On Doomed Queens and Dumb Women

[Naden]

Ever wonder what cult members do when they think the world ends on Tuesday but Wednesday shamelessly strolls in?

 

Leon Festinger did research on prophecies in the fifties by studying a woman who believed that a cataclysm was approaching. She claimed the date was delivered by aliens and her followers believed they would be spared the end if they followed her. The dates, of course, came and went and no cataclysms of any sort, not even a meteorological hiccup. Did this make her followers change their minds? No such luck. They ignored the failed prophecies, suppressed the dissonance between prophecy and reality, and merrily went about observing their alien-inspired practices with gusto. “A man with a conviction is a hard man to change†observed Festinger, especially when the “person has some investment in his belief.â€

 

Cataclysms and aliens aside, I’ve been thinking about 2 hadiths discussed in another subforum in regards to women and leadership. Both are apparently verified and widely accepted by many scholars although if you look hard enough, you might hear a grumbling or two. The first hadith is understood to place a limit on how high a woman can go in a leadership position in a muslim state. It is also interpreted, when desired, to mean any position where a woman is in charge of a man. The second hadith refers to a speech given by prophet Mohamed (pbuh) to a group of women whereby he describes them as ناقصات عقل ودىن , deficient in intellect and religious practice. For the actual hadiths, here’s a link to a good site: Source.

 

Let me preface with this: prophet Mohamed’s (pbuh) morals and manners were exceptionally high or else he would not be entrusted with the holy message. Unfortunately, these 2 hadiths don’t agree with my beliefs in the equality of people as espoused in the Quran. They just don’t, so dissonance is inevitable and something has got to give. Hence the following neural firings (umm...thoughts ):

 

Random neural firing #1

 

The first hadith raises a couple of questions: In what context did the rasuul (csw) make this utterance? What scant criticism available hints at its informative (as opposed to normative) nature. Thus, its interpretation/application may be limited in time and space to this female ruler of Persia and her failing kingdom. We may never know.

 

We do know this: the Quran does not limit leadership/rule to men. Is the hadith contradicting fundamental principles of equality in the book? More learned people are debating this and will continue to do so. What I am certain of is that I have an interest AND an investment in the belief that my equal rights as a human being are granted/protected by God. I am also of the understanding that some men, including many muslim scholars/jurists who are interested in positions of power, whether domestic, social, economic or political would be in strong support of as wide an application as possible of this hadith and using it as a basis for a law. A view that women have no place leading them might make these interests materialize; in this sense, female limitation leads to direct male advantages. Wrapping these interests in the clothes of Islam makes anyone who questions their legitimacy seem as though they are questioning Islam.

 

No less motivated by interests, I often wonder if I would be equally bothered if the prophet (csw) was quoted as saying that no nation would prosper that is led by a left-handed Abyssinian born to a one-legged woman. It would be tragic for all the left-handed Abyssinians with one-legged mothers but would I be bothered? Probably yes. It is unacceptable and wrong that one (or 2 or 3?) hadith can be the basis for the exclusion of women from any type of decision-making position in the public domain, even in the hypothetical highest leadership. In my view, it contradicts the basic principles of Islam of equality and accountability.

 

Random neural firing #2

 

The second hadith poses a smaller but not less significant dilemma. Simply examining the hadith with a most untrained eye leads to the following observations:

 

1. Similar to the first hadith, equal responsibility and accountability of women and men in the Quran leads one to believe that they are considered equal in intellect. Of course, some interpretations quickly point that prophet Mohamed (scw) was merely talking about an extraordinary (and hell-leading) ability of women to lead men astray despite their limited intellect and religious practice and not necessarily singling them out but I’m not convinced.

 

2. Women are commanded not to fast or pray when menstruating (out of compassion, no doubt) but would adherence to that command lead them to be labeled as deficient in practice? If anything, obeying god is the opposite of that label. Similarly, the command of 2 women in the place of one man’s testimony in commercial transactions (the only exception to equal weight of witness testimony, mind you) is from god. How can this be held against them and their intellect?

 

Creative interpretations are abound but most can’t ignore that big, fat elephant in the room: a deficiency in reasoning (not to mention understanding, reflection, obedience, imaan, and many others) are human qualities as described in the Quran. Again, is the hadith contradicting fundamental principles of equality (even in deficiencies) of genders in the book?

 

Random neural firing #3

 

Just a couple of final thoughts:

 

1. To reconcile my belief that the equality of people is protected in the irrefutable Quran with the belief that prophet Mohamed (pbuh) would not contradict god, I am led to suspect one of 2 things:

 

a) the hadiths ascribed to him have somehow misconstrued his words or taken them out of context.

 

b) there are hundreds of thousands of ahadiths rejected/labelled as weak -- perhaps there need to be hundreds of thousands plus 2.

 

2. Personal and ideological interests are sometimes protected at all costs, and motivate these discussions on religion and equality. They dictate which convictions we vigorously and repetitively defend and which ones we gently observe or treat with respectful indifference.

