:roll:

Why is everyone so concerned about what people will think? Your all soo suspicious and paranoid. Hellloooooo thats all backbiting isnt it??? And we all know Islams view on backbiting?

I cant speak for anyone else: me personally i simply dont care what the stupid community think. They should know better than to gossip. In the end i answer only to my lord and only to him must i justify myself.

My partner will walk beside me bcoz i consider her my equal, and i have enough trust and faith in her to stand by me even if i meet some1 on the street. At the end of the day who is she going home with?? ME. And im not insecure about it that i will always be suspicious of her behaviour.

And if i wish to show affection i will do so in the appropriate manner damn it, that means if i want to hold her hand in public for whatever reason other than shes my equal than i will do so.

Thats my personal opinion and preference, med a man has to go his own way, if yours works for you gr8 im not here to judge you (that part has already been taken) just respect me enough to leave me to my ways.

"Seraphim" wrote:

Thats my personal opinion and preference, med a man has to go his own way, if yours works for you gr8 im not here to judge you (that part has already been taken) just respect me enough to leave me to my ways.

WOAH!

Have I said something to offend you or have I come across to be judging you bro? If I have then I apologise. I think I have already stated that its my personal preferece, if I remember correctly admin asked if I had asked a scholar about this or if I knew of a ruling and I said that no it was just my personal preference.

Sorry if I said summat to upset u bro. That was NOT my intention.

"Med" wrote:

"Seraphim" wrote:

Thats my personal opinion and preference, med a man has to go his own way, if yours works for you gr8 im not here to judge you (that part has already been taken) just respect me enough to leave me to my ways.

WOAH!

Have I said something to offend you or have I come across to be judging you bro? If I have then I apologise. I think I have already stated that its my personal preferece, if I remember correctly admin asked if I had asked a scholar about this or if I knew of a ruling and I said that no it was just my personal preference.

Sorry if I said summat to upset u bro. That was NOT my intention.

lol no sorry

my bad... i didnt explain myself propperly..

i wasnt taking a shot at you in particular.

Your view was the most in contrast with mine... and i simply meant just bcoz they do something one way and someone else does it another should not lead them to start badmouthing them... thats all.

lol sorry bro... totally my fault.

lol.

sorry I misunderstood.

"Ramz" wrote:

"naj" wrote:

most decent ladys i've seen walk behind their husbands.

And indecent women walk next to them? :roll:

Ramz, of course not.

It’s incorrect to say that only indecent women walk beside their husbands. I’d be insulted if I was told that I cant walk along side my partner.

Personally, I think anything more then hand holding in public (for our generation only) is just not right. And even hand holding should only be done in a busy crowd or crossing roads.

My mum has really bad eyesight so whoever walks with her has to hold her hand. Even though dad does hold her hand he’s always moaning about how embarrassing it is and how it doesn’t look right.

I remember once a couple came to our house and they were eating from the same plate and feeding one another and calling each other “Janu” (sweetheart). I was put of my food and couldn’t stop giggling with my sisters.

Maybe that says a lot about my immaturity.

Someone mentioned to me once she heard an Imam give a lecture once and he said that it’s a massive sin for the wife to call her husband by his name?!

However, he did not give any evidence to support his claim and according to another scholar that I asked no such evidence exists.

It’s a cultural thing not to call ones husbands by their name…My auntie’s from Pakistan when referring to their husbands say “Humza ke daddy” (And Humza is the name of their eldest son).

However, I wouldt say that this is because they are a lot more decent then the women here...cos to be blunt they're not.

I think its better for the wife not to call her husbands name, but having said that my mom does say my dads name but my oldest aunt and my grandmother NEVER EVER say their husbands name, EVER.

It aint really a big issue.

