Can a women lead a congregational prayer with men and women mixed behind her?

As-Salaatayn

I see a lot of people here who have issues with unpopular concepts. Our ideals and real life are two different things. I realized that along time ago. I think many of you here need to realize this as well. In the end reality is always much stranger and unpopular than you think. You can chalk it up to "issues", but none of you have been able to talk intelligently about this without being extremely offended or feeling the need to defend yourselves or come to the defense of the "weaker" sex, while claiming at the same time that she is equal.

Zulf, I am really not going to waste my words anymore. What i said is as clear as day

Huruf,

Some men live and die for womenn willingly because they are noble,

Nobility DOES NOT....IN ANY WAY...consist of living and dying for women. It consists of living and dying for God. Most men live and die for women every day. The real fact is that you don't care about how they do this unless it involves something immediately dramatic and that brings fame to that man, and indirectly, to you. It is also baffling how you assume that most women are good. The Quran says that most people are misguided and tyrannous. It even curses mankind. Yet somehow you think that women are precious and good by nature and that men should be glad to give their lives for any women....nonsense. Aren't women apart of mankind?

Here are some more popular myth busted

Most people are NOT good ( I already established this one).
Children are born ignorant fools and must be taught to be wise, noble and capable through discipline
Because most people are not good. Most women are not good either. Just like most men are not good.
Women are usually more emotionally immature than men (this becomes clear by one's twenties), despite the fact that women are able to be extremely driven, intelligent and capable.
Freedom is a myth. If you follow a religion, or are bound by laws then you are not free.
Freedom is actually evil. Only proper discipline leads to growth.
This world was not meant to be perfect, nor your health, nor anything. Yet you must strive to grow and better if you don't want to be a complete loser in life. So you are basically running on a treadmill that will never stop.
There ARE Kuffar, who are treasonous to God and they are going to HELL forever. It more about being treacherous with God than with humanity. Islam is not humanism. Good will among men is just a consequence of subjecting ourselves to Allah. Some of those people who are hell-bound will be our parents, our siblings and the children we love. And we must always be careful about it being us.
Atheists are going to HELL, no matter how nice they are or how good of a person you think they are. You can't send them on their way, nor should your remind them of this only to insult them, but they are still going there. Same thing goes for all people who literally or in their actions make equals with God.
Atheists who get offended at being told they are going to Hell are simpletons.
As much as women talk about love they actually do not love even a fraction of the amount that men love. Pretty ironic seeing how men are usually not as open with it. That is why men kill themselves over women. Women just get another boyfriend or remarry...quickly. Women do NOT kill themselves over men. (This is a generalized, yet true statement).
Women only value men for what men can do for them. Men value even women who can't do anything for them. Women don't marry paupers, but men do all the time and they do it gladly.
The main motivating factor in a man's life are the women in his life. Women, however, could care less about what men think, they compete with each other to attract the man who can do the most for them. Men are tools for women. That's it.
Women have more egos than men, just not as much muscle and base to make it easily known.

This world is a mess. But the vileness of men and women does not HAVE to be the case. Women don't have to act like cavewomen and men don't have to act like cavemen. Men and women don't have to be driven by their base egos or be obsessed with gender if we learn our roles and play them as Allah says. But when your pride is based on your gender and not you servitude to Allah, well...that's what you get, cavemen, cavewomen and gender wars. And you get people who defend this cave life tooth and nail.

We all need to learn our place. Period.

Salaam

Yosemite

Exactly!

that's deluding yourselves to the biology of humans

either way this just sounds like feminist chauvinism, when the second post in the thread already responded rightfully and beautifully

it looks more like empty rebelling than anything like we typically see in the usa like how feminists want to use "she" when talking about god as an example

that's an issue of the english language, but still it's easy to see when there's feminist chauvinism in play

Yosemite

You have quoted the wrong person. HURUF did not write what you have quoted and put an answer underneath. Seems like a Freudian slip.

...

himself as black and livd through what blackmen lived everyday. You should live in those societies as a woman for a while and then come and tells us the great fun it was.

Salaam

Huruf,

I have very plainly pointed out the weakness. And I never once mentioned carnal desire. Nor did I mentioned ladies' dress.

...

more prevalent in both rebellious youth and (secretly and openly) rebellious women from what I have seen.