 

 

(I just missed an episode of Law & Order writing this )

[Castro]

Interesting thoughts Naden. Invariably, you will be advised to submit first then ask questions later. Not bad advice, ostensibly, but deeper inspection might reveal lack of knowledge (on matters you query) on the donor's side. My suspicion is the answers you seek may not be found here (or other similar quarters). What you can do is share these answers when, or if, you find them.

 

Good day and good luck.

[Naden]

Originally posted by Castro:

My suspicion is the answers you seek may not be found here (or other similar quarters). What you can do is share these answers when, or if, you find them.

Good day and good luck. [/QB]

Indeed, more questions than answers. Although of principal importance, there are many issues more pressing in the day to day struggles of muslims. This is easier said, of course, by those of us in the Western world.

 

And a good night to you.

[-Serenity-]

Hi Naden,

 

You might find this (Chapter 4 if you want to cut to the chase) interesting and helpful in your quest for answers.

[Khayr]

....and the broken record keeps playing over...and over...over...again.... :rolleyes:

 

In the day of judgement, you will be judged on your Taqwa/Piety and not your gender, plain and simple. So worry about that and ponder over it over and over....again!

[Naden]

Originally posted by Amelia:

Hi

Naden

,

You might find

this

(Chapter 4 if you want to cut to the chase) interesting and helpful in your quest for answers.

Hi Amelia, thanks for the link.

[Johnny B]

The inevitability of the dissonance is natural since it is about your faith, it is due to the mysticalness of the faith and your congenital naturalistic rationale. overwhelmingly latent, most people psycologically repress religious dissonance becouse it depicts painful and disturbing realities that need to be excluded from the embellished realities, somethig so dear and symbolic might get to give, and that is not even an option to be entertained, hence the latency.

It is cogent to see how you enchantingly weave the relation between the infalliable messenger and the follies of ( parts ) the message.

Where in the intellectual ladder you´ve placed the feet of the dissonance-crux , threatens to turn your point of contention to nothing but a great farce, however,you came off as genuine and cincere contemplator.

 

Whenever the concept of “holiness,†acquires a rather benign metaphysical connotation, the mystical and inexplicable become the normative of the rationale, that is why it seems to me that you were hunting a Bear with a pocket-knife so to speak.

 

WB Emperor Castro, and that SOL has suffered due to your absence, is an understatement.

[Naden]

JB,

overwhelmingly latent, most people psycologically repress religious dissonance becouse it depicts painful and disturbing realities that need to be excluded from the embellished realities.............It is cogent to see how you enchantingly weave the relation between the infalliable messenger and the follies of ( parts ) the message.

Interesting how dissonance was seen as one of the reasons for either dropping a belief entirely or becoming a relentless (extreme?) and unquestioning supporter. I don't believe the messenger was infallible, no human is; of high morality, yes, but not infallible. What is ascribed to the prophet (pbuh), which is essentially hearsay, should always be intensely examined.

 

Where in the intellectual ladder you´ve placed the feet of the dissonance-crux , threatens to turn your point of contention to nothing but a great farce, however,you came off as genuine and cincere contemplator.

Umm, thanks .......I think :confused: .

 

I think dissonance is only part of it and other sources of spiritual angst maybe culprits. An interesting read is Al-Nabulsi's 'religious sin complex'. He comments on critics of religious doctrine who backtrack after intense attacks, and denounce their previous writings.

 

Could it be that any serious reflection and questioning buckle under the burden of sin, perceived or otherwise? Sin is at the center of religious instruction and is seared into the psyche of anyone reared with its ideals. Probably an effective tool in moral development, if only this instruction is not often imbued with equal doses of guilt, manipulation and fear. You see, the neighbour sins, my great aunt with the moustache sins, I sin (but will deny unless tortured ), we all sin according to these doctrines and religious reflection can be like picking at scabs. A painful and difficult reminder of not only what you're doing but what you're not doing but should be doing and all the shidh you shouldn't have done but did anyway. Who are we then, pathetic lot of stinking sinners, to question this and that?

 

that is why it seems to me that you were hunting a Bear with a pocket-knife so to speak.

I would have brought heavier artillery but all those bloody sins made my legs buckle .

 

WB Emperor Castro, and that SOL has suffered due to your absence, is an understatement.

*Shakes her head and mumbles about SOL ingrates who don't notice that you missed Law & Order on Wednesday and Numb3rs on Friday to share reflections. Note to self: add JB to a list of people to cyber poke with a pocket knife.*

[Cara.]

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

 

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."

 

Does any woman really think that this is a message from her creator? It's so wrong on so many levels it's kind of breathtaking. I can't believe some wouldn't reject it even on the basis that it clearly contradicts the Qur'an.

[Pi]

Why is there an exception when it comes to the number of women required in buiseness transactions? Is this exception only applied in buisenesss transactions(the 2 women= 1 man rule) or is it more general? And why? Any explanations? Anybody?

[Khayr]

Originally posted by Cara:

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301:

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:

 

Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."

 

Does any woman really think that this is a message from her creator? It's so wrong on so many levels it's kind of breathtaking. I can't believe some wouldn't reject it even on the basis that it clearly contradicts the Qur'an.

