^^War JB-yow, war maxay waxani? Though very provocative; I promise I will (Inshaa-Allah) read (watch). Gotta go now.

Good essay, bro (Nur). JZK as always!

Shesheey (pardon the slight corruption of your name), I could shorten my answers to two words: ignorance and culture. But that would beg the question you raised. It points the finger at a familiar direction. It does not suggest a solution. I could lecture about the goodness of this faith and the superiority of its ideals. I could furnish and narrate the history of how women were emancipated from the shameful practices of pre-Islamic era: the lovely story of how property rights, right to divorce, and gender equity have come about. But those you already know. So what is the reason for which we are unable to harvest? It is you, and she and I. It is simply we. Are we using these ideas? Are you? Am I? How true Muslims are we? The value of and idea, as Thomas Edison (the American inventor) once said, lies in the using of it . The changes you yearning for will never come to you if you don’t work hard and strive to make it happen. So lets put the blame squarely on us. The sisters are part of the problem, Sheh. Those who got secular education tend to develop identity crises. They tend to sing and hum with the popular songs. Hijaab becomes no longer their style. Those who have religious training tend to create a mini Islamic state of theirs. And they seem to be unaware of the challenges ahead. The gap between the two is unfortunately widening. But the objective should be, for all of us, not imitate the superficial life in the west but to live as good Muslims should. To day what you need most is to educate yourselves about the basics of this religion. The Muslim women need not to delegate the tasks of learning critical Islamic subjects. You also need not to exaggerate and inflate the problems that you are facing. In the society we come from, women are not oppressed. In the urban centers women do have the opportunity and some choose to take it and some not. In the rural areas one would always expect some disparity would exist due to the primitive and harsh lifestyle and the lack of the reach of law. So I am not quite sure what you mean ‘basic rights taken away from them’. Is it a widespread phenomenon that most Muslim women have to face? Or is it an isolated incident? There is also the question of modernity and change it brings. The peculiar culture where lower self takes the lead and where sexual lawlessness represents the zenith of liberty and freedom of choice. Where children are aborted in the name of women rights. That you should reject. There is also that question of modernity as it relates to balancing between family and career. What would a Muslim woman do when confronted between choosing her children and her career (the one, mind you, she sacrificed time and treasure)? What would her priorities be? Would she stick to her profession and in the way sacrifice the well being (religious, emotional, and the quality) of her precious ones? If she chooses family over profession would she then be seen as submissive and docile of sort? Here is where religious knowledge would greatly help. It is where the line between secular life and faith-based one is drawn. And in the domain of decision-making, women have a role. They really do. You do it every day. Your mom did it. If you mean politics, though that may not be the ideal function for a God fearing Halimo, you may probably know that the four largest Muslim countries in the world (Indonesia, Turkey, Pakistan, and Bangladesh) has voted and elected woman. A political experience that is lacking in America, mind you. And although it remains a contentious issue among Muslim scholars (the admissibility for woman to hold high decision making position) the debate had, nevertheless, begun in the 9th century and that you shall pride (I don’t want to mislead you here because the majority of the jurist believe that it is not admissible for a woman to be head of state). I don’t personally think this is a problem because in the end it would boil down to the level of your faith. After all you’re bound to accept the higher rulings of Allah. In the final analysis the message of this faith is one of an absolute submission to Allah. And so only Him you shall fear. And respect those who are the vessels of His Sharia. There you have it my 2 cents, sister.

Originally posted by Saluugla: Waryaa , Ducaqabe Inabti soo digii dooda badhtamaha ugu jirey xageed u oronaysaa maxaa laga doodayey. lol Xiinfiniin ,OO heedhe hadii adiga marka lagula doodayo aad dad ka aflagaadaynayso, waa dhibaato (for SOL) wallaalo. Waar seefla boodnimada is ka daa oo dood fiican la kaalay. Oo adna xaggee ka timid Walaal? Maxaad dood fiican u taqaan? aflagaadose maxaad u taqaan? Walaal tani waa dood diineed. Nabigaaga ninkii u gefaa muxuu kuu la haray? mise waxba maad aqrine dhexdaad ugasoo dhacday? Midda kale meeshaan arrin adagi ma taallo qofkas ta arrrin u aragtidiisa ka dhiiban karo weeye marka: Xagun labada d-a-a-r-o-o-d ku daran ha isxakabin meele! Ama sida Castro yeel. that it is an option too .

