Reviving Our Sense of Gheerah (ghayrat)

[pk_taz]

fraudia covering the face and hands is disputed weather it is obligatory or optional but all major sunni scholars, even those who are of the view that it is optional believe that it is better to cover these also.

by the ways you need a crash course in respect, learn to respect other peoples beliefs and cultures or don’t expect any for your own, calling them tents and ninja’s is not the way to go, that’s just as bad as me saying mahajir women from karachi don’t have any sharm-o-hayaa and their men are bay-ghayrats.

[Mr_Fraudia]

*Originally posted by Iqraa_k: *

**I get burkas are not the scale to measure ones religious connection but to call them tents & face mask is suggesting the ladies who wear purdah are weak, why els would someone where a tent **

a few points

1. you are right, my intent was to say that burqas are not required.

2. I am not suggesting anything of the sort that women who wear them are weak, that is your own assumption.

3. btw by face masks I meant face masks, go to KSA sometime and see women wear actual masks on their faces. and by saying that it is a tent like burqaa, it is tent like, that is exactly what it looks like, and the point is to emphasize that it is not a requirement. Fine if someone wants to do it, their vhoice, more poweer to them, but thats a personal choice, not a religious requirement.

4. there are non tent like burqas as well, teh fitted figure hugging burqaas you sometimes see in Pakistan, thats a whole diff topic

**
Do u think all woman who where burqas out of force. **

No, I did not state that, 2 points here

1. All I said was that a burqaa is not a requirement, now whether they wear it as a choice, or whether they are forced to wear it ios a secondary topic which I had not brought up

2. Do you think all women who wear burqas wear it due to free choice? A sizeable number of women do wear burqaas because it is forced upon them, case in point KSA. take a picture of ppl borading a plane in Riyadh and take a picture when they land in London. The burqaas are off, pants and skirst are in. again, their business, but just that example shows that not everyone who is wearing burqaas is doing it out of personal choice societal expectations and/or laws force it on many as well.

**PPl should liberate her because theirdefination of hijab varys from hers. **

Whereas my intent is not to liberate anyone because my definition of hijab varies, the point is that some expectation that a burqaa is required should not be forced upon them either, as is the case in KSA or was with taleban

Suppressing cultural norms into religious aspects are, the father forcing his daughter into nikkah with a man she does not choose. Or the husband neglecting his wifes rites to please his parents.or Slaying of woman due to honor killings. Or a husband blurting out divorce thrice at once and the wife with 4 kids has to marry another man than get a divorce again ,so she can go back to her first husband. All this because of our jurists don’t want to see another school of thought apparently they are convinced theirs is rite and to borrow something from another school of thought would be wrong. All though all school of thoughts have studied different times of the Prophet’s life. This is oppression,limited understanding. Most muslims recite the quran without fully understanding the meaning of the arabic text.. How are we to grow as muslims and break these cultural norms chains.

**Why is the burka looked as, fuel of oppression and not the illiteracy. I did not say the burqa was mandatory , but if a woman chooses to wear it , than no one, especially muslims, should poke fun at her by put downs like her burqa is a tent, or face masks, bring down her morale. **

Burqa is only looked upon as a fuel of oppression when it is made mandatory, when people are forced to comply.

and you have completely missed my point. The goal here is nto to say that someone who is wearing burqaa with her choice shoulkd abandon it, quite the opposite, i.e. those who dont think burqaa is required should not be expected to.

**In front of the kufar showing muslim who do purdah are meek need of liberation-lol look what happened in france. Now that is trampling on rights,what is next? Where is the liberation of france’s muslim womans rite to practice her religion.? **

Free and open discussion should nto be an issue, regardless of what the audience is.

You are going on some tangents that I had not even touched. please get off your soapbox.

My point was as simple as this statement

“hijab is required, burqaa is not”

**Many muslim woman in west choose to wear their burka
and many reverted sisters also although,they live in post 9/11 society:flower2: **

That is their choice, they can enjoy their burqaas and enjoy the fact they they dont live in idiotic countries liek france where they would be forced to not wear them or in KSA where they would be forced to wear them, but thattheya re doing it out of their own free will. and that somone’s misguided sense of ghairat has not forced them to do something that they dont agree with

[Mr_Fraudia]

*Originally posted by pk taz: *

*fraudia covering the face and hands is disputed weather it is obligatory or optional but all major sunni scholars, even those who are of the view that it is optional believe that it is better to cover these also. *

I know that, but whats preferred is not what is required is it? lets not pose the "preferances" as noted by some people as being superior to what we know is required.

*by the ways you need a crash course in respect, learn to respect other peoples beliefs and cultures or don’t expect any for your own, *

what exactly did I say that was disrespectful? as far as respect for myself, i get called kaffir by assorted ppl all teh time :)

** calling them tents and ninja’s is not the way to go, **

the reason that I called them tents was to seperate them from the body fitting tight burqaas you see otherwise.

as far as ninja goes..i used thatterm what, months ago. that was done and over with. did I use it this time?

the challenge is with comunication using tis medium, had i meant it as a disrespect, i would have stated it very differently. this was supposed to be a description of the burqaa, which indeed is a tent like burqaa, versus the abaya which is not tent like, or the fitted burqaas, which ofcourse are fitted. would using the common terms for those burqaas as "shuttlecock" burqaas be less offensive.

