Study: American women are not happy
A recent study, titled The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness, conducted by professors Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers (University of Pennsylvania) for the Social Science Research Network (SSRN) – concludes that though American women are better off economically since 1970s – socially they feel more miserable than before….. The women who have been to a women shelter (there 300 of those in Canada as compared to none for the men) – will tell you how callously they are treated by the hags employed there. Distressed women are pressured to end their marriages and are offered help and resources to do so. Feminists are not interested in the welfare of women. They rely on domestic violence for their cushy jobs and to emasculate men – by portraying them as abusers….”
Could this be due to the American feminist movement, mostly run by Jewish communist women or women working for the CIA, such as Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug, Gloria Steinem, Gloria Allred, etc.? These so-called “women’s rights’ activists have made the American women to see themselves as the victim of oppressive patriarchy in which their true worth will never be recognized and any success is beyond their reach.
Heather MacDonald in her 2008 article, The Campus Rape Myth exposed some of the feminist hoaxes.
Canadian Jew academic Henry Makow PhD in his article titled Domestic Violence Hysteria is Political said:
“Even though the women initiate violence against men in almost equal numbers, most of the publicity is devoted to women as victims. This is because the feminist activists, funded and empowered by Rockefeller social engineers, want to stigmatize men and marriage in the eyes of young women. they want the young women to Eat at Lesbian Jill’s or Single Jane’s but definitely not at Joe’s. This is how mass behavior modification works.
Of all the major religion – Islam is the only religion which, though physically and psychologically different, sees both sexes share a common fate and are subject to the same existential conditions, with the same spiritual protection and same purpose of being. Holy Qur’an is the only divine book which in all its 114 chapters (Surahs), has one chapter ‘al-Nisa (The Woman)’ dedicated to women and deals with women’s rights and the family life. Interestingly, no chapter is named after men.
Islam is only religion which gave the women right to marry of her choice, right to divorce, entitled for inheritance from her parents and husbands, and right to testify in the court of law – and more over 1400 years ago when no women of other religion or society dreamed of those privileges.
Marriage and family life is the most important unit in Islam and a successful marriage and a loving-family is regarded as a charity with immense rewards in the life after. Islam (Holy Qur’an 4:34 prefers that decisions on family affairs to be taken inside the family – and as a rule, gives the husband – normally the earner and protector – the decisive vote. However, that doesn’t translate into husband being superior to wife. Holy Qur’an doesn’t reject birth control or family planning under certain conditions but it doesn’t give a mother the right to abortion. Islamic Shar’ah gives a Muslim wife an exclusive right to manage and dispose of her personal property, including her dowry – the right a western woman only got during the 20th century, if at all.
With all the hype by the feminist activists, the women situation in the American society is pathetic. To count a few – a woman is raped every 90 seconds; majority of the 2.1% population of Americans in jails is women; women are still paid 60% of the salary of men doing the same jobs; there are over seven million battered women, and the majority of annual murders (12,054, the highest in the world – are women).
“Of course Islam’s scheme of life is from another world. It is an alternative that confronts the so-called modern world, its values, agnosticism, and ‘anything goes’ mentality, with a genuine counter-project that only appears to be outdated because it is timeless,” – Murad Wilfried Hofmann, former German diplomat and NATO’s Director of Information (1983-87).
http://rehmat1.wordpress.com/2009/10/17/study-american-women-are-not-happy/
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Jesus vs. Santa: Give back its true meaning to Christmas
Jesus vs. Santa: Give back its true meaning to Christmas
'Tis the Season of Deception
by Rick Watson
What do a decorated tree, Santa, St. Nick, the birthday of Jesus Christ and the 25th of December have to do with each other?
And why is the 25th of December a holy day (holiday)?
The pagan Babylonian sun worshipers didn't just worship the sun, but also 35 other pagan gods ~ one of which was the tree of life, and today we know this as the Christmas tree.
The Holy Bible gives us instructions on what NOT to do concerning this pagan practice in Jeremiah 10:
10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
10:5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
It "speaks not" because it is indoors and the wind is not whistling through it.
The Babylonian practice was to offer gifts unto their tree god by placing gifts of sacrifice under the tree.
There is a lighted Christmas tree at the Vatican in St. Peter's Square every midnight mass, or should I say Christ-Mass.
Catholic belief is that Jesus was born at midnight on the 25th of December but there is no basis for this belief in Christianity.
There simply is no history or Biblical scriptures to back this claim.
As for Santa and "St. Nick," this is a Catholic creation as well as the birth of Christ being the 25th of December. The 21st thru the 25th of December is the marked pagan worship days of Saturn, the winter solstice, praying to the sun god to return. Since the evergreen tree remained green throughout winter, it had power and therefore must have been a god, hence, the tree of life. The Roman Catholic church devised the deception of Christ being born on that day to emulate the pagan festival so the Pope blessed the 25th of December as a holy day (holiday). God only blessed and sanctified one day in the Bible, and this was the Sabbath Day (seventh day of the week.)
So why did the Pope allow such paganism as the tree to exist in the Roman Catholic church, when God Almighty instructed against it as demonstrated in Jeremiah 10?
This, my friend, is part of a bigger deception. Christmas (or "Christ-Mass) is using the name of Jesus in vain, or falsely, by saying it is His birthday so you will honor a pagan winter festival.
Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain (falsely); for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain (falsely).
Jesus Christ stated in Revelation 1:8,
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending," saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
People lie to their children about Santa, they bring a tree that belongs outside into their homes, and are told by the media to buy everything in the store for someone because its the day Jesus was born.
The suicide rate is higher during this time of year, as well as robberies and numerous other crimes. Alcohol consumption, depression and anxiety abound. Families fight about what gifts they were expecting but didn't get. Divorces and spousal problems occur over money and the lack thereof, while some spend more for Christmas than they can afford, sinking them more and more in debt. This is the joy and peace that is all supposed to be in the name of Christ?
Let's all wake up and smell the coffee.
Have you ever noticed that as soon as a "holiday" is over, all the stores start stocking up the shelves with the next holiday's junk?
