Pashtun system of marriage has benefits...

[Tjanaparh]

rules of action for gain, can be just done for the sake of the reward, and not for true compassion, no matter what the rule was made for in the first place.
i never needed a rule nor reward, for compassion.

You need however to educate insomehow, right? For example wrong education often aims to make people loose compassion, to suppress it.

[faye]

yeah, that's what i keep saying, wrong thinking is the problem.
but to need a reward in the afterlife for caring for others?

[Tjanaparh]

yeah, that's what i keep saying, wrong thinking is the problem.
but to need a reward in the afterlife for caring for others?

Perhaps You did not understand what I said?

I meant that I suppose at the begining it wasn't that way, do You think it was?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Well, I am not an expert but I think you misinterpret partially the meaning of namus. I would say that a man is taught to protects his wife or sister or daughter because if he doesn't, and a woman will do something unacceptable, then he will be called beghairat and her acts will affect his sense of honour and social acceptance. So in fact by protecting women men in fact protect themselves and their namus.

If it were as you say, men after divorce would not be taunted as talaqi. Probably you know that in Pashto the real meaning of this word is different than that indicated by its Arabic origin. So man after divorce can lose his honor. For me it proves that de facto men protect their own honor.

exactly ....in Pashtunwali "Namos" is actually "Male reputation regarding women" not ""guarding the well being of women".


Case and point; a Pashtun family would kill or rebuke their daughter if she fell in love, not because of its degrading consequences but because of their reputation. But they'd have NO problems of selling their daughter to an old. unfit and abusive Pashtun male if he gave a high walwar.

where in this is women's benefit again?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Faye
I think the environment forces people to be conservative. The urban pashtuns are more liberal than the rural pashtuns and one can see this all over the world with all people. It does have compassion for others misfortunes because it has the concept of "melmastai" (the concept of hospitality) and "nanawata" (the concept of sanctuary and mercy for those that ask for it). There is one change in Afghanistan that has occurred for the first time in history. The urban population has increased from about 10% pre 2001 to more than 35% today and the projection is that it will be more than 50% by the end of the decade. This is a huge environmental change and peoples psyche will evolve with it.

As for your theory. I dont think it has anything to do with western women had no role models or they lacked spirituality. The liberalization and equality for women goes through the same process and ends up the same in the east and the west because all women seek freedom from not just male control but any control that society has put on them, this is not just unique in the West.

Human being in essence want to control others whether they are male or female. Men and women use their particular strengths to dominate others in their environment whether its through physical strength or through creativity/manipulation . The men raping men in prison is all about control and securing dominance over others in their environment. The want to control and dominate is not unique to one sex.

You're essentially analogizing Pashtun marriages with rape which is more or less what I have been arguing. It's all about control and the ego of domination involved, these ideas like namos and ghairat that Pashtunwali promotes (not what Islam promotes) are not about social welfare or "caring for others as one's self", but domination and control at all costs


Speaking only for myself, I'm not advocating this cycle of self destructive impulses that spurs out of erratic and misguided notions of freedom which is mainstay in the West. I didn't concur with Faye that patriarchy and male domination were at the core here because those things are evolutionary outcomes. However what Pashtuns do can no longer be said to be a product of evolution but very self defeating process. I'm talking about women's welfare where their best interests are allowed to surface. Where they can make decisions on their destiny and not be hoarded or bartered off like a donkey. WHere they can get educated, acquire their own resources and have recourse to maintain security against hostile forces. This doesn't mean lacking rules or standards of what is right and wrong. The system Pashtuns currently have clearly doesn't work for Pashtuns as we can see the disastrous consequences it has. Bacha Bazi in Pashtun culture is linked to the marriage practices of Pashtuns; men who don't end up having the chance to marry end up seeking interest in other males as a "surrogate". To say this is "merely a minority" is false as it has been confirmed by studies on the matter that it is extremely frequent.

There's a Taoist saying, a tree that sways so easily in the wind will fall over, but a tree that refuses to bend, will break. That describes the current state of Pashtuns.

you've nailed your own coffin here.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

That's true about being in disregard but I'm talking about in general.

As far your statement about divorce, you are right that unless a woman is in a system where she can take care of herself or force the father of her kids to pay child support/alimony, it would be not practical, but in pashtun society the divorced men are mocked and taunted to a point that they are almost shunned/ignored from society.

So Imran Khan who lives in a mansion is mocked and ignored in society? The guy speaks Urdu, divorced his wife, had a child out of wedlock and still hundreds and thousands of Pashtuns cozy up to him.

[Badlun]

I did not say that Wikipedia sources cannot be used but I simply said be wary. Make sure that the links and citations are saying correct information and properly cited.


