N
neploho
Guest
To some Muslims yes. How is it relevant to this discussion we are having?
- Status
S
sedonaman
Guest
I agree, but remember, Mohammed was trying to get as many converts as possible, and by including Abraham, Moses, Jesus, et al, in with his belief system, he could get more to convert to Islam than he otherwise could.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Your ignoring the question makes me suspicious that you are willfully ignorant.
N
neploho
Guest
I’m not ignoring it however I am not well read in the history of the conflicts and fail to see how the are relevant to your decision that perhapse you two read too much into my question. If you could provide a rational response as to how they are relevant to our discussion I would be happy to give you my elementary understanding of the events.
C
chrisse
Guest
While it might be argued that in the beginning, when mohammed created his “religion”, it may have been meant to be a complement to Judaism and Christianity, ie Judeo/Christianity for the pagan arabs, it certainly cannot be argued as anything but a total abrogation of not just Judaism and Christianity, but all religious and civil allegience and law to the gods of Islam : allah and mohammed.
M
Muslim_Woman
Guest
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Salaam/peace
Is a Brother in-Law a Mahram?
Heshaam : Is the husband of my wife’s sister a mahram (husband or close male relative forbidden in marriage) to my wife or a non-mahram? Can my wife talk to him alone in seclusion or must she cover her `awrah (parts of the body that must be covered) in front of him?
Ahmad Kutty , Canada:
Your wife is not allowed to treat her brother-in-law as a mahram; he is not her mahram and, as such, he is no different from any other stranger for her as far as the rules of hijab and isolation are concerned.
A mahram is someone whom one is not allowed to marry at all in any circumstance. Your wife is allowed to marry him, if, God forbid, you divorce her and her own sister is divorced, or dies. In this way, the bar for marriage that exists at present does not mean they are mahrams to each other as it is only a temporary bar.
Furthermore, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warned us against isolation between the sexes in similar relations: He said, “In-laws are akin to death!” In other words, they face a greater risk of falling to sins than strangers, because they have more chances to meet and interact, and the result would be far more disastrous than death. Therefore, let us guard against all the doors that lead to temptation, for as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “The devil runs through the blood veins of the children of Adam!” They can only protect themselves against his snares and temptations through remembrance of Allah and by complying with His orders.
In conclusion, your wife must observe full hijab in front of her brother-in-law, and she is not allowed to be alone with him under any circumstances.
Related Questions
islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1235628821068&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar
Salaam/peace
Is a Brother in-Law a Mahram?
Heshaam : Is the husband of my wife’s sister a mahram (husband or close male relative forbidden in marriage) to my wife or a non-mahram? Can my wife talk to him alone in seclusion or must she cover her `awrah (parts of the body that must be covered) in front of him?
Ahmad Kutty , Canada:
Your wife is not allowed to treat her brother-in-law as a mahram; he is not her mahram and, as such, he is no different from any other stranger for her as far as the rules of hijab and isolation are concerned.
A mahram is someone whom one is not allowed to marry at all in any circumstance. Your wife is allowed to marry him, if, God forbid, you divorce her and her own sister is divorced, or dies. In this way, the bar for marriage that exists at present does not mean they are mahrams to each other as it is only a temporary bar.
Furthermore, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warned us against isolation between the sexes in similar relations: He said, “In-laws are akin to death!” In other words, they face a greater risk of falling to sins than strangers, because they have more chances to meet and interact, and the result would be far more disastrous than death. Therefore, let us guard against all the doors that lead to temptation, for as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “The devil runs through the blood veins of the children of Adam!” They can only protect themselves against his snares and temptations through remembrance of Allah and by complying with His orders.
In conclusion, your wife must observe full hijab in front of her brother-in-law, and she is not allowed to be alone with him under any circumstances.
Related Questions
- Communicating With Non-Mahram Behind Husband’s Back
- Shaking Hands with a Non-Mahram
- Why a Close Friendship between non-Mahrams Is Un-Islamic
- Mixing Between Men and Women
islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1235628821068&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaEAskTheScholar
C
chrisse
Guest
Are Brothers-In-Law Haram?
Not exactly correct, Muslim Woman. She could suckle him - then he’d be like her son.
The brilliant revelation of adult suckling came to Mohammed AFTER he had the revelation that adopted children were not to be considered as children of the marriage. This caused a few problems for those who had adopted sons previously.
Not exactly correct, Muslim Woman. She could suckle him - then he’d be like her son.
Adult suckling was in the news not so long ago when a scholar from Al Azhar announced his brilliant fatwa to enable muslim women to work with men (I’m assuming here only muslim men of course).
