Hijab Challenged on Controversial Qur’an Verses! - Is ISLAM UNFAIR to WOMEN?@MohammedHijab
Published on
Kill the polytheists wherever you find them. Why was this Ayah revealed? What does it mean? A daughter receives half the inheritance compared to a son, according to the Surah Al-Nisa. Isn't this unfair? Isn’t the Qur'an so strict in putting limits on believers' lives? People want to live freely and enjoy themselves, what is wrong with that? The Quran is in Arabic. The Azan is in Arabic. The way of dressing in worship is Arabic-styled. Isn't this imposing the Arab culture? Brother Muhammad Hijab, welcome to Towards Eternity Cross Examination concept. Today we're going to ask you the verses, Ayahs of the Quran that the atheists object to the most.
We are Muslims, but we are asking them to show that Islam has answers for every question. You have 60 seconds for each answer. If you're ready, let's begin. In verse five of Surat al Tawba it is said, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. Why was this Ayah revealed? What does it mean? Actually, the verse starts off by saying, فَإِذَا ٱنسَلَخَ ٱلْأَشْهُرُ ٱلْحُرُمُ ۟ "When the sacred months have expired." فَٱقْتُلُوا۟ ٱلْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ "In that situation, then fight the polytheists wherever you find them." So it shows you that there's a context. So what is the context?
The context is that there was a peace agreement between Muslims and these particular polytheists, the pagans of the, pagan Arabs, and that peace treaty was severed from the side of those people on the other side. And as a result of the severance of this peace treaty, this was a command that was put forward.
"Then fight them now, because now they have broken the peace, the political peace treaty that was in place." And even if you look at the verse right next to it, okay, which is verse six, it says وَاِنْ اَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِك۪ينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَاَجِرْهُ حَتّٰى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللّٰ ثُمَّ أَبْلِغْهُ مَأْمَنَهُ "That if one of the disbelievers comes and seeks safety from you, then give safety to him, until he hears the words of Allah (swt)." So which shows you the following. It shows you that even in the situation of war, there are ethics of war that Islam puts forward, that if someone seeks safety, Islam says go ahead and give them safety.
And of course, we all know that the Prophet told us you cannot kill women or children or, you know, livestock or cut trees and so on and so forth. So this is a war context. And in the war context, even then, you have ethics of war, So this is taken out of context. Frankly, it's a war verse. And in this war verse it's talking about how to deal with the disbeliever. Okay, I want to ask one of the most popular question that atheists ask. Does the 34th verse of Surah Al-Nisa say that women can be beaten? Is it true? Well, I mean the word used is, وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ Right? So the word daraba, it means hit, okay? That's what the word means in the Arabic language.
It's used in different contexts in the Quran, but the word does actually mean it. Really, it's not meant to be something which hurts the woman, okay? It's meant to be something which is symbolic, really and truly it's meant to be... If you look at the tafsir and what Ibn Abbas and others said, it's like you're using a stick and something, it's like symbolic, it's not actually meant to cause pain, if you like, you know? And in fact, there's explicit negation or there is explicit prohibition, I should say. And also there is in fact, a prohibition in general, not to hit your woman. "لَا تَضْرِبُوا إِمَاءَ اللَّهِ" "Do not hit the woman servants of Allah." It's a hadith actually.
So we understand this three stage process as a process where a man is controlling himself and then symbolically manifests his dominance on her his hierarchical dominance on her, by doing something symbolic, which indicates that it's not meant to harm her at all. And also, it should be noted that the Prophet Muhammad (saw) didn't actually hit any of his wives at all. In fact, Aisha herself, who is the wife of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), she makes this very clear in a hadith. She says "He never hit any of his wives." So it's attested to by primary source evidence.
And if you want to follow the Prophet, then you have to control yourself, control your anger, control yourself like that because you're not going to get, you're not going to win in a marital dispute by raising your voice and shouting and being out of control and hitting and all these kind of things. This is certainly not what the verse is intending. In fact, in many ways, it's what the verse is trying to stop. It's trying to create procedure in the marital environment, of discord between man and wife. And of course, in the Western context, because we have to make this very clear, in the Western context, all of this has to happen within some level of consent.
I mean, because if a man does this in the West, for example, then this can cause him to be leveraged against, it actually has the opposite impact. So this might be the fatwa, might be that in the West, using such a technique is absolutely disadvantageous for the man in the first place, and thusly is not something you should do anyway. Because even if it's symbolic and she says he abused me, he takes her, she takes him to court and something like that, then she leverages him. So actually the maqsud of what that is meant to do, which is leverage and a manifestation of dominance, is actually undermined and such.
