What's new

Two Opposing Terms: Islamic and Republic

@Talon
I agree with you that Islam gives maximum rights to women
But here we are talking about "equal rights" with men , which Islam does not grant to women
UN Declaration of Human Rights asks for EQUAL rights for men & women in all aspects
So it contradicts with Islamic laws

One can rightfully argue that Islamic laws are better than UN laws , But that is not the point of discussion here ...
Hope you understand

I have agreed that it is not equal...But I question in what sense do you want it equal? I brought forward the differences like physical, physiological and psychological to name a few and based on these rights are given and distributed...

So I ask again can you please narrow it down to what form of rights are we talking about that Islam is ignoring?
 
.
@qamar1990
I wanted to give you a very detailed answer and due to this reason wanted take my time, which would have taken a long time and the spirit of discussion would have diminished by then. Therefore, here I am with a response to your post



Human Rights. “Dignity of humankind” without any conditions attached is the first and basic law of the Qura’n.

1. Gender Equality

According to the Qur’an, gender difference is neither the means of lowering nor raising of status. That is, neither the male on the basis of being male is better nor is the female on the basis of being female worst off. The genesis of life is from the ‘one self (4-1)’. Qura’n says “every human child, weather boy or a girl has a part in it of male and female’’ (49-13).

Therefore the male is neither a special being nor is the female a different specie. Both genders are of one being and are partners in the one status as human being. There is no aspect which has its door open for one and closed for the other. Biologically the difference that exists between man and woman is from natural inheritance. On human level there is no difference. On this level the field of action is the same for both and the reaction in the law of nature is the same (3-194). ‘None of you will have your actions wasted whether you are a male or female’---What is the meaning of male and female (thafis)……..? ‘you are part of each other’---‘You share equally in all aspects of life’. ‘You are part of the same group of people’. Have a look at verses 33-35 and 9-71. How does the Qura’n make man and woman stand shoulder to shoulder in matters of lie.

Gender Equality is the basic right of humanity and cannot be usurped in any way. The Qura’nic social system is responsible for maintaining that equality.

2. The Standard of Deeds as Higher Status

Following the issue of Dignity, the varying status of Humankind comes to the fore. The rule for it is as follows:

46-19 The status and position of every body is dependent upon their actions. That is the dignity of humankind on the basis of human being will be followed by taking into account the personal character and actions of the individual, and the society as a whole will establish their status and position accordingly. The person of higher capabilities will have the right to higher position in society (49-13). From the highest to the lowest all positions will be open to every body, who according to their capabilities will be able to claim for themselves. This right of status cannot be usurped by any body nor will any other standard be adopted for it.

3. Right of Freedom

You must have heard this slogan many a times “ Freedom is every body’s birth right” yet its true meaning has seldom been obvious. The place from whence you might have heard this slogan proclaimed, would be the same place from where rules are proclaimed putting all sorts of restrictions on rights of the people. So, one is at a loss to understand that if Freedom is a basic right then why are these restrictions imposed. The answer given is that these restrictions are imposed according to the Law and as such these do not restrict humankind’s freedom; and if these laws were not there then nothing would be safe. ---hence for freedom these laws are imperative.

It is true that for the safety of individuals these restrictions are necessary, but it is also obvious that those given the authority to enact these laws perpetrate transgressions, behind the veil of authority that assertion of lawlessness is of no value. The lawlessness (anarchy) is an open revolt but their transgressions take place behind legal curtains. These people in authority first go through the ritual of law-making and then this knife ‘blown upon with Bismillah from Shah Madar’ is used to cut the throat of whoever, thus making the slaughter as halal.

(i) This is a very important question which has not been answered yet, as to how can the preservation of Right and the necessity of making Laws be reconciled that both remain intact. The solution is given by the Qura’n. It first explained in 3:78/79 ‘No human being, even though Allah may have given him/her a code of laws or the power to enforce it or even prophethood- has the right to say to others: “you should obey me rather than God” Qura’n has established the constitution of human right at such a high level that humankind could not even envisage.

(ii) This is the reality of Human Rights. Now look at Law making. In the same verse by saying min dunillaah it explained that though it is necessary to enact laws they cannot be man-made laws. Only God has that right. Now the question arises as to how are these divine laws to be enacted? Will it be theocracy which in God’s name the clergy will do as it pleases? Qura’n says ‘NO’, theocracy is the worst example of transgression. That is why Qura’n has juxta positioned Haman who was the representative of the clergy, with Pharaoh as an equal criminal. With regard to restriction imposed by law it says in 3:78,79 ‘no body has the right to tamper with these restrictions or impose others’. This is the practical meaning of laailaahaa illallaah that none has the power and authority to subjugate (let alone enslave) any other person. Now it raises the question as to how to practically implement these limits and restrictions given in the Book of God. It is clearly explained that this right is not given to any particular group or community but that it is the collective responsibility of all the individuals of the society and these matters will be “addressed in consultation” (42:38). These rights of consultation are also included in the list. The practical machinery for consultation will be constructed according to the conditions then prevailing.

