Islamists Try to Defend Forced Hejab... School Girl Wipes the Floor With Them

[El Sidd]

Please read them. It was not only removing the Burqa, but full program of differentiating between Free and Slave woman, hitting them. Absolutely no difference to what 2nd Caliph Umar Ibn Khattab did.

Narrated by Shahid al-Awwal in Dhikra [3:10] and al-Barqi in al-Mahasin [2:318]:

سألت أبا عبد الله (ع) عن المملوكة تقنع رأسها إذا صلت؟ قال لا قد كان أبى إذا رأى الخادمة تصلى في مقنعة ضربها لتعرف الحرة من المملوكة

“I asked Aba `Abd Allah [al-Sadiq] (as) concerning the possession’s covering of her head when she prayed? He replied: ‘No! For when my father saw the female servant *praying* with a scarf on, he *hit* her; so that the free can be known from the possession.”

And it is in Man La Yahduruh al-Faqih – the book considered all authentic by its author al-Saduq – [1:373] and al-Kafi [5:525] that Imam al-Baqir said:

ليس على الأمة قناع في الصلاة

“There is no cover for the slave girl during pray.”

This report is declared “Sahih” by the Grand Ayatullah al-Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Ruhani in Fiqh al-Sadiq [4:228]

In fact, it is narrated in Qadi Nu`man al-Maghribi’s Da`a’im al-Islam [1:177] and al-Nuri’s Mustadrak al-Wasa’il [3:217] that Ja`far al-Sadiq was asked about the permissibility for a slave girl to cover her head during prayers and he replied:

لا كان أبى رضوان الله عليه إذا رأى أمة تصلى وعليها مقنعة ضربها وقال يا لكع لا تتشبهي بالحرائر

“No, When my father, `alayh as-salam, saw a slave girl praying and she had a scarf on her, he hit her! And he said: ‘You rascal! Do not resemble the free ones!’”



Brother please don't deceive the people and yourself by hiding behind the "marriage of slave girl".
Marriage of a slave girls is a joke itself, while master could take her back any time he wants.
According to Shia fiqh, if penetration has not taken place, then no need of Iddah, but straight forward she could be married to another person who could play with her naked body against her consent.
This was the Muslim culture where slave girls were used to make the guests happy.

Also our basic topic was Controlling yourself when you see a naked girl.
Muslim brothers were denying any such control and education.
But you could see, here girl is not only naked, but the brother is also kissing her and playing with her naked body, but still he has not to penetrate in her.

So please tell me brother, when have I showed the wrong and biased interpretation, for which you are blaming me?



Perhaps the distorted version of Beharol Anwar is present online.

Same tradition is present in "Wasail us Shia" on the howza's website:

ﻋن اﻟﺣﺳن ﺑن ظرﯾف. ،. ﻋن اﻟﺣﺳﯾن ﺑن ﻋﻟوان. ،. ﻋن ﺟﻌﻔر. ،. ﻋن أﺑﯾﮫ. ،. ﻋن ﻋﻟﻲ ﻋﻟﯾﮭم. اﻟﺳﻼم اﻧﮫ ﮐﺎن إذا أراد أن ﯾﺷﺗري اﻟﺟﺎرﯾﺔ ﯾﮐﺷف ﻋن ﺳﺎﻗﯾﮭﺎ ﻓﯾﻧظر. إﻟﯾﮭﺎ

Link: http://alhawzaonline.com/almaktaba-almakroaa/book/140-hadith/0032-wasael alshia/13/13.pdf

Dude give it a rest. Stop selling the moon landing is fake theories here.

Nobody will buy it.

The narrative itself is very narrow minded and has little to do with religion.

Reading random books cooking random theories is easy.

An oral culture as strong as the Arab culture there must still be signs.

And quoting books from sub continent. Well need i say more.