The brilliant revelation of adult suckling came to Mohammed AFTER he had the revelation that adopted children were not to be considered as children of the marriage. This caused a few problems for those who had adopted sons previously.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Chrisse asked if you are “willfully blind” because there is a lot of it going around, especially, it seems, when it comes to Islam; and your question had an inkling of it. Below is an example from Great Britain, and the author notes that it is soon to come to America [as though it already hasn’t].
“For decades, the British people have undergone an onslaught of aggressive government propaganda schemes intent upon preparing them first to accept the multicultural totalitarian assault and to become a veritable doormat for millions of colonizers – the vast majority being from Islamic countries. There was no public debate nor any citizen vote – multiculturalism, along with militant political correctness, were thrust upon and infected the populous of Great Britain like the Black Plague. Multiculturalism – rather than being based on mutual respect – is a parasitic ideology that encourages immigrants not to assimilate … In my opinion, multiculturalism demands ‘reverse assimilation’ or the inevitable loss of the indigenous culture as native populations are brainwashed, goaded, shamed, and threatened to place all other cultures above their own. The following is primarily about Britain but the same could be said about much of Europe – and likely soon to be the USA.
“Ever growing numbers of Muslims entered/enter Britain via immigration, political asylum, and family reunification. They quickly learned that multiculturalism gives them top priority, and as the prioritization pendulum swung towards the Muslim population and away from the British indigenous population, the reverse assimilation began – and continues today. The British people, like most ‘Westerners’, viewed multiculturalism through their Christianity based rose-colored glasses and wanted to be seen as caring and accepting of others. Rather than being seen as a magnanimous by the followers of Islam, such noble traits are seen as weakness or dhimmitude.
“Thus it comes as no surprise that increasingly the British people and their traditions are taking a back seat. British children are being brainwashed with mutliculti/Islamic propaganda – made to feel shame for their British heritage. National pride is said to be xenophobic and racist – even the English Cross of St. George flag and traditional parades are banned. Beloved toys and dolls are doomed to the dust bin for being perceived (by the Important Ones a.k.a., – Muslims) as ‘offensive’. People are made to feel selfish and racist if they don’t embrace the droves of immigrants. Even Britain’s top Christian leader abandoned his ‘flocks’ to jump on the ‘accommodation’ bandwagon. Cities are chastised, by their own government officials, as being ‘hideously white’. which went along [with] the despicable lie that only whites are racist and commit the bulk of race hate crimes – despite [that] the exact opposite has long been known to be the truth. The term racism has become the equivalent [of], if not worse than, Nazism. One can almost be deafened by the noise from the collective knee-knocking and teeth-chattering that occurs whenever some multicultural automaton trots out the ‘racist’ club as time and time again the British people watched the verbal bludgeoning of non-conformers (a.k.a., ‘racists’) whose reputations and careers were destroyed or the offender was arrested. Even a mentally disabled teenager was not exempt from being denounced as a racist. The media played their role by sensationalizing the political correctness provoked lynchings – so-called human rights and hate crime legislation was enacted to further silenced any dissension. Thus, the British people were sufficiently cowed & primed for escalating Muslim immigration – with the invading hoards heralded in Orwellian terminology as ‘enhancers’. Multiculturalists are ecstatic … and in purposeful denial …of the travesty, under the guise of ‘diversity’, that they have laid upon the British people. Very few true believers admit to seeing the indigenous cultural suicide caused by multiculturalism and the downside of diversity.” [Emphasis added]
“British Women Pay High Price for Multiculturalism”
theopinionator.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/02/british-women-girls-pay-high-price-for-multiculturalism.html
[The high price that British women are paying is the non-prosecution of their rape by Muslim men. Even the newspapers generally elect not to report such crimes.]
That leads to the topic of the Crusades, which have been widely reported as wars started by mad, power-hungry popes and waged by greedy soldiers-of-fortune in the name of Christianity. Lots of breast-beating by multiculturalists and Christians has accompanied this attitude. Multiculturalist reaction toward those who do not wish to join them in their guilt trip is similar to the British one above, including chastisement for being “hideously” Catholic [catholicleague.org]](http://www.catholicleague.org]). Like the British who “wanted to be seen as caring and accepting of others,” many Westerners have blindly adopted the Muslim view of the Crusades as their own, breast-beating and all; and true to form, “rather than being seen as magnanimous by the followers of Islam, such noble traits are seen as weakness or dhimmitude.” I call it blind because no multiculturalist [to my knowledge] has ever asked how Muslims got from Medina to rule the Holy Land to begin with; I can assure you it was not by preaching on street corners, knocking on doors, or handing out brochures. In fact, if someone were to suggest applying the same rules to Muslims as they apply to us, it might be an eye-opener.
