Every mans nightmare

[Samaalic Era]

It’s not ambiguous at all but these guys only like traditional opinions when it benefits them and women have to follow it, when it comes to them they start doing their own interpretations this is what the scholars of islam say fellas, read it and weep

Any hadith that contradicts the Qur'an is rejected. The Qur'an takes precedence of any hadith

 

[HalimaJ]

It’s not ambiguous at all but these guys only like traditional opinions when it benefits them and women have to follow it, when it comes to them they start doing their own interpretations this is what the scholars of islam say fellas, read it and weep

I know, i find it insane that I was the one that was accused of making things up or interpreting hadiths and making religious rulings myself.

Not one of these guys provided scholarly evidence. We are layman. We cannot interpret hadith, as without Islamic schooling on the science of hadith we will make errors as looking it from an uneducated lense, you would think some hadiths contradict each other. Hence why, madhabs and scholarly commentary is vital.

But the men of sspot think they are more knowledgeable than Islamic scholars who have spent yrs upon yrs studying fiqh and the science of hadith.

 

[HalimaJ]

Any hadith that contradicts the Qur'an is rejected. The Qur'an takes precedence of any hadith

I've just read that amongst Islamic scholars, there is no difference of opinion when it comes to this issue. Only when the mother is unmarried.

So why is it amongst all the scholars who have studied the Quraan in detail believe this is not a contradiction?

 

[Samaalic Era]

This does not contradict the Quraan.
Surely classical and modern scholars would know better than you.

What Islamic training have you received? Have you been taught Islamic science of hadith and isnad?

The Qur'an makes it clear that you can only claim your legitimate father through nikah. a bastard can only take his mother's lineage

 

[HalimaJ]

The Qur'an makes it clear that you can only claim your legitimate father through nikah. a bastard can only take his mother's lineage

Read my post above.

 

[HalimaJ]

@TekNiKo do you have a problem with me or this Islamic ruling?

Take it up with the scholars of Islam who all agree with this ruling.

 

[Samaalic Era]

Read my post above.

I've just read that amongst Islamic scholars, there is no difference of opinion when it comes to this issue. Only when the mother is unmarried.

So why is it amongst all the scholars who have studied the Quraan in detail believe this is not a contradiction?

When there is a clear ayah, the opinion of scholars is irrevelant. Allah swt said call them by their fathers name.

When there is a contradiction in hadith, the reference becomes the Qur'an

 

[Dino]

Shes right. Even look what this sheikh on islamweb says

“As regards the daughter, you have nothing to do with her at all; she should be attributed to the husband of the woman because he is the owner of the bed. The Prophet, sallallaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, said: "The child is for (i.e. traced back to) the owner of the bed (i.e. the legitimate husband)." [Al-Bukhari and Muslim] For further information see Fatwa 84301. Besides, financial expenses of this daughter and nurturing her are the responsibility of her father. Therefore, you have to break off your relationship completely with this family, so that it would not be a reason to encourage you to commit adultery again with this woman.”


I know you guys don’t like it but I’m sure it’s to protect the child

If a man commits adultery with a married woman and a child is born and the husband disowns the child then it is fine. The ruling was made on the premise that a man who left his wife for 20 years and came back to her found her with a child and still claimed it as his own. Even though it was pretty obvious it was not his. The ruling is a ruling of mercy.

However it depends on the husband. Husband disowns, child is no longer his. Video explains everything

 

[HalimaJ]

When there is a clear ayah, the opinion of scholars is irrevelant. Allah swt said call them by their fathers name.

When there is a contradiction in hadith, the reference becomes the Qur'an

They have more of a holistic understanding of the deen than you do. It is why we have madhabs.

Do you speak Arabic walaal?

Have you been taught about islamic fiqh and understand the Quraan without relying on English translations?

 

[HalimaJ]

If a man commits adultery with a married woman and a child is born and the husband disowns the child then it is fine. The ruling was made on the premise that a man who left his wife for 20 years and came back to her found her with a child and still claimed it as his own. Even though it was pretty obvious it was not his. The ruling is a ruling of mercy.

However it depends on the husband. Husband disowns, child is no longer his. Video explains everything

He will have to disown the child through Li'aan by swearing that his wife has committed adultury.

Dino, you accused me of lying. I want an apology.

 

[Dino]

He will have to disown the child through Li'aan by swearing that his wife has committed adultury.

Dino, you accused me of lying. I want an apology.

Apology for what? For saying that a child born out of wedlock is not legally the father's? It is not. Unless the man overlooks the adultery and claims the child as his own.

And no man in this age will claim a garac.

 

[HalimaJ]

Apology for what? For saying that a child born out of wedlock is not legally the father's? It is not. Unless the man overlooks the adultery and claims the child as his own.

And no man in this age will claim a garac.

Islamically, unless the husband does Li'aan under Shariah it is his. The hadith which is saheeh bukhari reports this.

That is what I posted. Wasn't even my own words.

Yet you accused me of lying.

So Dino, am I lying?

 

[Dino]

Islamically, unless the husband does Li'aan under Shariah it is his. The hadith which is saheeh bukhari reports this.

That is what I posted. Wasn't even my own words.

Yet you accused me of lying.

So Dino, am I lying?

Technically it is not his. Unless he claims it. Or he is oblivious to the fact that his wife slept behind him. Which is sad. I accused you of lying when you said the child is legally his. It is not his anymore since he disowned the child if you read the article. Ofocurse he is gaal. But if he were muslim the child is not his anymore

 

[HalimaJ]

Technically it is not his. Unless he claims it. Or he is oblivious to the fact that his wife slept behind him. Which is sad. I accused you of lying when you said the child is legally his. It is not his anymore since he disowned the child if you read the article. Ofocurse he is gaal. But if he were muslim the child is not his anymore

I posted a hadith and scholarly commentary. Most of my posts were copy and paste. It is what the website said.

So who is lying then?

 

[Dino]

I posted a hadith and scholarly commentary. Most of my posts were copy and paste. It is what the website said.

So who is lying then?

sigh,

halima, look at this way. The article said man suing his wife for damages. practically disowning the child. in islamic terms he is no longer the child's father.

you and i agree that a child remains the father's if he is unaware of what happened or he claims the child still. which is not the case here.

So lets leave it at that.