Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Miss USA 2010 - Rima Fakih
Comments
-
@irishconvert
Who said everyone is supposed to dress modestly???
Apologies to irishconvert - so as not to take the thread further off-topic, I've bumped up an older thread "Men - Dressing like Muslims" and included a discussion of why Muslim men are supposed to dress modestly, and what this may involve.0 -
Would muslims not consider making an exception to a muslim taking part in a beauty simply in the spirit of competition?
Take combat sport as an example. In most religions and societies, fighting is generally immoral. However, there are plenty of boxers and MMA fighters who practise religion and fight, not because they like beating people up, but because they like the competitiveness.
Beauty pagaents and combat sports aren't the best comparison, but they are both forms of competition which do offend many people. But the participants don't do this to offend people; they just want to be the winners. Just food for thought...
I haven't read the thread thoroughly, so my apologies if this point has already been made...0 -
irishconvert wrote: »Ok, let me try to answer your original question again. Allah is not saying a purer person is one who avoids looking at the opposite sex. The verse is simply a warning that one can go astray by doing this, it can fill your mind with impure thoughts, which may lead to other sins. If a man, for example, is always looking at women other than his wife, then it is possible he may develop feeling for another woman which could result in an affair. So Allah is giving us guideance here on how to avoid getting into this situation.
BTW, I am not a scholar, this is my understanding of this verse.
What if you are unmarried and perhaps looking for a wife? Is it ok to look at a pretty girl then? Or do all marriages have to be arranged?0 -
A Primal Nut wrote: »What if you are unmarried and perhaps looking for a wife? Is it ok to look at a pretty girl then? Or do all marriages have to be arranged?
The two are not inconsistent. Although arranging a marriage should involve the parents or guardians of the potential husband and wife, even those who believe that women should not normally show their faces to "non-mahram" (unrelated) men allow an exception for the man to see the face of the potential bride.
In practice, particularly in non-muslim countries, muslim men will look at muslim women. However, the injunction to "lower the gaze" means that such looks should not be persistent or have sexual overtones. If a man sees a woman that he fancies, he should approach the woman's father or guardian so that any subsequent interaction is formal and chaperoned.
There's a very funny book from the woman's perspective by Shelina Zahra Janmohamed called Love in a Headscarf: Muslim Woman Seeks the One (Aurum Press, 2009), which has been mentioned in this forum before. This book gives a good idea of how compromises between a dating culture and an arranged marriage culture emerge in practice.0 -
LordChessington wrote: »Would muslims not consider making an exception to a muslim taking part in a beauty simply in the spirit of competition?
Take combat sport as an example. In most religions and societies, fighting is generally immoral. However, there are plenty of boxers and MMA fighters who practise religion and fight, not because they like beating people up, but because they like the competitiveness.
Beauty pagaents and combat sports aren't the best comparison, but they are both forms of competition which do offend many people. But the participants don't do this to offend people; they just want to be the winners. Just food for thought...
Competition in itself is neither good or bad, it depends on what the competition is about. Sports competitions, even combat sports, may be acceptable. For example, there are traditions that report on archery and wrestling competitions taking place with the approval of Muhammad, and horse racing is a traditional Arab sport that many Muslims from the Middle East are involved in. Generally, sports activities that help to keep you fit and/or help to train you to defend the Muslim community are OK.
Recently, with the World Cup, there was some discussion among Muslim scholars about whether playing or watching football was acceptable. The more liberal view is that soccer is fine so long as players don't expose their "awrah" (the part of the body from the navel down to the knees), games don't keep people away from religious obligations such as prayer and fasting, and playing for/supporting teams does not lead to disorder. However, more conservative scholars argued that there is no evidence that the companions of Muhammad played football, and that all team sports are prone to encourage factionalism and disorder. Watching the World Cup would inevitably take people away from learning about Islam and doing good deeds.