So the Qura’n has given the laws which must be followed or has established those limits within which the community will consult to change them as required. No one has the right to transgress these limits or to implement others instead, because this will equate to means of usurping the Human freedom and no body can be given that permission. Qura’n equates this to Shirk. Sura Shuaraa 42:41says ‘have these people got other partners who enact such rules for which they have no permission from God?’ Thus the Qura’n gives no permission to enact such laws for the society.

This is the method by which the Qura’n prevents assault on any Human Rights so that lawlessness does not spread in the society. This collection of distributed right is the unique quality of the Quran.

4. Rights of Labour

Qura’ns pronouncement is that ‘every one will get the full reward for their work’ (39:70).

No body will usurp the rewards of his/her effort, nor reduce its return. In this respect it said at other place ‘except those who are incapacitated to work (which will be discussed later) no body will gain without endeavour’. That is to say that in such a society parasites who sponge off others and live a life of comfort and luxury will have no place. It is therefore obvious that in such a society where ones endeavours will not be exploited, will obtain their rights of just reward. Under this rule the roots of capitalism’s are cut off. Its very existence depends upon the exploitation of labour.

Remember that those who, in spite of the capacity to work, sponge off others labour, are in fact beggars however rich they may be.

5. Justice and Fairness

This is what is meant by “Justice”- That every body receives a fair share. According to the Qura’n Justice is a very composite expression in which all rights are preserved. Legal right is the same thing in that its purpose is to restore through the courts the rights of a person whose share has been usurped. On this issue the Qura’n is so careful as to warn: “watch out that in the matter of justice you do not differentiate between a friend and a foe’ and ‘lest it may happen that as a result of an enemy-nation’s behaviour towards you, it may induce you to injustice. You should always treat them with justice, for justice is not a tit-for tat issue. On the basis of humanity it is their right and your obligation” (5:8).

But Qura’n just does not stop at Justice. It goes beyond (as has been said before). Justice means that whatever is due to people, is given. But what if that is not enough for their necessities? Qura’n says that in that case the society makes up for the shortfall in order to maintain the balance (ehsaan) of the social system (16:90). This ehsaan is also included in the basic rights. The world encourages ‘charity’ in such cases. But charity tramples humanity and it is obvious how it destroys self respect of the receiver of charity! That is why Qura’n does not refer to ehsaan as charity but says that to demand the topping up of this shortfall is a Right. (70:24) Those who’s endeavours are not enough or those who are incapable to provide for themselves have a share in the wealth of those who have more than their requirement. This right is not under cover or secret but is transparent to the Qura’nic social system. To make up for the shortfall of people as a basic right will not be found in any other document except the Quran.

6. The Right of Sustenance

The life source of humanity (indeed of all living things) is the provision of sustenance. The world has decreed that every individual fulfils his responsibility to provide for all their needs and that of their children. But Qura’n in this respect differs from the world. It says ‘ there is no living being in this world, the responsibility of whose providing for its provision is not on Allah’(11:6).

It has to be understood that those responsibilities that Allah has taken upon Himself are to be fulfilled by the State that runs on Qura’nic system. Hence it is the responsibility of any State that runs on Qura’nic system, to ensure that it establishes a system wherein no living creature lacks the necessities of life and declares to all its citizens ‘we are responsible to provide for your and your progeny’s basic necessities too ‘ (6:152). The provision of basic necessities of life is a right of every human being and he can demand it from a system based on Qura’nic principles. This right is not written in any other Charter in the world.

With respect to the provision for the progeny, it also includes the provision of resources for their eduction and training. ‘Do not murder your children due to the lack of resources’ (6:152). Here the word ‘murder’ does not only mean to kill. It also means to destroy by denying education and training (soul destroying). Hence it is the obligation of the Qura’nic system to provide for the best education and training of children. As a result every child can demand best education and training as a right in a Quranic system of State and no body can deny them this right.

7. Sanctity of Life

But before the provision of necessities of life, the protection of life becomes an issue. The Qura’n has clearly expounded ‘God has declared the sanctity of life, hence no body can be given the permission to take life, except when Right demands it (6-152)’. Qura’n explains in another context what this demand is. If one murders another unjustly then the former can be sentenced to death in response, or if one causes disruption in the justice and social system and cannot be refrained from it after repeated attempts, a death sentence can be given. Outside these conditions if one is to take life for no reason, it would be construed as if the whole of humanity is murdered. On the other hand if someone saves one life it is equated to the saving of the whole of humanity. (5-32). Have you noted that under which special conditions has Qura’n allowed taking of a life (that is taking of a life legally)? That too is for the purposes of universal protection of life. That is what it calls bil haq.

8. Sanctity of Wealth

Along with the sanctity of life, the sanctity of wealth which remains for the individuals use, is also included in the basic rights. No body is allowed to usurp what others have for their legitimate use. For it says that you should not usurp each others wealth (4-29). Wealth is a compound word and includes possessions of every kind and its protection is a basic right.


9. Protection of Residence

Following the protection of life and wealth the Qura’n also provides the right to safety of residence. The allegations Qura’n lays at the feet of Jews is this ‘You are the people who unjustly murder and drive out people from their homes’ (2-85). Hence to provide roof over the head is also an obligation of the State and to deny it is an abrogation of the individual’s basic right.