There is no Arabic Islam or Pashtun Islam; Islam is/was opposed to the Arabic customs so it cannot be Arabic culture just like it is opposed to the customs of Pashtun culture.

Islam is not against Pashtun culture because it is Pashtun; it is against Pashtun culture because it is cruel, unjust and backwards. It teaches hatred to women, male bigotry. Islam wants justice, fairness and balance.
Pashtuns should not follow their way of marriage because their way is sick, and degrades women. Islam does not promote cultural customs of any culture, it promotes what it determines as just and fair.

In Islam reason does exist; in fact Qur'an encourages to use of logic, analysis and thinking to solve problems; Yes there are aspects which they stress may surpass reason, but the actual practice of the religion as a method to deal with problems is reasonable.

I'm not a Wahhabi; I'm a Mu'tazili and as you can see I have a sympathetic attitude to Sufism; this contradicts Wahhabiyah.

When you include dress, beard, veil, mahr, marriage ceremonies,festivals, banning music, dance, photopgraphy , sculpture, poetry etc then you do reply Arab culture on Muslims or interrupt cultural development of a nation by applying religious injunctions. This Islam is against Pashtun culture where you are abusing millions of Pashtuns by calling them cruel, unjust and backward. If you remove the Islam of Taliban from Pashtuns then they are very humane, just, merciful, egalitarian and progressive. islam of Taliban have made them backward , retrogressive and cruel.

Is it the justice of so called Islam to imprison women in 4 walls on the name of veil. Why two women are equal to one man in evidence and inheritance. Why polygamy is allowed. Why men can marry non Muslims but women cannot. Why a mahr of 10 darhams is made standard to buy a woman for the whole life. Why angels curse a woman the whole night if she refuses sex with her husband. Why beating of women is allowed in Islam.

Why just by saying a word of talaq the woman is no more a wife. Why there is not an elaborate system of divorce. Why women cannot ask for normal divorce and why they have to adopt the complicated way of khula.

Why a woman cannot go out of home alone? Why always she needs a male companion even for going to hajj. Why a woman even cannot see brother of her husband and it is a hadith that looking at him is like death. Why a father or a guardian the so called wali can decide the fate of a girl to be married to a male who even she has not seen before her marriage. Why marrying a 9 years old girls is called to be sunna and an act of virtue???????????????

Dont you think all this injustice, cruelty and barbarity in the name of Islam?Whenever you have time I want logical replies to all my above observations.

No reason exists for beliefs in an unseen God, angels, the life after death, heavens, hells, the holy scriptures, the modes of worship etc. You just have to believe. No facts and figures, No verification like science. This is why religion is based on revelation not reason or senses. Senses are for science, reason for philosophy, intuition for mysticism and revelation for religion. Otherwise all philosophers and scientists would be prophets not the ones who receive revelations.

[faye]

Perhaps You did not understand what I said?

I meant that I suppose at the begining it wasn't that way, do You think it was?

which beginning are you talking about? beginning of humanity as a thinking being or pashtun culture?
i really couldn't say.

i would say any afghan culture has and is going through many changes and disruptions, during all the years of wars and other catastrophes, that have helped create the poverty and terrible situation that is in afghanistan today.

progress and development has been stumped by many factors, coming from inside and outside of afghanistan.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

When you include dress, beard, veil, mahr, marriage ceremonies,festivals, banning music, dance, photopgraphy , sculpture, poetry etc then you do reply Arab culture on Muslims or interrupt cultural development of a nation by applying religious injunctions. This Islam is against Pashtun culture where you are abusing millions of Pashtuns by calling them cruel, unjust and backward. If you remove the Islam of Taliban from Pashtuns then they are very humane, just, merciful, egalitarian and progressive. islam of Taliban have made them backward , retrogressive and cruel.

No this is completely false; firstly because the Pagan Arabs used to have images and idols and sculptures. On top of that Islam does not necessarily shun pictures or art. This has nothing to do with Arab culture what so ever. Now dress some can argue it is an Arab style of dress; but it is not advocated BECAUSE it is Arabic but because it is practical and sensible.

The Taliban were cruel because they were a mixture of Wahhabism and Pashtunwali; two of the worst forms of ignorance and dogma in the Islamic World. The Pashtunwali injustices to women existed before the Taliban even was heard of. So you cannot use the Taliban excuse anymore.

Is it the justice of so called Islam to imprison women in 4 walls on the name of veil. Why two women are equal to one man in evidence and inheritance. Why polygamy is allowed. Why men can marry non Muslims but women cannot. Why a mahr of 10 darhams is made standard to buy a woman for the whole life. Why angels curse a woman the whole night if she refuses sex with her husband. Why beating of women is allowed in Islam.