Last month, the Muslim lifestyle magazine EMEL did a feature on Muslim footballers, including interviews, and there are extracts on its website. On the other hand, a frequently-heard YouTube preacher, Abu Mussab Wajdi Akkari of the Jeddah Da'wah Institute, has set out various conservative views - for example, watching a football game may make you miss a lecture on Islam! Sadly, however, some extremists seem to take the ultra-conservative fatwas seriously, so it was reported that two people were executed last month in Somalia by Islamist warlords for trying to watch the World Cup on television.0 -
Advertisement
-
0
-
How conservative are these guys? I mean if they take things that literally what about all sorts of modern stuff the companions couldn't have had? Are they bad too?
There are certainly some scholars who are, in my opinion, bizarrely conservative. Such scholars tend to use two lines of argument. The first appeals to the concept of bida, or innovation. Muhammad is reported to have said "Beware of matters newly begun, for every matter newly begun is innovation, every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance is in the hellfire."
However, are all innovations necessarily reprehensible? The general consensus is that innovations in "matters of religion" are unacceptable, since the Qur'an states (Surat al-Ma'idah 5:3) "This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." Hence anything subsequently added to religious practice cannot be acceptable, or it would suggest that Islam was not, as the verse states, perfect.
An example of this is the Mawlid, or celebration of the birthday of Muhammad. There is no evidence that Muhammad himself, or his Companions or Successors, celebrated this occasion (indeed, celebrating birthdays is a relatively recent cultural phenomenon). So some scholars claim that the Mawlid is an innovative religious ceremony, and hence not permitted. Other scholars don't regard the Mawlid as a religious activity, and therefore allow it. Innovations that have no overtones of religion, and do not relate to matters specifically prohibited in the Qur'an or Sunnah, are considered by the vast majority of scholars to be perfectly fine. So football may be an innovation, but unless it offends against other Islamic precepts, it should not be prohibited. For further details on bida, see this article.
The other line of argument that conservative scholars take is that Muslims should not imitate non-Muslims (disbelievers, or kuffar). The prohibition against imitating non-believers is based on Muhammad's saying (hadith) that "whosoever imitates a group of people becomes one of them" (Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, 50/3; Sunan of Abu Dawud, 5021), and on the hadith: "Don't resemble the Jews and the Christians," which is included in the Sunan of Al-Tirmidhi.
Some of the more conservative scholars seem to take this to extremes, their standard argument being "Non-Muslims do X, Muslims should not imitate non-Muslims, so Muslims should do something very different from X." For example, most non-Muslim men are clean-shaven, so Muslim men should grow beards so as not to imitate non-Muslims. This non-imitation argument is also used to oppose the Mawlid: Christians celebrate the birthday of Jesus (Christmas Day), so Muslims should not celebrate the birthday of Muhammad (and by extension should not celebrate any birthday) because this would be imitation of non-believers.
I came across a fatwa on football attributed to a Sheikh Abdallah al-Najdi, which takes this idea of not imitating non-Muslims to extremes. For example, the fatwa suggests: "Don't play soccer with four lines [surrounding the field], since this is the way of the non-believers, and the international soccer rules require drawing [these lines] before playing." I suspect, to be frank, that this fatwa is a spoof rather than genuine, but it's certainly amusing to read as an example of how the precept "do not imitate non-Muslims" can be taken to ridiculous extremes.0 -
Via a Malaysian tweeter, here's another take on it:
http://pewforum.org/Religion-News/Muslim-women-fed-up-tell-men-to-lower-their-gaze.aspxRNS) It was a moment Laila Al-Marayati wishes she had back.
Standing outside the Islamic Center of Southern California in Los Angeles following Friday prayers, a male worshipper approached and chastised her for not wearing a headscarf.
"If you were a true Muslim," he snapped, "you would keep your hair covered."
Al-Marayati, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles-based Muslim Women's League, was taken aback and too shocked to be able voice her anger.
Looking back, she wishes she could have given him a piece of her mind.
"And if you were a true Muslim," she would have told him, "you wouldn't be staring at me."
P.0 -
I came across the following extract from a speech by the Indian muslim writer and speaker Dr Zakir Naik:Let us analyze, what does Our Creator, Almighty God, have to say about modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, in Surah Nur, Chapter 24, verse 30:
Say to the believing man that he should lower his gaze and guard his modesty.
