Death of Sarah/Restoration of Qetura

Jews believe that the lives of the Prophets are a foreshadowing of our own (ma'aseh avot siman l'vanim, as discussed by Ramban and others). What do the lives of the patriarchs tell us about the birth of Islam? In fact they tell us a great deal; and we can learn from them that we, as Jews, should not shun or fear the growth of Islam, but should welcome and embrace it as the natural extension of history.

First, what was the story of the Patriarchs? (Please note that I will be citing exclusively Jewish sources, to appeal to a Jewish audience). Abraham took two wives, as we know: Hagar (later called Qetura: Bereshit Rabbah 61:4, Rashi, etc) and Sarah. As we know, both women were princesses. We know that Abraham sent Hagar away at the demand of Sarah, but continued to visit her in the desert. A midrash (Arabic equivalent: hadith) about these visits is as follows:

Ishmael married and had four children and he prospered and had flocks and herds and tents according to the merits of Abraham his father. Some time after his father sent him away - perhaps three years – Abraham said to Sarah, “I will go and see my son Ishmael; I yearn to see him, for I have not seen him in a long time.” Sarah agreed, on one condition: that Abraham not dismount from his camel [so that he would not resume relations with Hagar, to whom he was still married]. Abraham went and he reached the place where Ishmael lived. There, he met Ishmael's wife. He greeted her and asked her, “Where is Ishmael?”

She answered, “Off, hunting game.”

Still mounted on the camel Abraham said, “My daughter, give me a little water, that I may drink, for I am weary from the journey; and a little bread.” Ishmael’s wife answered, “No water, no bread.” The Midrash says that all this time while she was talking with Abraham, she also was beating her children in the tent, cursing them and cursing Ishmael. So Abraham said, “When your husband returns tell him, ‘A very old man from the land of Canaan came here to seek you. I did not ask him who he was, and seeing you were not here he spoke to me and said, ‘When Ishmael your husband returns tell him, Put away this tent pin, which you have placed here, and put another tent pin in its place.’" And thereupon Abraham returned home. Ishmael finally returned to his tent. Hearing this message from his wife, he knew the visitor was his father and that the "tent pin" referred to his wife. He immediately divorced her and married another.

Another three years passed and Abraham said, “I will go see Ishmael, my son, because I have not seen him for a long time.” He made the same agreement with Sarah and he went off on his camel again. He met the new wife; and some say her name was Fatima. This one invited him in and offered him food and drink. He could not dismount, because of his promise to Sarah; so the woman brought him water and bread. Abraham told her, “Tell your husband, ‘A very old man from the land of Canaan came here and asked for you and I brought him food and water, and he ate and drank and his heart was glad.’ And tell him, ‘Your tent-pin is very good. Do not put it away from the tent.’” And Abraham went on his way and returned to Sarah.

Ishmael returned again and Fatima repeats all this to him. And here the Midrash says, “Ishmael realized that his father still loved him.” Even though Ishmael had not seen Abraham, he knew his father was periodically checking in on him; that he was concerned with his welfare; that he had not forsaken him.

The immense love of Abraham for Ishmael is evident in this narative; as is Ishmael's obedience to Abraham, even while they were separated. But during this time, the Rabbis tell us that Hagar's heart was not faithful to God while in the desert, and that she complained against Him: "Yesterday thou saidest: 'I will multiply thy seed exceedingly' [Gen. xvi. 10]; and now my son is dying of thirst" (although it is well worth noting that Hagar remained faithful throughout this period to Abraham). This time of Ishmael in the desert is the time of b'nei Yishma'el before Mohammad. Most had relapsed back into idolatry; idols filled the Kabah and Mecca.

