Bismika Alllahuma

最近，基督徒传教士由“Lazarus的”名字出版了电子邮件对话的结果以一个引入歧途的标题 回教是否是妇女友好的？. 多血症狂放的想像力和错误解释形成中坚力量物质为上述“对话”。 多数什么演讲了涉及了以前。

然而，什么我们牵涉到这里是大胆扭转一特殊hadith由基督徒传教士。 为“显示”有在一条狗和一名妇女的治疗上的少许区别在回教，传教士陈述如下：

确切地请解释什么事实我们通过引述Muhammad的妻子扭转了Ayesha [sic] 谁认为：

叙述的`Aisha ： 您是否做我们(妇女)均等对狗和驴？ (Sahih Bukhari 1.486， cf。 Sahih Bukhari 1.490， Sahih Bukhari 1.493， Sahih Bukhari 1.498)
--我希望您能看我们这里不在误引或欺骗，但是宁可，因为我们爱真相并且渴望为了穆斯林能发现和知道这真相。

这里注意是有趣的传教士未故意再生产整体hadith从他参考的Bukhari。 下列是实际的 充分的引证 hadith由传教士部份地引述了：

容量1，书9，第490 ：

叙述的`Aisha ：

废除祷告的事在我之前被提及了。 他们说， “祷告由狗、驴和妇女废除(如果他们在祈祷的人民前面通过)”。 我说， “您做了我们(即。 妇女)狗。 当我在我的床曾经在他和Qibla之间时，我看见先知祈祷。 每当我是需要某事，我为我会滑倒烦恶面对他”。

它是否要求许多智力了解这hadith ？ 有一次讨论在`Aishah，先知(p)的妻子之间，与不是博学的关于宗教maters关于什么的问题的有些穆斯林使salat (伊斯兰教的礼节祷告)无效。 她告诉了他们她是博学的关于这样规则。 They remarked that when a woman or a dog, or a donkey passed in front of a praying person, the latter’s prayer was nullified. She corrected their wrong understanding with sarcasm (by saying that they are equating woman with dogs) and said that when the Prophet (P) prayed his tahajjud (midnight voluntary prayers) in her room, her bed (where she lay) was right in front of him. Hence, those Muslims were wrong in their understanding of the rules of nullification of salat: a salat is not nullified if a woman is in front of a praying person.

Other ahadith that closely follow in Bukhari further collaborates the matter.

Volume 1, Book 9, Number 491:

Narrated ‘Aisha:

The Prophet used to pray while I was sleeping across in his bed in front of him. Whenever he wanted to pray Witr, he would wake me up and I would pray Witr.

Volume 1, Book 9, Number 492:

Narrated ‘Aisha, the wife of the Prophet, “I used to sleep in front of Allah’s Apostle with my legs opposite his Qibla (facing him); and whenever he prostrated, he pushed my feet and I withdrew them and whenever he stood, I stretched them.” ‘Aisha added, “In those days there were no lamps in the houses.”

Volume 1, Book 9, Number 494:

Narrated ‘Aisha: (the wife of the Prophet) Allah’s Apostle used to get up at night and pray while I used to lie across between him and the Qibla on his family’s bed.

We wonder why this simple issue was so hard for the missionary “Lazarus” to understand. The fact that he had to offer a distorted interpretation of hadith #490 (when this and other ahadith 491-7 plainly contradicted him) by equating women with dogs certainly speaks for itself. One has to be intellectually dishonest or have a diminutive lack of comprehension to assert from the hadith #490 that a woman is as impure as a dog and a donkey!

It would be a useful point at this juncture to look at how some Western observers have viewed the status of women in Islam. To quote Henry Bayman:

The people of the Middle East where Islam originated belonged to a male-dominant culture. The period before Islam, referred to as ‘the Age of Ignorance’, was replete with the ill treatment of females. A woman was a vehicle for sexual satisfaction and little else?lacking, in many cases, even the legal protection of a marital arrangement. Little girls were disposed of by burying them alive. Very few women had the means to become prominent and powerful members of society. Women could be gambled on and given away in bets; they could be inherited like a household object.¹

This dismal situation of women however was later changed when Islam came into the picture.

