How do you think about it? How can a man satisfy a woman with such a small salary left, he barely can satisfy himself with what is left?

A husband has a outlined duty for providing for one's Wife. How that is actually done is a contractual obligation between you two at marriage, and altered where necessary during marriage.

My Wife is the main earner, she works more hours than me, she earns more per hour than me, she pays the largest household bill. I work evenings and weekends where I can to make up the rest of the income, and pay for all the other utility bills. I'm left with virtually nothing after splitting food bills with my Wife, but I am content. That is because I'm not particularly bothered about money and I'll end up spending it on something useless like Video games anyway*

Our marriage works around more than just finances, and I give her other things than just financial security of her wage being topped up to have nice things. There is the emotional and physical sides to marriage that cannot be discounted.

Yes, North Africa and other Muslim regions are culturally used to having non-working Women, but this wasn't the case during and immediately after the Prophet's time where Men and Women worked pretty equally. If you are trying to find a Wife in Morocco, maybe there is potential spouses who would love your thinking and want to break into working on and forming a career path.

• This is what I actually spend my left over cash on.

It will be fine to find a service to do the necessary preperations for your parents wishes post death. In fact, if you live in a Western country, this is pretty much a given anyway as Funeral services are standard. How much you physically get involved in those services is between you and the Funeral service provider. While Muslim Funeral services may find it strange that you don't participate in anything, and may even try to change your mind, you have plenty of valid reasons they don't need to know about to not go ahead personally. For example, you may feel too emotional to fully participate.

When my first Wife's father passed away, many people tried to get me involved in a lot of the rituals, but only being two days after he passed, I struggled and barely played along because I was emotionally distraught. I barely touched his shoulders when taking part in Ghusl before breaking down crying. When it came to the funeral prayer, although I stayed with the sons with the body as people entered the Mosque, I found a place in the middle of the congregation out the way where I again broke down crying (the amusing scene of a White guy in the middle of a Bengali funeral prayer crying the most at the dead of an old man). When it came to the actual burial, again people tried to get me to take part by placing dirt into the grave with everyone else, I did one bit and broke down crying again and being an emotional wreck.

I type this out because not everyone can handle that pain, especially if the funeral is so soon after death, as normal for Muslim tradition. He wasn't even my blood father, who is still alive.

Emphasis on "I think". You are just guessing. You are giving mention to perspectives that are unquranic. As long as you move in such direction you are merely conjecturing.
Follow what Allah has revealed not your assumptions.

Give proof for what you speak of or do you say about Allah that which you do not know?

Yes, I'm guessing because I'm not dead yet.

I would not call it manipulation. It was done willingly since we are not that religious a family.

Sorry for dragging an old topic, but I'm of a similar mind to Reel, but feel I need to be harsher.

At best, your daughter is a "Kuffar" one that "hides", some traits are described as such here

https//quran.com/2/14-20

It all depends on whether she fully understood what it meant to "convert", if she was tricked, of course she is ignorant and hold no fault. Otherwise, she'll be punished for it on death for being a liar.

Your daughters "husband" (bare in mind that as she is a fake believer, the marriage isn't valid) will suffer worse for this deception against God, and if his family is aware of it too, them as well.

I don't mean to be harsh, but its the honest opinion. Conversion to Islam should not be treated lightly, its a direct link and pact to God, that's not to say that I believe leaving Islam should be punished, but openly describing oneself as such but privately being a disbeliever is. They would be better off being an unmarried couple for life and ironically I wouldn't think anything bad of it.

But Lying...

Secular Muslims are seen as bad Muslims or not true Muslims because they do not wish to be governed by Gods law (Sharia)but instead want to be governed by man-made systems. For instance, you mentioned your support for gender equality which is in direct oppositions to Sharia in which women can have some rights but they are in no way equal to men.

Secular Muslims are rarely religious in the traditional sense.

The irony of course being is that God's law/Sharia is based upon human interpretation of what does and doesn't constitute a law made by God, and hence a man made system. A sharia system is based purely upon the evidence and resources presented by a human being to support it, and can be either for or against gender equality based upon interpretation.

My interpretation is that while some things are defined in a gender setting that vast majority of things aren't, and where they do, they positively discriminate either in favour of women or in protection of women; especially against existing faith based legal systems.