Returning to the narative of Abraham, when did the restoration of Ishmael and Qetura occur? In Parshat Chayei Sarah, we read וַיֹּסֶף אַבְרָהָם וַיִּקַּח אִשָּׁה, וּשְׁמָהּ קְטוּרָה. And Abraham took another wife, and her name was Qetura, because her deeds had become like Qeturot, incense (Midrash Rabbah). Ishmael and Qetura then lived with Abraham until his death (as per Bereshit 25:9). And when was the death of Sarah, but after the akidah? Now, therefore, the akidah was the destruction of the Temple, for there has been no greater loss to our people; and the death of Sarah was the loss of the semchiha in the fourth or fifth centuries C.E. And it was only after this that Mohammad, peace and blessings be upon him, was sent to the world. The proper response of b'nei Israel is to accept the return of their brother and to receive him again into the family, as it was in the beginning: וַיִּקְבְּרוּ אֹתוֹ יִצְחָק וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל, בָּנָיו, אֶל-מְעָרַת, הַמַּכְפֵּלָה And when these two live in peace, a new era will dawn.

וְהָיָה יְהוָה לְמֶלֶךְ, עַל-כָּל-הָאָרֶץ; בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, יִהְיֶה יְהוָה אֶחָד--וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד.

The Lord will be king over all the earth; in that day will God be One, and His Name One.

Homosexuality and Islam

Homosexuality and Islam

Assalamu aliekum wa rahmatullah wa barakhatu. There is much confusion on the topic of homosexuality and Islam and insha’Allah I wish to help break some of the misconceptions people hold. As I explained in my article "Women in Iraq", the so-called “Islamic” maltreatment of women in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan is entirely the result of the U.S. military occupation of those countries, and is not the result of their Islamic heritage. Contrary to popular belief, traditional Islam does not ostracize homosexuals any more than it maltreats women. Instead, both groups have a long history of high standing in traditional Muslim societies, as this paper will clarify.

Theological Support

The first question that must be answered, before discussing the history of why so many believe that Islam is opposed to homosexuality, is what does Islam really say about the issue? There is in fact no word for homosexuality in the Qur’an. Other words used are:

Fahisha (7:80, 27:54) Lewdness, indecency, gross.

Khabaidh (21:74) Improper

Sayyi’aat (11:78) Evil

(Imaan, Quran FAQ).

Many people believe that the sin of Lot (Lut)’s people was homosexuality; however, this is not at all clear and the sin is equally likely to be rape/violence against another. Nowhere is it clarified that a relationship between a loving homosexual couple is wrong. Also, lesbianism is never dealt with in the Qur’an.

Furthermore, there are those who claim the Islamic punishment for homosexuality is death. This requires closer examination because of the great stakes involved. First, today there are no true Muslim courts anywhere in the world and no countries that truly follow Shariah law. Therefore no Muslim anywhere in the world is justified in applying the death sentence to anyone; to do so is outside the bounds of Shariah: there is no room for vigilantes and honor killings within Islamic jurisprudence. Second, there are only three sins for which a Muslim can be executed: Murder, treason (not necessarily apostasy: this refers to one who goes out and causes harm to the Muslim community; interestingly, as I will prove, this can be said of many who support the execution of homosexuals), and Fasad fil-ardh: spreading mischief in the land. The third is most open to interpretation, but applies to those whose actions endanger the community as a whole. The question then becomes, does homosexuality threaten the community as a whole? It does not seem to.

But then a third consideration must be taken into account. Islam never punishes the mentally ill “until they are cured”: individuals cannot be held responsible for crimes they commit that are outside their realm of reasonable control, no matter how serious the crimes. For example, if a woman developed post-partum depression and killed her children (a crime which takes 200 lives per year in the U.S. alone), Islam would not execute her because she was not reasonably able to control her actions because of her insanity. Although she committed a terrible crime--and no one is denying this--to punish her is un-Islamic. I believe the same is true for homosexuality because scientifically, the causes of homosexuality and mental illnesses--such as post-partum depression--are the same. Both homosexuality and mental illness are caused by a genetic predisposition that is either active or inactive, depending more on genes than on environment. There has been much scientific research that indicates that homosexuals are born, not made; although some choose to live hetero-typical lifestyles due to social pressures, innate feelings of attraction towards the same sex is inborn and cannot be changed with modern medicine. Furthermore, other studies have shown that heterosexuals who carry the gay gene have greater reproductive success than heterosexuals that do not.

