01 02 03 10

Fridays Freaky Fatwa---Driving while Muslim

A Muslim asks a scholar

My wife is not in the habit of going outside of the house without a mahram unless it is a case of dire necessity. Now, a problem which has recently occured is that sisters who regulary go out unchaperoned are telling her that it is stupid to wait at home until I come if she needs to buy something. What should I say?

And the scholar replies

It is allowed for a woman to go to the market to buy something necessary if there is no one to buy it for her. While going out, she has to observe proper Islamic dress, avoid mixing with men in one place, and conduct herself morally
…conduct herself morally. Obviously that must be very difficult for Muslim women. I can only assume it’s because they get wild urges to strip naked, jump on the hood of a car and holler Allah akbar! Islam liberates women!! The men don’t seem to have this problem. We never hear of Muslim men acting immorally. Only women. Based on that, Muslim women must be outlawed. They just can’t be trusted.

A Muslim asks a scholar

A Muslim woman who wears Hijab was divorced by her husband in Switzerland. Right after this she asked a Swiss court for separation. She takes more than half of the husband’s monthly salary.

This woman does not work and she has the custody of her 4 years old daughter. According to Swiss law, this is not considered divorce. As for them divorce does not take place unless both husband and wife agree to it, or after two years of separation.

More than one year passed and this woman takes more than her right, and does not agree to divorce in order to prevent her husband (who divorced her) from marrying another.

1- Is it correct to turn to the law of Switzerland instead of the Islamic law, and justify this by saying that we should abide by the law of where we live?

2- The father spends on his daughter, has he to spend on his ex-wife, knowing that she finished her ‘iddah more than one year ago? When should he stop spending on her?

3- What is the ruling on this woman who used the law of Switzerland to stop her husband from marrying another, although he divorced her more than one year ago?

And the scholar replies

Praise be to Allah.
It is not permissible to refer for judgment to anything but the Sharia of Allah, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

4:65 “But no, by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you O Muhammad judge in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept them with full submission”
Ah, but Muhammad is dead. So they should refer to the Quran which is the living word of Allah. So what does Allah say about this matter?

Ibn Katheer said: Allah swears by His Divine Self that no one truly believes unless he makes the Messenger judge in all his affairs. What he rules is the truth which must be followed both inwardly and outwardly.
Uh—no. Allah doesn’t say that at all. Allah knew Muhammad would die. It’s why Allah sent the Quran…right?

Hence He (Ibn Katheer-who lived in the 1300’s then Allah made him blind) says “and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept them with full submission” i.e., if they refer to you (Muhammad) for judgment and obey you inwardly so that they find in themselves no resistance against your ruling, and they follow it outwardly and inwardly, then submit to that fully with no objection, resistance or argument.
Translation; Obey Muhammad as he knows more than Allah. Doesn’t matter if he’s dead, his stories live on as do those of his companion war thugs, like….

Ibn ‘Uthman said: This oath begins with the words Fa laa (But no) which is used for emphasis, then Allah swears by the most specific type of Lordship – which is the Lordship of Allah to His Messenger.
Well that certainly sounds like shirk. Allah hates shirk more than anything else. (shirk is making a partner with Allah. Totally pisses him off). I have to wonder if these scholars want Muslims to go to the hellfire. Like I don’t have enough to do…
– that the one who does not do the following things has no faith:

1 – Referring for judgment to the Messenger, because He says “until they make you O Muhammad judge”. The one who seeks judgment from anyone other than Allah and His Messenger is not a believer, and is either a kaafir who is beyond the pale of Islam or a kaafir in the sense of lesser kufr.
The word kafir predates Islam. It was a word used by farmers when the covered up their seed. It’s clear if you read the Quran that muhammads only message was the Quran.

3:144 Muhammad is no more than an apostle: many Were the apostle that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then Turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah. but Allah (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who serve Him with gratitude
Aw, but who the hell cares, right?

2 – Contentment with and acceptance of his ruling, so that they do not find in themselves any resistance against what he has decreed, rather they accept it and are content with what the Prophet has decreed
What the prophet has decreed? Allow me to quote the Quran again.

2:23 And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave Muhammad, then produce a sura or the like thereof, and call your witnesses beside Allah if ye are truthful.

3 – That they accept with full submission, submit totally. Beware, O Muslim, of cancelling out your faith. End quote.
I think it’s been cancelled. And they still haven’t answered the original question

What this sister – in whom it seems that there is a great deal of good, based on what it says about her in the question, such as that she wears hijab – should do is refer for judgment to someone who can judge between her and her ex-husband on the basis of the laws of Allah.

