Monday, November 07, 2005

Family Law

* These are Profoundity Ferret's thoughts and opinions about the family law. I disagree with alot of what he is saying, but the issue is well thought-out.

What is Family law?

It is a group of law stipulates handling of marriage, divorce, children custody, inheritance, alimony, and etc. cases. These laws jump to the surface recently due to several factors among which:

· Increased awareness among women in particular of their capability to change their current unjust treatment of their (women) cases with regard to divorces, marriages, alimony and guardianship through some communities and societies which started to take shape recently,

· Continued family violence and ignominy especially against women,

· Lack of last resort to most of the women in family disputes due to the masculinity of our society that women should always be a follower to the man since he has the last word in marriage, divorce and guardianship.

· Corruption in the court system that any of the abovementioned cases might take very long time to be resolved during which most of the women has to continue suffering with their collapsed marriages, or thrown on the street waiting for some charities to provide them with their basic needs

All of the abovementioned reasons plus more lead women to raise their voices asking for laws to protect their status disregarding who legislates that, religion or the government, they had enough of humiliation and disrespect.

Now I answered briefly " what is the need to legislate family law?" question. But let us underline proponents' statement:" legislate law". Do our court systems lack laws that govern the above cases so that proponents are recommending to come-up with new ones? The answer is no, the official religion of the kingdom is Islam and it explicitly stated in the constitution that Islamic sources of laws in respect to the above matters are the holy book and the prophet hadiths.

But if the Islamic laws that protect the women's rights and their social status are there, why family cases have to wait for ages to be resolved?


The problem is not with the absence of laws, rather, it is with the judicial systems and the application of laws among people. One proof to the last point is: are we suffering from lack of legislated commercial and banking laws? Resounding NO, then why do we have conflicts, violations, and legal suits against employers, banks, companies in addition to the fact that some of those cases wait for years to be resolved. So the problem is not ascribed to the absence of laws, it is with the judicial system and the applications of laws among people involved.

Why most of the turbaned and ayatollahs opposing this law? i.e. what is their take on the subject? The turbaned concerns are on delegating the parliament or any government's agencies to legislate the family law. Their argument is that laws pertaining to marriage, divorce, alimony, etc. should governed by Islamic laws not by codified law legislated by people who lack expertise in Islamic laws and principles such as seculars, communist and socialist (there are actually some communists among the proponent of the law). But you turbaned what are you going to say if we tell you that we would give you positive assertions that the law would be in line with the Shari'a Directives? Ayatollahs have taken one step further to reply that even if we are given assertions that law will be in line, who guarantee that it will remain so given the fact that the law has taken its legitimacy through the parliament, and what is approved by the current parliament might be rejected in the next one. So turbaned wants constitutional guarantee that family law once legislated by Islamic expertise should be given a constitutional guarantee to keep those laws unchanged

Let me now tackle the turbaned argument, you want Islamic law to proceed any other laws. Ok, are we going to have unified law for both Sunni and Shia or two separate law for each? If your reply is unified, then how long do we have to wait until you reach on an agreement and compromise to your everlasting differences? And if your reply is separate law then are you ready to the sub difference among shia themselves and sunni themselves because as you know there are significant variations in fatwas (religious opinion) between one ayatollahs to the other and between Wahabi and Sunni? Both parties are silent to these crucial questions.

I do no think that scholars who are so into opposition sexually insecure or they are against women rights, instead, it is quite evident from their speeches and books that they are totally with women rights and equality. Then why they are so freaked-out because of the law? They are freaked out because of similar proposition in other countries for family law that disregarded and violated fundamental Islamic principles, which totally not accepted by all Muslim people (I suppose). For instance, in Tunisia, the current family laws contains sheer variation from the Islamic laws as follows:

· Forbids polygamy, which is explicitly allowed in the holy book
· Women can divorce men
· Equality of women to men in inheritance
· Allowed abortions


In sum, I would like to make the following conclusions on my take on the issue:

Islamic laws should supercedes other laws.
Any community and committee that is involved in legislating any laws to govern social status and any other issues directly related to religion should be formed with Islamic expertise, not seculars or people of any doctrines.
There is no lack of Islamic laws that stipulates the social status, every thing is there in the religion, rather, we lack judicial system and proper &conscientious applications of the laws.
Turbaned should not take the issue to the streets through demonstrations; the issue should be discussed through civilized ways.
scholars should stress on the reform of judicial system as much as they do in opposing the law because most of the corruptions In the judicial system is because of turbaned as well.
Seculars and other proponents of the law should stop accusing the scholars of any wrongdoing, they have their rational concerns.

52 Comments:

Blogger Um Haleema said...

Do non-Muslims get their own set of laws?

5:44 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Yes, I do believe that there are some interpretations for non Muslim in Islamic societies,

6:55 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

All the more reason to completely separate religion from the state.

The current situation is clearly a power play, nothing else. The Shi'a draft of the Family Law which was prepared by several noted and notable Shi'a scholars and judges like Al-Uraibi has been completed since 2003 and has been presented to Qassem, Najati and Ghuraifi for their input and blessings. No input was received and of course no blessing.

The whole draft was then taken to Qum in Iran and presented to the very top scholars there and it received approval, yet the Bahraini trio refused to have anything to do with it.

So the issue that you proclain that the Shi'a scholars in Bahrain are "afraid for the religion" is patently false. And their current actions plainly show that, why else are they trying to mix the cards now by blaming the States for the stage the rules have reached so far? The demonstrations which happened on the Budaiya road yesterday concentrated on "No to family law as it is the dictate of foreign powers"!! And it is going to be the same issues raised on Wednesday when Isa Qassem leads a "massive" demonstration on the Seef road.

If they were in fact concerned about parliament or any other body changing the laws after they are set, they should concentrate on this message and this message only, rather than try to mix the cards.

No, they are afraid of losing their position and their absolute control over their societies and their daily bread and butter and women and children be damned.

What I suggest that the government do is issue the law and disregard their objections, and even then create a "civil family law" which is available for ANYONE to marry under and those marriages will be shoved down both the Shi'a and Sunna's scholars throats to be ratified as legitimate. Then those marriages will have a civilised set of laws that they will fall under.

As to your assertion that in Tunisia they have changed Islamic doctrines by adopting their version of family laws is once again completely false:

1. The quran clearly says that only the just can marry a second wife etc and only Allah is just. Clearly meaning that as human beings are inherently unjust, they are limited to only ONE wife. If you want to marry another then divorce the first.

2. Women CAN divorce men in Islam.

3. Equality of men and women in inheritence, of course they are equal, God said that plainly in the quran. The Hadiths associated with inheritence distribution then are either completely false or manufactered. That is one major difference between the Sunni and Shi'i doctrines and that is why a lot of rich Sunnis with only daughters legally change their affiliation so that their daughters do receive inheritence.

4. Allowed abortions. Show me a passage in the quran that forbids it, especially one that can prove that if the child endangers the mother's life MUST continue until the mother dies.

My friend we live in a world that has moved on. We need to move on with it as well. And no, it's not a conspiracy, to me the Family laws are the inculcation of Islam.

6:59 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

Umm Haleema, the Jews, Christians and Hindus do have their own set of laws. Civil laws. Lucky them!

7:00 PM  
Blogger The Joker said...

Mahmood, you've tackled more than what I even intended. Ferret, I'd be interested to know how you reached the conclusion that scholars are worried about Islam by opposing the laws and how seculars have to back off. I really need more explanation in that area

10:13 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Mr. Mahmood, thanks for your comment,

(The quran clearly says that only the just can marry a second wife etc and only Allah is just. Clearly meaning that as human beings are inherently unjust, they are limited to only ONE wife)

I disagree with you on that, people can also be just, who said only God is the Just, it is true that God is the ABSOLUTE Just, but people can also be just. If I Agreed with you on that, what do you call the prophet polygamy, was it unjust deed also, we has unjust when he married more than one without divorcing another? Did he do something against the holy book? Or may be he was so stuoid to comprehend that no one can be just but GOD. As far as I am concerned I do believe that prophet is absolutely infallible and just. And if you want to refer to the holy book word by word as you did in your reply, then your interpretation that you have to divorce the other one is not there, it is only your own conclusion. Besides, why would the God mentioned something in his holy book permitting something explicitly and implicitly (that no one can be just as the almighty is the only just) forbidding it, does not make sense to me!


