Muslims: Can someone explain this to me?

[beenie]

Can someone explain how this is true? This answer was given by a Mulfti who claims to be able to give fatwas...I've never heard of a woman needing to cover her hair in her home when NO ONE IS THERE.

Question:

When I am indoors by myself or with my husaband, is it necessary for me to cover my head.

As someone has told me there are two angels watching me and satan is with me aswell and i must keep my head covered at all times eve when there are no other males present. Is this true? Secondly am I allowed to work. My husband works but we remain overdrawn which forces us to pay onterest. If I work then we no longer will have to pay interest as the income will be enough. Thirdly, if we live in the UK are we allowed to obtain a mortgage for our main residence. Someone said it is OK for your main residence but not for any further property purchases such as a second property to rent out etc.


Answer:

1. If you are alone with your husband then you do not have to cover your head. However, it is advisable to have your head covered even if you are alone with your husband. It is true that every one has angels around him/her. The angels should be respected.

2. If your husband’s income is sufficient to fulfil the needs of the family, then it is not permissible for you to work.

3. It is not permissible to take out an interest bearing loan (mortgage) even if it is for the one main house.

And Allah Ta’ala Knows Best

Many of these "fatwas" don't seem right to me, and many people are following these:

Question:

Is it permissible for a Muslim woman to trim her hair provided she exposes her hair only to her husband?


Answer:

It is not permissible for a female to cut or trim her hair. However, trimming her hair to come out of Ihram from Umrah and Hajj is an exception to the general prohibition. (Shaami vol.6 pg.406; HM Saeed)

And Allah Taala Knows Best.

The reason I'm posting this is because I find it disturbing that someone can develop a website and make fatwas like this. IMO it's one of the major reasons there is so much strife within the Muslim community; people who aren't qualified making and enforcing laws...it's scary to me.

Edit: forgot to put link in.
http://www.askimam.org/

 

[ohhcuppycakee]

I wouldn't even bother with fatwas. I have seen some pretty crazy ones out there.

 

[Peace]

1. If you are alone with your husband then you do not have to cover your head. However, it is advisable to have your head covered even if you are alone with your husband. It is true that every one has angels around him/her. The angels should be respected.

That's really complete nonsense and ignorance

It is not permissible for a female to cut or trim her hair. However, trimming her hair to come out of Ihram from Umrah and Hajj is an exception to the general prohibition. (Shaami vol.6 pg.406; HM Saeed)

Women can cut their hair but with one condition is not to cut it so short in order not to look like a man.

 

[Sahar]

ssainhu, can you post the link to that website so that we can avoid or warn against it?

 

[beenie]

Ask Imam

You will see so many fatwas on there that will make your hair stand on end.

 

[beenie]

This one disgusts me:

I am writing regarding one fatwa that is posted on your internet:

> If a female was raped due to her not maintaining the laws of
> Hijaab, she is partly to be blamed as the rapist will be
> considered as being seduced by her revealing form and shape.
> She should make Tawbah (sincerely repent) by also adhering to
> the laws of Hijaab.

I just wanted to express my disgust and repulsion towards this statement. Rape is about power, about violence, not about whether you were wearing your hijab or not. The rate of rape in Afghanistan (where women are all covered) is 1.3 times higher than the rape rate in the US. Statements as the one posted on your website make all educated muslims ashamed. In addition it has no basis in sharia.

As a PhD in Islamic studies with many scholar friends, I will give your website the largest advertisement so everyone can know the extent of the atrocities said in South Africa. With things like this, it's no wonder the state of the Ummah is in such poor condition. We need to stop blaming women for men's barbaric behavior. If not, they're never gonna improve.


Answer

It is important to understand the Fatwa in context. There are generally two types of women. Those that cover and yet have become victims of rape. That is surely no fault of the woman. That is clearly an open violation on behalf of the rapist who should be dealt with severely. Such a woman requires our help and sympathies.

However, if a woman does not cover properly and wears revealing clothing, which seduces men, if such a woman is raped, would it be correct to excuse her? Yes, the man has violated Shari’ah and will be dealt with. The answer should be read in conjunction with the question. It does not deal with man’s power or a fully clothed woman. After all, why is a woman required to cover herself? Do you think a woman’s revealing body does have no effect on a man and she will not be partly responsible for being raped under those circumstances? Both the man and woman will be responsible. She, for her immodest dressing.