Salaam

handsome men who dress with tight clothes get leered at by women all the time

it's not oppression of women when the quran tells people to dress modestly

es

Salaam,

I see a lot of people here who have issues with unpopular concepts. Our ideals and real life are two different things. I realized that along time ago. I think many of you here need to realize this as well. In the end reality is always much stranger and unpopular than you think. You can chalk it up to "issues", but none of you have been able to talk intelligently about this without being extremely offended or feeling the need to defend yourselves or come to the defense of the "weaker" sex, while claiming at the same time that she is equal.

Zulf, I am really not going to waste my words anymore. What i said is as clear as day

Huruf,
Nobility DOES NOT....IN ANY WAY...consist of living and dying for women. It consists of living and dying for God. Most men live and die for women every day. The real fact is that you don't care about how they do this unless it involves something immediately dramatic and that brings fame to that man, and indirectly, to you. It is also baffling how you assume that most women are good. The Quran says that most people are misguided and tyrannous. It even curses mankind. Yet somehow you think that women are precious and good by nature and that men should be glad to give their lives for any women....nonsense. Aren't women apart of mankind?

Here are some more popular myth busted

Most people are NOT good ( I already established this one).
Children are born ignorant fools and must be taught to be wise, noble and capable through discipline
Because most people are not good. Most women are not good either. Just like most men are not good.
Women are usually more emotionally immature than men (this becomes clear by one's twenties), despite the fact that women are able to be extremely driven, intelligent and capable.
Freedom is a myth. If you follow a religion, or are bound by laws then you are not free.
Freedom is actually evil. Only proper discipline leads to growth.
This world was not meant to be perfect, nor your health, nor anything. Yet you must strive to grow and better if you don't want to be a complete loser in life. So you are basically running on a treadmill that will never stop.
There ARE Kuffar, who are treasonous to God and they are going to HELL forever. It more about being treacherous with God than with humanity. Islam is not humanism. Good will among men is just a consequence of subjecting ourselves to Allah. Some of those people who are hell-bound will be our parents, our siblings and the children we love. And we must always be careful about it being us.
Atheists are going to HELL, no matter how nice they are or how good of a person you think they are. You can't send them on their way, nor should your remind them of this only to insult them, but they are still going there. Same thing goes for all people who literally or in their actions make equals with God.
Atheists who get offended at being told they are going to Hell are simpletons.
As much as women talk about love they actually do not love even a fraction of the amount that men love. Pretty ironic seeing how men are usually not as open with it. That is why men kill themselves over women. Women just get another boyfriend or remarry...quickly. Women do NOT kill themselves over men. (This is a generalized, yet true statement).
Women only value men for what men can do for them. Men value even women who can't do anything for them. Women don't marry paupers, but men do all the time and they do it gladly.
The main motivating factor in a man's life are the women in his life. Women, however, could care less about what men think, they compete with each other to attract the man who can do the most for them. Men are tools for women. That's it.
Women have more egos than men, just not as much muscle and base to make it easily known.

This world is a mess. But the vileness of men and women does not HAVE to be the case. Women don't have to act like cavewomen and men don't have to act like cavemen. Men and women don't have to be driven by their base egos or be obsessed with gender if we learn our roles and play them as Allah says. But when your pride is based on your gender and not you servitude to Allah, well...that's what you get, cavemen, cavewomen and gender wars. And you get people who defend this cave life tooth and nail.

We all need to learn our place. Period.

Salaam

I apologise in advance as I apprec that this may sound patronising or condescending, but I pity you. I pity the view you have of people. I hope you come to the conclusion that the reality is not as abject as how you currently perceive it.

Salaam.

Bender

Bender,

Of course. My observations are those of the general weaknesses and strengths of women and men.

Salam.

Hi,

Thank you for your honesty.

Allah is just, He will not punish a woman because you can not take your eyes of her.
Your duty is to behave like a man in every situation.
If there is a naked women and you rape her then you will get a punishment equivalent to your crime.
Blaming the naked woman will not save you a single bit from your punishment for raping.
Your weaknesses are ONLY your weaknesses and your strengths are ONLY your strengths.

es

that's deluding yourselves to the biology of humans

Our biology isn't too dissimilar from animals, but supposedly we are more complex creatures with more advanced faculties which we are, apparently, supposed to engage.