(Equality of men and women in inheritance, of course they are equal,)

How you claim that there are equal in inheritance while it is explicitly mentioned in the holy book that man’s share is twice as woman’s?

(Allowed abortions. Show me a passage in the quran that forbids it)

من قتل نفسا بغير نفس فجزاءه جهنم. I
I do believe that an abortion GENERALLY is forbidden as it represents killing innocent soul. However, there are cases where it is allowed for instance the examples you mentioned in your comment. Besides there are pretty much agreement on the interpretations of this verse that abortion represents killing innocent soul, you can get back to one of those if you will.
.
(My friend we live in a world that has moved on.)

Yes, I know and I am moving as well J, but do asking for implementing Islamic laws instead of other codified laws hold us back? For me, resounding NO

(No, they are afraid of losing their position and their absolute control over their societies and their daily bread and butter and women and children be damned.)

I do not care who loses his positions for who, or why did not Qassim respond positively to Al-Urabi, I do not know. it is praiseworthy to mention to you and to clarify that to the Joker that I illustrated my opinion not to defend the opponents turbaned or scholars, I defend the “Islamisation” of the law in general, regardless of who is sharing that with me, Qassim or Gurraifi. You might be right on your judgment that they are afraid of losing their power; I cannot make this assumption.

(they should concentrate on this message and this message only, rather than try to mix the cards.)

They are focusing on this now, their speeches and letters are asking for assurances, you may get back to some Qassim’s speeches ( I do not like the guy any way J )

(The demonstrations which happened on the Budaiya road yesterday)

I am against this barbarian demonstrations.

11:26 PM  
Blogger The Joker said...

Again, ferret,I am still left wondering how did you reach the conclusion that the scholars should islamatize the law and sectarians should not be involved. I don't see the link from the issue to that conclusion.

6:34 AM  
Blogger Cerebralwaste said...

Ferret
It is incumbent for all citizens to question ANYONE in a position of authority. Turbaned, bearded or otherwise. Not to do so is tantamount to allowing the inmates to run the asylum. The same applies to allowing the State to dictate religion or Religion to dictate the rules of the state. I am not sure just what you are driving at here Ferret but you do seem to remind me of my own pet ferret. She is everywhere and nowhere at the same time..

6:59 AM  
Blogger moodZ said...

I really don’t classify myself as an expert in laws or Islamic regulations, and to be honest I cannot make a judgment as to whether or not the proposed laws do in fact contradict with the core Islamic principals, I do believe however that a solution that should be reached to the issue not by filling the street with those stupid cartoon images and kindergarten type of smilies, but by locking the scholars, lawyers and those in charge all in one room for them to fight about it all they want.

Now, just a couple of points that are I believe are worth replying.

Mahmood:

- “The Quran clearly says that only the just can marry a second wife etc and only Allah is just.”
NO! And let’s not argue about that; please do take the time to go through any Islamic article about this matter.

- “Equality of men and women in inheritance, of course they are equal. God said that plainly in the quran.”
He didn’t.. And they are not equal according to Islamic teachings. وللذكر مثل حظ الإنثيين

Ferret:
On Abortions:
The issue is very controversial, there are various points of view on the issue.
Point being? The fetus is not considered a نفس. It will be after نفخ الروح فيها which again varies in time according to scholars.

I personally a strong believer in abortions, the child should be brought to a life in which he will suffer in because of his parent’s stupidity.

Joker:
We do live in an Islamic country by the way, we do require our laws to at least abide by the lines of the religion, and to be honest, its not as bad as it seems (if you don’t include isa qassim and the rest of the gang)

9:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The same people who are saying that parliament has no authority to change the family law are demonstrating on thursday because they say the parliament is not democratic enough.

Is this as stupid as it looks?

10:28 AM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

What are the circumstances of the Prophet's (pbuh) marriages? They were explicitly allowed by Allah to unite warring tribes. He allowed him to marry 9 times (if I remember correctly) and he took advantage of that to unit and defend the young Muslim nation. Who am I to disagree with God or his prophets? I'm not going to comment on that as those are specific cases.

Taking the cases however of THIS day and time, there is absolutely no need for polygamy. It creates more trouble that its worth and is governed by a patrernistic society and the really sick thing is that women - who constitute the majority on this island - actually condone this!

What we need is for people to own up to their resopnsibilities. If you divorce someone then make sure that they are provided for appropriately and that of their children. If your wealth was created by the woman who has stood beside you and created the environment that allowed you to excell, then she should rake in some of that success if both of you decide to go on your separate ways, and that decision does not come lightly.

I stand by my own interpretation and that that has allowed Tunis to interpret it the same way as well, a man can marry only one. End of story. Other interpretations are there to benefit man alone. And the same goes for temporary marriages as well but that's a different issue and I'm not going into it here. Suffice it to say that the courts in Bahrain and elsewhere have sided with men all along and will continue to unless clear laws are noted down on paper in an unambiguous way and not allowing a cleric to continue to mess with the laws laid down without justification.

I do have a problem with inheritence and witnessing however. How can Islam purport to be a just religion when it clearly favours man over woman? Why is it that a man is worth 2 women? Interpreting it like this clearly shows vast contradictions that must be addressed. God created man and woman equal, therefore their roles and responsibilities should be equal, why is Islam then being so completely unjust here? I've got two daughters, do you think I will accept that my son will have double whatever I leave the girls? Think again!

No, the whole issue of personal or family laws has been politicised (by both sides I grant you) and has been for some 25 years and no conclusion is in sight purely because of the obstinacy of these clerics. They need to move on and codify these laws, or move aside.

10:30 AM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

Anon: the demonstration is on Wednesday afternoon starting at Seef and according to the papers today there are going to be actually TWO demonstrations, one for and one against. So it should be MAJOR fun! I wonder where the women would join?

And I agree, how can the opponents of the 2002 constitution, and opposition which still is vehement, demand that it be amended to guarantee that no changes to the laws will occur after it is agreed? Doesn't this demand validate the very constitution they are against?

What nonesense!

10:34 AM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

We do live in an Islamic country by the way, we do require our laws to at least abide by the lines of the religion, and to be honest, its not as bad as it seems (if you don’t include isa qassim and the rest of the gang)

We do live in a Muslim country for sure, but our constitution is based on Secular laws for the most part and it clearly states that Islamic laws are not the exclusive source of legislation.

Unlike you however I do have a problem living completely under Islamic law but have no problem whatsoever with the respected clerics you mentioned. I do have major problems however living under Muslim laws that chops heads, hands and feet for crimes committed. And the various other outdated laws it brings forth should the constitution (and the clerics clear demand) for an exclusive Muslim state.

10:38 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Mahmood

(Taking the cases however of THIS day and time, there is absolutely no need for polygamy.)

Agree with you totally, the current application of this permission has nothing to do with religion because the negatives are more than the positives. But I guess we both agree now that polygamy is permitted (in principle) ha J

With regard to the witnessing, I would suggest that you go to some articles in aht respect to hear the justification and rational to it

11:03 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Emoods
( Ferret:
On Abortions:
The issue is very controversial, there are various points of view on the issue.
Point being? The fetus is not considered a نفس. It will be after نفخ الروح فيها which again varies in time according to scholars.)

Totally agree but I preferred not to mention that in detail as I tend to believe it is a crime to kill some one even if his parents were stupid :)

11:06 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Mahmood ,

(We do live in a Muslim country for sure, but our constitution is based on Secular laws for the most part and it clearly states that Islamic laws are not the exclusive source of legislation)

But it says explicitly that the religion of the kingdom is Islam, so I do not think it is right to say that the constitution is secular in most of its part :)

11:08 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Joker,

We are living in Islamic society, and I do believe that Islamic laws should applied at all the time (not to chop heads or hands, this is not religion, rather this is politics, and I will write later about the “wahibism” and the Saudi Regime), and laying down such laws in legislative manner requires expertise in Islamic laws ( as it is the case with any kind of laws, banking, commercial, only experts in the field), and obviously seculars and other sectarians are not experts in that respect.