Allah first speaks about the modesty for the man and then for the woman. Whenever a man looks at a woman, any brazen thought comes in his mind, he should lower his gaze. There was a muslim who was staring at a girl for a long time. I told him, "brother! What are you doing, it is haraam to stare at a woman!" He told me, "our beloved Prophet [saws] said, 'the first glance is allowed, the second is prohibited', I have not yet completed half my glance!" What did the Prophet [saws] mean when he said the first glance is allowed the second is prohibited? What he meant was, if you unintentionally look at a woman, do not intentionally look at her to feast on her beauty. That does not mean that you can look at a woman for ten minutes without blinking and say, "I have not completed my glance"!
Perhaps the man who criticised Laila al-Marayati for not covering her hair was still on his first glance?
By the way, Zakir Naik was banned from entering the UK last month - see this BBC report.0 -
By the way, Zakir Naik was banned from entering the UK last month - see this BBC report.
Yes, what a joke this is. For anyone who has access to Peace TV, the Muslim TV channel run by Zakir Naik, they will know this is a disgraceful decision by the home secretary.0 -
Advertisement
-
irishconvert wrote: »Yes, what a joke this is. For anyone who has access to Peace TV, the Muslim TV channel run by Zakir Naik, they will know this is a disgraceful decision by the home secretary.
"If he Osama bin Laden is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist."
Seems very reasonable grounds to not let someone in.0 -
"If he Osama bin Laden is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. If he is terrorizing the terrorists, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him. Every Muslim should be a terrorist."
Seems very reasonable grounds to not let someone in.
Zakir Naik made the various statements held against him several years ago and he had been admitted to the UK several times since then. Maybe the recent change in government in the UK led to a change in attitude.
He claims that the various statements have been taken out of context, and even manipulated. My own view is that he should have had more sense than to make statements that were capable of being taken out of context in the first place.0 -
Sure.
My view is that it is appropriate for women to dress modestly according to my beliefs, but not only this, but that men need to control whatever lusts and the like that may arise if women do not dress modestly in public. I think this is fair to assume the other way around as well.
1) what does it matter to you what other people wear?
2) I'm appalled at such denial of manhood.0 -
Dax Crooked Ventilate wrote: »1) what does it matter to you what other people wear?
People are at liberty to decide what they wear for themselves.
In Christianity, however the understanding is that one shouldn't lead another into temptation. Not dressing modestly is one way in which we as human beings can tempt each other rather than living in a self controlled manner as we should. Just because people exist doesn't mean that we should lust after them, people aren't sexual objects, they are people with worth and value.
Personally, I think it would be better to gain an emotional connection with someone before I would ever consider intimacy.Dax Crooked Ventilate wrote: »2) I'm appalled at such denial of manhood.
I don't believe it is a denial of manhood to attempt to live in a right manner, and to fully respect others for who they are and to generally act with a degree of civility.
Just because you have a desire to do something does not mean that it is always right, there are times when such action is appropriate or inappropriate.
Self control, and living honourably, are two things which I believe that manhood should be about.
Modesty is one area I agree with Muslims on. What I disagree with Muslims on in respect to modesty is that one cannot be modest unless one covers their hair.0 -
^The head covering back in the days was considered a sign of honor for women in the Islamic world. Now in this brave new world attitudes have changed.
There's probably a deeper reason as well.
Its like Islam recognises women's physical beauty and how deeply attractive it is to men. Hence to preserve modesty and chastity, women are supposed to dress in a way in which men don't get strongly attracted to them and men are supposed to not look at a women lustfully. The head covering sort of helps with it.
As any person at the sight of a beautiful and attractive women would for the lack of a better word "check her out"...
Saying that I'm totally against forcing women or making any denigrating remarks at them for not wearing the hijab. Its their personal choice and most women who wear the hijab do so voluntarily and feel it makes up her identity. When you see a women in a hijab you can immediately recognise her as a muslim. When you see a muslim man, well he could be anything until you ask him if he's a muslim. So you can't judge a person from just their appearance.
Also a few notes on the whole manhood thing.
Islam tells man to rise above his earthly and animalistic desires such as anger, greed, arrogance, lust etc.
