We have previously seen Muslim clerics instruct men on how to beat their wives in an Islamically correct way. Egyptian cleric Abd Al-Rahman gave the latest installment on Al-Nas television — affirming the need for men to beat their wives as did Mohammad.
Al-Rahman noted that Mohammad beat at least one of his wives, Aisha. Aisha was believed to be nine when she married Mohammad, who had multiple wives.
Al-Rahman explained:
Islam instructs a man to beat his wife as a last resort before divorce, so that she will mend her ways, treat him with kindness and respect, and know that her husband has a higher status than her.
I say to every husband: Do not rush to beat her whenever a problem arises. Oh servant of Allah, Allah said: “Admonish those of them on whose part you fear disobedience, refuse to share their beds, and beat them.” One should not beat out of anger. . .
This you must know: If the wife utters the name of God, the beating must stop. . . .
When ‘Aisha thought ill of the Prophet Muhammad, believing that he did not treat her the same as his other wives, and that when he left her room, he would go to another wife, she followed him and spied on him. ‘Aisha said that when the Prophet found out about this, “He gave me a shove that was painful.”
This was done in order to discipline her, not because the Prophet enjoyed beating or inflicting bodily harm. The Prophet did this in order to discipline this woman. . .
A good woman, even if beaten by her husband, puts her hand in his and says: “I will not rest until you are pleased with me.” This is how the Prophet Muhammad taught his women to be.
The disconnect between such historical examples and modern values is extraordinary. Today, the described marriage would violate three different parts of the criminal code — a type of trifecta of felonies. The marriage to a nine year old would be viewed as child rape occurring within a polygamous marriage with spousal abuse. Of course, many of the Biblical figures also married young girls and were polygamists.
Al-Rahman’s insistence that beatings are part of a good marriage based on Qur’an 4:34.
Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband’s] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.
The advice captures the plight of women in this part of the world who are beaten under spiritual guidance from clerics like Al-Rahman. However, he is not alone. The second-class status of women has been affirmed by our stalwart ally in Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai.
Source: Times of Israel
idealist707 1, September 5, 2012 at 2:14 pm
I admire Islam for three reasons:
—-brotherhood within the kindredness of the Book (Bible and descendants of Abraham)
—-brotherhood within the Umma (congregation of Islam)
(none are excluded for reasons of color or origin)
—-brotherhood of all mankind.
=============================================
Yep, I always wondered about the Islamic acceptance of Jesus as a great prophet, but the Jewish rejection of Jesus as a heretic, and the subsequent “Christian church” glom onto the Jewish position.
I mean without sufficient explanation to satisfy my curiosity, being a cat and all …
Unrequited love, is it shit faced or what?
I admire Islam for three reasons:
—-brotherhood within the kindredness of the Book (Bible and descendants of Abraham)
—-brotherhood within the Umma (congregation of Islam)
(none are excluded for reasons of color or origin)
—-brotherhood of all mankind.
The latter experienced I the first time in Saudi Arabia with a very dark African co-worker with tribal scarification scars on his cheeks. My interest and acceptance of him as a person was greeted with similar brotherly response. I think that may be due to Islam.
But surer am I in the demonstrated fact that all the worlds people are welcome at any moment into Islam and to visit Mecca as members. All of equal value before their God and in their society, as far as my lack of language to confirm this view, permits me to say so.
We say that we Christians do so. And the RCC New Years mass exhibits its world acceptance. More than that acknowledgement will I not go.
But did we and do we Christians have integrated churches in the South?
Are los indios welcome to hispanic churches in Latin America? Not offered as a challenge but in curiosity and willingness to learn.
Minute bol,
While all you write is worth citing, here are two:
“the words Allah Akbar, one of which being that it indeed should be a safe word for everyone, saying God is Great should stop any muslim from inflicting harm on you, however justified he’d be.”
Thus as you note previously, the holiness of all God’s work forbids destruction on the basis of differing from the other’s viewpoint (if not theatened)
———
“Now the fact that Muslims are not perfect and express their frustrations through political, cultural or pseudo religious traditions speaks only of their distance from the aim of the Quran but in no way reduces the Quran to a justification of those abberations.”
Acknowledging that few read their Bible today, the corresponding situation of needing help in understanding the Koran leaves us all helplessly illiterate.
But to practical matters, how can one explain the the Arabian peninsula as haven for the Salafists (and their expansion to Egypt, etc.
And secondly how is the islamic world coping with it, if you think it does?
And what do you think the best ways of countering these excesses.
I leave all options open for you to choose.