So that’s the relevance of the Crusades as I see it. Never mind answering the question. We’ve wandered way off topic.
N
neploho
Guest
Stupid vitriol is not “taking the blinders off”. In the West there has been a great deal of idealizing Islam as some more pure and pristine religion, a pluralistic utopia, a nearly pacifistic religion “like the Quakers, without all the aggression”. Obviously this is incorrect The causes of this are complex. At the same time there has also been a great deal of the non-sense we see on this board. A personal hatred of Muhammad often rooted in both stupidity and ignorance. I am not speaking of a reasoned moral critique of his policies but a personal hatred of the man I simply cannot understand. There has been a great deal of paranoia, intolerance, vulgarity, and willful ignorance. We see this here in the many anti Islam posts which contain (at best) confused logic and assertions of assailable factual validity.
A perfect example of this would be the Hezbollah thread I posted on when I first returned. You had an individual making a logical error that any reasonably bright fifth grader would be able to point out, the individual was so eager to prove Islam hates God according to the Bible (or whatever inane rubbish they were getting at) that all powers of basic logical deduction seemed to be abandoned by them. Within the study of social phenomena the situation is no better. Individuals suddenly suspending their usually grasp of scientific methodology and logic to declare the vileness of Islam every time a Muslim terrorist group commits some atrocity.
The individual I asked my question to make a asinine and rude comment. Me asking them why they would venture into such vulgar fatuity is not being “blind” to the truth. It is a perfectly reasonable question. The only explanation I have been able to arrive at is that some individuals need the fantasy of being some pseudo freedom fighting anti jihad internet warrior to give their otherwise sad lives meaning. While this is somewhat pathetic the real problem is that some gullible souls can become ensnared in their sophism.
S
sedonaman
Guest
I disagree because how to think, especially logically, and avoiding fallacies are not taught in public schools. You seem particularly harsh on non-Muslims here for illogical thinking. What do you think about the way Muslims reason?
Then why are you here?
N
neploho
Guest
I am harsh on it when it is fueled by an attitude of bigotry and intolerance. Simple logical errors in apologetics do not annoy me. Which is what I usually see in the Muslim posters. That is no reflection on Muslims and Christians as a whole, simply what happens to generally be the case on this board.
As I have said before I do not believe most individuals here have those attributes. It seems to be a small, angry subset.
M
Muslim_Woman
Guest
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Salaam/peace
Fatimah - United States : Could you please tell me how Muslim women especially those living in majority non-Muslim countries can celebrate the Prophet’s birthday?
Zainab Al-`Alwani, Instructor of fiqh and Islamic studies, Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, Leesburg, Virginia:
If your intention is as such, then I may suggest some activities to do on that day.
Related Questions
%between%
Salaam/peace
Fatimah - United States : Could you please tell me how Muslim women especially those living in majority non-Muslim countries can celebrate the Prophet’s birthday?
Zainab Al-`Alwani, Instructor of fiqh and Islamic studies, Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, Leesburg, Virginia:
Code:
First of all, you should know that celebrating the Prophet’s birthday is neither a Sunnah nor an obligation. However, people have got used to expressing their love for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in a moderate way on his birthday.
Code:
Things to Do
1. Increase your dhikr and salutations for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) on that day.
2. Gather Muslim ladies and educate them about the best manners of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), how he was a role model for the whole mankind, how he treated women, etc.
3. Study the seerah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with your family and choose certain incidents that relate to the present time.
4. Increase reading Qur’an and du`aa’ on that day.
While doing all these activities, you should never think they are Sunnah, but always entertain the feeling that you are remembering the greatest legacy the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) left behind and you are showing your love for him.
Things to Avoid
1. Any kind of innovation or exaggerating in expressing the love of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).
2. Any song that would describe the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) with some shirk concepts.
3. Any violations to his Sunnah or teachings.- Celebrating the Prophet’s Birthday
- Fasting on the Prophet’s Birthday
%between%
M
Muslim_Woman
Guest
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Salaam/peace
It’s absurd that a woman can breastfeed an adult man .
Salaam/peace
anything that goes against holy Quran is not accepted to Muslim as truth. God says in holy Quran to breastfeed kids up to 2 years . It’s allowed ( if necessary ) for 6 more months.
It’s absurd that a woman can breastfeed an adult man .
C
chrisse
Guest
5th March 2009, Saudi Arabia, News :
A 74 year old woman has been sentenced to 4 months imprisonment and 40 lashes because of illegal seclusion with 2 Saudi men.