Sheh, I will, Insha Allah , attempt to answer those questions of mine. If I am not misreading your piece, you are looking for solutions to come from within. From that angle my analysis shall emanate and on it my examination shall rest.

Castro , Look at you; yours is very interesting character to say the least. I stand with the charlatan charge. A man who has no respect for the articles of my faith will never find a reliable shelter from my sharp tongue. Actually I haven’t called in my heavy artillery yet. So be afraid. Respect is mutual, so keep that in mind. For now though, forget about Socod-badane and his blasphemy (that is what it was) for a minute, and tell us where you stand on the issue at hand. If you want to debate make an argument, explain it and back it with supportable facts. Don’t trail behind, saaxiib. Here is the argument I tried to challenge: 1-Sharia Law is outdated, unfair, and dispensable. 2- Mohamed (the prophet of God) is fallible (not macsuum) man whose words are not final. 3- When discussing about the above points, definitions don’t matter. I realize you at least agreed with argument # 2. Come out of your closet and tell us more. Care to furnish us how you believe in the words from a man (the prophet that is) who could err like we do? Is it not that the height of ignorance? This is a little challenge for you, I suppose. As Ducaqabe eluded, you can’t just choose and debate (serious debate that is) about any subject if you lack the basics of it. Is it not fundamental to your faith that you accept and comply with Allah’s laws? Is it not basic that you accept and respect the Cismah (infallibility) of your prophet? What calls? Or the mere fact that Xiin is the other side of the argument is enough for you to drink from the bog? NGONGE, is this the reform you had in mind saaxiib? I guess the pre-labor is over for you and it is high time to deliver . Count on me on this, I will be there for you .

^^^As the old the saying goes, you can’t clap with a one-hand saaxiib. I was lured by what seemed to be a genuine debate. An empty loom it has become. That much for lament over this failed crop. As for your intermittent bared-teeth, I donnu what to make of it. Perhaps I could do the same .

^^^The Prophet was ‘incapable of error in defining doctrines touching faith or morals’. So yes he was not fallible.

What an honest self-critique this is! While affirming the goodness of your faith you managed, good sister, to raise very propping questions as to why the reality of many Muslims (Muslim women in this case) does not reflect the very values they brag? Though I am ill equipped to propose practical remedy to this seemingly persistent problem, your sentiment does, however, resonate with me. I do indeed share your frustration, sister. Will we ever see in a world where Muslim woman takes advantage of all the privileges by which her God granted? Why not? What are the obstacles? Who is preventing her to grow with in the bounds of her faith? Is it ignorance? Or are there other forces that’re at work here?

^^And here you go again. Though the prophet was, as a human, capable of making mistakes He was not, good Castro, erroneous in his divine reports. His (Axaadiith) were not a mere collection of mortal rants; they were, as the Qur’an affirms, another form of revelation, saaxiib. The reason I’ve withdrawn from this thread is not because Socod-badane is misinformed about the basics of the subject he chose to debate rather it is because he sounds to me a charlatan of sort. And I don’t deem wise to engage a virtual dual with imposters, saaxiib. For you to come out for the rescue of this sinking soul, as hastily as you did, by playing with the words while avoiding the gist of his broken argument is a telling sign. Engage me, if you will, but be brave enough not to camouflage with semantics, saaxiib. What does it mean to assert that the words of the prophet are the interpretations of fallible man? What does it imply in the context of his argument?

^^ Waa kaa haray. Adeer anigu cid walba lama doodo. Originally posted by Socod_badne: Few things. First, the hadiths are NOT the word of Allah but words and interpetations of fallable man. Since the Hadiths are not Allah's words, they are changeable, redefinable with intention of making them more practical and harmonious with today's world and its needs. The Hadithsa are not untouchable, only the Quran . Muslims believe that their Prophet is not a fallible man!