Believing in a faith requires belief in statements in that faith, which usually constitute rules. Sharia based Muslims therefore find it hard to understand why a confessed Muslim would not want Muslim rules, because they are unable to conceptualise a world without the boundaries of those rules.

To present a difficult example, I'm a Muslim in an officially Christian country via the Church of England, an Anglican Christian denomination, that offers no particular compensations to me as a Muslim. I could argue that a Secular country; that is one that favours a position of no faith instead of a different faith to mine may well be more advantageous to me if the current rules discriminate against me. A secular state could indeed just as easily discriminate me on the same basis, or offer me concessions by accepting my differences. Hence, its not a clear cut thing that secularism = bad. Sometimes compromise is a lot better than complete rejection of a system.

I think it really boils down to what you perceive heaven to be, and how close it is implemented to the scale and quality of life we have in this existence. Most religions tend to lean towards the afterlife being the "superior" life, one that either lasts significantly longer or permanent. Many interpretations of a heaven is the freedom to do what one chooses with little boundaries, with some going as far as saying you would be unable to break a soul of another person, and hence would never be able to commit acts such as 'murder'. If the heaven a soul ends up in has features of a mouldable form by the soul, then presumably a transgender person who choose what everyone else would do whatever is comfortable.

This presumably means that people who weren't transgender in this life, may well have the option of doing so in the next without discrimination.

I wondered whether to sift into the other conversations in this topic, but decided to leave it at that.

Sorry for the late reply Ed, I didn't mean to be away for so long!

I think you are right about a lot of what you said, Salafi is a loaded term, and I generally agree on the three group principle Quietist Salafism which rejects all politics out of hand, political Salafists (which I was closest too) which worked to bring social change via interaction with political systems and 'Jihadi' Salafism which is inherently violent. It was a bit of a eye opener when I realised I didn't actually liked any of the post-Sahaba Salaf (that is, the 2nd and 3rd generation of Muslims) as it felt like the rotting of religious practice and conservative movements had already started to occur. That's not to say they were all bad, but I had never followed anything those two generations actually brought about.

In response to Submitter what my post was essentially making out is that I have curbed the region of data that I used to formulate my theological perspectives, by limiting it to just one generation the one that assisted and lived among our Prophet; and that those actions even then were not necessarily all good, but were all able to be used to develop right, wrong and practical responses to real life problems. It might be suggested that limiting the pool of people even further than Salafis would would make the doctrine more conservative; doesn't sit when you look into the wild differences between the men and women who made up the Sahabah, that is rather than creating a more conservative form of Salafism, it actually creates a more malleable interpretation of actions when viewed under the lens of imperfect people trying to do the best they can living in an age with a prophet of God.

I have to believe that what happened in this generation makes at least some difference, because if it didn't, there would be no need for revealed text from God to be based on and commenting on the actions of living people at the time of revelation.

some of them are very intolerant and won't even recognize me as muslim, instead I am seen as an apostate and an innovator brickwall

I usually bypass this by being more knowledgeable about their Hadith and Schools of Thought than they know themselves. Then I plant seeds that gradually sprout that there might be another way than the way they were indoctrinated in.

I am interested in the views of Quran-alone Muslims - what do you make of Converting others to submit to God (Islam)?

Walikum salaam EdQ.

Think I'm with the consensus here, I have no 'calling' to do Dawah, rather than trying to convince people to believe in what I believe, I try to convince people to believe I do no wrong for believing what I believe. I am content to be accepted by others who appreciate I have different opinions to them.

You mention elsewhere about the wide variety of God Aloners/Quranists/Submitters etc. Its true, the very fact there is so many words for it shows how we are just as divided, if not more so. What differs though is our acceptance generally of others, because we follow the word of God that commands us to be friendly with our neighbours. We are also possibly just people of good nature, Quran or not. We will remain so divided because there has been a concerted effort over many centuries of "purifying" Islam through further conservative regression, and "free thinkers" like us who envision a new way (or, how I see it, a very old way) of thinking gets in the way of that regression.

See look, the three of us could meet up in the middle (Huddersfield) and be best friends forever.

Stockport, outside Manchester these days, I used to be in Walsall, Birmingham. Worse, I'm from Swindon, Wiltshire originally.

