What's new

It's a misconception that the way women dress attracts abuse: Mehwish Hayat

I think yes, because Allah did not just create Humans, to which you can guard yourself by walls and roof , but there are other Creations like Djinn and Angels who are invincible to our eyes but they are there to harm or protect us, now as a Muslim at least you have believe that on both of your shoulders you have 2 Angels that write your Deeds from good to bad, and there are Jinns ( Good and bad ) that you might not see but you have to keep guard yourself from them, That is why even having sex in Islam is described very precisely and detailed, to guard the modesty of not just your body but the body of your Wife . You Run around naked in a empty house, but if you know that Allah is All knowing and ever Watching and if you are a True believer you will from within will feel a bit shame to put on some clothes .Rest is up to you, you can run around naked but make sure you don't have creepy neighbors :)
@Blacklight

Also think about the poor uber eats delivery guy. And the hygiene situation when pizza toppings fall off or burger sauce leaks.

Also leather sofas and human skin in the summer don't mix. In the winter it presents a different problem.

Also in this lockdown ka dor, everyone is video calling.
Pls read below:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

I was trying to bring down the temperature of the thread down. You and your imagination :lol::lol::lol:
 
.
Immorality by women won't tolerated.

Immorality by men, that's par for the course.

Are you a sexist? Have you ever witnessed what happens to a guy who gets caught with a girl? While the girl gets away with public shaming and maybe a few slaps, I dont think you want to know the horrors of the agony and punishment a guy receives while in immorality.



Ill give you a hint.























They start yelling for them to be stoned to death.....:pakistan::agree:
 
Last edited:
.
Difference is what kind of clothes? Bikinis, bras, no clothes.

Different circumstances invite different approaches.

No they do not. Islam isn't one thing when its teachings fall in line with your sentiments and quite another when it does not.


Not judging, trying to Protect my own culture.

The others' rights are far more important than your need to protect your own culture. Frankly speaking, there is no "my own culture". Culture by definition is under the collective ownership of all who live within its socio-geographic boundaries. How do your sentiments supersede the sentiments of those who would maybe like to see the opposite? What gives you, a single man, the right to physically enforce your view upon the remaining +200 million? Nothing. Least of all your pretentious self-righteousness.

I like it if theyre naked there is no Islam but if you try to do something to the naked women its un islamic.

The satanic culture you are trying to promote wont work in Pakistan.

When they are naked they are not transgressing against your rights. When you "try to do something" you are infringing upon their rights. According to Islamic teachings it is the difference between transgressing against Huququllah Vs transgressing against Huququlibaad.

Your willful disregard of established Islamic teachings in order to claim false religious authority and exact your un-Islamic judgement in matters which are solely the domain of God, under the very teachings that you ironically claim to "defend", is a sin tantamount to blasphemy, or "shirk", as you tried to put it earlier to another member. Fortunately for you, even though it is far more detrimental to any given culture/society than a naked woman, no one has the right to ring your neck for it. Because you see, that too is between you and God, i.e. Huququllah.

I didnt condone anything, just stating the truth. You can ban me from this forum, it wont change my views and principles.

You are under the clear misunderstanding that we are trying to change your views. Not the slightest.

We are here to make sure that when an impressionable member reads your posts, he/she also gets to see how revolting they are. We are here to protect our culture from being further hijacked by self-acclaimed religious and social authorities who have no problem infringing upon others' rights by enforcing their own pseudo-principles disguised as religious decree.
 
.
Read these conditions for Amar Bil Maruf Nahi Anil Munkar.

https://seekersguidance.org/answers/hanafi-fiqh/the-criteria-of-enjoining-good-and-forbidding-evil/

The Mullah gardi we see in Pakistan does not fit the criteria of the sunnah and the method of the awliya.

You say "people will stop it" but frankly what auqat do people have to do so? Barely 30% of this country are matric pass. The jahil awam has no credibility to preach the deen of Allah. The responsibility is upon the knowledgeable - Google does not qualify people as knowledgeable.
Who ever knows one AYAT has duty of telling it to others and yes more knowledge you have the better and that is why I said best case scenario is Government does its job other wise eventually people will.

No they do not. Islam isn't one thing when its teachings fall in line with your sentiments and quite another when it does not.