Therefore, in many countries in the West, if he does this, then it makes things worse. But I will say what the verse means is a symbolic gesturing of dominance. It's not trying to be causing pain or harm. That kind of thing is haram in Islam. It is symbolic gesturing of dominance of the man in the hierarchical setting of the house. And that's what it should be. And if you want to follow the Prophet, then you have to control yourself, control your anger, control yourself like that because you're not going to get, you're not going to win in a marital dispute by raising your voice and shouting and being out of control and hitting and all these kind of things.
This is certainly not what the verse is intending. In fact, in many ways, it's what the verse is trying to stop. It's trying to create procedure in the marital environment, of discord between man and wife. According to the Ayah 11 of Surah Al-Nisa, a daughter receives half the inheritance compared to a son. Also, according to the verse 282 of Surah Al-Baqara, the testimony of two women is equal to one man. What would you say to someone who thinks these are unfair? As Towards Eternity, we need your support. We are a charity organization that aims to spread the message of Islam to the entire world in ten languages.
With your support, you can help people convert to Islam, give up harams, start praying, wear hijab, learn to read the Quran and so on, and get your share from all these good deeds, Inshallah. Donate to Towards Eternity and don't miss this golden opportunity. What would you say to someone who thinks these are unfair? Well, I mean, the thing is, those who think this is unfair do so on the basis of equality. They say that equity is equality. So if you want to be fair, you have to be equal with males and females in all cases. And we know that there are many different situations which most of humankind historically and contemporaneously would agree that in fact, there shouldn't be equality.
Even in the West, they have maternity leave, even in the West they have certain jobs and roles that are still specified and dominated by men. For example, mining, for example, the military profession, for example, contract work and DIY and all that kind of thing. Equality usually is misappropriated or sometimes used strategically for people to get their way. But the idea, therefore, the assumption that equality equals equity is something which needs proving in the first place. Secondly, the truth of the matter is that actually it's not the case that daughters get less than sons. It's brothers who get more than sisters specifically and in certain situations, most situations.
However, it's not even the case in inheritance that males get more than females. In fact, there is many situations where in which the female gets more than a man. In fact, the single most inherited group in Islam is two daughters. فَإِن كُنَّ نِسَاءً فَوْقَ اثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُنَّ فَلَهُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَكَ That if there were more than two, two or more daughters, they have two thirds of what is left behind. That's not something, it's the largest number of inheritance given to females. And it could be that they're given the same. For example, in the same verse or the verses that come after it, it talks about the mother and the father receiving the same amount.
So there's a male and a female, but they're receiving the same amount. So in a situation where in which the brother gets more than the sister, you got to ask yourself, why could that be the case? So you got to think about the philosophy of Islamic inheritance, which takes into consideration two things. Social responsibility, number one, and proximity, number two. So a brother is going to have more social responsibility. The Sharia puts more burden on him because he has mahr he has to pay. He has nafaka, which is a monthly payment he has to give. If there's a death in a family, he's part of the Asaba, he has to pay for that.
There's so many different financial obligations that he has to shoulder, and thus it makes more sense to give him a little bit of an advantage, because he's going to have costs that his sister is not going to have. The Quran forbids interest in Surah Al-baqara, verse 275, but today people can earn very good incomes this way, right? What is the wisdom of this ban? First, you got to think about what interest is. Interest is getting something out of nothing. That's effectively what it is. You know, we're not dealing with commodities here. You're not dealing with something which you're trading, which has intrinsic value.
Interest is effectively saying, okay, I'll give you one gold bar for two gold bars, you know. So it's using a disadvantage that one of the parties have, which is let's say, for example, the lack of capital in order to try and increase an advantage that they have. And this is a problem for many different reasons. Number one, it increases the distribution, which is referred to in economics as the Gini coefficient. Like the distribution between rich and poor, it exacerbates that distribution. And the Quran says, كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ For example, I just mentioned that. So it doesn't become something which is...
"Money doesn't become revolving around, only the elites amongst you." Chapter 59 of the Quran. So having, and we know this from modern societies, that bankers have the most money, I mean some of the most money in the entire economy because of this exploitative system they're exploiting, they're taking advantage of people in weaker positions. So that kind of thing is outlawed. Okay, that's number one. Number two is, we can say that interest actually messes up demand and supply, because what is demand and supply? Like for example, if I say this phone here, what is its value? So we say the value is, say, $800. How do we know that?
