Imam Al-Syafie states:
"If a man commits adultery with a woman and gives birth to a daughter, then the man can marry either the woman or his daughter. This is because Allah only makes the mahram relationship based on halal marriage only”. [Al Syafie, Ahkam al-Quran, p. 189]
Imam al-Khatib al-Syirbini said: A woman born of adultery, intentional or not (rape) ... then the law of both of them is halal because it is considered foreign as there is no respect for adulterous sperm. ” [Mughni al-Muhtaj, 4/287].
The final opinion of the al-Syafie school, the seeds resulting from non-sharia intercourse have no legal value.
Qurán:
33:5 Name and call your adopted children after their fathers...
irrespective of how you come to adopt the child. so if a family adopts an illegitimate child, he/she must be named after the biological father, with the attendant responsibilities and rights accorded.
Actually, I was wrong - there is no need to wait for her onset of menses, according to the current translation and understanding of the eddah verse
A better translation of this verse is as follows
65:4 And those of your women who no longer expect menstruation 𝗼𝗿 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝗯𝗶𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗲, to resolve your doubts, their waiting period is ordained to be three months. ...
This revised translation does not contradict the verses stating requirements for marriage - mental maturity [4:16], consent [4:19], and ability to enter into a contract [4:21]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When Albert Einstein gave lectures at U.S. universities, the recurring question that students asked him most was: "Do you believe in God?"
> thread
And Einstein always answered: "I believe in Spinoza's god, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a god who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."
"The philosopher whom Einstein admired most was Baruch Spinoza, the 17th-century Jewish philosopher, who was excommunicated by the Amsterdam synagogue and declined the Heidelberg professorship in order to live as a lens grinder, leading an independent life dedicated to…
When someone says they want to protect the sanctity of Islam, they don't mean protecting the Divine (God) because it is absurd to think of a mortal human being standing in defence of the Almighty.
thread >
In fact, it is blasphemous to think of God as a weak Being in need of His creatures' protection.
What is meant truly when someone says they want to protect the sanctity of Islam is this: 'I want to protect my understanding of Islam'.
It is this conflation of the self and the religion that is at the root of the desire to insert oneself in the grand script as 'God/Islam's defender'. In the mind, there is a cosmic drama unfolding between the forces of good (i.e. me/us) and the forces of evil (they/them).
4:34 …And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them… (Muhammad Asad)
4:34 …If you have reason to fear ill-will from your wives, remind them of the teachings of God, then ignore them when you go to bed, then depart away from them… (Safi Kaskas)
The reason I believe 1) the Qur'an is true is that it describes what people we see around do, in real-time, to a high degree of accuracy. 2) traditional Islam is not in the Qur'an.
This thread is a witness:
God: Here's a book of guidance for *anyone* who wants to live a righteous life (2:2)
Muslims: This is OUR book, and you "non-Muslims" have no right to interpret it. Can't even touch it, actually, if it's in Arabic.
(what about non-Muslim Arabs, how do they read?)
God: There is no compulsion in The Way (2:256)
Muslims: if you change your religion, you should be killed. If you have doubts, you should undergo rehabilitation. If you speak against it, you can be persecuted.
The average Malay Muslim has been told so often that he is incapable of understanding the Qur'an on his own, that he is utterly dependent on someone else's interpretation to the point that the interpretation is now akin to the word of God Himself.
thread>
As a result, these man-made interpretations cannot be questioned, and a different understanding of the verses cannot be comprehended or processed.
To be fair, there is no real basis for comparison, because he thinks he will not be able to understand a pure translation.
Because these interpretations have been accepted for centuries, the Qur'an is anchored to the period in which the interpretations were made, instead of being interpreted in light of the currently available evidence.
It's hard to defend your faith against detractors because there are so many similarities between the Taliban / ISIS and traditional Islam
Quran ✅
Sunnah & Hadith ✅
Ijma' (consensus) ✅
Qiyas (analogy) ✅
Even the attestation of faith is the same ✅
thread >
In Shafi'i-centric Malaysia, there is even some amount of support for the Taliban.
So how can you glibly say "They are not Islam" to non-Muslims?
Are you even allowed to declare others who call themselves Muslims "non-Muslims"?
The minutiae of faith and actions are opaque to non-practitioners. Even practitioners themselves quibble over matters (hence ijma'), so how do you expect non-Muslims to know these fine details?