The others' rights are far more important than your need to protect your own culture. Frankly speaking, there is no "my own culture". Culture by definition is under the collective ownership of all who live within its socio-geographic boundaries. How do your sentiments supersede the sentiments of those who would maybe like to see the opposite? What gives you, a single man, the right to physically enforce your view upon the remaining +200 million? Nothing. Least of all your pretentious self-righteousness.



When they are naked they are not transgressing against your rights. When you "try to do something" you are infringing upon their rights. According to Islamic teachings it is the difference between transgressing against Huququllah Vs transgressing against Huququlibaad.

Your willful disregard of established Islamic teachings in order to claim false religious authority and exact your un-Islamic judgement in matters which are solely the domain of God, under the very teachings that you ironically claim to "defend", is a sin tantamount to blasphemy, or "shirk", as you tried to put it earlier to another member. Fortunately for you, even though it is far more detrimental to any given culture/society than a naked woman, no one has the right to ring your neck for it. Because you see, that too is between you and God, i.e. Huququllah.



You are under the clear misunderstanding that we are trying to change your views. Not the slightest.

We are here to make sure that when an impressionable member reads your posts, he/she also gets to see how revolting they are. We are here to protect our culture from being further hijacked by self-acclaimed religious and social authorities who have no problem infringing upon others' rights by enforcing their own pseudo-principles disguised as religious decree.
Sorry nudity and vulgarity is a major problem not a small one. Showbiz has reduced women status to items and objects which has led to increase in sex related crimes. One of the things which ALLAH has promised his Azaab is vulgarity.

IMG-20200425-WA0007.jpg

IMG-20200425-WA0008.jpg

IMG_20200426_200525.jpg

IMG_20200426_200523.jpg
 
.
Who ever knows one AYAT has duty of telling it to others and yes more knowledge you have the better and that is why I said best case scenario is Government does its job other wise eventually people will.


Sorry nudity and vulgarity is a major problem not a small one. Showbiz has reduced women status to items and objects which has led to increase in sex related crimes. One of the things which ALLAH has promised his Azaab is vulgarity.

View attachment 633856
View attachment 633857
View attachment 633858
View attachment 633859

And is it @SHAH BAAZ or yourself that God has authorised to exact these punishments and enforce his commands?

Please read my post again, it was very clear and simple. The matters that are between other men/women and God are between them alone. Common sense does not allow you to violate this God given right, Islamic teachings promise punishment.
 
.
Mehwish Hayat....the great scholar
we need to open one thread for every great saying of this great scholar.
 
.
And is it @SHAH BAAZ or yourself that God has authorised to exact these punishments and enforce his commands?

Please read my post again, it was very clear and simple. The matters that are between other men/women and God are between them alone. Common sense does not allow you to violate this God given right, Islamic teachings promise punishment.
No Sir they are not between them and GOD crap done in public is affects every Muslim and therefore duty of every Muslim to stop it and most importantly of state. The concept of being between person and GOD alone is western not of Islam.
IMG-20200425-WA0016.jpg

IMG-20200425-WA0018.jpg

  • "Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining Al-Ma`roof (i.e., Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do) and forbidding Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden). And it is they who are the successful.'' [Quran 3:104]
  • "You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma`roof (i.e., Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden)''.[Quran 3:110]
  • "Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the foolish (i.e., don't punish them).''[Quran 7:199]
  • "Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dawood (David) and `Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evildoing, sins, polytheism, disbelief) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do".[Quran 5:78, 79]
  • "…We (i.e. Allah Almighty) rescued those who forbade evil, and with a severe torment We seized those who did wrong because they used to rebel against Allah's Command (disobey Allah)."[Quran 7:165]
Nu`aman Ibn Basheer
icon--3.gif
reported: The Prophet
icon--1.gif
said: "The likeness of the man who observes the limits prescribed by Allah and that of the man who transgresses them is like a group of people who get on board a ship after casting lots. Some of them are in its lower deck and some of them in its upper (deck). Those who are in its lower (deck), when they require water, go to the occupants of the upper deck, and say to them: `If we make a hole in the bottom of the ship, we shall not harm you.' If they (the occupants of the upper deck) leave them to carry out their design they all will be drowned. But if they do not let them go ahead (with their plan), all of them will remain safe". [Al-Bukhari]

Huthaifah
icon--3.gif
reported: The Prophet
icon--1.gif
said, "By Him in Whose Hand my life is, you either enjoin good and forbid evil, or Allah will certainly soon send His punishment to you. Then you will make supplication and it will not be accepted". [Al-Tirmithi]
 
. .
@Xeson I have already explained and it's agreed thing among Imams of Fiqh and Ha

I dont know about your imams but as said in post #351 quran n hadees says following about slandering (repute damaging statements) so again NOTHING JUSTIFIES EVEN BAD MOUTHING, VERBAL ABUSE AND SLUT SHAMING...