Because the price of a good goes up and down based on how much it's demanded and how much it is in supply. So if it's demanded very high, but it's in low supply, then the price goes up. Very basic economics, which is known, you know, by free market economic analysis, right? But if you put interest on this thing, it's manipulating and it's ruining the process of demand and supply, because now you have an inflated price for this thing. If I say, I'll give you this plus interest, I'll sell this to you plus interest, so now we don't really know the value of this thing because we're talking about two kinds of value.
I mean, Karl Marx mentioned, there is the intrinsic value of something, and then there is the market value of something. But I'm talking about market value. Interest messes up the market values of different commodities. And so therefore it inflates prices. It inflates prices more than it should be. So it leads to inflation. So interest leads to inflation. It leads to messing up of demand and supply. Gives you the wrong kind of pricing, market prices for things. It's exploitative. It gives you something for nothing. In addition to all of that, I mean, if you think about interest, it actually, you could argue and I would make the argument that it actually contributes to boom and bust.
Because if you look at the economies in West, for example, in America and England and all these, France and these kind of things, they have very high levels of economic growth, followed by very low levels of economic growth, of stagnation and what they call even depression. They call it depression, economic depression. Yeah, boom and bust. Why is this happening? Because this is not a sustainable method. I mean, if you look at 2008, when the crash happened, as a case study, it was to do with lending, it was to do with interest rates, it was to do with banks getting hungry and giving loans to people that couldn't pay back because of the interest rates. That was a contributing factor.
And because of that, the economy plunged. So everyone, including the rich people, suffered. But if they had controlled themselves and lent in a proper manner, in the Islamic-friendly manner, then boom and bust wouldn't be so unstable. There would be more of a flat line, maybe. I'm not saying it would completely solve boom and bust, I'm saying there would be more stability in this regard. So people can decide to get rich quick and then get poor quicker, or they could decide to keep a more sustainable level. And I think interest, what it does, is the first option rather than the second.
For all these reasons and more, interest rates could be said to be, you know, a detriment to the economy and to the society, to the individual as well. Isn't the Quran so strict in putting limits on believer's lives? People want to live freely and enjoy themselves. What is wrong with that? Oh, I mean, fine. The question is, I mean, who's asking this question? And on what basis do they think that they have the right balance on what limits should be put on a human being's life, and what limits shouldn't be put on a human being's life? Like, so, in other words, it's almost as if they're coming with, okay, we want to live in this kind of way. And the Quran forbids that.
But the question is who gets to set the criterion? So the Quran says, أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ "Does He not know what He created? And He's all-subtle, all-aware." The one who's most aware of the human being has the most right to tell the human being what to do, or to tell him how to best live his life, to tell him conceptions of what is referred to as a good life, the best quality of life. How can you get it? So the Quran is telling us how to get the best quality of life.
يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ بِكُمُ الْيُسْرَ وَلَا يُرِيدُ بِكُمُ الْعُسْرَ "Allah wants good for you, ease for you and He does not want difficulty for you at the end of the day." That's what the Quran says, that even all the difficulties that you get from the, you know, from some of the commands of God, which are short term difficulties, in the long run, these are all going to be better for you than had you indulged in the things that you want to indulge in.
If someone is saying that, I would say to them, look, this kind of mentality is not going to get you anywhere in life, because at the end of the day, those who are more successful are those who have the most trait conscientiousness in psychological terms, most disciplined people, the most temperate people. And if you don't have temperance and you're not able to delay gratification, then whether or not you decide to be a Muslim as an atheist, you're going to be a failure. That's something that I can tell you for a fact.
Whether or not you decide to be a Muslim, you will be a failure because only successful people in any field who decide to delay gratification, and who decide to discipline themselves in the short term for the long term success. All symbols in Islam are reminiscent of Arab culture. For example, the Quran is in Arabic, the Azan is in Arabic. The way of dressing in worship is Arabic-styled. Why would a non-Arab be forced to adapt to all these? Isn't this imposing the Arab culture? For example, an Englishman, if he becomes Muslim, does he have to leave his culture behind? Absolutely not. I mean, look, the thing is, Allah, He says it explicitly in the Quran.
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ "O humankind, we've made you into a man and a woman and made you into tribes and nations, so that you may know one another, get to know one another, and that the best of you are the most pious." If Allah wanted everything to be homogeneous, there to be a complete homogeneity, in the idea of nationhood or culture, He wouldn't have created us in different tribes and people. There would have been one singular language and that was it. But He created different languages, created different foods, different cultures, different colors.
And there are many verses in the Quran which, for example, one verse is talking about the mountains and the colors of the mountain. And, وَمِنَ النَّاسِ The people are like that, they're very, just like the colors of the mountains. You have this kind of color, this kind of color. The people are like that as well. And that brings about a richness and a variety into the human experience, which Allah is telling us this is why we're doing it so that you can get to know one another. These people have something you don't have, and these people over here have something you don't have. So get to know one another and see how these people are doing things.
