User:Lehrasap/Sandbox 1

Quran 2:229:

الطَّلاَقُ مَرَّتَانِ فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ وَلاَ يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُواْ مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا إِلاَّ أَن يَخَافَا أَلاَّ يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللّهِ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلاَّ يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ اللّهِ فَلاَ جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا افْتَدَتْ بِهِ A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allah, there is no blame on either of them if she gives something for her freedom ( Arabic word:افْتَدَتْ  which means Ransom money).

Muhammad said: "Women who seek their freedom through Khul’ are hypocrites"

If a woman does not simply like her husband, and seeks to get her freedom by using the greed of money of her husband, then Muhamamd declared such women to be hypocrites.

Sunnan Tirmidhi, Kitab-ul-Talaq:

عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏"‏ الْمُخْتَلِعَاتُ هُنَّ الْمُنَافِقَاتُ ‏"‏

The Prophet said: "The women who seek a Khul are hypocrites."

This tradition is “Sahih” (i.e. Authentic)

Sunnan Tirmidhi, Kitab-ul-Talaq:

عَنْ ثَوْبَانَ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ أَيُّمَا امْرَأَةٍ سَأَلَتْ زَوْجَهَا طَلاَقًا مِنْ غَيْرِ بَأْسٍ فَحَرَامٌ عَلَيْهَا رَائِحَةُ الْجَنَّةِ

The Messenger of Allah said: "Whichever woman seeks a Khul from her husband without harm (cause), then the scent of Paradise will be unlawful for her."

This tradition is also “Sahih”.

Even if husband beats and breaks the bones of wife, still she could not get the divorce automatically without his approval (and forget about any fine for damaged body part)

Sunnan Abu Dawud, Book of Divorce:

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:

Habibah daughter of Sahl was the wife of Thabit ibn Qays Shimmas. He beat her and broke some of her part. So she came to the Prophet after morning, and complained to him against her husband. The Prophet called on Thabit ibn Qays and said (to him): Take a part of her property and separate yourself from her. He asked: Is that right, Messenger of Allah? He said: Yes. He said: I have given her two gardens of mine as a dower, and they are already in her possession. The Prophet said: Take them and separate yourself from her.

Sheikh Albani declared this Hadith to be “Sahih” (authentic)

So, the injustices of Allah/Muhammad against the poor woman are:

• She could not get the divorce even if he beats her, and beats her so brutally that it breaks part of her body (i.e. bone)
• And still she has to pay for her freedom
• And forget about her getting any penalty/fine money for damaging her body part.

In the non-religious Western world of today, where humans make the laws according to their own rational thinking, such poor women will not only get their freedom without paying anything, but they will also get the money for damage to their body parts.

If bone or any part of woman is not broken due to the hitting of husband, then she has no right to get her freedom

Sahih Bukhari, Book of Dress:

Rifa`a divorced his wife whereupon `AbdurRahman married her. `Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil, and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating. It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Messenger came, `Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!"

When `AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife.

She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment,

`Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Messenger! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to (her first husband) Rifa`a (by doing Halala with me).

" Allah's Messenger said, to her, "If that is your intention (i.e. to do Halala), then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa`a unless `Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you."

Then the Prophet saw two boys with `Abdur- Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that `AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,"

Therefore, this tradition tells:

1. This woman was extremely unsatisfied with her husband, and didn’t love him, and wanted to get rid of him.
2. Since Khul’ is not the right of woman in Islam, but depends upon the will of man, that is why she was unable to get rid of him despite having a strong desire for her freedom.
3. And this 2nd husband used to beat her brutally till she got bruises all over her body. But despite this beating, he didn’t give her divorce or give her freedom through Khul’.
4. And Muhammad didn’t prohibit that cruel man from beating her so brutally, but made it a part of Islamic Sharia by keeping quiet upon it (known as Hadith-e-Taqriri).
5. And Muhammad also didn’t give the right to woman to take her freedom through Khul’ after such beating.

A woman could not get her freedom through Khul’ even if the man is infertile:

All 4 Sunni Fiqh Imams agree that the wife could not take divorce if the man is infertile.

Largest Islamic Fatwa website Islam Q&A writes (link):

With regard to the man’s sterility, i.e., his inability to father children, this is not counted as a fault that would necessitate annulment of the marriage, according to the majority of scholars, apart from the view of al-Hasan al-Basri, and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah

Actually, it was impossible to find out if a man was infertile in the previous centuries. Therefore, it was impossible to blame the man for infertility. This was the case with Muhammad himself.

Islam apologists: Woman is “emotional” and thus husband should decide for her if divorce is in her favour or not

This is so wrong to only blame women for being emotional. Indeed, men could also be emotional and could make false decisions in anger.

But despite the extreme uncontrolled and extreme emotional nature of men in anger, still Islam made it so easy for man to say 3 times Talaq, and the divorce takes place.

Islam Apologists: But Sunnah way of giving Talaq is 3 menstrual periods

Sunnah or not, but Islamic Sharia indeed does allow men to divorce their wives in anger by saying 3 times Talaq.

Secondly, if the divorce process is 3 menstrual periods long, then not only husbands come out of their anger, but women will also come out of their anger or emotions. Thus, then Islam should also give this right to the women to give divorce after 3 months, while they are no more in state of emotions/anger.

