… is short lived. Maybe half a century more and all major religions of the world will see women challenging the male authority, and seeking equality in spiritual life. It is bound to happen.
Contrary to common believe the male dominance is not an issue of western religions alone or Islamic to be specific. It’s pretty global. Elders of Native Americans are generally male, so are the monks of Buddhism, priests of Zoroastrians and Hinduism isn’t any different. As the ever evolving and growing technology makes the world a smaller place, we are bound to share, pass-on, dictate and dominate cultures, ideas, customs and religions. It is becoming increasingly impossible to live in segregated cultures and avoid conflicts. It is phenomenon of social science that when cultures & civilizations meet there are conflicts but eventually they come to an equilibrium.
As opposed to unequal treatment by God in the hereafter? There is already spritual equality, whether women are smart enough to figure that out, is another issue. In any case, MEN are hardly providers of spritual equality, so these women as well spend their time doing something more worthwhile. Like studying their religion, and understanding its true meaning.
Right, men are NOT PROVIDERS OF spiritual equality.
But they certainly do HINDER not only spiritual equality but also worldly equality. And the Prophet did say after all that deen and duniya go hand in hand...you can't just expect women to accept their historical second class significance and retreat into asceticism...
skhan, even you agree that there is a dominance, right? Now if it is innately justified or not is a totally different question and can be argued in many different ways but that is not essence of this topic. What I am trying to point out is that all religions of the world have readjusted/reshaped themselves over time. It is as natural as human growth.
For example, majority of Islamic scholars today believe that as long as women wear hijab in western countries they are abiding by the stature of purdah. They are not required to wear 'burqa' or 'Abaya' or cover their face totally but go back a century and that justification of 'hijab only' wasn't there. Same is the case with slavery, teen/arranged marriages, institutions of government etc. Democracy which some still consider an unIslamic rule of law, now has approval of many Muslim scholars, some even go as far as to call it an Islamic virtue in terms of ijtihad.
So the point is that these changes are inevitable, you can debate them as it is always healthy to talk things out but it doesn't change the fact that as the people around the world become closer so does their religion, customs and morals.
Worldly equality I can agree with. But religion is only between a person and God. Therefore, the only limitation to one’s level of spirituality, is oneself.
Male dominance? That’s a controversial topic and as you said many justifcations are available to assert that isn’t the case. The issue is, how can humans provide spritiual equality (if indeed it is needed) like you indicated in your post? I don’t believe Islam has changed at all. It’s basic fundamentals have been applied to modern day situations. If you change a religion, then what is the difference between it and any regular man made laws? In its very definition a religion like Islam is perfect in every means and is least of all affected by worldly entities like time.
The examples you cite about hijab and democracy, these are merely different interpretations not actual changes in the religion. As the scholars who think Niqab isn’t necessary today about whether it was necessary 100 years ago, and they will have the same viewpoint.
skhan, you certainly do have a point and I totally agree with you that humans cannot force spirituality in it's true sense or equate it among sexes. It is a relationship & inner peace which is blessed and not dictated. But there is a worldly side to this term.
Pope, is considered by millions of Christians as the sinless "spiritual leader" of the faithful who is the authority of God on earth and thus has attained the highest level of spirituality. You and I might not agree with it along with many Christians but millions of people do. Now, isn't it grounds for inequality that in the 2000 year history of church not a single woman has been a pope or have taken part in choosing one?
Also, you might think democracy is "merely different interpretations" of Islamic thought but let me assure you that those who are trying to establish khilafat consider democracy as Un-Islamic as homosexuality and consider those who justify democracy or the thought of nationalism for a Muslim country equal to kafirs. It is not a simple difference in interpretation, it is a difference in religion.
The only contradictions that exist are in your mind. Quran and the hadith (authentic) ones don’t contradict each other. If you ever take the time to study Islam thoroughly before blindly declaring the Prophet’s (pbuh) words a farce, you will realize that ways of reaching that same spritual equality are different for men and women. Then, that hadith will make perfect sense.
I am far from knowledgable on the tehnicalities of Christianity so I cannot comment on the absence of a female Pope. However, I do believe that in Islam, the WAYS in which men are women go about attaining that EQUAL sprituality are different. This usually causes rise to miconceptions like the dominance of one sex.
If you study the way the Prophet had setup the political infrastructure of the Islamic state AND the ways of which the 4 Caliphs afterwards rule, it really is NOT democracy. I am not an authority on this by any means but it is certainly a very subjective topic and I am not at all suprised that some don’t consider democracy as Islamic for that very reason. Nationalism, is also a grey area, why, because techincally there can only be ONE nation, SPRITUALLY, as every Muslim is the same in eyes of God. No? As you can see all this open to interpretations, but do not deviate much from the fundamentals.
It does deviate from the fundamentals and that is where you and I disagree but that's ok.
Let me try to clarify it again. I do not wish to discuss if women can or should be Imams, pirs, sheikhs, popes, sadhus, chiefs or monks. Instead, my thoughts revolve around the fact that hierarchy (I will drop the term spirituality) of organized religion is globally dominated by males and Muslims are no different. And it is inevitable that it will be challenged in the near future.
If ladies are able to compete men, then they should be given their right place, as of islam that gives ladies same status in any community except a lady can not be prophet.also there is no question of men also to be prophet any more as this status is no more granted by God as our last prophet is Mohammed(Sa).So ladies can be equal rather may be better then men in all respect.As for speaking male dominance, it is decreasing enormously as ladies are improving in all fields and getting authority in their fields. also regarding otherwise thanks to scientific advancement too; that is reducing the men dominance as a requirement to bear a child.Regarding religious duties performance; ladies before were and even now, in contributing families religious duties to their children are more hardworking than men.
Skhan you make some very valid points, but how does the female fraternity climb out of this patriachal collection of hadith? Iam afraid its not that easy given the amount of literature produced to support such mysoginistic ideas. The same can be applied to Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism. Much of our literature related to the status of women can find its roots in Christianity. Have we borrowed ideas from our Ahle Kithab? Most probably, yes. We should remember one thing, religions were a product of tribal societies with well entrenched biases, social and gender sensitive, for them to revert back to their old habits was always easier when they could justify such acts in the garb of religious validity.
Christianity to a certain extent has been able to evolve socially, economically and politically. Our problem lies in the inability to perform religious discourse (Ijtihad) so muslims are stuck somewhere in the eleventh century in a drastic need to evolve or face perpetual ignorance…
Nope, my namaz is just as good as yours. But just like you’re not responsible for providing for your spouse, I am not given the status mothers are given in Islam. Different roles, same spritual purpose.
BTW, a feminist rant is not fit for every discussion.
Christianity may have needed evolution, Islam doesn’t. Please quote some examples of how we need evolving? Hadith, besides the authentic ones, are controversial and not 100 percent reliable. But I like said, the fundamentals of Islam are defined by the Quran and the authentic hadith (Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari), and they are perfect.
Ok, so what changes do you anticipate which can make Islam a less male dominated religion in terms of hierarchy? This isn’t Christianity where a male intermediary in the form of a priest is required. In fact, besides an Imam there isn’t much hierarchy to speak of in Islam. Islam is just between one and God, there isn’t much in the way of that, which is why I think any sort of dominance shouldn’t even be an issue.
you know if you think before you put up messages you would come across as anything but an airhead. in not so distant past you were actually intelligent enough to degrade greatest women in muslim ummah in defence of a dyke now you are at it again. exactly the type of person who gives a bad name to gender if the other person is narrow minded enough.with friends like you i dont think women need chauvinists to control them. you do that for yourself.