I do not deny that there are many homosexuals who wish to change their orientation; in fact, I fully recognize that there are many and I do support their right to do so. However, there are no modern methods which can make their dream a reality. Groups such as NARTH, Exodus International, and Jonah have an average success rate of >15% and a much higher suicide rate. I cannot in good conscience suggest that someone engage in an activity that will more likely result in their deaths than their cure; nor do I believe any good Muslim could do so. If a cancer treatment had an effectiveness of >15% and a mortality of, say, 30%, the FDA would not approve it, and doctors would not recommend it. If and when a safe, reliable method of altering sexual orientation is discovered, I believe the option should be given to homosexuals; and I believe many would take it willingly.

Historical Support

It is one thing for a single person to support something; it is quite another for a society to support it. Now that I have explained my views, do they have any historical backing? In fact they do. In 1858, the Ottoman Empire--the last Islamic caliphate--decriminalized homosexuality. In Muslim Spain, gay poets created a great deal of literature and lived in relative comfort. Although Spain did not decriminalize homosexuality, it did not enforce punishment. Islam punishes sins committed in the open; a conviction of a crime such as adultery requires several witnesses, not mere speculation or jealousy--and generally, one does not bring witnesses to something so private. Similarly, most homosexual acts occur in private, not on public display, and therefore are not prosecuted by Islamic law.

The Regress

There is an oft-repeated myth that while other religions were able to secularize their mainstreams, Islam never accomplished this. In fact, the opposite is true. While Christendom was in its Dark Ages, the Muslim world was a thriving center for knowledge, liberalism and free thought. While Christendom was punishing heretics for believing the sun was not the center of the universe, Muslims were postulating the existence of the atom. While the church burned suspected witches and heretics at the stake, Muslims practiced “covivienca”, coexistence with other faiths. So how did Islam regress? The answer is actually Christendom.

It was not until the last several years that a right-wing movement has come to power in the Muslim world. It was given leadership, not be the support of its people, but by American dollars. Hillary Clinton bravely admitted during an interview with reporters that it was the American government that created, funded, and trained the Taliban. Saddam Hussein is another example of a politician who was held in power, not by his people’s support, but by American funds that gave him weapons, technology, and information he used to control his people. Other farther-right dictators the U.S. has supported over the oppositions of their people and in spite of their civil rights abuses include King Abdullah of Saudi, King Abdullah II of Jordan, Karimov of Uzbekistan, and Berdimuhammedov of Turkmenistan. Exactly as I demonstrated in my “Women in Iraq” article, today these countries follow not traditional Islam, but America’s ideas about Islam. America has created an enemy, given his weapons, money, information, and training, and has used this enemy as an excuse to wage war on Muslims around the world. No Muslim can, in good conscience, support this American version of Islam. To do so is not only to turn your back on centuries of Islamic history and tradition: it is to support the wholesale slaughter of brothers and sisters in Islam around the world both by Americans and by their puppet governments. This is by far much more un-Islamic than to support the rights of gays to marry. To support this American Islam is a great evil: it is treason; it is murder; it is sin.

Looking Ahead

No society can maintain extremist right-wing ideology for very long. Policies that oppress women and minority populations are unsustainable because they reduce the population, increase poverty and fear, and increase civil unrest. As we are currently seeing in the Middle East, “secularism,” or a more moderate approach to life, triumphs over extremism. If Islam is to survive--and it will--it must return to its roots and become more moderate. This is not an un-Islamic approach; if anything, it follows traditional Islam more closely than right-wing extremism does.

Long haitus, eh?

So I took a really long haitus from posting, mostly due to lack of things to say. Anyway, I just wanted to say hi. :)

Of Creeds and Canons--For "Nazarenes"

Of Creeds
Everyone has a creed. Dictionary definition of creed:
Creed: any system, doctrine, or formula of religious belief, as of a denomination.

Your personal creed may not reflect the creed of any other denomination or religious group, but you yourself have a creed.
Now, do you or do you not hold to these twelve points:
1. I believe in God, the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth.
2. I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
3. He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary.
4. He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.
5. He descended into hell. On the third day he rose again.
6. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
7. He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
8. I believe in the Holy Spirit,
9. the holy catholic (NOT CATHOLIC AS IN ROMAN CATHOLIC!!! Definition of catholic: "universal in extent; involving all; of interest to all.") Church, the communion of saints,
10. the forgiveness of sins,
11. the resurrection of the body,
12. and life everlasting.