The reason the Mawlana probably advised against this is because of the fact that the husbands rank is so high compared to the wife. I read once that a woman would never imagine to call her father by his name, or her older brothers by name so how can she call her husbands name when the husband's position is second to ALLAH alone?
Also, Im pretty sure that this trend of calling the husbands name is only very very recent. The tradition has been for centuries that the husband was not called by name, now the muslims break from their own tradition and adopt the ways of others.

Like I said this aint a big issue, but if there's nothing wrong with saying the husbands name then equally there is nothing wrong with sticking to things how our elders did them and sticking with our own traditional ways of expression and communication as opposed to modernising everything.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with following ones culture or sticking to how our elders did things as long as it doesn’t contradict the teachings of Islam.

However, one can’t help but feel outraged if they are accused of being sinners just because they refer to their husbands by their first names especially since there is no evidence that backs up such a claim.

I dont knw who heard this Mawlana but I take it with a pinch of salt that the Mawlana actually said that women who refer to their husbands by name are sinners. I doubt very much that any alim would say it is a massive sin and the Mawlana did say that then whoever has doubts should take them to him.

I think sometimes if people dont understand urdu well they misunderstand what was said or alternatively peoples memories are not all that.

But, yeh it aint a big issue really.

You’re assuming Med.

Yes, my Urdu is terrible however my memory is quite good. However, it was my Bengali mate who told me that her local Bengali Imam said this.

I’m sure she didn’t misunderstand the Imam as her and her father (who was also present at the talk and is very fluent in Bengali) were arguing about this issue for days. (He agreed with the Imam)

It might be a minor issue to you, however making haraam what Allah (swt) and His Rasool have not made haraam is a big deal to me.

No Im not assuming.

You mentioned you heard it from someone else.

So for me this information is worth not much, I dont knw you, I dnt knw her, I dnt knw the person she heard it from.

So yeh, it aint a big deal for me cos I aint too bothered. Call him by his name if u want, call by his kids name if u want. Its not really something Im all that worried abt.

You took my comments personally. I wasnt referring to you. I was saying generally and was trying to give a positive explanation for the Mawlana.

OK, u take it as a big deal. Im happy for u.

Thank you for editing your post.

I appreciate it.

hmmmmmm yes

If my partner didnt like me calling him by his name then I can think of some more names that may be more to my liking

such as Loser and moron :roll:

"MuslimSisLilSis" wrote:

If my partner didnt like me calling him by his name then I can think of some more names that may be more to my liking

such as Loser and moron :roll:

and i bet he could think of other people he'd rather be married to...

"Seraphim" wrote:

and i bet he could think of other people he'd rather be married to...

hahahahaha

I think she was describing who she's gonna end up with, cos lets be honest, he is gonna have to b a loser and a moron if he ends up marrying her.

I'd be more then happy with a "moron and a loser" rather then someone with a family history of wife beating and a fetish for depressed brides

lol, lilsis. Don't worry u be just fine. Don't worry about what Med thinks, you on the right tracks if u scaring people like him off.

"yuit" wrote:

lol, lilsis. Don't worry u be just fine. Don't worry about what Med thinks, you on the right tracks if u scaring people like him off.

Your the man Yuit.

Say if I was married and my husband asked me to walk behind him or not to refer to him by his first name, I would refuse. It's stupid, and in my opinion, rather degrading.

"Shabana" wrote:

Say if I was married and my husband asked me to walk behind him or not to refer to him by his first name, I would refuse. It's stupid, and in my opinion, rather degrading.

From what i know you will be well in ur right to do so as well. Because as far as i know there no evidence to apply it should be the case and from what i know, very very few men in today society would want it that way as well.

But too be honest, that why it importnt to make the right choice in the first place, so there less chance of these little incident happening afterwards.

"yuit" wrote:

"Shabana" wrote:

Say if I was married and my husband asked me to walk behind him or not to refer to him by his first name, I would refuse. It's stupid, and in my opinion, rather degrading.

[b]
From what i know you will be well in ur right to do so as well[/b]. Because as far as i know there no evidence to apply it should be the case and from what i know, very very few men in today society would want it that way as well.