Somalia 's breakaway region of Somaliland has intensified efforts to halt the spread of the HIV/AIDS virus, whose prevalence has steadly risen there over the last six years, said the United Nations. Authorities in the northwestern region last week launched a National AIDS Commission to fight the deadly virus as well as offer treatment, care and support of those infected and affected, the UN humanitarian office for Somalia said in a statement on Monday. The commission will be a partnership between the public and private sectors, which will work to brake the spread of the virus in the region that unilaterally declared independence in 1991 when Somali dictator Mohammed Siad Barre was toppled. Read on.

Yaa ku dhaca hee!

Viking , I understand why now. But I cannot help but wonder (this is not about you as you’re not first to release his curiosity on this) why a Muslim mobilize his/her efforts to dice and slice divine words? Of course you know, good Viking, what gave these questions to surface was the genuine attempt of rationalist scholars to address the issue of divine attributes and to effect perfect Tanziih. But as you may be aware of the process had became quite slippery and many were compelled (by the methods of logic) to deny some of Allah’s divine qualities. So my question has been and still is if the companion of the prophet were not raising these questions and took the literal meaning of the script why should we? Are we trying to arrive at better and superior understanding than theirs? I am not a daring man when surrounded with the bulwark of the revealed word. I have found my safety in being compliant with the original understanding of the salaf. They were pioneers of this and lived better era than we do. By now, you know me enough and you often saw me insisting that the beauty of faith is to believe. Though the meaning of this particular hadith is readily available and easily attainable, your questions are on a bigger topic or so I think. As I said before the applicability of Majaas to the Qur’an is a subject that had been attended by scholars of great authority. As of ten the case is, I am with the radical view of Shiekhul Islam on this. And thusly I hold it to be not permissible. Thanks for the topic, saaxiib, it is great.

Dee Wiilana ku dara soo dhaweynta . Soo dhawaada kuligiin.

Originally posted by Socod_badne: I don't have a definition of Sharia law and it doesn't matter what is the definition of Sharia law. .............The Sharia law is NOT Allah's laws. Only parts of it but not ALL. Most of the Sharia law is man made, how can you say its Allah's laws? Most of the Sharia law is based on Hadiths.. ^^Look how you contradict yourself, Socod-badane. If you don’t know (don’t have) the definition of Sharia Law then how have you arrived these definitive conclusions? You see, good Socod-badane, facts are stubborn and no one is entitled to them. But if you’re resolved to be evasive about where you get these astonishing assertions I must assume that you’re not interested in a serious debate. Nevertheless, I will, with good intent, try to engage you and show how you got those allegations, embarrassingly, wrong. To begin, you need to know one of the worst mistakes one makes is to misrepresent and twist facts to advance trivial agendas. It is one thing to question and address the pervasive and the persisting legal corruptions in the Islamic world but it is, all together, another to indict divine legal system and negate its validity. To dispute, as you proudly did, the source of the Sharia Law, thought hopeless and futile effort in nature, requires more than mere sophistry, saaxiib. Socod-badane, you are really impeaching the integrity of your character by sounding naively simplistic. Compounded-ignorance is not the invention of Muslim scholars whose authority you don’t respect, much less recognize, rather it is telling description of those who think they know some thing when in fact they are in darkness of it. It is much like Mark Twain’s (another Twain as I have a hunch that you would recognize his literary authority!) famous quote; it ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. Marka ha ka caroon saaxiib. Now, to say that Qur’an is the main source of Sharia Law is understatement. That the sound Xadiith is the primary source to interpret the Qur’an is a fact. The two are intertwined. Sharia Law, hence, is the combinations of the two. Here are couple useful definitions of it (It really, mid you, matters what the Sharia Law is). 1- Definition of the Sharia Law 2-Definition with some key terms of the Sharia Law Granted there are contentions issues in the Islamic code as any other legal code. But the Islamic code is applicable to day as it had been before. It encompasses all aspects of life (both secular and religious if you can make that distinction, that is). The objective of Sharia مقاصد الشريعة (of Islam for that matter) is to safeguard five things: religion, property (and other possessions), life, relationships (like marriage), and Sobriety of Muslim. Of course each one of these could have infinite issues that require specific clauses to address it. But you get the general idea. I don’t honestly know any modern Muslim country that implements Sharia Law. But it is some thing I yearn for and I would like to see implemented. As a Muslim I believe it will have positive impact on my life. From finance, inheritance, to the concept of proof in the courts, Sharia Law will have consequential impact and a positive one at that. I hope you change your paradigm from which you based your argument. Make no mistake I am not defending the way Saudi Royal courts implement it nor have I satisfied with the way Taliban abused it. What I am contending is your reckless allegations. It really borders blasphemy, saaxiib. As to this topic and recognizing Sharia Law in the west, though partially, I like it. I think it is a good idea. It would help.