If you hold these twelve points, you hold the Apostle's Creed. If you do not, you do NOT hold the Apostle's Creed. It's a matter of saying you do or do not hold twelve simple statements of faith. Do you or do you not hold these twelve points true? If you do not hold them ALL true, which ones do you disagree with?

Of Canons
If you accept religious texts, you accept a canon of some sort. You may determine your own canon if you wish, but if you accept the canons of others (standard canons), I expect you to follow those who gave you those canons in other ways as well. If you create your own canon, I expect your theology to be based largely on the books in that canon. That is why I want to know which books you consider canonical. Do you accept the canon of the Council of Trent? the Samaritan Canon? the Masoretic Text? Do you accept as canonical other books which are not accepted in the standard canons, such as 1 & 2 Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, the Gospels of Barnabas or Thomas or Mary, the Didache, The Letter of Clement, The Book of Jasher, the Gospel of the Nazarenes, Gospel of the Ebionites, Gospel of the Hebrews, or the HIGHLY interesting Shepherd of Hermas.

YOUR CANON AND YOUR CREED DETERMINE YOUR BELIEF

You have a canon and creed and you must clearly define them, or I shall continue to call you a Christian, as you seem to follow standard Christian creeds and canons.

Women in Iraq

Abstract: The American government has claimed that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s government in Iraq has given women freedoms that they did not have prior to the beginning of the 2003 war. Independent journalists in Iraq have stated that not only is this a lie, it is exactly opposite of the truth. Many independent sources have confirmed that the US led invasion has cause great suffering and oppression to the Iraqi women. Further, the US backed government in Iraq has enacted un-Islamic law that mirrors American perception of Islamic law, but has no basis in true Islamic jurisprudence.

