Tony Cisse <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Dear Tony,
Thanks for the fact that you got my point.But the other fact is that non of us
is driving an anti Islamic propaganda for some of those involved are
themselves Muslims , some of your points are well out of contents,and this is
not interesting.In such a way the discussion will be without any direction
,sorry to say but this is not honest.When you did agree that there is the need
to take heed to what we are saying ,and that is, given an interpretation of
Islam with the eyes of today, should have concluded the whole discussion.
Secondly you are taking Kabirs points out of contents.What Kabir is trying to
say,as I notice it,is that the condition on the ground are concrete,they are
political and social,religion will not be able to solve these problems because
they are collective issue and religion is private.When Malcom X said that it
was time for them to keep their religion at home,because they were not
oppressed because of the religion they belong to but because they were blacks
and in that case and since they (Black People) belong to different religions
it is better for them not to be divided on religious lines.This is very clear
Tony. our conditions are different with that of those
people who were fighting Jihad,this is another time,those events are history
and do not have anything to do with the problems we are faced with,the only
thing we can do with history is to learn from it,the life of those who fought
Jihad cannot define our destiny.No one is denying the fact that
religion,whether this is Islam or Christianity,had one time or another had
influence on the life and development of one society or the other.This is an
ABC of history.
You might read again that posting and understand the contents.The reading
seems very liberal but this is not the case.Tony the posting gives the man
the right to decide what is "reasonable",it is not made a collective
responsibility.What is the "Custom" of relationship between a man and woman in
a semi feudal society like the Gambia?
You pointed out the case of Salman Rushdie were the media happened to get some
people to short their mouths even though they were against Fatwa.This again
has no relevance to the discussion,again the discussion is not for or against
Islam,anybody who reads your last postings will see it at such and this is
unfair to those Muslims who are supporting the point we are raising.This is
how the polarisation you are talking about comes about.But to clear one
pricinple question here.If those people who are against Fatwa short their
mouths,then it becomes a victory for the mass media in its day to day struggle
to control the human mind.I am of a free mind,my stand point in that case
was(as it was for many muslims,if you did follow the discussion very well)
that Salman Rushdie should know better that he was out to provoke millions of
believers but that Barbaric leaders like Ayatola,who have driven millions of
his his own muslim country men into exile and dead have no moral or religious
claim to the life of Salman Rushdie,if you Tony kept silent or find your selve
supporting Ayatolas Fatwa because of the media propaganda then you are doing
the very job that the media is asking of you.Because these are the front page
stoff that sells and thus the polirisation between people who have important
things in common to fight for,a better society !
For Freedom
Saiks
For Freedom
Saiks
Jaajef Saiks,
The point you make about "new religious leaders who should give religion a
better interpretation with the eyes of today" is the point of my original
posting on this matter.
How to interpret Modou's original posting on this matter? Lets ignore the
title of the posting for a moment, which I agree could be seen as provocative,
but what is the essence of what was really being said? I might be missing
something but the way I read it seems to be different from some of the
negative responses to Modou Mbye. Indeed, by my reading, the original posting
does not actually imply that the woman should be "in the matchbox of the
household" or indeed should "take people back to the stone age". My posting
was an attempt to explore the idea that despite the title, the essence of
Modou Mbye's posting was more enlightened than might at first have been
assumed (or indeed has been assumed in this debate). Indeed Modou Mbye, in his
response to me did not disagree with this.
I think we have to be very careful when discussing religion. Religion is a
matter of faith which people hold to differing degrees. Yes I agree that no
one would wish to see an Afganistan scenario developing in the Gambia, and
that there are possibly forces, both in Senegal and Gambia that might wish to
see this. However there are also many Muslims who do not neccessarily agree
with the Taliban interpretation of Islam. To attack the religion per se
because one disagrees whith aspects of it, or the way that it is interpreted
is, in my opinion, both as biased as what you may be attacking, but also
counter-productive, in that it drives people with different interpretations to
defend what they might otherwise of been more critical of. In short it brings
about the polarisation of the society, with all the negative potential that
might bring.