Islam never teaches that, so this argument is irrational and incorrect. Women were active in Islamic Society while veiling at the same time; this was known from the early days of Islam and Islamic history. Things changed when people started mixing their ignorance and backwards culture. The Flaws you see with the Taliban is because Taliban are using Pashtunwali standards with Wahhabi doctrine and claiming falsely that they are applying Islam

Islam judges by a holistic understanding of outcomes and disposition and the varying degrees to which they interplay. Women are generally not involved in certain fields so it wasn't practical to have women accountants and so of the women accountants available they had more women in certain procedures because women were less likely to have expertise in those fields. It has not saying that women are less capable or less worthy than a male. In fact even the verse you mention it is not considered a "Hukm" (implying commandment) it is considered a NasiHa (advice). Even in the Tafsir of the old Scholars it stresses this and it also says in the life of the Prophet(saw) many women became more competent in business transactions and during the Khalifa of Umar(ra) a woman was the chief treasurer and regulator of pricing affairs of the Khilafah. So definitely no biased to woman there

The issue of angels cursing a woman who does not sleep with her husband is not an issue of woman's rights; This is an issue stressing the importance of maintaining a good sexual relationship between husband and wife. The hadith is actually related to a situation in which women were depriving their husbands of sexual relations as a way to try to manipulate them; and so this response was given so that women understood what they were doing is wrong. If a woman is sick or incapable of having sex with her husband she is not cursed but rather she is excused and her discomfort becomes a source of barakah for her later on. Polygamy is a complex issue; but it relates to several things: how men and women are built biologically, the population ratio of men to women and roles of genders. Since men often died earlier than women since they tended to work in more dangerous circumstances, it left a higher ratio of women and thus men who were more fit ended up marrying more women to balance everything out.

So all your statements are lies after lies after lies; most of the problem you see in the Taliban is the fault of Pashtunwali and Pashtun culture. The suicide bombing is of course from Wahhabis and Fanatics from the Middle East.

Why just by saying a word of talaq the woman is no more a wife. Why there is not an elaborate system of divorce. Why women cannot ask for normal divorce and why they have to adopt the complicated way of khula.

Again this is the way Pashtuns and South Asian cultures abuse and msapply Islam; In Shari'ah it is not that easy to do it just because of the impulsive nature of people. So a man cannot just say talaq 3 times in a row and he's divorced. The reason these rues are in place is so people take the issue of divorce seriously and that it is not a light matter and to think deeply before doing it. The reason women need a khu'a is to make sure she has help is so the Islamic Authorities can intervene to prevent any retribution from her husband.

Why a woman cannot go out of home alone?

She can, but in certain instances because women are physically weaker and not everyone is automatically an angel. a special precaution is added during certain travel ventures to ensure she is not victimized.

Why always she needs a male companion even for going to hajj.

See above.

Why a woman even cannot see brother of her husband and it is a hadith that looking at him is like death.

In Pashtun culture, a brother takes his brother's wife when if he dies; that's DISGUSTING and also HARRAM.

Why a father or a guardian the so called wali can decide the fate of a girl to be married to a male who even she has not seen before her marriage.

They can't; that is what Pashtunwali teaches.

Why marrying a 9 years old girls is called to be sunna and an act of virtue???????????????

It isn't; that's what Pashtunwali teaches; in Islam only Nabi(saw) did this, but Aisha(ra) was exceptionally mature and an exceptional woman. Islamic Law requires physical and mental maturity. It is not aged defined; but the MINIMAL age of marriage is after puberty. But this can vary individually. But they must be Baligh or else the marriage is not Ja'iz.

Dont you think all this injustice, cruelty and barbarity in the name of Islam?Whenever you have time I want logical replies to all my above observations

.

Yes all those things are done by people like backwards Pashtuns who misuse Islam and never try to learn and study what Islam actually teaches and instead mix their culture and idiotic ideas which they got from their ancient Hindu and Zoroastrian ancestors.

No reason exists for beliefs in an unseen God, angels, the life after death, heavens, hells, the holy scriptures, the modes of worship etc. You just have to believe.

If you think this; then you're not a Sufi; Sufis say they directly experience the Tajjali of Allah(swt) and this experience is gnostic. Of course it is not scientific but it is reason.

But those are metaphysical issues; which I already said is debatable whether logic can be used to ascertain them. When it comes to Islam as a way of life it is PERFECTLY Logical and therefore those practices can be determined by Reason and Logic as I have shown.

Otherwise all philosophers and scientists would be prophets not the ones who receive revelations.

Those are metaphysical aspects of religion; The existential aspects like Way of Life, Law, Politics; this can be addressed by Logic and Reason. In fact Philosophers like Ibn Rushd or Al-Mawardi did exactly that.

Ibn Haytham the Muslim Mathematcian and Physicist said that Science merely reveals the Hidden Truths of revelation using Logic and Reason. So they are perfectly on conjunction if you keep an open mind.

