Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Wakas

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 38
Women / Re: Divorce
« on: June 02, 2023, 02:53:33 AM »
1) for Khula or ransoming out of the marriage does wife need the husbands agreement? If she does then what happens when the husband forces her to stay when she doesn’t want to?

Using what I wrote above what is your response to this? i.e. what do you think the answer(s) could be.


Women / Re: Divorce
« on: June 01, 2023, 03:25:41 PM »
Are you referring to Traditional Islam or Quranic Islam?

I cannot help with the former, but for the latter please see my above post. Answers therein.

If, after reading the above, you still have questions then please state your question, one at a time, along with what you understand from the above, then I can better respond.

Women / Re: Divorce
« on: May 30, 2023, 11:53:17 PM »

You may find the following helpful:

....... it does give a guideline and mentions situations and conditions that should be considered before marriage:

Determining mutual attraction/compatibility [2:221, 2:235, 30:21, 33:52]
Ascertaining whether the potential partner is of similar beliefs/faith [2:221, 60:10]
Discussion of and agreeing to the level of dower and other terms (if any) [4:4, 4:24]
Understanding and mutual acceptance of marriage as a solemn/strong oath/contract [4:21, 2:232, 2:237, 24:33]
If male, capable of providing for the family/household [2:228, 2:233, 4:34, 65:6]
To have physically matured / post-puberty [4:6, 24:31, 24:58-59]
To have the marriage contract/oaths witnessed [2:235, 2:237, 2:282, 65:2]
If the marriage is unsuccessful, one should also be capable of undertaking divorce proceedings, e.g. separation period, arbitration, discussion of settlement etc [2:226-232, 2:241, 4:35, 4:128-130, 33:49, 65:1-6].

To understand the sequence of events, we must fully understand the divorce procedure according to The Quran:

'cooling-off' period for those who swear away from their wives sexually, limited to 4 months [2:226]*
after this 4 month 'cooling-off' period, the options are: revert to normal relations or divorce/talaq [2:227]
post-divorce interim/waiting period is 3 menstruation periods or 3 months, if pregnant it is until they deliver, if widowed it is 4 months and 10 days [2:228, 2:234, 65:4]
if no sex has taken place after marriage, then no interim period is required after divorce/talaq [33:49]. Compensation may be due however if dower was agreed upon [2:237]
during post-divorce interim period, wife remains in the same house, and is compensated by way of maintenance during this period in the same living standard as the husband, each according to their means [2:236, 2:241, 65:1, 65:6-7]**
divorce is automatically retracted if sex between the couple takes place during the interim period [inference from 2:226, 33:49, 65:1]***
if couple reconciles, then divorce/talaq may be retracted twice during interim-period. If divorced a third time it is final unless she marries another then they divorce, only then can original partners re-marry. If the couple fear they will not maintain God's bounds, then wife may give some dowry back to release herself [2:229-230]
if couple still wishes to follow through with the divorce/talaq after the end of the interim period and undergo final separation, then two witnesses are required to complete the process [65:2]
exceptions exist, in certain situations [60:10-11]
the onus is upon the person in the wrong to rectify the situation or initiate divorce/release, and it is an obligation upon the contract-breaking party to compensate the other [2:229, 2:237, 4:19, 4:128-129, 33:28, 60:10-11]

As a side note, the last point is also mentioned in traditional Islamic law and sources, see M.Asad's note on 2:229. This system would also protect the male if he were to marry a female who only did so for his money or the marital gift then she wished to end the marriage later, because since the contract-breaking party compensates the other partner, she would have to do so accordingly. Similarly, this would protect the female if she were to marry a male who only did so for lustful reasons then wished to end the marriage later, as he would then have to compensate her.

*Also possibly provides a time limit due to a practice of the time in which husbands did not have sex with their wives but also did not divorce them, see 58:1-4, 33:4; i.e. leaving them in a state between marriage and divorce. Similar to what is implied by 4:129.

**And the same goes for the lesser situation of 'cooling-off' period. Obviously, the wife would not be removed from the home for the lesser serious 'cooling-off' period then brought back just for the post-divorce interim period.

***Inference from 2:226 is that resumption of sexual relations is equated to reconciliation, thus no initiation of divorce. Hence, same proviso for post-divorce interim period, i.e. sex = reconciliation.

