Showing posts with label Experiences. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Experiences. Show all posts

Myth of Islam's Contribution to Human Civilization

Since the tragic incident of September 11, 2001 when 19 suicidal Muslim terrorists rammed airplanes into the World Trade Centre in New York and Pentagon Headquarters killing more than 3000 innocent people, Islam, as a religion, has come under serious scrutiny. A number of books, critically examining Islamic doctrine have been published, whilst volumes of articles and essays, critical of Islam are being published in print media and in the Internet on a daily basis. This is a new experience to Muslims. Indeed, despite being an evidently obscurantist religion, Islam has escaped its due share of criticisms for a long time. For example: hundreds of books and essays critical of Christianity or Hinduism have been freely available in the library and media for a long time whilst such materials on Islam have been virtually absent, since a few titles that were published were banned. Indeed, any attempt to criticize Islam has been silenced through Islamic "rogue justice" called Fatwa as has happened to Salman Rushdie, author of "Satanic Verses". The tragic event of 9/11 (2001) has acted as a catalyst in the hands of the critiques of Islam to invigorate their criticism of Islam. These critiques include moderate Muslims, ex-Muslims and non-Muslims.
As Islam is increasingly being portrayed as an obscurantist and a violent religion which promotes cruelty, armed militancy, human rights violation and a hindrance to progress and modernization, the Muslim apologists - who go by the label "moderate Muslims" - are desperately trying to defend Islam as a religion of peace, progress and modernity. In their desperation, Muslim apologists are often making extraordinary claims such as Islam's contribution to human civilization as a measure of Islam progressiveness. For example, a Muslim apologist of Bangladeshi origin, who is a professor at a college in New York, made the following claim in an Internet forum: "Equating a political ideology, that of the Jamaat-e-Islami (an Islamic political party in Bangladesh), with Islam is a gross insult to a great religion that has contributed to the lion's share of human civilization." Her claim that Islam contributed a lion's share to human civilization did not come with any supporting evidence or example. When an explanation was sought from the professor to support her claim, she remained silent. This essay will critically examine the contribution of Islam to world civilization. Because of the interrelatedness of the issue, contributions by other religions, namely Christianity and Judaism, would also be covered in a substantial way to give a comparative picture.

Examining Contribution of Religions to Civilization

Let us start with the greatest 20th century philosopher Bertrand Russell's assessment on the contribution of religions to human civilization. Lord Russell, in his famous essay "Has Religion Made Useful Contributions to Civilization?" has outlined a concise account of contributions made by religions (all religions) to human civilization [Ref: Why I am not a Christian, p.24]. Bertrand Russell could not find any significant contribution that religions, including Islam, might have made to human civilization. He wrote:
"My own view on religion is that of Lucretius. I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race. I cannot, however, deny that it has made some contributions to civilization. It helped early days to fix the calendar and it caused Egyptian priests to chronicle eclipses with such care that in time they became able to predict them. These two services I am prepared to acknowledge, but I do not know of any others."

