Up to this point I can truthfully say I don’t know a lot about Islam. The clash of religions at present however is becoming so overwhelming I think it is time I looked into it. It is breaking into open warfare on the streets of Europe and other places. The history of Islam and the ability to coexist with other groups and nationalities has not been smooth sailing.
This whole thing reminds me of a quote by the Buddha:
“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” The Buddha
There is nothing in the Quran that advocates beating women Saudi style-nothing
Since 1933, when Standard Oil of California (now Chevron) won a concession to explore in eastern Saudi Arabia and discovered oil in 1938, the United States and Saudi Arabia have forged a close bond.
In spite of the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers during the attacks on 9/11 were allegedly from Saudi Arabia, remarkably enough, the two countries remained friends. In spite of their murderous track record of using US bombs to lay waste to innocent women and children, the United States and Saudi Arabia have not parted ways.
The Saudis have proven that they can behead people for free speech, invade and lay waste to other countries, and even fund terrorism around the world, and yet the United States government continues to bow down to the incendiary regime.
How many times have we heard the reason the United States invades other countries is to save the citizens from their fascist regimes which oppress their people?
Lybia, Syria, Iraq, and more, have all been invaded, and destroyed as the United States pretends to be the police of the world — yet not even once has an establishment politician called for invading or even questioned the horrid atrocities carried out against the people of Saudi Arabia by their rulers. We hear all about the deplorable and violent beheadings by the Islamic State, but when it comes to the Saudis, who beheaded far more people than ISIS last year, the United States remains mum.
So, when the Saudi state-run media releases an instructional video on how to properly beat your wife, it should come as no surprise as to why the US establishment refuses to even acknowledge it.
The video below was recorded in February but was released this week via the Washington DC-based Middle East Media Research Institute. Its contents are nothing short of infuriating.
The video features a Saudi doctor, Khaled Al-Saqaby, who deals with the often ‘thorny’ issue of how and when to beat your wife. Al-Saqaby begins the video by telling husbands not to immediately attack their wives, but to discipline them properly first.
When speaking of how women some women say they would like to be treated with equality, Al-Saqaby called this a “very grave problem.”
He says, “The first step is to remind her of your rights and of her duties according to Allah. Then comes the second step – forsaking her in bed.”
The third step, beating, has to correspond with the “necessary Islamic conditions” before taking action.
“The beating should not be performed with a rod, nor should it be a headband, or a sharp object.”
Instead, husbands should use a ‘tooth-cleaning twig or with a handkerchief’ to beat their wife.
Hopefully then, the wife will “feel that she was wrong in the way she treated her husband.”
At the end of the video, Al-Saqaby lets the wife-beating husbands of Saudi Arabia that sometimes, you may have to dole out an extra beating outside of the world of just discipline. Sometimes, according to this sicko ‘doctor,’ they just deserve to be beat.
Al-Saqaby says, “In addition, sometimes a woman makes a mistake that may lead her husband to beat her.
“I’m sad to say there are some women who say ‘Go ahead, If you are a real man, beat me’ She provokes them.”
Below is a video which is representative of a strong US ally. An ally who has not only terrorized the world, as well as their own people but who has shown they wield power over America by blackmailing the government for attempting to tell the truth.
The man in the video below represents the regime that US President Barack Obama just flew down to curtsey to, just last week.
It is important to note that there are many people out there who will implicate all of Islam in this type of behavior. Those people will even use a handful of quotes from the Quran which they say condones the beating of women. To those people who use a few quotes from the Quran to smear an entire religion, the same thing can be done with the bible, as it also condones beating one’s wife, as it says she is your property.
As with all religion — its context can be used to create peace or foster hatred and war.
