhather than fight. I can hardly think of anything more disgusting than trying to disguise that shocking cowardice under the word of God. Wht an afront!
And you keep your dirty dialectic of accusing of dismissing ayas. You seem to be dismissing a whole lot of ayas from sura an-Nur and making a mockery of them. We pretend to punish, out of your ?apostolic? knowledge, all the women of the earth as if they were a piece of dead wood that does not suffer or feel, and imprison them for life, in spite of the Qur'an saying that oppresion is worse than murder? You pretend to punish half human kind for no crime at all, just because of the obssession of a bunch of males who have lost their way? You intend that? Sure, that is justice, equity, fairness and above all tenderness for women. Man, am I moved. I certainly expect something else from men and I KNOW there are men who are not cowards, who take a stand, who out of their sense of loyalty and honour protect their women. Please, do not cheat us that we have to pander to the bunch of abusers that this male obssession makes of so many males. Women are not things. Are persons. You cannot place them here or there so you get rid of the need to treat them and deal with them with justice. And as males, the Qur'an imposes on you their portection, not their imprisonment but their protection.
As I said, I am not an idiot and I am old person and do not think for a second that I do not know how to distinguish a gentleman from rogue. To expect that both of them deserve the same treatment is spitting on the best qualities that the Qur'an enjoins. Rogue males want to be on top of the world and want that women are there for them but have no right whatsoever to be persons, independent persons themselves. Long live justice an equity!
As to the question I asked, it is there in the thread, if you did read my messages instead of using them as material to repeat over and over your own thing, you would have seen it.
Whatever the wives of the Prophet, the ones who were being talked to, might teach, surely it would not be injustice, ferocity with the most vulnerable, cruelty and abuse. Why don't you lock up males if they are the source of danger? Why do you lock up the victims? Because they are burdened with childbearing and cannot defend themselves? Can there be nything more shameful. Instead of honouring the wombs as God commands, we kick the wombs? The Qur'an teaches really that, that you punish the innocent and pat the guilty on the back?
Weird, very weird, and, please understand that I do not take it except as the ideas that come from sick obssession an distortion.
And after this, since you keep repeating the same thing over and over but give no reason, no foundation, except your own unwarranted and groundless interpretation of ayas which are quite clear without your creativeness, and since those injunctions you come up with are totally against the spirit and the letter of the Qur'an, I am not going to keep posting, in turn, over and over the same thing. It would not be fair to readers. If I have the time, the strength and the clarity of mind to bring up something new I may write, but just to keep the ping pong going I will not.
Just one more thing you might post the names of some actual and alive wives of apostles that might be mothers of the believers today, and recommend them to their sons. There is a lot they should teach them. They are far more in need than their daughters. Their sons have completely gone wild, they certainly can take a rest teaching women, if it is not some martial arts for self defence in harass and raping countries. ?Ah! And also warn them that, should their husband apostle die, they cannot marry again, even if they are 18 years old.
So girls watch out when you marry whether you marry an apostle or a common man. Since there are so many, you run that risk.
Come to think of it, widow burning might be a good idea after all, right?
Salaam
-
peace
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, these links are of men and women in bikinis,
appropriate in public?
You decide.I decided that a bikini or bathing suit is appropriate on a beach or at a swimming pool. Going swimming in a full body suit does not make sense to me, nor is it fun.
sun
Btw., this is the kind of bathing suit the original poster was referring to. Apart from the fact that the model is horribly emaciated I can't see anything "inappropriate" in the picture.Link to bathing suit.
-
He thus duped them with lies. As soon as they tasted the tree, their bodies became visible to them, and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise.
Wouldn't covering your private parts with leaves be the equivalent of a bikini?
http//www7.pic-upload.de/15.12.13/rny1cueopuuv.jpg
-
The red part needs clarification; I do not get what you mean by that statement. Are there provisions of exceptions to drinking and gambling too, as you had said in the matter of sex ?
Peace ? it means as stated; lifestyle of drinking, gambling, and/or having sex with all sorts lead to failure.
2431 ... that may you succeeding
590 ... that may you succeedingI don't understand your question on exceptions (i.e. does not follow a rule) to drinking and gambling?
2219 they asking you about the inebriate and the gambling say in them both harm immense and benefits to the humankind and the harm of them both greater from benefit them both ...
1667 and from fruits the date palms and the grapes thou taking from it intoxicant of and provision of good surely in such surely sign for folk reasoning
4715 like the garden the one promise the righteous therein springs from water other than polluted and springs from milk not change taste its and springs from inebriate delicious to the drinkers...
The context is God says to the women folks about the wives of the Prophets that
- They are the wives of the Prophets
That is imprecise.
Address is to a prophet with particular circumstances at time of revelation not to or all the prophets.
3332 O womenfolk the prophet you are not as one from the womenfolk if thou fear/are mindful so not be soft in the speech so be moved with desire the one in heart his disease and say word of kindness of
3350 O you the prophet surely we made lawful we to you spouses your the ones whom thou gave rewards theirs and what possess thine right hand your from what bestowed the god upon you and daughters paternal uncles yours and daughters paternal aunts yours and daughters maternal uncles yours and daughters maternal aunts yours the ones whom migrated with you and lady believer if she devotes self-hers to the prophet if intended the prophet that thou marry her exclusively to you from besides the believers hence know we what made obligatory we on them in spouses theirs and what possess right hands theirs that not it being upon you critical and he is the god forgiver of merciful of
3352 not lawful to you the womenfolk from after and not that replace in them from spouses and supposing pleased you beauty theirs except what possess thine right your and he is the god on each thing watchful of