An example:
The Salman Rushdie affair in the UK. Muslim opinion in the UK was divided in
reaction to his book "Satanic Verses". Whilst many condemed the book, or how
it was published, a few took up Khomeni's view that the death penalty should
be imposed on him. The media seized on this few and presented the whole Muslim
community as a bunch of raving lunatics just wandering around looking for an
opportunity to Kill Rushdie. The racist National Front used the book to taunt
Asian communities. This in turn meant that even Muslims who diagreed with
Khomeni's fatwa were forced into a position of silence, not wishing to be seen
as allying themselves to the media or the racists.
Is it not more important then too actually recognise progressive and positive
aspects of religion, to see beyond stereotypes and assumptions, and to forge
unity around areas of agreement, without of course silencing dissent?
Other examples can be shown of where women's organisations used Islam to show
the un-Islamic nature of FGM, or in the Pakistanti community in the UK where
there are similar moves to combat forced marriage.
Amadou Kabir says: "If you and Jabang can teach me ways and means of finding
solutions to Africa's struggle for basic, decent, respectable human living
condition, I shall be a keen student of yours". Well there are examples in
history where, whether you are a Muslim or not, it has to be recognised the
progressive role the religion has played in that historical context:
The role Islam had in developing the great West African empires (Mali, Bornu
etc), The struggle against corrupt feudalism in West Africa in the time of the
jihads, the struggle against colonialsim, Samory Toure, Amadou Bamba, etc.
etc. are all examples.
Today examples and lessons can be draw from the functioning of, as one
example, the Mouride Brotherhood in the development process of Senegal
(without reliance on foreign aid). There was even a very interesting recent
posting from Jabou on "Riba" which has important lessons and examples which
are of relevant for today's struggle for development in the face of the
stranglehold of aid/debt.
In conclusion I would say, let none of us be dogmatic or intellectually
blinkered. We should be able to learn from the positives in all faiths and
philosophies, we should look into the positives of each other's ideas and
encourage that rather than highlighting the negative. All progress and
development demands the maximum and widest unity, and in my opinion that is
what we should be striving for.
Yeenduleen ak jaama
Tony
>>> saiks samateh <[log in to unmask]> 5/July/1999 05:31pm >>>
Dear Kabir,
Your last posting was just too great.The religious hypocrisy that is been
advocated by some of our friends will never help,this would not only divide us
but will take us back to the stone ages when ever they have the power to
decide.We know what is happening in Afghanistan,in Sudan etc.In Iran it is a
crime to even have a Parabola antenna for this is against Islam.The place of
the woman is in the match box of household.
Young people like Mye Jabang should have been the new religious leaders who
should give religion a better interpretation with the eyes of today.But it
seems that their religious knowledge is basically reading the scripts without
understanding the meaning and under which circumstances it was said and
pouring it out of their brains and mouths like robots.It took Malcom X great
pain and suffering before understanding that he need to understand religion
with the eyes of his generation.Islamic fundamentalism will never triumphant
in our dear country.
For Freedom
Saiks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jaajef Saiks,
This is an interesting point, and a relevant one, although I am not sure that
I agree with your interpretation of Modou Mbye's posting. When Modou quotes
Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah, Abu Ishaaq al-Jawzjaani
and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah as, saying " that it is the woman's duty to
serve her husband
within the bounds of what is reasonable and as other women who are like her
serve husbands who are like him", the question must then be put as to what is
the measure of "reasonableness" and who are her peers (i.e. women like her),
by which her behaviour is measured?