If my understanding is correct, the above quote from Bertrand Russell relates to the religious priest of Egypt preceding the birth of Jesus. Or, to be precise those two contributions were made by the ancient Egyptian religious priests before the arrival of Moses/Jesus. Even the Chinese Royal astrologers were able to predict Eclipse in 2134 BC, long before the birth of Moses, allegedly after 1200 BC. In other words, none of the three major Abrahamic religions, namely Judaism, Islam and Christianity, has made any contribution to human civilization. Instead, all these religions have only hindered progress and development of human civilization. A classic example of this is the plunging into the proverbial Dark Age of the Greek rationalism-inspired vibrant and fast- prospering Europe as soon as the anti-progressive and often cruel Christian ideology became part of the ruling machinery of Roman Empire in the early 4th century when Roman Emperor, Constantine the Great, became a Christian. The Western world, where religion is becoming increasingly extinct, those societies are making significant contributions to science, technology, human values and social development in recent times. On the other hand if we look at the Muslim world today - where people's religious fervor and adherence to religious rituals are very strong - we clearly see that these societies are making very little contribution to progress and development of their society and people and to the world at large.
Hence, we can safely take Russell's assertion "I regard it as a disease born of fear and as a source of untold misery to the human race" as true. As for Islam, this religion started with violence initiated by Prophet Muhammad himself. Prophet Muhammad is said to have fought 78 or more wars and only two of those were initiated by his opponents. He started his campaign to establish Islam as a true religion with the aim of capturing Ka'ba, the alleged House of God from the hands of the Meccan Pagans. However, by the time of his death Muhammad had conquered most parts of the Arabian Peninsula as a result of those 78 or more wars he had fought. Following his death, his successors stepped in the Prophet's footsteps and this bloody Islamic conquest continued as long as the brutal Arab and Persian Muslim rulers could, for the sake of spreading Islam that resulted in creation of the giant Islamic kingdom.
It should, however, be considered that the Islamic conquests were very different from those of other conquerors, like that of pagan "Alexander the Great". In the case of Alexander, once he conquered a land, the miseries of the conquered people were over since he quickly moved on to establish just governance whereby he rarely discriminated the conquered people. It should be noted that once Alexander established his huge Empire and instituted its capital in Persia, people in his Empire were better off than before, since he established good governance and a better justice system. He realized that, although conquered, those defeated people were intelligent, capable and worthy of respect. Subsequently, he continually pushed for equality amongst all the people in his kingdom irrespective of religion, race or culture. He also realized that racial differences are major a reason for conflicts amongst different people. Hence, he used to encourage inter-racial marriages amongst his people as a means to promote racial harmony. He hosted a feast, famously known as the "Marriage of the East and the West", at which several thousand Macedonian troops formally married Asian women. He also promoted cross-cultural exchanges and during his rule many cultural concepts from India and Arab world entered Europe whilst Greek cultural influence moved eastward to Asia and India.
On the other hand, the Muslim conquerors had invariably indulged in destroying the cultures of the subdued people. Furthermore, the conquered people in the Muslim kingdom had to continue to suffer as the Muslim rulers would impose various discriminatory measures literally to force them to accept Islam. The conqueror Muslims would even brutally persecute those conquered people if they refused to accept the religion of Islam. In Islamic kingdoms, non-Muslim had to pay Jiziya, a special high tax, tactically designed to force the non-Muslims into accepting Islam. It can be cited here that during the centuries of Muslim rule in the Indian subcontinent it is estimated that the tyrant Muslim rulers had killed some 50 million Hindus and indigenous people, whilst hundreds of Hindu temples were destroyed. Even Sultan Haider, the father of Tipu Sultan of Haiderabad, had ordered the destruction of many Hindu temples.
It must also be remembered that as per Islamic traditions set by Prophet Muhammad himself, once a country or domain was conquered Muslim army had every right to take the subdued male as slaves and their women as sex-slaves. Muslim conquest of India was no exception in this regard. It becomes evident that after conquering India, tens of thousands of people might have had been taken as slaves by the Muslims army. As an example: while being transported to Persia, some 100,000 Hindu slaves died in a mountain area in Afghanistan because of sudden ensuing of severe winter. This mountain is now known as the "Hindu Kush", meaning "Hindu death". This tragedy, which has never happened in any history of conquest, was of such great enormity that this mountain was so named to recognize the victims. It is always the rule of war: the conqueror takes the credit and not the vanquished.
We should also consider the fact that Bertrand Russell's book "Why I am Not a Christian" was published in 1956. Hence, if Islam had really made the lion's share of contribution to the progress of human civilization it must have happened only after this book was published in 1956. But to our knowledge, Islamic world has only degraded or obstructed the progress of all the fundamental aspects of excellence of our civilization in recent decades. For example, violation of human rights and the practice of unfair justice are rampant in the Islamic world. It is very clear, Islamic world has made no contribution whatsoever to the advancement of science and technology and neither has it made any worthwhile inputs in any other endeavors of human development during the last few decades.

Contribution to Civilization: The Religious Understanding

During discussions with the Islamic as well as other religious apologists, who often make extraordinary claims about great contributions of religions to civilization, I realized that the fundamental understanding of these people about the basic elements of human civilization are grossly flawed, despite their having a very high grade of modern education. I quote here one such highly educated religious person (probably a Christian) who described her idea of religions' enormous contribution to Civilization as follows:
"I would say the contribution is enormous; it actually gives the best thing that there is to people. It gives hope, it gives some kind of meaning to life, and it tells people that they are not alone but someone is watching over them all the time so that they are safe. You see you can have a band of army guarding you 24/7 and you still might feel unsafe, but if you believe in religion then you will probably feel even in the darkest lonely night you have no reason to fear. This is what religion contributes to human life, what more do you think human being needs?"