Revelation 18:3 ... and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Friends, this is Satan at his best. These things are not of Christ.
1 James 2:15 Love not the world neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the father is not in him.
As a matter of fact, all holidays, or should I say "Holy days," are a deception of the Roman Catholic Church. For example, St. Valentine's day, St. Patrick's day, Halloween (the holy eve of all saints day.) Most do not know that Easter was a Babylonian fertility festival. Did you ever wonder what bunnies and eggs have to do with the resurrection of Christ? Most Easter egg hunts take place on church grounds, Catholic or not. Candy is passed out to kids on Halloween at most churches, who claim to be anything but Catholic.
What will happen to the deceivers of the world, who boldly think of themselves as more powerful than almighty God and create their own holy days?
Let's look in the book of Revelation:
Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
So the next time that the 25th of December comes around, take a stand for Jesus Christ and separate yourselves from it. Stop following "man" instead of following Jesus. Jesus is the Master Teacher, all you have to do is listen to His Word.
http://www.helium.com/items/1377634-jesus-vs-santa-give-back-its-true-meaning-to-christmas?page=2
'Tis the Season of Deception
by Rick Watson
What do a decorated tree, Santa, St. Nick, the birthday of Jesus Christ and the 25th of December have to do with each other?
And why is the 25th of December a holy day (holiday)?
The pagan Babylonian sun worshipers didn't just worship the sun, but also 35 other pagan gods ~ one of which was the tree of life, and today we know this as the Christmas tree.
The Holy Bible gives us instructions on what NOT to do concerning this pagan practice in Jeremiah 10:
10:2 Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
10:3 For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe.
10:4 They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.
10:5 They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good.
It "speaks not" because it is indoors and the wind is not whistling through it.
The Babylonian practice was to offer gifts unto their tree god by placing gifts of sacrifice under the tree.
There is a lighted Christmas tree at the Vatican in St. Peter's Square every midnight mass, or should I say Christ-Mass.
Catholic belief is that Jesus was born at midnight on the 25th of December but there is no basis for this belief in Christianity.
There simply is no history or Biblical scriptures to back this claim.
As for Santa and "St. Nick," this is a Catholic creation as well as the birth of Christ being the 25th of December. The 21st thru the 25th of December is the marked pagan worship days of Saturn, the winter solstice, praying to the sun god to return. Since the evergreen tree remained green throughout winter, it had power and therefore must have been a god, hence, the tree of life. The Roman Catholic church devised the deception of Christ being born on that day to emulate the pagan festival so the Pope blessed the 25th of December as a holy day (holiday). God only blessed and sanctified one day in the Bible, and this was the Sabbath Day (seventh day of the week.)
So why did the Pope allow such paganism as the tree to exist in the Roman Catholic church, when God Almighty instructed against it as demonstrated in Jeremiah 10?
This, my friend, is part of a bigger deception. Christmas (or "Christ-Mass) is using the name of Jesus in vain, or falsely, by saying it is His birthday so you will honor a pagan winter festival.
Exodus 20:7 Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain (falsely); for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain (falsely).
Jesus Christ stated in Revelation 1:8,
"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending," saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.
People lie to their children about Santa, they bring a tree that belongs outside into their homes, and are told by the media to buy everything in the store for someone because its the day Jesus was born.
The suicide rate is higher during this time of year, as well as robberies and numerous other crimes. Alcohol consumption, depression and anxiety abound. Families fight about what gifts they were expecting but didn't get. Divorces and spousal problems occur over money and the lack thereof, while some spend more for Christmas than they can afford, sinking them more and more in debt. This is the joy and peace that is all supposed to be in the name of Christ?
Let's all wake up and smell the coffee.
Have you ever noticed that as soon as a "holiday" is over, all the stores start stocking up the shelves with the next holiday's junk?
Revelation 18:3 ... and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
Friends, this is Satan at his best. These things are not of Christ.
1 James 2:15 Love not the world neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the father is not in him.
As a matter of fact, all holidays, or should I say "Holy days," are a deception of the Roman Catholic Church. For example, St. Valentine's day, St. Patrick's day, Halloween (the holy eve of all saints day.) Most do not know that Easter was a Babylonian fertility festival. Did you ever wonder what bunnies and eggs have to do with the resurrection of Christ? Most Easter egg hunts take place on church grounds, Catholic or not. Candy is passed out to kids on Halloween at most churches, who claim to be anything but Catholic.
What will happen to the deceivers of the world, who boldly think of themselves as more powerful than almighty God and create their own holy days?
Let's look in the book of Revelation:
Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
So the next time that the 25th of December comes around, take a stand for Jesus Christ and separate yourselves from it. Stop following "man" instead of following Jesus. Jesus is the Master Teacher, all you have to do is listen to His Word.
http://www.helium.com/items/1377634-jesus-vs-santa-give-back-its-true-meaning-to-christmas?page=2
Was Jesus Born on the 25th of December?
Was Jesus Born on the 25th of December?
By AM - The Light (December 24, 1982; pages 7 and 8 & 48 and 49)
The twenty-fifth day of December, being the Christmas day is celebrated by millions all over the world as the birthday of Jesus Christ.
Was he born on the twenty-fifth December? No one knows exactly when Jesus was born.1
Exact Date of Christ's Birth:
"It is impossible to determine the exact date for the birth of Christ, either from the evidence of the Gospels or from any sound tradition."2 Did the disciples, who knew Jesus personally, celebrate his birthday (i.e., Christmas)3 on the 25th December? "Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. The first evidence of the feast is from Egypt."4 The early Church had no fixed date for Christmas; "by some it was observed in May, by some in January, and by others combined with Epiphany."5 We learn from the Oxford Dictionary of Christian Church that "through speculation as to time of year of Christ's birth dates from the early 3rd Century … the celebration of the anniversary does not appear to have been general till the 4th century."6 The Encyclopaedia Americana says: "Christmas was, according to many authorities, not celebrated in the first centuries of the Christian Church as the Christian usage in general was to celebrate the death of remarkable persons rather than their birth. A feast was established in the memory of this event in fourth century. In the fifth century the Western Church ordered it to be celebrated for ever on the day of the Old Roman feast of the birth of Sol, as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed."7 Thus there is "no authoritative tradition as to the date or month of Christ's birth."8 The above historical authorities led us, as they have led Christian scholars to conclude that the "Christmas was not observed by Christians for the first two or three hundred years. It got into the Western or Roman Church by the fourth century A.D. It was not until the fifth century that Roman Church ordered it to be celebrated as an official Christian festival."9
Christmas Customs:
"Most of the Christmas customs now prevailing are not genuine Christian customs, but heathen customs which have been absorbed or tolerated by the Church. The Saturnalia in Rome provided the model for the most of the merry customs of the Christmas time."10 The pagan customs were so deeply entrenched in the daily life that the Christian influence could not get rid of them.
