Applying For Mechanic License Toronto Ontario

ARENA douce with Afshar FATHER TRAUFFER


The tolerance dancing with Dschihadreligion continues

09/25/2006 Benedict was right and does back down, and none of the European political leaders stood before him and behind the meaning of his speech against the Muslim mob, whose representative he now receives, so that the devastating price of Assisi, has opened with the predecessor of the tolerance dance with Islam is not corrected. The dhimmi European elites do not mind confrontation with Islam.

What is currently happening in discussions to Pope's speech in the media, is a macabre chorus of dhimmis who cower before Islam and spit against the speaker of Regensburg. distance, called "differentiation" is the key.


The sycophants on the front line against the critics who are to justify the freedom of speech, as if there is to justify anything. Duckmäusertum the triumphs and the stupidity escalates in the TV rounds. Left-Green rags grinning characters take the floor for the views dictatorship. It is the hour of collaborators. protest

instead against the violence of the Moslemmobs, who confirmed the statements of Regensburg reflex, is a brainless media pack going to the speakers from Regensburg, as if the lecture was the scandal and not the reactions to it, which demonstrate the Gewaltträchtigkeit of Islam ceaselessly.

political proletarian rant against a lecture that they have not read; SP-floor men clamor against the islamkritischeren learned theologians in the Vatican and discover for their love of the Koran kisser Wojtyla; upstarts the left hand swing as Ströbele the Bible to every Speech by the violence of the real existing Islam to silence. The left-fascist mob accosted on demos ind Germany together with Hamas against Israel and has Ströbele, boom. You only have seen the grinning face of this ignorant of history at Phoenix, when the Islamic barbarities, such as the murders at the critical journalists in Algeria have been something mentioned, la gauche au visage barbarie. There are now not only the rights that the Democrats put the fear, it is the Left alliance with Islamofascism. If you like the day before the historian Baring in a TV talk directly addresses the issue and expresses what threatens Europe, the waves of talking shops immediately over together.

Alleged reconnaissance closed on democratic march against the fundamental rights to freedom of speech and freedom of speech and are furious over a single citation to Islam, during the orgies of violence, terror, Islamic religion are not even up for discussion. The new Fascism raises its head shamelessly. They crawl to the cross, the collaborators and accomplices of the religious dictatorship.

Pope scolding is now called the left sport with a heart for Wojtyla, the death squads of Allah remain completely unscathed by the Medienempörung, and Mordwut of Moslemmobs, which has an alliance against the freedom of speech in Europe furious totalitarian left, as oh so understandable reaction to the "provocation" the dhimmis to the heart is placed. The "reaction" to the Pope's speech in the west part to a fascination with violence and a willingness to surrender, which drives the spiral of Islamic terror. It is the hour of character rags.

wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Not all of Benedict in the rain. Incidentally, it was a Swiss Federal Council, which explained what Benedict had said was right and necessary.

A courageous word of Couchepin, not seen in the EU. (Except for Barroso, the cowardice called the € Olympic leaders as disappointing.)

In the diocese of Basel, the Pope's speech was protected, at least not excuse worthy, from the vicar general of the diocese, Roland Trauffer, he said in an interview that the Pope should be no excuse, because there was no guilt. In view of the left smearsheet BaZ, Ramadan institution that is already bold. Although it sounds a lot more defensive as the only correct statement by Federal Councillor Pascal Couchepin. Where are we living in! In the realm of Stallhin? A mentally something simply left knitted journalist from Baz format, the theologian Sonja Hasler wanted to Trauffer then in an interview on Swiss television partout to admit that the Pope had gone too far and drgl. Heartfelt Bieder, has gone down well with people who it is not quite understandable that in the West such a thing as freedom of speech there, and that the impositions of a "culture", answered the criticism by force, can not be answered with excuses. Trauffer was not sure pure, but pulled himself not explain this to the Pope and the Emperor of Byzantium, but have had absolutely right. Sonja Hasler presupposed seems that all the world had to distance himself from Manuel II and to follow John Paul.

the west can also Christians who think that Islam is peaceful, even criticize the pope, without to set fire to churches. The interviewer seemed to be but did not like that the speaker has not revoked his speech at the request of rampaging Muslims. She held your relevant questions to Trauffer well for "critical". As much as a prelude to
discussion in the "Arena" SF v. 22.09.2006
Father Trauffer While defending the demokratischr less freedom, not just a church specialty, but the right of the pope, not to have to apologize for something that was not at fault. That was true of course. Trauffer said here certainly less in the categories of freedom than the sin argued, are not present in this case.

What if someone something "disrespectful" has said against Islam in the West? Does he have to apologize then? The cartoons were a debt? The Pope's views is not unseen, but where he is right, as with the manual quotation in Regensburg, he's right. This is wrong not the Pope.

Arena Afshar - culture war consensus on Swiss

occurred in the confrontational political broadcast ARENA on Swiss television last Friday, 09.22.2006, representatives of parties and religions, to be dealt with under this pope talk to each other:
Roland Trauffer , Vicar General of the diocese of Basel, and Farhad Afshar

, President of the Islamic Society of Switzerland
, the historian Mörgeli (the amusing comments in the world week to the dogmas of the left religious beliefs of the leftists push open as acidic as the Muslims, the cartoons of the Prophet, laughter forbidden) and an exponent just left this school of thought censorship of the Green Josef Lang, also called Joe. (The same old story in the SF discussion with Prof. Schulze terror, the latter also being courted by the NZZ as Islam expert - as in the SF call with editors of NZZ 23.9.2006, where it Schulze, who looks like Dracula on vacation when the specialist is required for the Muslim sense of all those who wallow in these Islamic "feelings" just above) to Arena. First of all: the beginning clearest position compared with the reaction from the kingdom of Allah on the speech of Pope was referring to the historian Mörgeli. The most bitter reaction to the criticism of Islam came from the green side, which einschoss with Joe Lang once more on the violence in the history of the church to present the Threat to Europe through the left Solidarbrüder the Islamofascists to distract. Lang & co do not know of the Islamic violence, they only know a Christian, although that is not rooted in the Gospel as the Muslim in the Qur'an, and prefer to stay in the Crusades as if they were like Muslims in the 13th Century stuck. Since knowledge of history are left with as little as in Islam, it's quite possible that as early as the 13th Century life. Mörgeli wondered about the double standards of the Left, but understood no irony and no fun with religion, like their brothers in Allah.

prompt appeared on an Islamic scholar, a
Ilfete Faney
who said Mörgeli have no idea about Islam. know For every historian in the West must, if he only mentioned a few long bestbelegte facts about past and present of the Islamic culture from which we know not just the study of the history of Islam as they do - before Western scientists had they explored, the Muslims their own story as good as unknown, the knowledge was limited in practice on the statements of Allah, when the colonial masters came - ". no idea about Islam," he added, especially when someone has not Koran knowledge of which has the average Muslim in the West do not know, then take him of the club with the full force of the Ilfete Argumentationslosigkeit, which forbids discrimination in terms of facts and logic, criticism of Islam, which threatens his critics murderous. AplogetInnen Ilfete like these are already outraged that the historian who dared to do even more to know about Islam, which can know only the Koran schools. From which spring from these educated Taliban. Also, the burning of girls schools in the countries of the Islamic knowledge to mention is only for people like Mrs. Ilfete been a sacrilege.