This definition of 'enormous contribution' by religion to human civilization possibly gives an indication as to why religions or the deeply religious people have never been part of the progress of civilization; instead, had acted as a serious impediment. If this idea on contributions of religions to civilization is to be taken as true, then it can be safely said that the middle-age world and her barbarian people were more civilized than those of today. It is because most of the people were more religious during that time when compared with those of present time. For example, today about 50% of the people in the Western Europe do not subscribe to the known Gods or religions, whilst people not believing in a God and Religion in the middle-age must have been a rarity. Following the logic of the religionists the middle-age world must had been a better civilization. Unfortunately, most philosophers, scientists and humanists, majority of whom have been heretics or skeptics of traditional religions and Gods, might have spoiled the good old civilization by pushing our world towards today's perceived degraded state.
Today, individual freedom and respect for human rights and dignity etc. define the absolute core elements of modern civilization. These defining elements of today's civilization are far different from what is claimed to be the defining essentials of civilization in religious terms as explained above. And definitely, religions have no critical value in the defining modern civilization. In fact, most of these elements which are the cornerstones of modern civilization have been and still are the enemies of all religions. This is because efforts to institute these defining elements of today's civilization have always collided with religions and they often have been achieved at the costly sacrifices of humanists and freethinkers. Indeed, these pivotal elements of today's civilization are becoming instrumental in kicking religions out of peoples' lives and hence today a good number of people around the world are atheists, skeptics and agnostics. Their number is continually on the rise. Thus, if we are to accept the above-mentioned definition of civilization proposed by the religious friends, we surely live in a much less civilized human society today compared to the one in which, say Prophet Muhammad, Jesus or Moses had lived and the civilization is rapidly turning uncivilized! So, to fulfill our  innate aspiration to reach to a higher level of civilization, it is probably time "we set the clock of our world backward and go back to the greater civilization of the time of Prophet Muhammad, Jesus or Moses or may be Adam" - if we are to follow the reason of the religionists. Leaving aside the sarcasm, we may surely conclude that the religiously-indoctrinated peoples' mind, brain and psyche are truly stunted or prejudiced about the whole idea of the progress and excellence of our world and civilization. This also probably explains the reason why religions as social institutions and the religious people have never been part of the progress of civilization but instead have acted as serious impediments.
More intelligent religious apologists, however, would mention the names of renowned scientists, philosophers and thinkers of their respective religions to claim the credit of contribution of their religions to civilization. For example, Christian would mention about Newton and Galileo et al., Jews will mention about Einstein or an array of modern-day Nobel laureates of Jewish origin whilst the Muslims would cite the name of great intellectuals of the past like Ibn-Sina, Al-Biruni and Omar Khaiyam et al. as well as more recent Nobel laureate such as late Professor Abdus Salam. These names indeed make a formidable case in favor of the religionists but such arguments cannot be given an automatic pass without raising a huge question mark about the role of religion in these individuals' contributions to science. We must consider the following points in this regard:
  1. How knowledgeable and dedicated they were in religion? How much did their religious knowledge help them in making their ground-breaking contributions?
  2. Were they closer to Gods like the Maolanas/Mullahs (Islam), Rabbis (Jewish), Priests/Pastors (Christianity) and Prophets?
  3. What are the contributions the alleged 140,000 Prophets (according to Islam) made to what defines today's civilization?
Many individuals, such as, Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Buddha, Confucius, Euclid, Epicurus, Democritus, Lucretius and Aristarchus et al., born long before the Prophets such as Muhammad and  Jesus, were all known to be pagan as per Abrahamic religions. But they had direct and profound influence in laying the foundation of today's world of excellence in science, education, human rights and justice. As civilization progresses, we keep distancing ourselves from whatever the alleged God-sent Prophets, namely Muhammad, Jesus and Moses et al. had advocated. It is a stark reality that the sole contributions of these Prophets, the Torah/Old Testament, Bible and Koran, have only stalled the progress of civilization to a higher level. The Jews and the Christians of today can mention scores of modern Nobel laureates of Jewish and Christians backgrounds to claim their respective religion's contribution to civilization. However, the following questions are needed to be answered before accepting such examples:
* Are those Nobel laureates going to agree to stoning-to-death of their spouses or anybody else if the latter committed adultery? ["If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her."............ "Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you." (Deuteronomy 22:22,24)]
* Are they going to agree to rip up pregnant women and chop the unborn embryo into pieces for whatsoever reasons? ["Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up." (Hosea 13:16)].

These God-given verses have been taken directly from the Bible. The Christians, however, deny these atrocious and barbaric edicts as alien to their religion since they are actually taken from the Jewish Old Testament. It should, however, be considered that Jesus did not himself write the New Testament; instead, Saint Paul is known to have authored major part of the New Testament. Jesus is said to have had whole-heartedly accepted and preached the Old Testament or Torah. In this regard Michael Hart says in his book "The 100":
"..Mathew and Luke give completely different versions of Jesus' last words; both of these versions, incidentally, are direct quotations from the Old Testament. It was no accident that Jesus was able to quote from the Old Testament; though the progenitor of Christianity, he was himself a devout Jew."

Old Testament, of course, is a part of the Bible and nowhere in the New Testament has Jesus ever rejected or denounced the Old Testament. It must also be understood that Christians believe the God of the Jews as the same God as their own. Hence, an all-correct, all powerful and all-knowing God's eternal and absolutely original teachings as prescribed in the Old Testament cannot be negated or overruled by the lesser than original ones outlined in the New Testament.
Yet, the great majority of the scientists, thinkers and philosophers of today do not subscribe to the fables of creationism or virgin birth of Jesus. For example, most scientists today would believe that in scientific term, Jesus was an illegitimate child, that is, the so-called Holy Ghost who is claimed (by Christians) to have impregnated Mary was none other than  a mortal human being. However, the punishment for these giant scientists for such blasphemy is death as has been prescribed by Jesus himself in the Bible:
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the [world] to come. [Mat 12:32]

It is true that majority of the great scientists of modern times have Christian and Jewish root or background. But this does not automatically make these Christians and Jews or their great discoveries and contributions to be religious. For example, take the case of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the melting-pot of all the greatest scientists worldwide. Interestingly, only 7% of the scientists of NAS believe in the known Gods or religions. Thus, the greatest minds of today, despite having Judeo-Christian backgrounds, are actually heretics to their religions. The punishment for these great minds, as per the Judeo-Christian religions, is death as outlined in the following Biblical verses:
"If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;" (Deuteronomy 13: 6)
"Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people." (Deuteronomy 13:8-9)