10. Sanctity of Honour

Human honour is invaluable commodity. This thing of the highest standard is not found in the animal kingdom and is only a human specialty. Sexual urge is common among both animals and human, but the sense of honour is only found in the domain of humanity. Hence Qura’n gives the protection of honour a permanent value of Right. Therefore it has ordained the flouting of honour as a major crime and has prescribed a heavy penalty. Adulterer, ‘be it male or female, punish them with hundred lashes’(24-2).

Not only in adultery but to cast unproven aspersions on the honour of a respectable woman is to be punished with eighty lashes (24-4). It is so because this is also an assault on her honour.

To accost and tease respectable women, to pass derogatory and incite-full comments upon them is even greater crime. In this respect it says that such people should be exiled. Such people should be stripped of their citizenship. If they do not recant, they should be taken in custody and on proof of their guilt executed, (33-60).This is that divine rule about which it says ‘this is the law that was given to the previous nations and it is of such permanent value that there can be no change made to it.(22-61). This means these laws existed to all those who were visited by prophets, not limited to Jews and Christians.

11. Right of Choice in Marriage

With respect to married couples, Qura’n has ordained that the choice of a spouse is a basic human right. It addressed men ‘you marry women according to your choice (4:3) and on the other hand has protected the right of choice of women in addressing men ‘you can not be their master by force (4:19). Marriage is a contract for which the agreement of the two parties is the basic condition.

In this context it must be emphasised that after the ‘contract of marriage’ the responsibilities of husband and wife according to Qura’n are equal in all spheres of life. There is only one exception to the rule. In the situation of divorce or widow-hood, the woman is not allowed to remarry during the period known as iddat. There is no such iddat for man and its rationale is obvious. The period establishes if the woman is pregnant. This rule is for the protection of the child’s right, in order to establish the biological father of the child. In Surah Baqara it said ‘the women have similar rights commensurate with their responsibilities. There is only one aspect where the men have an advantage in that they do not have to wait for the passing of the iddat’ (2-228). Again a law made to protect rights of an unborn child. Which charter in the world provides for the rights of an unborn child.

12. Aesthetic Right

The Qura’n respects an individual’s aesthetic taste and does not allow any body to deprive the person of this right. It emphasises ‘who is it that can deny the aesthetic resources that HE has provided for HIS servants and make unlawful for them to enjoy it.’ (7:32) It is every body’s basic right to enjoy them while staying within the divine limits. Nobody can deny them of the right. As a rule it must be understood that what God has not forbidden, no one can declare it as forbidden. This is equal to usurping the basic rights which nobody has the authority. It must also be understood that Qura’n does not restrict the manner of food consumption and people’s life style. Instead it has given the right of choice to all according to ones taste. It says that you are free to eat and drink at any body’s house including that of your relatives and friends, whether you eat separately or together (24:61). Similarly it does not place any restrictions on style and type of dress and encourages every body’s sense of aesthetics. It also says that in addition to covering ones modesty, the dress is also for decoration (7:26). Gold ornaments, silver and glass utensils, soft and smooth silk clothes, and even high class furniture (76:13 to 15 and 18:31) and similar objects are manifestation of jannah. Although it is necessary to realise that the whole society is in a position to afford such a standard. It is never said that this heavenly life is a prerogative of only a select group and others will go without. The heavenly life that an individual can afford must be available to all the members of the society.

13. Religious Freedom

The Qura’n gives full freedom of religion. It maintains that the Iman (belief) is the name of accepting the truth with the application of higher intellect, contemplation and vision. ‘Tell them that Truth has come in Qura’n from your Sustainer, you should contemplate on it and then whoever wishes to accept it, do so and whoever wishes to reject it, do so.’ (18-29) It has also emphasised that the difference between the other creations of universe and mankind is that everything in the universe is obliged to obey the rule that has been set for it, but humankind is created to exercise a choice. It has been shown the path and left alone to its own choice, either follow the path or digress from it. If it follows the shown path it will lead a pleasant life; if not, it loss will be theirs. If it was God’s wish to force it to follow a certain path it would have been created similar to other objects in the universe but it is not so. It has been created with power of exercising choice. It would be against the divine will that humankind should be compelled to follow a certain path. Qura’n has addressed humankind ‘if it was in your Lord’s programme that humankind was to be compelled to follow the path of iman, then there was nothing to stop HIM, but HE has not created humankind so; it has been given a choice in this matter, so would you compel it to believe? That would be against Divine will. Your duty is only to pass on the message, you are not expected to do more10-99’. The right and wrong has been made evident by the Qura’n. ‘After this there is no compulsion in the matter of Deen.’ (2-256)

The reality is that Islam is not a Religion (mazhab). This word is not in the Qura’n. So it does not accept other religions of the world as its worthy opponent. It is a Code for life or a system of government. It cannot allow that those of other religions should set up a different system of government within its borders. This would be equivalent to setting up a State-with-in-a-State which is not allowed anywhere else either. But it does not oppose that people who live within its State boundaries chose their religion. It gives them the freedom to do so. It takes upon itself the responsibility of the security of their houses of worship in the same manner as it does for the mosques. Qura’n establishes the reason for an Islamic State thus-‘if God was not to have controlled through humankind the rebellious elements in society then certainly the monk’s monasteries, Christian churches, other houses of worship and mosques, where God’s name is taken in abundance, would be demolished’ (22-40) Hence the security of all houses of worship rests with the States operating on Qura’nic system of government where all non Muslims can demand security as their basic right.

