Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!caen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!crackers!m2c!wpi.WPI.EDU!zahle.wpi.edu!shari
From: mucit@slate.cs.rochester.edu (Bulent Murtezaoglu)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: One Man = Two Women <===> Equality  ??? How come!
Message-ID: <1991Jun25.181441.1863@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Date: 25 Jun 91 18:14:41 GMT
References: <1991Jun23.234331.28116@wpi.WPI.EDU> <1991Jun24.160952.8483@wpi.WPI.EDU> <1991Jun25.131903.28707@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Sender: news@wpi.WPI.EDU (News)
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Rochester
Lines: 93
Approved: shari@zahle.wpi.edu
Originator: shari@zahle.wpi.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zahle.wpi.edu


In article <1991Jun25.131903.28707@wpi.WPI.EDU> uunet!plains!tera.cs.umn.edu!cosar@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Ahmet Cosar) writes:
   In article <1991Jun24.160952.8483@wpi.WPI.EDU> rached@kaa.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rached Zantout) writes:

   >>First let me clarify something to you and other fellownetters:
   >>Men and Women will never be absolutely equal, they are different men are
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^           ^^^^^^^^^
   >>men and women are women. Women give birth to children men (even if they

   >I agree that women and men are `different', the point is that whether
   >we agree that they are `equal' as well. I consider the fact that women
   >are capable of bringing new humans to life as a `plus' not something
   >which is exploited to forbid some other social roles to women.

Right, I agree.  


   >>Allah knows best what are the rights that should be given to both. So
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
   >>from this argument every muslim once provided with an evidence from the
   >>Quran (the Holy book revealed by Allah through his Angel (Gabriel) on
   >>the prophet Muhammad Peace Be Upon Him) or from the sayings of the
   >>prophet Peace be upon him, about a right for either men or women must
   >>obey that without any discussion.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   >This is the point that each religion always includes to rule out any
   >criticism, possible updates and changes in accordance with the modern
   >world. Therefore I believe what we need is a religious move like the
   >`protestants' of Christianity which will act to evolve Islam to fit
   >the current world and needs of Muslims.

While it is clear that God knows all, it isn't all that clear to me
why we have to have a blind faith in all the _men_ who interpret and
present Islam to us.  Our faith is to God, not to ulema nor anyone else.
It would IMHO, be safe to question the authenticity of hadith, and even 
the common belief that the Quran has been preserved verbatim.  Because
those things, though they may look sacriligious to some, does not 
weaken the faith in God -- they just weaken the faith in _men_.  So I agree,
a reform movement would be welcome and might even be inevitable.  What I do
not agree with is the way Mr. Cosar says this should be done.  One ought to
be able to get at the general principles that remain invariant and valid
despite the changing social norms.  I tend to think of this as something
that each individual would have to do for him/herself.


   >There may be no harm in applying the rules related to personal religious
   >duties of Muslims, however when the subject is to use it on daily life
   >I cannot accept to "obey that without discussion". Just give everybody
   >a copy of Qur'an and an interpretation prepared by the `ulema', it is done.

Exactly.  I agree.  If we are to do as we're told we're placing our faith in
men and social customs and how we've been raised not in God. 


   >>This is the general rule, now a muslim is not prohibited to think about
   >hat Allah has ordered and try to conclude the wisdom behind it, if he
   >>can find some then it is good otherwise that does not mean that the
   >>wisdom does not exist but it means that the human level is not yet
   >>developped to recognize or identify that wisdom.

   >This is a very ambiguous ruling which leaves Qur'an open to any possible
   >interpretation as seen fit by people who claims to have authority in
   >religious jurisdiction, `ulema'. 

I disagree somewhat.  It also leaves it open to interpretation by ordinary
God-believeing (and otherwise ;) folk.  The power of Ulema is derived 
from the herd mentality of people. 

   >I know that they are educated in
   >religious Universities, have similar procedures such as earning PhD,
   >tenure, Professorship, etc., but I also know how much personal relations
   >and politics are involved with decisions in such organizations.

This is a more immediate concern of course, but if people are raised to
be sceptical (and cynical :), the danger dimisihes.

   >>In matters that need the special skills of a person, the testimony of a
   >>woman may be more strong than that of a man like in things that are
   >>related to women issues. It is narrated that when Khalif Omar (May Allah
						      ^^^^^^^^^^^
   >This is not relevant, what counts is the Qur'an. Omar was the 'Khalif'
   >so he had the `power' to make such a decision. What will I say if
   >someone says "look this is what is written in Qur'an", will they accept
   >Khalif Omar as a higher authority? 

I agree.  Asserting that one has _the_ interpretation of the Quran
amounts to the blaphemous claim of prophethood.  On the other hand,
it makes sense to look at what people have thought before.

[the rest deleted]

B.M.