So now think of no one, perhaps the Buddha statues by Afghanistan, turned quickly to Mr. Afshar and spoke with a gentle voice gekreideter, all religions are expected in Switzerland to build their temples, Buddhists should that only the Muslims should not. Yes what may that be because the Muslims are permitted to distribute no Buddhists in Switzerland as in the Far East and their temples not to light. Depends perhaps to the fact that the Muslims are no Indonesian Christians and Buddhists?
on Now a well Trauffer, the Afshar has understood very well: The church would also apply as a monolithic, they have it but can integrate here. The Muslims would have to arrange just so with the Swiss conditions.

As pastor Grice from Grisons (>
the cross of the church with democracy
) was not present, was the question which what all the church has to find so here and how far she probably hopes that Islam improved this unfortunate situation, not discussed. Trauffer first time was on the side of democracy. The Muslims have to adapt too. (What happens if they have adapted in such sufficient numbers that they no longer have to adapt, that is not here the full-length theme). Trauffer know, however, that "questions of faith not a matter of democracy". (This fits somehow to the beautiful set in front of the Houses of Parliament at the Demo 2006: Religion is for democracy.)

questions of faith certainly does not believe policy issues very well. The Trinity is not a democratically elected body, But if the distribution of dioceses or church tax money belongs to the religious questions remain open. Trauffer said: If the Muslims have adapted to Swiss conditions, then he would say to them: "Your community has a right to live their faith here." Sounds demokatisch somehow, right? So say the man who is best to know what it means to be able to survive the plague in Europe. Unfortunately in this arena, no one asked what a belief in the Koran and Sharia or should be because you want to live here. What is it about the CEO of the diocese of Basel? In order to definitive adaptation of this monolithic religious group the local democratic pluralistic legal relations or to the future living the Schariaregelen belonging to the Islamic faith, known as the Mass Church.

A man came from the EVP (Evangelical People's Party) to the microphone and announced that here we have a problem between Christians and Muslims. Meant was the minaret. The EPP-man knew how to solve the problem by not talking more about it.
"Instead of minarets to fight, you should ..." What? The sharia ban? Not so: ". Be prepared to talk"

example: "We will meet alternately in the mosque and the church. Then, with another half-hour they sit together. "

now want but not all Christians when they go to church there, alternately, the Muslims pray and meet with them to Allah. Also we would like at least when we enter a court house, we say to a divorce hearing, there a Schariarichter meet alternately with a Swiss judge. We do not want, and we also want no EPP Papas, introduce the us. Therefore we would not choose better.

We want a minute to sit together with Muslim men who find it really what's in the Koran, Sura 2223, after which you must beat the women with them, and otherwise do what man wants. "I plead that you do not see Islam as a threat," the man spoke of the EPP. We advocate that you do not elect such men.

It was then a representative of the EDU, which - in addition to the SVP - came to the point and some made it clear to the peaceful Islam, hear what no one wolltel: that the former Koranic verses from the time when Mohammed was still powerless in Mecca, definitely to be revoked apply by the later violent pregnant, to which the faithful of the widespread violence Dschihadreligion called with good reason, as the last will of the prophets.
soon as he has said things in which all the fuss about the absurdity of Islamic Tolerance was performed, was quickly changed the subject, as if nothing had been said about this. Because this vote hit the mark.

The EPP-man alternately goes to church and the mosque, apparently had a sleeper from the audience to life, who introduced himself as a Jew and told him he had just come from Israel from a community where Jews and Muslims in lived together in peace and no one came up with the idea to ban minarets. What no one had the idea to ask how many synagogues as Hezbollah in his opinion, Israel would allow for resolution of the State of Israel? Or how many churches could be built in Saudi Arabia, without religious Muslims in Pakistan the idea they come to light or throw bombs inside?

at the idea of the minarets, which no one has to ban sparked by now all the enthusiasm of the Green Josef for the Christian churches, which are also the minarets in Switzerland - Josef Lang rose in the dialogue with the left into churches - ". who have done much more for the dialogue as the left" Yes, St. Joseph the Greens will soon be a holy picture of St.. John Paul set up at home can be for daily morning prayer. The left-green religion has suddenly no fear more in the church. But Christianity, which is a big problem for the Green Man of God St. Joseph, the violent history of Christianity! Oh, yes, which leaves St. Josef sleep just not quiet. He recognized the danger to Europe. The Crusades and the SVP. Before that, Europe needs to be preserved. Bloss no referendum on the EU! Better a concordat with the ayatollahs ..

short, the alliances are now criss-cross the old differences. There is the Catholic left is not so petty with. Church, if that is only attending on asylum vote for more Muslims in the country. More God's law and more social misery. Since wheat is green, the left and the church is flourishing. At the same time must be St. Joseph, but the SVP historian for the sins of Christians with the associated moral indignation for Islamic religious show among voters and fight the Crusades. connect but no Trauffer too close. For what is a proper left green carnivorous plant so that swallows everything, which makes them fatter. "We have left us an example to attend the churches," says the mullah left. (!) And while we have left to do anything against the Crusades, is not it? Double moralgemoppelt holds better.

Not the churchman is here from the enemy for the green Joseph, einkriegt is no longer out of sheer outrage at the history of Christianity, but the historian of Mörgeli the SVP. Before it is to warn the Swiss people. There's a devil in the back left church, the SVP. And a real savior: Wojtyla. Historical knowledge of Islamic history are the red cloth for the Greens.
As the moderator turns to Mörgeli because he "does not understand" what Mörgeli "said."
just
That must be terribly difficult to understand if you are moderator and it all has to do both right and especially the Muslims quite like to make and has always known it that the Left understands more of the true course of history than their opponents.
Moderator Leuthard "means" not at all what does Mörgeli when the violence Islam says. Even the Greens do not understand that. He understands when he hears of violence, only the Crusades.