Defence :
Again, from the land of shariah justice:
A 74 year old woman has been sentenced to 4 months imprisonment and 40 lashes because of illegal seclusion with 2 Saudi men.
Defence :
- Young man #1 was the son of the woman because he was breast fed by her;
- Young man #2 did not enter her house.
Again, from the land of shariah justice:
M
Muslim_Woman
Guest
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Salaam/peace
Salaam/peace
So , what’s your point ???
P
planten
Guest
**neploho, quite True. I feel these catholics have no sense. They do not look into their own backyard and they start the worst filth against the prophet and Islam. While at the same time they would like Jesus to be counted as a prophet.
I cannot understand why these catholics want all the best things for themselves and all the worse things for others. They would like that jesus be admitted as a prophet as well as a God. How come, such a faulty belief? Why don’t they take this teaching about a Jew (Jesus) to the Jews? The Jews will deal with them very well, Insha Allah.
The Catholics are nieher honest nor justified. But we will go along with them until they try to get us banned like they did to paarsurrey. They all surrendered before paarsurrey because he brought out all their mistakes in their theology.
**
C
chrisse
Guest
That you don’t get it.
D
dzheremi
Guest
neploho, quite True. I feel these catholics have no sense.
Really…?
M
Muslim_Woman
Guest
In the name of Allah , Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Salaam/peace
Was Islam Spread by the Sword?
04/Oct/2006
Mark: A few days ago, the Pope (Benedictus) said in a speech he was giving: "In the seventh conversation … the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. … “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Idris Tawfiq :…Perhaps one of the greatest misconceptions about Islam is that it was spread by the sword. However, this idea is now so widespread that people accept it as a fact. Even the Pope, whether he intended to or not, caused great offense to Muslims throughout the world by referring to this myth of Islam being spread by the sword.
…Indonesia has around 450 million Muslims, which is more than the population of all the Arab countries put together. In fact, Arabs count for only around 18 percent of all Muslims. By far the greatest concentration of the world’s 1.1 billion Muslims lives in Southeast Asia. Islam has been deeply rooted there for centuries.
Those who beat the drum of Islam being spread by the sword fail to mention Southeast Asia, since it does not fit into their agenda. No Muslim armies ever went there.
…When `Umar entered Jerusalem at the head of a Muslim army in 638 CE, just six years after the Prophet’s death, he entered the city on foot, as a gesture of humility in a city sacred to Muslims, Christians, and Jews. There was no bloodshed. There were no massacres or forced conversions.
On the contrary, those who wanted to leave were allowed to do so with all their possessions. Those who wanted to stay were granted protection for their lives, their property, and their places of worship.
…All of this is in marked contrast to what happened when the Crusader armies later took Jerusalem. Seventy thousand men, women and children were slaughtered. Any remaining Muslims and Jews were driven out. When the city was recaptured by Salah Ad-Din (Saladin), the Christian inhabitants were granted protection and were escorted to safety by the Muslim army…
When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) finally entered Makkah at the head of a Muslim army in AH 8, he did so not to force the Makkans to convert, but because they had violated their peace treaty with the Muslims. The Prophet entered with great humility, ordering that there should be no fighting or bloodshed. Instead, he forgave all those who had opposed him and the growth of Islam for so many years. Those who wanted to leave were allowed to do so. The whole city, so impressed by the men they had fought against for so long, converted to Islam.
Useful Links:
Did Islam Grow By Killing Non-Believers?
Does Jihad Propagate Islam by Force?
Jihad, not… a “Holy” War!
Violence and Islam
Violence in the Qur’an
The Way of the Sword
Muslims, Interfaith Dialogue, and Pope Benedict
Was Islam Spread at the Point of Sword?
The Truth About the Spread of Islam
Muslims’ Reaction to Pope’s Remarks
Addressing Misconceptions About the Hadith of Fighting Non-Muslims
readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1158658493752&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE
Salaam/peace
Was Islam Spread by the Sword?
04/Oct/2006
Mark: A few days ago, the Pope (Benedictus) said in a speech he was giving: "In the seventh conversation … the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. … “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.”
Idris Tawfiq :…Perhaps one of the greatest misconceptions about Islam is that it was spread by the sword. However, this idea is now so widespread that people accept it as a fact. Even the Pope, whether he intended to or not, caused great offense to Muslims throughout the world by referring to this myth of Islam being spread by the sword.
…Indonesia has around 450 million Muslims, which is more than the population of all the Arab countries put together. In fact, Arabs count for only around 18 percent of all Muslims. By far the greatest concentration of the world’s 1.1 billion Muslims lives in Southeast Asia. Islam has been deeply rooted there for centuries.