@Slav Defence @Jungibaaz @The Eagle

Either you guys take care of this or give me a free hand

molesting and undressing the slaves first was invented by Sunnis' second Khalifa (Ummar), it's widely reported by Sunnis themselves so they can't deny it. what Sunnis and their scholars have done is none of our business, that's why we are called Shiah.

in Shiah, except very few reports from the same era (in which Shiah leaders were highly suppressed by Sunni scholars), there is no any other reports (and that's only about removing the burka, not the shameful acts which second khalifa done), removing slave's burka was a governmental order by Ummar, in return we do have some quotes which contradicts these reports, so first of all it hasn't been repeated after that era and secondly the credibility of those reports are in question.


It's just your biased interpretation.
as you can see in the first page of the chapter, it says marriage book(chapter), not free sex!
for marriage of a Muslim girl, in addition to her consent, her father should permit too, in that era and for slaves, the owner had this authority to marry the slave to another man even without her consent (after all she was a slave), also the owner could decide to limit the extent of relations (just like today's laws),the rest of marriage laws applied too, for example two men couldn't use the same slave girl, when the owner gives this permission to another man, then even himself couldn't use the slave woman anymore.




fake link, fake quote, fake reference, done either by Zionists or Wahhabis. it just shows how naive you are to believe whatever they throw at you.

check the link, it says:
The requested page "/html/ara/books/lib-hadis/behar100/b08.htm" could not be found.
so the address is fake.

then check the reference:
it's reference says Beharol Anvar volume 100, page 120.
and here is Beharol Anvar volume 100, page 120, a completely different subject:
http://lib.eshia.ir/11008/100/120




as I said, me (as a man) and the rest of Muslim women in Iran enjoy the same amount of sun light absorbent, they may even absorb more, as I can classify myself one of world leaders in staying out of the sun light, AND I HAVE NO VITAMIN D DEFICIENCY.
Iranian women are as active as the men, maybe even more and our religion doesn't stop them, your religion is none of my concern.


firstly as I said state of Pakistani women is none of my business, secondly your women are no different than my own condition and I'm healthy. find other excuses.

secondly, in Iran most men wear shirts which has full sleeves and they never wear shorts,so find other excuses.

thirdly, you could encourage your women's social activities, certainly it's much more achievable than prescribing them to have no hijab, so again find other excuses.


reformist monkeys.

تجویز مسکن برای درمان سرطان/ آقای خرازی! آن زمان که عراقچی از «جان کری» عکس اینستاگرامی می‌گرفت، باید پروتکل رفتار دیپلماتیک را آموزش می‌دادید

Oh wow another credit to Omar.

Omar did it.
Ali could not.

Lol. How convenient.

@Slav Defence @Jungibaaz @The Eagle @waz

 

[Shajida Khan]

Why is there so much brouhaha about Hijab? Do not have a well researched survey, but most of the girls around me and myself included adore Hijab. It gives a very graceful look to any girl. So folks! back off! Like our grandmothers and mothers before us, we know what is right for us and what is modest for us.

 

[Sine Nomine]

Brother, you may play with sarcasm, but it is not the way for searching the right path. You have not to Think like a Muslim, but as a Neutral Observer.

According to the modern science, more our skin is exposed to the sun light and the fresh air, better it is for the sikn, vitamin D and for our moods.




Brother, it would be completely useless to deny the Science with such arguments (I already guided you towards the fact that men are going very often out of the house, wearing T shirts, or at least pulling their sleeves up. While religion has discouraged the women to sit outside of homes, under the sun, while it is against the religious modesty. I don't know which language do you understand if not this simple fact. Moreover, there are also men who suffer from vitamin D deficiency. Perhaps they are the one who don't expose enough of their skin to the sun)

Science is telling you a problem in the Muslism society. Poor women are suffering due to the religion.

You are not helping these poor women by defending the wrong and anti nature Sharia orders of the religion.




This is the history of Muslim slavery, which has been recorded in the Muslim Fiqh Books itself and all 4 Imams are unanimous upon it.

Just see the references above.