And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses - lash them with eighty lashes and do not accept from them testimony ever after. And those are the defiantly disobedient (Quran-24:4)

Indeed, those who [falsely] accuse chaste, unaware and believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter; and they will have a great punishment (Quran-24:23)

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Avoid the seven sins that doom a person to Hell.” It was said: What are they, O Messenger of Allaah? He said: “Associating others with Allah (shirk); witchcraft; killing a soul whom Allaah has forbidden us to kill, except in cases dictated by Islamic law; consuming orphans’ wealth; consuming riba; fleeing from the battlefield; and slandering chaste, innocent women.” (Bukhari/Muslim)
 
.
I dont know about your imams but as said in post #351 quran n hadees says following about slandering (repute damaging statements) so again NOTHING JUSTIFIES EVEN BAD MOUTHING, VERBAL ABUSE AND SLUT SHAMING...
Lanat word is in the Quran and no those who spread crap will get it. They won't get 21 Gun Salute
 
.
No Sir they are not between them and GOD crap
The concept of being between person and GOD alone is western not of Islam.

The concepts of Huququllah and Huququlibaad are nothing but Islamic. There is a reason why these were detailed and differentiated between explicitly. Please don't deliberately distort Islamic teachings to suit your own fancies.

done in public is affects every Muslim and therefore duty of every Muslim to stop it and most importantly of state.

If an action, any action, infringes upon the rights of another then it is the sole authority of the state to physically stop it. If an action, in its very essence, proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society as a whole, then the state has the sole authority to firstly decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it. If an action proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society in a religious context, vis à vis Islam, then it is the sole responsibility of the state to decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it only when concerning its Muslim citizens. No one else has the authority or the right in any of the above mentioned cases to judge or exact any punishment. If you do, it is unanimously considered against the teachings and rulings of Islam and the constitution of Pakistan. In fact, Islam goes to the extent of explicitly ordering Muslims to abide by the rules and laws of the state. If those laws/rules hinder your ability to practice your principles then you are advised to migrate to other lands where it would not be so.

So no, "every Muslim" can physically stop only those who have been given under his/her authority, i.e. his/herself and his/her dependant family. Advise, debate, reason with the rest? Of course.

*The only time you are allowed to physically stop someone is when someone's life or property are under direct physical threat at that very moment.



This Hadith is a brilliant example of how and why "Half knowledge is worse than ignorance" - Thomas B. Macaulay. As is with everything taught in Islam, that Hadith is to be taken in conjunction with all the other teachings of Islam. Everything said in that Hadith comes with the preamble "Provided that you have the authority to". Authority which has been explicitly demarcated in the religion. Did you think that it was talking about one's physical strength? That the burliest man of the neighbourhood go knocking down doors making sure everyone was breaking their fast with a date? How is this not obvious?

View attachment 633861
  • "Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islam), enjoining Al-Ma`roof (i.e., Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do) and forbidding Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden). And it is they who are the successful.'' [Quran 3:104]
  • "You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma`roof (i.e., Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden)''.[Quran 3:110]
  • "Show forgiveness, enjoin what is good, and turn away from the foolish (i.e., don't punish them).''[Quran 7:199]
  • "Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dawood (David) and `Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed (Allah and the Messengers) and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from the Munkar (wrong, evildoing, sins, polytheism, disbelief) which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do".[Quran 5:78, 79]
  • "…We (i.e. Allah Almighty) rescued those who forbade evil, and with a severe torment We seized those who did wrong because they used to rebel against Allah's Command (disobey Allah)."[Quran 7:165]
Nu`aman Ibn Basheer
icon--3.gif
reported: The Prophet
icon--1.gif
said: "The likeness of the man who observes the limits prescribed by Allah and that of the man who transgresses them is like a group of people who get on board a ship after casting lots. Some of them are in its lower deck and some of them in its upper (deck). Those who are in its lower (deck), when they require water, go to the occupants of the upper deck, and say to them: `If we make a hole in the bottom of the ship, we shall not harm you.' If they (the occupants of the upper deck) leave them to carry out their design they all will be drowned. But if they do not let them go ahead (with their plan), all of them will remain safe". [Al-Bukhari]