Islamic Golden Age and Contribution to Civilization

Similarly, Muslims, whenever they talk about Islam's contributions to civilization, also quickly point to the great Muslim poets, philosophers and scientists, namely Omar Khayam, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd et al. of the so-called Islamic Golden Age, spanning from 8th to the 14th century. There is no denying the fact that these great Muslim people have made significant contributions to human society. But we must address the essential question: "How good Muslims were they?" The truth is, they were hardly good Muslims and in correct religious term, many of them would qualify to be apostates of Islam and indeed, the-then Islamic clerics had called them heretics.
During the so-called Islamic Golden Age (8th-14th century), the Islamic world was most advanced in Science, Technology, Industries, trading and in many other fields compared to other parts of the world. Indeed, during that  period, Islamic world produced many scientific, literary and philosophical genius, such as Omar Khayam (1048-1122), Al-Zahrawi (936-1013), Al-Khowarizmi (780-850); Al-Biruni (973-1050), Al-Kindi (801-873), Al-Battani (850-929 CE), Ibn-Sina (973-1037), Abdallah al-Ma'arri (973-1057), Omar Khayam (1048-1122), Ibn-Rushd (1128-1198) and Jalaluddin Rumi (Birth 1207) amongst others.
There is no doubt about the greatness of these genius intellectuals who were indeed without any parallel in their fields of scholarship amongst the compatriots from other religions on the world stage. However, there is something very interesting about that period of Islamic Golden Age - from the time preceding and following that period. It should first be considered that that was the time, when the Christian world of Europe went into the grip of the Christian Churches which plunged the fast progressing and prospering Europe, inspired by Greek philosophy of Hellenistic Age into the proverbial Dark Age. However, exactly the opposite was happening in the Islamic world during this time. Greek rationalism and philosophy disappeared from Europe but emerged in the nascent Islamic world which gave rise to a new Islamic doctrine called Mutazili, originated during the period of 'Abbasid Caliphate' (749-847 AD).
Mutazili theology originated in the 8th century in al-Basrah (also called Besra), the great Iraqi City, when Wasil Ibn 'Atta' left the teaching lessons of al-Hasan al-Basri after a theological dispute. Thus, Ibn 'Atta' and his followers were labeled "Mutazili" which means "deserter of Islam". The Mutazili theology expanded on the logic and rationalism of Greek philosophy, seeking to combine them with Islamic doctrines, and show that they were inherently compatible.
During this period, several questions were being debated by Muslim theologians, including whether the Qur'an was created or eternal, whether evil was created by God, the issue of predestination vs. free will, whether God's attributes in the Qur'an were to be interpreted allegorically or literally, and whether sinning believers would have eternal punishment in hell. Mu'tazila thought attempted to address all these issues.
The Mu'tazila ideology believed that Koran was created by Mohammad; it was not the words of Allah. They believed that Prophet Muhammad could not have direct conversation with the allegedly visually perceptible Allah, who is claimed to be invisible and imperceptible in the Koran. And this doctrine, which amounts to absolute heresy, as per Islam, was promoted by the-then Abbasid Caliphates Haroon al-Rasheed (763-809) and was made the official court belief by his son, the great Caliph al-Mamun. Caliph al-Mamun even instituted inquisition-style persecution, called Mihna in Arabic meaning Ordeal (833-848), for those who would not accept the Mutazili ideology, instead of Koranic Islam. The most famous victims of the Mihna were Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who was imprisoned and tortured, and the judge Ahmad Ibn Nasr al-Khuza'i who was crucified.

Marriage Between Muslims and Non-Muslims

In the following discussion I will attempt to address the issues involved in a Muslim marrying a non-Muslim. I will first discuss the matter in the light of religious laws and the opinions of scholars.
Then I will discuss the social aspects of family life and children in an inter-faith marriage. The ideas in this part are based on my and my friends' personal experiences in inter-faith marriages and may be at VERY odds with your experiences or views on this matter.
Readers are encouraged to indicate any mistakes that I make here regarding Islamic laws and teachings.
Note: References are provided at the end of this article.