And few more here:

امام بیہقی نے اپنی کتاب سنن الکبریٰ میں روایت نقل کی ہے (لنک):

عن نافع ، عن ابن عمر ” أنه كان إذا اشترى جارية كشف عن ساقها ووضع يده بين ثدييها و على عجزها
ترجمہ:
نافع نے صحابی ابن عمر سے روایت کی ہے: جب بھی ابن عمر کو کنیز خریدنی ہوتی تھی، تو وہ پہلے اس کنیز کے معائینے کے لیے پہلے اسکی ٹانگیں دیکھتے تھے اور پھر ہاتھوں سے اسکی چھاتیوں اور کولہوں کے ابھاروں کو پرکھتے تھے۔

سعودی مفتی اعظم البانی نے اس روایت کو 'صحیح' قرار دیا ہے (لنک)۔

مصنف عبدالرزاق میں شعبی سے روایت ہے (لنک):

13207 عبد الرزاق ، عن الثوري ، عن جابر ، عن الشعبي قال : " إذا كان الرجل يبتاع الأمة ، فإنه ينظر إلى كلها إلا الفرج " .
ترجمہ:
۔۔۔ شعبی کہتے ہیں: اگر کسی مرد کو کنیز خریدنی ہے، تو وہ اس کنیز کا پورا جسم دیکھ سکتا ہے سوائے شرمگاہ کےسوراخ کے۔

اور فتاویٰ عالمگیری (جو تمام دیوبندی و بریلوی حنفی مدارس میں پڑھائی جاتی ہے) میں درج ہے (لنک):

جامع صغیر میں مذکور ہے کہ اگر کسی شخص نے کوئی کنیز باندی خریدنے کا قصد کیا تو کوئی ڈر نہیں ہے کہ وہ اسکی پنڈلیاں و سینہ و دونوں ہاتھ چھوئے اور کھلے ہوئے اعضاء کی طرف دیکھے۔

اور صحابہ ان سرِ بازار برہنہ بکتی ہوئی لاچار کنیز عورتوں کو کیسے بھیڑ بکریوں کی طرح خریدتے تھے، اسکے لیے یہ روایت پڑھئے:

امام ابن ابی شیبہ نے اپنی کتاب المصنف میں نقل کیا ہے (لنک):

حدثنا جرير عن منصور عن مجاهد قال : كنت مع ابن عمر أمشي في السوق فإذا نحن بناس من النخاسين قد اجتمعوا على جارية يقلبونها ، فلما رأوا ابن عمر تنحوا وقالوا : ابن عمر قد جاء ، فدنا منها ابن عمر فلمس شيئا من جسدها وقال : أين أصحاب هذه الجارية ، إنما هي سلعة
ترجمہ:
مجاہد کہتے ہیں: میں ابن عمر کے ساتھ غلاموں کے نیلامی والے بازار سے گذر رہا تھا۔ وہاں ہم نے غلاموں کے چند تاجروں کو دیکھا جو کہ ایک کنیز عورت کے گرد جمع تھے اور اسکو جانچنے کے لیے معائینہ کر رہے تھے۔ جب انہوں نے ابن عمر کو دیکھا تو انہوں نے ابن عمر کو روک لیا اور کہا کہ ابن عمر آئے ہیں۔ پھر ابن عمر اس کنیز عورت کے پاس آئے، انہوں نے اسکے جسم کے کچھ حصوں کو ٹٹولا اور پھر کہا: اس کنیز عورت کا مالک کون ہے؟ یہ (کنیز) ایک قیمتی تجارتی جنس ہے۔


مالکی مذہب کے امام ابن ابی زید (متوفی 386 ہجری) اپنی کتاب 'الجامع' میں لکھتے ہیں(لنک):

"امام مالک کو یہ بات پسند نہیں تھی کہ مدینے میں باندی عورتیں ننگے سینوں کے ساتھ گھومیں۔ امام مالک کہتے ہیں کہ انہوں نے اس سلسلے میں سلطان سے بات بھی کی، لیکن سلطان نے انہیں کوئی جواب نہیں دیا۔ "

شیخ حمزہ یوسف کی ویڈیو (لنک) دیکھئے جہاں وہ بتلا رہے ہیں کہ عمر ابن خطاب کے دور میں مدینہ میں باندی عورتیں ننگے سینوں کے ساتھ گھومتی تھیں۔ ​