I make no claim to being a scholar of Islam, and can therefore only
interpret/understand this from my own point of view and experience. I would
read this as in fact saying that what is "reasonable" and "customary among
people like her and her husband" is inextricable bound up with what the actual
realities of their situation are. Reasonableness, as far as it can ever be
defined is really only what is appropriate in any given situation, and
therefore it's definition can change, as can customs " according to
circumstances, time and place". Following this, using your example of a woman
going out to work whilst the husband is unemployed, what would be reasonable?
and what would be "customary" amongst partners (and their peers) in similar
circumstances? I beleive that under these conditions it could well be
"reasonable" that, for example the husband occupies himself with cooking and
washing, and that it would be seen as quite unreasonable for the woman to go
to work AND do all the domestic work. Indeed "custom" about what a woman's and
man's role is within the home has demonstratably globally changed, and is
still changing according to "circumstances, time and place".
This posting can indeed be read as a warning, and education, to those husband
who choose to misinterpret (or through unawareness) of religion as an excuse
to mistreat and oppress their wives. In the past others used the name of the
religion to justify not allowing their daughters to go to school, or in some
societies to justify forced arranged marrigaes, against the will of one or
both of the concerned.
I beleive that it is important to recognise the implications of what has been
written here. Indeed in the conclusion of the posting, it is shown that the
interpretation of the relevant hadeeth, is that either:
serving the husband and taking care of the house by the woman is VOLUNTARY
or
that even if it is interpreted as a duty, the husband should treat it as
voluntary
This I beleive constitutes a challenge to all men to examine their behaviour.
I wonder how many men, Muslims, non-Muslims, Aethists, Christians or even
so-called pro-femminist "new men" really accept this IN PRACTICE, (even though
they might "in theory"). After all even Karl Marx left his wife to struggle to
look after and feed the children whilst he spent his days at the British
Library reading room, and Che GUEVARA left the mother of his children to
support and bring them up one her own whilst he was involved in the Liberation
struggle.
I think that we should not allow our own beliefs, prejudices, and indeed
use/interpretation of language, to obscure our vision of the real essence of
meaning.
No hard feeling to anyone, these are just my own views.
Yeenduleen ak jaama
Tony
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
saiks samateh <[log in to unmask]> 1/July/1999 01:44pm >>>
Momodou Jabang <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Modou Mbye,
I think you are just trying to provoke once again,and I would have love to
know why you think this article is relevant.Is it that you are trying to tell
that it is not wrong for my wife to be my servant,doing the washing,cooking
etc.If this is your hidden intention then sorry you did not make it.
I can see that you are trying to make a point that the comstom that was should
be the departing point for such a relationship.I dont know who is your
wife,but let me put it this way;The day you return back to the Gambia and find
out that there is no longer a job for you and that your wife is at work,she
has a secured jobb.Would you wait until your wife come back home to do the
cooking and washing,whiles you chose to go the mosque or any where else just
to return back home and be serve a meal ?Is this the type of human
relationship that our generation should be preaching about ?
You must wake up to understand that we are leaving in another generation that
demands another form of human relationship and not the enslavement of the
women.Hope this message gets through.
For Freedom
Saiks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Asalaamu alaikum G-l,
Alhamdulillah wasalaatou wasalaamu ala Nabiyyina Muhammad. Someone asked
Skeickh Munajjid
Question:
Is it the wife's duty to do all the housework, must the
husband help her or not? Or is it possible, that her work is
just a favour to the husband and the family and she will be
rewarded for it, as if she gave sadaqa?
Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.
The more correct view in this matter is that stated by a number of
scholars, such as Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah, Abu Ishaaq al-Jawzjaani
and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on
them), who said that it is the womanÆs duty to serve her husband
within the bounds of what is reasonable and as other women who are
like her serve husbands who are like him. She also has to take care of
the house, doing things like cooking and so on, in accordance with
what is customary among people like her and her husband. This
differs according to circumstances, time and place, hence Ibn
Taymiyah said: ôThis varies according to circumstances. What the
Bedouin wife has to do is not the same as what the urban wife has to
do.ö
The evidence for this more correct opinion is:
1.the Hadeeth of al-Bukhaari:
Imaam al-Bukhaari narrated in his Saheeh that Faatimah (may
Allaah be pleased with her), the daughter of the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) asked him for a
servant. He said, ôShall I not tell you of something that is better
for you than that? When you go to sleep, say æSubhaan-Allaah
(Glory be to Allaah)Æ thirty three times, æAl-Hamdu Lillaah
(praise be to Allaah)Æ thirty three times, and æAllaahu akbar
(Allaah is Most Great)Æ thirty four times.ö (Saheeh al-Bukhaari bi
Sharh al-æAsqallaani, part 9/506).