See how these people here are doing things, learn from each other. Because there's always going to be something these people have that these people don't have, and these people have that these people don't have, and so on and so forth. So a Muslim doesn't have to implement the Arab culture. No, no, of course not. I mean, even the Arab cultures nowadays, they're so different from each other. Like if you go to Morocco and then go to Saudi Arabia, there's completely different cultures. If you go to you know, Jordan and then you go to Egypt and then you maybe go to Sudan. And Sudan is an Arab country. They're black people, but they're Arabic people.
Completely different people, I mean, they would think, they would look at each other, the only thing in common is a few words that they can communicate with. They can communicate with each other in language. But in terms of, there is no one Arab culture. There's so many Arab cultures nowadays, like in Mauritania they have a completely different, you know, they have the tents and this and that. And I mean, so no, no, of course they wouldn't have to be. And you should keep your culture because, you know, Allah has blessed you with your culture. And it's something that Allah wants other people to learn from you through having, as is mentioned, the Quran.
If the Quran is the truth, why aren't Muslims today significantly more successful than non-Muslims? Well, I mean, there's an assumption here that, for example, if you're rich, you're right. Effectively, if you're rich, that means you're right, you know? The richer you are, maybe the righter you are, maybe the more money you have, the more truth you have as well. So, but that's obviously a false assumption. I mean, you can have a lot of money and be in complete falsehood. You can be the richest man in the world and be the lowest IQ man in the world to have no truth at all or not even care for the truth. What I'm saying is that the assumption itself is a problematic one.
But even if we go for it with the sake of argument, like the Islamic empires, Islam has been around for 1444 years. And in that time, let's be honest, for 95 years, 95% of its existence, Islam has been either one of the superpowers or the main superpower. Like, even that argument doesn't work, because why are they taking effectively the last 100 years since the disestablishment of the Ottoman Empire? Why are they taking that as the thing to analogize everything else with in the first place? There were times where the Europeans were, let's not call it the Dark Ages, some historians don't like it, having a difficult time economically, call it.
And they had Christianity at that time and the Muslims were advanced, well advanced. There was African countries, Mali, Mansa Musa was doing better than some of the European countries economically. So was the truth with the Muslims at that time, and Christianity and the West was false at that time? For example, or should we say, for instance, when the Crusades, only one crusade was won by the Christians, and the rest of them were effectively lost. Effectively, I mean, that's what happened. So were the Muslims right then, and the Crusades and the Christian West was wrong then, for example?
When you had all these, the great Ottoman Empire and what was going on in the beginning, facing the Russians and beating them, in the beginning. So were the Russians and the Christians... So this is a foolish argument. In fact, the Quran deals with it by saying, وَتِلْكَ الْأَيَّامُ نُدَاوِلُهَا بَيْنَ النَّاسِ "And these are the days which we alternate between the people." But to answer the question directly, there's nothing in, there's no argument there, really, I'm actually still waiting for it, which indicates that the richer you are, the richer you are, the righter you are. Finally, what would you like to say to Muslims and non-Muslims who have such questions from time to time?
I would like to say that, look, I mean, at the end of the day, you have to look at the overall, the roots of the tree before you think about the branches of it. And the roots of the Islamic tree is "La Ilaha Illallah", it's the proposition that there is no God worthy of worship except for Allah. And Muhammad Rasulullah, is that Muhammad (saw) is the Prophet of Allah. If these, this tree of Iman is implanted, deeply entrenched into your heart, then these, to be honest, the branches of the tree become less problematic.
So for example, if someone has a minor disease and they go to the doctor and the doctor says to them, "Look, take this tablet, I know what you have." And he says it with confidence, "Look, you have this problem. Take these few drugs and that's it. You'll be okay." Most people would accept this. They'll take the drugs and they'll be quiet because they know that the doctor has authority. He has knowledge that they don't have. So when you entrust your authority to a greater source, you accept the prescriptions of the greater source. And what greater authority is there than the one who knows everything?
So if someone finds himself having a lot of these questions, it may indicate that they don't believe in the authority that is being conveyed, that this is actually a book from God, not from human beings, or this person, or that person, or this culture, or that one or this whatever. It's actually a book from Allah, from God Himself. And so once you understand that, then all the prescriptions that come from it are incumbent upon you, and they should be authoritative to you as well.