The moderator let himself to be difficult to illustrate with understanding, think of something that we would have on his mind to doubt if we could believe it is not a method of presentation, with the present Muslims are presented, what a moderate mentally they are. So Leuthard said he would see here a picture of peaceful Muslims that do not agree with what I said Mr. Mörgeli.. Now
had neither wife nor Mrs. Hafner Ilfete in any way, especially on our peaceful, but very militant when they as usual to understand arrogant indicated that none of the Christians who say not the same as the Muslims and their allies in the West, something of Islam understand, but as Mr. Weimer on German television generous and cunning so stupid, brazen, and whether the criticism of Islam enraged apologists like Katajun Amirpur described diplomatically as "charming", called Moderator Leuthard the Islamic female agents and apologists who have no criticism of the really existing and tolerate their apostate murderous religion, "peaceful." As he has so far right, and we are no Muslims in a TV show have seen, there set fire to churches, or calling during the show. A Muslim woman proves it on the spot, how peaceful Islam is and it explains, forced marriage has nothing to do with religion.

Too bad that no one seems to know in the arena, that forced marriage is vorgeschrreiben to all schools of Sharia, the child marriage is legal under Islamic law. But really, the Sharia, there is no idea as us, Ms Amirpur the Press Club of ARD shortly. There are also the Islam it is not so. Why he just makes so much talked about?

such thing as forced marriages taught that peaceful Muslim then the kapituliernde without a fight arena, there is also in Switzerland.

By now it would not be a moderator who understood what had been said, must come up with that in the Switzerland, in fact, forced marriages are, in the Muslim milieu, and the Federal Council does not want it to have an investigation. He prefers to let the rounds of the peaceful Muslim with the usual Islamic-left distractions soap when to intervene against unreasonable demands such as: "In the Koran to be no forced marriage, was unchallenged as served up by Mrs Ilfete. .

But in the Sharia should there not only, but they are the norm as practiced by masses of Islamic law in Sudan to Iran, from Afghanistan to Alba Istan in Switzerland.

Now Mr Afshar also joined to the plate in front of the head of the Muslim, the just right teachings on Swiss and Schariarecht issued had to fix something to reaffirm what has been said and the "Western double standards" to denounce it. For as we all know, the forced marriages are not even Muslim, but Swiss. In Islam, they do not occur, but in Switzerland. As the stoning, which were not according to Afshar of the "prophet" was approved, but of the Jewish Jesus.

If someone had said of the Swiss, one would say he has a screw loose, but the glass front of the head of the Muslim woman is loose not sitting so tight that there is nothing to shake it.

Yeah, that's dependent. to do nothing. First, there is not Islam, second He is peaceful, thirdly, he has no forced marriages, find the fourth place in Switzerland. In fact, according to Christian law.

The moderator said this but not that he had probably misunderstood. Only
Mörgeli asked why there was the forced marriage in Islam then. The woman fell to anything. The disc moves ever had. In contrast to the earth.
dialog carousel is turning in the same direction. On the issue of violence in Islam, the answer follows from the Christian crusade, it is an Islamic scholar and explained that we understood in the West, not Islam, then someone may ask a question to the present Muslim women what they thought of the forced marriages, after which a to this end invited Vorzeigemuslima said they felt free there would not wangs around. Except for the Christians.

Father Trauffer raised then still oppose Afshar jointed trump card of the "Christian double standards," and indicated to the double tongue, so that he knows exactly what he was saying there. The Chalk's voice did not, of course, of which baptism talked and tried to watch as three Seligsinddiesanftmütigen. Except that the wolf under the sheepskin coat as tainted by shining it was even too much Trauffer, despite the common struggle for living out of faith in the minaret.

Trauffer betrayed to the question as he stood near the Muslims, cryptically: "If I meet the Imam (in front of the church, where the planting of Muslims want their bayonets, as Mr Erdogan would say), 'then I come across him as a believer. We can not actually be close enough. " The faith is the Swiss dialect, the only insiders understand. For what the Father has just said? Have we really understood?

So if we sum up the times for our understanding of things, we have understood as much: here are several soup cooked over a fire. At the bottom of the bubbling cauldron of Islam, about how a multi-stage cooking pot stirred the church to their own ends and top over it and browned the left green vegetables, the pot is heated at the church.

we remain hopeful that the brew in the kettle does not explode below.

Does Mayonnaise In Packet

Sharia - or the source of legal discovery


The double tongue with dual citizenship

Farhad Afshar by the Council of Religions

see> Arena Afshar
http://reginevancleev.blogspot.com/2010/02/arena-mit-afshar . html

from an interview of the World Week 3 / 05 with Afshar

The World Week (3 / 05) writes:

"revealing are Afshar statements on Sharia. This is nothing but a "source of law-finding", a method by which one Islamic law could be derived. She was not a law. To the objection that this was contrary to the accepted definition, obtained from Afshar to a digression on the colonial history and the introduction of European legal systems in Islamic countries, and then give that will used for example in Saudi Arabia a "very strict criminal law. Since the governments of such countries but its own people the freedom withheld and abused the religion to justify political repression, if they were already "contrary to Islamic law."
then collected Afshar again, reports on the five different schools of law within the Islam and the "incredible advanced "instrument" Ischtihad, "the one" interpretation of the Koran according to requirements enables the present ". Finally, he points out that no Muslim should feel bound to a religious opinion - a preposterous statement, you think of the Rushdie case and the death sentences against homosexuals or adulterers in Iran.
After half an hour we still do not know how Afshar is the Sharia and the postulated severe corporal punishment in it. The head of the Islamichen Centre in Geneva, defended the punishment of stoning is well known, while his brother Tariq is merely a "moratorium" with respect to could struggle through the application of Sharia punishments.
WW: Can you, Mr Afshar distance themselves from the Sharia?
M: It is absurd to try to distance themselves from the Sharia: It is a legal recognition method to analyze the course of justice, and this method has no statements.
WW: Please be more specific.
AF: I do not know what represents Mr. Ramadan. But let's look at the stoning. Stoning is first, not Islamic, but of Semitic origin. The most famous parable about the stoning they have in Christianity. If you want to understand Islamic law, we must know the sources. The stoning is from the Bible. Even Jesus is not distancing itself from the Stoning, by saying those should cast the first stone, who have no sins. In Islam, one goes far beyond that. It is up to the judge, the mitzuberücksichtigen the traditions of a country.
WW: Once again, the stoning is provided in the traditional Islamic criminal law, and the brothers say Ramadan, the leave will not change. Why did you not publicly dissociate themselves from the views of the brothers Ramadan?
M: I need not to distance himself from Hani Ramadan. I think his views are refuted by Islam. As a Muslim he would have to kindly respect the Swiss constitution. say in reference to the stoning is necessary to: it is the judge free to impose the maximum penalty. Even when Christ is no longer. Even before Islam could not enforce the stoning without violating religious laws. For every Muslim Jesus is incredibly important. (Holt) We can not go back behind Jesus. If he has already prevented the stoning, a Muslim is required to further inquiry in this tradition and think: what is required by today's time?
WW: stoning, Mr Afshar, are still practiced in Islamic countries. For example, in Iran. There is even a teenager at the moment because of "lewd" sexual acts are stoned. What do they think?
(There were others an adolescent who should be stoned, hanged instead of what was shown in the Süddeutsche as human progress of the advanced woman Katajun Amir Pour. The sickle)
Af. Actually, there is no stoning in Iran as far as I know ...
(This also Mr Khatami told in each case on European trip, see, for example, the newsletter of the Christian "club versus fundamentalism" in Basel), if such a thing happen, then in remote areas of the Iran. Mr Khatami respectively forgot that the stoning to be no matter what part of Iran respectively granted by the Court in Tehran. And his complacent Swiss interviewer, Roger de Weck, forgot to ask him specifically. The sickle)
Af. ... But it is relatively easy to determine for you the have to just call the embassy and get information about let the Justice Department.
WW: You should be aware of these things as an Iranian-Swiss citizens ..
Af .. I would say after today's case it should not happen.
Then ask the World Week again, whether he meant that women in Iran would no longer stoned as adulterers what Afshar meanders like a snake and said that he knew of "statements of the Minister of Justice" that we must change the law "so "that" the time is. "
When asked, "Do you believe the statements of the minister," Afshar replied: "Yes. Until I learn otherwise. "
The man then simply refuses to admit that he of course knows the law and practiced in Iran, it would be absurd, he wanted to distance himself of what he himself says. He talks himself out of alleged "statements" of anyone who has said that the law must be "adjusted", which is completely unverifiable and a mockery, given the practice of Sharia law in Iran. But as the time is the time of Allah, is probably also clear who is who needs to adjust before, during and after the stoning.
"Opaque" writes the World week, were also Afshar's relations with Iran. (We find this very transparent DS.)
WW: Different informants to report on his regular visits to the Iranian Embassy in Bern as well as on frequent trips to Iran.
Afshar is also President of the Swiss Agency's Iran (NIKU) and another aid organization, called the International Charity Organization (ICO). (Sounds like the charities Hezbollah or Hamas dS.)
WW: In view of the fact that Farhad Afshar restrictions on religious freedom of Muslims in Switzerland has repeatedly criticized with harsh words, it is amazing that he can hardly be related to the serious human rights violations in its old home expresses ..
We find it anything amazing. What has been expected because the dual citizen with the double tongue, which is split with him as well as in Ramadan? That this is a representative of a moderate peaceful religion speaks? As for the serious human rights abuses in Islamic countries machislamischem right, then the official is not without any interference by Farhad Afshar in Switzerland noted it already provides the Commission against Racism. And the Swiss world ethicists Küng unbelievers brings in a brochure entitled "Muslims in Switzerland," which he wrote the preface, the necessary respect for the barbarities of the religion of the law in by explaining about the contemptuous of women slave be marriage law of Islam, which millions of women in sub-human status to fall victim to a lifelong sexual slavery: there are probably "isolated tragedies," said Master Kung (of which one but not so much should make a fuss? vrgl.> Being Born as Muslim Woman
http://reginevancleev.blogspot.com/2010/02/being-born-as-muslim-woman.html

The patriarchal alliance is now united in the>> Council the religions of Bern, to show off with the father-right triple reinforced and the women will teach mores.
Regine van Cleeve
May 2006
************************ ********************
second June 2006

Ambiguous statements to stoning

Who Farhad Afshar?

By Prof. Dr. Eberhard Hamer, Head of SME Department, Hannover / Germany

Bern's Muslim Farhad Afshar is the most important contact in the so-called inter-religious dialogue. Who is this man?
Hardly a discussion on inter-religious dialogue takes place in Switzerland busy without the Bernese sociologist Farhad Afshar. The Iranian-Swiss dual citizen is president of the advocacy group co-ordination of Islamic organizations in Switzerland (KIOS). He sits as the sole representative of Muslims in the country of the Council of Churches launched religions. He is the hub of many interfaith projects. Afshar is also active in the training of imams in Switzerland. He worked mainly with the Iranian Foreign Ministry and Shiite clerics. The President of the
KIOS will lay claim to represent Muslims in Switzerland. He is a representative of the Shiite minority. So his agency is also among the Muslims as problematic. For the vast majority of coming mainly from Turkey and the Balkan Muslims in Switzerland would never accept a Shia as their representative. Afshar is acclaimed by many media as an integration Pope. He complains that Switzerland, that the Muslims had a hand in Switzerland build and Assisted in the country would now Switzerland. On the other hand, the Muslims would be no opportunity to build mosques in Switzerland to create Muslim cemeteries, to be educated Muslim religious teachers in public schools, Muslims to engage in the judicial process and the like. Especially with the latter is clearly what Mr. Afshar really wants: a kind of parallel society in which even the Sharia law would have its place. No
distancing
The head of the Islamic Centre in Geneva has known for some time openly defended the Islamic punishment of stoning. Compared to the Internet portal to online reports Afshar said literally: "It is absurd from the Sharia do to dissociate. It is a legal recognition method
further says Afshar, that the punishment of stoning so in the Bible come. Even Jesus is not distancing itself from the stoning, Afshar said on whether he wants to give a feeling that stoning actually only half-Sun bad is
The Swiss Muslim representatives will obviously declaration of emergency, if addressed to human rights violations in Iran?. Actually, there is no stoning in Iran as far as I know has Afshar one hand always hard against any restriction on the freedom of worship in Switzerland approached. On the other hand, he has expressed himself against serious human rights violations in Iran never clear let alone distanced themselves from violence in Iran. In an interview with the NZZ am Sonntag (17 July 2005), Afshar said, against the surveillance of mosques - with the argument that because of some Catholic IRA fighters Catholic churches would not be monitored.
integration of Islam?
remains Strange that Afshar is a lecturer at the University of Bern as a sociologist, however, has published almost never scientifically. *
The NZZ has recently been a sympathetic portrait of Afshar published under the title: An analyst for the integration of Islam (May 8, 2006). As to whether Islam should be incorporated in Switzerland and if not all Islamic people Faith to accept the Western customs and laws without reservation. * Note
the Sickle: This is reminiscent of the doctoral thesis of the Ramadan Muslim Brotherhood, see hompage Gudrund Eussner that has a lot to say Ramadan and the untraceable the alleged doctor Nadeem Elyas. DS)