But back to your main point; Even if what you were arguing is true which most of it is FALSE; EVEN the WORST of your allegations against Islam is better than the way Pashtunwali treats women.

In Pashtunwali women cannot even get a divorce even if she wants a Khul'a And if her husband divorces her she can almost never get remarried. In Pashtunwali. In Pashtunwali women are forced to get married to men against their will; She is sold by her father. If her husband dies she MJST do degrading and disgusting things like marry her akhshey (brother in law). In Pashtunwali she cannot even GET her inheritance, nevermind whether she can be witness of inheritance. She cannot even work for herself and acquire her own money in Pashtunwali. Even the Kuchi girls are limited in movement and not allowed to learn to read and write. In Islam it is REQUIRED for women to be educated.

So even with all your misunderstandings of Islam; Islam still provides more for women than Pashtunwali. Pashtunwali is a backwards thinking which should be thrown away like rubbish.

[Badlun]

To tell you the truth I was expecting some rational ,concrete and convincing replies to all my observations regarding the cruelty women are facing in the name of Islam . But I am disappointed totally as what I see here is a Mulla using fatwas as this is completely false and then paradoxically says that on dress some can argue!

It means that Pagan Arabs were better as they used to have images and idols and sculptures as all this is art! There are explicit hadith forbidding pictures. How can you say that Islam does not necessarily shun pictures or art.

How can you say that Arab style of dress is practical and sensible. Do you think that those long shirts worn by Arab men and burkas by women are more sensible and practical. Why the world is then wearing paint shirts and partoog kamees? Never this ugly Arab dress can be more sensible and practical. Even an idiot can know this. Yes it is practical to cover the long and large bellies of Arabs who even cannot run in their dress and thus fattening themselves all the times.

Where from you prove that the Pashtunwali injustices to women existed before Islam. When I say Taliban it means any form of extremist Islam where culture and politics are mixed with religion. Pashtun women and men were living freely before imprisoning women in the chains of veil by the so called Islam.


The so called Islam do teaches veil , special dress code for women and asking women to remain at homes. When women were active?. Can you tell me some 20 women names in the 1400 years of Islam who were politically , economically and socially active. Even they are not active religiously. They are not allowed to join congregational prayers. It is said to them that its better for them to offer prayers in the dark corner of a house even not in the drawing room. It is not only Taliban doing so , every where it is happening.

Women are generally not involved in certain fields because of the false religious injunctions that their place is house or grave. I have seen best accountants to be women. This is very stupid that accountancy depends on gender. Sex has nothing to do with accountancy.

It means that verses in Quran can be considered a "Hukm" (implying commandment) or a NasiHa (advice). If it is so then my job becomes easier. We do need to argue any more. I will consider that all these verses which are applied on women and discriminating them are mere advices and not to be followed. This way the whole Quran can become advisory, optional and a book of advices not commands as no where it is written in parenthesis that this verse is hukm or nasiha.


Why the angels do not curse a man if he does not sleep with a woman? Why they only curse women. This is discriminatory. I am really astounded that a rational man following reason and bringing revolution by reason tries to justify that yes women can be cursed for not having sex with men. For God sake do not oppose for the sake of opposition. Some times do admit that yes the other one has some reason.

If Polygamy is a complex issue then it should be totally rejected. No one can justify that one man should have 4 wives at the same time. Some even say that having 12 wives is a sunna. If women start asking polyandry then?


By writing few words you come to the conclusion that all my statements are lies after lies after lies. This is the style of a Mulla. Come with some reason declaring me liar or simply admit that you cannot defend polygamy, equaling two women to one man etc as these cannot be defended.

Talaq is part of the so called sharia with schools of thoughts. Hanafis do divorce their wives by saying 3 times the word talaq. And then if they repent on this, they have to let some other man to sleep with his wife..the halala. My God what kind of Islam we have. Islam is great if keep limited to faith, worship and morality but if we mix it with other aspects of life then we have things like Halala.

Why women need a khu'a and to make sure she has help so the Islamic Authorities can intervene to prevent any retribution from her husband . Why husband does not have this so called Help. Man can just say a word and go away but woman has to beseech authorities for her talaq!

How the hell on the earth a woman can go out only in certain instances because you say women are physically weaker and not everyone is automatically an angel. a special precaution is added during certain travel ventures to ensure she is not victimized. Why she is kept deliberately weaker so that she always need a man to protect her. This is rubbish.


The concept of Wali is there specially in Hanafi Fiqa. You know it is there. just by saying it is not Islamic cannot resolve the issue.


More than 90% Islam is metaphysical or moral and no logic can be applied. Your arguments for other issues is totally illogical as no one can logically prove one man with 4 wives or two women equal to one man.