That is what meant pal

11:19 AM  
Blogger moodZ said...

Mahmood:
”Taking the cases however of THIS day and time, there is absolutely no need for polygamy. It creates more trouble that its worth and is governed by a patrernistic society”

We cannot make that judgment, it is a right granted by god, I don’t think that we are in a position to tell whether there is a need for polygamy; the issue is a personal one and varies from an individual to another. Regulation is what I believe should be done, probably a law assuring proper financial support to both wives/families, and if that can be secured I see no reason why the guy should not be allowed another marriage.

”How can Islam purport to be a just religion when it clearly favors man over woman? Why is it that a man is worth 2 women? Interpreting it like this clearly shows vast contradictions that must be addressed.”

Islam does not favor a human over the other, but fairness my dear friend does not necessarily mean equality. Islam chose to give the male a larger chunk of the inheritance as he is obliged to support his family (according to Islamic principals), and hence the money will be passed down to his own children, which is not the case for women -who should be supported by their husband instead-.

“I do have a problem living completely under Islamic law but have no problem whatsoever with the respected clerics you mentioned.”

Take my word on this, ORIGINAL Islamic laws are not so bad, our problem would be those who enforce it.

The clerics?! Excuse me, I do have HUGE problems with “Ayatollah” Qassim, do I have to remind you about his fatwa on banning women from universities? Or his famous saying: من لم يوقع على العريضة الشعبية.. خااااائن للدين والوطن

12:19 PM  
Blogger The Joker said...

Emoodz,

"I see no reason why the guy should not be allowed another marriage."

If you were a middle aged woman with a couple of kids, and no law to enforce your husband, thats off to marry another unfortunate, to provide for the kids, would you see a reason by then?


"Islam chose to give the male a larger chunk of the inheritance as he is obliged to support his family"

We want a law that MAKES SURE that happens!

12:47 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

Emoods,

Ali Al-salman has just uncovered that the reason why Isal Qassim ignored the drafted law prepared by Mr. Abdulhussain Al-Urbai. It is ascribed to political reasons. That political reason was that they did not want the draft to be approved and blessed by Qum Hawza, instead they wanted Al-Najaf Hawza’ blessing.

Now what this guy, Qassim, is trying to do here? When he wanted to study advanced Fiqh, he went to Qum. If they are not sure about the crescent, they depend on Qum’s hawza for Ramadan and Eid. For the approval and blessing of the draft , he seems not convinved with Qum blessing and that is why he did not respond to Uraibi attempts.

That all the more prove the point to me that this guy does not know what he is doing

12:56 PM  
Blogger moodZ said...

Joker:
The solution is not by criminalizing plural marriages habibi, a lot of issues come into play when talking about such a sensitive and personal matter, you simply can’t generalize a law that forbids polygamy in hope for fewer problems.

Husbands like ones you mentioned, would just go around the corner to one of the hotels and grab a one night stand, or (if he had some self respect to his pathetic self) start an affair; and then we will have a whole set of problems altogether, we do need a permissible substitute; not everything can be solved by rigid laws, whips and chains.

1:12 PM  
Blogger moodZ said...

ferret:
On a totally different matter..
”If they are not sure about the crescent, they depend on Qum’s hawza for Ramadan and Eid”

لا يتبع حكم الإستهلال رأي المرجع الفقيه

1:21 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

emoods,
Yes it does,
ويعتبر حكم وليس فتوى , إذا حكم فضل الله بالهلال يجب اتباعه, وبالمثل في حالة الخامنئي ( لمقلديه طبعا),

1:52 PM  
Blogger moodZ said...

I personally follow AlSistani..

َQuestion 33:
http://www.sistani.org/html/ara/menu/4/?lang=ara&view=d&code=106&page=4

2:04 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

But it says explicitly that the religion of the kingdom is Islam, so I do not think it is right to say that the constitution is secular in most of its part :)You can believe any fairytale you like my friend, the truth however is that our constitution has nothing to do with Islam other than giving it a nod in the first couple of paragraphs because Isa Qassim and Abdulamir Al-Jamri fought tooth and nail to get that adopted in the 1973 constitution. But the laws within it are based really on the Egyptian and Kuwaiti constitutions for the most part.

I think the king has lost a major opportunity in not striking those clauses from the 2002 constitution while he had the chance!

More's the pity.

2:15 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

With regard to the witnessing, I would suggest that you go to some articles in aht respect to hear the justification and rational to it

Don't be so condescending. If you can't carry an argument, just excuse yourself rather than writing crap like this.

Let me reiterate this point: If Islam is supposed to be so just, why does it differentiate between men and women so? Are we not both created by the same just God?

Now get off that fence and talk to me.

2:17 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

I do believe that Islamic laws should applied at all the time (not to chop heads or hands, this is not religion, rather this is politics

hmmm, nope, this is religion and has nothing to do with politics. And in any case, Islam does not provide for politics nor democracy and it merges everything under the same umbrella.

So your concept of picking and choosing what to apply from Islamic jurisprudence doesn't work at all. Which interpreted another way, you're telling me that Islam is a failure and is not really made for all time...

2:22 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

Islam does not favor a human over the other, but fairness my dear friend does not necessarily mean equality. Islam chose to give the male a larger chunk of the inheritance as he is obliged to support his family (according to Islamic principals), and hence the money will be passed down to his own children, which is not the case for women -who should be supported by their husband instead-.

What is it with condescension today? Am I wearing a stupid hat or something?

"My friend" don't hide behind rhetoric, answer the question directly:

IF ISLAM IS SUPPOSED TO BE JUST THEN HOW CAN IT DIFFERENTIATE SO UNJUSTLY BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN?

If you have daughters would you like these laws to apply to them? What about your sisters if they are kicked out of their homes because their husband got horny and screwed the maid? What about your mother, aunts and nieces?

This is utter bullshit about "the man needs more dough to take care of his family" didn't you hear of working ladies "my friend?"

but fairness my dear friend does not necessarily mean equality

Which book are YOU reading and can I have a copy please? What utter bull "my friend" look up both terms in any dictionary you like and then come back and talk. Fairness ALWAYS means EQUALITY and vice-versa.

Hummos, Coffee, choose whichever you wish to smell but just wake up!

2:28 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

Take my word on this, ORIGINAL Islamic laws are not so bad, our problem would be those who enforce it.

Sorry Mohammed, I won't take your word for it, with all due respect, because they don't make any sense whatsoever.

As far as reality is concerned all Islamic laws are ORIGINAL. And almost all of them do not belong to this day and age.

Prove me wrong:

1. The "original" law for murder is?
2. The "original" law for a rapist is? And what about the victim?
3. The "original" law for stealing a piece of bread is? What about stealing millions?

Need I go on?

2:34 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

The solution is not by criminalizing plural marriages habibi, a lot of issues come into play when talking about such a sensitive and personal matter, you simply can’t generalize a law that forbids polygamy in hope for fewer problems.

Mohammed, please name me these issues and list them, but keep in mind that they ALL should be written and thought of when thinking of your sisters or mother.

2:36 PM  
Blogger The Joker said...

Mohammed, trying to be a moderate and tip-toeing around this issue is not enough when whats stake here is the life and welfare of families. In my book, fair is equal. Giving the man more responsibility, since he gets paid more in inheritance, to be responsible for other people to that extent may be interprited as unfair to him either. To me equality is pretty obvious 1=1. Any shift in that equation is niether equal not fair.

And the comment about men without polygamy easily sneaking off to a cheap motel or a red light, my comeback has never been easier. With a coded law, where women can easily divorce someone like that and still get alimony, this man will be flat on his ass at the curb faster than he can say pre-nup. And guess what? Half of his income gets funnled to the family he snuck out from.

As for the side-argument about the lunar sighting, I am not very religious, and ramadan is over. So I have 11 months before I start worrying about it again :D

Also, other than Um-haleema, we havent heard many ladies give in their opinions. We have a good debate going on, but the issue first and for-most affects women.

4:22 PM  
Blogger moodZ said...