Those who beat the drum of Islam being spread by the sword fail to mention Southeast Asia, since it does not fit into their agenda. No Muslim armies ever went there.
…When `Umar entered Jerusalem at the head of a Muslim army in 638 CE, just six years after the Prophet’s death, he entered the city on foot, as a gesture of humility in a city sacred to Muslims, Christians, and Jews. There was no bloodshed. There were no massacres or forced conversions.
On the contrary, those who wanted to leave were allowed to do so with all their possessions. Those who wanted to stay were granted protection for their lives, their property, and their places of worship.
Umar very famously declined to pray one of the five daily prayers in the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, lest in years to come Muslims might try to turn it into a mosque in his memory. Instead, Umar cleansed the so-called Temple Mount with rose water and built a small mosque there, where the Dome of the Rock now stands.…All of this is in marked contrast to what happened when the Crusader armies later took Jerusalem. Seventy thousand men, women and children were slaughtered. Any remaining Muslims and Jews were driven out. When the city was recaptured by Salah Ad-Din (Saladin), the Christian inhabitants were granted protection and were escorted to safety by the Muslim army…
When Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) finally entered Makkah at the head of a Muslim army in AH 8, he did so not to force the Makkans to convert, but because they had violated their peace treaty with the Muslims. The Prophet entered with great humility, ordering that there should be no fighting or bloodshed. Instead, he forgave all those who had opposed him and the growth of Islam for so many years. Those who wanted to leave were allowed to do so. The whole city, so impressed by the men they had fought against for so long, converted to Islam.
Useful Links:
Did Islam Grow By Killing Non-Believers?
Does Jihad Propagate Islam by Force?
Jihad, not… a “Holy” War!
Violence and Islam
Violence in the Qur’an
The Way of the Sword
Muslims, Interfaith Dialogue, and Pope Benedict
Was Islam Spread at the Point of Sword?
The Truth About the Spread of Islam
Muslims’ Reaction to Pope’s Remarks
Addressing Misconceptions About the Hadith of Fighting Non-Muslims
readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1158658493752&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE
S
sedonaman
Guest
I don’t think they are “errors”. I think they are coached responses. One of the tactics used to great effectiveness is shifting the argument, as planten, for example, has done many times. Ask a question in a thread about Islam or Mohammed, and he quickly asks a question about Jesus or the Bible. You yourself have done this. I asked about the length of lines to get in and out of Islamic countries, and you responded by asking about the lines to and from “Catholic” dictatorships in South America. Is this not a red herring or shifting the argument? The length of the lines to and from SA countries is irrelevant to the ones to and from Islamic ones. No one likes hypocrisy, but it is only an apparent fallacy ajronline.org/cgi/content/full/187/5/W469.
If you are interested in a reasoned response to Islam you can find one here answering-islam.org/Authors/Wood/deceptive_god.htm and here frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26769. Note that in the latter, the author is concerned about only political Islam, so I think logically accusing him of religious bigotry would be difficult. One of his main points is that Islamic logic is dualistic, whereas, “All of our [Western] politics and ethics are based upon a unitary ethic that is best formulated in the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would be treated.”
Sister Amy has complained about Muslims being “oppressed” but refuses to recognize that she is asking of non-believers what her religion is not willing to accord them. There is not a SINGLE Muslim here who will say that Islam has any responsibility for waging aggressive war and have refused to explain how Muslim armies got from Medina in 632 AD to the gates of Vienna in 1683 [while some Christians are still beating their breasts over the Crusades]. Why is that? Because Muslims don’t believe that they are waging war at all against those who resist their aggression to expand Islam; they think it’s the non-believer who is the one waging the war, and therefore what the Muslims are doing is “defensive” because they have conjured up a command from Allah to conquer the whole world, and how dare anyone resist the will of Allah? In fact, to a Muslim, the mere existence of a non-Muslim must be an act of aggression against Islam.
“Simple logical errors”…? Sister Amy has also complained that she would move to an Islamic country if she could find one that practiced perfect Islam. In view of the facts that no human endeavor is 100% perfect and 99.44% perfection is insufficient, this amounts to no more than an excuse to have it both ways: freedom of the West and Islam as her religion. The ironic thing is that if her goal of Islam’s taking over was realized, she would be living under imperfect Islam.
Have you considered that the anger might be justified? I don’t know how much traveling you do, but nowadays before boarding a flight, you have to submit to what is close to a humiliating strip-search of your body cavities. Muslims the world over must be laughing particularly hard because this is self-induced dhimmitude by “infidels”.
- Status