In fact "the pagan festival with its riots and merry-making was so popular that Christians were glad of an excuse to continue its celebration with little change in spirit and manner. Christian preachers of the West and the Near East protested against the unseemly frivolity with which Christ's birthday was celebrated, while Christians of Mesopotamia accused their Western brethren of idolatry and sun-worship for adopting this pagan festival."11 As to the origin of the date the World Book Encyclopaedia says: "In A.D. 354 Bishop Liberins of Rome ordered the people to celebrate it on December 25th. He probably chose the date because the people of Rome already observed it as the Feast of Saturn, celebrating the birthday of the sun."12 However, the choice of the 25th December in the West was chiefly due to the following considerations: "The Winter solstic was regarded as the birthday of the sun and at Rome a pagan festival of Sol invictus was introduced by the emperor Aurelian on 25th December 274. The Church unable to stamp out this popular festival, spiritualized it as the feast of the Nativity of the Sun of Righteousness."13 According to the Collier's Encyclopaedia, "The choice of December 25 was probably influencedby the fact that on this day the Romans celebrated the Mithraic feast of the Sun god (Natalis Solis invicti), and that the Saturnalia also came at this time."14
We have seen from the above evidence that Chraistmas has its roots in paganism and certainly did not originate in Christianity. The next question is, was Jesus born on 25th December? There is no historical evidence as to the day or month of Christ's birth and some uncertainty exists as to the actual year. "St. Clements of Alexandria refers to calculations which placed it in April or May. Some such dates would better accord with the Gospel statement that 'shepherds were watching their flocks by night' than 25th December which falls in the cold and rainy seasons in the hilly country of Judaea".15 The 25th December could not have been the birthday of Jesus. The Bible shows that at the time "Shepherds" were still in the fields at night. As the Encyclopaedia Britannia (1907, Vol. V, p. 611) acknowledges, they would not have been there in the cold, rainy season of winter (Luke 2:8-12)."16 Accordingly, Jesus was not born in the winter season. We have seen that when he was born "there were, in the same country, shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flocks by night."17
Could this have occurred in Judaea in the month of December? "The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountain sides and fields and corralled them not later than October 15, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed that date. Notice that the Bible itself proves, in songs of Solomon 2:11 and Ezra 10:9, 13 that winter was a rainy season not permitting shepherds to abide in open fields at night."18 We read in Adam Clarke's Commentary19 that it was ancient custom among Jews to send out their sheep to fields and deserts about the Passover in early spring and bring them home at the commencement of the first rain. The same authority states, "During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to 'part of our October and November' (begins sometimes in October), we find that the sheep were kept in the open fields during the whole summer. And as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields, nor could He have born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground, the nativity in December should be given up."20
The facts produced in these pages may shock those who had faithfully believed that Jesus was born on the 25th December, but they are plain facts of history.
To conclude we shall summarise below the conclusions we have reached:
1. Jesus was not born on the 25th December.
2. The early Christians were neither aware of the "25th December" nor celebrated the Christmas.
3. The festival was borrowed from Pagans and spiritualised as Christmas in the fourth and fifth century - so it is against Jesus teachings.
4. As Jesus was born at a time when shepherds were abiding in the fields keeping watch over their flocks by night, Jesus could not have been born, later than September.
source: By AM - The Light (December 24, 1982; pages 7 and 8 & 48 and 49)
Footnotes:
1. The World Book Encyclopaedia, U.S.A. (1977) vol. 3, p. 409.
2. Colliers Encyclopaedia, Macmillan Educational Corporation, New York (1980), vol. 6, p. 403.
3. Christmas in Old English was called "Cristes Maesse" which means "the mass of Christ" later shortened to Christ-Mass and eventually became Christmas.
4. The Catholic Encyclopaedia, (1908), vol. III, p. 724.
5. Everyman's Encyclopaedia, (1978), vol. 3, p. 299.
6. The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Church, Oxford University Press, London (1977), p. 280.
7. Encyclopaedia Americana (1944 edition), quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas". Worldwide Church of God, California, p. 9.
8. Chambers Encyclopaedia, (1967), vol. 3 p. 538.
9. Herbert W. Armstrong, The Plain Truth About Christmas, Worldwide Church of God, California, p. 9.
10. James Hastings, Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. 3, pp. 608-609.
11. New Schaff Herzog, Encyclopaedia of Religious Knowledge, quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas", a Worldwide Church of God publication.
12. The World Book Encyclopaedia, (1966), vol. 3, p. 416.
13. Chambers Encyclopaedia, (1967), vol. 3, p. 528.
14. Colliers Encyclopaedia, Macmillan Educational Corporation (1980), vol. 6, p. 403.
15. Chambers Encyclopaedia, London, (1955), vol. 3 p. 540.
16. The Truth that leads to Eternal Life, Watch Tower Bible Tract Society, New York, (1968), p. 148.
17. Luke, 2:8.
18. Herbert W. Armstrong, Supra, p. 9.
19. Adam Clarke, Commentary, New York, vol. 5, p. 370.
20. Adam Clarke, Commentary, New York, vol. 5 page 370 quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas", Worldwise Church of God, California, p.11.