I can easily reach anywhere in Greater Manchester; Bradford / Yorkshire and West Midlands is manageable for a day out, London would have to be something special.

Salam Taro,

My opinion on the Ahmaddiyans has softened slightly, I still believe any extension on the finality of the prophet Muhammed to be a rather dark subject, and honestly believe his lack of surviving male offspring to be a testament to this finality. There are good traits among the Ahmaddiyans, they are hard working and they are charitable.

But, they cling to their Caliph like he is a God, and while I can respect their deeds as individuals, I can't take any of their theological beliefs seriously, even when it agrees with my own. Its the same with the Islamic State; I'm sure there are some very good brothers and sisters currently living in the territory of the Islamic State, and may even be doing some good deeds under its banner, but this doesn't wash the taint of their patronage and similarly, I wouldn't take any theological issues from Islamic state and its Caliph any more seriously than I would the Ahmaddiyans and their Caliph.

I don't have a serious problem with meeting in real life, only by the boundaries of reasonable distance. As someone said very early on, for someone like me in the UK, with no disposable income, even getting from Manchester to somewhere like London, in the same country can be problematic.

Travelling Abroad is simply not possible at this time.

I'm a member of various facebook Quran only groups, which if I'm honest is occasionally flooded with hadithers who's english is so bad they don't even understand the group name. Sometimes the posts in some of the groups are interesting and relevant to living as a Quran only Muslim in society, others are as far as I'm concerned useless pictures with cheesy phrases.

A Skype/Whatsapp group is fine if it has anything relevant to bring to the table, is it about advancing the Quran only cause? About melding muslims of different opinions together? Then fine, this is a reasonable goal warranting such a group. Is it simply to chat/philosophise? then here is just fine.

I'm involved in UK politics, the only people who have my whatsapp number are those interested in the Muslim cause in the UK, and they are all; to my knowledge outside my own Wife + Ex Wife, hadithers. And that's the thing, hadithers care more about the day to day running of Muslim involvement in society so they are the ones I interact with on a daily basis.

Salam mate, nice to see some stuff about the Ahmadiyyan position, they are an interesting lot though for obvious reasons that both you and I know they do conflict with some of the very basic tenants of Islam.

Its interesting that you've slid into a Quranist position from there, in talks I've had with other Ahmadiyyans they do acknowledge they are closer to those ideals than the mainstream, and south asian culture is hard to shake off.

Although I've never tried to be sectarian I probably labelled myself sunni when I first converted, it was easier, but since I realised that the term sunni is just another division and another useless object of classifying people different than everyone else.

Blinks

How did it get this bad guys and gals?

Maybe everyone needs to take a breather.

Welcome to the forum, hope you find what you are looking for.

Also on a side note, is that you in the picture Man of Faith, if so you are pretty damn handsome.

from my understanding of the quran i think there's a difference between being Legally married and Religiously married, and you may not agree with me on this but i kinda see today's couple as technically religiously married according to the Quran, they both support each other financially, and the Guys today seem to be taking care of the girl right than any messed up couple in today's society.

Legal marriages according to the state they're in mostly ended up being used as an advantage to rob the husband's inheritance, i see today's couples(Girlfriend-boyfriend relationships) that are not legally married as Religiously married from my understanding of the quran if the man can provide for her of course and treat her and love her as a human being and a respectable women. They usually last longer than Legally married couples from what i see

Not trying to promote free sex here though...i only see that couples don't need to be legally married as long as they can provide and love each other

I think this post could be the most telling. I'm going to tell you a little secret that very few muslims seem to know. The Quran screws men over. That's right, men get screwed over. Why? Because "Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women)." 434. The Quran at multiple points makes men responsible generally for the financial and physical responsibility for others, the young, Women and the elderly. It does not mean that these groups of people are incapable of protecting themselves, nor do men become the masters of Women, but men are responsible, it is their curse and it is what every God fearing man's responsibility is.

To describe my own experiences, I've had 'relationships' with four Women in my life, I'll describe them as such

1 Before I was Muslim and God fearing, I was in a relationship for about 12 months (ironically, her parents were Muslim but gave it up before she was born).
2 After I converted, I had to wait nearly 2 years to marry a Woman who I spent 6 years with and gained two children from.
3 After separating from the second, I had a mild thing which was a lot of fun and I thought I loved with someone else which turned into nothing, who was separated from her own husband.
4 My current wife of about 5 months.