You are welcome to advertise the Fatwa with your objection and my response – unlimited advertisement. I will be happy to respond to anyone on condition it is on an academic level. I thought phd’s had that approach and do not follow emotions.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

...and we wonder why some people still act like primates.

 

[jamaesi]

G-d forgive us and show us mercy, even though we don't deserve it.

Someone needs to let this "imam" know that actually Muslimahs and any other women who dress modestly are more likely to be targeted by rapists. This might be triggering so I am putting my explainifyin' of why this is under spoiler tags, click if you want to see it.

Spoiler: Trigger Warning

A lot of people who wear loose, baggy clothing that disguises their bodies have low self esteem or other body/self image issues. Rapists see them as easy targets who probably won't fight back. Loose clothing is also easier and faster to remove than say a hip-hugging pair of skin-tight jeans. A rapist isn't going to want to fight both the victim and her tight clothing. Another thing is we are, as Muslims, instructed to lower our gaze. That's something a rapist would also preceive as a mark of an easy target.

It is disgusting and unforgivable to me to hear people, especially men who aren't also covering their heads and bodies and wearing a beard even though they're supposed to be wearing hijab too, say hijab protects against rape. It doesn't. That's not the point of wearing hijab anyway.

The only thing that can stop rape is for rapists to stop raping people, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for a flood of fatwas that admonish men for abusing and raping women.

 

[muslim-]

This one disgusts me:



...and we wonder why some people still act like primates.

Well, wear a Rolex watch and jewlery and walk into a bad neighborhood. If attacked, yes, they are fully responsible and not you, but that doesnt mean walking into such neighborhoods with flashy jewlery is to be encouraged.

 

[muslim-]

The Mufti of this website isnt Sunni, first of all. They call Sunnis "wahabi". The owner of this site is a Deobandi strict hanafi, with differences between them and Sunnis in belief, and not only branches. He seems to be strictly Hanafi, although Imam Abu Haneefah himself always advised following evidence and not words of men, including his own.

A basic Sunni concept, is that if theres no evidence, then the Fatwa isnt to be listened to. This is one of the basic concepts of Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama'ah.

So , although the fatwa didnt say covering is mandatory and its only "Advisable" , theres no evidence im aware of on the "respecting angels by covering". The authority is Qur'aan and Sunnah, not the words of any sheikh.

As for the second question, perhaps its in reference to certain types of trimming, and that it was mistranslated?

I dont know, but what I do know is that when theres continuous strict following of Madhabs and sayings of certain Imams, then after a while, evidence from Qur'aan and Sunnah goes out the window, and with time it gives "men" too much authority, opening the door for superstitions etc.

He is not only not Sunni, but in one of his fatwas he attacks Sunnis labeling them as "Wahabi" saying that they are the "real Sunnis". The Mufti is Ebrahim Desai and is based on out of south Africa.

He also believes in

1- blind following of sheikhs, and here is what he says about it "The Ulama of the Ahlus sunnah wal Jamaa'ah hold that taqleed of one mazhab is necessary, while the Wahabis generally do not adhere to a mazhab and claim that following one imam blindly is Bidah and shirk. "

2- Asking the dead for help at their graves as opposed to asking God.

3- He appears to be Ash'aree / Maturidi in belief

Im sure if I looked more id find more differences but asking the dead for help alone goes against the most important concept in Islam which is directing supplication ONLY to God, and DIRECTLY to Him. Heres what he says about it, calling Sunnis who reject graveworship "wahabis" :

"The Wahabis reject the permissibility of using a deceased person as a intermediary in dua, while we hold that it is permissible. "

 

[beenie]

Well, wear a Rolex watch and jewlery and walk into a bad neighborhood. If attacked, yes, they are fully responsible and not you, but that doesnt mean walking into such neighborhoods with flashy jewlery is to be encouraged.

That can, in no way, be compared to rape...ever.