If men didn’t have god, they really would have no trump card in the control-the-women game, would they?
When we were matriarchal, so long ago nobody believes it ever happened (Read Evelyn Reed), we didn’t need gods.
So when Judge Bruce Bach in Virginia wanted to deny to Wicca Priestesses the right to perform marriage ceremonies, he asked a litigant, “You worship trees, don’t you?” She answered wrong. He ruled Wicca was not a religion and ergo she couldn’t perform marriages. But the right answer would have been, IMHO, “Yes Judge Bach, we worship trees. We have much better gods than you have. OUR GODS do not kill anybody unless you chop them down and make them fall, or unless lightning thrown around carelessly by one of YOUR GODS hits them and makes them fall on us or burn us. We worship gods who have never swallowed up folks for making mistakes, never declared war, never sent floods, and never chased folks out of their gardens for eating apples. We worship trees.”
Nick,
Will have to check that out: Libertarian, civil libertarine. MikeS claims he is the latter. You the former. And the former is often used dispariingly for
Ayn Randians, or Neo-Cons, or corporatists, etc.
To the issue:
In Norway I believe there is a law driving them towards balanced representation.
So far in Sweden, I have not seen the trend to more women in parliament bringing better thinkers. Or if it is a matter of chutzpah (egotism) which is lacking.
It took many millenia to develop male chutzpah, why should women be expected to have it so quickly.
We have had one. She was chased away from her GAO position here to the UN position, there she was chased out because she was too good for comfort, and not sure where she is now. Oh yes, she did a stint in the EU commission before the UN job.
So there are ones, but will the system let them be effective. How many MALE maverick congressmen survive?
What happened to Alan Grayson. Sure he had Koch money against him last time. But where was the DNC money. He was too high profile for comfort. DNC said that that was a no-no. No money. No Grayson in Congress now.
Idealist707
I appreciate the help. You are welcome Bettykath
No you are not wrong at all, it is one of the aspects of Allah Akbar. it is a multipurpose word, that means literally God is Great, and within contemplative prayer, is a mantra that reconnects the believer to the divine and allows to find the divine within and ultimately, to lose oneself within it. In the ritualistic, physical prayer (one of the 5 daily) it acts as transition between stances and also as formal entry into the prayer. In Arabic, it acts as an interjection, not unlike “Oh my god!”, or “really!?”. Whole books have been written about it from sufis (contemplative form of islamic spiriutality that sees God into all of His creation, and therefore cannot really be against or hate anything or anyone for it is to hate the divine expression and plan. it is opposite the salafist, who are the rightwingers of islam, eager to kill and maim under the guise of protecting the faith.) there are many spiritual secrets around the words Allah Akbar, one of which being that it indeed should be a safe word for everyone, saying God is Great should stop any muslim from inflicting harm on you, however justified he’d be.
I think that any debate about Islam should hold the following in mind:
1- fundamentally, Islam is no better or worse than any established religion because it is solely guidance for people. As great of a guidance as it is, it is nothing on its own, and is only valuable when applied as prescribed. it is an extension of Judaism and Christianity, and closes them as the final revealed religion. That is why the story of Moises and Jesus is told in details in the Quran, and why there is a chapter named after the Virgin Mary, and also why the Prophet Muhamad is called the seal of the prophets, as the successor and holder of the message that started with Abraham and ended with him, through Ismael and Isaac, Joseph, David, Solomon, Moses and Jesus. it is also why Muslims say “Peace and blessings be” on not only the prophet Muhamad’s name but also on any of these other prophets’ names.
2- Many practicing Muslims, as well as many practicing Christians and Jews, have never read their holy books. Rather they depend on others, seemingly more knowledgeable, priests and imams, to interpret for them what the books say.
3- Fear is what drives people, either to act against or to react. Many people, from all persuasions, take it as a duty to protect that which they believe in against any perceived or real attack for fear that to not do it would challenge their faith, therefore their eventual entry into paradise.
4- the standards for justice in the Quran are so stringent as to not be really enforceable. Any act deemed punishable has to have been witnessed by 4 pious people known as such (including adultery). Secondly, the enforcement relies on the guilty party not having apologized. thirdly, Allah tells the wronged party, yes, you are right to be offended and hurt, and you have right to seek retribution, but if you were to forgive, it would be better for you. So for every right one has to fight back or strike back, one is told twice as often to be patient and forgiving.
5- We cannot get away from the fact that the Quran values the life of the human being, and says that to kill one person unlawfully is to kill all humanity. The quran is also a social structure, forcefully telling people to protect and provide for the orphan, to help the poor, to share with others, to respect everyone’s being, rights, property and space, to value one’s neighbor, to not harm anyone or anything, including animals or the environment.
