Roe vs Wade

It was January 27th , 1973, this historical case was decided.
 So often things come to a discussion about abortion or its related questions especially in times of political debates during elections times. Here the message was sent to America that it is the pregnant woman's choice to get abortion if she wanted for whatever reason, leaving aside the prevailing medical opinions for abortion to save the life of mother which still is true.
That would also be comparable with the subject of contraception about which I wrote on 29th Feb. 2012 as follows:
   "Every TV host has made some comments about Rick Santorum and started from Obama Administration's 'order' to  supply free contraceptives for all employees etc.
  Well, there is religious freedom upon which USA makes claims to be its main upholder which seems to be clashing here  and then the GOP Presidential candidate Rick Santorum has said some things which are reminiscent of USA's attack on Bin Laden Philosophy.
 May be there is always some religious bias in each President (after all he is a human being and does claim to one or the other religious teaching) which does play at some point or the other during their political and governmental transactions or acts, intentionally or un-intentionally So strictly speaking you cannot really oust religion completely from the politics."
    Then I had also written earlier the position of Catholic teaching regarding this subject.
Whereas such ideas are noble for the betterment of society yet one 'side-effect' of this is increased promiscuity of sexual behavior among the women, as the 'fear' of pregnancy is removed
The contraceptives are freely available and if they fail, you have the choice of freely available termination of pregnancy and no ethical or moral hinderance attached. My earlier note of contraception runs a bit longer
but here it is:
 "That the Catholic teaching is in direct opposition to the Government mandated free supply of contraceptives of all types to all employees is not new and regulation has been imposed with full knowledge which is surprising. It provides excellent opportunity for the GOP "wannabe" candidates for forceful rhetoric as the other questions have limited the number of 'bullets' or arrows to throw on Obama.
 However, this seems rather illogical approach because even though contraceptives are used by Catholic men and women either in open defiance to the Church Rule or in modification and gradual relaxation of the strictness of the rule, Government cannot enforce such "preventive care" as many other "preventive care" methods are NOT regulated or "forced to be free". Dental care, eye-glasses prescription filling, hearing aids are some of the things that come to my mind.
 You may say that these things are options BUT
 Low hearing may put some people out of job, out of social gathering, out of listening to good things including music etc. causing psychological disturbances or mental torture (personal experience)
Poor vision may result in bad accidents, a definite deadly risk- not driving means loss of job or other consequences.
Dental problems. Many diseases originate, get worse etc. due to poor dentition
  I understand the real reason is not contraception as much as it is prevention of AIDS but the same argument can be against contraceptive use (there is no doubt that free availability of contraceptives has increased promiscuity in the society).
 No matter how you see it the objection for the Governmental rule remains more appropriate.
 IMANA (Islamic Medical Association of North America) has its position paper on the subject of abortion and use of contraception. (the Ethics Committee of IMANA)"

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

My enrty into NC

Forty years ago today:
It was at 9 am on 27th of Jan. 1973, I was interviewed by NC Medical Board in Pinehurst, the little town that impressed me I wrote, (in my notes)
" This village is built  like English small villages and developed for Golfing"
I did not know much about Golf. Anyway then I proceeded to Fayetteville NC where my contact (wife of my future colleague) had reserved for me an apartment in Briarwood Arms, (26-H) within walking distance of Cape Fear Valley Hospital.
 Next day I submitted my application for priviledges in the hospital, with the help of my neurosurgical colleague and thus started my practice of Neurology in NC. Actually Mr. Moulton, the then director of the hospital was admitted under the care of the neurosurgeon with back problem.
 My first patient on 31st of January, A Mr. Willie Locklear, a 47 yr. old with a hemiplegia, transfered from the neurosurgeon. 
 To bring you to update, I saw my last patient in Fayetteville NC (in VA Medical Center) on 31st of Jan. 2003.(Exact 30 years of Neurologic Practice).  I have been retired now for 10 years. 


Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Muslim marriage with a Kitabi(Quranic evidence)

 Face Book note of Baitee Shabana (Koonj) on this subject has prompted me to write this one. I read the "fatwa" of Shaikh Khalid Abou-el-Fadl and my notes here would indicate that I mostly agree with his statement (May be not all).
   Firstly I will start with a clear statement (ayat muhakamat) in Qur'an-el-Majeed      لا
" تَنكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّىٰ يُؤْمِنَّ ۚ وَلَأَمَةٌ مُّؤْمِنَةٌ خَيْرٌ مِّن مُّشْرِكَةٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَتْكُمْ ۗ وَلَا تُنكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَتَّىٰ يُؤْمِنُوا ۚ وَلَعَبْدٌ مُّؤْمِنٌ خَيْرٌ مِّن مُّشْرِكٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكُمْ ۗ أُولَٰئِكَ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى النَّارِ ۖ وَاللَّهُ يَدْعُو إِلَى الْجَنَّةِ وَالْمَغْفِرَةِ بِإِذْنِهِ ۖ وَيُبَيِّنُ آيَاتِهِ لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَذَكَّرُونَ
( all English versions are fromYusuf Ali)
"Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise". (2-Baqara- :221)

The words Mushrikat and Mushrik are better understood words by Muslims than any translation. So, here it means Muslims are NOT allowed to marry Mushrikeen, period. No ifs ands or buts. 
Next we encounter that The Qur'an referring to ahl-el-kitab (Kitabis-means Jews and Christians) as 'Kafir' and yet clearly allowing Muslim men's marriage with kitabi women.

لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۚ قُلْ فَمَن يَمْلِكُ مِنَ اللَّهِ شَيْئًا إِنْ أَرَادَ أَن يُهْلِكَ الْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَأُمَّهُ وَمَن فِي الْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا ۗ وَلِلَّهِ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا ۚ يَخْلُقُ مَا يَشَاءُ ۚ وَاللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
"In blasphemy indeed are those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every - one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion ......................... " (5:17)
لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ ۖ وَقَالَ الْمَسِيحُ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُ مَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَاهُ النَّارُ ۖ وَمَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ مِنْ أَنصَارٍ (S. 5, Aya #75)
"They do blaspheme who say: "Allah is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help."
لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ ۘ وَمَا مِنْ إِلَٰهٍ إِلَّا إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۚ وَإِن لَّمْ يَنتَهُوا عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ لَيَمَسَّنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
"They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them." (5:76)        and then

 الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ ۖ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَّكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَّهُمْ ۖ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ مُحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَافِحِينَ وَلَا مُتَّخِذِي أَخْدَانٍ ۗ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِالْإِيمَانِ فَقَدْ حَبِطَ عَمَلُهُ وَهُوَ فِي الْآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ
This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them. (Lawful unto you in marriage) are (not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the People of the Book, revealed before your time,- when ye give them their due dowers, and desire chastity, not lewdness, nor secret ................." (5:6)
       In all three places,(Ayat 19, 75 and 76) clearly indicate that "those who call Issa-ibn-Maryam God or one of the three" are making "Kufr" And yet in the next quote from Sura al-Maida Muslim men are given permission to marry kitabi women. That seems to 'suggest' that the same priviledge is NOT being extended to Muslim women. At the same time it is to be noted that Qur'an does not make an express statement that Muslim women are not allowed to marry a kitabi, (like in the case of Mushrikeen)
 Does that mean the previously stated Aya 221st from Al-Baqara correct for them?, meaning they are not allowed to marry Mushriks of Kitabi type who believe three God-heads God the Father, God the son and God the Holy Ghost?. Or we stay with the fact that a clear prohibitive Qur'anic statement is not given. That is what all mufassireen mention and all 4 schools of thought consider the above statement not "suggestive" but clearly meaning prohibition of marriage between a Kitabi man and a Muslim woman. Here I do like how this has been presented by the learned writer. Shaikh Khalid (in his fatwa).
 Of course you are free to make your own interpretation and understanding AFTER you have seen all the related verses not only the ones quoted above but also the ones I am quoting below. ( My suggestion for those of you who, like me, are not Arabic-educated should read translations and tafseers written by different authors-English and/or Urdu.) 
   Before going further I wish for all of you to contemplate on this verse:  
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَالَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالصَّابِئُونَ وَالنَّصَارَىٰ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا فَلَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
Those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (5:72)
  I quote this one which also appears in S. Albaqara (Aya 62) because how God judges the persons is from such angles rather than labels of believers Muslims, and Christians Jews and Sabeans etc.
      Next I would like you to make good understanding and Tafseer of the aya from "Sura al-Mumtahena" . I have found M. Maudoodi's explanations best for this one (Tafheem-ul-Qur'an or its English Translation)