Mahmood:
It will take me a while to tackle all the points you raised Mahmood, I will be a little slow.. Here goes..

"IF ISLAM IS SUPPOSED TO BE JUST THEN HOW CAN IT DIFFERENTIATE SO UNJUSTLY BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN?"

Try to follow me here.. if I die, leaving ONLY a son and a daughter behind.. an inheritance that is worth 30K, according to Shia Islamic teachings, the girl ends up with 10K, the boy with 20.. unfair.. right?

Not close:
1. If she was not married, the son(s) will be required to support her financially, which includes ALL her personal spending/healthcare/accommodation/education.. and what not, while still being required to spend his money on his own family (if married) along with other sister (if existed)
2. If she was not married, she will be receiving dower (which is UNJUST obligation by a man to a woman upon marriage), the dower is a requirement to any marriage, it is solely the property of the woman, she is free to do whatever with (again, she is not required to spend it on anyone, neither her husband, nor children. It is completely up to her)

Now.. We could end up by any of the following:
Situation (1): I die, leaving a single daughter, married son. The girl will be receiving her dues (10K) while still sharing her brothers (20K) until she gets married (which is when she will receive her dower from another man, her 10K untouched), the son having to pay ALL her expenses till then.
Situation (2): I die, leaving a single son, married daughter. My son will be getting his 20K (which he will need to start his life/get married/assuring accommodation and well being for his new family), while my daughter will get her 10K, while still being fully sponsored by her own husband.
Situation (3): I die, leaving a single son, single daughter. Like 1 above, the girl will get her share, with the boy being obliged to sponsor her until marriage. Hence, still not touching her 10K.
Situation (4): Both married, the son will get the lions share and spend it on his family, the daughter on the other hand will get her share and only be obliged to spend it on herself.

Additionally, the man is also (UNJUSTLY) required to pay alimony/child support incase of marriage according to Islamic teachings, he is also required to financially support his relatives other than his sister, hence.. he is naturally expected to get a bigger chunk!

Moreover, the issue of the man getting double what the woman is getting is not a general law in Islam.

القرآن الكريم لم يقل: يوصيكم الله للذكر مثل حظ الأنثيين.. بل قال.. ((يوصيكم الله فى أولادكم للذكر مثل حظ الأنثيين))، إذ ان التوصية بالضعف مقرونة بكون الورثة من الحالات الخاصة المرتبطة بالأولاد فقط.

أ ـ إن هناك أربع حالات فقط ترث فيها المرأة نصف الرجل :

1) فى حالة وجود أولاد للمتوفى ، ذكوراً وإناثا (أى الأخوة أولاد المتوفى)
لقوله تعالى (يوصيكم الله فى أولادكم ، للذكر مثل حظ الأنثيين) النساء 11

2) فى حالة التوارث بين الزوجين ، حيث يرث الزوج من زوجته ضعف ما ترثه هى منه.
لقوله تعالى (ولكم نصف ما ترك أزواجكم إن لم يكن لهنَّ ولد ، فإن كان لهنَّ ولد فلكم الربع مما تركن ، من بعد وصية يوصينَ بها أو دين ، ولهنَّ الربع مما تركتم إن لم يكن لكم ولد ، فإن كان لكم ولد فلهنَّ الثمن مما تركتم من بعد وصية توصونَ بها أو دين) النساء 12

3) يأخذ أبو المتوفى ضعف زوجته هو إذا لم يكن لإبنهما وارث ، فيأخذ الأب الثلثان والأم الثلث.

4) يأخذ أبو المتوفى ضعف زوجته هو إذا كان عند ابنهما المتوفى ابنة واحدة ، فهى لها النصف ، وتأخذ الأم السدس ويأخذ الأب الثلث.


ب ـ وهناك حالات أضعاف هذه الحالات الأربع ترث فيها المرأة مثل الرجل تماماً :

1) فى حالة وجود أخ وأخت لأم فى إرثهما من أخيهما، إذا لم يكن له أصل من الذكور ولا فرع وارث (أى ما لم يحجبهم عن الميراث حاجب). فلكل منهما السدس ، وذلك لقوله تعالى (وإن كان رجل يورث كلالة أو امرأة) أى لا ولد له ولا أب (وله أخ أو أخت) أى لأم(فلكل واحد منهما السدس ، فإن كانوا أكثر من ذلك فهم شركاء فى الثلث ، من بعد وصية يوصى بها أو دين غير مضار ، وصية من الله، والله عليم حليم)النساء: 12

2) إذا توفى الرجل وكان له أكثر من اثنين من الأخوة أو الأخوات فيأخذوا الثلث بالتساوى.

3) فيما بين الأب والأم فى إرثهما من ولدهما إن كان له ولد أو بنتين فصاعداً:
لقوله تعالىولأبويه لكل واحد منهما السدس مما ترك إ ن كان له ولد) النساء:11

4) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأخت شقيقة: فلكل منهما النصف

5) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأخت لأب: فلكل منهما النصف

6) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأم وأخت شقيقة: فللزوج النصف ، وللأم النصف ، ولا شىء للأخت (عند بن عباس)

7) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأخت شقيقة وأخت لأب وأخت لأم: فللزوج النصف ، والأخت الشقيقة النصف ، ولا شىء للأخت لأب وللأخ لأب.

8) إذا مات الرجل وترك ابنتين وأب وأم: فالأب السدس والأم السدس ولكل ابنة الثلث.

9) إذا مات الرجل وترك زوجة وابنتين وأب وأم: فللزوجة الثمن وسهمها 3، والأب الربع وسهمه 4 ، والأم الربع وسهمها 4 ، ولكل ابنة الثلث وسهم كل منهما 8.

10) إذا مات الرجل وترك أماً وأختاً وجداً: فلكل منهم الثلث. فقد تساوت المرأة مع الرجل.

11) إذا مات الرجل وترك (أربعين ألف جنيهاً) وابن وابنة وزوجة لها مؤخر صداق (ثلاثة عشر ألف جنيهاً) فستجد أن نصيب الأم تساوى مع نصيب الابن. ويكون التقسيم كالتالى:
الزوجة 000 13 + ثمن الباقى (ثلاثة آلاف) = 000 16 ألف جنيهاً
الابن : ثلثى الباقى 000 16 (ستة عشر ألف) جنيهاً
الابنة : الثلث ويكون 000 8 (ثمانية آلاف) جنيهاً


ج ـ وهناك حالات تزيد عن خمسة عشر حالة ترث فيها المرأة أكثر من الرجل:

1) إذا مات الرجل وترك أم وابنتين وأخ
فلو ترك المتوفى 24000 ألف جنيهاً لكانت أنصبتهم كالتالى:
الأم : 3000 جنيهاً (الثُمُن)
البنتين: 16000 جنيهاً للواحدة 8000 جنيهاً (الثلثين)
الأخ: 5000 جنيهاً (الباقى)
وبذلك تكون الإبنة قد أخذت أكثر من 150% لميراث الأخ

2) إذا مات الأب وترك ابنة وأم وأب وترك 24000 جنيهاً
فالإبنة تأخذ النصف أى 12000 جنيهاً
الأم تأخذ السدس 4000 جنيهاً
الأب يأخذ السدس فرضاً والباقى تعصباً أى 4000 + 4000جنيهاً
وبذلك تكون الإبنة قد أخذت 150% لميراث الأب

3) إذا مات الرجل وترك ابنتين وأب وأم: فلكل ابنة الثلث ، والأب السدس والأم السدس.

فلو ترك الرجل 000 24 (أربعة وعشرين ألف جنيهاً) لكان نصيب كل من الابنتين 000 8 (ثمانية آلاف جنيهاً) ويتساوى الأب مع الأم ونصيب كل منهما 000 4 (أربعة آلاف) جنيهاً ، وبذلك تكون الإبنة قد أخذت 200% لميراث الأب

4) إذا ماتت امرأة وترك زوج وأم وجد وأَخَوَان للأم وأخين لأب: فللزوج النصف ، وللجد السدس ، وللأم السدس ، ولأخوة الأب السدس ، ولا شىء لأخوة الأم.
فلو ترك المتوفى 000 24 (أربعة وعشرين ألف جنيهاً) لكان نصيب الزوج 000 12 (اثنى عشر ألف جنيهاً) ويتساوى الجد مع الأم ونصيب كل منهما 000 4(أربعة آلاف) جنيهاً ، ويأخذ الأخان لأب كل منهما 2000 (ألفين من الجنيهات). وبذلك فقد ورثت الأم هنا 200% لميراث أخو زوجها.