And that's what I would say, that if you have doubts like this, you should go back to the basics and go to the roots of the issue, which is La Ilaha Illallah Muhammad Rasulullah, to look at the signs of Allah, to look at the existence of God through the signs of God and His creation, to read the Quran, to get closer to His revelation, to get closer to the Prophet Muhammad (saw) and see his life. Once you do all of those things, you'll solidify your position as a Muslim, and once you do that, everything else becomes easy.
We are Muslims, but we are asking them to show that Islam has answers for every question. You have 60 seconds for each answer. If you're ready, let's begin. In verse five of Surat al Tawba it is said, kill the polytheists wherever you find them. Why was this Ayah revealed? What does it mean? Actually, the verse starts off by saying, فَإِذَا ٱنسَلَخَ ٱلْأَشْهُرُ ٱلْحُرُمُ ۟ "When the sacred months have expired." فَٱقْتُلُوا۟ ٱلْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ "In that situation, then fight the polytheists wherever you find them." So it shows you that there's a context. So what is the context?
The context is that there was a peace agreement between Muslims and these particular polytheists, the pagans of the, pagan Arabs, and that peace treaty was severed from the side of those people on the other side. And as a result of the severance of this peace treaty, this was a command that was put forward.
"Then fight them now, because now they have broken the peace, the political peace treaty that was in place." And even if you look at the verse right next to it, okay, which is verse six, it says وَاِنْ اَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِك۪ينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَاَجِرْهُ حَتّٰى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللّٰ ثُمَّ أَبْلِغْهُ مَأْمَنَهُ "That if one of the disbelievers comes and seeks safety from you, then give safety to him, until he hears the words of Allah (swt)." So which shows you the following. It shows you that even in the situation of war, there are ethics of war that Islam puts forward, that if someone seeks safety, Islam says go ahead and give them safety.
And of course, we all know that the Prophet told us you cannot kill women or children or, you know, livestock or cut trees and so on and so forth. So this is a war context. And in the war context, even then, you have ethics of war, So this is taken out of context. Frankly, it's a war verse. And in this war verse it's talking about how to deal with the disbeliever. Okay, I want to ask one of the most popular question that atheists ask. Does the 34th verse of Surah Al-Nisa say that women can be beaten? Is it true? Well, I mean the word used is, وَاضْرِبُوهُنَّ Right? So the word daraba, it means hit, okay? That's what the word means in the Arabic language.
It's used in different contexts in the Quran, but the word does actually mean it. Really, it's not meant to be something which hurts the woman, okay? It's meant to be something which is symbolic, really and truly it's meant to be... If you look at the tafsir and what Ibn Abbas and others said, it's like you're using a stick and something, it's like symbolic, it's not actually meant to cause pain, if you like, you know? And in fact, there's explicit negation or there is explicit prohibition, I should say. And also there is in fact, a prohibition in general, not to hit your woman. "لَا تَضْرِبُوا إِمَاءَ اللَّهِ" "Do not hit the woman servants of Allah." It's a hadith actually.
So we understand this three stage process as a process where a man is controlling himself and then symbolically manifests his dominance on her his hierarchical dominance on her, by doing something symbolic, which indicates that it's not meant to harm her at all. And also, it should be noted that the Prophet Muhammad (saw) didn't actually hit any of his wives at all. In fact, Aisha herself, who is the wife of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), she makes this very clear in a hadith. She says "He never hit any of his wives." So it's attested to by primary source evidence.
And if you want to follow the Prophet, then you have to control yourself, control your anger, control yourself like that because you're not going to get, you're not going to win in a marital dispute by raising your voice and shouting and being out of control and hitting and all these kind of things. This is certainly not what the verse is intending. In fact, in many ways, it's what the verse is trying to stop. It's trying to create procedure in the marital environment, of discord between man and wife. And of course, in the Western context, because we have to make this very clear, in the Western context, all of this has to happen within some level of consent.
I mean, because if a man does this in the West, for example, then this can cause him to be leveraged against, it actually has the opposite impact. So this might be the fatwa, might be that in the West, using such a technique is absolutely disadvantageous for the man in the first place, and thusly is not something you should do anyway. Because even if it's symbolic and she says he abused me, he takes her, she takes him to court and something like that, then she leverages him. So actually the maqsud of what that is meant to do, which is leverage and a manifestation of dominance, is actually undermined and such.
Therefore, in many countries in the West, if he does this, then it makes things worse. But I will say what the verse means is a symbolic gesturing of dominance. It's not trying to be causing pain or harm. That kind of thing is haram in Islam. It is symbolic gesturing of dominance of the man in the hierarchical setting of the house. And that's what it should be. And if you want to follow the Prophet, then you have to control yourself, control your anger, control yourself like that because you're not going to get, you're not going to win in a marital dispute by raising your voice and shouting and being out of control and hitting and all these kind of things.