Pashtunwali is silent on all such issues. It is a natural way of life not a written code. No where Pashtunwali says that polygamy is allowed. If Pashtuns commit some wrong it does not become Pashtunwali.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

If that is your assessment it means you did not carefully read my response to you and just responded based on your ego and anger only. Blinded by rage you missed my points and arguments and that even the most detailed response your ego prevented from assessing or comprehending.

I said Islam DOES NOT necessarily Shun all art or pictures; In the times of the Pagans they did to decondition society from the habit of idol worship; but afterwards painting and pictures gradually began to come back once it was known that such things are not to be objects of veneration and worship.

Your problem is you're an extremely uneducated and ignorant person who just gets his knowledge from poorly made or poorly cited websites; You never actually taken any serious study of any of these topics. If you studied the hadith regarding the issue of pictures or sculptures, Nabi (saw) once had a picture of a Bird in his house; yes he did say "take it way" because it reminds him of this world, but he did not destroy or ask it be damaged. It was only a sentiment of his focus to think of things beyond the material life. So this means the hadith you were referring to has a CONTEXT and not an absolute dictation.

But of course since you are not learned about this subject and just know a handful of hadths you'll make these silly mistakes.

About the veil; The Veil is not a primary issue in Islam; but the veil does not hinder women at all , in fact it gave women a lot of dignity at least according to History. Now some may claim it has pre-Islamic origins; but Islam does not shun something just on account that it came before Islam or after, It shuns something by its merits. Islam advocated veil because they saw it as a commendable and appropriate type of dress for public environment; but it wasn't something as strongly emphasized as it is now.

Look in Tarikh Al Tabari or any Major Islamic History book you will find Hundreds of women's names who were active in Islamic Societies and wore the veil. Since you look to use Internet sources, type "Women in Islamic HIstory" and see how many names that you find.

Women were generally not involved in those fields because Those fields were already predominantly involving men PRIOR to those religious "Injunctions" as you call them; And the reason this was is because at the time those verses were revealed Women predominantly tended to other vocations related to other types of social involvement as a consequence of the Natural Environment and Ecology . This is just Human Anthropology, that no matter what we want to believe we can't get around. However I never made the claim that accountancy "depends" on gender; this is a Straw-Man fallacy that you manufactured due to poor logical comprehension.

I already addressed all of your issues that after Islam became instituted and there was a full on Islamic society that The State Treasurer and Pricing Regulator was a woman; so this means your understanding of what these verses imply is COMPLETELY WRONG and that these verses are NOT Injunctions at all but merely recommendations based on circumstances dealing with available people who were competent in certain types of work

I said your arguments are LIES ALL LIES after I explained WHY they were lies; you're simply blinded by your ignorance.

Even Yasmeen thanked my post because I'm citing things which are factual. No one has thanked your post because your post is largely nonsense and based on weak an very shallow/superficial understanding of Islam

No You can't just decide arbitrarily which verses are considered 'Hukm" and Which are considered Nasiha; you have to look at the Type of statement; the types of phrases used, the context. ONLY THEN do we decide. To just say only verses that I like or don't like are this and that is totally ILLOGICAL.


There's no discrimination; a man who does not help his wive's sexual needs will be accountable for it on judgment day which is basically another way of saying that he is scrutinized for not doing his duty. In fact some may argue that in Islam it is harder on the man on this issue because the wife can divorce him for not fulfilling her sexual needs, but the men cannot divorce his wife for this reason. Again this s why your statements are lies because you speak from Ignorance

WOmen need Khul'a obviously because men tend to be Physically stronger and can come after or inhibit woman if he doesn't agree to her decision where as Men don't generally need that type of protection from the wife.

Women are not kept deliberately weaker; In the physical sense that's just how nature evolved women . This happened because evolutionarilly women had more intrinsic tendency for more domestic oriented labor related to nurturing rather than things like hunting or fighting. Of course this is not a strict binary and there is a continuum; but that is why I said tendency; because stochastically that is what happened. So on things like far journeys and such women had certain support system to ensure their journey.

I hve a copy of Durr Al Mukhtar which has Hanafi Legislations regarding Marriage and I don't see what you describe at all; Yes the pronoucement of Three Talaqs is there, but you cannot say "Talaq Talaq Talaq" three times in a row ad divorce. This is not in ANY Hanafi Fiqh book. Hilla Marriage is so that men take Talaq seriously that they should take divorce seriously and not something they use to manipulate over their wives. Furthermore if someone does divorces for the motive of doing a hillah marriage this is Harram.

The concept of Wali is in Islam; but Wali is not the same as a Pashtun father selling his daughter or treating his daughter like a piece of property. Wali is a mediator and protector of woman's interest not his personal profit. This is why Pashtunwali does not promote Walayah, because it's the opposite in Pashtun culture..