Below are just some of the Noble Verses and Sayings in the Quran that support the prohibition of any type of wife beating:
The following Noble Verses and Sayings from the Noble Quran and Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him respectively seem to very well support the above interpretation:
“…Do not retain them (i.e., your wives) to harm them…(The Noble Quran, 2:231)”
Narrated Mu’awiyah al-Qushayri: “I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)”
Narrated Mu’awiyah ibn Haydah: “I said: Apostle of Allah, how should we approach our wives and how should we leave them? He replied: Approach your tilth when or how you will, give her (your wife) food when you take food, clothe when you clothe yourself, do not revile her face, and do not beat her. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2138)”
Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) as saying: “He who believes in Allah and the Hereafter, if he witnesses any matter he should talk in good terms about it or keep quiet. Act kindly towards woman, for woman is created from a rib, and the most crooked part of the rib is its top. If you attempt to straighten it, you will break it, and if you leave it, its crookedness will remain there. So act kindly towards women. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Book 008, Number 3468)”
“O ye who believe! Ye are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should ye treat them with harshness, that ye may take away part of the dower [money given by the husband to the wife for the marriage contract] ye have given them, except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and God brings about through it a great deal of good. (The Noble Quran, 4:19)”
“And among God’s signs is this: He created for you mates from amongst yourselves (males as mates for females and vice versa) that you might find tranquillity and peace in them. And he has put love and kindness among you. Herein surely are signs for those who reflect. (The Noble Quran 30:21)”
“Women impure for men impure. And women of purity for men of purity. These are not affected by what people say. For them is forgiveness and an honorable provision. (The Noble Quran 24:26)”
Narrated Abu Huraira: “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘The strong is not the one who overcomes the people by his strength, but the strong is the one who controls himself while in anger. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Good Manners and Form (Al-Adab), Volume 8, Book 73, Number 135)”
Narrated Abu Huraira: “A man said to the Prophet , ‘Advise me! ‘The Prophet said, ‘Do not become angry and furious.’ The man asked (the same) again and again, and the Prophet said in each case, ‘Do not become angry and furious.’ (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Good Manners and Form (Al-Adab), Volume 8, Book 73, Number 137)”
Abu Huraira reported: “I heard Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: One is not strong because of one’s wrestling skillfully. They said: Allah’s Messenger, then who is strong? He said: He who controls his anger when he is in a fit of rage. (Translation of Sahih Muslim, The Book of Virtue, Good Manners and Joining of the Ties of Relationship (Kitab Al-Birr was-Salat-I-wa’l-Adab), Book 032, Number 6314)”
Allah Almighty loves those who restrain anger: “Those who spend (freely), whether in prosperity, or in adversity; who restrain anger, and pardon (all) men; for Allah loves those who do good. (The Noble Quran, 3:134)”
Now lets look at this from another angle, that of German scholar Lamya Kaddor.
The German Islam Scholar Lamya Kaddor
Why I as a Muslim Woman Don’t Wear a Headscarf
Does the Koran really demand that women wear headscarves? Or is it mainly older men who claim they can decide how women should dress – with no theological foundation whatsoever? For the Islam scholar Lamya Kaddor, there is no question about it: the headscarf is obsolete
If I as a Muslim woman living in Germany ask myself whether I should wear a headscarf or not, that gives rise to the question of whether the additional head-covering called for in the Koran (33:59) still fulfils its original purpose of protecting women from male desire. My answer is: no. In contemporary Germany such covering-up no longer serves that purpose. It is even more likely to bring about the opposite of what God intended by exposing wearers of headscarves to discrimination.
Today the intended protection against ‘annoyances’ is provided by a well-functioning legal system rather than by adherence to social rules from the past. A free state based on the rule of law protects a woman, for example by punishing attacks on her person. This protection may be primarily concerned with bodily integrity, but people in a modern state are more than ever responsible for themselves with regard to the freedoms accorded – including in the realm of moral integrity. Covering my head cannot relieve me of that responsibility. I cannot hide myself behind a little piece of cloth. A free and democratic state grants rights and also imposes responsibilities. In such circumstances I can behave honourably with and without a veil or head-scarf – or not, as the case may be.
A ‘fashion accessory’ from Koranic times?
If this argument is accepted, one can also abandon the Koranic demand for additional covering, directed towards women in Early Arabic tribal society. What would still initially remain is the khimâr, the head covering that was part of women’s clothing at that time. The Koran neither speaks against nor in any way emphasises that form of covering. God uses the word only once in the Koran (24:31). That occurs in passing in connection with a call for moral behaviour. So there is no Koranic emphasis on such head covering. However, if God had required a special head covering, would He not have said so explicitly? The khimâr thus merely constitutes a ‘fashion accessory’ according to the spirit of that age. Viewed rationally, functions consciously or unconsciously associated with head coverings across the course of history – such as protection against sand or evil influences – are all superannuated today and have lost their validity. People’s powers of imagination have changed.
In the Germany of the twenty-first century – at the very latest – women’s hairstyles are no longer per se an erotic stimulus. The sight of head-hair no longer provokes sexual fantasies and thus immoral behaviour – except perhaps among fetishists. When you walk along a city’s pedestrian precincts no one turns to look at you because of your hair. Only if you dress provocatively or in a particularly original way, and behave accordingly, do you attract some attention. In addition, this isn’t a male world that still thinks as it did a thousand or more years ago. Thanks to the achievements of a free and democratic state, and thanks to the prevalent understanding of relations between the sexes, you no longer necessarily need a head covering in order to live morally. The headscarf has become obsolete.
Misogyny by Islamic scholars
Today’s orthodox comprehension of the obligation to wear a head covering is primarily based on the interpretations of scholars who lived several generations after the Prophet Mohammed. One can follow their judgements but they are not sacrosanct. As human beings all scholars are fallible. Conservative and fundamentalist circles constantly emphasise that our behaviour should follow the Koran and the Prophet. Their spokesmen maintain that this directly accords with what was laid down during the Prophet’s lifetime and the initial period of Islam.