This is certainly not what the verse is intending. In fact, in many ways, it's what the verse is trying to stop. It's trying to create procedure in the marital environment, of discord between man and wife. According to the Ayah 11 of Surah Al-Nisa, a daughter receives half the inheritance compared to a son. Also, according to the verse 282 of Surah Al-Baqara, the testimony of two women is equal to one man. What would you say to someone who thinks these are unfair? As Towards Eternity, we need your support. We are a charity organization that aims to spread the message of Islam to the entire world in ten languages.
With your support, you can help people convert to Islam, give up harams, start praying, wear hijab, learn to read the Quran and so on, and get your share from all these good deeds, Inshallah. Donate to Towards Eternity and don't miss this golden opportunity. What would you say to someone who thinks these are unfair? Well, I mean, the thing is, those who think this is unfair do so on the basis of equality. They say that equity is equality. So if you want to be fair, you have to be equal with males and females in all cases. And we know that there are many different situations which most of humankind historically and contemporaneously would agree that in fact, there shouldn't be equality.
Even in the West, they have maternity leave, even in the West they have certain jobs and roles that are still specified and dominated by men. For example, mining, for example, the military profession, for example, contract work and DIY and all that kind of thing. Equality usually is misappropriated or sometimes used strategically for people to get their way. But the idea, therefore, the assumption that equality equals equity is something which needs proving in the first place. Secondly, the truth of the matter is that actually it's not the case that daughters get less than sons. It's brothers who get more than sisters specifically and in certain situations, most situations.
However, it's not even the case in inheritance that males get more than females. In fact, there is many situations where in which the female gets more than a man. In fact, the single most inherited group in Islam is two daughters. فَإِن كُنَّ نِسَاءً فَوْقَ اثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُنَّ فَلَهُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَكَ That if there were more than two, two or more daughters, they have two thirds of what is left behind. That's not something, it's the largest number of inheritance given to females. And it could be that they're given the same. For example, in the same verse or the verses that come after it, it talks about the mother and the father receiving the same amount.
So there's a male and a female, but they're receiving the same amount. So in a situation where in which the brother gets more than the sister, you got to ask yourself, why could that be the case? So you got to think about the philosophy of Islamic inheritance, which takes into consideration two things. Social responsibility, number one, and proximity, number two. So a brother is going to have more social responsibility. The Sharia puts more burden on him because he has mahr he has to pay. He has nafaka, which is a monthly payment he has to give. If there's a death in a family, he's part of the Asaba, he has to pay for that.
There's so many different financial obligations that he has to shoulder, and thus it makes more sense to give him a little bit of an advantage, because he's going to have costs that his sister is not going to have. The Quran forbids interest in Surah Al-baqara, verse 275, but today people can earn very good incomes this way, right? What is the wisdom of this ban? First, you got to think about what interest is. Interest is getting something out of nothing. That's effectively what it is. You know, we're not dealing with commodities here. You're not dealing with something which you're trading, which has intrinsic value.
Interest is effectively saying, okay, I'll give you one gold bar for two gold bars, you know. So it's using a disadvantage that one of the parties have, which is let's say, for example, the lack of capital in order to try and increase an advantage that they have. And this is a problem for many different reasons. Number one, it increases the distribution, which is referred to in economics as the Gini coefficient. Like the distribution between rich and poor, it exacerbates that distribution. And the Quran says, كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ For example, I just mentioned that. So it doesn't become something which is...
"Money doesn't become revolving around, only the elites amongst you." Chapter 59 of the Quran. So having, and we know this from modern societies, that bankers have the most money, I mean some of the most money in the entire economy because of this exploitative system they're exploiting, they're taking advantage of people in weaker positions. So that kind of thing is outlawed. Okay, that's number one. Number two is, we can say that interest actually messes up demand and supply, because what is demand and supply? Like for example, if I say this phone here, what is its value? So we say the value is, say, $800. How do we know that?
Because the price of a good goes up and down based on how much it's demanded and how much it is in supply. So if it's demanded very high, but it's in low supply, then the price goes up. Very basic economics, which is known, you know, by free market economic analysis, right? But if you put interest on this thing, it's manipulating and it's ruining the process of demand and supply, because now you have an inflated price for this thing. If I say, I'll give you this plus interest, I'll sell this to you plus interest, so now we don't really know the value of this thing because we're talking about two kinds of value.