If Pashtunwali is vague and doesn't have any rules or pronouncements; then That means Pashtunwali is totally useless and means absolutely nothing; That's more a reason to get rid of such empty garbage that has no purpose of set standards. Human society needs concrete principles to regulate it. Something vague and useless is hardly "natural" since humans are species that are capable of sophisticated structure.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

If that is your assessment it means you did not carefully read my response to you and just responded based on your ego and anger only. Blinded by rage you missed my points and arguments and that even the most detailed response your ego prevented from assessing or comprehending.

I said Islam DOES NOT necessarily Shun all art or pictures; In the times of the Pagans they did to decondition society from the habit of idol worship; but afterwards painting and pictures gradually began to come back once it was known that such things are not to be objects of veneration and worship.

Your problem is you're an extremely uneducated and ignorant person who just gets his knowledge from poorly made or poorly cited websites; You never actually taken any serious study of any of these topics. If you studied the hadith regarding the issue of pictures or sculptures, Nabi (saw) once had a picture of a Bird in his house; yes he did say "take it way" because it reminds him of this world, but he did not destroy or ask it be damaged. It was only a sentiment of his focus to think of things beyond the material life. So this means the hadith you were referring to has a CONTEXT and not an absolute dictation.

But of course since you are not learned about this subject and just know a handful of hadths you'll make these silly mistakes.

About the veil; The Veil is not a primary issue in Islam; but the veil does not hinder women at all , in fact it gave women a lot of dignity at least according to History. Now some may claim it has pre-Islamic origins; but Islam does not shun something just on account that it came before Islam or after, It shuns something by its merits. Islam advocated veil because they saw it as a commendable and appropriate type of dress for public environment; but it wasn't something as strongly emphasized as it is now.

Look in Tarikh Al Tabari or any Major Islamic History book you will find Hundreds of women's names who were active in Islamic Societies and wore the veil. Since you look to use Internet sources, type "Women in Islamic HIstory" and see how many names that you find.

Women were generally not involved in those fields because Those fields were already predominantly involving men PRIOR to those religious "Injunctions" as you call them; And the reason this was is because at the time those verses were revealed Women predominantly tended to other vocations related to other types of social involvement as a consequence of the Natural Environment and Ecology . This is just Human Anthropology, that no matter what we want to believe we can't get around. However I never made the claim that accountancy "depends" on gender; this is a Straw-Man fallacy that you manufactured due to poor logical comprehension.

I already addressed all of your issues that after Islam became instituted and there was a full on Islamic society that The State Treasurer and Pricing Regulator was a woman; so this means your understanding of what these verses imply is COMPLETELY WRONG and that these verses are NOT Injunctions at all but merely recommendations based on circumstances dealing with available people who were competent in certain types of work

I said your arguments are LIES ALL LIES after I explained WHY they were lies; you're simply blinded by your ignorance.

Even Yasmeen thanked my post because I'm citing things which are factual. No one has thanked your post because your post is largely nonsense and based on weak an very shallow/superficial understanding of Islam

No You can't just decide arbitrarily which verses are considered 'Hukm" and Which are considered Nasiha; you have to look at the Type of statement; the types of phrases used, the context. ONLY THEN do we decide. To just say only verses that I like or don't like are this and that is totally ILLOGICAL.


There's no discrimination; a man who does not help his wive's sexual needs will be accountable for it on judgment day which is basically another way of saying that he is scrutinized for not doing his duty. In fact some may argue that in Islam it is harder on the man on this issue because the wife can divorce him for not fulfilling her sexual needs, but the men cannot divorce his wife for this reason. Again this s why your statements are lies because you speak from Ignorance

WOmen need Khul'a obviously because men tend to be Physically stronger and can come after or inhibit woman if he doesn't agree to her decision where as Men don't generally need that type of protection from the wife.

Women are not kept deliberately weaker; In the physical sense that's just how nature evolved women . This happened because evolutionarilly women had more intrinsic tendency for more domestic oriented labor related to nurturing rather than things like hunting or fighting. Of course this is not a strict binary and there is a continuum; but that is why I said tendency; because stochastically that is what happened. So on things like far journeys and such women had certain support system to ensure their journey.

I hve a copy of Durr Al Mukhtar which has Hanafi Legislations regarding Marriage and I don't see what you describe at all; Yes the pronoucement of Three Talaqs is there, but you cannot say "Talaq Talaq Talaq" three times in a row ad divorce. This is not in ANY Hanafi Fiqh book. Hilla Marriage is so that men take Talaq seriously that they should take divorce seriously and not something they use to manipulate over their wives. Furthermore if someone does divorces for the motive of doing a hillah marriage this is Harram.