Interesting that she is deemed good simply for wearing the magical penis repellent. So let’s see what laws of Allah they will produce to answer the question.

We advise her to try again to set things straight and try to re-marry her husband, as that is in the interests of their daughter.
Obviously she didn’t want to do that…so now what?

As for the answer to the questions that are mentioned:

1. Divorce occurs when the husband utters the word of divorce and it does not need a ruling from a Sharia judge let alone a ruling from one who does not rule in accordance with that which Allah has revealed.
Like the scholars, she made up her own rules. The uttered (probably shouted) that she wants a divorce. And I’ll bet she also believes that Sharia law sucks…so now what?
2. It is not permissible to turn to man-made laws in order to prevent a man from doing that which Allah has permitted; that is a transgression against him and is wronging him.
Hadith and Sharia are all man-made laws. Maybe she knew that and thought, hell, the western laws are better.

This sister should fear Allah and remember that wrongdoing will be darkness on the Day of Resurrection.
Or maybe she read the Quran which says;

3:144 Muhammad is no more than an apostle: many Were the apostle that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then Turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah. but Allah will swiftly reward those who serve Him with gratitud
If Muhammad was no more than an apostle, then Uthman was a poser

3. After the end of the ‘iddah, (3 periods) the divorced woman is not entitled to any maintenance or accommodation. Ibn Qudaamah said: Accommodation and maintenance are only due to a woman from her husband in the case of a revocable divorce. End quote.
And according to the aya above, this fool is a fake, too. So far, no one has quoted from the Quran. Is it possible that the Quran is not complete?...or not important?

4. If it is known that she is not entitled to any maintenance or accommodation, then what she is taking from the man on the orders of the court, which is not given by him willingly, is haraam, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

4:29 “O you who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves unjustly except it be a trade amongst you, by mutual consent”
Seriously? This is the best they have? I doubt she’s eating the couch. And if 2 people consent it’s mutual. The Swiss courts agreed with her. So far, she’s winning.

And because the Prophet said: “Every Muslim is sacred to his fellow-Muslim, his blood, his wealth and his honour.” Narrated by Muslim. Based on that, she should return it to him or ask him to let her off.
They’re reading this wrong. She is a Muslim therefore she is sacred to her Muslim husband including his wealth. His honor is debatable as it has not been proven. He doesn’t wear the Hijab. Doubt he wears high water pants, either. And I’m sure she wants to let him off—go. But, western women have more rights than Muslim women and Allah is all about fairness. As shown in this aya’

2:62 Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Christians, and Sabaeans whoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day and doeth right surely their reward is with their Lord, and there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve
She is just asking for part of her reward up front.

5. Custody of the daughter before she reaches the age of seven years is her mother’s right, so long as she is Muslim and trustworthy, and has not remarried. Imam Ibn Qudaamah said: If the couple separate, and they have a child who is still a minor or disabled, his mother has the most right to custody of him if she fulfils all the conditions, whether the child is male or female.

This is the view of Yahya al-Ansaari, al-Zuhri, al-Thawri, Maalik, al-Shaafa’i, Abu Thawr, Ishaaq and ashaab al-ra’y, and we do not know of anyone who disagreed with them.

Really, you don’t know anyone who disagrees with them? Obviously the woman disagrees, I disagree and so would Allah. This is not based on the Quran; it’s made up by Muslim men….as if they were the pillar of knowledge and all things good…ppfftt

3:94 And whoever shall invent a falsehood after that concerning Allah, such will be wrong doers
Maybe she actually read the Quran?

6. Maintenance of the daughter is a Sharia obligation on her father, even if she is in her mother’s custody, because of the report (this is a he said, she said, someone said, Muhammad said, Hadith) narrated by Bukhari and Muslim from ‘Aiesha, that Hind bint ‘Utbah said: O Messenger of Allah, Abu Sufyaan is a miserly man who does not give me enough for myself and my child, except for that which I take without his knowledge. He said: “Take that which will suffice for you and your child, on a reasonable basis.”
Isn’t that what she is trying to do?
This indicates that the maintenance of the children is their father’s duty, and that the maintenance should be based on what is sufficient, and she has no right to take more than what is sufficient.
Based on the Hadith, she gets to decide what is sufficient.

And Allah knows best.

And so does she, according to Swiss courts
11 12 15