CONCEPT OF MARRIAGE IN ISLAM
There are several passages and verses in The Holy Qur'an regarding marriage and family that encourage Muslims to be married, if possible. The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) has even said that when a Muslim marries, he has fulfilled half of the religious devotion and duties and then he should take care of other half by being God-minded and aware of his obligations. [1]
Marraige is considered a religious duty in Islam and is enjoined upon all believers who can afford it. It provides a moral safeguard and legal means to develop relationship with the opposite sex and to extend the family. It is both solemn and sacred above physical terms. It is not only a contract between two persons committing themselves to eachother but it is a contract to which God Almighty is made the first Witness. It is made with every intention of making it permanent to the eternal success. Celibacy is NOT recommended either for Muslim men or women.
"The motivating cause of union - matrimonial and carnal - between the spouses is said to be love. This is a Qur'anic thesis that affirms the primacy of love as the cause of marriage, not simple reproduction. Nevertheless, the religious authorities, almost unanimously, interpret marriage as primarily reproductive in nature and as a means of perpetuating the species.
.....Islam views the carnal act as not merely the source of pleasure but also of as a source of "barakah" means that sexuality has apositive conotations and is not associated with sin,.." [2]
The following issues must be observed when a marriage based on Islamic priciples is desired [3]:
  • Both parties should get familiarized sincerely with eachother without getting involved in immoral acts or crossing boundaries set by Islamic moral teachings. No party should attempt to deceive the other in this process.
  • Woman should be chosen on the basis of their permanent values, such as, high morals, religious devotion, and not merely on her attractiveness or other mudane wealths. The Prophet is reported to have said that a woman is ordinarily sought as wife for her wealth, for her beauty, for the nobility of her stock, or for her religios qualities; but blessed and fortunate is he who chooses his mate for piety in preference to everything else. [4]
  • Woman is encouraged to judge whether the man is actually worthy of her respect, love and capable of providing her happiness in the whole life. She should consider if her marriage to the man will be allow her to fulfill the duties of a wife wholeheartedly.
  • Woman has a right to demand dowry (gift) from the man that she feel comfortable with. The man should meet her demands to show his willingness to undertake to responsibilities of married life and his readiness and capability to fulfill her justified needs.
  • The consent of both man and woman is necessary condition for the marriage without which the marriage is not valid.
  • The marraige ceremony should be made as publicly known as possible and should be celebrated in a joyful manner.
  • The marriage ceremony should be held before atleast two adult witnesses from the community and should be registered in official documents.
  • The maintenance of the wife and family is husband's duty. The marriage entitles her with these rights and imposes certain obligations upon both parties. Any property which belongs to her before or during the marriage, the man has no right to the wife's property during or after the marriage. This issue relieves the marriage of certain materialistic objectives and ensures the bond remain noble and beyond mundane greed.
The role of husband demands him to be bound by the promise to God to be kind and patient toward her; to keep her honorably in the marriage or otherwise free her from the martial bond honorably. [Ref. Surah 2:229-232; 4:19]
The wife is expected to work toward the happiness and comfort of her family. Wife must be sincere toward the family and honest and loyal to her husband. She should not deliberately avoid conception against her husband's will [1]. Both spouses should keep eachother's honor and protect and gratify eachother with love.
When a marriage based on Islamic principles has irreconcilable differences or irreparable damage done to the mutual trust, then as a last resort to make the distasteful marriage end, divorce is applicable. Divorce has been defined by the Prophet as the most detestable of all lawful things in the sight of God Almighty. Scholars believe a final course must be followed before a divorce is made final [5]:
  1. Both parties involved should try to reconcile the difference, settle the disputes and solve the problems within themselves.
  2. If they fail to come to an agreement and solve their problems, then a person from husband's relations and the other one from wife's should arbitrate the situation.
  3. If both attempts fail and both parties agree, divorce can be applied.
  4. If, after a divorce, a reunion occurs, it will be regarded as a fresh marriage. However, there can be no more than two reunions. The third divorce is a final one. In that case, the only possibility is that the woman needs to marry another man after "iddat" (varies from 3-12 monthly periods for diff. opinions; See Surah 2:228), consummate the marriage and get divorced and remarry the first husband again after "iddat." (See 2:30). It allows a man to be thoughtful and composed in such serious matters and the marriage with another man allows a woman to evaluate if there are other men better than her first husband that she would like to be married. There is no compulsion in her getting divorced from the second husband, if she likes him better than the first one. [See also 2:224-232; 4:34-35; 4:127-130]
Some relatives that cannot be joined in a marriage are described in Surah Nisaa 4:22-24.
The following are the positions of scholars and Islamic laws on marriages bewteen Muslims and non-Muslims:
MUSLIM WOMAN AND NON-MUSLIM MAN
....And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikun until they believe in Allah alone and verily a believing slave is better than a (free) Mushrik, even though he pleases you....[2:221] (Al-Mushrikun=Pagans, idolators, polytheist and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His messanger Prophet Muhammad SAW) - [6]
Islam considers the husband to be the head of the family and therefore requires that a Muslimah cannot marry a non-Muslim because she will be under the authority of a non-muslim husband. He may prevent her from carrying out her religious obligations by either pressuring her or physically abusing her. But it is not the sole reason for imposing the restriction. The situation is considered very damaging for the woman to practise Islam afterwards and even worse for the kids in such marriages. There are NO conditions mentioned under which a Muslim woman IS allowed to get married or remain married to a non-Muslim husband after she has accepted Islam. Therefore, even if she has freedom to practise Islam after marriage, she is NOT allowed to enter into an inter-faith marriage.
MUSLIM MAN AND NON-MUSLIM WOMAN
Marriage with Christians and Jews:
The marriages between Muslim men and CERTAIN non-Muslim women is allowed. However, certain restricitions exist on such marriages, especially if they occur in non-Muslim lands where Islamic law and religion is not prevailing.
Here I am translating the "fatwaa" from Maulana Muhammad Yousuf Ludhianvi, a well-known Muslim scholar from Pakistan, answering a question regarding the shar'aii position of marriages in the US with non-Muslim women. This question was asked by a Pakistani Muslim, living in the US, and it appeared in Maulana's column that is published every Friday in a daily newspaper, "Jang". He interprets the Islamic law as following:
1- Non-Muslim women, to whom Muslim men can marry, are the women from Christian and Jewish religions who are residents of "Daar-ul-Islam" (nations where Islamic law prevails) and who are thereby called, "Dhi'mmi" (those who give Jizyah in an Islamic state), but NOT the residents of "Dar al-Kufr" (where the kuffar or non-Islamic rule exists). To these women, marriage is allowed but is "mukrooh tanzihi," or disliked. (Victor Danner describes "Dar al-Islam" as "the House of Islam, or the Islamic world; the Islamic community, where submission to the Divine Will reigns; as opposed to Dar- al-Har, the non-Islamic community.")