5) إذا ماتت امرأة وترك زوج وأم وجد وأَخَوَان للأم وأربع أخوة لأب: فللزوج النصف ، وللجد السدس ، وللأم السدس ، ولأخوة الأب السدس ، ولا شىء لأخوة الأم.

فلو ترك المتوفى 000 24 (أربعة وعشرين ألف جنيهاً) لكان نصيب الزوج 000 12 (اثنى عشر ألف جنيهاً) ويتساوى الجد مع الأم ونصيب كل منهما 000 4(أربعة آلاف) جنيهاً ، ويأخذ كل من الأخوة لأب كل منهم 1000 (ألف جنيه) وتكون بذلك الأم قد ورثت أربعة أضعاف الأخ لزوجها أى 400%.

6) إذا ماتت امرأة وترك زوج وأم وجد وأَخَوَان للأم وثمانية أخوة لأب: فللزوج النصف ، وللجد السدس ، وللأم السدس ، ولأخوة الأب السدس ، ولا شىء لأخوة الأم.

فلو ترك المتوفى 000 24 (أربعة وعشرين ألف جنيهاً) لكان نصيب الزوج 000 12 (اثنى عشر ألف جنيهاً) ويتساوى الجد مع الأم ونصيب كل منهما 000 4(أربعة آلاف) جنيهاً ، ويأخذ كل من الأخوة لأب كل منهم (500 جنيهاً) وتكون بذلك الأم قد ورثت ثمانية أضعاف أضعاف أخو الزوج أى 800%.

7) إذا مات انسان وترك بنتين، وبنت الإبن، وابن ابن الإبن: فالإبنتين لهما الثلثان وسهم كل منهما 3 ، وبنت الابن سهم واحد وابن ابن الإبن سهمين.
فلو ترك المتوفى 000 18 (ثمانية عشر ألفاً) لكان نصيب كل ابنة (ستة آلاف) ، وكان نصيب بنت الابن (ألفين) وابن ابن الإبن (أربعة آلاف). وبذلك تكون الإبنة قد أخذت 150% لنصيب ابن ابن الإبن.

8) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأخت شقيقة وأخت لأب وأخت لأم: فللزوج النصف ، والأخت الشقيقة النصف، ولا شىء للأخت لأب وللأخ لأب. وبذلك يكون الزوج والأخت الشقيقة قد أخذا الميراث ولم يأخذ منه الأخ لأب وأخته.

9) إذا مات رجل وترك ابنتين وأخ لأب وأخت لأب: فلكل من الشقيقتين الثلث وسهم كل منهما 3 ، والباقى يأخذ منه الأخ الثلثين وأخته الثلث.

فإذا ترك المتوفى 000 90 (تسعين ألف جنيهاً) ، فيكون نصيب كل من الإبنتين (ثلاثين ألف جنيهاً) ، ويكون نصيب الأخ لأب (عشرين ألفاً) ونصيب الأخت لأب (أخته) عشرة آلاف. وبذلك تكون الإبنة قد أخذت 150% لنصيب الأخ لأب.

10) إذا مات رجل وترك زوجة وجدة وابنتين و12 أخ وأخت واحدة: فالزوجة الثمن وسهمها 75 ، والبنتان الثلثين وسهم كل منهما 200 ، والجدة السدس وسهمها 100 ، والأخوة 24 سهم لكل منهم 2 سهم ، والأخت سهم واحد.
فلو ترك المتوفى 000 300 (ثلاثمائة ألف جنيهاً) ، فستأخذ الزوجة 000 75 ألف جنيها ، وكل بنت من الإبنتين 000 100 (مائة ألف) ويأخذ الجد (مائة ألف) ، ويأخذ كل أخ (ألفين) وتأخذ الأخت ألفاً واحداً. وعلى ذلك فالإبنة أخذت 37.5 ضعف الأخ وتساوت مع الجد.

11) إذا ماتت وتركت زوج ، وأب ، وأم ، وابنة ، وابنة ابن ، وابن الإبن: فللزوج الربع وسهمه 3، ولكل من الأب والأم السدس وسهم كل منهما 2، والإبنة النصف وسهمها 6، ولا شىء لكل من ابنة الابن وابن الابن.

فلو تركت المتوفاة 000 12 (اثنى عشر ألفاً) ، لوجب أن تقسم التركة على 13 (ثلاثة عشر) سهماً ، لأخذ الزوج 5538 جنيهاً ، ولأخذ كل من الأب والأم 3692 جنيهاً ، ولأخذت الإبنة 076 11 جنيهاً ، ولا شىء لإبنة الابن ولابن الإبن. وهنا تجد أن الإبنة قد أخذت أكثر من ضعف ما أخذه الزوج وأكثر من 250% مما أخذه الأب.

12) إذا مات أو ماتت وترك جد ، وأم وأخت شقيقة وأخ لأب وأخت لأب: فتأخذ الأم السدس وسهمها 3، ويأخذ الجد ثلث الباقى وسهمه 5، والأخت الشقيقة النصف وسهمها 9، ثم يقسم سهم واحد على ثلاثة للأخ والأخت لأب (للذكر مثل حظ الانثيين).

فإذا ترك المتوفى 000 18 ألف جنيهاً لأخذت الأم (ثلاثة آلاف) جنيهاً، ولأخذ الجد (خمسة آلاف) ، ولأخذت الأخت الشقيقة (تسعة آلاف) ولأخذ الأخ (666) جنيهاً تقريباً، ولأخذت أخته (333) جنيهاً تقريباً. وهنا تجد أن الأخت الشقيقة أخذت أكثر من (13) ضعف ما أخذه الأخ لأب.

13) إذا مات الرجل وترك زوجة وابنتين وأب وأم: فللزوجة الثمن وسهمها 3، والأب السدس وسهمه 4، والأم السدس وسهمها 4 ، ولكل ابنة الثلث وسهم كل منهما 8. فيكون عدد الأسهم 27 ، فلو ترك المتوفى 000 24 (أربع وعشرين ألفا) لوجب أن تعول إلى 27 سهم بدلاً من 24 ، ويأخذ كل منهم عدد الأسهم التى فرضها الله له. وفى هذه الحالة ستأخذ الزوجة 2666 جنيهاً ، وستأخذ الإبنتين 15222 ألف مناصفة فيما بينهما ، أى 7111 لكل منهن ، والأم 3555 والأب 3555. وهنا تجد أن الإبنة أخذت ما يقرب من ضعف ما أخذه لأب.

14) إذا مات أو ماتت وترك أماً وجداً وأختاً: فيأخذ الجد السدس ، وتأخذ الأم ضعفه وهو الثلث ، وتأخذ الأخت النصف.
فلو ترك المتوفى 000 120 ألف جنيهاً ، لكان نصيب الجد 000 20 ألف ، وكان نصيب الأم 000 40 ألف ، وكان نصيب الأخت 000 60 ألف. أى أخذت امرأة ضعفه وأخذت الأخرى ثلاثة أضعافه.