From the plural usage in the following verses it can be seen that the court/authority becomes involved post-divorce/talaq:
2:229 ("... and if you (plural) fear that the couple will not uphold God's limits...")
65:1 ("... and you (plural) keep count of the period...")
Which makes sense, because it is only after divorce/talaq that the authority would be needed to make things official and ensure The Quran's laws are being followed, e.g. record divorce date, keep count of the interim period, possible examination of marriage contract, mediate, determine compensation/maintenance, living arrangement and any settlement (if disputed).

In Quran, to my knowledge, there is no discussion of divorcing by man/woman for no reason. Before marriage a lot of additional stipulations could be put into the marriage contract if the couples agreed, assuming they do not violate specifics in Quran. For example the wife could clarify divorce rights etc.
Again, to my knowledge, there is no initiation of "talaq" (the classical term for "divorce") from the wife to the husband in Quran. It would perhaps be more fitting to say she can release herself by way of ransom/exchange (which usually means giving up a part or all of her dower). This would make sense with the principle that the contract-breaking party should compensate the other.

Also you can read up on 58:1-4 and 4:128 here for situation of no resolution / intransigence:

The above is my understanding.

Women / Re: Dress code based on verses 24:31 and 33:59
« on: May 21, 2023, 03:56:04 PM »

Those verses are covered here:

Misconception: Muslim women must fully cover up in Islam
Background: Some think that Muslim women must cover their whole body, including face when in public. Women's dress code in Islam is one of the most focused upon subjects not only in the Western media but also in Muslim countries, yet it remains one of the most distorted and misunderstood.

Firstly, according to The Quran, the most important rule of the dress code for both men and women is as follows:

O children of Adam, we have provided you with garments to cover your bodies, as well as to adorn you. But the best garment is the garment of piety/righteousness. These are some of God's signs, so that they may be mindful. [7:26]

The garment of righteousness/piety could either refer to choosing a garment that reflects this quality or enveloping oneself in righteous/pious conduct is best, or both.

The following verses tells women to guard their private parts (i.e. genitalia) and cover their chests:

Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their private parts, for that is purer for them. God is fully aware of what you do.
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent of it, and let them draw with their covers over their chests. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those committed to them by oath, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed. [24:30-31]

From the above verse it can be deduced that for the purposes of women's dress code two types of beauty are described:

1) What is apparent (this can be revealed in public)
2) What is hidden (this type must be covered in public, but could be revealed by a striking of feet or walk/stride which is revealing)

Such a striking of feet or walk could only reveal a limited number of parts of the body, e.g. the private parts, buttocks, thighs, breasts, hips, thus any part not revealed by such an action should not be considered part of hidden beauty and therefore part of apparent beauty. Of course, this means such things as face, hair, hands, feet etc would not clearly fall into the category of beauty that is meant to be hidden. Furthermore, the verse clearly brackets what beauty it is referring to by saying "...the child who has not yet understood the composition of women" implying it is relating to what is specific to a woman (i.e. what is different between man and woman) nothing else.
This understanding would also fit with The Quran's instruction on the body parts that are to be cleansed during daily ablution (hands, arms, face, head and feet), see 5:6, 4:43.

A headscarf (commonly called "hijab") is often worn by Muslim women, however this word is not used like this in The Quran. In fact, the word "hijab" is not even used to mean an item of clothing and simply means something which intervenes between two things, e.g. barrier, screen, seclusion. All verses where this word occurs are as follows: 7:46, 33:53, 38:32, 41:5, 42:51, 17:45, 19:17, 83:15. It should also be noted that believing men and women are free to eat in each other's company, whether family or friends [24:61], thus a veil covering the face (commonly called "niqab", or the full veil "burqa") would obviously be impractical. Again, such an item of clothing is nowhere to be found in The Quran.

Another common mistake regarding dress code is when the following situation-specific verse is applied to all situations:

And those who harm the believing men and the believing women, with no just reason, they have brought upon themselves a slander and a gross sin.
O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the woman of the believers that they shall lengthen (or draw near) over themselves their outer-garments. That is more likely they be recognized so not harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
If the hypocrites and those with disease in their hearts and those who spread lies in the city do not refrain*, then We will let you overpower them, then they will not be able to remain as your neighbours except for a short while. [33:58-60]
*proving harm is already occurring, and refers back to 33:58, which is before the modification in dress is mentioned.