Yosemite

Our biology isn't too dissimilar from animals, but supposedly we are more complex creatures with more advanced faculties which we are, apparently, supposed to engage.

like i said in the quran it tells people to dress modestly for a reason
i hate using utopian ideas and ideology to prove a point, i'd rather use precedents and human behaviour

women dresses tightly and short and sexy -> throughout human history men have leered at such women
men dress tightly and short and sexy -> throughout human history women have leered at such women

it is so simple yet we have to go on silly debates about "controlling" the self

sorry, men with high testosterone levels will have a harder time doing that, and they will leer

we already know rape and abuse and all that is a crime, also according to the quran it is a crime, and people engaging in these crimes are to be taken care of, we know all of that already

personally i don't go around telling all women they should "control" themselves and stop staring at me, i just dress modestly

thank god the quran exist amrite
and really if the idea of dressing modestly is considered oppressive, that person should just go live in a society that isn't run with the quran in mind ok

anyway, As-Salaatayn only add fuel to the fire with such rhetoric , such a waste of time wow

As-Salaatayn

Es,

Please specifically point out which part of what I said is abject and deserves pity? This is called Dunyaa for a reason. It has a lot of beauty but it also contains the lowest of the lowest. Otherwise, there would be no reason for God to have sent his prophets and messengers (saas) and his book to correct the world. Pay attention to what the Quran has to say about mankind. Do you not believe it? Is it not true? Do we only look at the good and not the bad?

Yosemite,

What rhetoric?

Bender,

When did I ever say that it was okay for men to rape women or to even think about that? Never. I never even mentioned rape. That was NEVER a part of anything I said, I never condoned it and I never included the idea of rape in anything that I said. At least Es actually addressed what I actually said.

Salaam

hanslan

Peace.

Nothing in the Quran prohibits women from leading a congegational prayer. Go ahead and do it - be happy!

But then again, congregational prayer is a concept carried over from Christianity. Nothing in the Quran explicitly and clearly provides an example for a congregational prayer. One instance of congregational prayer mentioned in Quran is the time when prophet/rasul were 'leading' a group and be replaced by a second group in times of war(?). But the Surah Jumaat, does not clearly support a congregational prayer concept; it only supports praying at specific times, the person being called to prayer still has the option to follow or disregard and there is no 'leading' in it nor is there any Qutbah al-Jumaat (which is a primary part in Friday congregational prayers).

Congregational prayer is also an inconsistent concept when we are being judged by Allah. Are we judged based on the congregation we belong to or are we judged individually? I will strongly object if I am judged by other peoples' actions instead of my own. Where is the fairness there? Is it fairness on Allah's part or just oppressive if you are judged based on the congregation you belong to?

The Quran states and recommends roles to men and women (some people like to deny this), we can choose otherwise and create the whole mess we are currently in as state by As-Salaatayn earlier, Or we accept the recommendations made by the Creator and assume the recommended roles. Biologically roles are also assigned, again we can say men too can get pregnant by biological re-engineering and vice-versa women need no men to procreate only needing the seed (to be biologically engineered) thus create a new world of mess. When we disregard the recommended roles we are playing the role of the Creator and thus far we humans are extremely good at messing things up just like what iblis and the angels said to Allah. Thats freedom for you!

And yes, man status is higher as long as he is a provider to women thus when women have the economic means, men can assume the recommended role for women being the homemaker - back home in Malaysia we have those, but even better for the men! - the men actually do nothing except spend a bit of money hanging in street side cafes whilst the women goes to work or run a business, and at night the men performed their sex duties without fail and when the women gets fedup, she divorces the man and finds another partner. The divorced man also finds another willing woman to replace his previous wife - and life goes on. So in this society the rate of divorce and remarry is high - commond to find a woman who is at least twice divorced and remarried here in the state of Kelantan, Malaysia. Truly an advance society.

Salat and Zakat - commitments and purifying/developing/growing - basically upholding your commitments and obligations and make them grow, weed out unnecessary obligations (like going to disco with friends and getting wasted on weekends, or maintaining bad habits like smoking etc).

