Powered by
UI
Techs
Home
>
Forums
>
>
General Discussion
>
Are Muslims on TV Really on Guidance?
Post Reply
Username
Invalid Username or Password
Password
Format
Andale Mono
Arial
Arial Black
Book Antiqua
Century Gothic
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Tahoma
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Script MT Bold
Stencil
Verdana
Lucida Console
1
2
3
4
5
6
Message Icon
Message
- Forum Code is ON
- HTML is OFF
Smilies
[quote]First, it’s a pleasure to discuss things with you. I must confess that I loved your attitude that you summarized in the following way: “In the end I'll just say that I will consider myself to be right as long as I'm not proved wrong. This belief of mine that I'm right is not out of arrogance dear brother, it's because I have proof that I'm right. If you prove me wrong, I'll accept my mistakes without any hesitation, and I'll in fact be thankful for that.” This is how a true believer should be. Masha’allah! Somehow, tennis has started between us. [:)] Therefore, I’d ignore the little difference of opinions between us and discuss only those point which, I think, are major. However, there is a consensus between us, as well, on a number of issues which is very nice to see. Point A: Nida-e-Khair wrote, “I've finally read the link.” This is all I wanted. I mean, I wanted you to see different opinions about this very issue. Now whatever opinion you hold after seeing these different views, it’s one of your basic rights that I cannot dare to attack. Point B: Nida-e-Khair wrote, “They pluck their facial hair for the purpose of looking more attractive. I do not know their intentions, but…” Oh hey, let’s leave their intentions with them. They’re responsible for their intention, good or bad, in front of the Almighty. Point C: Nida-e-Khair wrote, “These words of yours are in conflict with these that you wrote earlier: "Back-biting is allowed in five situations in Islam one of which is when someone has to criticize a wrong deed..." Isn't this what I'm doing? Ain't I criticising a wrong deed, which you say is allowed?” Yes, this is what you were doing and that is why I asked you not to feel bad for it as you were only doing the permissible form of back-biting. Later I said, “I know you haven’t imposed but you have criticized women.” This statement has got nothing to do with the earlier one of mine. In this particular statement, I am asking you not to criticize women who do not cover their heads because it is purely a matter of interpretation of the Qur’an. From “illa-ma-zahra”, you have concluded that women should cover their heads, however, someone else may conclude that head is the part of “illa-ma-zahra” and, therefore, needed not to be covered. Point D: Nida-e-Khair wrote, “But these religious women, such as the Naat-Khuwaans that I mentioned earlier, have this habit (or whatever you'd call it) to expose their satr, i.e. necks, etc. You're talking about tight jeans; if I had wised to write about tight jeans, I would've first written about the Muslim sports-guys on TV that wear shorts…” I am sorry for the misunderstanding. Now your point is clear. And please note that I already agreed to you in one of my previous postings that exposing the neck is a sin for a woman. Point E: Nida-e-Khair wrote, “I agree with the latter sentence but I do not agree that a woman should not cover her head unless there are threats. This is because Surah Noor tells you to cover your head, not directly but indirectly, i.e. firsly through the fact that women at the Prophet's (SAW) time were not seen with their heads uncovered, secondly because the majority of commentators say that "illa maa Dhahara minhaa" means face and hands.” Nida-e-Khair further mentioned, “…then I would say that none of the 4 points mention the covering of the stomach or back either. Does this mean that a woman can reveal them?” You have raised a beautiful point. Please note that women of the Holy Prophet’s (SAW) time did not use to cover their faces in the normal circumstances. This point must not be confused with the Ahadith that come under the verse 59 of Sura-e-Ehzab. However, there was a conflict among the companions of the Prophet (SAW) on whether a woman should cover her face. Now coming towards head, you are right that the majority of the commentators say that “illa-ma-zahra” means face, hands and feet but majority is not always authority. However, I feel that if a woman should cover her head, it is the best but it must not be seen as a compulsion. Head can also be a part of “illa-ma-zahra” because it is a part which seems naturally open. But, of course, there may be two opinions regarding this. I can never say that you are wrong if you say that it is a compulsion for a woman to cover her head because your point is in accordance with the Qur’an. However, it must also be realized that there can be another opinion in this matter. In addition, the Prophet (SAW) did not say anything about covering the head except for when a woman has to offer salah. (I mean, there are Ahadith asking women to cover their heads but only while offering their salah.) As far as the legs, back and tummy are concerned, I think no one can say that these are naturally opened parts, therefore, “illa-ma-zahra” cannot include them. That’s all. Thank you. Best wishes, J. Edited by: JunaidHasan on Thursday, July 13, 2006 8:01 PM[/quote]
Mode
Prompt
Help
Basic
Check here to be notified by email whenever someone replies to your topic
Show Preview
Share
|
Copyright
Studying-Islam
© 2003-7 |
Privacy Policy
|
Code of Conduct
|
An Affiliate of
Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences ®
Top