6-In the time of the prophet, and a bit thereafter, no Christian or Jewish person not at war against the islamic commnunity was ever killed or hurt or dispossessed by a Muslim but Islamic law gave him full redress and punished the offender.
Now the fact that Muslims are not perfect and express their frustrations through political, cultural or pseudo religious traditions speaks only of their distance from the aim of the Quran but in no way reduces the Quran to a justification of those abberations.
id, I’m a libertarian. As much as I would like to see balance it must come from the people, not an edict.
Dredd,
Haven’t forgotten you, bro. I assumed the link was to you and hubris. Asch how I fooled myself. That news was indeed unexpected. Will check it carefully later.
Nick and Darren,
Got news for you. Women have testosterone too, in smaller quantities. And women fight too. Violently.
But mandatory balance in Congress from each state would be a first step. But not a cure all. Selling your ass for campaign money would not end with achieving balance. Many small steps in a long journey are needed.
And climate change still awaits, whatever its cause. Will se survive Monsanto and the oil corps?
Here is a song about not beating your mother, or else you shall be doomed to circling lakes like leery loons:
idealist707 1, September 5, 2012 at 12:52 pm
I have often said that the female is the most complete sex.
==================================================
Once upon a time I had a vision about where their evolution was going:
(The Virgin MOMCOM). The reality of the IMOM in this story is that he is subconsciously masturbating while consciously confusing it with justice.
Vietnam food for thought.
Darren, The key is balance, not dominance by either sex. As Camille Paglia says, if women ruled the world we would be more peaceful, but still living in caves. Testosterone makes men risk takers, which is, of course, a double edged sword.
I have often said that the female is the most complete sex. The most normal and complete persons.
Thank god for them. Without them we would have and will perish. Every pregant belly is greeted with my approval. Every small child with a benevolent smile.
If women had not had the sense they had to assume the greater part of the burden to bring forth and succor life, then our species would number in the hundreds or be extinct.
Each wife with one child at her breast and one in hand wandered and gathered the grubs and roots to sustain life while her husband slept or was out nominally seeking game
How in the hell, men felt threatened by their children’s mothers escapes me. The succoring was inherited from the mammalian strain. But perhaps the brain led to the woman saying to the man to get off his lazy ass and look for game, which male lions do NOT do, and man probably did not either. He might have gathered his own grubs, but that is not sure either.
Whatever happened to the prehistoric Mother depicted in figurines, and the presumably religion and societal form associated?
idealist707 1, September 5, 2012 at 12:40 pm
Dredd,
Stop pulling our legs. The mothas can’t even communicate, nor can they simulate a brain in their trillion celled conglomerate. Too much BS, man.
=================================================
The link is to an official .gov publication: “US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health” … sorry it pulled your string bro.
Mike:
I don’t mean to sound sarcastic here but I have maintained at least as a subject for theoretical discussion to flush out the issues: “It would be better if the world was completely governed by women for a while.”
After such governance, how would we be as a species. Better I would say.
Dredd,
Stop pulling our legs. The mothas can’t even communicate, nor can they simulate a brain in their trillion celled conglomerate. Too much BS, man.
The concept of male patriarchal superiority should be decried everywhere it exists. My own belief is that those who champion it are males with deep sexual issues and females who are suffering from the Stockholm Syndrome. The problem is this patriarchal system has existed for thousands of years throughout most of humanity. It is ingrained to such a degree that those in its thrall can’t see the great contradiction. Why would you mistreat the woman you love and share sex with? The answer to that contradiction is that the need for dominance is not about sex, but is something missing in the psyche of the male.
Nick and others,
Don’t you see the euivalence in the act of faith of he monks in Moorish Spain and the suicide bombers of today.
I am doing God’s will and his justice will prevail. My puny life is of no concern. Eternity at his side awaits me.
Nice view from there. Surrounded by non-sexed angels or sexy houris.
Minute Bol,
Hope that my interpretation of Allah Akbar, and other parts of Islam and its history have not been misleading. I have spoken freely, lacking other more
more knowledgeable voices to take the lead in providing true facts
Welcome and thanks.
I may even take issue with you, as even Islam once could but that was banned a few hundred years ago. Unfortunately.
This religious tension is a result of an aberrant microbial plot:
(Microbes, warfare, religion, and human institutions, emphasis added). Or as Abdulla Bin Baptist says “get in touch with your inner tube” dood.