The mistake is exposed when the practicalities of applying the above verses are considered. The verses deal with open enmity with significant repercussions for the perpetrators if this behaviour does not stop. The open enmity is direct to the person, hence the need for the women to modify their outer-garment in order to be recognised in public and not harmed. For the suggested solution in these verses to succeed four things must be in place:

1) The open enmity or harm must be present in the community first and direct to the women
2) The modification in outer-garment and the consequence for the perpetrator of not abiding by this identification code must either be made known to the community or this would have to be common knowledge amongst the community
3) The modification recommended would be enough to differentiate one group from another
4) The authority is in place to fight/expel those persisting in this behaviour

Clearly, this specific criteria has to be fulfilled for these verses to work, thus is not a universal rule. It is situation-specific, e.g. if a section of the community become hostile to believing women or women in general and the believers have some power in the land, then they can utilise this solution, effectively giving an ultimatum with no room for excuse for the perpetrators.

These verses are commonly interpreted to mean that Muslim women must lengthen (or draw near) their outer-garment whenever in public even in times of peace. However, this is easily refuted by considering that if this was the case and open enmity then appeared, the modification suggested in these verses would already exist, thus implementing the modification in these verses could not be done, thus rendering the solution described in these verses as void.
However, from these verses it can be deduced that wearing of an outer-garment by women when in public was the norm.

The following verse shows being clothed is the norm but makes it clear that flexibility is allowed in certain situations, as long as we are mindful of modesty. The context is etiquette within the household:

And the women who are past child bearing and who do not seek to get married have no sin upon them if they discard their garments*, provided they do not show off with their beauty. If they abstain, then it is better for them. God is Hearer, Knower. [24:60]
*Arabic word is "thiyab" and refers to ordinary clothes/gowns.

It should be noted that all examples of dress in The Quran of the righteous or believing men and women involve wearing garments, e.g. 18:31, 22:23, 24:58, 24:60, 35:33, 74:4, 76:21. Also, to provide clothing for others is considered a charitable or righteous act [4:5, 2:233, 5:89].

As can be seen, The Quran gives us a set of simple basic rules with flexible guidance for the rest, which can be applied to different situations/society/function. This flexibility is a mercy but has unfortunately been abused by various schools of thought and religious leaders who have issued their own additional rulings and consequently there is disagreement amongst them on other than the basic rules.

Additional notes for Arabic readers:
The word "khumur" is used in 24:31 and can be the plural of "khimaar" or "khimirr", and can mean any cover made of cloth or headcover, according to Classical Arabic dictionaries and Traditional Ahadith/Narrations (see Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 282). Please note the Arabic preposition "bi" meaning "with" in "bikhumurihinna", which means they are to cover their chests with their "khumur/covers/headcovers". The usage of preposition "bi" is different to the preposition "min" as used in 33:59 "min jalabeebihinna" which means to use a part of their "jilbab/outer-garment" in the modification suggested, i.e. not all of it has to be lowered or drawn near, just part of it. In 24:31 if God intended that part of it (e.g. headcover) stays on the head and part of it be used to cover the bosom, it would have been more appropriate to use "min khumurhinna". Furthermore, the word "yadribna" as used in 24:31 has no connotation of lengthening or lowering in any other occurrence, unlike "yudneena" in 33:59 which does, thus would have been more appropriate to use.
Even if "khumur" is taken to mean "headcovers" it should be noted that the order is to cover the chest, not the head - of course, one may cover their head if they wish.

Women / Re: Husband can beat ( not severe ) his wife
« on: February 19, 2023, 09:25:03 PM »
Thanks for your thoughtful work, brother Wakas. :)


The example of 58:1-4 seals the deal for me, so to speak.

"cite them" is by far the most cogent understanding as per Quran.

General Discussions / Re: Flogging Punishment And As A Deterrence.
« on: February 19, 2023, 09:15:06 PM »

Question: let's say it means lashes as punishment, witnessed by a group/community, what if the lashes were so severe that they tore the clothes of the person being lashes and thus exposed their body in a non-Quranic manner?

The point of my question: to my understanding public lashing is the punishment for a proven case, in a community governed by Quran-based authority BUT the lashes cannot be severe enough to tear clothing, so they would hurt but not extreme. Part of the goal seems to be public naming/shaming which is a deterrent in itself.