The only relationship I regret is the third. Why? Because it was the only one which didn't have strings attached, there was no attempt by her to make anything serious of it and that bothered me and for her the idea was opposite to her sense of freedom. Even the first relationship had some degree of commitment despite both of us being atheist at the time. I know better now, that 'boyfriend-girlfriend' status doesn't really work. That might sound rich from someone who got married then divorced, I'm not claiming that marriage is a band aid for all time and it will prevent separation, but marriage, true marriage; not one where you pick and choose at will is the stable safety net that people need in the horrible event that it doesn't work and separation happens.

For my first wife I didn't marry legally in terms of the state (United Kingdom) only an Islamic wedding. Through that, while there was no 'legal' reason to support her in divorce I did so because it was my duty as a Muslim, as a maintainer to do so and I'm proud of doing it. I'm proud to say that I didn't leave my ex-wife in a ditch that despite our issues I acted as I was ordained to do; possibly the first man to ever do that in her immediate family and I hold an immense sense of pride in that.

Islam, God, the Quran, whichever or all you follow, places a huge weight on the responsibilities of couples, you need to ask yourself if you really are 'married' living together as boyfriend and girlfriend or if true marriage, yes with conditions of dowry to her and the event of divorce, with witnesses to accept it as a legal act is true. The way of God is not meant to be easy, it places a huge responsibility on us all to support each other despite all difficulties. Marriage does not have to be expensive, you don't even need an imam to host or bless it, but you do need to make a public commitment and outline what happens if it fails.

One of those twitter accounts I recognise, think they added me when I was on twitter.

A very recent example is the recent one minute silences for the Tunisian attack victims and the 10th anniversary of the 7/7 attacks, I honestly believe this to be largely pointless and didn't "participate".

it is not a case of being completely cold to it, I've used my regular prayers to think of them, and the damage caused by terror attacks, but my political experiences when I lobbied for military action in Syria in 2013 which largely fell on deaf ears (only to be reconsidered now we've lost people) frustrated me. It also bothered me that my work place does not do a minutes silence for any generic military remembrances (which I DO do), nor is there any for any recent genocides (Holocaust or Bosnian Genocide) which I feel to be more relevant.

The other reason I didn't participate is that I fall into the crowd that believes that Muslims are expected to condemn the actions of other Muslims on the grounds if we don't we are condoning it. I don't like to be told what to believe and that in itself can be an autistic trait. Regardless, my refusal was met with accusations that my faith had something to do with it, despite mentioning my absolutely non-religious political objections and hawkish military preferences.

Walikum Salaam,

Homosexuality is always going to be a contentious issue, but should not effect ones own beliefs. Yes, the Quran outlines sodomy as a sin, sodomy is not defined by one particular sexuality. It does however, have the issue that for a male-male relationship it presents a dilemma in the event of need of physical and/or emotional gratification between two people. It is not something that I, as someone who has only had heterosexual relationships although believing I would be "ok" being in love with another man is able to comprehend from my own current experiences. All I can say is that there is nothing specifically against people who don't fit the heterosexual norm in the Quran, belief in God is belief in God and if you choose to define yourself as a Muslim, Quranist, or a God fearing person then you can do so whether you are straight or gay.

The concept of throwing homosexuals off cliffs is actually a fairly modern one, dating from Sudanese rebellions against the British in the 19th century, and before that had little tract in the Muslim world. There has even been Caliphs of past days which it was generally known about their escapades with other men without the need of removing them from power or their palaces.

My honest belief is that 'religion' should be basic, it does not need to be defined by ever increasing rules of acceptability, or liberalisation. Remembering God is the first element, doing good for others is the second, keeping oneself from evil is the third. That does not mean that we can't be really complicated people! I have found myself labelling myself a Quranist/God alone for awhile now, but I'm extremely political both as a British Nationalist and as theological Islamist; the idea of a political Islamic state does not scare me, but at the same time don't honestly believe the UK (or the US) would be the target of such a creation nor do I promote it as such.