Huthaifah
icon--3.gif
reported: The Prophet
icon--1.gif
said, "By Him in Whose Hand my life is, you either enjoin good and forbid evil, or Allah will certainly soon send His punishment to you. Then you will make supplication and it will not be accepted". [Al-Tirmithi]

None of these tell you to physically stop another. They are addressing the person's self, in his/her own capacity. You know this. Otherwise, according to your logic, the second Ayah is telling you to go forcibly convert non-Muslims to Islam. Are you saying that it does?

Please stop trying to deliberately distort the Ayahs and Ahadith. The sin for that is far severe than the women you so wish to punish.


This is moving from a social to a religious debate, which are against forum rules. Let's turn back and discuss this in a social and psychological context. Any further religious debate on the matter will be removed.
 
Last edited:
.
The concepts of Huququllah and Huququlibaad are nothing but Islamic. There is a reason why these were detailed and differentiated between explicitly. Please don't deliberately distort Islamic teachings to suit your own fancies.



If an action, any action, infringes upon the rights of another then it is the sole authority of the state to physically stop it. If an action, in its very essence, proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society as a whole, then the state has the sole authority to firstly decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it. If an action proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society in a religious context, vis à vis Islam, then it is the sole responsibility of the state to decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it only when concerning its Muslim citizens. No one else has the authority or the right in any of the above mentioned cases to judge or exact any punishment. If you do, it is unanimously considered against the teachings and rulings of Islam and the constitution of Pakistan. In fact, Islam goes to the extent of explicitly ordering Muslims to abide by the rules and laws of the state. If those laws/rules hinder your ability to practice your principles then you are advised to migrate to other lands where it would not be so.

So no, "every Muslim" can physically stop only those who have been given under his/her authority, i.e. his/herself and his/her dependant family. Advise, debate, reason with the rest? Of course.

*The only time you are allowed to physically stop someone is when someone's life or property are under direct physical threat at that very moment.




This Hadith is a brilliant example of how and why "Half knowledge is worse than ignorance" - Thomas B. Macaulay. As is with everything taught in Islam, that Hadith is to be taken in conjunction with all the other teachings of Islam. Everything said in that Hadith comes with the preamble "Provided that you have the authority to". Authority which has been explicitly demarcated in the religion. Did you think that it was talking about one's physical strength? That the burliest man of the neighbourhood go knocking down doors making sure everyone was breaking their fast with a date? How is this not obvious?



None of these tell you to physically stop another. They are addressing the person's self, in his/her own capacity. You know this. Otherwise, according to your logic, the second Ayah is telling you to go forcibly convert non-Muslims to Islam. Are you saying that it does?

Please stop trying to deliberately distort the Ayahs and Ahadith. The sin for that, is far severe than the women you so wish to punish.


This is moving from a social to a religious debate, which are against forum rules. Let's turn back and discuss this in a social and psychological context. Any further religious debate on the matter will be removed.
Haququl Ibad doesn't mean you start tolerating the crap and Haram which is being done and spread in public. In fact Haququl Ibad in this case is to stop the Haram at all costs other wise it would destroy the society. Sorry Haququl Ibad is Islamic concept but the way you are taking it sorry that is wrong dead wrong.

The concepts of Huququllah and Huququlibaad are nothing but Islamic. There is a reason why these were detailed and differentiated between explicitly. Please don't deliberately distort Islamic teachings to suit your own fancies.



