| Author | Topic |
Nida_e_Khair
PAKISTAN
|
 Topic initiated on Sunday, July 9, 2006 - 5:40 AM 
Are Muslims on TV Really on Guidance?
...
Edited by: Nida_e_Khair on Saturday, October 14, 2023 7:04 PM |
|
student1
PAKISTAN
|
 Posted - Sunday, July 9, 2006 - 4:30 PM 
Asalam Aalaikum,
Well I donot agree with you completely, because I have seen some very knowledgable Scholars in the TV program "Alim online" and their dresses donot look very expensive and we learn alot from them.
I donot know which Islamic Scholars are you talking about.
Even for the sake of argument, if we accept that those Alims/Scholars are wearing expensive and high standard dresses then what does it has to do with us? You should be only concerned with the knowledge that they communicate with you through TV.
Unfortunately it has become habbit of muslims to concentrate on irrelevant things. I have seen some muslims who start talking about the origin of the Muslim Scholars who appear on TV.
I donot care whether the Alim wears dress paints with shirt or Sub-continent dress , I only concentrate on what the Alim speaks.
Regards, |
|
student1
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Sunday, July 9, 2006 - 4:38 PM
Asalam Aalaikum,
By the way why is the dressing of those Islamic Scholars bothering you?
Should you be concerned about your dressing or their dressing?
Another question for you if you donot mind, why do you think that they should wear the same dress again and again.
Let me remind you of a hadith of Prophet(pbuh) in which a companion came upto Prophet(pbuh)and asked him that" Can he wear beautiful cloths and look beautiful?" Our beloved Prophet(pbuh) replied that "a muslim should concentrate on his beauty because Allah(swt) love beauty".
Do you know that our beloved Prophet(pbuh) inspite of living a simple and clean life use to do fashion?
He never lived a boring life and his Companions may Allah(swt) be pleased with them all always talked about the description and living style of Prophet(pbuh).
I hope this helps, |
|
student1
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Sunday, July 9, 2006 - 4:46 PM
Asalam Aalaikum,
If you read the hadith of Tirmidi,then you will come to know that Prophet(pbuh) use to keep long hair which were
above the shoulders and use to wear a silver ring and use to put itir on his clothes. From the beautiful seerah of Prophet(pbuh) we learn that within the boundaries of Shariah ,you can even do fashion but that fashion should not be
out of limit as unfortunately muslims now a days do.
I am not saying that I am very religious and follow each and every teachings of Islam but I realize that we muslims are not moving in the right direction because Alhamdulilah I have the sense. |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Monday, July 10, 2006 - 12:26 AM
Dear Nida-e-Khair:
Assalamo’alaikum.
I’d like to reflect upon a few things that you mentioned.
Point No.1:
You wrote, “…Frankly, I've never seen any scholar uptil now who has repeated his clothes. …mean, you appear on TV and tell millions of Muslims to be simple (for example), but at the same time you're wearing a top designer's outfit?! That really doesn't make sense.”
There are certainly a number of Islamic scholars who repeat their dresses and do not seem to wear designer clothes, for example, respected: Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, Dr. Israr Ahmad, Dr. Zakir Naik and Mufti Muneeb-ur-Rehman etc.
Even if anyone wears expensive dresses, it is certainly not forbidden in Islam. However, I agree that it is better to spend more and more in the way of Allah if He has bestowed someone with wealth but still, it is not a hard and fast rule if one has already paid the obligatory alms. Therefore, we may tell someone humbly to spend more in Allah’s way rather than spending on precious clothes but we do not have any right to criticize anyone who spends much on the clothing.
Point No. 2:
You wrote, “…secondly because they have their eyebrows all shaped-up and upperlip done.”
There is a perception, because of the saying ascribed to the Holy prophet (SAW), that women should not shape up their eye brows. Do you know in which circumstances this hadith was said, who was the audience and, above all, what is the status of the very hadith: sahi, hasan, da’if etc.? If you do not know these things, you should not give a verdict about such women. Also, present a sound directive from the Qur’an or Hadith if you think that removing the upper-lip hair is not permissible for a Muslim woman.
You further wrote, “They have their dupattas so loosely wrapped that the latter literally hang down to their chests, exposing their necks and part of their hair."
I fully agree that women should cover their chests as it is a clear directive of the Qur’an for them. However, covering hair (except for offering prayers) is not mentioned in either the glorious Qur’an or Hadith. Is hair a part of “illa-ma-zahra” or not? – there can be a debate on it. Therefore, please do not be judgmental on this very issue.
Point No. 3:
You wrote, “… but hey, wait a sec.! I thought we were discussing Muslims; these guys in Lollywood are not even fit to be called unbelievers! They're hypocrites!”
We have no right to call anyone a kafir or mushrik or munafiq.