2- With Christian or Jewish women, who are residents of "Dar a-Harb," the nikah (the marriage contract) will be valid, but will be a "mukrooh Tahrimi" (worse than tanzihi) situation. The act which is "mukrooh tarhimi" is so close to "haraam" (not permissible at all) that it is ALMOST "haraam" and is "na'jaiz" ie. not legal. The man involved will be responsible for committing an act which is very close to a state of sin.
3- It is required that the women should be practising their religion at the time of marriage and they are not practically "Mulhid" (atheist). To any woman who doesn't believe in God, religion, God's message and doesn't practise any religion at all, the "nikaah" (marriage) will be INVALID and according to "shari'ah" (Islamic Law); such a couple is involved in sin.
4- If any Muslim marries a woman from the "People of the Book," the children, by shar'iah (Islamic law) are considered to be Muslim. For instance, often, in "Dar al-Harb," the kids adopt the religion of their mother; and, sometimes, a marriage is arranged upon agreements between the couples that half of kids will adopt mother's and the other half will follow father's religion. If a Muslim man agrees to ANY of such terms accepting the kids to be raised non-Muslims, the person will be regarded as a "Murtid" (the one who has denied Islam) because he has allowed his kids to become "kaafir" who may have been brought up in Islamic religion. Anyone who willingly and knowingly allows/agrees for his kids to become "kaafir" is regarded as "kaafir." He is out of the Islamic circle. If he had any Muslim woman in his "nikaah" before this marriage, the Muslim woman is free from his bond (because a Muslim woman can't remain married a non-Muslim).
5- Since some of our naive Muslim young men, living in the West, get married to the Christian women in their countries, and since, usually, the local courts allow the women to get the custody of kids and the divorce settlement in their favor, our young men are "khusar al-duniyaa wal'-aakhiraah" meaning they have lost both this world and the Hereafter. Since, according to sharia'ah, the "al-maa'roof ka'almashrrot", meaning whatever is prevailing or common practise in the society is being accepted in a marriage contract. It means a Muslim man, by getting married under these circumstances in these countries, is knowingly agreeing that the woman may, in case of divorce, gets the custody of the kids and is free to raise them afterwards as she pleases.
6- For all the above stated reasons, in non-Muslim countries, it is not allowed for Muslim young men to marry Christian women. For the reason #3 (woman not practising a religion), the "nikaah" isn't even valid. Since the reason #4, leads to "kufr" and he becomes "murtid", the marriage to any Muslim wife becomes invalid. The reason #5 is not apllicable, if the local laws do not usually grant custody to woman or if Muslim man hasn't agreed to any "kufriaah" terms (such as accepting some kids to be raised as non-Muslims). "Haaza ma' indee, wal'Allah ilm bis'swaab."
It is clear that Maulana Yousuf's position is extremely strict on the issue of getting married to non-Muslim women in the West. But so is the seriousness of such situations. A scholar at Dar ul-Noor hifz school and Al-Farooq Masjid, Atlanta, Dr. Abdul Ghaffar, recommends that if a Muslim is already married to a non-Muslima, he should REMAIN married to her. He should be kind and passionate to her and facilitate her understanding of true Islam. He should reflect Islam in his character and encourage her to become Muslim voluntarily before kids are born into such marriage. At that time, I found out the Al-Farooq Masjid doesn't even administer ANY inter-faith marriages.
The best option under these circumstances is to introduce the woman to Islam and WAIT for her to accept Islam before getting married. Imposing any firm conditions of her accepting Islam before marriage will NOT do any good. Because, if a woman is willing to accept Islam merely to get married to a Muslim man that she likes, she will be most likely to leave Islam if the marriage ends up in a divorce or even if the marriage becomes unpleasant for her.
It should be desireable that a woman accepts Islam solely for the reason that she likes Islam. Any forceful acceptance of Islam is not likely to be permanent nor very suitable for a happy marriage. If the woman is not a Muslim by her own choice, then in case of divorce, she may leave Islam and be free to date and marry a non-Muslim. Her new family may ultimately decide how to raise the Muslim man's children. This situation should never be acceptable to any Muslim man.
MARRIAGE WITH KUFFAR:
Marriages between Muslims and atheists are not permissible at all. In such cases, the man or woman should accept Islam before entering into a shar'ai legal "nikaah."
And do not marry Al-Mushrikats {idolatress, etc.} until they believe (worship Allah alone). And indeed a slave woman is better than a (free) Mushrikah {idolatress, etc.}, even though she pleases you. And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikun until they believe in Allah alone and verily a believing slave is better than a (free) Mushrik, even though he pleases you. Those Al-Mushrikun invite you to the Fire {Al naar}, but Allah invites you to the Paradise and Forgiveness by His Leave, and makes His Ayaat {proofs, evidences, lessons, verses, signs, etc.} clear to mankind that they may remember. [Surah 2:221] [6]
"...(Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the People of the Book revealed before your time, when you give them their due dowries, and desire chastity, not lewdness, nor sectret intrigues. If anyone rejects faith, fruitless is his work, and in the Hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost (all the spritual good)." [Surah 5:5] (See the following two notes)
A note [7] following the above passage further describes that a Muslim man can marry a woman from their ranks on same terms as he would marry a Muslim woman, i.e. he must give her an economic and moral status, and must not be motivated merely by lust and physical desires. A Muslim woman cannot marry a non-Muslim primarily because her religious affiliation and duties will be affected by the authority of her husband. A non-Muslim woman marrying a Muslim man are expected to eventually accept Islam. Any man or woman, from any race or faith, upon ACCEPTING Islam can freely marry any Muslim, man or woman, provided the objective is purity and chasteness and not lewdness. In the above verse, "People of the Book" refers to the true followers of the religions who received God's message in the form of teachings by Prophet Moses (AS) and Prophet Jesus (AS) before Islam. However, the term "people of the Books by no mean refers to the present Torah or Pentateuch or The Bible which were written by various authors decades and centuries after their respective Prophets. The term "Book" therefore does NOT affirm in any manner the validity of the present Bible (canonized in 325 AC) or Torah (written over an uncertain period est. 1500-1350 BCE) as God's message as their followers vehemently argue and would like Muslims to take the term "Book" for their Bible or Torah. The following note by Abdullah Yousuf Ali is worth mentioning here:
Note #390: ...The Original Gospel (see Surah 3:48 below) was not the various stories written afterwards by disciples, but the real message taught directly by Jesus (AS). St. Paul, author of almost half of the New Testament and the one annulling Mosaic law, and Luke, to whom "Gospel According to Luke" is attributed, were not even among the original 12 disciples.
"And Allah will teach him (Jesus (AS)) The Book and Wisdom, The Law and the Gospel." [Surah 3:48] [This clearly indicates THE Gospel given to Jesus (AS) and not to the Council of Nicaea which decided, in 325AC, by vote, what The Bible canon should be comprised of].
"There is among them a section who distort the book with tongues; (As they read) you would think it is part of the Book, But it is no part of Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," But it is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!" [Surah 3:78]
Note: Much has been already said on this topic on s.r.i.
MARRIAGE WITH JEWS:
According to Jews, a Jewish Mother gives birth to a Jew. As one of my friend tells, this issue has caused problems especially in Israel where a woman who married a Muslim man was exhorted by Jews and ultimately she accepted Islam to avoid the pressure on her family. All the rules that apply to Christian women, apply here as well.