Not only that but it has stressed upon the community of believers that –you should not swear at their Gods lest the non-believers, in their ignorance swear at Allah.

As you would be offended, they too are offended by your disrespect to their idols. The fact is that every body loves and respects their own object of worship’ (6:109). You should convey to them the truth. When, with vision and understanding they are able to differentiate between right and wrong they will discard their false Gods and adopt the right path to lead their life. You will not be able to compel them to do so.

Hence the Qura’an not only gives humankind the freedom but gives assurance that their religion is protected from abuse.

Although God has given total freedom to humankind in respect of religion, there is no reversion if a person embraces Islam. Like any other contract in the world conversion to Islam is a contract between the person and God. According to that contract there is no reversion. This is clear to the person before entering parameters of Islam, so the contract should be signed thoughtfully. Once in it, the rule is to be followed.

It should be realised that one has the basic right to either adopt the Deen and live within an Islamic system or exercise the choice to live outside it, but it is not allowed that a person would accept the system superficially and then select those codes that suit him/her and reject the others. This sort of freedom is not available in any system.


14. The Right to Speak the Truth

Qura’n has not only given us the Right to speak the Truth, but has ordained upon us to practice it. There is no choice given in it. It has ordained that whereever there is the necessity, speak out truthfully. Let us see how far Qura’n goes in this respect. ‘oh you the people of belief, it is obligatory upon you to maintain justice in the world’. It is imperative in order to maintain justice that truth should be told without fear or favour’. ‘When called upon to give witness you should not consider as to which party or group you are speaking against, you should think that you are a witness to God and tell the truth even if it is against your own self’ (see how Qura’n elevates the position of humankind). ‘even if it goes against your parents or relatives’, ‘whether rich or poor’, for ‘Allah’s right is bigger than theirs’. ‘Remember that your vested interests, the relationship of relatives and friends and the fear of reprisal from the rich and influential, can stand in the way’. ‘But you should not consider these issues and stand firm in your resolve’. ‘Nor should you speak with forked tongue nor should you avoid the truth, you may be able to fool people but you can’t fool Allah, HE knows all’ (4:135).

Having given the above edict, it warns the society that it should implement such a system that the witness suffers no reprisals on giving witness (2:282) As called Witness Protection in modern times.

15. Freedom of Expression

One of the differences between animal kingdom and humankind, according to Qura’n is that the former do not have the capacity to express its consciences. humankind has been given this capability. God has created humankind and has given it the capacity to express itself (55:4), and at other place it says that HE has given humankind the capacity to express itself with the pen’ (96:4)

Humankind has the right to express its opinion with the help of a tongue (language) and with pen as well.

It must be understood that expression of opinion or the use of any other God-given faculty in contravention of HIS laws is a crime and worthy of punishment. It is different thing to restrict or curtail

these God given capacities. The wrong use of these capacities can be rendered as crime but the right to use them cannot be usurped. To do so would be akin to turn humankind into an animal.

16. The right of protection of privacy

Qura’n prevents us from unnecessarily scrutinising individual’s privacy (49:12). It means that it gives the individual the assurance that their privacy will not be encroached upon.(In the matter of crime investigation it becomes a different issue). The protection of the content of letters and correspondence falls in this category. It thus gives the right of privacy to an individual when it says ‘except in your own, you should not enter into others houses without the resident’s permission’. (24-27) So called flag bearers of human rights and democracy pry into people’s private life by tapping their phones and scanning their email communications, without their knowledge.

17. Protection against Slander

Qura’an provides for protection against slander. It says ‘Allah does not like that a persons weakness be propagated maliciously’. (4:148) If correction is intended then it should be under taken quietly, then it says ‘a group or party should not belittle another (49:11). No derogatory names be given. One must not be teased, just on the basis of rumour (49:12). This explains why one should be presumed innocent till proved guilty and no talk behind the back be indulged into (24:12 and 24:16). Back-biting is strictly forbidden in Qura’n (49:12). With these given warnings,

18. Assurance of Peace

Qura’n steps further after giving all the above rights. ‘These people will have no fear and stress’ (2-38).Fear is an anxiety caused by the external dangers. Hence this society will be protected from external dangers by the State. Stress is the name given to the trauma caused by these anxieties. Thus in a system where the State has taken the responsibility of protecting the people from external dangers, it is also its responsibility to remove the causes of anxieties. The protection from fear and stress is such a composite statement that it conjures up the concept of total bliss. In this protection also lies the idea ‘no body who can a carry a burden will carry the burden of another’ (6-165). It will not happen that one will take the action but some one else will reap the reward. That the responsibility should be of some one but some one else would fulfil the responsibility. Some one should commit a crime but some one else would suffer the consequences. This is the security with which all will get true contentment. The acquisition of it is the basic right of every individual.

Which human rights system or declaration addresses Human Rights in such an explicit fashion, which Quran has defined.