At the Republican National Convention in 2004, President George W. Bush stated that because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, "young women across the Middle East will hear the message that their day of equality and justice is coming." The implication of this statement is that women in the Iraq were oppressed prior to the U.S.-led invasions. President Bush and his staff made such insinuations frequently. In reality, women in Iraq had more rights before the U.S.-led invasion than anywhere else in the Middle East (Suri, Saddam Better for Women).
As a result of this constant misrepresentation of the facts on the ground, as well as the gross failure of much of the Western media to report the facts as they are, many Americans have a distorted view of the life of women in Iraq prior to the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. Numerous independent reports have shown that most women highly preferred Saddam Hussein’s “barbaric” regime to current conditions, and that they are substantially more oppressed now than ever before in Iraqi history. Even in Afghanistan, women say that their lives are getting progressively worse since the U.S. invasion (Motevalli, First Afghan Woman Mayor Says Women's Rights Worsened).
One of the areas of life where women’s rights have devolved is in the area of education. Most Americans will agree that an educated woman is an empowered woman. Iraq’s constitution, created by the Baath party, guaranteed women and men equal access to education. Six years after Saddam Hussein took power, there was a 75% literacy rate among women. U.S. sanctions in the 1990s forced the Iraqi government to reduce their education budget. By the year 2000, only 25% of Iraqi women were literate (Al-Azzawi, Deterioration of Iraqi Women's Rights and Living Conditions Under Occupation). Today, women are almost entirely unable to go to school. Nora Hamaid, 30, told reporters, “I completed my studies before the [American] invaders arrived because there was good security and I could freely go to university.” Now she is afraid to send her children to school, because the abduction and murder of women and children is so common: “I mean, every day, from when they depart to when they return from school, for fear of abductions.” (Jamail, Women Miss Sadam)
Women also had the ability to pursue careers of their own choosing. They had many rights and benefits provided them by law. Women holding government jobs received one year paid maternity leave. That time has been cut in half (Jamail, Women Miss Saddam). A government employee who asked to be called “Iman” (Faith) told reporters: “I am an employee, and everyday go to my work place, and the biggest challenge for me and all the suffering Iraqis is [that] the roads are closed and you feel you are a person without rights, without respect. To what extent has this improved my security? We have better salaries now, but how can women live with no security? How can we enjoy our rights if there is no safe place to go, for rest and recreation and living?”
But for her complaints, Iman is one of the lucky ones. In “Brutalized For Western Profit” (Nousratpour), the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq says: “Women have all but disappeared from public life for fear of being raped, killed, kidnapped or trafficked to foreign countries." Before the U.S. led invasion, women were able to roam the streets fearlessly. Today, only 10% of Iraqi women have regular salaried jobs. Ironically, inability to leave the house for fear of rape has driven tens of thousands of women into such dire poverty that they are forced into prostitution (Nousratpour, Brutalized for Western Profit).
Before the invasion, women were able to leave the house dressed however they willed. (RWOR, What the U.S. Occupation Has Meant for Iraqi Women). They had the freedom to choose their own ways of dress, just like western women. If they chose to wear hijab (veil), they did; if they did not wish to do so, no one compelled them to do so. Today, tailors have been ordered to only make certain types of clothing (Ibid.). Women are afraid to leave their houses dressed in ways that the local government condemns.
Not only has the life of women outside the house become unbearable, the life of women within their own houses have been increasingly threatened since the invasion. In Fallujah alone, more than seventy women have been killed just for opening the doors of their homes when men knocked. (Ibid.) Women are trapped: if they person knocking is a soldier and they do not answer, the door will be broken down and they will be shot; but if they do open the door, the person may be a thug who will shoot them for this “crime.” This never happened before the invasion.
The married life of women has also deteriorated. Without the ability to hold down jobs, poverty-stricken women are forced to marry in the hopes that a husband can provide for them. The marriage age of women is getting lower because younger and younger girls need husbands to provide for them (Jamail, Women Miss Saddam). Saddam Hussein’s government made polygamy practically impossible, but the current government is enabling it. Even in relatively progressive Kurdistan, polygamy is being touted by the new government (Nousratpour, Brutalized for Western Profit).
Under Saddam Hussein, women had the right to divorce their husbands, had equal consideration in the custody of children, and even had the ability to receive child support (al Azzawi, Deterioration of Women’s Rights). The current government only allows men to divorce women, and automatically gives children of divorced women to the husband. Women were protected against domestic violence in marriage (Ramdas, U.S. Invasion Makes Life Worse for Women of Iraq). Today this right is also gone, and gruesome and despicable “honor killings” are on the rise.