By AM - The Light (December 24, 1982; pages 7 and 8 & 48 and 49)
The twenty-fifth day of December, being the Christmas day is celebrated by millions all over the world as the birthday of Jesus Christ.
Was he born on the twenty-fifth December? No one knows exactly when Jesus was born.1
Exact Date of Christ's Birth:
"It is impossible to determine the exact date for the birth of Christ, either from the evidence of the Gospels or from any sound tradition."2 Did the disciples, who knew Jesus personally, celebrate his birthday (i.e., Christmas)3 on the 25th December? "Christmas was not among the earliest festivals of the Church. The first evidence of the feast is from Egypt."4 The early Church had no fixed date for Christmas; "by some it was observed in May, by some in January, and by others combined with Epiphany."5 We learn from the Oxford Dictionary of Christian Church that "through speculation as to time of year of Christ's birth dates from the early 3rd Century … the celebration of the anniversary does not appear to have been general till the 4th century."6 The Encyclopaedia Americana says: "Christmas was, according to many authorities, not celebrated in the first centuries of the Christian Church as the Christian usage in general was to celebrate the death of remarkable persons rather than their birth. A feast was established in the memory of this event in fourth century. In the fifth century the Western Church ordered it to be celebrated for ever on the day of the Old Roman feast of the birth of Sol, as no certain knowledge of the day of Christ's birth existed."7 Thus there is "no authoritative tradition as to the date or month of Christ's birth."8 The above historical authorities led us, as they have led Christian scholars to conclude that the "Christmas was not observed by Christians for the first two or three hundred years. It got into the Western or Roman Church by the fourth century A.D. It was not until the fifth century that Roman Church ordered it to be celebrated as an official Christian festival."9
Christmas Customs:
"Most of the Christmas customs now prevailing are not genuine Christian customs, but heathen customs which have been absorbed or tolerated by the Church. The Saturnalia in Rome provided the model for the most of the merry customs of the Christmas time."10 The pagan customs were so deeply entrenched in the daily life that the Christian influence could not get rid of them.
In fact "the pagan festival with its riots and merry-making was so popular that Christians were glad of an excuse to continue its celebration with little change in spirit and manner. Christian preachers of the West and the Near East protested against the unseemly frivolity with which Christ's birthday was celebrated, while Christians of Mesopotamia accused their Western brethren of idolatry and sun-worship for adopting this pagan festival."11 As to the origin of the date the World Book Encyclopaedia says: "In A.D. 354 Bishop Liberins of Rome ordered the people to celebrate it on December 25th. He probably chose the date because the people of Rome already observed it as the Feast of Saturn, celebrating the birthday of the sun."12 However, the choice of the 25th December in the West was chiefly due to the following considerations: "The Winter solstic was regarded as the birthday of the sun and at Rome a pagan festival of Sol invictus was introduced by the emperor Aurelian on 25th December 274. The Church unable to stamp out this popular festival, spiritualized it as the feast of the Nativity of the Sun of Righteousness."13 According to the Collier's Encyclopaedia, "The choice of December 25 was probably influencedby the fact that on this day the Romans celebrated the Mithraic feast of the Sun god (Natalis Solis invicti), and that the Saturnalia also came at this time."14
We have seen from the above evidence that Chraistmas has its roots in paganism and certainly did not originate in Christianity. The next question is, was Jesus born on 25th December? There is no historical evidence as to the day or month of Christ's birth and some uncertainty exists as to the actual year. "St. Clements of Alexandria refers to calculations which placed it in April or May. Some such dates would better accord with the Gospel statement that 'shepherds were watching their flocks by night' than 25th December which falls in the cold and rainy seasons in the hilly country of Judaea".15 The 25th December could not have been the birthday of Jesus. The Bible shows that at the time "Shepherds" were still in the fields at night. As the Encyclopaedia Britannia (1907, Vol. V, p. 611) acknowledges, they would not have been there in the cold, rainy season of winter (Luke 2:8-12)."16 Accordingly, Jesus was not born in the winter season. We have seen that when he was born "there were, in the same country, shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flocks by night."17
Could this have occurred in Judaea in the month of December? "The shepherds always brought their flocks from the mountain sides and fields and corralled them not later than October 15, to protect them from the cold, rainy season that followed that date. Notice that the Bible itself proves, in songs of Solomon 2:11 and Ezra 10:9, 13 that winter was a rainy season not permitting shepherds to abide in open fields at night."18 We read in Adam Clarke's Commentary19 that it was ancient custom among Jews to send out their sheep to fields and deserts about the Passover in early spring and bring them home at the commencement of the first rain. The same authority states, "During the time they were out, the shepherds watched them night and day. As the first rain began early in the month of Marchesvan, which answers to 'part of our October and November' (begins sometimes in October), we find that the sheep were kept in the open fields during the whole summer. And as these shepherds had not yet brought home their flocks, it is a presumptive argument that October had not yet commenced, and that, consequently, our Lord was not born on the 25th of December, when no flocks were out in the fields, nor could He have born later than September, as the flocks were still in the fields by night. On this very ground, the nativity in December should be given up."20
The facts produced in these pages may shock those who had faithfully believed that Jesus was born on the 25th December, but they are plain facts of history.
To conclude we shall summarise below the conclusions we have reached:
1. Jesus was not born on the 25th December.
2. The early Christians were neither aware of the "25th December" nor celebrated the Christmas.
3. The festival was borrowed from Pagans and spiritualised as Christmas in the fourth and fifth century - so it is against Jesus teachings.
4. As Jesus was born at a time when shepherds were abiding in the fields keeping watch over their flocks by night, Jesus could not have been born, later than September.
source: By AM - The Light (December 24, 1982; pages 7 and 8 & 48 and 49)
Footnotes:
1. The World Book Encyclopaedia, U.S.A. (1977) vol. 3, p. 409.
2. Colliers Encyclopaedia, Macmillan Educational Corporation, New York (1980), vol. 6, p. 403.
3. Christmas in Old English was called "Cristes Maesse" which means "the mass of Christ" later shortened to Christ-Mass and eventually became Christmas.