The concept of Wali is in Islam; but Wali is not the same as a Pashtun father selling his daughter or treating his daughter like a piece of property. Wali is a mediator and protector of woman's interest not his personal profit. This is why Pashtunwali does not promote Walayah, because it's the opposite in Pashtun culture..

If Pashtunwali is vague and doesn't have any rules or pronouncements; then That means Pashtunwali is totally useless and means absolutely nothing; That's more a reason to get rid of such empty garbage that has no purpose of set standards. Human society needs concrete principles to regulate it. Something vague and useless is hardly "natural" since humans are species that are capable of sophisticated structure.

You are 100% correct about the history here.

Pashto and Pashtunwali was not some document where 599 elders sat around and codified something and left it for posterity in a museam with their signatures on it.

Recent evidence shows it was and remains a common practice amongst Pashtuns to "inherit" a wife within the immediate tarbooraan/wrorryaan. When the Brits were in KP they sent hundreds of young men to their deaths in Sudan to fight Hitler and they pushed these guys up front to be cannon fodder. Many subsequent marriages were between their widows and the brothers/male cousins of these folks - especially in the Khattak tribe that furnished large numberes of fighters for the Brits.

Also, regarding polygamy, Karzai's own dad had two wives at the same time and this is common knowledge in Qandahar. These peoples saint, Amanullah Khan, the "forward thinker" had multiple wives alongside Soraya Tarzai as well.

Now I dont think its fair to judge these men and women as in a tribal agrarian society this may be done to protect familial honor, land, bloodlines and to keep the peace. Often times, it was a form of caretaking for the widows too. But what is 100% certain is that it runs in contradiction to Islam in a very clear way to inherent a woman without her explicit consent.

Divorce amongst our people was all but a legend long before the word Talib was even in vogue. The concept was not even thought of. And this was a pan tribal phenomena. To this day it is a taboo thing and can get people killed and start badi.

He is clearly playing fast and loose with the rules of debate and discussion here. So on the one hand he finds it perfectly valid to weigh and compare Quranic edicts and outcomes with Western laws and mores but then balks when Pashto culture is also held up for scrutiny and examination.

He goes on to claim that this is not "Pashtun wali" or "Pashto" since it doesnt accord to some recently written up document by some historian, but that is absurd since one of the key tenants of our people is "zaar, zameen, zaan" and this has defined Pashtuns for centuries. That says enough already.

Also in your other thread regarding scrutiny of weights and measures given to the amount times something is said in a document rendering it more or less important, I refer you to our prior discussion regarding the bill of rights. Remember, he got all hot and bothered when he couldnt deal with the first amendment being less than 1% of the constitution/bill of rights. He just kept repeating himself hoping that repetition would make him right.

[Toramana]

You are 100% correct about the history here.

Pashto and Pashtunwali was not some document where 599 elders sat around and codified something and left it for posterity in a museam with their signatures on it.

Recent evidence shows it was and remains a common practice amongst Pashtuns to "inherit" a wife within the immediate tarbooraan/wrorryaan. When the Brits were in KP they sent hundreds of young men to their deaths in Sudan to fight Hitler and they pushed these guys up front to be cannon fodder. Many subsequent marriages were between their widows and the brothers/male cousins of these folks - especially in the Khattak tribe that furnished large numberes of fighters for the Brits.

Also, regarding polygamy, Karzai's own dad had two wives at the same time and this is common knowledge in Qandahar. These peoples saint, Amanullah Khan, the "forward thinker" had multiple wives alongside Soraya Tarzai as well.

Now I dont think its fair to judge these men and women as in a tribal agrarian society this may be done to protect familial honor, land, bloodlines and to keep the peace. Often times, it was a form of caretaking for the widows too. But what is 100% certain is that it runs in contradiction to Islam in a very clear way to inherent a woman without her explicit consent.

Divorce amongst our people was all but a legend long before the word Talib was even in vogue. The concept was not even thought of. And this was a pan tribal phenomena. To this day it is a taboo thing and can get people killed and start badi.

He is clearly playing fast and loose with the rules of debate and discussion here. So on the one hand he finds it perfectly valid to weigh and compare Quranic edicts and outcomes with Western laws and mores but then balks when Pashto culture is also held up for scrutiny and examination.

He goes on to claim that this is not "Pashtun wali" or "Pashto" since it doesnt accord to some recently written up document by some historian, but that is absurd since one of the key tenants of our people is "zaar, zameen, zaan" and this has defined Pashtuns for centuries. That says enough already.

Also in your other thread regarding scrutiny of weights and measures given to the amount times something is said in a document rendering it more or less important, I refer you to our prior discussion regarding the bill of rights. Remember, he got all hot and bothered when he couldnt deal with the first amendment being less than 1% of the constitution/bill of rights. He just kept repeating himself hoping that repetition would make him right.

