Monday, September 17, 2018

Women get more share in Inheritance under Shari'a law:

Women get more share in Inheritance under Shari'a law:

If you view only one aspect of the bigger picture of the shariah, which is sometimed presented incorrectly, you will miss the wisdom that it holds as an integrated whole.

In Islamic law of inheritance, Women get less than men in only 4 situations, equal in 20 situations and more than men in 14 situations!

And remember that all the financial needs of women have to be borne by their male relatives at every stage of her life.
And if her male relatives do not support her, she can claim it through law.

If she doesn't have any male relatives to support, it's the responsibility of the Muslim society and the government to support her and her kids.

Apart from this, she gets Mehr during marriage, which is totally her's.

She also has right to own property or any wealth independently and she can do business if she wants. She can dispose of her wealth in any manner she likes.

Even if the husband is poor and his wife is rich, it's still the responsibility of the husband to take care of her and their children's needs and he cannot force her to support or share in family expenses.

And all these economic rights were given to women by Islam since more than 1440 years.

Monday, June 4, 2018

why there was no need for an 'enlightenment' in Islamic world:

On Islamic philosophy, intellectual freedom in the medieval Muslim world,  the continuing philosophical tradition in the Muslim world and why there was no need for an 'enlightenment' in Islamic world:
(Extracts from an interview with Professor Peter Adamson, who is a professor of late ancient and Arabic philosophy at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. His primary areas of interest are late ancient philosophy and Arabic philosophy, and is the author of books including The Cambridge Companion to Arabic Philosophy and Philosophy in the Islamic World. He is also the host of the weekly podcast 'History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps'.)

   "In general, there was very little intellectual persecution in the Islamic world.
There was a lot more openness and freedom for intellectual debate in the Islamic world than in the Latin medieval world because there was no Church. There was no one who had authority to come along and say, ‘you can’t say that.’ Although there are some exceptions to this rule, generally speaking, it doesn’t really make much sense to think that the way that books were written in the Islamic world had to do with avoiding persecution, because there was so little persecution to be avoided.

When you say there was no Church, weren’t there religious leaders fulfilling that role?

There were religious scholars but they were independent of political institutions. They were the people you would consult if you wanted to know the answer to a question and they were involved in the law. But they couldn’t necessarily have ordered soldiers to come down and arrest you and execute you.

We’ve talked about philosophers in the early medieval period. There was this amazing flourishing of ideas in the Islamic world. Was that something that got closed off, or is it a continuing tradition?

It’s a continuing tradition. That’s why I wanted to mention the Rāzī because he, in a way, stands at the beginning of that later tradition, as a conduit through which people respond to earlier figures like Avicenna. Avicenna really became the main figure for subsequent generations. If you move ahead to philosophy in the Safavid period, there was a really important figure called Mulla Ṣadrā. He was contemporary with early modern thinkers, dying in 1640.

You have to remember that the Arabic to Latin Translation Movement happened around 1200, and Fakhruddin Al-Razi lived all the way out in Central Asia and Persia. So, he lived too late for his works to be translated into Latin. This contributes to the illusion and myth that philosophy in the Islamic world ended with Averroes, because he was the last figure whose works were translated into Latin. But really what happened is that, especially in the eastern part of the Islamic Empire, there was a continuing production of philosophical and philosophically-informed theological works which went on century after century, all the way up to the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of the 19th century.

Even in otherwise very good introductions to the history of philosophy, you’ll see this idea that philosophy in the Islamic world dies after Averroes, that it all becomes mysticism or whatever. This is complete nonsense. Just in terms of the number of texts, there were many more philosophical works after that period than before. But they’re very badly studied—and the main reason is that they had no influence on European culture. Specialists in the field have only started looking at them recently.

(Answering Why the Islamic world didn’t have an 'Enlightenment'?):

People often think that there was this break or collapse of Islamic philosophy. In a way, the contrast with Europe is not so much that it collapsed but that it didn’t. You didn’t have an Enlightenment where they made a big show of setting aside everything that came from the scholastic traditions, and starting from scratch (not that they really did this in Europe either, but they pretended to).

In the Islamic tradition they kept working on what were often very technical areas of Avicennan philosophy, trying to negotiate between Avicennan philosophy and Islam. They were innovative; they made progress in logic, metaphysics, psychology, and so on. But they didn’t have a real restart as happened in modern Europe. The result of that is that when the colonialist period happened, you had a confrontation between a very longstanding intellectual culture—that came from the period we’ve been talking about—and a new wave of ideas from Europe. They clashed and then more intellectual developments grew out of that, like, for example, radical Islam and Salafism which have been inspired, in part, by European philosophy. Whether they would admit that or not is another matter.


Sunday, June 3, 2018

Sahih Hadith against Leaving from the taraweeh before the Imam finishes

Leaving from the taraweeh before the Imam finishes:

It is noticed that some of the people during taraweeh prayers leave after imam finishes 8 rakats, thinking that sunnah is only 8 rakats or due to other reasons.
This is against saheeh hadith (given below) and also against the fatwas of Shaikhs Bin Baaz, Jibreen, Munajjid etc.

However, If someone wants to pray only 8 rakats then they should go to a Masjid where taraweeh of only 8 rakats is prayed.

It is proven from the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he encouraged praying Taraweeh in congregation and he said:
“Whoever stays with the imam until he leaves, (the reward of) qiyaam al-layl will be written for him.”

Narrated and classed as saheeh by al-Tirmidhi (806); also narrated by Abu Dawood (1375), al-Nasaa’i (1605), and Ibn Maajah (1327). Also classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi. 

This reward will not be attained by anyone but the one who prays with the imam until he has finished all the prayers.

*The one who only prays some of the prayer and then leaves is not entitled to the reward promised in this hadeeth, which is that of spending a night in prayer (qiyaam layl). 

Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: 

If a person prays in Ramadan with someone who prays twenty-three rak‘ahs, but he only prays eleven and does not complete the prayer with the imam, is this action of his in accordance with the Sunnah? 

*He replied: The Sunnah is to complete the prayer with the imam, even if he prays twenty-three rak ‘ahs, because the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever stands (in prayer) with the imam until he finishes, Allah will record for him (the reward of) spending a night in prayer.” According to another report: “… The rest of that night.” 

It is better for one who is praying behind an imam to stay with him until he finishes, whether he prays eleven rak‘ahs or thirteen or twenty three or whatever. That is preferable, to follow the imam until he finishes.
End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 11/325 

Shaykh Ibn Jibreen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

Praying qiyaam in Ramadan is attained by praying part of the night, such as half of it or one third of it, whether that is by praying eleven rak‘ahs or twenty-three. Qiyaam is attained by praying behind the neighbourhood imam until he finishes, even if he finishes within one hour. 

Taken from:
https://islamqa .info/en/153247

Apart from loosing the rewards of qiyaam layl the brothers who leave the rows of the Masjid after 8 rakats become a cause of unnecessary disturbance to the congregation and a fitna for the other people with a weak determination and poor knowledge of the Deen, causing them to leave as well considering that it's okay to leave when one wants instead of forcing one's nafs to complete the taraweeh!

So if someone thinks that taraweeh is only 8 rakaats, then let him go to Masjid where only 8 rakaats are offered by the imam.
May Allah guide us all.