Now you know that Proud_Muslimah and other nomads already dealt with this issue back in Oct./Nov. 2005 and you were back then the propagater of the Negative View of Women.... You got dealt with so why bring it up again unless you are bidding to do the work of the Shaytan. :rolleyes:

[Naden]

Originally posted by Cara:

Does any woman really think that this is a message from her creator? It's so wrong on so many levels it's kind of breathtaking. I can't believe some wouldn't reject it even on the basis that it clearly contradicts the Qur'an. [/QB]

Unfortunately, many women (and men) are either illiterate or believe that the ahadith are actually the words of the prophet (pbuh), instructed/inspired by God. This particular hadith and the leadership one (among many others) have a couple of incredulous qualities about them:

 

1. They ascribe to the prophet knowledge of the unknown (when will the hour be, who will be in heaven or hell and so on) when the quran clearly spells out that he does not. The following ayas show that: Sura 6, Verse 50; Sura 7, Verse 187; Sura 46, Verses 9-10; Sura 79, Verses 42-44 and many more.

 

2. They ascribe to the prophet the prototypical sexism and condescension of the region across times. Very tempting and easy it must be to place "it was said by prophet Mohamed (csw)" before a personal and vile thought. The above hadith sounds like the mutterings of a man tortured by multiple wives and female slaves whom he wishes he could stuff into hell.

 

This gem and others are in the book of menstruation .

 

Originally posted by Pi:

Why is there an exception when it comes to the number of women required in buiseness transactions? Is this exception only applied in buisenesss transactions(the 2 women= 1 man rule) or is it more general? And why? Any explanations? Anybody?

I believe the provision of two female witnesses in the place of a male is only seen in commercial transactions. In the other specific acts of witness - against a fahisha (Sura 5, Verse 15-16) and to a punishment (Sura 24, Verse 2) - all believers are admonished. Bearing just witness is a required duty for all believers in general (Sura 5, Verse 8).

 

From a limited knowledge of the history and customs of the time, contractual and commercial issues were dominated by men who tended to socialize only with other men . As I understand it, the need for multiple witnesses (male or female) is seen as a reminder for one if the other(s) forgets not as a comment on the cognitive and memory functions of women. This legislation probably introduced women as credible witnesses into commercial transactions with a responsibility to present themselves as such when needed and to be just when doing so. Interesting to see the quran also admonishing all witnesses to be 'just witnesses' (Sura 5, Verse 8), be present when called and not intimidate scribes (Sura 2, Verse 282).

[Khalaf]

My dear sisters think about this:

 

"What I have forbidden for you, avoid. What I have ordered you [to do], do as much of it as you can. For verily, it was only the excessive questioning and their disagreeing with their Prophets that destroyed [the nations] who were before you". [Related by al-Bukhaaree and Muslim

 

e.g bani Israel. All your questions have been asked by people stronger in intellect and more articulate then u, our ulma have answered each and every question. But people continue to raise baseless questions and Allah says:

 

Their likeness is as the likeness of one who kindled a fire; then, when it lighted all around him, Allah took away their light and left them in darkness. (So) they could not see. They are deaf, dumb, and blind, so they return not (to the Right Path). [Al-Baqarah]

 

If u are sincere in your questions then go to those who have knowledge, Proud_Muslimah did an excellent job, but u can't guide the blind or make hear the deaf. May Allah guide us all.

[Valenteenah.]

Originally posted by Khayr:

Now you know that Proud_Muslimah and other nomads already dealt with this issue back in Oct./Nov. 2005 and you were back then the propagater of the Negative View of Women.... You got dealt with

so why bring it up again unless you are bidding to do the work of the Shaytan. :rolleyes:

To question a hadeeth is to do the work of the shaytan? Trust you to believe that. :rolleyes: You may enjoy wallowing in ignorance, but others have a right to fully understand their religion (if only to make sure that they aren't misled by stooges like you).

 

 

Naden,

 

I agree with those that say you'll not find satisfactory answers from anyone in here.

[Johnny B]

WB Cara , nice to have you back, and as always you pose valid questions , Though i do buy most of Naden´s line of thinking i´ve two more cents to spend.

 

In the context of a patriarchal mind-set, complete freedom is too wild privilege of sort to understand and handle, so the type of fundamentalist women/girls who choose freedom through submission to God through Men are aware of the trade-offs, but find it somehow worthwhile, instead of facing the consequences of decision-making ( even in mundane things ), the hard work of constantly thinking critically and all the hassle that human fallibility connotes.

 

Seen in that light ,though their freedom and choices are severely constrained by Men, the notion that some fundamentalist women might actually experience a sense of liberation, ain´t as paradoxical as it may first sound, what is deadly sick and paradoxical is, however ,that those very fundamentalist women/girls find it inconceivable that you among other women think diffrently.

 

As for Men, an Omniscient, omnipotent and compationate God takes away some people´s lights to leave them intentionally in the dark, deaf and dumb, never to find out about the very message that he sent so many messengers (who had to do the impossible [sometimes even to kill] ) to spread on mother earth

 

So much have i heard of encouraging questioning but what Khayr and Khalaf have shown is everything but that.

 

** JB is thankful that Naden has 6 fingers on her right arm, that the pocket-knife is under a firm grip is an insurance of sort. **