Tips to a Better Marriage

I have listed some rules that may benefit those seeking an Islamic marriage, as well as those who are already married. I do not pretend to be an expert of any kind. I have learned what I know through marrying at the early age of 18, just 9 months after embracing Islam. I muddled my way through much of my 14 years of marriage, and consider myself a graduate from the 'school of hard knocks'. The rules are:
1. Be conscious of your physical appearance.
No one was more conscious of this than the Prophet. His Sunnah reflects keen attention tseekingo personal hygiene and good grooming. He kept himself strong and muscular. Most likely the first aspect of you that attracted your mate was your appearance, so don't think that simply because you are married the task is over. You can't hide a weight problem under Thawbs' (dress) and long Khimars' (veils). Your mate knows. Be aware that you live in a society that places a high premium on physical appearance. It flaunts the shapely female and her muscular counterpart. Temptations that beckon non-Muslims beckon Muslims as well. Don 't allow your mate to get side-tracked by the likes of a 'Raquel Welch or an Arnold Schwarzenegger'. Jog, join a gym, roller skate, swim and stay in shape. Insha' Allah, you will be more vibrant, more radiant, and more attractive to your mate.
2. Be aware of your role, but do not fall into role-playing.
Muslim spouses sometimes experience difficulties because they are trying to do things 'by the book' without giving due consideration to the conditions prevailing in their country. For example, most female converts are taught that the role of the Muslim woman is to be at home raising her children. Supposedly, it is the man who works outside the home to maintain the family. She may have read about birth control and assumed that it has no place for the Muslimah; yet, it is worth noting that the Prophet himself allowed coitus interruptus. If ideal Islamic conditions prevailed, there would be no reason for a sister to worry about her financial situation interfering with her right to bear children. However, without an Islamic society, needy Muslim families may have to resort to welfare and food stamps rather than Zakaah and Sadaqah. This creates a feeling of dependence and humiliation that can place extreme stress on a marriage. In this ease, it may be helpful for the Muslim couple to delay having children, or for the wife to work while the children are young and until the couple 's financial situation improves. Islam gives you this flexibility. Don't be afraid or ashamed to use it.
3. Be a companion to your mate.
Try to show enthusiasm for your spouse's interests and hobbies. It is well-known that the Prophet would run races with 'Ayesha. By all means try to involve your mate in your interests.
4. Be active in Islamic community life.
This will strengthen your commitment to Islam while providing you wish a wholesome social outlet. Encourage your spouse to engage in activities that promote Islam. Have dinners at your home for Muslims as well as non-Muslims, and don't neglect your relatives. These activities will indirectly enhance the quality of your marriage through widening your circle of activity and contacts.
5. Admit your mistakes and have a forgiving, generous attitude when your mate errs.
This country is a difficult place to live in. Most Muslims fall short of the Islamic ideal. Contradictions abound. Be quick to admit your shortcomings and work to amend them. Be understanding when your mate does not live up to the Islamic ideal and gently try to motivate him or her in the right direction.
6. Have a sense of humour.
Be able to chuckle at life's minor aggravations.
7. Be modest when around members of the opposite sex.
Do not try to test your spouse's affection by feigning interest in another. This will only cause dissension and bad feelings.
8. Share household duties.
Brothers, take note. This is especially important these days when women work outside the home. The Prophet always helped his wives around the house and even mended his own clothes. Who knows? You might find you actually like preparing the evening meal or taking care of junior so your wife can have the afternoon off. The Messenger of Allah said, "The most perfect of the believers in faith is the best of them in moral excellence, and the best of you are those who are kindest to their wives." (at-Tirmidhi).
9. Surprise each other with gifts.
Treat her to an evening out alone, away from the children. There are no words to describe the lift this can give to a marriage.
10. Communicate your feelings to one another, good and bad.
Tell him how handsome he looks. Where there is disagreement, have an open discussion. Don ' t collect red stamps. Nip it in the bud .
11. Live within your means.
Stay away from credit cards if you can. Sisters, take note. Don't envy the possessions of your friends, and don't belittle your husband because he can't provide them for you. Muslim couples will do well to stay away from ostentatious living. The Prophet did not live luxuriously, and neither should you.
12. Respect your mate's need for privacy.
A quiet time to oneself each day, either at home or away from home, can make a disagreeable person agreeable.
13. Don 't share personal problems with others.
There are a few exceptions to this rule, but if you must discuss personal problems, make sure it is with a person in whom you have the utmost confidence. If you have a learned Muslim brother or sister in your community, seek him or her out first.
14. Be sensitive to your mate's moods.
If you want to share a personal achievement, don't do it when your spouse is 'down in the dumps.' Wait for the proper time.
You may be saying to yourself, "All This is easier said than done." Well, you're right. A successful marriage doesn't just happen. It's not simply a matter of luck or finding the right person. It takes hard work and determination. It means being selfless and making mistakes. It means having vengeance on your mind but forgiveness in your heart. But, then, its perfection is "half of faith."
"And those who pray, 'Our Lord! Grant unto us spouses and offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and give us (the grace) to lead the righteous.'" Qur'an 25:74
"The whole world is an asset and the best asset is a good wife." (Muslim)
"And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts). Verily in that are Signs for those who reflect." (30: 21).