Now if we do not know our roles and commitments we can proudly call ourselves morons because just take a look at yourself! Are you a mother?, a father? a grand parent? a cousin? a aunty or uncle? a husband? a wife? an employer? an employee? a citizen? a student? a created being? Each of those mentioned carry an obligation/commitments (you can deny this but you are only fooling yourself - that is why there are man made laws to uphold those obligations inherent in the mentioned roles), the task is to excel in those roles and continue developing them. Quran also says do not compare yourself to others, each human despite having similar roles mentioned has the freedom to choose on how to develop them (or even discard those roles) and each being are given different settings/circumstances (like poor, rich, big/small families, orphaned, different countries, etc) and of course being human and a created being we have a specific commitment to the Creator at specific times to express our gratitude and ask for whatever we need. Humans are not created as angels thus it is not our function to worship Allah, humans are created as servants, to serve Allah by fulfilling our roles. Those who disregard their assigned roles (assigned here means the circumstance you are currently in) can be regarded as a failed creation. Thus failed creation are sent to the waste incinerator.

Creator creates creation. Creation serves purpose. Failed creations are creations failing to meet their assigned purpose. Failed creation gets destroyed. Creations who meets their purpose are retained and further developed.

Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim main attributes causing Creator to create. Absence of Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim = destruction. Before destruction, humans gets reminders of purpose to fulfilled and ultimate failure after reminders are sent will lead to destruction (at-taubah).

Anybody who discounts the existence of a Creator is just fooling himself. Nothing exists on its own evolution or revolution from nothing to something. Existence comes from existence. The Creator is Existence itself, creation is the result from. God is a fictitious character made by humans primarily a concept to comfort oneself like sucking your thumb, once you migrate from the thumb to something else like boobs for comfort the thumb is no longer 'God'. It is just like someone who was a Muslim and then suddenly became a Christian, God literally changed from somethin unknown and is only known through his attributes (commonly referred to as the 99 names of Allah) to something more known ie a human - Jesus; and then that person changed to hinduism and found out more Gods to choose from (without understanding that those many2 gods are attributes of the one Creator). Currently, the most popular god is money because humans have become truly dependant on it - its like saying without money there is no life - is not that right people???

Now going back to the topic, can women lead congregational prayer? Who says cannot? But you will create another faction within a faction. Whats another faction? More faction the better? Yup the world is truly a wonderful place now!

My understanding the commonly practiced congregational prayer is not found in the Quran, but a group of people can pray in the same location.

Now who says we follow the Quran? Are we brave enough to abandon years of corrupted practices, rules and regulations that bind us? of course not, majority will always say they follow whatever their ancestors do - a confirmation of what is stated in the Quran.

Theres a phrase in the Quran that says something like this no one can come near the Quran if they are not pure. Commonly the sunnis force people to take ablution before touching the Quran physically. Even worse for menstruating women, they can't even read nor touch the Quran.

My understanding the Quran is only saying 'those who lives by existing rules and practices that are inconsistent with the Quran will not be able to benefit from the Quran'. Nothing about being clean physically. It is about the willingness to abandon non-Quranic beliefs and practices. My understanding did not come from reading the Quran one time, it took many moons and realisation and understanding comes in only after I've read many translations later! The Quran states factual statements and relates historical accounts as examples. Factual statements in the Quran is actually a test for the reader. Example 'There is no doubt in this book' - its a statement; the test is when the reader doubts the Quran especially when the Quran contradicts existing practices.

Al-Fatehah is recited daily, but the lack of action to understand the Quran despite the avenues available today and the unwillingness to abandon non-Quranic practices is the root of failure for humans as a failed creation.

The Quran is a a book for all mankind and we should promote it as such; and not belonging to 'Muslims' as defined by clergy.

Peace.

huruf

Hanslan, provide ayas where the Qur'an says that the role of woman is that of homemake, home maker not to be confused with motherhood.

Second provide aya where God says that males status is higher tht that of the women if he in fact is a provider.

Salaam

hanslan

Hanslan, provide ayas where the Qur'an says that the role of woman is that of homemake, home maker not to be confused with motherhood.

Second provide aya where God says that males status is higher tht that of the women if he in fact is a provider.