Lol. Lil Sis u r a one funny thing. Thanks, you always make me laugh.

Yuit brother I have to take issue with you on that line. If the husband tells her not to call him by his name or if he tells her to walk behind her then the shariah demands she MUST obey the husband. Please provide evidence that it is her right to disobey her husband and call his name and walk alongside him.

Addressed generally:

just incase som1 thnks I think wife MUST walk behind him or that she MUSTNT say his name. I have mentioned before that its not a big issue. Im just challenging the notion that she can disobey him. She cant. She must obey him.

"Med" wrote:

Yuit brother I have to take issue with you on that line. If the husband tells her not to call him by his name or if he tells her to walk behind her then the shariah demands she MUST obey the husband.

OR

she can reason/discuss with him nicely, which is what most couples do when they come across lil' things they disagree on - both should be open to change and new ideas.

"Aasiyah" wrote:

"Med" wrote:

Yuit brother I have to take issue with you on that line. If the husband tells her not to call him by his name or if he tells her to walk behind her then the shariah demands she MUST obey the husband.

OR

she can reason/discuss with him nicely, which is what most couples do when they come across lil' things they disagree on - both should be open to change and new ideas.

agreed.

BUT if he says she has to be like that, and after discussing or whatever he still says it, then she has no religious freedom to do otherwise.

What I want to know is how yuit could say she has the right to not do as he wants?

"Med" wrote:

BUT if he says she has to be like that, and after discussing or whatever he still says it, then she has no religious freedom to do otherwise.

in my humble opinion, such a man would come across as a tyrant and his wife would lose all respect for him. marriage is about compromise.

"Med" wrote:

What I want to know is how yuit could say she has the right to not do as he wants?

i think you're misinterpreting what yuit said - he just said the woman has a right to walk beside her husband and call him by his name.

"Aasiyah" wrote:

"Med" wrote:

BUT if he says she has to be like that, and after discussing or whatever he still says it, then she has no religious freedom to do otherwise.

in my humble opinion, such a man would come across as a tyrant and his wife would lose all respect for him. marriage is about compromise.

"Med" wrote:

What I want to know is how yuit could say she has the right to not do as he wants?

i think you're misinterpreting what yuit said - he just said the woman has a right to walk beside her husband and call him by his name.

aasiyah, I dont think ur getting what Im riting?

Im not saying anything abt the man or the woman. I was simply and purely objecting to yuits statement and saying that she has to obey her husband.

And as for me misinterpreting yuits comments that is entirely possible. However, if he was saying what u have ritten above. Where has this right been given to walk beside or to call his name?

I AM NOT saying she cant walk with him or call his name, Im just getting confused abt what the heck is going on here.

Look, simply put. The husband says walk behind me, she must walk behind him. Should he tell her to walk behind him even if she wants to walk next to him? Is he being old fashioned. Is he being arrogant. Is he being a tyrant. Is it forbidden to walk with your husband. Is she shameless for suggesting she wants to walk with her husband?

None of these above questions have any relevance to my point. They are not what Im chatting abt.

I have said my bit.

Peace a word from a Lord Most Merciful

What i was trying to say was that marriage isn't a dictatorship. The husband role is not to control the wife and everything that she does. Yeah it her duty to obey her husband, but it doesn't mean that the husband should used it to control her or abuse his right towards her. It about companionship and mutual understanding and respect, that what all the good marriage seem to have IMO. Now, the husband behaviour should be such, that these quality are apparent within the marriage.

^^^^^
That post I totally agree with brother.

I was just unclear about what your previous post meant.

A husband cannot orer the wife to do whatever he wills.

As an example, cooking.

If she says no, he has to do it, or hire help. He CANNOT COMMAND HER to do the cooking and cleaning.

[edit]

Or call a takeaway.

A good place to read up on this stuff:

http://www.therevival.co.uk/marriage.php

Some really good stuff in there.