Democracy also does not guarantee equal wealth to all. Universe is created on the principle of Adl (balance) if everyone is equal then there will be stagnation. There will not be any growth. When it comes to being blessed, everyone is blessed in one way or other. People get the return based on their capabilities and hard work. Even in the democratic world if all become equal who will clean the toilet for you and will you be obeying your boss. Everyone will be president of their country and there will be no one to implement law and obey law which is essence of community living.

When the Quran was revealed, slavery was in wide practice throughout the Arab World, thus, it would have been impractical and detrimental to place an immediate ban on the slave trade, forcing all slaves into unemployment/poverty. The Quran uses a better psychological approach to win people’s hearts in the struggle against slavery and all forms of discrimination by placing a strong emphasis on human dignity and equality and encouraging the freeing of slaves:

Did we not show him the two paths? He should choose the difficult path. Which one is the difficult path? The freeing of slaves. Feeding, during the time of hardship...[90:10-14]



Righteousness is not turning your faces towards the east or the west. Righteous are those who believe in God, the Last Day, the angels, the scripture, and the prophets; and they give the money, cheerfully, to the relatives, the orphans, the needy, the traveller, the beggars, and to free the slaves...[2:177]


The Quran lists the penalty for various misdemeanours as freeing of slaves, see 4:92, 5:89, 58:3. It also implies distribution of community/collective charities would contribute towards freeing of slaves:


The charities are to go to the poor, and the needy, and those who work to collect them, and those whose hearts have been united, and to free the slaves, and those in debt, and in the cause of God, and the traveller. A duty from God, and God is Knowledgeable, Wise.[9:60]

The only method mentioned in The Quran for gaining captives (more correctly termed 'prisoners of war', not slaves) is during warfare, after which they must be released or ransomed. Keeping them is not an option:

Therefore, if you encounter those who deny the truth (in warfare), then bring about the captivesuntil when you have subdued/overcome them, then strengthen the bind. Then after either grace/favour or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. That, and had God willed, surely He would have gained victory Himself from them, but He tests some of you with others. And those who get killed in the cause of God, He will never let their deeds be put to waste.[47:4]

Interestingly, in the above verse, it implies a preference for taking captives rather than killing the enemy in warfare.

As can clearly be seen, taking all of the above verses of The Quran into account, it would lead to a gradual reduction in slave numbers and eventually abolish slavery.




How do you infer the interpretation from this verse. Please justify highlighted portion through the above verse. How does marrying corresponds to keeping concubines. I mentioned earlier that please do not give myopic reference of Quran but look at it in totality. Had you done so you would have come across. Other verse also which I will reproduce in the following text.

One problem is the isolation of a Qur’anic verse from its context and turning it into a universal rule or moral injunction. For example, Muslims who consider that polygamy is a “right” of men have overlooked that verse 4:3 states “if you fear that you will not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, three or four…” It is explicit here that polygamy is not a right, but a responsibility to ensure that justice be done to orphans. In practice, however, rarely is polygamy a question of orphans’ care.

The verse then goes on to state, “If you fear that you will not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one.” It is obvious here that the Qur’an does not promote polygamy. This is further strengthened by 4:129, which states “you are never able to do justice between wives even if it is your ardent desire.” When the Qur’an explicitly stresses just conduct toward women and equal treatment among wives, it also recognizes the impossibility of living up fully to these ideals (4:129). Accordingly, it in effect advocates monogamy as the original and ideal state of marriage in Islam

Furthermore, it has been statistically proved that population of women is more than men on earth. Moreover, male population is more exposed to life dangers (owing to their responsibilities ordained by God), their quantity diminishes in wars also. Thus rendering many helpless women. Looking at things in this context provides a clear evidence that Islam exactly knows about the need of women and helps them secure better position in society by allowing polygamy. As regard question of allowing women to practice polyandry is concerned it is but obvious that in polyandry identification of biological father is not possible without advance scientific techniques. Thus, rights of new born will be usurped. This law has been made to protect human rights of an unborn child.



4:7

For men is a share of what the parents and close relatives leave, and for women is a share of what the parents and close relatives leave, be it little or much - an obligatory share.4:11 (Now see the complete version against your incomplete reference)

Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females. But if there are [only] daughters, two or more, for them is two thirds of one's estate. And if there is only one, for her is half. And for one's parents, to each one of them is a sixth of his estate if he left children. But if he had no children and the parents [alone] inherit from him, then for his mother is one third. And if he had brothers [or sisters], for his mother is a sixth, after any bequest he [may have] made or debt. Your parents or your children - you know not which of them are nearest to you in benefit. [These shares are] an obligation [imposed] by Allah . Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Wise.

4:12

And for you is half of what your wives leave if they have no child. But if they have a child, for you is one fourth of what they leave, after any bequest they [may have] made or debt. And for the wives is one fourth if you leave no child. But if you leave a child, then for them is an eighth of what you leave, after any bequest you [may have] made or debt. And if a man or woman leaves neither ascendants nor descendants but has a brother or a sister, then for each one of them is a sixth. But if they are more than two, they share a third, after any bequest which was made or debt, as long as there is no detriment [caused]. [This is] an ordinance from Allah , and Allah is Knowing and Forbearing.