Salaam

Salam Huruf,

There is no ayat stating woman's role as a homemaker. Both sex can be a home maker. Both can work and at the same time share the burden of home mgt. The traditional role of a man is to provide because of biology whilst the traditional role of women is to manage household because of biology BUT both can hunt and provide and manage the home. What does a woman do if she is married and not a bread winner, and the husband assumes the role of the breadwinner and provides for her?
Q434. Maybe the word 'status' as I used is too general. But I cannot be precise, my weakness. maybe obligation is better.
Man's status/obligation is higher because man is entrusted to look after women by way of providing for women, but once women starts to provide for men isn't the status/obligation becomes null? Definitely the two sex are equal right? Women can always replace men (and vice versa) no question about it. The issue is with reversal of roles or sharing of roles, obligations and commitments also shifts. Thus women can't complain of being burden more now because obviously they would due to motherhood (on top of that sharing the role of provider and home mgt), whilst men being men can always evade fatherhood because biologically they are not constrained - but this would be lousy/bad example of men. Yes??

peace.

Man_of_Faith

I think researchers have indicated females are better at marksmanship. It is involved in hunting.

Be safe
Amenuel

Bender

Bender,

When did I ever say that it was okay for men to rape women or to even think about that? Never. I never even mentioned rape. That was NEVER a part of anything I said, I never condoned it and I never included the idea of rape in anything that I said. At least Es actually addressed what I actually said.

Salaam

Hi,

When did I ever say that you said, it was okay for men to rape women or to even think about that?
It was just an extreme example, to make clear that we (men or women) must blame our shortcomings on our self and not on others.

If I can not control myself when there are women in front of me (no matter how they are covered or even not covered) then that's my weakness and I should try to control my weakness instead of blaming it to them.
What if women start to say that men can not lead a prayer because they get to excited when they see men in front of them?
We can go even further then this, I want everyone who is richer then me not show his/her property or otherwise I will steel it and it's not my fault that I steel.
And so I can make an endless list were I impose others to behave exactly how I want it.

Salaam,
Bender

huruf

Salam Huruf,

There is no ayat stating woman's role as a homemaker. Both sex can be a home maker. Both can work and at the same time share the burden of home mgt. The traditional role of a man is to provide because of biology whilst the traditional role of women is to manage household because of biology BUT both can hunt and provide and manage the home. What does a woman do if she is married and not a bread winner, and the husband assumes the role of the breadwinner and provides for her?
Q434. Maybe the word 'status' as I used is too general. But I cannot be precise, my weakness. maybe obligation is better.
Man's status/obligation is higher because man is entrusted to look after women by way of providing for women, but once women starts to provide for men isn't the status/obligation becomes null? Definitely the two sex are equal right? Women can always replace men (and vice versa) no question about it. The issue is with reversal of roles or sharing of roles, obligations and commitments also shifts. Thus women can't complain of being burden more now because obviously they would due to motherhood (on top of that sharing the role of provider and home mgt), whilst men being men can always evade fatherhood because biologically they are not constrained - but this would be lousy/bad example of men. Yes??

peace.