15) إذا مات الرجل وترك (أربعين ألف جنيهاً) وابن وابنة وزوجة لها مؤخر صداق (ستة عشر ألف جنيهاً) فيكون التقسيم كالتالى:
الزوجة 000 16 + ثمن الباقى (000 3 آلاف) = 000 19 (تسعة عشر ألف) جنيهاً
الابن : الثلثى بعد خصم مؤخر الصداق 000 16 (ستة عشر ألف) جنيهاً
الابنة : الثلث بعد خصم مؤخر الصداق 000 8 (ثمانية آلاف) جنيهاً

16) ولو مؤخر صداقها أكبر لورثت أكثر من ابنها كثيرا مثال ذلك:
إذا مات الرجل وترك (ستين ألف جنيهاً) وابن وابنة وزوجة لها مؤخر صداق (ستة وثلاثون ألف جنيهاً) فيكون التقسيم كالتالى:
الزوجة 000 36 + ثمن الباقى (000 3 آلاف) = 000 39 (تسعة وثلاثين ألف) جنيهاً
الابن : ثلثى التركة بعد خصم مؤخر الصداق000 16 (ستة عشر ألف) جنيهاً
الابنة : ثلث التركة بعد خصم مؤخر الصداق 000 8 (ثمانية آلاف) جنيهاً

د ـ وهناك حالات ترث فيها المرأة ولا يرث نظيرها من الرجال :

1) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأخت شقيقة وأخت لأب وأخت لأم: فللزوج النصف ، والأخت الشقيقة النصف ، ولا شىء للأخت لأب وللأخ لأب.

2) إذا ماتت وتركت زوج ، وأب ، وأم ، وابنة ، وابنة ابن ، وابن الإبن: فللزوج الربع وسهمه 3 ، ولكل من الأب والأم السدس وسهم كل منهما 2 ، والابنة النصف وسهمها 6، ولا شىء لكل من ابنة الابن وابن الابن ، أى الابنة ورثت ستة أضعاف ابن الابن.

3) إذا ماتت وتركت زوجاً وأماً وأَخَوَان لأم وأخ شقيق أو أكثر.
للزوج النصف وسهمه ( 3 ) وللأم السدس وسهمها ( 1 ) وللإخوة لأم الثلث وسهم كل واحد منهما ( 1 ) وتصح من ( 6 ) ولا يبقى للأشقاء ما يرثونه. (عمر بن الخطاب)

4) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وجد وأم واخوة أشقاء واخوة لأم: فللزوج النصف ، وللجد السدس ، وللأم السدس ، وللاخوة الأشقاء الباقى ، ولا شىء لأخوة الأم.


ذ ـ وهناك حالات يرث فيها الرجل أكثر من المرأة سواء أقل أو أكثر من الضعف :

1) فلو مات الابن وترك أب وأم وأخوة وأخوات ، فترث الأم السدس ، ويرث الأب خمسة أسداس تعصيباً ويحجب الإخوة. فقد ورث الرجل هنا خمسة أضعاف المرأة.

2) إذا مات رجل وترك زوجة وأم وأب: فللزوجة الربع وسهمها 3 وللأم الثلث وسهمها 4 والأب يأخذ الباقى وسهمه 5. فلم يأخذ ضعف أياً منهما.

3) إذا ماتت امرأة وتركت زوج وأم وأب: فللزوج النصف وسهمه 3 ، وللأم ثلث الباقى وسهمها 1 والأب ثلثا الباقى وسهمه 2. فقد أخذ الزوج ثلاثة أضعاف الأم.

4) إذا مات رجل وترك ابناً وست بنات: فالإبن يأخذ الثلث والبنات الثلثين: وفى هذه الحالة سيكون الابن ثلاث أضعاف أى من البنات الستة. فإذا ترك 18000 ألف جنيهاً ، فسيأخذ الابن 6000 ، وكل بنت تأخذ 2000 جنيهاً. فيكون الأخ أخذ ثلاثة أضعاف أخته.

5) ماتت وتركت زوج وأم وأَخَوَان لأم وأخ شقيق أو أكثر: فالزوج يأخذ النصف وسهمه 9، والأم السدس وسهمها 3 ، والأُخوة الثلاثة الباقية الثلث ، وسهم لكل منهم. (على بن أبى طالب والمذهب المالكى والشافعى أخذوا به) فيكون الزوج أخذ ثلاثة أضعاف الأم.

فلو تركت 000 18 (ثمانية عشر ألف) جنيهاً ، لكان نصيب الزوج (تسعة آلاف) ، ونصيب الأم (ثلاثة آلاف) ، والثلث الباقى يقسَّم على الثلاث أخوة بالتساوى، لكل منهم (ألفين). وهنا تجد أن الزوج أخذ ثلاثة أضعاف الأم.

أى أن هناك أكثر من ثلاثين حالة تأخذ فيها المرأة مثل الرجل ، أو أكثر منه ، أو ترث هى ولا يرث نظيرها من الرجال ، فى مقابلة أربع حالات محددة ترث فيها المرأة نصف الرجل .

I will stop here, and wait your reply on this matter. I wish I could compare it to the common law when it comes to inheritance, but I seriously haven't got the enough background.

"but fairness my dear friend does not necessarily mean equality
Which book are YOU reading and can I have a copy please?"

What I am reading "MY DEAR FRIEND" is the holy quran, available in all bookshops near you, but since that’s greek to you.. how about simple example, child perceiving, is it fair that the man creates the child at the highest moment of pleasure and not have to worry about physical pain, whereas the woman has to go through 9 months of suffering and probably end up with some 16 hours in labor??

The only other examples I can think of right now come from the quran to be honest, I'll get back to u on this.

" If you have daughters would you like these laws to apply to them? What about your sisters if they are kicked out of their homes because their husband got horny and screwed the maid? What about your mother, aunts and nieces?"

I really like your passionate speech there, moved my heart, if you only went on for 2 more lines there I would've probably went on crying worse than a 12 year watching Titanic for the firs time.

Mahmood, laws are not derived according to what I think, what I allow or to what I believe should be right, not that I wouldn't like them to be set that way but they are not. I do not want my father to divorce my mother; does that mean that Islam should ban divorce? NO! I don’t want my father going around marrying another wife, does that mean that Islam should ban polygamy? NO! I can't stand the smell of Ketchup, does that mean that islam should ban ketchup from the local markets? HELL NO! Laws are put for the ultimate good of the entire community "MY DEAR FRIEND", regardless of what (I) think, and the way I see stuff.

"1. The "original" law for murder is? DEATH
2. The "original" law for a rapist is? And what about the victim? DEATH, nothing to the victim.
3. The "original" law for stealing a piece of bread is? What about stealing millions?

إذا سرق الرجل البالغ العاقل من الحرز ـ وهو المصون بقفل وصندوق أو نحو ذلك ـ ما قيمته ربع مثقال من الذهب الخالص ، وجب ـ بعد المرافعة عند الحاكم ، والثبوت بالاقرار مرتين ، أو البينة ـ أن تقطع أصابعه الأربع من يده اليمنى ، فإن عاد بعد الحد قطعت رجله اليسرى من وسط القدم ، فإن عاد ثالثاً خلد في السجن ، فإن سرق فيه قتل.
ولو تكررت السرقة قبل الحد كفى حد واحد ، والطفل والمجنون يعزران ، والسارق يغرم ما سرق مطلقاً ، ويكتفى في الغرامة الإقرار مرة ، وشهادة العدل الواحد مع اليمين .

" Mohammed, please name me these issues and list them, but keep in mind that they ALL should be written and thought of when thinking of your sisters or mother."

hmm.. Child perceiving problems? Sickness? Poor sexual drive? Are those enough?

Joker:
" With a coded law, where women can easily divorce someone like that and still get alimony, this man will be flat on his ass at the curb faster than he can say pre-nup. And guess what? Half of his income gets funnled to the family he snuck out from."

This is not a solution, you will end up having a sexually thirsty woman/man, a broken down family (where the kids will have to grow up without their father), and lifetime for misery for the guy. Doesn't work.

That’s all for now..

8:22 PM  
Blogger Abu Sinan said...

Wow, some great debate happening here. Lots to be said for both sides. I think, personally, whenever the clerics are left to solve these issues based on differing rulings or vague ideas that are not agreed upon, there will be injustice.

I am a practicing Muslim, but I certainly think that a defined set of laws, codified, needs to be set for EVERY country.

The way things are in the Middle East is just unacceptable. I have two stepchildren. They are aged 13 and 14. My wife divorced their father when the boy was 1 and the daughter was not yet born.

In the 13 years since she has been divorced neither him nor his family have provided anything for either of them. Not for healthcare, cloths, schooling, not a thing.