However in reality this view is mainly based on the ideas of scholars who lived some 600 (!) years later – such people as Ibn Qudâma (d. 1223), Ibn Taymîya (d. 1328), or the latter’s pupil Ibn Qayyim al-Jawzîya (d. 1350). Bearing in mind the patriarchal social structures of that time, it is unsurprising that interpretations of sources concerning relations between the sexes were usually unfavourable for women – even though that contradicts a striving (to be found throughout the Koran) towards improving women’s situation. That tendency is even less surprising if one recalls the misogyny demonstrated by many scholars throughout the history of Islam. Linking shame and a head covering is by no means as self-evident as it seems. Sura 24:30-31 calls on both men and women to behave chastely, but exegesis of the Koran up to the present day only puts the emphasis on chaste behaviour for women.
No political symbol
Nevertheless, the Koranic injunction to dress in a way that is generally demure remains a religious demand, to be fulfilled by wearing ‘appropriate’ clothing. A woman believer sees this as signifying that all those parts of the female body which nowadays excite the idea of possible sexual contact should continue to be ‘properly’ concealed beneath the kind of clothing usual today. What is entailed in ‘proper’, ‘appropriate’, or ‘decent’ is left to the reasonableness of every mature woman citizen, since at present there are no specific directives based on Islamic sources. In prevalent practice, it is mostly older men – learned or unlearned – who assume the right to determine how a woman should appear, but there is no theological or sociological foundation for this.
A similar situation prevails regarding evaluation of the headscarf as a token of Islamic faith. Such a function cannot be demonstrated in the history of Islam. The depiction of the headscarf as a unifying element within the Muslim community is not well founded either. In addition, its function as a political symbol, so frequently evoked in public discussions today, also constitutes a historically unfounded inflation of the significance of this item of clothing. This has occurred only in recent decades, as an element in the opposition to Western influences within the Islamic world.
Lamya Kaddor © Goethe-Institut 2011
Lamya Kaddor was born in 1978 in Ahlen, Westphalia, as the daughter of Syrian immigrants. As a student she specialised in Islamic Studies, and went on to train Islamic teachers of religion at Münster University. Since the 2003-04 school year she has been involved as a teacher in the ‘Islamic Studies in the German Language’ project. Her most recent book is “Muslimisch – weiblich – deutsch! Mein Leben für einen zeitgemäßen Islam” (Muslim – Female – German! My Life for an Islam in Keeping with the Times), C.H. Beck Verlag, Munich 2010. This text is an abbreviated version of a study published in Thorsten Gerald Schneider’s Islamverherrlichung [Glorification of Islam], VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2010, pp. 131–158.
Editor: Lewis Gropp/Qantara.de
As I stated earlier the relationship between Muslims and Hindus has been one of struggle. I am only going to post a brief portion of this.
3100 YEAR OLD MARTHANDA SUN TEMPLE OF KASHMIR, DESTROYED BY MUSLIM INVADER SIKANDER BUTSHIKAN , THE AKSHARDHAM EXPERIENCE – CAPT AJIT VADAKAYIL
“The most spectacular monument in India would have been the 3100 year old Marthanda sun temple of Kashmir, if it had NOT been destroyed by the 7th invader Muslim king of Kashmir , Sikandar Butshikan, out of sheer jealousy.
There was no treasure in the temple vaults.
Taj Mahal would have been nowhere.
It took Sikander Butshikan’s soldiers 13 months to destroy this glorious temple . Such was its amazing strength with huge interlocking stones.
If you go on Google EARTH and zoom in at Lat 33°44′44″N Long 75°13′13″E, nine kilometres east-north-east of Anantnag district headquarters you can see how big it is.
The roof this temple was gold coated and spires were solid gold.
Above is a black and white photo of the ruins of this magnificent temple , taken in 1868 by John Burke.
Cruel and blood thirsty Muslim invader king Sikander Butshikan, the second Sultan of the Swati Afghan Shah Miri dynasty of Kashmir ( 1389–1413 AD ) was an ethnic cleanser who was the first on this planet to be guilty of a true holocaust.
His cousins were ruling Afghanistan and the Western part of Pakistan. They had been ruling Kabul lagmant and Swat in 1190–1520, and are known as Jahangiri dynasty in history.
Almost all glorious Hindu temples were destroyed by Muslim invaders and the stones used for building mosques and other structures.
Every body talks about the grossly inflated 6 million Jew holocaust and genocide.
Nobody talks about 90 million Hindus killed.
No history books write about it.
It is fashion to ignore the Hindus in India, their own country. Hinduism is the only secular religion without a conversion agenda by lollypop sops or force — all know that.