 

[beenie]

The Mufti of this website isnt Sunni, first of all. They call Sunnis "wahabi". The owner of this site is a Deobandi strict hanafi, with differences between them and Sunnis in belief, and not only branches. He seems to be strictly Hanafi, although Imam Abu Haneefah himself always advised following evidence and not words of men, including his own.

A basic Sunni concept, is that if theres no evidence, then the Fatwa isnt to be listened to. This is one of the basic concepts of Ahl al Sunnah wal Jama'ah.

So , although the fatwa didnt say covering is mandatory and its only "Advisable" , theres no evidence im aware of on the "respecting angels by covering". The authority is Qur'aan and Sunnah, not the words of any sheikh.

As for the second question, perhaps its in reference to certain types of trimming, and that it was mistranslated?

I dont know, but what I do know is that when theres continuous strict following of Madhabs and sayings of certain Imams, then after a while, evidence from Qur'aan and Sunnah goes out the window, and with time it gives "men" too much authority, opening the door for superstitions etc.

He is not only not Sunni, but in one of his fatwas he attacks Sunnis labeling them as "Wahabi" saying that they are the "real Sunnis". The Mufti is Ebrahim Desai and is based on out of south Africa.

He also believes in

1- blind following of sheikhs, and here is what he says about it "The Ulama of the Ahlus sunnah wal Jamaa'ah hold that taqleed of one mazhab is necessary, while the Wahabis generally do not adhere to a mazhab and claim that following one imam blindly is Bidah and shirk. "

2- Asking the dead for help at their graves as opposed to asking God.

3- He appears to be Ash'aree / Maturidi in belief

Im sure if I looked more id find more differences but asking the dead for help alone goes against the most important concept in Islam which is directing supplication ONLY to God, and DIRECTLY to Him. Heres what he says about it, calling Sunnis who reject graveworship "wahabis" :

"The Wahabis reject the permissibility of using a deceased person as a intermediary in dua, while we hold that it is permissible. "

These people are scary; blindly following ANYONE who is not God is frightening.

 

[jamaesi]

Well, wear a Rolex watch and jewlery and walk into a bad neighborhood. If attacked, yes, they are fully responsible and not you, but that doesnt mean walking into such neighborhoods with flashy jewlery is to be encouraged.

You have got to be ******* kidding me.

And knock it off with the hating on Sufis and Shi'as, it's just uncouth.

 

[muslim-]

You have got to be ******* kidding me.

And knock it off with the hating on Sufis and Shi'as, it's just uncouth.

What hating? Im stating facts. Sorry if you dont like it. Also, this section is called "same faith debates". So if anyone can object and discuss any statement if he/she disagrees. So try to discuss ideas instead of persons, it keeps the conversation on a higher more respectable level. A level above the use of your language that requires usage of stars instead of letters.

As for kidding you, no im not. To say that a woman in a bar full of drunk pervs, dressed like a stripper, is likely to be raped just as much as a conservative missionary at a lecture given at a University, is absurd in my opinion.

To say the way one dresses and/or acts plays no factor at all in increasing the number of incidents is simply illogical. Who says otherwise can go an experiment and take a walk in any neighborhood full of gangs and drugs, one dressed in a bikini with mardi gras beads, and the other as a nun. Saying it makes no difference at all, is absurd.

This has nothing to do with justification, or blaming the victim. But its basic logic that is necessary if one wants to understand factors that are a part of the equation.

 

[jamaesi]

And again, you've got to be ******* kidding me.

It's uncouth to insult Sufis and Shi'as. Remember your religion says that good manners are extremely important. I don't blindly follow anything despite being a Sufi.


And speaking of blind following, have you studied this topic academically like I have? Or are you just blindly parroting misinformation?

Let's have it, then.

Rape is not about sex or arousal or lust, it's about power and control and aggression and hatred. Only 4% of rapes are committed because of an act of provocation on the victims part and it's STILL not their fault for the rape, it's the rapist's. The majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim has known for at least a year. The vast majority of rapes are premeditated and the rapist doesn't remember what the victim was even wearing. BTW, in the majority of cases, the victim was wearing normal clothing like jeans, sweatpants, or pajamas. Over half of rapes occur the in victim's own house and usually in their own bedroom. Victims range from a few days old to into their 90s and higher; how exactly is that baby or grandmother dressing too sexy? Victims are chosen for their vulnerability; that's why the rate of rape for people with disabilities is astronomical.