Again understand when it is supposed to be disrespectful, versus explanatory.

Now after all this drama, what is wrong with the statement that

"burqaas are nto required, covering the face is not required" now go back to the original article which talks about men asking their women to cover their faces due to ghairat. fine thats due to ghairat, not due to islamic law.

[Madhanee]

Very true, some beliefs revolve around a pussy cat. The pussy is a Man’s Gherat. Is there any mention of the sausage in religious context?

[rehman1]

Faisal Sahab
I hope that you will issue appropiate warnings for loose
talk by one of your mate.
i was issued a warning just for using the word Kadiani.
yeh kha ka rule hee.

[rehman1]

Praise be to Allaah.

Whoever ridicules a Muslim woman or man for sticking to and applying the teachings of Islam is a

disbeliever. This is regardless of whether it is concerning woman's hijab or any other matter of the Shariah. This is based

on the following narration from ibn Umar: At a gathering during the Battle of Tabuk, one man said, "I have not seen

anyone like our Quranic readers who is more desirous of food, more lying in speech and more cowardly when meeting

the enemy." A man said, "You have lied and you are a liar. I shall definitely tell the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon

him) about that." That news was conveyed to the Messenger of Allah and the Quran was revealed. Abdullah ibn Umar

added, "I saw the man holding on to the bag of the camel of the Messenger of Allah and the dust was striking him while he

was saying, 'O Messenger of Allah, we were just joking and playing. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was

simply saying the verse of the Quran],

"Was it Allah, and His Signs and His Messenger you were mocking? Make no excuse, you have disbelieved after you had

believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others among you because they were sinners" (al-Tauba 65-66).

So ridiculing believers has been equated with ridiculing Allah, His Signs and His Messenger.

The Standing Committee (www.islam-qa.com)

[Mr_Fraudia]

There is a difference between ridiculing and asssessing whether what someone is doing is "required" or someone's own preference due to what they think is right.

tomorrow if I start covering my face because the touaregs do and believe that men should cover their faces, and you come up to me and say that this is not required it is not ridiculing, is it.

[hiccup]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by pk taz: *

Astaghferullah, becoming religious is mental regression?

I like it this way, it’s cool to rebel against societal norms, well I was doing that before as well, but it got boring… lol…
[/QUOTE]

I would class hypocrasy and classing yourself as judge and jury to be mentally regressive.

If you have embraced religion that is good. For you spiritually, however do not presume the same interpretaion that you choose to read applies to everyone.

Especcially on little/no proof.

[Iqraa_k]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
There is a difference between ridiculing and asssessing whether what someone is doing is "required" or someone's own preference due to what they think is right.

tomorrow if I start covering my face because the touaregs do and believe that men should cover their faces, and you come up to me and say that this is not required it is not ridiculing, is it.
[/QUOTE]

No that is not ridiculing, but if I say your "dishcloth", like cover on your face is not mandatory. This becomes ridiculing

[bao_bihari]

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by pk taz: *
fraudia covering the face and hands is disputed weather it is obligatory or optional but all major sunni scholars, even those who are of the view that it is optional believe that it is better to cover these also.

by the ways you need a crash course in respect, learn to respect other peoples beliefs and cultures or don’t expect any for your own, calling them tents and ninja’s is not the way to go, that’s just as bad as me saying mahajir women from karachi don’t have any sharm-o-hayaa and their men are bay-ghayrats.
[/QUOTE]

Well said Pk....

It specially is very important nowadays because the general moral level is fast on decline.....

kisi ko sumajh na aaee to hum kiakarain....

[ammarr]

Fraudia loves this topic.

Anyway, fraudia since you keep harping no about proof, proof. And suggesting the some things are just “preferences” rather than requirements, and x-y-z things are not religious requirements, lets get a few things clear.

1- From what I have read, covering the body is a requirement. This simply means that wearing body-huggin clothes would not be considered ok, even if the person wears a head scarf (which is common these days). If you disagree, put up proof. Why do I consider modest body covering (Jilbab) compulsory? Please read: http://www.muhajabah.com/jilbab.htm

2- As for wearing face covering (or face-masks)- then as we found out last time, it may be a disputed issue. However when you claim that it is not a religious requirement, and it is preferential, you are actually being EXACTLY like those scholars who claim that doing so is fardh. Accept that there is a difference on this issue, some might consider it fardh, others might consider it recommended. I myself believe that it is not fardh, but highly recommended. And again, if you keep insisting that it should not/can not be a part of religion at all, then you are being just as stubborn as those who consider it as such.

Also, as I have understood, the original article talks about covering the face if the husband asks, which is a different issue, since the wife should be obedient to her husband if he does not ask anything haram off her.

[4:34] … Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in the husband’s absence what Allâh orders them to guard (e.g. their chastity, their husband’s property, etc.) …