Thirdly, if Islam does not give this right to women to decide for themselves even after 3 months (by blaming them of being emotional), then still Islam had to give this right to father or brother or son of the woman to decide on her behalf.

But when Islam says that if a woman wishes her freedom, then it is the Husband who should decide for the wife if divorce is in her favour or not, then this is not Wisdom, but plain Stupidity.

Muslim women should ask these questions from themselves:

If you are a Muslim woman, then please ask this question from yourself:

• If you were there in place of Allah, and you had to make the laws, would you have made such a law like Khul’ for the women?
• Do you really consider that such an “Unjust” law like Khul’ could be made by the divine owner of Wisdom?
• Do you accept this blame that only women are emotional, and thus unable to decide themselves for their lives?
• Do you find it fair that even in case of differences and disputes, and despite having a strong desire to separate, still it is the husband who will decide for you if divorce is good for you or not?
• Don’t you realise that this thing which is called “Allah”, does not give the right of freedom to you while he thinks that woman is a creature with “lower Intelligence Level” as compared to the man?
• Don’t you feel that these unjust laws like Khul’ are not made by any Divine God in heaven, but a MAN is present behind these laws, whose thinking is that women are of lower status than men, and she should always obey the men?

Your human rationale and humanity in you is enough to guide you and you could yourself easily differentiate between the right & wrong.

A Response from a Muslim woman: I never heard about the ransom money

A Muslim woman wrote:

First time I am hearing that a wife needs to pay ransom money in Khul'. If Im not mistaken a woman does not need to pay back the dowry. Also, they can ask for divorce through the court if the husband abuse her (mentally or physically), fail to give nafkah etc.

Answer:

Problem is the Deceptions of Muslims, where they MIX one thing with another and keep thus hide the real face of Islam.

For example:

• If a man is impotent and unable to penetrate, then woman take take divorce through the court. But if the man is infertile, and could not give children to the women, then in this case women are NOT allowed to get their freedom through divorce in the courts, and to marry other man in order to get the children.
• And Muslims also tell that women are also allowed to take divorce, if man is not providing them with their maintenance money. Although this statement by Muslims is true, but still it is not the "complete" truth. Complete truth is this that woman has to wait 2 years if he is not providing her with the maintenance money. And only after this period (i.e. 2 years), Islamic courts will let the women to take divorce.
• And in case that: * Man is ugly. * Woman does not love him due to his bad habits. * Or man is abusive and beats her brutally. If woman wishes to get her freedom from him, then she simply cannot do it in Islam. Yes, one possible way is to use the greed of her abusive husband, and offer her the dower (bridal gift) back, or even more than this (according to the demand of the abusive husband). But still the final decision of her freedom lies in the hands of the husband. He could accept her offer and set her free, or he could reject the offer, and in this case all doors are closed upon her to get her freedom. Not even the Islamic courts could provide her freedom from her abusive husband in this case.

Difference between the "Islamic Laws" and the "Laws of Muslim Countries"

Please note this difference carefully, while again Muslims try to deceive innocent people by mixing these two things.

Real Islamic Rulings have been described above (i.e. Khul' is not the right of woman, but it depends upon the will of husband to grant her freedom or not).

During last 14 centuries of Islamic history, this Islamic Ruling stayed the same.

But in this century, thanks to the Western Feminist Movement, even women in the Islamic countries are becoming aware of their rights as humans.

Thus, these feminist movements in the Muslim countries fought against this Divorce/Khul' ruling of Islam, and to surprise, they also succeeded in many Muslim countries in "CHANGING" this actual Islamic ruling.

Now in many Muslim countries, indeed woman could go to the court, and ask for the Khul' (without paying the ransom money).

Actually, Islamic Scholars initially tried to stop this change, but this Islamic Ruling was so much against the Humanity, that they failed to achieve success in it.

It is same like Muslim men didn't need the permission of first wife to marry another wife, but due to the strong opposition from the feminist movement in the Muslim countries in this century, now Muslim men have to ask the written permission of the first wife before taking another woman as a wife.

For example, please read the following 2 Studies about how Courts were given the right to give freedom in Khul' without paying the ransom money, while Islamic Scholars opposed it, while according to Sharia it is the right of husband, and not the courts.

Study 1

Study 2

Moreover, if you want to know the Real Islamic Rulings, when a woman is allowed to take divorce from her husband, then you could look it here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_Muslim_Marriages_Act,_1939

2. Grounds for decree for dissolution of marriage.

A woman married under Muslim Law shall be entitled to obtain a decree for the dissolution of her marriage on any one or more of the following grounds, namely:

(i) That the whereabouts of the husband have not been known for a period of 1[one] years;

(ii) That the husband has neglected or has filed to provide for her maintenance for a period of two years;

(ii-A) That the husband has taken an additional wife in contravention of the provisions of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961;

(iii) That the husband has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 2[three] years or upwards;

(iv) That the husband has failed to perform, without reasonable cause, his marital obligations for a period of 3[one] years;

(v) That the husband was impotent at the time of the marriage and continues to be so;

(vi) That the husband has been insane for a period of two years or is suffering from leprosy or a virulent venereal disease;

(vii) That she, having been given in marriage by her father or other guardian before she attained the age of sixteen years, repudiated the marriage before attaining the age of eighteen years:

All these conditions upon a woman was a great burden and injustice. That is why even Muslim countries were compelled to abandon this Islamic Ruling, and allow the woman to take Khul' immediately in the Courts without paying the ransom money.