I think You are missing the whole point of what the Qur'an does. And you are confusing being mother with being homemaker. Women are physiologically enabled to become pregnant, deliver creatures and suckle, me are not. Women are physiollogically enabled to wash dishes and pans and iron clothes and clean, but so are men. Men are not one bit less able than women to do any of that, and if the pans are heavy even better enabled than most women. And in fact, historically, men have done all household chores. Till not very long ago, men were domestic servants doing all that. When I was in Egypt in fact there were still many being domestic servants. The women = homemaker does not come from biology but from bourgoisie and bourgeois middle class. High bourgeois had domestic servants. For lesser middle class bourgeois they assigned the woman as the house servant with a level. First class house servant, the wife, or the mother or the daughter.
And with the industrial revolution, work, which was usually done by craftsmen or craftswomen in their houses or in shops adjacent to their houses or very close by, enabling the whole family and the whole neaighbourhood to lead a life in common, work then, what is called productive work, become suddenly, and I would say brutally, cut off from family and neighbourhood life, creating a chasm for the poorest classes of society.
That "productive" "environment" is the one that has been imposed since then on all societies, breaking up families, not because women go to work but becaause the structure of production and labour was changed so that anybody working would be broken up from his or her family. And it has been so effectively implanted in all collective minds that now that structure seems as the only one posible or admisible, as if it was God imposed. And we have to put up with a lot of nonsense on how women working (women have alway worked and many times very heavily, but they have not always being paid) has destroyed the family? But the family was very effectively destroyed with the industrial revolution where men (then also women and children) were taken off their families.
The talk about hunting is ridiculous. Hunting is and was not an everyday job, not by any long stretch, and propably neither all the men went hunting nor all the women did not hunt; and there were many other jobs like gathering vegetal food which were as far as it seems carried out by women and which was obviously not done within the home but rather anywhere ad any distance from the home; and there were other things, like makig tools. But never mind, because now we are so far from that life that it makes no sense for such a thing to be brought up.
So much for the home making.
Forcing on women the choice ?either you stay home and serve us men ?homemaking? or you put up with doing everything and paying for everything inn the home and outside the home and taking care of the children?. (Although we do not know whether such men who put that dainty choice to the women still insist on being fathers of the children or not it does seem that they simply become another child to be maintained and brought up by the woman (wife I suppose we should understand) like all her other kids. I suppose the woman?s reaction to that should be to cry ??Please don?t, please don?t, I will be good, I will be good!?)
In fact, without being given any choice at all either with gun or without it, many women have had to do that, for the father as well as for the children or just for the children and that has happened even when women did not have any legal right to practically anything and not by their choice but by being left without ay choice.
I find it ashtonishing that that way of life which is so much boasted about of being islam is so happy with adopting the worst moral debacle of a civilisation which was the industrial revolution which enslaved first the countries where it happenned and then all the others. ?Oh yes, the pinacle of family life and human liberation!
Eat pig or die. That is more or less the kind of thing that is offerd to women in the scheme put forth by hanslan.
So now we are in the clear men who uphold that social structure inherited from the industrial revolution do not care that they are cut from their family provided they get good service by the ?wife? or the idiotess of the moment. Family is just good for breaking women aspirations and putting them in their place but for us men, please leave us in peace with our industrial revolution working conditions and working hours and the hours back and forth from work and all the external obligations of work because we are prima and happy, completely happy, with not seeing that much of the family.
Never mind that women are not pregnant or deliver or suckle children their whole life or that if they do not want to suckle they can do so and that even if they do all that and while they do it, it has never prevented them from working, and even working very hard and has never prevented them either from being exploited against their will with no family loving men coming to their rescue.
And all along, in this scheme of things, it seems that that is the only choice posible Women, all women, if they are truthful or loyal, must, either choose to be homemakers and treat husbands as a big child competing with the other children for attention and service (is it husbands only or is it any man?) or otherwise they must accept to be exploited in the home (having children and washing dishes and cleaning floors being one and the same thing) and being also exploited outside the home, while men are treated as spoilt useless invalids who if they do not go hunting are good for nothing.
Some speak about realism bu then come up with improvements o actual tyrany that leave one wondering what else can be imagined in order to make things more complicated than they already are.

I have known plenty of men who have worked (price of living in this age) outside but who were great fathers, who did not exppect to be served but themselves were always ready to serve the women and the children and any family member or neighbour. For them there was not such a thing as putting a gun to any person, least of all a woman, and tell them ?choose between bad and worse?. That was why they (the men) were there, to prevent that in their presence any such thing as abusing women or children or anybody occurred. Those men, those who do not demand but give and protect, those are the qawwamun, those are the ones that deserve respect and that, when they are dead, are remembered with tears and prayers, because they indeed were a pre-sight of paradise and I am sure that even in the intimacy of God they continue to pray to Him for us whom they left in the earth.
Salaam

Zulf

that's deluding yourselves to the biology of humans

My response "Exactly!" to the message of MoF meant that I agreed with him that if someone has so strong urges and bodily desires that it affects his mind to the degree that he cannot focus on the sermon, but instead focusses on the women, then such people should perhaps consider doing some work on themselves to at least reduce the influence of the flesh on them.

Is such a stand point the same as being deluded to the biology of human beings?

But I guess I'm under-estimating the animal instincts in human beings in general. I was surpirsed thought at your reaction. Anyhow.

either way this just sounds like feminist chauvinism, when the second post in the thread already responded rightfully and beautifully

it looks more like empty rebelling than anything like we typically see in the usa like how feminists want to use "she" when talking about god as an example

that's an issue of the english language, but still it's easy to see when there's feminist chauvinism in play

Hmm...