4. The Catholic Encyclopaedia, (1908), vol. III, p. 724.
5. Everyman's Encyclopaedia, (1978), vol. 3, p. 299.
6. The Oxford Dictionary of Christian Church, Oxford University Press, London (1977), p. 280.
7. Encyclopaedia Americana (1944 edition), quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas". Worldwide Church of God, California, p. 9.
8. Chambers Encyclopaedia, (1967), vol. 3 p. 538.
9. Herbert W. Armstrong, The Plain Truth About Christmas, Worldwide Church of God, California, p. 9.
10. James Hastings, Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, vol. 3, pp. 608-609.
11. New Schaff Herzog, Encyclopaedia of Religious Knowledge, quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas", a Worldwide Church of God publication.
12. The World Book Encyclopaedia, (1966), vol. 3, p. 416.
13. Chambers Encyclopaedia, (1967), vol. 3, p. 528.
14. Colliers Encyclopaedia, Macmillan Educational Corporation (1980), vol. 6, p. 403.
15. Chambers Encyclopaedia, London, (1955), vol. 3 p. 540.
16. The Truth that leads to Eternal Life, Watch Tower Bible Tract Society, New York, (1968), p. 148.
17. Luke, 2:8.
18. Herbert W. Armstrong, Supra, p. 9.
19. Adam Clarke, Commentary, New York, vol. 5, p. 370.
20. Adam Clarke, Commentary, New York, vol. 5 page 370 quoted by Herbert W. Armstrong in "The Plain Truth About Christmas", Worldwise Church of God, California, p.11.
Salutations at Graves
Salutations at graves
What are the salutations done at graves? Is there any difference in greeting the Prophets and Martyrs at graves?
Is it right to say As-salamu ^alaykum ya rasula Allah' on Prophet’s grave and Asslam-o-Alaikum ya Ahlol Quboor at the entrance of the graveyard or Does it count as Shirk?
Praise be to Allaah.
Visiting graves is mustahabb for men, because according to the hadeeth of Buraydah ibn al-Husayb, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I used to forbid you to visit graves, but now visit them.” (Narrated by Muslim, 977). According to another report, “… for they will remind you of the Hereafter.” (Narrated by Ahmad, 1240; Ibn Maajah, 1569; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh ibn Maajah).
When visiting the graves it is mustahabb to greet the occupants of the graves with salaam and to make du’aa’ for them saying the words that the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to teach his companions. It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “O Messenger of Allaah, what should I say to them (i.e., to the occupants of the graves)?” He said, “Say: Al-salaamu ‘ala ahl il-diyaar min al-mu’mineen wa’l-Muslimeen, wa yarham Allaah al-mustaqdimeena minna wa’l-musta’khireen, wa innaa in sha Allaah bikum la laahiqoon (Peace be upon the inhabitants of the graves, believers and Muslims. May Allaah have mercy upon those who have gone ahead of us and those who come later on, and verily we will, in sha Allaah, join you).” Narrated by Muslim, 974.
It was narrated from Buraydah ibn al-Husayb (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to teach them, when they went out to the graveyard, to say: “Al-salaamu ‘alaykum ahl al-diyaar min al-mu’mineen wa’l-Muslimeen, wa inna in sha Allaah lalaahiqoon. As’al Allaah lana wa lakum al-‘aafiyah (Peace be upon you, O inhabitants of the graves, believers and Muslims. Verily we will, in sha Allaah, join you. I ask Allaah for well-being for us and for you).””
With regard to the graves of the Sahaabah, he should say the same du’aa’s as described above; there is no special du’aa’ for that.
With regard to visiting the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them), what was narrated from the Sahaabah is to greet them with salaam. Ibn ‘Umar used to say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah, al-salaam ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya abati (O my father),” then he would go away. This was classed as saheeh by al-Haafiz ibn Hajar.
Some of the scholars added to that: “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya kheerat Allaah min khalqihi, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya sayyid al-mursaleen, ash-hadu annaka ballaghta al-risaalah (Peace be upon you, whom Allaah chose from among His creation; peace be upon you O leader of the Messengers, I bear witness that you indeed conveyed the message).”
See al-Adhkaar by al-Nawawi, p. 174; al-Mughni, 5/466
Al-Tabari said: If the visitor says the above longer version, there is nothing wrong with that, but following the example (of the Sahaabah) is better, i.e., limiting oneself to what was narrated from the Sahaabah is better.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Manaasik al-Hajj wa’l-‘Umrah: After (the pilgrim) prays upon arrival in the Prophet’s Mosque as much as Allaah wills he should pray, he should go and send salaams upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them).
1 – He should stand in front of the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), facing the grave and with his back towards the qiblah, and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ayyuha’l-Nabiyyu wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu (Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and the mercy and blessings of Allaah).” If he wants to add something appropriate there is nothing wrong with that, such as saying, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya khaleel-Allaah wa ameenahu ‘ala waheehi wa kheeratahu min khalqihi, ash-hadu annaka qad ballaghta al-risaalah wa addayta al-amaanah wa nasahta al-ummah wa jaahadta fi Allaahi haqqa jihaadihi (Peace be upon you, O close friend of Allaah, the one with whom He entrusted His revelation and the one whom He chose from among His creation. I bear witness that you conveyed the message, fulfilled the trust, sincerely advised the ummah and strove with all your might for the sake of Allaah).
But if he limits himself to the first salutation, that is good. Ibn ‘Umar used to say “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah, al-salaam ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya abati (O my father),” then he would go away
2 – Then he should take one step to his right so that he is in front of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya khaleefat Rasool-illaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) fi ummatihi, radiya Allaahu ‘anka wa jazaaka ‘an ummati Muhammadin khayran (Peace be upon you, O Abu Bakr, peace be upon you O successor of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in his ummah, may Allaah be pleased with you and reward you with good on behalf of Muhammad).”