Even if you see someone worshipping an idol, you do not know if the one is doing so out of stubbornness (even after knowing that the true Rabb is Allah) or doing so because of not really knowing (in a convincing manner) whether the true Rabb is Allah or someone else. If the case is latter, then one is not a mushriq in Allah’s eye.
People who know what the truth is and still do kufr or shirk or munafiqat out of stubbornness are kafir, mushriq and munafiq, respectively, in Allah’s eye. As we cannot see other people’s hearts, we cannot be a judge over them to give them any of such titles.
Allah knows the best, of course.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Junaid Hassan |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Monday, July 10, 2006 - 5:44 PM
Dear Nida-e-Khair:
Assalamo'alaikum.
First, I’m very happy to see that you have a very nice attitude; you accept where you think you’re wrong and try to rectify yourself. Masha’allah! Please keep this great virtue with you, it’ll surely help you much to improve upon your moral values.
Point No. 1:
You wrote, “But it's Sunnah not to spend so much. What amazes me is that these people who give lectures on Islam are themselves not following the Sunnah.”
It is not Sunnah but Uswa-e-hasana not to spend so much for the sake of the worldly possessions.
Here I am copying one of my earlier responses on this forum, I hope it’d help:
Literally, Sunnah in Arabic means "well trodden path". However as a religious term, its definition is as follows:
Sunnah is the set of traditions of Prophet Abraham (SAW) (Sunan-e-Ibrahimi) which the Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) revived, and after corrections and additions, instituted in his followers as an integral part of their faith (the D'in).
Here is the notion of the above definition in the Holy Qur'an:
"And then We revealed unto you (the command) to follow the religion of Abraham, who was steadfast and was not one of the polytheists." (16:123)
In the light of the above definition, all the unreligious matters like walking on sand, riding on camels, covering the head, using specific Arab perfumes etc. are out of the boundary of the Sunnah.
This is a long topic; to remove the confusions about Sunnah, Hadith and Uswa-e-hasana, please attend the following courses on this web-site:
1. Introduction to the Hadith
2. Understanding the Sunnah
Point No. 2:
I am aware of the hadith you quoted from Sahi of Bukhari (RA) i.e., Volume 7, Book 72, Number 822, that is why I didn’t say that there isn’t any of such hadith but mentioned about:
1. It’s authenticity.
2. The circumstances in which it was revealed.
3. It’s addresses.
I’d like to add upon more here:
4. Other of such ahadith in this matter.
5. The co-relation of the Qur’an or Sunnah and the very hadith.
6. The correct translation of the hadith.
We cannot judge a matter merely on the words of a hadith. There are certainly a number of things to look upon, some of which I have already mentioned in the points above.
I will not go into the details of the very hadith but like to mention that the Arabic word translated as “who removed hair from their faces” has been translated by the scholars in other meanings as well and there is a disagreement (among the scholars) whether shaping eye-brows or removing upper-lip hair is forbidden in Islam.
For the details, please see:
http://understanding-islam.com/related/text.asp?type=question&qid=900
Point No. 3:
You wrote, “However, this verse was obviously revealed to protect the Muslim women from getting molested, and also to instill a sense of modesty in them (Allah knows best). So it goes against common sense that Allah would not order a woman to cover her hair. A woman can allure a man from her face. The hair of a woman is naturally more attractive, so how can it be left exposed? In several authentic Ahaadeeth, it says that when the verse ordering women to "draw their veils over their bosoms" was revealed, the women of the Ansar tore part of their outer garments and covered their faces with them.”
The verse of Surah-e-Ehzab that you are referring to was revealed in the special circumstances in which there was a great threat to the Muslim women due to some characterless men. It cannot be generalized as an order for all the Muslim women living in normal circumstances. The permanent orders of hijab, for the Muslim women, are there in Surah-e-Noor. Please see the commentaries of both of the surahs for details.
The ahadith you have mentioned were consequently a result of the very verse of Surah-e-Ehzab that you referred to, earlier. Therefore, these ahadith should be understood keeping in mind the background of the circumstances in which the directive was revealed in Suraqh-e-Ehzab.
I wonder why you’re specifying beauty with women only. Man’s body and face are of attraction and beauty to women too. Why don’t men wear a veil upon their faces? The simplest answer to this is that Allah T’ala has not ordered men to do so. Same is the case for women, when Allah has not ordered them (in the normal circumstances) to cover their heads, who are we or anyone else to impose this on them?
Even if you have a difference of opinion in this very matter, you should present your own viewpoints peacefully to the Muslim women. Still, I think you cannot impose them on them as they have a right to choose among any of the viewpoints according to the best of their own understanding.
Point No. 4:
You wrote earlier, “I knew very well that it would sweep me into Hell---firstly, for eating several dead brothers' flesh, and secondly, for criticising scholars as they are likely to be waliullahs.”