Sally Salon Online Games

Being born as a Muslim Woman

BORN TO BE Unfree

The tragedy of being born woman asMuslim

I Am a Muslim Woman

from> www.secularislam.org 2001 (>> see Reza Afsharai criticism of Mernissi ) They differed with me over what times we are living in. It is not a democracy when a man can talk about politics without anyone threatening him. Democracy is when a woman can talk of her lover without anyone killing her. Dr. Sauad M. Al-Sabah
I am a Moslem woman. I have no face. I have no identity. At age 9, based on lunar year (a lunar year is twelve months of 28 days each or 336 days) or, when I am actually 8 years and 8 months old, I am considered an adult. Being an adult means that I have to adhere with Islamic laws as stated below.
I have to pray five times a day, fast one month out of the year and cover myself from head to toe in yards of black fabric. I am eligible to be married and can be punished for any wrong doing. I can be incarcerated and, if needed, executed for my crimes, even political ones.
Islams law - that Allah sent down to his messenger Muhammad - came to announce that women (exactly like men) are full human beings. Women (like men) are therefore required to follow the way appointed by Allah.
A woman (like a man) is therefore obligated with all three degrees of this religion: Islam (outward submission to Allah), iman (inward faith in Allah), and ihsan (perfection of worship of Allah).
Women have such honorable rights as obligations, but men have a (single) degree above them. The Koran 2:228
Men are the managers of the affairs of women because Allah has preferred men over women and women were expended of their Rights. The Koran 4:34
Islam believes and promotes only one relationship between male and female and that is the relation of lust.
If a man and a woman are alone in one place, the third person present is the devil. Prophet Mohammed
I am not allowed to swim, ski, ride a bike, dance, learn to play musical instruments, practice gymnastics, or any other sport. I am not even permitted to watch men play sports, either in the stadium and/or on television.
I am not permitted to participate in Olympic games.
From age 7, I am segregated from all males in and out of my extended family.
My father, grandfather, uncles, brothers or my male cousins are not allowed to be present at any ceremonies for my accomplishments. They will not be allowed to participate in my birthday parties.
I have to study under female teachers and professors. However, since women of prior generations were not allowed to go to school, there are not that many qualified women teachers and professors. Male professors must teach me from behind a wall.
I am to be treated by female doctors. Go to female dentists. And if there are none, then I have to go without or I must be examined through some sort of divider.
I am not allowed to practice birth control or have abortions, even if carrying or having a child means I have to die.
My worth is based on the Islamic Laws of Retribution, 24th edition, December 1982, as half of a man. It doesnt matter who I am, how educated I am, and what earning potential I may have in my life. My worth is half of a man, any man.
According to clauses 33 and 91 of the law in respect, Qasas (The Islamic Retribution Bill) and its boundaries, the value of woman is considered only half as much as the value of a man.
Article 1: dieh or blood money paid to the victim or next of kin for as compensation for bodily injury or murder of a relative.
The Islamic Law of Retribution
In the old Islamic laws, recently placed into practice by the Islamic Republic of Iran, the worth of a mans life is equal to the market value of 100 camels or 200 cows and that of a woman is equal to half of the mans, 50 camels or 100 cows.
The clause number 6 regarding the dieh (cash value of the fine) states that the cash fine for murdering a woman intentionally or unintentionally is half as much as for a man. The same clause adds that if a man intentionally murders a woman and the guardian of the woman himself is not able to pay half of the Dieh (the value of 50 camels or 100 cows, the difference between the value of a man to that of a womans life) to the murderer, the murderer will be exempted from retribution.
New Legal Standing: Pursuant to article 85 of the constitution, the Islamic penal code was implemented in December 1981. According to article 300, blood money or dieh, a sum paid to the next of kin as compensation for the murder of a relative, is twice as much in the case of a murdered man as in the case of a woman. The number of witnesses required to prove a crime is higher if the witnesses are female. For example, article 237 of the penal code states that first degree murder must be proven by testimony of two just men and evidence for second-degree murder or manslaughter requires the testimony of two just men, or one just man and two just women, or of one just man and the accuser.
My testimony in a court of law is equal to half of that of a man. In most countries I dont vote and I dont get elected to office. And if I do, it does not mean much. I inherit only half as much as my male siblings.
I cannot get custody of my children. Even if their father dies. In the case of divorce or death I have to surrender my children to their father and/or his family.
I cannot travel, work, go to college, join organizations, even visit my friends and relatives without my father or husbands permission.
I must live where my husband desires.
I am banned from studies such as engineering, agriculture, archaeology, restoration of the historic monuments and handicrafts, and many other fields. I am not allowed to become a judge.
Under the terms of Koranic law, any judge fulfilling the seven requirements (that he have reached puberty, be a believer, know the Koranic laws perfectly, be just, and not be affected by amnesia, or be a bastard, or be of the female sex) is qualified to dispense justice in any type of case.
I have no right to choose the clothing I wear in public. This is done by the Office of the Islamic Guidance which sets the color, the style, and the accessories for women and girls as young as 6 years of age.
I will get arrested, beaten, and sometimes even executed if I wear make-up, nylons, bright colors and specifically the color of red.
I cannot choose my mate and am not permitted to divorce him if things did not work out.
According to Khomeini, the Iranian Islamic Imam, The most suitable time for a girl to get married is the time when the girl can have her first menstrual period in her husbands house rather than her fathers.
I have to meet all my husbands desires including the sexual ones. And if I refuse he has the right to deny me food, shelter, and all of lifes necessities. I have to say yes every time he wants to have sex.
According to Hojatoleslam Imani, Religious Leader in Iran. A woman should endure any violence or torture imposed on her by her husband for she is fully at his disposal. Without his permission she may not leave her house even for a good action (such as charitable work). Otherwise her prayers and devotions will not be accepted by God and curses of heaven and earth will fall upon her.
My husband can divorce me without my knowledge and by the Islamic law he is required to support me for only 100 days. And if he dies, I am entitled to 1/8 of his Estate.
I can only ask for divorce if my husband is impotent, if he does not have sex with me at least one night in every forty nights, and if he refuses to provide me with a minimum standard of living.
My husband can have four permanent wives and if he is from Shii sect, he can have as many temporary wives as he wants.
Koran says that Men your wives are your tillage. Go into your tillage anyway you want. This means that a man is allowed to sodomise his wife and she cannot complain.