In addition to this sons have obligations towards fathers debt, daughters do not. So justice has been done, the girl gets it from her husband also. He the divine has placed every thing on Adl which means balance. Justice is synonymous to balance. If he has given something extra to son, then he has given extra responsibilities also. If you look at above verse you will find father and mother has equal share. Doesn’t it prove that they are equal?

In no way this means men are superior. It clearly says that men are incharge of their wives, when the authority has been given to them, they have been given responsibility also. When he has been asked to provide for women, then they have been asked to obey him and guard in his absence what Allah would have them guard (chastity). And in this particular verse it is very clear that the matter under discussion is extra marital activity by a married woman

That is Ibn Katheer’s interpretation, which does not mean that it is correct also. This is what he feels is correct, based on acquired information. He existed in mid 13th century, thus is not a firsthand interpreter.

“the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the one with the most taqwa” (49:13).



The Qur’an was revealed within a sociohistorical context. Some of the traditional ‘ulama believe that even though a verse might be occasioned by a certain situation, its application is universal. For example, in Verse 2:282, the injunction calls for two witnesses to a written transaction or contract. The witnesses can be two reliable adult males or one male and two females “so that if one of them errs, the other ca remind her.” At the time of this revelation women were not normally used to dealing in business and financial transactions. To ensure justice, if that witness erred, the other was needed to remind her. However, some traditionalists understand this specific situation as universal in its application and make eternal the law that two female witnesses equal one male.

It is necessary to understand the context of Qur’anic verses in order to understand the values and principles that lay behind them. “To insist on a literal implementation of the rules of Qur’an, shutting one’s eyes to the social change that has occurred and that is so palpably occurring before our eyes, is tantamount to deliberately defeating its moral-social purposes


i) Thus, the interpretation that the testimony of one woman was considered less reliable than that of a man because of her inexperience in financial transactions would be restricted to that socio-historical context. In modern times when women are highly educated and involved in business and finance, this injunction would no longer apply. The underlying value was that justice be done. When women are equally educated and conversant in business as men, there is no reason why her evidence cannot be equal to that of a man.

To say otherwise is an outrageous affront to the Qur’an’s stress on justice and human egalitarianism. It is important to remember that while the Qur’an gives solutions to and rulings on specific and concrete historical issues, the Holy Book at the same time provides, either explicitly or implicitly, the rationales behind these solutions and rulings. It is by considering these rationales that one can then extract general principles. It is these general principles of the verses, not the specific sociohistorical case, that have eternal validity.


ii) Furthermore, even if it is considered that this restriction is for all times to come, it may not be wrong. Islam demands true testimony may it be against son, father, brother or any loved one. Woman by nature is kind hearted and may not be able to testify against their sons and fathers. In such case another witness is there to help her reach the right decision.


The belief that only men can be leaders is a fallacy since neither the Qur’an nor the Hadith say that a woman cannot be a leader. In fact the Qur’an extols the leadership of Bilqis, the Queen of Sheba (27:23-44).

Bilqis’s qualities as a good leaders were not measured by gender, but by:

i) her capacity to fulfill the requirements of the office

ii) her political skills

iii) the purity of her faith

iv) her independent judgment


The principle used here is the one best suited to fulfill the requirements of good and effective leadership. If a woman is qualified and the one best to fulfill the task, there is no Qur’anic injunction that prohibits her from any undertaking because of gender.

Yes you have quoted Quran only to the extent which suits your point of view and does not support Islamic ideology

I am again repeating the referring to Quran myopically will never allow reaching the right message. It is very convenient for people to just refer to partial verse, which suits their purpose.

The Qur’ānic instruction of not taking the unbelievers as friends must be carefully analyzed and understood in the context of the circumstance under which the verse was revealed. The verse and sūrah was revealed in 3 A.H./625 C.E. after the battle of Badr and Uhud when the Muslims were in a state of confrontation with the unbelievers. Keeping this backdrop in mind, whenever conditions are hostile, people of other faith causing the hostility cannot be trusted to uphold the interest of the Muslims . In today’s world also citizens of rival countries do not trust each other or befriend them.

The message of this verse does not apply to casual friendship at work or school since 60:8-9 expressly allow making friendship with unbelievers who are not hostile to the Muslims and circumstances of war does not exist between them.

60:7

Perhaps Allah will put, between you and those to whom you have been enemies among them, affection. And Allah is competent, and Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.

60:8

Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.

60:9

Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers.



My dear you have answered your own question by referring to 4:104 and 4:160 I do not need to comment any further.

I think this verse is self explanatory and what has been mentioned is fair and just please have a relook at highlighted portion. I don’t find any injustice or violation of human rights in it.



How does that link to human rights?


The first point to be noted is that, in the verse above, the word Awliya is often incorrectly translated as friends(Awliya is the plural and its singular is wali and the concept is walaah). As a result, many people are under the misconception that this verse commands Muslims to distance themselves from Non-Muslims and to avoid friendship with them. This is far from the truth, as we shall see after examining the meaning of the wordAwliya.

3:122 ...Allah was their WALI (protector), and in Allah should the faithful (Ever) put their trust.

This verse indicates that a wali is one in whom trust is placed for protection, as the Qur'an always declares God the protector, wali, of the righteous.