Al-Tabari said, in his commentary on this hadeeth: we may
understand from this hadeeth that every woman who is able to
take care of her house by making bread, grinding flour and so
on, should do so. It is not the duty of the husband if it is the
custom for women like her to do this themselves.
What we learn from the hadeeth is that when Faatimah (may
Allaah be pleased with her) asked her father (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) for a servant, he did not
command her husband to find her a servant or hire someone to
do these tasks, or to do these tasks himself. If it were æAliÆs duty
to do these things, the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) would have commanded him to do them.
2.The hadeeth of AsmaÆ bint Abi Bakr
Imaam al-Bukhaari (may Allaah have mercy on him) reported in
his Saheeh that AsmaÆ bint Abi Bakr (may Allaah be pleased
with her) said: ôI got married to al-Zubayr, and he had no wealth
on earth and no slaves, nothing except a camel for bringing water
and his horse. I used to feed his horse and bring water, and I
used to sew patches on the bucket. I made dough but I was not
good at baking bread, so my (female) neighbours among the
Ansaar used to bake bread for me, and they were sincere
women. I used to bring date pits from al-ZubayrÆs land that the
Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) had given to him, carrying them on my head. This land was
two-thirds of a farsakh away. One day I came, carrying the date
pits on my head, and I met the Messenger of Allaah (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who had a group of the
Ansaar with him. He called me and made his camel kneel down,
for me to ride behind him, but I felt too shy to go with the men,
and I remembered al-Zubayr and his jealousy, for he was the
most jealous of people. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) realized that I felt shy, so he
moved on. I came to al-Zubayr and told him, æI met the
Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) when I was carrying date pits on my head, and he had a
group of his companions with him. He made his camel kneel
down for me to ride with him, but I remembered your jealousy.Æ
He said, æBy Allaah, it bothers me more that you have to carry
the date pits than that you should ride with him.Æö AsmaÆ said:
ôAfter that, Abu Bakr sent me a servant to take care of the
horse, and it was as if I had been liberated from slavery.ö
(Reported by al-Bukhaari, Fath, 9/319).
In the commentary on the hadeeth of AsmaÆ, it says: from this
incident we may understand that it is the womanÆs duty to take
care of everything that her husband needs her to take care of.
This was the opinion of Abu Thawr. Other fuqahaÆ suggested
that AsmaÆ did this voluntarily and that she was not obliged to do
it.
Ibn Hajar al-æAsqallaani said: ôIt seems that this incident û
AsmaÆ carrying the date pitss to help her husband û and other
similar incidents were the matter of necessity, namely that her
husband al-Zubayr and other Muslim men were preoccupied
with jihaad and other things that the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had commanded
them to do, and they did not have time to take care of domestic
matters themselves, and could not afford to hire servants to do
that for them, and there was no one else who could do that apart
from their womenfolk. So the women used to take care of the
home and whoever lived in it, so that the men could devote their
time to supporting Islam.ö
Then he said (may Allaah have mercy on him): ôWhat is more
likely is that the matter had to do with the customs in that land,
for customs may vary in this regard.ö
It seems that what Ibn Hajar said is close to the view of those
who say that the wife has to take care of her husband and the
home in accordance with the dictates of local custom.