All what you are saying has been quoted from here and there without any factual proof.Ya Syede Umar bin Al khtab would ask one woman to cover and one to not,since when it's his business.
In most Parts of Iran and Pakistan, either it's high temperature or low temperature.
From April to September temperature in Pakistan is average at 40°c and even at 50°c no right minded sane person would like to collect vitamin D.After that it's winter temperature will fall to -1 and even -20 at some places,no idiot would like to take a sunbath.

molesting and undressing the slaves first was invented by Sunnis' second Khalifa (Ummar), it's widely reported by Sunnis themselves so they can't deny it. what Sunnis and their scholars have done is none of our business, that's why we are called Shiah.

in Shiah, except very few reports from the same era (in which Shiah leaders were highly suppressed by Sunni scholars), there is no any other reports (and that's only about removing the burka, not the shameful acts which second khalifa done), removing slave's burka was a governmental order by Ummar, in return we do have some quotes which contradicts these reports, so first of all it hasn't been repeated after that era and secondly the credibility of those reports are in question.

Quote a neutral Authentic source for that claim.
He is quoting those events which only he knew.He is quoting old books,who have no value because in most part of Islamic world slavery died long time agnly was prevalent for slave soldiers which in many cases would be moving into higher positions.

Sister, if humanity is really alive in us, then what do you have to say about it:

Imam Malik's Fiqh: "The owner of a slave woman may not sell her separately from her child until the child grows its second teeth. "

Read this book online here.

You know what zahef hadees means, it's just a meaningless sentence.

Read it,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml

 

[Nilgiri]

@Nilgiri do you know such Tribes,as I know whole of Sub-Continent when English came was more civilized and rich then entire Europe.

Yes few hill tribes were like that and still go uncovered in few places today....it decreased over time even for these folk (from say early india to medieval india to british raj india)....as cultural sensibilities evolved and were influenced both internally and externally.

There was also enforcement of this policy on low caste women in some areas by higher caste people in South and Central India mostly (which was recorded by few British anthropologists...though their particular neutrality may not be guaranteed), but status of this is disputed and debated today regarding prevalence and even existence....given the propaganda and counter-propaganda used for politics now....but sparse tier A historical accounts.

As for general civilisation and wealth of subcontinent, yes it was probably ,even definitely lot higher than Europe at time of British arrival. British just had focused much of their resources into 3 key things: Trade, Banking, Warfare....and how to use these three with political goals....and they had much closer enemies (often way more powerful and richer than them) to practice and perfect it on for hundreds of years prior to arriving at India. Hence they could enrich from subcontinent long term by creating captive market there. That's one of the fundamental reasons for industrial revolution (esp sustenance after the spark) in UK. Subcontinent as you know was also in period of upheaval and major political vulnerability, which played very well to British....these coincidences were unfriendly to the region....we still suffering from results more than most people know.

 

[SALMAN F]

I see now, the term "You Muslims" has said alot.
no need to waste time arguing with you

So this the new tactic to run away??

 

[VEVAK]

My @$$ laughs to tippler idiots like u.

Are such things important matters? No.

I'm sorry but they are!!!!!!!!!!

The Hejab by force policy destroys tourism & Tourism is the LARGEST industry in the world if you take into account all the business effected by it!

I would say Hejab by force and other religious policies have severely harmed Iran's Economy and there is no way Iran's economy can compete globally when you cut out the largest industry in the world from your country!

Best policy is to have Free zones inside Iran (outside Tehran) where all religious policies are removed!

What's the difference people that want can just jump in a plane go to Turkey spend their dollars there and then come back! That's a dumb policy to keep on following!

 

[Sine Nomine]

Your knowledge about Islam is based mainly upon, third rated biased sources,which you are deliberately quoting to mislead.In India under Muslims Rule slavery was never practised.
Slavery was cultural thing for most of time.
No one can compare slavery in Muslim countries with one in West.Every one knows about Atlantic slave trade.
Now on ignore list,for distorting facts.