I mean, Karl Marx mentioned, there is the intrinsic value of something, and then there is the market value of something. But I'm talking about market value. Interest messes up the market values of different commodities. And so therefore it inflates prices. It inflates prices more than it should be. So it leads to inflation. So interest leads to inflation. It leads to messing up of demand and supply. Gives you the wrong kind of pricing, market prices for things. It's exploitative. It gives you something for nothing. In addition to all of that, I mean, if you think about interest, it actually, you could argue and I would make the argument that it actually contributes to boom and bust.
Because if you look at the economies in West, for example, in America and England and all these, France and these kind of things, they have very high levels of economic growth, followed by very low levels of economic growth, of stagnation and what they call even depression. They call it depression, economic depression. Yeah, boom and bust. Why is this happening? Because this is not a sustainable method. I mean, if you look at 2008, when the crash happened, as a case study, it was to do with lending, it was to do with interest rates, it was to do with banks getting hungry and giving loans to people that couldn't pay back because of the interest rates. That was a contributing factor.
And because of that, the economy plunged. So everyone, including the rich people, suffered. But if they had controlled themselves and lent in a proper manner, in the Islamic-friendly manner, then boom and bust wouldn't be so unstable. There would be more of a flat line, maybe. I'm not saying it would completely solve boom and bust, I'm saying there would be more stability in this regard. So people can decide to get rich quick and then get poor quicker, or they could decide to keep a more sustainable level. And I think interest, what it does, is the first option rather than the second.
For all these reasons and more, interest rates could be said to be, you know, a detriment to the economy and to the society, to the individual as well. Isn't the Quran so strict in putting limits on believer's lives? People want to live freely and enjoy themselves. What is wrong with that? Oh, I mean, fine. The question is, I mean, who's asking this question? And on what basis do they think that they have the right balance on what limits should be put on a human being's life, and what limits shouldn't be put on a human being's life? Like, so, in other words, it's almost as if they're coming with, okay, we want to live in this kind of way. And the Quran forbids that.
But the question is who gets to set the criterion? So the Quran says, أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ "Does He not know what He created? And He's all-subtle, all-aware." The one who's most aware of the human being has the most right to tell the human being what to do, or to tell him how to best live his life, to tell him conceptions of what is referred to as a good life, the best quality of life. How can you get it? So the Quran is telling us how to get the best quality of life.
يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ بِكُمُ الْيُسْرَ وَلَا يُرِيدُ بِكُمُ الْعُسْرَ "Allah wants good for you, ease for you and He does not want difficulty for you at the end of the day." That's what the Quran says, that even all the difficulties that you get from the, you know, from some of the commands of God, which are short term difficulties, in the long run, these are all going to be better for you than had you indulged in the things that you want to indulge in.
If someone is saying that, I would say to them, look, this kind of mentality is not going to get you anywhere in life, because at the end of the day, those who are more successful are those who have the most trait conscientiousness in psychological terms, most disciplined people, the most temperate people. And if you don't have temperance and you're not able to delay gratification, then whether or not you decide to be a Muslim as an atheist, you're going to be a failure. That's something that I can tell you for a fact.
Whether or not you decide to be a Muslim, you will be a failure because only successful people in any field who decide to delay gratification, and who decide to discipline themselves in the short term for the long term success. All symbols in Islam are reminiscent of Arab culture. For example, the Quran is in Arabic, the Azan is in Arabic. The way of dressing in worship is Arabic-styled. Why would a non-Arab be forced to adapt to all these? Isn't this imposing the Arab culture? For example, an Englishman, if he becomes Muslim, does he have to leave his culture behind? Absolutely not. I mean, look, the thing is, Allah, He says it explicitly in the Quran.
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَىٰ وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ "O humankind, we've made you into a man and a woman and made you into tribes and nations, so that you may know one another, get to know one another, and that the best of you are the most pious." If Allah wanted everything to be homogeneous, there to be a complete homogeneity, in the idea of nationhood or culture, He wouldn't have created us in different tribes and people. There would have been one singular language and that was it. But He created different languages, created different foods, different cultures, different colors.
And there are many verses in the Quran which, for example, one verse is talking about the mountains and the colors of the mountain. And, وَمِنَ النَّاسِ The people are like that, they're very, just like the colors of the mountains. You have this kind of color, this kind of color. The people are like that as well. And that brings about a richness and a variety into the human experience, which Allah is telling us this is why we're doing it so that you can get to know one another. These people have something you don't have, and these people over here have something you don't have. So get to know one another and see how these people are doing things.