Zulf

Our biology isn't too dissimilar from animals, but supposedly we are more complex creatures with more advanced faculties which we are, apparently, supposed to engage.

Exactly.

When we are totally ruled by the flesh, we are worse than animals. Yes, indeed we have an "animal" part... our biology. It serves a purpose and is all natural. But letting the carnal part of us take over, we neglect the spiritual part, and our intellect. Animals are animals, but when we act like animals, we are actually worse than animals. This is when we have stuff like rape. Not even animals do that. Animals properly follow their instincts, but we can fall down to a level where free will combined with instincts becomes something very ugly.

So yes, not engaging the more advanced faculties... is something unfortunate.

Zulf

Peace all,

I think women can lead prayer. Suppose she is moderatly dressed (which is a relative concept) then there should be no issue of men losing focus. Even today many people witin the Protestant Church are against women priests, and this has absolutely nothing to do with dress or such.
Women and men are of course equally good or bad.
When discussion injustice against women, we should not assume this has anything to do with dress or bodies or attraction. How about unequal salaries for the same job? How about being verbally abused just because you are a woman? Is it feminie chauvinism or envy to wish to be treated with plain and simple decency and fairness?
The question is are we supposed to let our body/biology and emotions overrule our intellect? We even have a mind that contains destructive thought patterns/habits, but we can still overcomes them. It's hard work. Are we just going to give up and blame it all on biology? Then we are both lost and doomed.

Bender

Peace all,

I think women can lead prayer. Suppose she is moderatly dressed (which is a relative concept) then there should be no issue of men losing focus.

Hi,

I think every praying house (or house in general) must have it's rules clear for everyone. The owners are free to set up their own rules even if they are discriminating.
If in that house women are forbidden then the women must accept that instead of being rebellious, if they want a praying house with their rules then they should build a building and set the rules they like.
I can not go in my underwear to my work, they will not let me in, and I have to respect that. Most disco's will not let me in here in Holland, I have to respect that. Millionaire party is also out of question for me, I have to respect that. And in my house you have to take off your shoes in the hallway otherwise you are not allowed to enter the living room.

But of course in general a woman can lead a prayer.

savage_carrot

Most disco's will not let me in here in Holland, I have to respect that.
Because you can't dance? I can respect that.

Yosemite

Peace all,

I think women can lead prayer. Suppose she is moderatly dressed (which is a relative concept) then there should be no issue of men losing focus. Even today many people witin the Protestant Church are against women priests, and this has absolutely nothing to do with dress or such.
Women and men are of course equally good or bad.
When discussion injustice against women, we should not assume this has anything to do with dress or bodies or attraction. How about unequal salaries for the same job? How about being verbally abused just because you are a woman? Is it feminie chauvinism or envy to wish to be treated with plain and simple decency and fairness?
The question is are we supposed to let our body/biology and emotions overrule our intellect? We even have a mind that contains destructive thought patterns/habits, but we can still overcomes them. It's hard work. Are we just going to give up and blame it all on biology? Then we are both lost and doomed.

.0

the quran already lays out the foundations concerning all of that, we dont need feminism

it says in the quran dont insult each other, dont be mean to one another
it says dress moderately
it says dont commit criminal acts, dont oppress
it says be fair

when we start having a gynocentric or a man centric view on issues, we just end up wasting time, because the issues we talk about are already taken care of in a 1400 years old book, some say older

now i see people complain they are not free because they cant roam around naked without being criticized
not here, but on the internet

whatever goes beyond the simple rules of the quran that applies to everyone (yes dressing modestly also applies to women and it is verily possible to gauge what modest clothing is - one just has to look at modern separate class experiment where all boys and all girl classes each perform better than mixed classes)

it's time we stopped viewing women as eternal victims especially because someone like me would tell a woman dressed half naked that she is not dressed modestly

if a handsome man dresses the same way women leer at him just as much
most men i see outside dress very modestly and loose, most women wear tight clothes

i keep seeing women complain about men having peeks, you cant expect to change the biology of men unless you pump them full of estrogens