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا جَاءَكُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتُ مُهَاجِرَاتٍ فَامْتَحِنُوهُنَّ ۖ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِإِيمَانِهِنَّ ۖ فَإِنْ عَلِمْتُمُوهُنَّ مُؤْمِنَاتٍ فَلَا تَرْجِعُوهُنَّ إِلَى الْكُفَّارِ ۖ لَا هُنَّ حِلٌّ لَّهُمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحِلُّونَ لَهُنَّ ۖ وَآتُوهُم مَّا أَنفَقُوا ۚ وَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ أَن تَنكِحُوهُنَّ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ ۚ وَلَا تُمْسِكُوا بِعِصَمِ الْكَوَافِرِ وَاسْأَلُوا مَا أَنفَقْتُمْ وَلْيَسْأَلُوا مَا أَنفَقُوا ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ حُكْمُ اللَّهِ ۖ يَحْكُمُ بَيْنَكُمْ ۚ وَاللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَكِيمٌ

Yusuf Ali

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them: Allah knows best as to their Faith: if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent (on their dower), and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their dower to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women: ask for what ye have spent on their dowers, and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent (on the dowers of women who come over to you). Such is the command of Allah: He judges (with justice) between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom.

 I have italicized the important aspect of this verse.
As I suggest for you to read the full explanation from Maudoodi you will realize that what was happening during the time of the prophet with women who would accept Islam while their husbands remained non-Muslim, Mushrik or Kitabi. I feel that will widen your understanding of what Shaikh Khalid has said especially about the application of having a kitabi spouse in a non-Muslim country and how it may differ in application in a Muslim country.
 I think there is wisdom in these statements and we should not reject outright or accept all without critical analysis.
  May Allah guide us in all our undertakings. Aameen.
 The question of marrying a  kitabi should be very seriously evaluated by a Muslim both man as well as woman. I have lots of examples of my friends and  persons known to me whose lives are not completely satisfactory because of this particular aspect. Muslim man married to Christian or Jewish wife. Muslim woman married to Christian or Jewish Husband and even married to Hindoo husband (without changing religion). I also know friends who did not marry (and were miserable at least for some time) because family did not agree for the change of religion. In India more Muslim men are now marrying Hindu wives who do not convert to Islam (More examples are in the Bollywood) and more Muslim women are marrying Hindu husbands

Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/

Start of 2013

This an ordinary "childhood toy" of no significance to anybody except the one who enjoyed its company during childhood

This would bring immediately the joy of childhood back to your mind.When such insignificant things, even a waste paper (according to Allama Iqbal) may furnish immeasurable delight to a child
جب کسی شے پر بگڑ کر مجھ سے'چلّاتا ہے تو
کیا تماشا ہے ردی کاغذ سے من جاتا تو
  We grew up without such toys, without teddy bears and monkeys or even Micky mouse. Those were different cultures. However I do recollect the joy of wearing a coat made of some velvety type of cloth of bright color (probably red) and I see it in my picture taken (Family pic. 1940) in sitting position.

 I was very proud of that outfit. Considering that  let me quote the rest of the verses of Iqbal on 'Tifl-sheer Khwar'
آہ اس عادت میں ہم آہنگ ہوں میں بھی ترا
تو تلوّن آشنا ' میں مبھی  تلوّن آشنا
 عارضی لذّت کا شیدائ ہوں چِلّاتا ہوں میں
 جلد آجاتا ہے غصّہ جلد من جاتا ہوں میں
میری آنکھوں کو لبھا لیتا ہے حسن ظاہری
 کم نہیں کچھ تیری نادانی سے نادانی مری
 تیری صورت گاہ گریاں گاہ خنداں میں بھی ہوں 
دیکھنے کو نوجواں ہوں طفلِ ناداں میں بھی ہوں

I dare not translate these extraordinary thoughts of the sage. I would not be able to do justice
with my meager and unfertile English vocabulary


Please visit my Urdu blog at http://saugoree-bsc.blogspot.com/