Interesting sidenote:

When lashes are given as punishment for proven adultery, The Quran states not to let pity/compassion prevent you from carrying out such a punishment [24:2], but it says no such thing for the alleged hand cutting-off verse, when many (all?) consider this punishment to be far worse. Please explain why this is.


Women / Re: Women's clothes and rape?
« on: February 19, 2023, 09:00:53 PM »

Re: 1)

You may find this useful:

It discusses the verse you mention.

Women / Re: Husband still has to pay all charges related to family?
« on: February 19, 2023, 08:41:01 PM »
peace Ayman, TS,

My Quranic understanding is the default role of the husband is as breadwinner/maintainer HOWEVER it can be modified depending on what the couple agree on prior to marriage and/or in the marriage contract. See here for references:

If she wants to work and there is no financial reason to, then she needs to obtain her husband's permission to do so.

Instead of saying "she needs to obtain her husband's permission" I would clarify to "it depends on what was mutually agreed upon prior to marriage and/or in the marriage contract". If either party wants to deviate from that contract then they must seek permission from the other.

Article has been updated with a small clarification/correction:

"the hajj are months well known so whoever specifies/obligates the hajj within them..." 2:197

i.e. it is the person that determines this. Similar to what I said about when to end it, see article.

Islamic Duties / Re: Hajj: Well known days and numbered days
« on: July 19, 2022, 03:51:18 PM »
I haven't studied in detail the "when" aspect. Here is a reasonable article that gives some good points:

I see little evidence for the traditional position with regards to timing/calendar, especially when considering this:

General Discussions / Re: Islamic calendar
« on: May 16, 2022, 07:26:51 PM »
I would say use whatever is more practicable wherever one is and what one has available to them.

Discussions / Re: Vaccines
« on: August 30, 2021, 11:45:20 PM »

I have researched this topic a lot, as I also have young children. Like most things there are pros/cons. Sometimes they vaccinate for conditions that there is a low risk of catching or sometimes it's not even present in your country, e.g. polio. However the chances of a significant/lasting side-effect of these immunisations is probably even lower. It is often claimed the quality of the vaccine research is excellent but once you look into it it is often not as good as it should be.
So you have to weigh up the benefits/risks for yourself. Fortunately there are things one can do to reduce risk of negative side-effects, e.g. have a healthy diet/lifestyle, space out the immunisations (e.g. only one on a given day, delay some till older), only select the ones which are most important, ensure targeted nutrition around the vaccination time e.g. Vit C, D, high antioxidant foods, drinking silica rich water (binds to heavy metals), and of course after doing your best put your trust in God and seek His protection.

Discussions / Imam Abu Hanifa's views on hadith
« on: July 24, 2021, 04:10:33 PM »
The following was taken from the book called "Hanafi principles of testing hadith" by Shaykh Atabek Shukurov. It deals with classical hanafi principles, not modern hanafi version which is significantly influenced by Shafi principles.

You can see some of his interviews here:

The purpose of this post is just to show what was apparently done in the past. It seems pretty obvious from Traditional Islamic and historical sources that the elevated status of hadith took a while to establish itself and became dominant post-Shafi.


Imam Abu Hanifa apparently had a much stricter criteria for ahadith/traditions, and made much more limited/cautious use of them in his rulings. Especially in comparison to later scholars and Imams of other madhabs e.g. Malik, Shafi, Hanbal.

In fact he rejected so many hadith that he was apparently accused in his lifetime of being a "hadith rejecter". He apparently clarified by saying he does not reject hadith but rejects incorrectly attributed hadith.

As such there was somewhat of a rivalry between him and muhadithin (scholars of hadith). For example, Bukhari (who came much later) famously does not take hadith from Abu Hanifa, or only does so indirectly.

His criteria for testing hadith, in brief:
1) does it go against Quran
2) does it go against established sunnah (precedent of prophet and companions)
3) if it is only one person narrating the hadith AND it affects everybody (i.e. a hadith that affects everybody should be much more well known than having one common narrator)
4) was the hadith ignored by the companions or following generation
5) does it go against the intellect
6) does it go against the senses/experience (empirical evidence)
7) if it relates to matters of theology (e.g. God and His attributes)
8] does it go against agreed upon principles of Islam

This is after having checked each narrator in the chain/isnad passes their narrator criteria (righteous, maturity, intellect, memory, Muslim, not known for innovation, acts upon their own narration etc).

Thought some might find this interesting.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 38