 

[Slav Defence]

Religious discussion is not allowed.

 

[OldTwilight]

Religious discussion is not allowed.

you could say this after 90 pages instead of 9 pages ....

 

[Slav Defence]

you could say this after 90 pages instead of 9 pages ....

I just checked.Exits doors will be shown for sure.
I have a personal life and job as well, alhamdullilah.I really have a tough schedule, yet members don't realize this.We are volunteering our services here for promoting positive and intellectual discussions and we are not getting payed for it.However, members here do not understand.

regards

 

[bozorgmehr]

PLEASE NOTE

This is NOT a religious debate. Religion is a set of beliefs. Religion is not science. Religion is not based on empirical evidence or repeatable experiments. You either choose to believe it, or you don't. You can't 'out-prove' or disprove other people's beliefs. All you can do is give the proper space and respect necessary for people to exercise their conscience.

And this is precisely why religion should always be a private matter and remain out of the public domain. Because no authority should ever be in a position decide your relationship with your god. No authority should be in a position to compel you to follow or not follow your conscience. Because like the girl said, god has created you free and has given you freedom of choice.

This thread is about a totalitarian system that uses the name and symbols of religion to justify their evil rule. A system that resorts to propaganda, corruption, lawlessness, thuggery, torture, murder, criminality, theft... to brutalize and terrorize the people of Iran to maintain their power. And in the process of doing so, they are unraveling the moral fabric of society and doing grave damage to the country and the religion they purport to speak for.

This is not about the religious argument for or against the hijab...

 

[Islamic faith&Secularism]

PLEASE NOTE
This thread is about a totalitarian system that uses the name and symbols of religion to justify their evil rule. A system that resorts to propaganda, corruption, lawlessness, thuggery, torture, murder, criminality, theft... to brutalize and terrorize the people of Iran to maintain their power.


This is NOT a religious debate. Religion is a set of beliefs. Religion is not science. Religion is not based on empirical evidence or repeatable experiments. You either choose to believe it, or you don't. You can't 'out-prove' or disprove other people's beliefs. All you can do is give the proper space and respect necessary for people to exercise their conscience.

And this is precisely why religion should always be a private matter and remain out of the public domain. Because no authority should ever be in a position decide your relationship with your god. No authority should be in a position to compel you to follow or not follow your conscience. Because like the girl said, god has created you free and has given you freedom of choice. And in the process of doing so, they are unraveling the moral fabric of society and doing grave damage to the country and the religion they purport to speak for.

This is not about the religious argument for or against the hijab...

Should we start to worry about your life as well, after nailing it in the head?

@Slav Defence ... Many non-English posts exist on this thread, which makes it hard for multinational members in an English-based forum.

 

[tirdad]

Will you please give some detail about your pessimism for the life of the teenager?

Even this teenager's intelligence can destroy the mullahs' ''theology'' in some part, then It does not deserve to be called ''Islamic'' revolution but a power-jacking.

you don`t live in iran ...

you don`t know and dont understand many things ...

they will do that ...

like what they did with Army generals and officers after 1979 uprising.

like what they did with Freidoon Frokhzad and many others.

here, islam is more important than us ...

insult islam, would cause "Mohareb" or "Mofsed fe l ardh" محارب و یا مفسد فی الارض ...

 

[Michael Corleone]

instead of worrying about others islam, why dont people fucking mind their own business tbh. you're god and he is gonna deal with them in judgement day... you won't. nor do you have to answer.... so why don't y'all **** off and mind your own business for once in your life. ffs.

no one should to told to wear what we think is right. that goes from a hijab to a bikini.

 

[war&peace]

I just checked.Exits doors will be shown for sure.
I have a personal life and job as well, alhamdullilah.I really have a tough schedule, yet members don't realize this.We are volunteering our services here for promoting positive and intellectual discussions and we are not getting payed for it.However, members here do not understand.

regards

Sir, just delete the thread... I don't think that is such an onerous task.