Perhaps the next issue that comes to the reader’s mind is, “Perhaps Islamic law, the official basis for the new law, is the problem.” Then we must ask, “Does Islam support the way that women are being treated in Iraq today?” The answer is a resounding “No.” Islam has always been, and remains, ahead of its time in the equal and fair treatment of women.
To understand my next points, we must begin with a basic understanding of basic Islamic law. Islamic scholars are divided into groups called “madhabs”. Each madhab has a distinct way of deriving law. The two basic sources of Islamic law are the Qur’an and the hadith (anecdotal stories from the life and teachings of Muhammad). Shi’a also add logic. Shi’ite courts traditionally seek logical cases endings more than Sunni courts. Sunni courts, on the other hand, traditionally rely more on legal precedent and the consensus of Islamic scholars, especially the early scholars.
In Islamic law, women and men are both ordered to seek knowledge and education. Sahih Bukhari (the most respected collection of hadith) says: "Seeking knowledge is mandatory for every Muslim". Muslim women have, from the earliest times, had equal education to men. Aisha bint Abu Bakr, who married Muhammad after the death of his first wife Khadija, became one of the most important “authors” (narrators) and teachers of Islamic law. Men came from afar and sat at her feet to learn. Before her marriage, she had overseen her father’s travels, packing his provision for many weeks’ travel into the harsh Arabian desert.
Women have had jobs in Islamic history. Islamic law guarantees women and men equal wages, a right American women do not enjoy to this day. Also, a Muslim woman is not required to share her income with her husband. He is required to provide for her provision, but if she does not wish to give him money from her earnings, there is no fault in her. During the Middle Ages, most of the wealth owned by Muslims was owned by women. Women inherited money from their fathers and husbands, or earned it, and used this money to affect many aspects of daily life, including the building of schools and mosques.
Islam does not compel women to veil themselves against their will. There is no set penalty for women who do not wear hijab under Islamic law. The only years a woman is strongly recommended to wear hijab are the years she menstruates. Before puberty and after menopause, it is purely optional. Also, a woman does not only need to wear hijab when she is at home, or with those who are close relatives of hers.
It is also useful at this juncture to mention that Islam is not the only major religion that orders women to wear the veil. Both Judaism and Christianity mandate the complete covering of women’s hair. In the Mishne Torah, Sefer Qedusha, in Hilkhoth Isurei Bi'ah 21:17 one can read the Rambam’s strict order that all women of marriage age must cover their hair, whether they are married or unmarried. In the Christian scriptures, Paul says, “For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.” (1 Cor. 11:6).
The killing of women within their own homes, simply for the crime of opening the door, is deplorable and without any precedent in Islamic law. Even in wartime, the killing of women and children is strictly forbidden unless the woman is actively engaged in combat. Non-combatant women are never to be killed.
Islamic law, though it allows polygamy, makes actually keeping multiple wives practically impossible. The man must be financial capable of fully supporting each wife and all of her children, something very few men can do today. Also, receiving the permission of the first wife to add a second wife to the family is strongly recommended.
Women in Islamic law have the right to divorce their husband in court. As the following well-known and accepted hadith shows, the mother is considered three times as important as the father, giving her preference in case of divorce except in cases when she abandons the children:
Bahz bin Hakim, on his father’s authority, said that his grandfather told him that he had asked Allah’s Messenger to whom he should show kindness and that the Prophet had replied: “Your mother.” He asked who came next and he replied: “Your mother.” He asked who came next and he replied for the third time: “Your mother.” He again asked who came next and he replied: “Your father, then your relatives in order of relationship” (Abu Dawud, 5120).
Islam, before any other culture, directly outlawed the killing of newborn daughters—still a common practice in China and parts of Hindu India. Kindness to daughters is one of the ways to be assured of Paradise in the hereafter according to Islam. There is no greater sin in Islam than the murder of one’s own daughter.
Women have always held a high place of honor in Islamic society. The first person to accept Muhammad as a prophet was a woman, as was the first Muslim casualty of war. Women served positions in government; Ash-Shefaa bint Abd’Allah al-Adawiyyah served as minister of finance during the first Caliphate. Umm Hani, the cousin of Muhammad, gave pardons to prisoners of war, and her pardons were accepted by Muhammad as valid and those she declared free were freed. Women received the right to vote and to pledge their allegiance to a leader during the time of Muhammad himself, and women were consulted in the nominations of the Caliphs, whereas American women did not receive the right to vote until 1917.
A woman can be a judge in an Islamic court, a position they did not hold in American courts until the 1870. Women have been heads of state in four of the five most populated Muslim-majority countries, as well as many other Muslim-majority countries, but have not yet reached this level in the United States.
By now, it should be clear to the honest reader that Islam does not and has not ever oppressed women. Rather, the oppression of women occurring today in Iraq is the direct result of the American occupation and puppet government. Iraqi women were not oppressed under Saddam Hussein as much as they are today under American rule.