In some countries they even mutilate, cut and sew my female sexual parts in order to control and regulate my sexual desire.
According to the Islamic Laws, I am supposed to be seen outside of my home three times in my life. When I am born, when I get married and when I die.
I have no explanation on why God denied me everything and made men in charge of me, if there is a God. I dont believe there ever was one.
In Islam, the age of majority for a girl is 9 years and for a boy is 15 years. This means that a 9 year old girl and a 15 year old boy are considered to have the same level of maturity. Now, if girls reach maturity six years earlier than boys, then why did God place men in charge of women? Was there something wrong with Gods Judgment?
In some Islamic countries such as Iran, if I am arrested for wearing make-up, the guards will force me to clean my face with cotton balls rubbed in pieces of glass. This cuts my face. The barbaric revolutionary guard, while watching the blood run out of my flesh, will tell me, next time you think about this and will not wear it.
As a political prisoner I will be used as a concubine for the revolutionary guards. In case I am condemned to death I will not undergo the sentence as long as I am a virgin. Thus I will be systematically raped before the sentence is executed. Mullahs believe that virgin girls who die go to heaven but politically inclined girls are ungodly creatures and they do not deserve to go to heaven, therefore they are raped so that the Mullahs can be sure that they indeed will be sent to hell.
In Islam, if a 6 or 7 year old girl is raped by an adult man, she will be the one that gets punished. It is her fault because she provoked it. The parents then will burn or kill her because she has dishonored the family.
It has been said that the Moslem Prophet got very upset one day noticing his wives flirting with men who visited him and ordered women to stay behind a dividing curtain when speaking with men. The idea of hijab, the covering up of women, became a law in Islamic countries from that day.
In 1991, the Prosecutor-General of Iran, declared that anyone who rejects the principle of hijab is an apostate and the punishment for an apostate under Islamic law is death.
Polygamy is legal in Islam. A man may marry four Permanent and as many Provisional or temporary wives as he desires.
Marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, four; but if you fear you will not be equitable, then only one, or what your right hands own; so it is likelier you will not be partial. The Koran 4:3 Most Europeans have mistresses. Why should we suppress human instincts? A rooster satisfies several hens, an stallion several mares. A woman is unavailable during certain periods where as a man is always active...., Ayatollah Ghomi, LE MONDE, January 20, 1979.
Womens High status and Privileged Position
Dear sisters: How many times have you heard this claim sisters, you should be very happy that you have a very high status and a very privileged position in our religion by the bearded ones in the mosques? God alone knows what high status and which privileged position they talk about....To be declared in the holy books that we are deficient in intelligence and that most of us will go to hell for being ungrateful to our husbands; and that we will make the big majority of the hells population? To be told to share the husband with three other wives and many concubines, sex slaves and captive women which his right hand posses? To be divorced by him at the drop of a hat by just his proclaiming 3 times I divorce you and we not having the same right to divorce him? Husband getting 72 perpetually virgin beautiful houris with big eyes and swelling bosoms in the paradise and we getting the same old husband and share him with the 72 voluptuous houris? (Believe me sisters; he will be so busy there with the lovely houris that the only time he will see you will be in the hallways when he is going from one houri’s room to another houri’s room). To be disciplined by the husband by being beaten up by him with scourge (lash) and green sticks? (Unless you are into the kinky stuff and actually enjoy the beatings).. Being raped and then be stoned to death for reporting it because you need 4 male witnesses to prove your innocence otherwise you yourself get accused of adultery? (Your only chance of finding 4 male witnesses is that if the attacker was of very low IQ or was really drunk and attacked you in the broad daylight in front of a bunch of degenerate horny men who watched and cheered and are later willing to testify) Being wrongly accused of adultery by a conniving husband and be stoned for it because he does not need 4 male witnesses if he swears 4 times himself? Being married at the age of 9 years to a much older man because it is sunna? To submit to him every time he desires you even if he wants it on the back of a camel, if he gets an untimely urge? (Not recommended, you both may fall down from camel’s back during the action and sustain injuries). Being cursed all night by thousands of angels if you refuse him even for a genuine reason? (What a boring job for angels who are assigned to watch your bedroom, always waiting for the action, unless of course they enjoy watching; in that case they have a reason to be disappointed and pissed by your refusal).To be declared half a person as witness in court or inheriting property? To be asked to stay at home by scriptures and only leave home if husband permits; that too fully covered by a tent like garment even if it is scorching hot (hey, sweating is good for you as it opens skin pores, besides the tent covering protects you from the hot sun and elements which keeps you fair and beautiful; sisters you need all the help you can get to compete with the other wives and concubines). If you want to know more about your great status and privileges please check out Dr. Ali Sinas website faithfreedom.org, or Parvin Darabi site homa.org
Section Two
The Veil of Equality and Justice
Muslim propagandists take advantage of the fact that Westerners do not read Arabic and therefore (out of ignorance) do not know the reality of Islamic faith as recorded in the books of Muslim scholars. Therefore, Muslim missionaries roam across Europe and America, East and West, writing a throng of books, declaring with a loud voice: How great Islam is! It is the religion of social justice, equality, women’s rights and dignity. Many naive and superficial people believe these claims and are deceived by this message, but this deceit should end. This veil should be removed.
We have found in Muhammad’s sayings (as well as of those of all Muslim scholars – intentionally or unintentionally – that both Islam and Muhammad discriminate between human beings. It matters whether they are males or females, Muslims or non-Muslims. We even find discrimination between Muslims because slavery (as we will see) is an Islamic principle.
Slavery in Islam has regulations and laws which differ from those for freemen, the masters. Actually, Muhammad, his wives, his successors, companions and his relatives owned slaves—males and maids. We can list the names of Muhammad’s slaves: men and women, whites and blacks, and we will show that Muhammad himself was a slave merchant especially after he claimed to be a prophet.
After reading these pages it should become very evident to all (including the most fanatical and tenacious Muslim) that Islam is a religion of social injustice, inequality, and racial discrimination.
Before we start our discussion, it is relevant to quote one verse from the Holy Gospel which emphasizes equality in Christianity,
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28).