3 – Then he should take one step to his right so that he is in front of ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya ‘Umar, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya ameer al-mu’mineen, radiya Allaahu ‘anka wa jazaaka ‘an ummati Muhammadin khayran (Peace be upon you, O ‘Umar, peace be upon you, O leader of the believers, may Allaah be pleased with you and reward you with good on behalf of Muhammad).
But he should send salaams upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions with proper etiquette and in a low voice, for raising the voice in the mosque is forbidden, especially in the Mosque of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and at his grave.
Manaasik al-Hajj wa’l-‘Umrah wa’l-Mashroo’ fi’l-Ziyaarah, p. 107, 108
If a person says “al-salaamu ‘alayum” when visiting graves, and says, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah” when visiting the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), this is not considered to be shirk, because it is not a prayer to the dead or seeking their help. Rather it is du’aa’ for them, praying that Allaah may keep them safe from all the dangers that a person may encounter after death, such as the torment of the grave, the resurrection, the reckoning and the horrors of the Hereafter.
We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound in this world and in the Hereafter.
And Allaah knows best.
See Zaad al-Mustanqi’, 5/473; Ashraat al-Saa’ah by Dr. Yoosuf al-Waabil, p. 337.
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/34561
What are the salutations done at graves? Is there any difference in greeting the Prophets and Martyrs at graves?
Is it right to say As-salamu ^alaykum ya rasula Allah' on Prophet’s grave and Asslam-o-Alaikum ya Ahlol Quboor at the entrance of the graveyard or Does it count as Shirk?
Praise be to Allaah.
Visiting graves is mustahabb for men, because according to the hadeeth of Buraydah ibn al-Husayb, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I used to forbid you to visit graves, but now visit them.” (Narrated by Muslim, 977). According to another report, “… for they will remind you of the Hereafter.” (Narrated by Ahmad, 1240; Ibn Maajah, 1569; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh ibn Maajah).
When visiting the graves it is mustahabb to greet the occupants of the graves with salaam and to make du’aa’ for them saying the words that the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to teach his companions. It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “O Messenger of Allaah, what should I say to them (i.e., to the occupants of the graves)?” He said, “Say: Al-salaamu ‘ala ahl il-diyaar min al-mu’mineen wa’l-Muslimeen, wa yarham Allaah al-mustaqdimeena minna wa’l-musta’khireen, wa innaa in sha Allaah bikum la laahiqoon (Peace be upon the inhabitants of the graves, believers and Muslims. May Allaah have mercy upon those who have gone ahead of us and those who come later on, and verily we will, in sha Allaah, join you).” Narrated by Muslim, 974.
It was narrated from Buraydah ibn al-Husayb (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to teach them, when they went out to the graveyard, to say: “Al-salaamu ‘alaykum ahl al-diyaar min al-mu’mineen wa’l-Muslimeen, wa inna in sha Allaah lalaahiqoon. As’al Allaah lana wa lakum al-‘aafiyah (Peace be upon you, O inhabitants of the graves, believers and Muslims. Verily we will, in sha Allaah, join you. I ask Allaah for well-being for us and for you).””
With regard to the graves of the Sahaabah, he should say the same du’aa’s as described above; there is no special du’aa’ for that.
With regard to visiting the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them), what was narrated from the Sahaabah is to greet them with salaam. Ibn ‘Umar used to say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah, al-salaam ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya abati (O my father),” then he would go away. This was classed as saheeh by al-Haafiz ibn Hajar.
Some of the scholars added to that: “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya kheerat Allaah min khalqihi, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya sayyid al-mursaleen, ash-hadu annaka ballaghta al-risaalah (Peace be upon you, whom Allaah chose from among His creation; peace be upon you O leader of the Messengers, I bear witness that you indeed conveyed the message).”
See al-Adhkaar by al-Nawawi, p. 174; al-Mughni, 5/466
Al-Tabari said: If the visitor says the above longer version, there is nothing wrong with that, but following the example (of the Sahaabah) is better, i.e., limiting oneself to what was narrated from the Sahaabah is better.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Manaasik al-Hajj wa’l-‘Umrah: After (the pilgrim) prays upon arrival in the Prophet’s Mosque as much as Allaah wills he should pray, he should go and send salaams upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions Abu Bakr and ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them).
1 – He should stand in front of the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), facing the grave and with his back towards the qiblah, and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ayyuha’l-Nabiyyu wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu (Peace be upon you, O Prophet, and the mercy and blessings of Allaah).” If he wants to add something appropriate there is nothing wrong with that, such as saying, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya khaleel-Allaah wa ameenahu ‘ala waheehi wa kheeratahu min khalqihi, ash-hadu annaka qad ballaghta al-risaalah wa addayta al-amaanah wa nasahta al-ummah wa jaahadta fi Allaahi haqqa jihaadihi (Peace be upon you, O close friend of Allaah, the one with whom He entrusted His revelation and the one whom He chose from among His creation. I bear witness that you conveyed the message, fulfilled the trust, sincerely advised the ummah and strove with all your might for the sake of Allaah).
But if he limits himself to the first salutation, that is good. Ibn ‘Umar used to say “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah, al-salaam ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya abati (O my father),” then he would go away
2 – Then he should take one step to his right so that he is in front of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Aba Bakr, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya khaleefat Rasool-illaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) fi ummatihi, radiya Allaahu ‘anka wa jazaaka ‘an ummati Muhammadin khayran (Peace be upon you, O Abu Bakr, peace be upon you O successor of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in his ummah, may Allaah be pleased with you and reward you with good on behalf of Muhammad).”
3 – Then he should take one step to his right so that he is in front of ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) and say, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya ‘Umar, al-salaamu ‘alayka ya ameer al-mu’mineen, radiya Allaahu ‘anka wa jazaaka ‘an ummati Muhammadin khayran (Peace be upon you, O ‘Umar, peace be upon you, O leader of the believers, may Allaah be pleased with you and reward you with good on behalf of Muhammad).
But he should send salaams upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and his two companions with proper etiquette and in a low voice, for raising the voice in the mosque is forbidden, especially in the Mosque of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and at his grave.