Works Cited
Al-Azzawi, Souad N. "Deterioration of Iraqi Women's Rights and Living Conditions Under Occupation." Deterioration of Iraqi Women's Rights and Living Conditions Under Occupation. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Jamail, Dahr, and Abdu Rahman. "Iraq: Women's Rights in Danger." Al Jazeera English. 20 Mar. 2010. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Jamail, Dahr. "Women Miss Sadam." Dahr Jamail's Mideast Dispatches. 12 Mar. 2010. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Motevalli, Golnar. "First Afghan Woman Mayor Says Women's Rights Worsened." Reuters. 15 Jan. 2009. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Ramdas, Kavita. "U.S. Invasion Makes Life Worse for Women of Iraq." SeattlePI. 2 Jan. 2007. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Suri, Sanjay. "IRAQ: Saddam Better for Women." Inter Press Service. 29 Mar. 2006. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
"What the U.S. Occupation Has Meant for Iraqi Women." Revolution 38 (12 Mar. 2006). Rwor.org. Web. 8 Apr. 2010. .
Nousratpour, Louise. "Brutalized for Western Profit." Equality In Iraq. Organisation for Women's Freedom in Iraq, 10 Feb. 2010. Web. 10 Apr. 2010. .

Status, Rights, and Responsibilities of Women in Islam

It seems that I write one of these most every Saturday in response to the questions of the week; I hope y'all enjoy reading them. Question of the week is: Does Islam oppress women?

Equality of Women

Men and women are equals in Islam. Both men and women are entrusted with rights and responsibilities that are in accordance with their physical differences and abilities. Although responsibilities are different by gender, rewards and punishments in the hereafter are identical. (As a sidenote, this is why I reject the "70 virgins" hadith, in addition to the fact that it was written about 200 years after the death of Muhammad saws, and its chain of narration is weak. Rather, I believe that the "spouses" they will be with in paradise [3:15] are the righteous partners they had in their lives on earth. Returning to my topic...) The Quran says [16:97] "Anyone who works righteousness, male or female, while believing, we will surely grant them a happy life in this world, and we will surely pay them their full recompense (on the Day of Judgment) for their righteous works." And: [33:35] "The submitting men, the submitting women, the believing men, the believing women, the obedient men, the obedient women, the truthful men, the truthful women, the steadfast men, the steadfast women, the reverent men, the reverent women, the charitable men, the charitable women, the fasting men, the fasting women, the chaste men, the chaste women, and the men who commemorate GOD frequently, and the commemorating women; GOD has prepared for them forgiveness and a great recompense." The Quran gives the only distinction between people: their piety. [49:13] "O people, we created you from the same male and female, and rendered you distinct peoples and tribes, that you may recognize one another. The best among you in the sight of GOD is the most righteous. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant." This message is repeated in the last sermon of the Prophet Muhammad (saws).
Rights of Women

Islam gave women rights and freedoms long before the European world, and continues to be ahead of its time in terms of equality of men and women. It is puzzling when many Westerners say that Islam oppresses women. Here, in life order, are some of the protections afforded women in Islam before they were offered in other cultures.
At Birth
In much of the east, it has long been common to favor having male children to continue the family name. Female infants were often killed at birth, and are now frequently aborted in China and India. Islam forbids female infanticide: And when the girl [who was] buried alive is asked for what sin she was killed and when the pages are made public and when the sky is stripped away and when Hellfire is set ablaze and when Paradise is brought near, a soul will [then] know what it has brought [with it]." [81:8-14] Those responsible for burying a girl child will be brought to task for their sins.
In Childhood
The Prophet (pbuh) said: "Whosoever has a daughter and he does not bury her alive, does not insult her, and does not favor his son over her, God will enter him into Paradise." Islam supports the equal education of girls and boys: "Seeking knowledge is mandatory for every Muslim". (AlBayhaqi). Muslim here includes both males and females.
In Marriage
Islam does not allow parents to force their children into marriage against their will. Ibn Abbas reported that a girl came to the Prophet Muhammad, and she reported that her father had forced her to marry without her consent. The Messenger of God gave her the choice between accepting the marriage or invalidating it. (Ibn Hanbal No. 2469). The girl said: "Actually I accept this marriage but I wanted to let women know that parents have no right (to force a husband on them)" (Ibn Maja, No. 1873).
Islam also forbids consummation of marriage before puberty, and should a woman be married before puberty she may complain to the courts and have her marriage invalidated. Islam prohibits violence against wives; the Prophet himself never raised a hand against his wives. The Prophet said: "The most perfect believers are the best in conduct and best of you are those who are best to their wives." (Ibn-Hanbal, No. 7396)
As a Mother
The Prophet many times relates the high status of the mother in Islam: A man once came to Muhammad and asked, "O Messenger of God, who among the people is the most worthy of my good company?" The Prophet (saws) said, Your mother. The man said, "Then who else?": The Prophet said, "Your mother." The man asked, "Then who else?" Only then did the Prophet say, "Your father." (Al-Bukhari and Muslim). The Prophet Muhammad also said, "Paradise is at the feet of mothers." (In Al'Nisa'I, Ibn Majah, Ahmad).
In Muslim History
Women have been given equal esteem in the carrying on of Islamic traditions since the beginning of the Prophet's ministry. Khadija (ra) was the first person to accept Muhammad as the Messenger of God, and Aisha was among the greatest narrators of hadiths. Muhammad's daughter Fatima was the only child of his to outlive him, and was influential in the history of Islam. An entire surah of the Qur'an is named after a woman (Surah Maryam). Hagar is famous in Islamic history for her piety, even when she was thrown out of her home.
In Secular History
Muslim women have been very influential not only in Muslim history but in secular history as well. Samira Musa and Khawla el-Krai (sp) were female Muslim scientists. Al-Ador Alkareemah bin Salah is an example of a Muslim Queen.
Responsibilities of Women