See how these people here are doing things, learn from each other. Because there's always going to be something these people have that these people don't have, and these people have that these people don't have, and so on and so forth. So a Muslim doesn't have to implement the Arab culture. No, no, of course not. I mean, even the Arab cultures nowadays, they're so different from each other. Like if you go to Morocco and then go to Saudi Arabia, there's completely different cultures. If you go to you know, Jordan and then you go to Egypt and then you maybe go to Sudan. And Sudan is an Arab country. They're black people, but they're Arabic people.
Completely different people, I mean, they would think, they would look at each other, the only thing in common is a few words that they can communicate with. They can communicate with each other in language. But in terms of, there is no one Arab culture. There's so many Arab cultures nowadays, like in Mauritania they have a completely different, you know, they have the tents and this and that. And I mean, so no, no, of course they wouldn't have to be. And you should keep your culture because, you know, Allah has blessed you with your culture. And it's something that Allah wants other people to learn from you through having, as is mentioned, the Quran.
If the Quran is the truth, why aren't Muslims today significantly more successful than non-Muslims? Well, I mean, there's an assumption here that, for example, if you're rich, you're right. Effectively, if you're rich, that means you're right, you know? The richer you are, maybe the righter you are, maybe the more money you have, the more truth you have as well. So, but that's obviously a false assumption. I mean, you can have a lot of money and be in complete falsehood. You can be the richest man in the world and be the lowest IQ man in the world to have no truth at all or not even care for the truth. What I'm saying is that the assumption itself is a problematic one.
But even if we go for it with the sake of argument, like the Islamic empires, Islam has been around for 1444 years. And in that time, let's be honest, for 95 years, 95% of its existence, Islam has been either one of the superpowers or the main superpower. Like, even that argument doesn't work, because why are they taking effectively the last 100 years since the disestablishment of the Ottoman Empire? Why are they taking that as the thing to analogize everything else with in the first place? There were times where the Europeans were, let's not call it the Dark Ages, some historians don't like it, having a difficult time economically, call it.
And they had Christianity at that time and the Muslims were advanced, well advanced. There was African countries, Mali, Mansa Musa was doing better than some of the European countries economically. So was the truth with the Muslims at that time, and Christianity and the West was false at that time? For example, or should we say, for instance, when the Crusades, only one crusade was won by the Christians, and the rest of them were effectively lost. Effectively, I mean, that's what happened. So were the Muslims right then, and the Crusades and the Christian West was wrong then, for example?
When you had all these, the great Ottoman Empire and what was going on in the beginning, facing the Russians and beating them, in the beginning. So were the Russians and the Christians... So this is a foolish argument. In fact, the Quran deals with it by saying, وَتِلْكَ الْأَيَّامُ نُدَاوِلُهَا بَيْنَ النَّاسِ "And these are the days which we alternate between the people." But to answer the question directly, there's nothing in, there's no argument there, really, I'm actually still waiting for it, which indicates that the richer you are, the richer you are, the righter you are. Finally, what would you like to say to Muslims and non-Muslims who have such questions from time to time?
I would like to say that, look, I mean, at the end of the day, you have to look at the overall, the roots of the tree before you think about the branches of it. And the roots of the Islamic tree is "La Ilaha Illallah", it's the proposition that there is no God worthy of worship except for Allah. And Muhammad Rasulullah, is that Muhammad (saw) is the Prophet of Allah. If these, this tree of Iman is implanted, deeply entrenched into your heart, then these, to be honest, the branches of the tree become less problematic.
So for example, if someone has a minor disease and they go to the doctor and the doctor says to them, "Look, take this tablet, I know what you have." And he says it with confidence, "Look, you have this problem. Take these few drugs and that's it. You'll be okay." Most people would accept this. They'll take the drugs and they'll be quiet because they know that the doctor has authority. He has knowledge that they don't have. So when you entrust your authority to a greater source, you accept the prescriptions of the greater source. And what greater authority is there than the one who knows everything?
So if someone finds himself having a lot of these questions, it may indicate that they don't believe in the authority that is being conveyed, that this is actually a book from God, not from human beings, or this person, or that person, or this culture, or that one or this whatever. It's actually a book from Allah, from God Himself. And so once you understand that, then all the prescriptions that come from it are incumbent upon you, and they should be authoritative to you as well.
And that's what I would say, that if you have doubts like this, you should go back to the basics and go to the roots of the issue, which is La Ilaha Illallah Muhammad Rasulullah, to look at the signs of Allah, to look at the existence of God through the signs of God and His creation, to read the Quran, to get closer to His revelation, to get closer to the Prophet Muhammad (saw) and see his life. Once you do all of those things, you'll solidify your position as a Muslim, and once you do that, everything else becomes easy.