A man is not free till his still bound by his bodily desires. The body is made of out earth/dust while the soul is angelic/spiritual/from God. So all the instinctual desires (which we readily see in the animal kingdom) such as anger, arrogance, greed, lust etc. are properties of the earthly body of the man. While the properties which requires a person to rise above his lower desires to act on such as love, generosity, patience, courage etc. are part of the angelic nature of the human.
You can note here that Moses was a very earthy prophet in which sense his teachings were addressing the earthy nature of humans. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. The instinctive gratification and retribution man desires.
While Jesus on the other hand was a very angelic prophet. He taught people to forgive and love. To turn the other cheek. Things that would require humans quite an effort to do. One needs to first overcome their instinctual desires to be able to perform such acts.
Islam now seeks the balance between the two teachings. It keeps Moses's an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth if one wants to seek that law but at the same time keeping with Jesus's teachings tells it is virtuous to forgive and there is much reward from God for those who forgive. Hence the middle path.
And Islam wants humans to rise above these earthly/bodily desires into the angelic characteristics of humans. Raise above from anger, greed, lust, arrogance to patience, courage, generosity, love.
Thus this is what will rise humans above this earthly/worldly realm into the angelic realm closer to God. For it is stated that the purpose of human beings is to get to know their God.
Once a person raises above his bodily desires, then he has freed himself from the bounds of this world and can be truly free to discover his creator.
Al Ghazali has written a lot about this. Infact he has pretty much based his whole philosophy on this. A man needs to free himself first of his bodily desires before he can get to know his creator.
Even Dante wrote about this in his divine comedy.0 -
af_thefragile wrote: »There's probably a deeper reason as well.
Its like Islam recognises women's physical beauty and how deeply attractive it is to men. Hence to preserve modesty and chastity, women are supposed to dress in a way in which men don't get strongly attracted to them and men are supposed to not look at a women lustfully. The head covering sort of helps with it.
This has just struck me as something strange to say and I would like to know the reasoning behind it.
Does Islam not recognize Men's physical beauty and how deeply attractive it is to women? If women were not attracted to men how would we procreate?0 -
This has just struck me as something strange to say and I would like to know the reasoning behind it.
Does Islam not recognize Men's physical beauty and how deeply attractive it is to women? If women were not attracted to men how would we procreate?
Women seem to be attracted towards men in different ways as which men are attracted to women. Women are not as strongly attracted to a man's physical body as men are attracted toward women's. Yet even men are told to dress modestly and not in clothes which would reveal their bodies. There are a lot of guidelines towards men's clothing in Islam as well.
They did an experiment in an american university where they got an attractive girl to go and invite guys from around the campus over to her room. Almost all guys she invited agreed to come with her.
They then did the same experiment with an attractive guy going over to girls on the campus, inviting them over to his place and almost none of the girls agreed to come.
Women sorta know how to hold in their desires/sexuality better than men do. Islam recognises men are weaker and so asks women to be more modest while dressing.
And then there's the question of if you ever saw a picture of the virgin Mary without her head covered. The covering of the head is a sign of reverence. People respect nuns and feel comfortable around them. While people disrespect muslim women who cover their heads and don't like to be around them.
Islam wants all women and men to be close to God. Like a nun who has vowed to committing herself to a spiritual life. Islam wants all men and women to commit themselves to the spiritual life as well. Only difference is in Islam people are allowed to get married and have a family while being committed to this path as its all a part of the spiritual life.
Someone said about the early muslims that during the day they lived like knights while during the night they lived like monks.0 -
af_thefragile wrote: »Women seem to be attracted towards men in different ways as which men are attracted to women. Women are not as strongly attracted to a man's physical body as men are attracted toward women's
I am a women and am very strongly attracted to men's physical bodies.I think their incredibly alluring,you just have to look at Michelangelo's David to appreciate their complete beauty. From past relationships I say my desire for my male partner would equally match his.af_thefragile wrote: »They did an experiment in an american university where they got an attractive girl to go and invite guys from around the campus over to her room. Almost all guys she invited agreed to come with her.
They then did the same experiment with an attractive guy going over to girls on the campus, inviting them over to his place and almost none of the girls agreed to come.
I think theres more a social reasoning behind that. As a women even though you may have exactly the same sexual desires as men you cannot act them out to the same extent without your character being cruelly tarnished.0
Advertisement