There is no recourse in my wife's country, Saudi Arabia, to change this. We have tried many avenues, Mahmood himself knows that I have been dealing with this issue for sometime. My first contact with Mahmood was to find out if he knew of resources to help in this issue. I am a step-father for these children, but I am more the biological father of these children than their real father, and I have the "Islamic laws" of Saudi Arabia to blame for this. I dont really mind, I need all of the ajure I can get for good deeds, but it is unfair for the children.

The sad fact remains that the best interests of children and women cannot be left to people such as this, whether they claim to represent Islam or not.

I say, as there has yet to be a government or body since the time of the Prophet(PBUH) himself that could fairly hand out "Islamic law" that it is high time written sets of laws be adopted in all of the countries in the Middle East that guarantee equality for men and women in all aspects.

Islamic law is nice and fine, but it just wont work in many places and many situations, especially with the people we have defining it for us. Until such a time as it can be done properly(probably never) it should be suspended. Tariq Ramadan has called for this suspension in regards to capital punishment, to me it needs to be extend to most areas of Islamic law.

There is a hadith that I love and it applies very much in this situation "for every three judges, two in hell."

As to plural marriages, I dont think there are many places in todays world where it is justified. In the Gulf it just seems to be a case of status, and often just plain old horny men.

I have heard it has made a come back in places like Chechnya and Bosnia, for obvious reasons. The wars there have so depleted the male population, that but for plural marriages, many women would not get married. Also, many families have been wiped out and men have taken more than one wife to help support the woman, often with multiple children already.

I think this is what the idea of plural marriages was all about. You'll find the Prophet(PBUH) did the same, he cemented alliances and married women who otherwise would have had no one.

8:23 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

thank you (Abu Arif, can i call you that )for your comment:)

(This is utter bullshit about "the man needs more dough to take care of his family" didn't you hear of working ladies "my friend?")


Even if women choose to work and participate in supporting the family as much as the husband, in Islam it is not compulsory for them to do so, it is the men responsibility to go out working and support the family including his working wife, it is compulsory for him. Women can choose not to work and set home and let the man get them everything they need (that is applicable in all societies) while men can not do that, they can not choose to set home. Plus, In Islam, it is the man who pays the money, not the woman. So Islam strike a balance, men with the above financial responsibility get compensated in inheritance, these are principles, I do agree that there are men who are not responsible for their families and yet receive the inheritance, if you want to stipulate a law you do not make it to fit all the abnormality. Please note that it does not mean that the law you are stipulating is not perfect or can not be followed perpetually, rather, it is with the assumption that abnormality is the exceptional and that is natural anyhow.

(Which book are YOU reading and can I have a copy please? What utter bull "my friend" look up both terms in any dictionary you like and then come back and talk. Fairness ALWAYS means EQUALITY and vice-versa.)

Fairness does not necessary mean equality; it might be in some cases while in others it might not. Mahmood, since we are talking in religion context, if some one wants to know the definition and explanation for fairness and equality, dictionary will not do him any good, it is only for language. In Islamic context fairness and just means (in religion and philosophy books) giving every one what he/she deserves. For example: if you have two kids, A might deserve more than B and being just and fair is to give A more, because he deserve more, you giving might be equal and might not. The same example extends to your employees, if one of them is doing the finest job and working so hard while the rest are normal, of course you will reward him more than the rest by bonus or remuneration, thus, you are being fair to them but not equal.


(Let me reiterate this point: If Islam is supposed to be so just, why does it differentiate between men and women so? Are we not both created by the same just God?)

With regard to witness, it is not because God treats men and women differently, it is because of the nature and psychology of women in general that they are drived more by their emotions and compassion. Contemporary books of psychology all confirm that men are more rational and less dependent on their emotions that women, again this in general, and as mentioned above, we should not depend on abnormality to come up with general rule.

8:23 PM  
Blogger Abu Sinan said...

Moodz,

Unless I am mistaken cannot the woman, in the Islamic marriage contract, ask for a sum of money upon any divorce and also ask for certain conditions in the way of money and support for any child conceived in this marriage? How is this different than a pre-nup?

I dont think it is, and I have known Muslim men who have stayed in awful marriages just because they couldnt or wouldnt pay the money he would have had to pay because of the marriage contract.

I think for most things in Islamic law there is a parallel instance in civil law, bar a few things which I suggest should be suspended anyway, ie capital punishment, ect.

As to inheiritance. I understand your ideas about dowry and supporting the family, but often the circumstances that these originally appied to are not there any more.

Women work and often HAVE to contribute to the family so they can survive. No longer can the woman always stay at home and contribute money at her discretion. Sometimes she MUST work and give the money. It is also said that any housework done by the wife is charity. So if she doesnt want to all men must get maids?

These things just dont apply to many situations today and cannot be bent or tweaked to make them apply. Any attempt to allpy Islamic law, literally, will fail in today's world.

8:33 PM  
Blogger The Joker said...

Emoodz, I really have a hard time comprehending how alimony is bad for the kids and the family, while polygamy is not a bad idea at all?! I think its the other way around. Polygamy, which certainly in most cases is a, legalized affair did ruin lots of families. While alimony is basically food and education. And thats the whole basis of the issue really.

10:50 PM  
Blogger Cancer said...

Hi all,
I'd like to say few words, this is the best Bahraini blog ever. Keep it up.
Mahmood, you seem to be so "liberal", I agree with you that Islam has not been able to address many of the challanges that we are facing today, however there are other 700,000 people who would just disagree with you, just because you are secular or liberal.

"What I suggest that the government do is issue the law and disregard their objections, and even then create a "civil family law" which is available for ANYONE to marry under and those marriages will be shoved down both the Shi'a and Sunna's scholars throats to be ratified as legitimate. Then those marriages will have a civilised set of laws that they will fall under."
I guess you are wrong about this, approving a set of law that the majority of people don't agree with will escalate the problem, and we may reach a situation like the one 1994-1999 "God forbid". Instead, I think constructive discussion should continue till we reach a compromise or who knows win-win solution! the problem is that the turbaned and the beards escalated the issue without the need to do so!

1:49 AM  
Blogger Cancer said...

By the way,where are the women?! I don't we heard a voice from them!

1:51 AM  
Anonymous ExCluSiVe said...

Guys I haven’t read the comments but I just want to share some thoughts with you:

-Divorce is a huge issue which needs codified laws, because Shar'ia Judges have the freedom to pick and choose as they please to apply any intellectually suitable faith مذهب without being well versed about the living backgrounds and reasons which led both- if I may call them- adversaries to file for divorce! I've seen it happen!
-Women and children are in undeniable agony because alimony has no known and set boundaries in our Islamic Shar'ia.

Reasons behind not having a codified Family law are clearly not convincing! For a Muslim country, we do have laws which contradict our official religion. Our laws without prejudice, are laws which are clearly influenced by the Egyptian legislative, and in my opinion we should codify our family law influenced once again by the said legislative. Trying to codify the law by gathering the turbaned dudes and a couple of other bamboozles won't lead to codification but would certainly lead to a dead end, don’t you think?

Brilliantly written ferret

Fatima

2:51 AM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

emoodz, ferret, thank you for the discussion and I wish you and your female relatives the best of what life has to offer and I sincerely hope that they especially do not get into a situation like divorce or any of the situations where the laws you support will have to be applied.

Once that happens (yes it will) please offer them your support and profusely apologise to them for your long held black and white views. Of course your apologies won't remove the suffering that the women and their children will experience, but hey, you've done your bit for the future by blindly supporting and following the past.

Fatima, they have been "discussing" this set of laws for over 25 years, what makes you think that they could hash it out any time soon?

9:29 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

(emoodz, ferret, thank you for the discussion and I wish you and your female relatives the best of what life has to offer and I sincerely hope that they especially do not get into a situation like divorce or any of the situations where the laws you support will have to be applied.)

The laws I support are the Islamic laws. Let me reiterate my position: if there are mistakes in application and weakness in other systems, which are responsible to implement these laws that does not mean I should reconsider the laws.