And yes, women who wear hijab are sexually assaulted and raped. Hijab is not a magical anti-rape device.

This myth of a women dressed up in revealing clothing and getting raped in a back alley by some man who couldn't control himself is just that, a myth.


How ******* dare anyone parrot rape apologia, it's so disrespectful of women and very telling of the character of the person doing the victim blaming. All the fault of rape lays on the rapist.

 

[muslim-]

And again, you've got to be ******* kidding me.

It's uncouth to insult Sufis and Shi'as. Remember your religion says that good manners are extremely important. I don't blindly follow anything despite being a Sufi.


And speaking of blind following, have you studied this topic academically like I have? Or are you just blindly parroting misinformation?

Let's have it, then.

Again, discuss my arguments and not me personally. Discussing persons only means that you have nothing to offer on the topic. Your reasoning doesn't sound very academic. The answer to your question only has two possible answers :

1- To say yes, I think I know more than you.

2- To say yes, you know more than me.

So what level of a discussion does that leave us with? Not a very academic one huh? As for manners, I'm discussing thoughts, and do not say anything I cannot back.In return, you use foul language that can't even be written without stars. So please, raise the level of the discussion.

Now back to the topic, blind following of Madhabs and sheikhs is an essential part of mainstream "Islamic" Sufism all over the world. It is taught at their schools, and written in their books, and their main figures even write responses "refuting" those who are against blind following.

If you had studied this academically, you would have known that as its a very basic concept, and has been for centuries, and you wouldn't have denied it.

If you are a Sufi, then you follow a Sufi Tariqa and have a sheikh that is following and given pledge of alliegence. So what Sufi Tariqa do you follow since you say you are Sufi?

 

[jamaesi]

Again, discuss my arguments and not me personally. Discussing persons only means that you have nothing to offer on the topic. Your reasoning doesn't sound very academic. The answer to your question only has two possible answers :

1- To say yes, I think I know more than you.

2- To say yes, you know more than me.

So what level of a discussion does that leave us with? Not a very academic one huh? As for manners, I'm discussing thoughts, and do not say anything I cannot back.In return, you use foul language that can't even be written without stars. So please, raise the level of the discussion.

Now back to the topic, blind following of Madhabs and sheikhs is an essential part of mainstream "Islamic" Sufism all over the world. It is taught at their schools, and written in their books, and their main figures even write responses "refuting" those who are against blind following.

If you had studied this academically, you would have known that as its a very basic concept, and has been for centuries, and you wouldn't have denied it.

I'm not talking about studying madhabs academically, I'm talking about women's studies. I have studied the topic of rape academically. I have absolutely no interest in discussing theology with a Salafi but your misogynist posts will not go unchallenged.

Don't use a tone argument with me, you can kiss my asterisks for all I care.

Now, are you going to just ignore the rest of my post or are you going to scrape up a source that refutes it?

If you are a Sufi, then you follow a Sufi Tariqa and have a sheikh that is following and given pledge of alliegence. So what Sufi Tariqa do you follow since you say you are Sufi?

None of your business. Don't feel too self-indulgently insulted, I don't tell anyone. It's my business and my murshid's business and G-d's business, that's it.

But something my murshid frequently says in frustration in response to my strong-willed obstinacy is "aren't you my student, didn't you promise to listen to me?" I'm not into following anything, let alone blind following. I'm a free *****, baby. My murshid sees my strong independent and questioning streak as a good asset, whenever he's not frustrated with it.

 

[muslim-]

you can kiss my asterisks for all I care.


None of your business. Don't feel too self-indulgently insulted, I don't tell anyone. It's my business and my murshid's business and G-d's business, that's it.

I'm a free *****, baby. My murshid sees my strong independent and questioning streak as a good asset, whenever he's not frustrated with it.

I can't really get into a discussion of this level. Fine, you are right, I am wrong.
Wish you the best.

 

[jamaesi]

I can't really get into a discussion of this level. Fine, you are right, I am wrong.
Wish you the best.

Xoxo <3 ****