Manaasik al-Hajj wa’l-‘Umrah wa’l-Mashroo’ fi’l-Ziyaarah, p. 107, 108
If a person says “al-salaamu ‘alayum” when visiting graves, and says, “Al-salaamu ‘alayka ya Rasool-Allaah” when visiting the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), this is not considered to be shirk, because it is not a prayer to the dead or seeking their help. Rather it is du’aa’ for them, praying that Allaah may keep them safe from all the dangers that a person may encounter after death, such as the torment of the grave, the resurrection, the reckoning and the horrors of the Hereafter.
We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound in this world and in the Hereafter.
And Allaah knows best.
See Zaad al-Mustanqi’, 5/473; Ashraat al-Saa’ah by Dr. Yoosuf al-Waabil, p. 337.
http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/34561
Al-Muhaddithat: the Women Scholars in Islam
Al-Muhaddithat: the Women Scholars in Islam
AbdulShaheed Drew
The book covers centuries of female scholarship from the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and thereafter. Although women became scholars in all fields of knowledge, this particular book covers the prominent female scholars of Hadith. It should be noted that Al-Muhadithat is only the Muqaddimah or introduction to Akrams 40 volume biographical dictionary on this subject. That's right, 40 volumes dedicated to female scholars of Hadith. Only the Muqaddimah has been translated from Arabic into English and it consists of about 300 pages.
Al-Muhaddithat is a great source of reference for female scholarship in Islamic history. It is well indexed and divided into ten chapters dealing with a number of valuable subjects. The biographical examples I isolated [below] were done so in order to provide a feel for some aspects of the book. Overall, I am pleased that such a detailed work has been translated into English on this subject. Likewise, it is significant because it highlights the potential of female scholarship.
Classes could be held in various venues such as Mosques, houses, schools etc. The attendees would be male and female and likewise the teachers could be male or female. The lists of attendees were recorded in the students manuscripts which would display the names of many female students. Akram notes that women became proficient with the pen in the second year after the migration to Madinah (Hijrah). For the centuries that followed, women as well as men sought out the obligatory knowledge of their religion based on the Hadith, Seeking knowledge is an obligation on every Muslim.
Akram points out that much of the early education started at home with the parents and relatives. Afterwards they may continue further studies with a teacher in the Mosque etc. They would also learn from their husbands and there were situations where their husbands would learn from them. A man who had a Shaykhah as a wife could refer to her for difficult juristic issues. The author gives some examples of parents who passed their knowledge to their daughters such as Imam Malik. His daughter memorized the Muwatta from him -the best book at that time for Hadith and Fiqh issues. Likewise, Saeed ibn Al-Musayyab had a daughter who learnt all the Hadiths her father knew by heart. The Umayyad Caliph Abdul-Malik ibn Marwan asked if his son Al-Walid could marry Saeed ibn Al-Musayyabs daughter. Rather than marry the Caliphs son, Saeed refused and preferred for her to marry one of his impoverished students. Her husband said about her, She was among the most beautiful people, and most expert of those who know the book of God by heart, and most knowledgeable of the Sunnah of the Prophet, and most aware of the rights of the husband.
The author gives many examples of greatly influential female teachers. For example, Umm Kiraam, Kareema Al-Marwaziyyah who came from central Asia was considered to be the best women of the fourth Hijri century to learn the entire Sahih of Al-Bukhari from her teacher Abul-Haytham Al-Kushmihani. Kareema later traveled with her father and settled in Makkah where students would travel from far and wide to learn the Sahih of Al-Bukhari from her. Akram notes, Her version of it has always been particularly popular. Imam Al-Dhahabi stated about her, Whenever she narrated, she would compare with her original. She had knowledge and good understanding [combined] with goodness and worship.
Another famous Shaykhah was Fatimah bint Saeed Al-Khair (sixth Hijri century). Her father was a scholar and she married one of her fathers greatest students. Although she was born in China, her father migrated from Valencia (in the western side of the world) possibly due to the upheaval caused by the Christians of the Spanish region at that time. Her father took her to learn from many scholars in different places. In fact, the map that appears on the cover of this particular book under review shows the study journeys of Fatimah. Fatimah had too many students to mention, so Akram left them out of the Muqaddimah. Her teachings were very influential and far reaching. In Akrams biographic dictionary about the Muhaddithat, he composed 20 pages alone on Fatimah bint Saeed Al-Khair.
The author gives name after name such as Aasia bint Muhammad AlIrbili. She received Ijaazahs (permission to teach a text or subject) from over two hundred of her teachers male and female. Many of our great male Scholars such as Ibn Taymiyah and Ibn Al-Hajr had numerous female scholar teachers. For example, Al-Mizzi, Ibn Taymiyah and Al-Dhahabi had Zaynab bint Makki ibn Ali ibn Kaamil Al-Harrani as one of their teachers. Abdul-Malik ibn Marwan (the Caliph) used to attend Fiqh classes with Umm Ad-Dardaa (a Muhaddithah and Taabiiyyah) etc. Although it is only the introduction, this book demonstrates great research in isolating the significance of these invaluable scholars in our illustrious history. It is also very well referenced.
Akram also makes such points in his preface that the correct Islamic etiquette was present such as no intermixing which will lead to forbidden relationships and Islamic attire such as Hijab was worn -as it is commanded from the Most-High. These women were upright adherents to the way of Islam as it was revealed.
Out of 8000 biographical accounts, Akram notes that there were no complaints from any of these women with respect to the position of women in Islam. They did not get the impression of inferiority or show disdain for the teachings of Islam and family life etc. Rather, they were firm defenders of the Sunnah and their scholarship attests to that. One of the women considered to be one of the reformers of her time (seventh Hijri century) was Umm Zaynab, Fatimah bint Abbas Al-Baghdadiyyah. When we say reformer, it is not in reference to changing the religion, rather it is in reference to reviving it back to the way it was. She was praised by the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaah such as Ibn Taymiyyah who said she was a great scholar, jurist, leader of the women of her time etc. Al-Dhahabi commented that the women of Damascus and Egypt were reformed by her. She had a lot of popularity and influence over the hearts [of people]. Ibn Kathir mentioned that she commanded good and forbade evil, spoke out and opposed deviant sects and opposed the people of bidah, in [all] that she did what men were unable to do.