Against this backdrop, Islam introduced almost every right that women enjoy in the 20th century. The right of women in France to exercise property rights independently of their husbands was granted only at the beginning of the 20th century. In Italy, the right to divorce had to wait until the last third of the 20th century. God’s instruction to the Prophet to accept the allegiance of women (60:12) has been interpreted by Moslems as the right to vote; in the USA, women could not vote until 1920. Today, at the end of the 20th century, universal suffrage still does not exist in Switzerland. In Germany, a woman could not hold a bank account until 1958, in France until 1965. The true emancipation of women in Europe is the matter of a scant fifty years.²

Writing about the contribution of Muhammad(P) in improving the status of women of his age, Stanley Lane-Poole states that

No great lawmaker has ever made such significant changes as Mohammed did on the subject of women. Rulings concerning women have been outlined in the Koran (Qur’an) in great detail. This is the point at which Mohammed’s greatest reforms have occurred. Although these reforms may appear insignificant to a European, they are actually tremendous. The restriction placed on polygamy, the recommendation of monogamy, the introduction of degrees of prohibition in place of the appalling collectivism and intermixing of Arab marriages, the limitations on divorce, the duty of a husband to take care of his ex-wife for a certain period even after they are divorced, the severe rulings to ensure her livelihood, the introduction of the novelty that women are legal heirs “even if at half the rate of men” so that children may be properly looked after, and the ability of a widow to receive her dead husband’s inheritance?all these constitute a programme of far-reaching reforms.³

Laura Veccia Vaglieri contrasts the situation of women in Europe with the Islamic world and says that

Even though woman has risen to a high social status in Europe, she has not, at least until recently, attained in many countries the independence and liberty enjoyed by a Moslem woman in the face of the law. In reality, the woman in Islam possesses the right to share in inheritance, even if to an extent less than her brothers; the right to marry according to her own choice and not to tolerate the ill treatment of a brutish husband; but further, the rights to receive dowry payment from her husband, to have her needs met by her husband even if she is rich, and to be absolutely independent in the disposal of her inherited property.⁴

Writing in the 19th century, Gaudefroy-Demombynes stated that

The rulings of the Koran, which are amazingly in favor of woman, provide her, even if theoretically, with a status better than present [19th century] European laws allow. The Islamic woman has the right to a separate fortune in financial matters. She owns her share, her property received through donation or inheritance, and her labor’s dues to the end of her life. Although it is difficult for her to make practical use of these rights, her sustenance, shelter and other requirements are guaranteed in accordance with her standing.⁵

These testimonies of well-known historians and Orientalists reveal that the discoveries of Western research in this field have not yet become common knowledge, and especially to the likes of “Lazarus”. He who likes to pick and choose parts of the hadith or the Qur’an to conform to his views, without looking into the context, can make a totally opposite case of the very intention for which such statements were made. The missionary “Lazarus” tried to do just that but failed miserably in convincing anyone other than equally-demented bigots.

To recap, we quote again the missionary boast:

Please explain exactly what facts we have twisted by quoting Muhammad’s wife Ayesha[sic]…I hope that you can see that we are not here to mislead or to deceive.

Based on the facts we have presented above, we can easily attest that the claim of the missionary “not here to mislead or to deceive” is certainly most doubtful. Now that the missionary has seen for himself the facts that he had twisted, it remains to be seen what his next excuse for this purposeful twist will be to conceal his bigotry and extreme hatred of Islam.

And only God knows best.

1. Henry Bayman, The Meaning of the Four Books, p. 138-9 [back]
2. ibid. [back]
3. Cited in Henry Bayman, The Meaning of the Four Books, pp. 142-3 [back]
4. ibid., p. 143 [back]
5. ibid. [back]