But in India the Hindu majority is always wrong, and they must be cowards , as per the Italian waitress turned empress. If Hindus retaliate and give back as good as they got, it become Hindu terror.
Her “not so bright” son Rahul Gandhi went so far as to complain to the US ambassador Timothy Roemer about Hindu terror. ( Wiki leaks ) and that Hindus are biggest threat to India — big mistake. He lost all goodwill !!.
Thank god it is the Internet era.
Punch into Google search THE UNQUANTIFIED HOLOCAUST AND GENOCIDE VADAKAYIL
Akshardham temple is in New Delhi, India. There is a sister temple in Gandhidham Gujarat.
Islamic extremists tried to destroy this temple on 24th Sept 2002 out of sheer jealousy. They failed to do it, and all they could do was to kill 32 persons including women and children , and injuring more than 80. The extremists were shot dead by Indian commandos.
So this is why tourists are NOT allowed to take cameras and mobile phones in Akshardma temples any more.
Now, I would like you to punch into Google search RUINED CITY OF HAMPI VADAKAYIL It covers 25 kilometers and takes ten days to see it all.
You will see that NO ruins on this planet whether in Rome, Athens or Egypt, can come anywhere near in sheer glory.
Tourists should first see Akshardham temple before they go to Hampi ruins. Only then they can visualize the glory of ancient Indian temples at its prime – gold , silver , precious stones and rosewood everywhere..
The Nizam of Hyderabad just got a small percentage of the stolen Hampi treasures, yet this was enough to propel him to the richest man on this planet.
Now let me put a few pictures of Akshardham temple at New Delhi first, before I proceed.”
And after all that the capt is still willing to say:
ISRAELI OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE, NAZIS WERE BETTER HUMAN BEINGS, STATEHOOD FOR PALESTINE NOW-CAPT AJIT VADAKAYIL
Where Islam began to go wrong
AS AN ADDED BONUS:
ANCIENT JEWS WHO ESCAPED TO BABYLON NAMED THEIR SYNAGOGUES ( TALMUDIC ACADEMY ) YESHIVA ( Shiva means seven TEE HEEEE )
ABOVE: THE JEWISH MENORAH IS NOTHING BUT A SPUN OFF SHIVA TRISHUL
ABOVE : THE SIX POINTED STAR OF DAVIS IS NOTHING BUT THE SHIVA-SHAKTI MERGING GEOMETRY FOUND IN ALL ANCIENT HINDU SHIVA TEMPLES.
ABOVE LINK : NEVER MIND THEIR MODERN NOBEL PRIZES , ANCIENT JEWS COULD NOT THINK SO DEEP TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTENT OF THE LINK ABOVE -PENNED 7000 YEARS AGO.
So to begin closing this out, the following people are coming to Germany when Germany is down after having been baited into two world wars by the Rothschilds, a third one looms. They are an occupied nation in a managed economy where the average German cannot afford to have children. They have an aging population and what do their leaders advocate, millions of young unmarried Wahabbis flooding in. This is a war of extermination by the powers that be, make no mistake about it. The following pictures are not young immigrants practicing some high form of religion, adjusting to their new country. These are barbaric savages who deserve a tent somewhere in the Sahara desert.
You cannot differentiate between good and evil just like that pig Hollande.
They murdered 160 of his own people in cold blood. They took their women out and raped them. You let them all come to Europe, they are all ISIS and Al-Nusra. There will be explosions in France, Germany, Russia, Italy and Serbia.
Do these guys look like they spend a lot of time pouring over the Quran? Announcing to the locals their days are numbered is not the way to win friends and influence people.
Von Storch had earlier blasted Chancellor Merkel on Facebook for “ruining our country like no one since 1945.”
AS AN ADDED BONUS.
I would love to have a glass of tea and watch a debate between Irene Caesar PH.D and Capt Ajit. Irene Caesar believes that Russians came down from the north and created Vedic civilization whereas Capt Ajit outlines how Nordic man originated in the Indus Valley and moved northward. I am afraid Capt Ajit is correct here and frankly is states the same in the Enuma Elish or Babylonian clay tablets. Let us point out however that Vedic civilization was once worldwide and certainly ancient Russia was also as the Russian language is very close to Sanskrit. We can see this in the ancient Siberian city known as Arkaim, the swastika city. It is built like the swastika and much more accurate than Stonehenge when it comes to measuring the heavens. Capt Ajit has what I would term a holographic mind. He himself has mentioned reading the auras of on his ship and looking at a book and absorbing the contents. I think this is very likely true.
As for myself, I suppose you could say my view is a cross section between Hinduism, Buddhism and Native indigenous. There is however in my opinion more truth to be found in Hinduism as the term itself means the search for truth. And there is no religion higher than the truth. It took me a long time to realize I must be a Hindu.
Some of my own meanderings