0101110001 = 1+16+32+64+256 = 369? what!

It is more complicated than this, saaxiib. It goes to the heart of admissibility of مجاز in the divine words of Allah. It is how the question of whether teh divine word is plainly and literally real or whether it could contain occasional metaphorical and allegorical passages was born. But before we go even further and expound why it is necessary to accept the literal meanings of both the tradition and the Qur’an I would plead with you to tell us what is it that bothers you to accept as it is? Or is it just a mere intellectual exercise of yours that brought this topic to life?

Wallee waa talo. Haddise aan joogi waayo SOL baa loo heystaa, awoowe. Baashow soo annoo faajeer ah oon reerka dhan u dhaafin brother Nur cashar nooma aqrin . Markaasaan kutub Xaajiyad ula soo baxay dee. Haddese iyo dan, bal Caribou Coffee aan ku dayo. Meeshana adiga iyo Libaax-ba anaa war idinkaga keenay, Haddii Alle idmo; I still consider it as a book about my prospective in-laws .

Warba maadaa hayya . Show waraaqahaygu kuma soo gaarin . Soo tii arrintaa rag u fariistay maaha. Sow tay xeerarka ad-adag u qoreen maaha :cool: . War ninyahow inaad cidla joodtid waa ogaa laakiin inaad saan u war la'dahay ma ogeyn. Wax badan baa alla sahlay, awoowe, intaad nagasoo maqneyd . Xaajiyadu iyadaa gar-wadeen ka ah howlahaan. Qur'aankey aad u taqaanaa qoftu . Sow waxaan ku raacay maaha .

lol@Ubooy Nagu Buqo! Horta Libaax wallee xikmad miiran baad tahay haddiiba aad ii dhehdaa qori kartid. Awoowe mindhaa xilligaad wax alifi laheyd baa lagaaray . Igu halle aniga meeshaas. though I don't like the open book place (it is too small a space). Baashiyow, awoowe maxaad isku yeel-yeelaysaa . Meeshaas oo kale sidee uga maqnaadaa? Sow maad ogeyn inaan cidda buuga laga qoray gabar ka rabey .

Thanks to bro Nur and Baashi. It was reported that a companion of the prophet brought charity to the mosque so the deserving poor would take it. But his son who stalked him to the mosque got hold of it and took the sadaqa. When the father found out what his son had done he came and complained to the prophet. And the prophet of Allah told him; you got what you aimed and intended. And you own what you took, the prophet told to the son. This is another case of the power of intent and the underlying lesson is: good intent does never get lost.

You’re right, good NGONGE , he does not fit in any of those categories. But who knows his could be one those minds that’s fed by the very people you mentioned . I am eagerly waiting for the brother to come back and answer my question. Potentially good topic indeed.

How did I miss this one? This smells like a good debate . Socod-badane, you of all people made somber assessments about the Sharia Laws and indicted fundamental tenets of this faith. You deemed it outdated because it is not, you reasoned, applicable to our age; unable to solve our problems. Unjust , you said, because it is inherently unfair as it harshly punishes the poor and looks the other way, so to say, when it comes to the rich. And finally it is dispensable , you concluded, and not essential to our live. Then you rose to the pulpit and lectured about how the Sharia is derived from confusing and differing opinions that we are not obliged to follow. Now before I accuse you (it would seem so, any way, even if I don’t mean one) of what the Muslim scholars term compounded ignorance , would you furnish us what definition of Sharia law you had in mind? I shall now wait and remain reserved till you come back with a supportable definition. For it may be the case, just may be, that you have forgotten Mark Twain’s priceless advice; get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please .

^^^Would that change any thing, good WOL? The head of old goons should go, I say. Or at least he needs to undertake real reforms in his little and corrupt empire. Any short of that would tantamount to brushing the surface whilst deep cleansing is needed.