Chapter Three The Status of Women in Islam
Some mistakenly believe that Islam honors women and dignifies them for the simple reason that they have not read the Qur’anic verses, and the sayings of Muhammad and all Muslim scholars concerning women. Thus they take at face value all the claims of Muslim missionaries in this respect. We seek to excuse those who have converted to Islam and are deceived because no one would expect a religion which claims to be divine (at the same time) to treat women so disgracefully.
We found on the other hand, some thinkers (even among Muslim Arabs) who have realized that women are not treated equal to men in Islam, though only a few of them occasionally dare to claim that publicly. Still, since their knowledge of Muhammad’s sayings and the commentaries of the scholars is limited, they present a few examples related only to the subjects of polygamy (marrying four women) and easy divorce. Therefore, we seek to discuss here several issues to clarify the point under discussion and to remove the deceitful veil of Islam concerning women.
The Qur’an Commands Men To Beat Women
While the New Testament commands men to love their wives and even to sacrifice their own lives for their sake as Jesus gave His life for us (Ephesians 5), we see that the Qur’an plainly and disgracefully commands men to beat their women as soon as they show any sign of disobedience to man’s authority and orders. It states in Chapter 4:34:
As for these from women, fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.
Without any exception, all the Qur’anic expositors agree upon the meaning of this verse because it is so obvious. In their famous commentary, page 69, the Jalalan said:
Those of you who are afraid of their disobedience which symptoms become evident to you, threaten them with the fear of God and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.
The Zamakhshari reiterates the same opinion (al-Kash-Shaf Vol. 1, p. 524). Both Imam Baydawi (p. 111), and Al-Tobari (p.92) repeat the same explanation. If we also search Ahkamal-Qur’an (the Ordinances of the Qur’an) by the Imam Shafi’i (Vol. 1, p.211), we read:
In case of a husband’s ill-treatment [of his spouse], the Qur’an permits reconciliation of the spouses and arbitration, but in the case of the wife it allows scourging her.
At the inception of Islam, we come across a very famous incident which all the Muslim chroniclers record (refer to Imam al-Nawawi: Riyad al-Salihin, The Orchards of Righteous Men, p. 107-108),
Umar Ibn al-Khattab came to Muhammad saying, ‘Women have dared to disobey husbands.’ He allowed their husbands to scourge them. Many women approached Muhammad complaining against their husbands because Muhammad received a verse for the Qur’an which commands their husbands to scourge them.
In the Kash-shaf (the revealer) of al-Zamakhshari (Vol. 1, p. 525), we read the following,
On the authority of Muhammad (peace and blessing of Allah be upon him), he said: ‘Hang up your scourge in a place where your wife (or wives) can see it.’
Also, on the authority of Asmaa the daughter of Abu Bakr El Sedik:
I was the fourth wife (among four) of al-Zabayr Ibn al-Awwam. Whenever he became angry at one of us he struck us with a hook rod until it was broken.
This hemistich was composed by al-Zabayr:
If it were not for her children, I would have hit her.
The command to scourge women is repeated in Sahih al-Bukhari, The Sound Tradition of al-Bukhari (Vol. 7, p. 100). Ponder for a moment over Muhammad’s order to the husband: Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it. This is intimidation and threat, as if a husband were telling his wife: Beware of disobedience, for this is the scourge which is ready to fall upon you!
There is no security or love in Muhammad’s words or in the deeds of al-Zobayer Ibn al-Awwam, who was a relative of Muhammad, one of his companions, and one of those models whom every Muslim imitates and vies with all over the world. He was one of the ten whom Muhammad assured of paradise and one of the six whom Umar recommended for the Caliphate. This man used to scourge his wife until the wooden hook was broken, as Asmaa (the daughter of Abu Bakr El Sedik who was one of his four wives) tells us. Is there greater wife abuse than that?
Contemporary Scholars
All contemporary scholars attest to this fact which is obvious in the Qur’an. In the book, You Ask and Islam Answers (p. 94 for example), Abdul–latif Mushtahiri says,
If admonishing and sexual desertion fail to bring forth results and the woman is of a cold and stubborn type, the Qur’an bestows on man the right to straighten her out by way of punishment and beating provided he does not break her bones nor shed blood. Many a wife belongs to this querulous type and requires this sort of punishment to bring her to her senses!
In his book, The Individual Guarantee In the Islamic Law (p. 63), Ahmad Ahmad, a professor at the college of Law at the University of Qatar, denotes the following under the title of Family Problems’ Solution,
If a woman is afraid that her husband may turn away from her or detest her, she will hasten to bring understanding and reconciliation. But if the husband is afraid that his wife may rebel against him, he hastens to bring mutual understanding by means of exhortation, then by abandonment of the bed, then by the scourging which deters.
Did you read it?—By the scourging which deters This is if the symptoms of disobedience became apparent exactly as the Jalalan, Baydawi, Zamakhshari have said and as the Saudi scholars indicated in AI-Muslimun magazine in its issue of March 17, 1989 (page 12). I can also easily list dozens of references, both ancient and contemporary, which explain this verse (4:34). Actually, it does not need any exposition because it is self-explanatory—and scourge them. It is evident that Christian countries regard wife abuse as a crime punishable by law because nature itself (as well as the simplest human principle) teaches us that it is not permissible for a man to beat an animal—much less his wife!
Yet according to the Islamic faith and by distinct orders issued by the Qur’an and Muhammad, a man is allowed to scourge his wife with a peaceful conscience because he is carrying out God’s command as recorded in the Qur’an. God the compassionate, the Merciful and the Glorious Qur’an—and Muhammad, the prophet of mercy and humanity who claimed that he honored women, yet said: Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it.
The Story of Job and his Wife in the Qur’an
In Chapter 38:44, the Qur’an declares that God has commanded righteous Job to beat his wife. We read:
And (it was said unto him), ‘Take in thine hand a branch and smite therewith and break not thine oath.’
All Muslim scholars agree on the exposition of this verse. Both Jalalan (page 383), and Baydawi (page 604) say:
When Job’s wife was slow (to do something for him) one day, he swore to scourge her one hundred times. God told him, ‘Do not break .... oath, but take a bundle of grass in your hand or rods to beat her up with.’
The Jalalaan say that Job took one hundred sticks and scourged her once. The Baydawi says that Job’s wife’s name is Liyya, daughter of Jacob or Rahmeh, daughter of Aphraim, son of Joseph.
Who among us would believe this ridiculous story of the Qur’an about Job, the righteous man, who was famous for his patience? Who among us would believe that God encouraged him to beat his wife with a bundle of grass or sticks so that he would not break his oath?
Forcing the Virgin to Marry
Most people believe that this was merely a detestable habit practiced by some Arabs and Muslims who lived in some underdeveloped countries. However, we must realize that this practice has its roots deep in Islamic law and that it is a principle applied by Muslim scholars. Yet, I myself have read this ordinance in the main sources of Islam acceptable to all Muslim commentators. Let us study together the ordinances and the statements of scholars of exposition and the Islamic law.
Ibn Timiyya and Ibn Hazm, Famous Legists
Muslims regard Ibn Timiyya as the Sheikh of Islam. He truly is. He is the author of great many huge volumes on various subjects If we open Vol. 32, pp. 29 and 30, we read,
Even if the virgin is an adult, her father may force her to get married. This is in accordance with Malek Ibn Ons, al-Shafi and Ibn Hanbal’s.
On page 39, he also states:
The young virgin can be forced by her father to get married without being consulted.