Back-biting is allowed in five situations in Islam one of which is when someone has to criticize a wrong deed or concept of a leader or scholar.
Point No. 5:
You wrote earlier, “Believe me, sometimes when one of my relatives is sitting with me, listening to Israr Ahmad, she always ends up criticising him for "the masses of wealth" that Mr. Ahmad accumulates. And I always have a 'why-should-I-care;-I-love-him-for-his-talks' kinda attitude.”
I think this attitude of yours is not enough. You should try to convince your relative that having wealth is no evil but a blessing of Allah T’ala.
Of course, Allah knows the best. There may be error(s) in my understanding of the D’in therefore it is not compulsory for anyone to follow what I say.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Junaid Hassan |
|
Zulfee
USA
|
Posted - Tuesday, July 11, 2006 - 2:07 PM
| Those who accept any other source (hadith etc) beside Noble Quran are no doubt Mushrik. They have the highest extreme of dishonesty even with the hadith as well because if any hadith doesn’t benefit them, they say, its circumstances are different or it is not authenticated. So in this way, in addition to Mushrik they are hypocrite as well. They have all the misfortunes in this world and the hereafter. |
|
Zulfee
USA
|
Posted - Tuesday, July 11, 2006 - 3:42 PM
Nida e khair:
YOU ARE WRONG!!!!!! |
|
student1
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, July 11, 2006 - 7:21 PM
Asalam Aalaikum,
Nida Khan you misunderstood me, I am not attacking you and not becoming agressive in my argument.
I am simply giving my explanation and please donot take it to your heart.
It is true that because of Zulfee I was little upset but now I am fine and I hope that you will forgive me for what I have said.
Please donot use the words like "pissed off" this is a slang and is not a respectable word. |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 12:10 AM
Dear Nida-e-Khair:
Assalamo’alaikum and thanks for your prayers.
Point No. 1:
You wrote, “The thing is that the material in these courses is debated over. I don't care what the definition of Sunnah actually is. I, being a Muslim, just know that it is supposed to be followed.”
It is your personal opinion that I have no right to interfere in. But I want to ask you a couple of things regarding your opinion so that we may remove some confusions:
a) Interpretations have always been debated over even if they were from persons like Ibn Taymiah, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik or Maulana Maududi (RA). Does it mean that we should ignore all the interpretations?
b) When someone does not know what is Sunnah, how can one practice it?
If you do not wish to answer, you have a full right to hold back.
Point No. 2:
You wrote, Brother Junaid, I'm not a scholar and it's thus going to be very hard for me to prove this Hadeeth to be correct, judging it by the points that you've mentioned. So if I can't prove this Hadeeth to be correct, why don't you prove it to be wrong? I think that'll be much better.”
I have already discussed this Hadith briefly and have provided a link for the details.
Point No. 3:
You wrote, “Excuse me? I'm not referring to Surah Ahzab. I'm referring to Surah Noor.”
Earlier you wrote “In several authentic Ahaadeeth, it says that when the verse ordering women to "draw their veils over their bosoms" was revealed, the women of the Ansar tore part of their outer garments and covered their faces with them.”
It is Surah-e-Ehzab in which the verse is reveled that orders Muslim women to cover their heads and faces (in the extreme circumstances). (Surah-e-Ehzab, Verse: 59)
Point No. 4:
You wrote, “And just why hasn't He ordered men to do so? It's because men can never become the victims of rape by women, and therefore they need not be protected like women.”
First, I did not need an explanation. My point was when Allah T’ala has not given anyone a particular order, we have no right to impose it on anyone or criticize anyone for it. I know you haven’t imposed but you have criticized women.
Second, even if women cannot generally rape, they can attempt on a handsome man. Qur’an tells the account of Yusuf (AS) and Zulaikha (RA) in this regard.
Point No. 5:
You wrote, “I understand "normal circumstances" to mean "in the home, etc." (correct me if I'm wrong). If by "normal circumstances" you mean "not at all unless there's a threat to the woman", then may Allah guide you.”
Why do we always think what we have heard or believe in is always true? Why can’t we accept that the other person may be correct too.
By normal circumstances, I mean, “not at all unless there's a threat to the woman". Surah-e-Ehzab’s Verse 59 has a specific background. It cannot be generalized for all the Muslim women living in the normal circumstances. Great scholars of Islam have had the same viewpoint about the very verse. The ahadith that you quoted in one of your earlier postings also are in regard to this specific verse of the Qur’an and should be understood accordingly.
There are four permanent orders for Muslims in the Qur’an regarding the exposure of men and women:
1. Lowering of the gaze. (This order is for both men and women.)
2. To cover and safeguard the sex-organs. (This also is for both men and women.)
3. To keep a loose garment on the chest (in addition to the normal shirt etc.) so that it is exclusively covered. (This is specific to women alone.)
