Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!samsung!crackers!m2c!wpi.WPI.EDU!zahle.wpi.edu!shari
From: ekrem@vlsivie.tuwien.ac.at (Ekrem Saban)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: One Man = Two Women <===> Equality  ??? How come!
Message-ID: <1991Jun26.133325.26480@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Date: 26 Jun 91 13:33:25 GMT
References: <1991Jun23.234331.28116@wpi.WPI.EDU> <1991Jun24.160952.8483@wpi.WPI.EDU> <1991Jun25.131903.28707@wpi.WPI.EDU> <1991Jun25.181441.1863@wpi.WPI.EDU>
Sender: news@wpi.WPI.EDU (News)
Organization: Vienna University of Technology
Lines: 87
Approved: shari@zahle.wpi.edu
Originator: shari@zahle.wpi.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: zahle.wpi.edu


In article <1991Jun25.181441.1863@wpi.WPI.EDU> mucit@slate.cs.rochester.edu (Bulent Murtezaoglu) writes:


   In article <1991Jun25.131903.28707@wpi.WPI.EDU> uunet!plains!tera.cs.umn.edu!cosar@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Ahmet Cosar) writes:
[...]
      >>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.

The enemies of Islam, like the orientalist Ignaz Goldzieher, are in
general sure that Qur'an is authentic. In my discussions with katholic
priests, there was nobody who had any doubt about it. So, if there
were some weak points on this elemantary fact, it would have been
evident up to day, I think...


      >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. 

That's true. We have to think. Npbody can think instead of me. But to
come to a solution, one has to have knowledge also! Without knowing
all the facts about a subject, you can't come to the right result.

      >>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. 

If the ulema is the ulema of a party or sultan, you are right. But
there have been always ulemas which were against the sultans (like
Imam Hanife). 

      >>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.

That`s right!

   [the rest deleted]