Barakzai the point is, Pashtunwali is a natural system without any divine machination attached to it---as such it is amenable to reform unlike the fanatic Arab brand Islam which is a divine dogma crystalized in time and unchangeable.

Now instead of Ayain Bayain shayain, go ahead and tell us would you like it to be humane if your daughter ends up in a polygamous marriage ---and how can you justify two women equal to one man? If you do, then you don't deserve to live in a civilized society ---it will be better for you to go and live in some Wahabi provided harem.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai the point is, Pashtunwali is a natural system without any divine machination attached to it---as such it is amenable to reform unlike the fanatic Arab brand Islam which is a divine dogma crystalized in time and unchangeable.

Now instead of Ayain Bayain shayain, go ahead and tell us would you like it to be humane if your daughter ends up in a polygamous marriage ---and how can you justify two women equal to one man? If you do, then you don't deserve to live in a civilized society ---it will be better for you to go and live in some Wahabi provided harem.

Dogma depends on the eye of the beholder atheist ikhwani comrade walker. The fact that it would take thousands of soldiers and even still Pashtunwali remains strictly in force even more than the "Arab brand" of Islam within the deepest heart lands shows that many people are willing to die for their own brand of dogma.

Quit throwing stupid red herrings out from your quote collection to attempt and malign the Quran that you find on your atheist toolkit websites. My opinion on two women witnesses ala Surah Baqrah has nothing to do with how Pashtuns view the concept, how the Muslim world views it, or how a shariat court, or Westerners view it.

What you just proved is that you have an issue with this sacred ayaah:

"O you who have believed, when you contract a debt for a specified term, write it down. And let a scribe write [it] between you in justice. Let no scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him. So let him write and let the one who has the obligation dictate. And let him fear Allah , his Lord, and not leave anything out of it. But if the one who has the obligation is of limited understanding or weak or unable to dictate himself, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And bring to witness two witnesses from among your men. And if there are not two men [available], then a man and two women from those whom you accept as witnesses - so that if one of the women errs, then the other can remind her. And let not the witnesses refuse when they are called upon. And do not be [too] weary to write it, whether it is small or large, for its [specified] term. That is more just in the sight of Allah and stronger as evidence and more likely to prevent doubt between you, except when it is an immediate transaction which you conduct among yourselves. For [then] there is no blame upon you if you do not write it. And take witnesses when you conclude a contract. Let no scribe be harmed or any witness. For if you do so, indeed, it is [grave] disobedience in you. And fear Allah . And Allah teaches you. And Allah is Knowing of all things."

So atheist ikhwani, tell us why you are attacking this verse and attempting to label it as an Arab invention?

Are you alleging that the Prophet Muhammad, being an Arab man is trying to impose Arab culture?

[RevolutionThroughReason]

Barakzai the point is, Pashtunwali is a natural system without any divine machination attached to it---as such it is amenable to reform unlike the fanatic Arab brand Islam which is a divine dogma crystalized in time and unchangeable.

Now instead of Ayain Bayain shayain, go ahead and tell us would you like it to be humane if your daughter ends up in a polygamous marriage ---and how can you justify two women equal to one man? If you do, then you don't deserve to live in a civilized society ---it will be better for you to go and live in some Wahabi provided harem.

Well first of all this claim is nonsensical, Pashtuns are "tradition" bound; they attach themselves blindly following merely because their ancestors did it; nothing is MORE Anti-Progressive of a mentality, and there is nothing "Natural" about it, on the contrary it is very awkward and counter-intuitive. Islam is open to interpretation because it's dynamics are intended to be applied in analogy to approach new situations using the fundamental tools. How can one re-interpret a degrading and filthy practice like forcing a woman to marry her akhshai when her husband dies; or selling a woman in walwar or other TOTALLY immoral things which Pashtuns have done for centuries and centuries and carried with them from their Hindu and Zoroastrian ancestors? On the contrary it is more enshrined because it is seen as a tradition and things which are traditions are followed unquestioningly without any reinterpretation.

Polygamous marriages isn't really an issue in the 21st century; most males cannot even conceive of it and the male-female ratio is about equal now that it is simply not very feasible. Only a few pockets have this as major societal issue. However it is better to be in a Polygamous Islamic marriage than a Monogamous Pashtunwali marriage which is more or less like a form of prostitution since the father profits from forcing his daughter to marry a man. At least in Islam a woman has the choice to say yes or no to a marriage; not in Pashtunwali.

The 2 women equal 1 man argument has been debunked and refuted. If Pashtuns practice such things then the blame is the misogynistic character within Pashtun culture; not Islam.

Islam is holistic and comprehensive; there are some fudamentals of course which define its structure those are the skeleton of Islam; but everything else is breathable and as long as it doesn't contradict the skeletal stucture is open to growth and newer applications.