4. Not to expose the adornment. (This is also specific to women only.)
You further wrote, “It's obvious that Allah Almighty wants Hijab for the woman because she is more attractive and might fall victim to molestation.”
Women are more attractive to men only. Why do you forget that men are of attraction to women too? The covering of sex-organs is essential for both men and women. I agree that women expose their bodies and adornment but men also wear tight jeans and see through shalwars (with no under garments) and similarly shorts – why don’t we criticize them? It is because we men only think in our own perspective and have a habit of imposing everything (whether it is a Religious or any other matter) on women alone.
Point No. 6:
You wrote, “I don't think there are any views that support women not covering their heads in public.”
You say so because you have only listened to the Religious viewpoints that are famous in the sub-continent and also observed the practice of covering the head in the very culture of the sub-continent.
You further wrote, “These women fail to realise that they're appearing in front of a million men, and there are chances that they may allure over 90%. Ask men who may have seen these women on TV. Ask them if these women look attractive. Most will reply in the affirmative.”
Again you are only thinking in men’s perspective. Men also appear in front of a million women on the TV and allure them. Pick up a modern Psychology book and it will surely tell you that women are also attracted towards men when they appear charmingly in front of women.
Point No. 7:
You wrote, “This statement of yours justifies my criticism, except for the point where I called them hypocrites.”
I put forward that statement to tell that you were not back-biting. It was not to criticize any of your viewpoints.
Point No. 8:
You wrote, “Allah does know best, and therefore He also knows my intentions and the fact that I'm not trying to "impose" anything on anyone as you said.”
I am sorry if I understood you wrongly; I hope you’d forgive me.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Junaid Hassan
Edited by: JunaidHasan on Friday, July 28, 2006 5:55 PM |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 12:21 AM
To all,
Don't be bothered by what Mr. Zulfee says. It is useless to waste time over his stubborn viewpoints. Whenever I have asked him to bring an argument from the Qur'an in favour of his viewpoint(s), he has had no answer to it.
Regards,
Junaid |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 7:59 PM
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 |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Thursday, July 13, 2006 - 9:26 PM
Wa’alaikumassalam Nida:
Thank you for your quick response.
By tennis (hehehe), I meant, that we were throwing arguments in each other’s court like tennis players throw the tennis ball in each other’s court. That was just a joke!
Nida-e-Khair wrote, “I fully approve of your statement brother. However, I'm not too sure what you were trying to say over here. I mean, did I go wrong anywhere in my statement?”
I was only requesting you to stay quiet about their intentions as we cannot know of what is in other person’s heart.
Nida-e-Khair wrote, “You're right that the Prophet (SAW) did not say anything about covering the head. Therefore, I think it's better to be on the safe side.”
I totally agree with you that the safer way is the best way. That is why I said earlier as well that the best, for women, is to cover the head; however, it should not be seen as a compulsion.
Nida-e-Khair wrote, “And by the way, it could be that the Prophet (SAW) would've mentioned something about the hair if only he had seen a woman with her head uncovered.”
Hm, I wouldn’t agree here because the Qur’an itself could make covering the head a clear compulsion if it wanted. But, I think, Allah T’ala wanted to give a little freedom to women in this matter that is why we find no hard and fast rule about it in either the glorious Qur’an or authentic Ahadith.
Nida-e-Khair further wrote, “If the head were not part of Satr, then why would the Almighty require us women to cover it during prayers or Hajj?”
But see, women cannot cover their faces during the hajj as they cannot reveal their heads in the salah. Special manners and etiquettes for special occasions such as salah or hajj or umrah should be seen as specific.
Thank you for your compliments though I don’t think I deserved them. And also, thanks a lot for such a healthy discussion. I think you are a girl because you are more polite, appreciative and considerate. By this, I don’t mean that men do not have these qualities but, according to the best of my experience, women have an edge in such qualities.
Sincerely,
J. |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Friday, July 14, 2006 - 6:36 PM
| What do you mean by "neck"? There is a difference between "chest" and "neck". Neck is the part above the shoulders and below the chin. However, the word "neck" is often referred to the part of the chest where necklace is worn or the most upper part of a female shirt in general discussions. Remember that the part on which the necklace is worn is, in fact, the part of the chest, in the human body, which the Qur’an is ordering women to cover. |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Saturday, July 15, 2006 - 7:48 AM
Nida:
I cannot say anything on behalf of other men but, to be honest, if attractiveness is the criterion, I can say that a woman's face, hands and feet are certainly more attractive for me as compared to her hair.
Junaid |
|
JunaidHasan
GERMANY
|
Posted - Saturday, July 15, 2006 - 9:20 PM
| Ah! Can't we say that it is not necessary for a woman to cover her head but it surely is a far better and much safe thing if she does so? "Necessary" is a little harsh, I think. No?? |
|
 Reply to Topic 
Printer Friendly |
| Jump To: |
|
|
|