It becomes clear that the word Awliya cannot be taken as simply referring to friendship, as it contains a much more complex meaning, including dependence and guardianship. Therefore, a more accurate translation of the verse would be:

5:51 O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your protectors: They are butprotectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

Therefore, the referred verse does not prohibit friendship with Non-Muslims at all



No need to commentsee the bold portion. These verses are also related to a particular battle, therefore, mentioning it here has no other purpose except to troll.


These all references are out of context under this topic. Therefore, I won’t comment on it. If you want to discuss these points open up a different thread, which by the way is banned on PDF. @WebMaster


I think you better rest your case if you think those sitting in UN are the only intellectuals this world has. UN is highly biased organization, through first hand knowledge I can say that highest level of prejudice prevails in UN organisations. They work on certain agendas and their objective is never to achieve what is being resolved in the assembly. What equality they have given to the world. Why should only 5 countries hold veto power or permanent position in security council. Is it equality?

The "power of veto" refers to thevetopower wielded solely by the permanent members, enabling them to prevent the adoption of any "substantive" draft Council resolution, regardless of the level of international support for the draft. The veto does not apply to procedural votes, which is significant in that the Security Council's permanent membership can vote against a "procedural" draft resolution, without necessarily blocking its adoption by the Council.

The veto is exercised when any permanent member—the so-called "P5"—casts a "negative" vote on a "substantive" draft resolution.

This goes as far as neutrality, equality and human rights of UN goes and its
intellectualism
@Azlan Haider
well done
 
.
I have agreed that it is not equal...But I question in what sense do you want it equal? I brought forward the differences like physical, physiological and psychological to name a few and based on these rights are given and distributed...

So I ask again can you please narrow it down to what form of rights are we talking about that Islam is ignoring?

In Islamic law , discriminations are made on basis of sex , religion and status (Free/Slave)
In UN human right declaration , no such discrimination is allowed


So , by the UN standards , the Islamic law violates basic human rights , hence incompatible with democracy ;

Democracy and the United Nations
Democracy is one of the universal and indivisible core values and principles of the United Nations. It is based on the freely expressed will of people and closely linked to the rule of law and exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Democracy, and democratic governance in particular, means that people’s human rights and fundamental freedoms are respected, promoted and fulfilled, allowing them to live with dignity.

United Nations Global Issues



Now if you want to say that Islamic law is better than the UN law, then open a new thread please as that is a totally different discussion , mostly members here are trying to justify Islamic laws without realizing that its not the topic of this thread ...

Islamic system is theocratic , and it always had been this way ..
mixing it with democracy is not a good idea
And that's what the OP meant

well done

Brother you don't need to quote the whole lengthy irrelevant post just to say two words :)
Now can you please respond to post 186 ??
 
Last edited:
. .
In Islamic law , discriminations are made on basis of sex , religion and status (Free/Slave)
In UN human right declaration , no such discrimination is allowed
Can I ask you about these discrimination that you point out? I have been repeating myself that the discrimination in Islam is based on the fact that WOMEN and MEN ARE DIFFERENT physically, physiologically, mentally, emotionally ...
So , by the UN standards , the Islamic law violates basic human rights , hence incompatible with democracy
Do you know this is theoratical, women still ARE discriminated in the WEST....try countries like South and East of Europe.....

Now if you want to say that Islamic law is better than the UN law, then open a new thread please as that is a totally different discussion , mostly members here are trying to justify Islamic laws without realizing that its not the topic of this thread ...
I am not pointing out the LAWS...but the laws giving the rights....a topic you and Fauji touched....

Islamic system is theocratic , and it always had been this way ..
mixing it with democracy is not a good idea
And that's what the OP meant
true to a certain extent...But what WE OTHERS are trying to say is WHICH law is bugging you soo much?
 
.
Can I ask you about these discrimination that you point out? I have been repeating myself that the discrimination in Islam is based on the fact that WOMEN and MEN ARE DIFFERENT physically, physiologically, mentally, emotionally ...

The point is ; there is discrimination in Islam... And the UN charter says "No discrimination" at all .....


But what WE OTHERS are trying to say is WHICH law is bugging you soo much?

If Islam , then proper Islam
If democracy , then proper democracy
No Hybrids
 
.
In what sense are you weighting the equality notion?
I have answered this but I guess like Fauji you didnt read my post... because you prefer rending something you dont agree with as stupid then to read it and try to understand...


I also answered this bit...


I also answered this one...Apparently you dont read any of my post!

@Azlan Haider read @Panther 57 post 217 it is clearer than what I have written...
Dear Talon,
No need to get stressed this is just a troll. So leave it.
 
. .
The point is ; there is discrimination in Islam... And the UN charter says "No discrimination" at all .....
JOKE of the century!!



If Islam , then proper Islam
If democracy , then proper democracy
No Hybrids
This thread is about stating that those 2 cant be merged while we believe they can overlap!
 
.
That dd not even make any sense....

You are the same guy who believes that UN intellectuals are silly ?? right ?? No wonder why this did not make any sense to you ;)


JOKE of the century!!

Really ?


This thread is about stating that those 2 cant be merged while we believe they can overlap!