South African Couples Draw Up Own Marriage Contracts




Negotiating Issues in the Marriage Contract
In South Africa, some Muslim couples are no longer just signing the nikkah register to solemnise their marriage in Islam. They choose instead to negotiate and sign their very own marriage or nikkah contract.
The couples at three recent weddings attended by this reporter each did it differently. While one of the couples decided to enter into a civil contract, the other two couples took a personal interest in their marriage contract as opposed to leaving it to a theological group. They had negotiated on issues regarding matrimonial property regime, the divorce process, custody, polygamy, sexual relationship and even relations with in-laws. This they did taking the Shari’ah and their personal circumstances and needs into consideration.
Although uncertain about its legal status, they felt that they at least will have some common understanding of their rights and obligations. al-Qalam has since learnt that the Muslim marriage contract is now recognised by the law.
According to Maulana Mohammed Saeed of the Jamiatul Ulema Transvaal, signing the traditional marriage register confirms the solemnising of the marriage contract. It is not a specific contract negotiated between the partners. Such a contract that regulates their marriage is separate.
Marriage Contract is New Concept for South African Muslims
While the concept of a marriage contract for most South African Muslims is foreign, having a marriage contract spelling out the terms of marriage was not an unusual concept during the early Muslim era as evidenced by Sukayna bint Husayn, the great granddaughter of the Prophet (s) and A'isha bint Talha, the niece of A'isha (r.a.).
Presently, many Muslim countries, including Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia, Tunisia and even where Muslim are in the minority like India have some kind of marriage contract that couples enter into. In some of these countries marriage laws are continually reformed. According to a report by Times of India, "The All India Muslim Personal Law Board will soon release a marriage contract which will revolutionise the status of married Muslim women." Reforms around mehr, triple talaq and polygamy had been included.
In South Africa, however, Muslim marriages were not recognised by the law, so issues of dissolution, custody and maintenance were taken to an informal judiciary, usually a theological body, to be resolved. The result was a sometimes messy process, which left couples uncertain and insecure.
The Experiences of Three Couples
Al-Qalam spoke to two couples who had recently chosen to negotiate and sign a marriage contract.
Mohammed felt that the present process was inadequate, and that there was a need to spell out certain provisions in the contract to protect his and his wives rights. His wife Farhana became aware that terms anegotiatend conditions could be stipulated in a marriage contract from her readings of Islamic history. For her it was important to set the boundaries of their relationship, and state from the very outset what their positions there were on various issues, and what the partners understood their responsibilities to be.
Ruwaida also negotiated a marriage contract. She first heard about the existence of such a thing in Jordan, she felt it was needed to avoid problems in the future, and it was also important so that other people could become aware that there were other ways of securing their rights within a marriage.
While her husband was uncertain about the necessity for such a contract, believing that the Shari’ah takes care of the marriage contract, he nevertheless agreed to enter into a personalised contract.
Farhana and Ruwaida felt strongly that signing a marriage contract was important for women who have had to face the brunt of unfair rulings on the part of some ‘ulama.
Another Muslim couple that al-Qalam spoke to decided not to negotiate their own marriage contract, and opted for the South African civil marriage instead. For them it was unnecessary to re-negotiate what was already in law, although they admitted there was a gender bias in custody rulings. Their understanding of marriage contracts was that it was a tool used in early stages of Islamic history, when there was no legislation in place to deal with marital disputes.
This new innovation, while lauded by some, has been criticised by others. One Maulana felt that while it might be a good idea to draw up the marriage contract in this way, the contract was inadequate in that it was not possible for it to deal with issues important in a marriage like justice with rahmah, fikr, and love. Mohammed faced criticism at his wedding when one guest greeted him after the nikah and told him that the contract was "a whole lot of hog-wash."