Ibn al-Qayyim said, concerning the story of AsmaÆ: ôWhen the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) saw
AsmaÆ with the date pits on her head, and her husband
al-Zubayr was with her, he did not tell him that she did not have
to serve him, or that this was unfair to her. He approved of her
serving him and of all the women among the Sahaabah helping
their husbands. This is a matter concerning which there is no
doubt.ö
3.The hadeeth of Jaabir
The Shaykh of the Muhadditheen, Imaam al-Bukhaari (may
Allaah have mercy on him) reported in his Saheeh that Jaabir ibn
æAbd-Allaah said: ôMy father died and left seven daughters, or
nine daughters. I married a woman who had been previously
married, and the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) said to me, æDid you get married, O
Jaabir?Æ I said, æYes.Æ He asked, æA virgin or a
previously-married woman?Æ I said, æA previously-married
woman.Æ He said, æWhy not a young woman so you could play
and joke with one another?Æ I said, æ æAbd-Allaah [the father of
Jaabir] has died and left behind daughters, and I would not like
to bring them someone who is like them, so I got married to a
woman who can take care of them.Æ He said, æMay Allaah bless
youÆ or æFair enough.Æö (Saheeh al-Bukhaari bi Sharh al-æAsqallaani,
vol.9/513).
The evidence derived from the hadeeth of Jaabir is that
al-Bukhaari introduced this hadeeth under the heading, ôBaab
æawn al-marÆah zawjahaa fi waladih (Chapter: a woman helping
her husband with his children)ö.
Imaam Ibn Hajar al-æAsqallaani said, commenting on this
introduction by al-Bukhaari: ôIt seems that al-Bukhaari derived
the idea that a woman should take care of her husbandÆs
children from the fact that the wife of Jaabir took care of his
sisters; if she should take care of his sisters then it is even more
befitting that she should take of his children.ö (Saheeh al-Bukhaari
bi Sharh al-æAsqallaani, vol.9/513).
We can say that the wife should take care of her husband, as
this is more befitting than her taking care of his sisters or his
daughters from another wife.
We may also understand from this hadeeth that what was
customary at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) was that women did not only
take care of their husbands, they also took care of those who
were dependent on their husbands and lived in their houses.
The evidence that this understanding is correct is the fact that
the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him) did not tell Jaabir off for his reason for marrying a
previously-married woman, which was that she could take care
of his sisters. This indicates that the custom among the Muslims
at that time dictated that the wife should take care of those who
were under her husbandÆs care, which means that the wife
should serve her husband in those matters that are dictated by
local custom, because the husbandÆs right to be served by his
wife comes before that of his sisters.
4.æUrf (custom)
General contracts û including marriage contracts û should be governed
by the customs that are known among the people, and the custom is
that the wife should serve her husband and also take care of matters in
the home. In some societies, the custom is that the wife should take
care of more than the regular domestic matters.
Imaam al-Qurtubi said, concerning the matter of the wife serving her
husband and taking care of the home: ôThis has to do with æUrf,
which is one of the bases of shareeÆah. The women of the Bedouin
and the desert-dwellers serve their husbands, even looking for fresh
water and taking care of the animalsàö
What happens nowadays is that the wife û usually û serves her
husband and takes care of different matters within the home. There
may be a servant to help her with that if her husband can afford it. If
the husband knows that the majority of scholars say that it is not
obligatory for the wife to serve her husband and take care of the
house, I say that one of the benefits of this may be that he will not go
to extremes and demand too much of his wife in this regard, and that
he will not give her a hard time if she falls short, because what she is
doing is not a duty according to the majority of fuqahaÆ. However,
even it is a duty according to some of them û and this is what we
think is more correct û the fact that there is such a difference of
opinion means that the husband has to look at what she is doing as
something voluntary rather than obligatory, or something in which the
scholars differ as to whether it is obligatory, so he should be gentle
with her if he sees that she is falling short in this regard, and he should
encourage her and help her to do it.
(al-Mufassal fi Ahkaam al-MarÆah by æAbd al-Kareem Zaydaan, vol.7/305).
May Allah increase our knowledge of His deen. Allahumma salli wasallim ala
Nabiyyina Muhammad. Wasalaam.
Modou Mbye
_
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