Women in Islam have responsibilities, just as men do. Women are not prohibited from having their own jobs, but are encouraged to first ensure the Islamic upbringing of their children. Women are responsible to follow the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad just as men are. Women are responsible to pray, to fast, and to do what is right, just as men. The only major difference is that a woman is not required to perform prayer or fast when she is having her regular cycle.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB_lLb2JsvI

Peace Thru Dialogue Pt 1

This is the unedited text version of the video format.

Assalamu aliekum wa rahmatullah wa barakhatu. May the peace, mercy and blessings of God be on you.
Insha'Allah this is the first video in my "Peace through Dialogue" series where I will discuss with Jewish youtube user omedyashar various issues and points of misunderstanding between Jews and Muslims in the hopes of increasing mutual understanding and clearing some misconceptions both sides may hold about the other. I want to personally thank Yusuf for agreeing to this dialogue. We have always maintained a public attitude of respect for each other, which was one of the reasons I chose to ask you to participate in this dialogue. The other major reason was that I highly respect your knowledge of Judaism, and hope you will continue to share it with the Muslim community, which already tends to respect you.
Without further distraction, I'd like to jump to this video's topic. One of the most critical components of both Judaism and Islam is belief in One God. In Islam, one of the simplest explanations of the nature of God is found in Surah Ikhlas, which was quoted in part earlier in this video. The opening verse is "Qul hu Allah hu ahhad"--Say He is Allah, the One. This is a declaration of the absolute unity of God, and the denial that He has any partners or opposites, as Ahhad also means "unique". The next verse says, "Allahu sommad." This verse means that God is independent of everything, and that everything depends on Him. The third verse states "Lam yalid wa lam yoolad": He does not beget, nor was He begotten. Verse four reads "Walam yakud lahu kuffuwan ahhadu": There is none like unto Him.
We also believe that God cannot be described using terms indicating time and space, as He is outside both. We believe God cannot be visualized or bound to a physical form. We believe Him to be transcendental. We believe God is eternal, without beginning or end. We believe He had no "need" to create the universe, and that it added nothing to Him because He existed with His attributes before time.
We do not believe God has a gender. In the Arabic language, the word Allah cannot be pluralized (as gods or elohim), nor can it be feminized (as goddess.
One of the things we as Muslims believe that God does not do is repent. We believe repentance denotes a need for forgiveness, and also demonstrates that there is one to receive the repentance. The Torah appears to say in several places that God repents.
Genesis 6:6 reads, "And it repented the LORD that He had made man on the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart." Does this verse imply that the creation of man was a sin? Also, why did it grieve God? To what extent are the actions of man beyond the control of God in Judaism?
A similar verse is Exodus 32:14" "And the LORD repented of the evil which He said He would do unto His people." Does this verse imply that God can plan to do evil or sin, and later repent of that evil?
Another question I'd like to ask, which is similar to the former, is: Do Jews believe God to be omniscient? In Genesis 3:9 we read "And the LORD God called unto the man [Adam], and said unto him: 'Where art thou?'" Why does God need to ask where Adam was?
In conclusion, although the Jewish concept of God appeals to the monotheistic mind, the Jewish scriptures appear to present God as less than perfect and with what we might perceive as major flaws. I look forward to hearing your understanding of these verses and discussing the questions you will bring about Islam.