This is the verdict of Ibn Timiyya who was joined by some great Legists such as the Shafii, Malek, Ibn Hanbal, and the professors of Islamic law at the inception of Islam in Mecca and Medina. Most Arabs and most Islamic countries embrace their teaching. Actually, if we study Malek Ibn Ons book (Vol. 2, p. 155), we read,
A father can force his virgin daughter, his maid-slave and his male-slave to get married.
What is Ibn Hazm’s opinion concerning the daughter’s marriage? How can we ignore the opinion of the chief Legists of Islam in this respect? It is well known that Ibn Hazm also composed huge volumes of books on various topics on which all contemporary Muslim scholars rely because he is one of the greatest scholars of the Islamic law through the ages. In his sixth volume, part 9 of his book al-Muhalla (The Sweetened, pp. 458-460), he says,
A father may give his consent to have his young virgin daughter married without obtaining her permission, for she does not have a choice, exactly as Abu Bakr El Sedick did to his daughter, Aisha, when she was six years old. He married her to the prophet Muhammad without her permission.
Then Ibn Hazm adds:
Even if she was deflowered (previously married and divorced, or a widow) as long as she is young and has not reached the legal age, her father may force her to marry without obtaining her permission.
As long as she is a virgin or just still young, she can be forced to get married without her consent. These are unequivocal, plain words. Without her consent, and does not have any choice. These are cruel, hard words and iniquitous Islamic principles which the free human conscience utterly rejects and detests because it is related to the most important subject in the girl’s life, that is, her body and her future.
If enrolling in a certain school or seeking employment for a particular job, even buying a house or a car, should be in accordance with person’s choice, how much more should choice control the issue of a girl’s marriage? We acknowledge that a girl should consult with her parents in this matter, and their duty is to offer their sound opinions to protect her interest and future, but we cannot understand or even imagine that a father may force her to get married to a man she does not know and has never met. This is Islam!
These are not just mere words. This is actually what happened to the prophet of Islam because Abu Bakr, El Sedick who was Muhammad’s friend, wed him to his daughter, Aisha, when she was six years old, though the actual marriage took place when she was nine years old, according to all the Muslim scholars and Chroniclers, without exception. Even Aisha related the story of her marriage, which we will review shortly.
The difference in their ages was 45 years! Muhammad at that time was 54 years old, the age of her grandfather, but what is significant for us now is not the great difference in age, but rather Aisha’s marriage without her permission. Even she was taken by surprise when she found out about it.
What about a son? In part nine, page 462, Ibn Hazm stresses that it is not permissible for the father to force his son to get married.
The reader may be interested to read the text recorded in Sahih Muslim (Vol. 3, p. 577) with the commentary of al-Nawawi, because this book is a basic, indispensable book. Aisha said,
The messenger of God betrothed me when I was six years old and then married me when I was nine years old.
In another story, he married her when she was seven years old. This is a clear text which makes it permissible for a father to make his daughter marry without obtaining her permission. All Muslims consent to that, and she did not have the option of nullifying this marriage which her father planned. This is according to Malek, al-Shafi’i and the rest of Hedjaz legists.
This was from Sahih Muslim, and a similar text is reiterated several times in Sahih al-Bukhari, part 7.
The Temporary Contractual Marriage
What a disgraceful and degrading thing a temporary, contractual marriage is for a woman! This is something which Muhammad made lawful according to all the scholars and chroniclers without exception. What an insult to a woman whom Muhammad stripped of her humanity and dignity in order to become a mere instrument for man’s enjoyment! Can contemporary Muslim scholars who would die defending Islam answer this specific question and tell us why Muhammad allowed men to have sexual relationships with women merely for the sake of enjoyment? According to Muhammad’s statement, it could be for some money, or a dress, as Muhammad said to his followers, then he could desert her, leaving her without any rights. What is the difference between this and adultery and debauchery? Could Muhammad and the scholars solve this problem by calling it a temporary marriage or marriage of enjoyment?
Muhammad made it lawful for his followers at first, then prohibited it! Then he made it legal again! Therefore, as soon as he died, the most famous Muslim scholars and relatives of Muhammad (such as Abdulla Ibn -Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud) made it lawful It was also in practice during the era of Abu Bakr and Umar, as is recorded in Sahih Muslim.
At present, the Shi’ite sects are accustomed to it and practice it in different parts of the world because the Shi’ite leaders claim it. There are more than one hundred million Shi’ites worldwide. Ibn Abbas, who defends the legality of the temporary marriage of enjoyment and its continued practice, is well known among all the Muslim scholars. He occupied a very esteemed position with Muhammad and the caliphs who used to seek his legal opinion and call him the interpreter of the Qur’an.
Sahih al-Bukbari
In part 7, page 37, we read the following,
While we were in the army, Allah’s Apostle came to us and said, ‘You have been allowed to have pleasure (Muta), so do it.’ If a man and a woman agree to marry temporarily, their marriage should last for three nights, and if they want to continue, they may do so.
There is also a very famous story related to us by Ibn Mas’ud and recorded in all the Islamic sources. We will allude to some aspect of it as it as mentioned in al-Bukhari, part 7, pp. 8,9, (also in section 6 of the interpretation of Sura, Chapter, The Table, p.66- Arabic edition). Ibn Mas’ud said,
We used to participate in holy battles led by Allah’s Apostle and we had no wives with us. At that time, he allowed us to marry women with a temporary contract and recited to us this verse, ‘Oh you who believe, make not unlawful the good things which Allah (God) has made lawful for you’ (5:87).
This famous story is recorded also in Zad al-Ma’ad by Ibn Qayyimal-Jawziyya (part 5, p. 111). In Sahih Muslim, exposition of Nawawi (Vol. 3 pp. 553, 554), he indicated that Muhammad had allowed his followers to have sexual intercourse with women for a dress !
Sahih Muslim
It was proven that contractual marriage was permissible at the beginning of Islam. It used to be practiced during a journey or a raid, or when it was necessary and there was a lack of women. In one of Ibn Abu’Umar’s episodes, it said that it was admissible at the inception of Islam, especially when there was a need for it.
Also, we read the following,
The contractual marriage was lawful before the campaign of Khaybar; then it became unlawful in the day of the campaign. Then it was made lawful again in the day of Mecca’s conquest. After three days, it was prohibited. The episodes concerning the lawfulness (of the contractual marriage) in the day of the conquest are not ambiguous and it is not permissible to forfeit it. There is nothing that may inhibit the repetition of practicing the contractual marriage again, and God is the omniscient, and the scholars have agreed to regard the contractual marriage as a temporary legal marriage, which does not entail any inheritance. The separation occurs as soon as the date of the agreement expires, and it does not require any legal divorce. Ibn’Abbas used to preach its lawfulness (pp. 553,554 volume 3 Sahih Moslem).
Actually Sahih of Muslim (in the same volume 3) records for us what Muhammad’s followers did when he allowed them to practice this. They used to meet a woman who belonged to one of the tribes (children of Amir) and attempt to seduce her by offering her either a dress or some dates or flour (p. 556). They spent three days with the harlot. Also sahih of Muslim describes for us in detail some moral scandals of which Muhammad approved. It also recounts that Muhammad himself used to bring the women to his followers or send a heralder to proclaim that it is permissible to sign contractual marriages (p.555 Vol. 3).
Ismai