At last, let me ask you this question and I hope you get back to me on this: the laws stipulated in US in particular and the West in general are definitely not the laws that I support and wish to apply, so did those laws solve the problems and situation “ which you sincerely hope my female relatives do not go through” in their societies? Well, stats and reports of women divorce cases; humiliation, harassment, etc fails to confirm that. Please allow me to take you through these grim American stats:
· 1,000,000 children run away from home, mostly because of abusive treatment, including sexual abuse, from parents and other adults. Of the many sexually abused children among runaways, 83 percent come from white families.
· 2,000,000 to 4,000,00 women are battered. Domestic violence is the single largest cause of injury and second largest cause of death to U.S. women.

· 700,000 women are raped, one every 45 seconds
· 40,000,000 persons, or one of every four women and more than one of every ten men, are estimated to have been sexually molested as children, most often between the ages of 9 and 12, usually by close relatives or family acquaintances. Such abuse almost always extends into their early teens and is a part of their continual memory and not a product of memory retrieval in therapy.

What is applied there in US society, secular laws or Islamic laws to result in these grim stats? Any turbaned was there to stipulate those laws?

Which books I am reading? Not the holy book this time, it is: Dirty Truth, Michael Parenti, City Light Books ,1996.

10:31 AM  
Blogger The Joker said...

You know, ferret, 1 million run-away teens and 4 million battered wives are nice sound bites. But guess where these figures come from? Because these teens and women have a place to run to in the first place. There are protective entities. Ferret.. face it.. some humans are bad. We have to be prepared, as a society, to face that. I bet you don't have the slightest clue what are the stats on domestic violence in your own country, do you? Not only is it socially intolerable to mention it, the case can be easily dismissed in court. The only reason you have statistics to rely on is because there is a proper system that victims can fall back on to defend their rights from abusive parents/spouses.

11:39 AM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

I do agree with you that there might be worse than those here if we have proper agencies that count these cases. However, the purpose of illustrating those examples is not to make comparison of bad and good society or people, joker, yes you are right, I am sure there are crimes as those in stats here and in every Muslim countries but we lack information about them, what I wanted to say is that there are secular laws and resulted in those stats, here we have SOMEHOW Islamic laws and as you said we might have worse than those stats if full information is disclosed, then where is the problem and the cure-all? For me, the cure-all is:
1) ALL Islamic laws,
2) Proper judicial and legal systems to enforce those laws, AND
3) Proper application and adherence to those laws by people.

12:09 PM  
Anonymous chanad said...

Ferret: Maybe the cure-all is "all Islamic laws"... but the question that always remains is what exactly are "Islamic laws"??

Is it the Jaafari fiqh, or the Maliki fiqh or the Ibadi fiqh? Or do we emulate the laws of some of the modern "Islamic states"? Iran? Saudi? Taliban?

If you tell me that Law X and Law Y are the cure-all, then I can agree or disagree... but saying "Islamic Laws" means very little. The Quran and Prophetic Traditions can and have been interpreted in hundreds of different ways to suit our interests.

I hope you see what I'm getting at.

1:53 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

what I wanted to say is that there are secular laws and resulted in those stats

Ah, but those secular laws can actually be changed to the better if they are discovered that they actually don't work, can't they?

That's a major plus point don't you think?

But getting back to the issue: I don't care what laws there are in other countries, the west included, I care about what laws are written and adopted here, in Bahrain so let's just keep to that please.

As The Joker said, the stats you provide don't prove anything and are actually completely out of the discussion at hand, get back to the point:

1. Family Status Laws if and when codified will create a better court system and will provide for better judgements for the family in whatever matter being adjudged.

2. In the context of the Family Law being discussed now, there is clear indication from the proponents of the law that it would be based on Shari'a exclusively. I am completely against that, but at least it is a start and would alleviate some suffering from those affected by it.

Now I've got just 5 minutes to get to the demonstration this afternoon... guess which one I'll join!

later...

2:58 PM  
Anonymous ExCluSiVe said...

Mahmood, Under the hectic political circumstances our country is going through, this law will be published soon!!

4:16 PM  
Anonymous Mahmood Al-Yousif said...

Here's my post for this afternoon's demos if you're interested:

http://mahmood.tv/index.php/blog/2000

8:48 PM  
Anonymous Profundity Ferret said...

chanad
Thank you chanad for your comment.

Yes, I see what are you getting at..

(but the question that always remains is what exactly are "Islamic laws"??

Is it the Jaafari fiqh, or the Maliki fiqh or the Ibadi fiqh? Or do we emulate the laws of some of the modern "Islamic states"? Iran? Saudi? Taliban?)

jaafri, sunni, taliban they are all Muslim with their own interpretations. Those specialty are respected and appreciated as long as their under one umbrella, Islam. Now, if Islamic laws to be applied in any country with population of people who believes in different interpretations and ideology, those differences should be respected and applied to the followers of those interpretations, each in accordance to his belief. For instance, assume that we have two persons A and B A is Shia and B is Sunni, both have the same case related to, say, inheritance, then the law that should be applied to A is the Shia interpretation of the general Islamic Law of Inheritance and by same talking, Sunni interpretation should be applied to B case with regard to inheritance.

Now, how to conduct that?

The way to do that is to legislate a detailed law that take in considerations the specialty and uniqueness of interpretation of different schools of Muslim which should be applied for the followers of those particular interpretations. (Because currently there are not set of laws, each turbaned judges based on his understanding)

I am not with stipulating one version of a law that to be applied to all, to the contrary, specialty should be respected.

In sum, what I mean by my post and subsequent comments is having detailed family laws which MUST be Completely based on Islam and nothing but Islam, taking in consideration the specialty of all Muslim interpretations.

I hope I answered your question chanad

9:10 PM  
Blogger Um Haleema said...

Here's one woman that is offended by the idea that a woman's testimony should be equal half of a man's. People are "individuals" and there are some men that are weaker and more emotional than some women. There are many women that are more capable of leading than some men are. People should not be judged by the sex organs that they are born with. Why should a woman be automatically deemed worth less than a man even if he has the IQ and morals of a donkey and she is saintly and holds a doctorate? And what if she chooses to remain single and that "donkey" is her brother that is responsible for supporting her with his share of the family inheritance?

9:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

尖锐湿疣
排铅
尖锐湿疣
中国康网
成人用品
尖锐湿疣治疗
中国癌症网

肺癌
胃癌
肝癌
肾癌
食道癌
子宫颈癌
乳腺癌
卵巢癌
直肠癌
结肠癌
皮肤癌
甲状腺癌
胰腺癌
前列腺癌
膀胱癌
骨癌
鼻咽癌
脑瘤

癌症
乳腺癌
肺癌
胃癌
食管癌
肿瘤
直肠癌
结肠癌
肝癌
宫颈癌
脑瘤
甲状腺肿瘤
胆囊癌
胆管癌
前列腺癌
白血病
鼻咽癌
肾癌
恶性淋巴瘤
皮肤癌
喉癌
舌癌
胰腺癌
膀胱癌

健康网
癌症
抗癌中药
肿瘤
胶囊类
片剂类
丸剂类
口服液类
散剂冲剂
针剂类
外用药类


牛皮癣
白癜风
鱼鳞病
脂溢性皮炎
脂溢性脱发
斑秃脱发
湿疹
阴虱
带状疱疹
狐臭
青春痘
中国文秘网
皮肤病
皮肤病医药网
牛皮癣
脂溢性皮炎
斑秃
白癜风
鱼鳞病
脂溢性脱发
阴虱
生殖器疱疹
皮癣
湿疹
青春痘
螨虫

健康
播客天下
华东信息网
牛皮癣
白癜风
鱼鳞病
脂溢性皮炎
脂溢性脱发
斑秃脱发
湿疹
阴虱
带状疱疹
狐臭
青春痘

这里有名言警句 名言警句
这里是菜地 菜地有很多菜
他是兽人皇帝grubby 兽族皇帝grubbyorc,fighting!
想要美丽健康,去美丽健康网 美丽健康网

5:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keep this going please, great job!

my website ... tv guide Mobile

7:36 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I truly love your website.. Very nice colors & theme.
Did you create this site yourself? Please reply back as
I'm planning to create my own site and would like to learn where you got this from or just what the theme is named. Thank you!

My web-site :: cardsharing news

9:35 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home