If an action, any action, infringes upon the rights of another then it is the sole authority of the state to physically stop it. If an action, in its very essence, proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society as a whole, then the state has the sole authority to firstly decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it. If an action proves to be detrimental to the well being of the society in a religious context, vis à vis Islam, then it is the sole responsibility of the state to decide that it indeed is detrimental and then to act against it only when concerning its Muslim citizens. No one else has the authority or the right in any of the above mentioned cases to judge or exact any punishment. If you do, it is unanimously considered against the teachings and rulings of Islam and the constitution of Pakistan. In fact, Islam goes to the extent of explicitly ordering Muslims to abide by the rules and laws of the state. If those laws/rules hinder your ability to practice your principles then you are advised to migrate to other lands where it would not be so.

So no, "every Muslim" can physically stop only those who have been given under his/her authority, i.e. his/herself and his/her dependant family. Advise, debate, reason with the rest? Of course.

*The only time you are allowed to physically stop someone is when someone's life or property are under direct physical threat at that very moment.




This Hadith is a brilliant example of how and why "Half knowledge is worse than ignorance" - Thomas B. Macaulay. As is with everything taught in Islam, that Hadith is to be taken in conjunction with all the other teachings of Islam. Everything said in that Hadith comes with the preamble "Provided that you have the authority to". Authority which has been explicitly demarcated in the religion. Did you think that it was talking about one's physical strength? That the burliest man of the neighbourhood go knocking down doors making sure everyone was breaking their fast with a date? How is this not obvious?



None of these tell you to physically stop another. They are addressing the person's self, in his/her own capacity. You know this. Otherwise, according to your logic, the second Ayah is telling you to go forcibly convert non-Muslims to Islam. Are you saying that it does?

Please stop trying to deliberately distort the Ayahs and Ahadith. The sin for that, is far severe than the women you so wish to punish.


This is moving from a social to a religious debate, which are against forum rules. Let's turn back and discuss this in a social and psychological context. Any further religious debate on the matter will be removed.
No the ayats are not talking about in your personal capacity. You are responsible for your family and society as a whole. Also biggest responsibility is of state so please Sir stopping Haram is primary duty of every Muslim
 
.
Haququl Ibad doesn't mean you start tolerating the crap and Haram which is being done and spread in public. In fact Haququl Ibad in this case is to stop the Haram at all costs other wise it would destroy the society. Sorry Haququl Ibad is Islamic concept but the way you are taking it sorry that is wrong dead wrong.

Everything you have said in this post has already been answered. You are deliberately trying to side step it. You don't want to accept it? Sure. For anyone else who actually does want to learn more about it, there are hundreds of books of Islamic Jurisprudence on it.

No the ayats are not talking about in your personal capacity. You are responsible for your family and society as a whole. Also biggest responsibility is of state so please Sir stopping Haram is primary duty of every Muslim

The argument is with regards to the use of physical force to stop the action. Which none of these Ayah advocate, as is evidently explained by the actions and the teachings of the Prophet (S.A.W) and the Sahabah chronicled in hundreds of books. Otherwise, as mentioned before, one of the Ayah you quoted directly advocates converting non-Muslims by physical force, which is against the very principles of Islam.

Like I said. If you don't want to accept it, by all means. There is no disagreement on the matter in the Islamic Scholastic circles. For those who would like to learn more, there is hundreds of years worth of work already done on the issue.
 
Last edited:
. .
Everything you have said in this post has already been answered. You are deliberately trying to side step it. You don't want to accept it? Sure. For anyone else who actually does want to learn more about it, there are hundreds of books of Islamic Jurisprudence on it.



The argument is with regards to the use of physical force to stop the action. Which none of these Ayah advocate, as is evidently explained by the actions and the teachings of the Prophet (S.A.W) and the Sahabah chronicled in hundreds of books. Otherwise, like I said, one of the Ayah you quoted directly advocates converting non-Muslims by physical force, which is against the very principles of Islam.

Like I said. If you don't want to accept it, by all means. There is no disagreement on the matter in the Islamic Scholastic circles. For those who would like to learn more, there is hundreds of years worth of work already done on the issue.
Sir I have studied same books. And no point is answered Sir I have quoted you Ayats and Hadith Sir. Stopping Haram is main responsibility of every Muslim and specially state, power can be used most by the state but individuals can also on family and society level. That is agreed thing among scholars and of Imams of Fiqh

From W and S to L and C.. Fair enough and Far better.
Those words are for women who expose and sell their bodies in name of fashion shows and acting and showbiz. Like Choor is for thief and one who rapes is called rapist same rule applies here
 
.
Back
Top Bottom