The thread is about "Islam and democracy are incompatibe"
And by mixing them i.e "Islamic Republic", we are damaging the essence of both

About "overlapping" , even a monarchy and democracy can possibly "overlap" , whats your point ?

No need to get stressed this is just a troll. So leave it.

Low quality post by a "tagged" member
 
.
You are the same guy who believes that UN intellectuals are silly ?? right ?? No wonder why this did not make any sense to you ;)

Here is what I said.

You are confusing two different ideas and putting a condition that one can not exist without another. That is not the case, and quite frankly, silly.

Democracy and Secularism are two different unrelated things. This is academics. If someone is not aware of 101 basics of "political science".What these concepts are and how they relate to each other, then I doubt one would be able to grasp what the intellectuals at UN are saying.

This is about Islam and republic.

Democracy, Secularism and UN, are three unrelated things. independent of each other.


No offence, but you don't seem to a have strong grasp over the fundamentals of what you are talking about, but you are building a castle over. So whatever you just said, does not make any sense.

You are simply. Wrong.
 
.
No offence, but you don't seem to a have strong grasp over the fundamentals of what you are talking about, but you are building a castle over. So whatever you just said, does not make any sense.
You are simply. Wrong.

Meray bhai I know what I am talking about .. I can also quote all my posts again , but there is no point .
No need to go in circles again and again , I have given my PoV , you have given yours ... Every one can see and evaluate who is more right than the other . You should not question my educational background when you know absolutely nothing about me
We can simply agree to disagree ...
Hope you understand
 
.
JOKE of the century!!



This thread is about stating that those 2 cant be merged while we believe they can overlap!

Democracy, Secularism and UN are three different things, which are independent of each other. There is NO condition, that one can not exist without another. In fact, they can exist quite separately.

"Human Rights" Is a subjective term. It has nothing do with the concept of democracy. Nor UN has anything to do with democracy. I did not know, that UN actually dictated what democracy should or should not do? That is just silly to say that.

Human rights is a subjective term. It means, if someone finds something "good", another might find it "bad". Perception of what is right and wrong, changes from person to person.


In UN, many people are trying to pass homosexual gay sex, as a human rights issue.




United Nations News Centre - At UN meeting, countries commit to protect gay rights, combat discrimination
26 September 2013 – Countries attending the first ministerial meeting held at the United Nations on the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals today reaffirmed their commitment to work together to combat discrimination and protect the rights of all human beings regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

Foreign ministers attending the meeting, held on the margins of the General Assembly’s annual high-level debate, adopted a declaration pledging not just to protect LGBT rights but also to counter homophobic and transphobic attitudes in society at large, including through public education campaigns.

UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay commended their resolve to act, but stressed many more challenges remain on this issue.

“Over the past decade, many countries have embarked on historic reforms – strengthening anti-discrimination laws, combating hate crime against LGBT people and sensitizing public opinion. But in spite of advances, very serious challenges remain,” she said.

“In some places, things seem to be getting worse, not better. As you know, regressive new laws have been proposed or adopted in several Eastern European and African countries in the past year alone […] We must, all of us, look for new ways to talk about this issue with governments – especially those that are reluctant to do so.”

More than 76 countries still criminalize consensual adult same-sex relationships, while in many more countries discrimination against LGBT people is widespread – including in the workplace and in the education and health sectors.


So if making Gay Sex illegal becomes part of Human Rights violation in the UN. Does that mean, that Gay Sex would become an essential part of democracy as dedicated by UN?
Or would it be up to the people of a democratic country to decide what is Right and Wrong for their own selves?

See how the argument of making UN an "essential" part of democracy does NOT even make any sense at all?

As I said. Democracy, Secularism, and UN are three separate different things. To claim they all are "essential" part of each other is a very, senseless, baseless, and nonacademic , silly and a troll argument.

Thus I believe this thread is being trolled hardcore...

@Talon @qamar1990 @Panther 57 @ssethii

PS: Also being democratic is a term also used in everyday conversation too. E.G, A teacher asks the class room to VOTE for the person, who they want to become the prefect of the classroom. It is called being Democratic. How is this practice against Islam in anyway?
 
Last edited:
.
Yes because you are comparing LAWS of UN which to some extent are unrealistic...Even if you are

The thread is about "Islam and democracy are incompatibe"
And by mixing them i.e "Islamic Republic", we are damaging the essence of both

About "overlapping" , even a monarchy and democracy can possibly "overlap" , whats your point ?
yes and that is what we are saying...nothing wrong with the 2 terms being used together...
 
.
Yes because you are comparing LAWS of UN which to some extent are unrealistic...Even if you are

I don't know when did UN become an essential part of democracy. I mean did UN even exist when democracy was being practiced in England or the US? Does UN dictate what democracy is, and what it should and should not do? How can you even possibly confuse UN with democracy? I mean how? That is just silly. Really. UN is a foreign body, and we can choose to recognize it or not.

I mean, seriously.. How? How can someone manage to make UN an essential part of democracy. Are there any other "foreign" organizations in a distant land, we need to know, which are some how a part of democratic practices?

This is a TROLL argument.

PS: If the best argument a person can come up against the idea of Islamic Republic is by butchering common sense to claim UN as an essential part of democracy. Then these people have NOTHING against Islamic Republic.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom