Most Famous Somali Sheikh is in Hot Water again against Somali Female Politician

[Man with a garuun]

Was this bill proposed solely for western gibs or was there a secular motive behind it?

From what I understand, the bill was pushed behind the scene by the Norwegian and Netherland governments through the funds they provide to Somalia from the EU's overall funding. The head of parliament in Netherlands - who is Lesbian - was reported in the Somali media to show up in Somalia in order to promote this bill.

Somalis who have been involved in both TFG and current FGS also convey that ever since the Somali government was established, UNSOM and EU were pushing this bill. So this is not the first time.

 

[AdoonkaAlle]

Walaal, have I argued that sexual violations do not occur? I have simply stated that rape and sexual assaults that come under the Zina category are non-existent in Sharia in relation to marriage. Can anyone refute this Islamically speaking? Any sexual abuse that occurs in marriage comes under spousal abuse which I first highlighted.

You have a familiarity with different Madhabs, is it true that the Hanafi Fiqh permits a man to rape his wife if she has no valid reason to refuse intercourse?

check my edit on my previous post, i was merely elaborating on your point about the non existence of the term spousal sexual abuse within the confines of marriage. Previously you stated that you wouldn't call it sexual abuse but spousal abuse as it was legally impossible for a man to sexually assault his wife.

In Sharia Law, that don't count for shit as they are legally married hence no 'Rape' charges cannot be levied. The discussion revolves around Sharia Law, not circumstantial evidence which is inherently impermissible in a Sharia Court as it does not fulfill the requirements of Zina etc. She can possibly seek redress through divorce on the grounds of spousal abuse but not 'Rape'.

The issue you have is not caused by men as a whole as the majority are laymen but with 'Sharia', thus take it up with the all of the classical scholars, and the evidence from the Qur'an and Hadith that they have utilised in presenting Islamic Law as practiced since the time of Sahabah to the Present.

I leave it to the scholars when it comes to the semantics of it, I am non the wiser as to what the legal precedents are regarding the different forms of spousal abuse and the terminology employed. If I was to hazard a guess, it would not be called sexual abuse as it is legally impossible for a man to sexually assault his wife in Sharia Law. Ask the other knowledgeable folk on here, they might be aware of a legal precedent that I am ignorant of.

This is where the issue stems from as you're using sexual abuse and sexual assault interchangeably & also thinking of specific forms of sexual abuse whereas the sisters are referring to other forms of sexual abuse.


I've no idea of the hanafi view regarding whether they allow it or not first i'm hearing about it ruunti.

 

[Deekhow]

@Angelina















I will ask you only one question about this bill: If Somalis are Muslim and there is nas that covers rape from the Quran and Sunah, and there are not implementing it, how willra this bill help rape victims?

 

[anonimo]

check my edit on my previous post, i was merely elaborating on your point about the non existence of the term spousal sexual abuse within the confines of marriage. Previously you stated that you wouldn't call it sexual abuse but spousal abuse as it was legally impossible for a man to sexually assault his wife.











This is where the issue stems from as you're using sexual abuse and sexual assault interchangeably & also thinking of specific forms of sexual abuse whereas the sisters are referring to other forms of sexual abuse.


I've no idea of the hanafi view regarding whether they allow it or not first i'm hearing about it ruunti.

No worries, to make it clear I was referring to sexual assault such as rape in Sharia Law, not the forms of sexual abuse which come under the spousal abuse category.

 

[anonimo]

@AdoonkaAlle

According to the work of this Hanafi jurist, under certain circumstances a man can obtain pleasure from his wife by force

How highly is this scholar held in Hanafi Fiqh?

The Hedaya, Or Guide

www.google.co.uk

 

[anonimo]

@anonimo

It is true that the Hanafi madhab like many Pre-modern classical jurists allowed a man to coerce his wife as long as it’s done in a manner that is not harmful and it’s ideal to refrain. Since we live in the modern world where we know far more about harm and psychology then our Pre-modern jurists knew then Modern contemporary scholars who are qualified Mujtahid’s can disagree with those scholars and come up with different fatwas that aligns with the Shariah and protects woman but since we are laymen, we should stay in our lane.

The other Madhabs don't hence it comes to a difference of opinion if this is true.

 

[Angelina]

I never argued that there are no punishments, I clearly stated that she can seek redress in court for spousal abuse but it will not come under the classification of sexual abuse in the traditional sense of the word in a Sharia Court of Law. The evidence you posted supports my stance!

If you never stated there is no punishment, why are you arguing. Why say sexual abuse doesn’t exist in Islam? Classical Scholars literally mention harming wife via intercourse which is literally what sexual abuse is.

You are again putting words in my mouth, I was clear that she can seek redress in the courts but not for rape in the traditional Sharia sense of the word but under the spousal abuse category.

I literally said she can redress the courts for sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is literally abuse using sex. That is the facts. Forcing yourself is sexual abuse. Why is that a difficult point for you to understand?

However you want to dress it up, for many Westernised women lacking in knowledge of classical Islam the fact that it will not be considered rape in a Sharia Court is the issue at hand. They have an issue with Islamic Law as practiced by the classical scholars hence why they are up in arms about the absence of 'marital rape' in Islamic Law.

If that was the case I wouldn’t have explained the Sharia point that Islam sees the r-word and forced sex within a marriage very differently. I’ve explained that yet you’re lying and telling me I’m dressing it up. It is you who wants to suggest that Islam doesn’t recognize harm via sex and the actual definition of that is drumroll……sexual abuse.

You’re the one who keeps on denying sexual abuse and you’ve said it multiple times. Islam is against any form of abuse. Why is it difficult for you to understand?

In DV cases involving the use of unreasonable force, I have not asserted that financial compensation is the sole punishment meted out but it is one of the traditional modes of redress along with divorce in classical Islam. It is down to the Qadi to determine the nature of the offence and the proportionate ruling. From your own Abuabuaminaelias source, a woman who is subjected to aggression in marriage during the time of the Prophet SAWS was granted divorce because of spousal abuse.

Yes and did I not say that a woman can go to the Islamic courts and sue her husband if he sexually abuses her? So what is your point exactly? If you believe that a woman in Islam can get justice for her husband abusing her sexually within the Islamic courts, then why are you arguing with me? If you do, what is your point?

Is this the legal precedent that the website you have quoted is using to determine what sort of justice can be served to a woman who complains of marital rape in Islamic Law?

Yes, Islamic courts which I mentioned time and time again, under the harm principle. How is that hard to understand?!

It is ironic how your own source demonstrates that there is no legal precedent for marital rape as it was never an issue in the past hence why there is no Sharia ruling specifically addressing marital rape or sexual abuse. Hence, why it falls under spousal abuse, the point I previously raised.

There clearly is legal precedent as a woman can go to the courts due to the principle of causing harm. How is that a difficult concept for you to understand. The sharia doesn’t have specific ruling for let’s say emotional abuse, but harming people via your tongue is a sin, so does that mean that a woman can’t sue for emotional abuse? What exactly are you arguing about? Also, If you read the text properly, the text states:

The classical scholars determined that a man does not have the right to have sexual relations with his wife if he harms her, as this is a violation of her rights and the Islamic values of mercy and honorable behavior. If he does not fulfill her rights, then she does not need to fulfill his rights.

Classical scholars have indeed talked about sexual abuse within marriage sighting the harm principle and women being harmed via sex which again the literal definition of sexual abuse. So again, what is your point?

Where have I refused anything that has a sound base in the Deen? You are always making accusations which are slanderous, I ask you again, where in this thread have I refused an Islamic fact?

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[Angelina]

No worries, to make it clear I was referring to sexual assault such as rape in Sharia Law, not the forms of sexual abuse which come under the spousal abuse category.

Not once did I mention sexual assault. Literally the whole time I was saying sexual abuse, yet you were still arguing with me. You’re a fraud.

 

[𐒁𐒚𐒒𐒂𐒘𐒂𐒗 𐒎𐒚𐒗𐒗𐒒]

@AdoonkaAlle

According to the work of this Hanafi jurist, under certain circumstances a man can obtain pleasure from his wife by force


View attachment 245380

How highly is this scholar held in Hanafi Fiqh?

The Hedaya, Or Guide

www.google.co.uk

 

[Angelina]

The other Madhabs don't hence it comes to a difference of opinion if this is true.

At one point smoking was allowed before we knew it was harmful for our body. We now know that forcing one’s wife can cause micro-tears and other issues physically along with psychological issues.

it’s rather interesting how not causing harm is a major component when dealing with humans and how there are hadiths that mention how one shouldn’t jump on their wives, yet you go out of your way to find an opinion that you’re allowed to.

 

[𐒁𐒚𐒒𐒂𐒘𐒂𐒗 𐒎𐒚𐒗𐒗𐒒]

@Angelina

I am starting to think that these men we see online, who are sexual violence apologists and refuse to even extend empathy for women, are p0rn sick. P0rn tends to be violent and abusive towards women, so maybe they don't even get aroused by consensual relations.

 

[anonimo]

At one point smoking was allowed before we knew it was harmful for our body. We now that forcing one’s wife can cause micro-tears and other issues physically along with psychological issues.

it’s rather interesting how not causing harm is a major component when dealing with humans and how there are hadiths that mention how one shouldn’t jump on there wives, yet you go out of your way to find an opinion that you’re allowed to.

I am not Hanafi but in any debate where the truth is sought, why not disclose religious evidence from all schools highlighting their stance in this matter.

What is Fawzan's stance regarding this matter as you follow his Madhab?

 

[Deleted L]

The other Madhabs don't hence it comes to a difference of opinion if this is true.

All four madhabs have these opinions and this opinion isn’t even a minority position. In fact, the Shafi’i and Maliki madhabs allow a father to marry off his virgin Adult daughter without her consent as long as she’s married to a suitable partner whereas the Hanafis unanimously forbid this if the girl is an Adult virgin.

There are some rulings in the books of Fiqh that would shock many westernized/Semi-westernized Muslims but since there are modern contemporary jurists who are qualified, they can address these in light of the times we live in.

Shafi’i fiqh manual for example:

 

[Mantiq_Al-gharb]

Shiekhs with no significant education calling the shots for a whole country, backwards logic. No wonder we are where we at, i can dye my beard red and put on a throbe and they'll listen to me more than politicians

You seriously think corrupt politicians have more of a moral high ground than shaykhs?

 

[anonimo]

Not once did I mention sexual assault. Literally the whole time I was saying sexual abuse, yet you were still arguing with me. You’re a fraud.

How am I fraud? Go through my posts, I have clearly clarified my position, challenge me where I have been wrong but don't be throwing slanderous statements without backing your shit up.

 

[𐒁𐒚𐒒𐒂𐒘𐒂𐒗 𐒎𐒚𐒗𐒗𐒒]

How am I fraud? Go through my posts, I have clearly clarified my position, challenge me where I have been wrong but don't be throwing slanderous statements without backing your shit up.

Who cares if you are a fraud or not, what is certain, is that you are trying to find a legal and islamic reason to sexually abuse women. Why else would you go out of your way to find an obscure Hanafi text that states so.

If that is your kink, that's between you and Allah, but don't corrupt impressionable minds with your issues.

 

[AMusee]

We do not need liberal bills that go against Islam under the guise of "rape" there are already clear islamic laws for rape, that is what needs to be enforced. The punishments are clear and harsher then this western sponsored bill.

The only people who tried championing this bill were paid to do so and its goals are clear.

People speak as if there are no laws in place for such crimes, there already are and they are a lot harsher.

 

[Angelina]

I am not Hanafi but in any debate where the truth is sought, why not disclose religious evidence from all schools highlighting their stance in this matter.

What is Fawzan's stance regarding this matter?

Because we’re talking about harm which can literally have an impact on women’s body and actual force can cause bleeding, infection you name it.

We literally have sahih Hadith that talk about not jumping on women like animals and the importance of foreplay and it’s everywhere to google.

I think the most frustrating thing about being a Muslim women who has to deal with Muslim men is how we have to argue to not being harmed whether it is physically or emotionally.

Causing psychological and actually physical pain clearly comes under harm, yet women’s well-being is routinely debated about. It’s dehumanizing wallahi. When do men have to defend the right to not be manhandled Authobillah.

 

[anonimo]

Who cares if you are a fraud or not, what is certain, is that you are trying to find a legal and islamic reason to sexually abuse women. Why else would you go out of your way to find an obscure Hanafi text that states so.

If that is your kink, that's between you and Allah, but don't corrupt impressionable minds with your issues.

This is a debate revolving around rulings and facts, do you expect me not to highlight Cilm which has an Fiqh precedent?

My personal stance is irrelevant in light of Islamic evidence, do your personal views supersede Sharia Law?

 

[World]

All four madhabs have these opinions and this opinion isn’t even a minority position. In fact, the Shafi’i and Maliki madhabs allow a father to marry off his virgin Adult daughter without her consent as long as she’s married to a suitable partner whereas the Hanafis unanimously forbid this if the girl is an Adult virgin.

There are some rulings in the books of Fiqh that would shock many westernized/Semi-westernized Muslims but since there are modern contemporary jurists who are qualified, they can address these in light of the times we live in.

Shafi’i fiqh manuel for example:

View attachment 245382

what does that have to do with a man forcefully taking his wife? it seems you want to take random fiqh opinions and try cause controversy for fun which is weird. if your mother and sister were taken forcefully, would you and @anonimo pull up that random english translation of this random hanafi “sheikh” and say it’s his right like a bunch of cucks? Disgusting.