(11) Facebook

(11) Facebook:

Fauzia Wahab under attack on facebook 

What do you mean by Muslim Aurit (women)?  The morals, values, ethics, social inter-actions and rules of engagement between human beings always change with the change of objective realities, subject to the time and space. What we call life, is the name of change, that is why Ali Shariati, while writing on the Sociology of Islam, said:  “on account of his dualistic and contradictory nature, men, this dialectical phenomenon, is compelled to be always in motion. … How disgraceful, then, are all fixed standards. Who can ever fix a standard? Man is a ‘choice,’ a struggle, a constant becoming. He is an infinite migration within himself, from clay to God; he is a migrant within his own soul.” 

There fore we have to take things in proportion to the real change. Argentina is close to south-pool while Pakistan is in South Asia. The people at the time of Prophet even were unaware of Argentina that is why they called Morocco as Magrib (west). Till today Arabs called Morocco as Magrib.

On the point of Islamic norms, value and inter-actions, also a false perception prevailed because it was never so in its entire history. Further more we don’t have any valid evidence of Islamic traditions to gauge and regulate our social actions of today’s life. The traditions in the name of Prophet were compiled and edited after two hundred years which are, firstly contradictory in its own corpus and secondly the time lapse and the fault of memory can not be ignored while deducing the facts.

The first source of Islam which is Qur’an, do not meet the requirement of modern time. By and large it is scripture to the satisfaction of the people of faith. It don’t meet the empirical test, if subject to critical and scientific analysis. The fact of life is subject to the empirical test. All the decisions are based and subject to empirical observation and tests. To identify faith communities and their variable scriptures and believe systems, in today’s terms also subject to a scientific study through empirical test but doesn’t mean that their believe system is true. It is matter of believe and all faith communities be they Muslims or not believe their scripture but scripture don’t regulate their life for the simple reason that scriptures are text not systems. Could be ideas and claims, and, we all know the difference between reality, idea and claims.

Let me give you some more examples to prove my point in relation to change that is subject to time and space, are as follows:

1: Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi is of the opinion that “then man is entitled to full freedom in respect of his marriage. He can marry any woman, whether Muslim, Christian or Jew, and can keep a slave-girl.  But the woman is not wholly free in this regard.  She cannot marry a non-Muslim.”  He draw his reference from Qur’anic verse 60:10; “They are not lawful for the disbelievers, nor are the disbelievers lawful for them.” 

He further explained sexual relations in his words: “She cannot have sexual relations with her slave. The Qur’an has allowed man to have sexual relations with his slave-girl, but the woman has not been given any such permission.  During the time of Caliph Omar, a woman misinterpreted the verse, “whatever your right hands possess…,’ and has sexual relations with her slave when the caliph got the report, he put the case before the advisory council of the Companions. They all gave the unanimous verdict: “She misinterpreted the Book of Alla.”  Another woman asked Omar for permission to indulge in a similar act. He punished her severely and remarked: “Arabia is secure till such time that her women are secure.” (Kashf-al-Ghamma by Sh’erani). (Purdah and the status of woman in Islam by Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi P-193)

He mentioned slave girl. In fact it is slave girls, because there is no limit on slave-girls but only for wives to be 4 at one time. Who were the slave-girls? Captured in wars or purchased normally. If they got pregnant, the child would belong to the master and biological father entitle of half of inheritance compare to the son from normal wife, yet she would remain slave girl.

2: Prophet’s all children were from his first wife Khadeeja. He never married another woman during her life time or any other relationship. After her death, Prophet married but we have variable counts. Some are suggesting 9 others are 11 but only child who died as Infant was Ibrahim who was not belonging to any wife. The name of his mother was Maria Qurtiba. She was not the wife of the Prophet. Then what she was? Certainly she was slave girl.  Can we keep slave girls today and make them pregnant and yet they would be deprived of the status of a wife? It is not possible today.

People like Maududi, Qutub or Ibn Tamayya, were literalists of their time and they interpreted Islamic literature by using literalist’s tools. The time of Prophet was a different.  It was a slave society. There fore the ethics, morals, values, norms, laws, human-inter-actions, socializations and the concept of good and bad were subject and reflection of it’s time. Buying and selling human being was not considered bad at that time which is crime now. Freedom as fundamental and birth right is very recent achievement. There was no concept of human rights at that time. There was no question to band slavery once for all because the conditions of a slave society were not allowing it.  Certainly, Islam as a movement of it’s time had educated and persuaded society towards reforms by introducing new laws to treat slaves justly and had influenced changes for betterment and improvement according to their own time and space.  

The opinion of those who think  that the text of the scripture and corpus of traditions is applicable today as it was during the time of its inception which also reflect from the question raised on this thread and those who condemn Islam all together are wrong on the point that their approach is neither historically correct nor scientifically valid.  Islam was a great movement of social change but subject to it’s time and objective conditions.

The world has moved far-behind from the limits of traditions of a faith community or norms of a specific geographical proximity. Today the local, national and international morals, norms, values, traditions and laws are subject to an enormous change that is been dictated by human inter-actions and socialization at global level.  Kissing on hand means to respect women and considered to be a very respectful approach. Mostly people kiss hand to show an utmost respect to the subject lady.  To the best of my understanding people while want to pay respect to Queens or Princes do it by kissing on their hands. This is also true to the women of aristocracy. In the western world, kissing on chick is also to pay a respect and honour.  The lips are the only exclusive property for husband/wife or lovers.