The believing men and believing women are protecting friends (awliya) of one another, they bid to good (al-maruf), and forbid from evil (al-munkar); they establish the prayer and give the alms (zakah) and obey God and His Messenger. [Qur'an: 9:71]
AbdulShaheed Drew
The book covers centuries of female scholarship from the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and thereafter. Although women became scholars in all fields of knowledge, this particular book covers the prominent female scholars of Hadith. It should be noted that Al-Muhadithat is only the Muqaddimah or introduction to Akrams 40 volume biographical dictionary on this subject. That's right, 40 volumes dedicated to female scholars of Hadith. Only the Muqaddimah has been translated from Arabic into English and it consists of about 300 pages.
Al-Muhaddithat is a great source of reference for female scholarship in Islamic history. It is well indexed and divided into ten chapters dealing with a number of valuable subjects. The biographical examples I isolated [below] were done so in order to provide a feel for some aspects of the book. Overall, I am pleased that such a detailed work has been translated into English on this subject. Likewise, it is significant because it highlights the potential of female scholarship.
Classes could be held in various venues such as Mosques, houses, schools etc. The attendees would be male and female and likewise the teachers could be male or female. The lists of attendees were recorded in the students manuscripts which would display the names of many female students. Akram notes that women became proficient with the pen in the second year after the migration to Madinah (Hijrah). For the centuries that followed, women as well as men sought out the obligatory knowledge of their religion based on the Hadith, Seeking knowledge is an obligation on every Muslim.
Akram points out that much of the early education started at home with the parents and relatives. Afterwards they may continue further studies with a teacher in the Mosque etc. They would also learn from their husbands and there were situations where their husbands would learn from them. A man who had a Shaykhah as a wife could refer to her for difficult juristic issues. The author gives some examples of parents who passed their knowledge to their daughters such as Imam Malik. His daughter memorized the Muwatta from him -the best book at that time for Hadith and Fiqh issues. Likewise, Saeed ibn Al-Musayyab had a daughter who learnt all the Hadiths her father knew by heart. The Umayyad Caliph Abdul-Malik ibn Marwan asked if his son Al-Walid could marry Saeed ibn Al-Musayyabs daughter. Rather than marry the Caliphs son, Saeed refused and preferred for her to marry one of his impoverished students. Her husband said about her, She was among the most beautiful people, and most expert of those who know the book of God by heart, and most knowledgeable of the Sunnah of the Prophet, and most aware of the rights of the husband.
The author gives many examples of greatly influential female teachers. For example, Umm Kiraam, Kareema Al-Marwaziyyah who came from central Asia was considered to be the best women of the fourth Hijri century to learn the entire Sahih of Al-Bukhari from her teacher Abul-Haytham Al-Kushmihani. Kareema later traveled with her father and settled in Makkah where students would travel from far and wide to learn the Sahih of Al-Bukhari from her. Akram notes, Her version of it has always been particularly popular. Imam Al-Dhahabi stated about her, Whenever she narrated, she would compare with her original. She had knowledge and good understanding [combined] with goodness and worship.
Another famous Shaykhah was Fatimah bint Saeed Al-Khair (sixth Hijri century). Her father was a scholar and she married one of her fathers greatest students. Although she was born in China, her father migrated from Valencia (in the western side of the world) possibly due to the upheaval caused by the Christians of the Spanish region at that time. Her father took her to learn from many scholars in different places. In fact, the map that appears on the cover of this particular book under review shows the study journeys of Fatimah. Fatimah had too many students to mention, so Akram left them out of the Muqaddimah. Her teachings were very influential and far reaching. In Akrams biographic dictionary about the Muhaddithat, he composed 20 pages alone on Fatimah bint Saeed Al-Khair.
The author gives name after name such as Aasia bint Muhammad AlIrbili. She received Ijaazahs (permission to teach a text or subject) from over two hundred of her teachers male and female. Many of our great male Scholars such as Ibn Taymiyah and Ibn Al-Hajr had numerous female scholar teachers. For example, Al-Mizzi, Ibn Taymiyah and Al-Dhahabi had Zaynab bint Makki ibn Ali ibn Kaamil Al-Harrani as one of their teachers. Abdul-Malik ibn Marwan (the Caliph) used to attend Fiqh classes with Umm Ad-Dardaa (a Muhaddithah and Taabiiyyah) etc. Although it is only the introduction, this book demonstrates great research in isolating the significance of these invaluable scholars in our illustrious history. It is also very well referenced.
Akram also makes such points in his preface that the correct Islamic etiquette was present such as no intermixing which will lead to forbidden relationships and Islamic attire such as Hijab was worn -as it is commanded from the Most-High. These women were upright adherents to the way of Islam as it was revealed.
Out of 8000 biographical accounts, Akram notes that there were no complaints from any of these women with respect to the position of women in Islam. They did not get the impression of inferiority or show disdain for the teachings of Islam and family life etc. Rather, they were firm defenders of the Sunnah and their scholarship attests to that. One of the women considered to be one of the reformers of her time (seventh Hijri century) was Umm Zaynab, Fatimah bint Abbas Al-Baghdadiyyah. When we say reformer, it is not in reference to changing the religion, rather it is in reference to reviving it back to the way it was. She was praised by the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaah such as Ibn Taymiyyah who said she was a great scholar, jurist, leader of the women of her time etc. Al-Dhahabi commented that the women of Damascus and Egypt were reformed by her. She had a lot of popularity and influence over the hearts [of people]. Ibn Kathir mentioned that she commanded good and forbade evil, spoke out and opposed deviant sects and opposed the people of bidah, in [all] that she did what men were unable to do.
The believing men and believing women are protecting friends (awliya) of one another, they bid to good (al-maruf), and forbid from evil (al-munkar); they establish the prayer and give the alms (zakah) and obey God and His Messenger. [Qur'an: 9:71]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
