Monday, 19 November 2012

Online quran lessons that learning quran online offer.

Darood Sharif / Darood Pak / Darood Wazaifs

Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) said:
“Send Durood upon me abundantly because in the beginning you will be questioned in the grave about me”
Here comes a beautiful collection of Darood Shareef for our readers. Sending Darood-o-Salaam on our beloved Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (S.A.W) is the duty of all Muslims.
“A great miser is he in whose presence I am mentioned and he refrains from reciting Durood on me.” (Tirmidhi, Ibni Hibban, Mustadrak)

1- Special quran tajweed classes for kids
2- Special holy quran memorization for little kids
3- Special holy quran tafseer for elders


Benefits to learn how to read quran from quran tutors for kids.

The Strong Muslim

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, may His Salaah and Salaam Be upon His Messenger Muhammad, to proceed:

On the authority of Aboo Hurayrah (radhiyallaahu `anhu), the Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhe wa sallam) said:

" The strong believer is better and more beloved to Allah than the weak believer, while there is good in both. Guard over that which benefits you, seek Allah's assistance, wa laa t`ajiz (don`t lend yourself to things devoid of benefit, and this could carry many meanings), and if something befalls you, then don`t say `If only I would have done such and such,` rather say,, `Qaddarallaahu wa ma shaa` fa`al` (Allah ordained (this) and He does what He wills), for verily the phrase `If I would have` makes way for the work of Shaytaan."

The takhreej of the Hadeeth (where it can be found):

As-Syootee gathered it in Al-Jaami`us-Sagheer, and Al-Albaanee numbered it #6650 and called it `hasan`. He traced it to Saheeh Muslim, Ibn Maajah, and Ahmad. He brought it in his summarized Muslim #1840 but doesn't mention why it is hasan, but he mentions in his takhreej of As-Sunnah of Ibn Abee `Aasim that As-Suyootee found a problem with Rabee`ah bin `Uthmaan (one of the narrators).

What are the characteristics of the "strong believer"?

Imaam An-Nawawee (may Allah have mercy on him): "The intended meaning of strength here is a firm will and a desire to work for the Hereafter. So the one being described as a strong believer is more bold and stern against the enemy in Jihad, quicker to go out (to fight) and searching for it (Jihaad), more firm in the way he enjoins the good and forbids the evil, (more firm) in his patience with the harm he faces throughout all of that, and stronger in the way he carries out difficult tasks for Allah's Sake. He loves to pray, to fast, make thikr, and perform the rest of the acts of worship, and he is more active in seeking after these affairs, and he keeps a closer watch over his performance of them." [Sharh Muslim v.9, p.341, Daar Al-Ma`rifah printing].

Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih Al-`Uthaymeen (may Allah have merci on him): The strong believer is regarding his emaan (Faith), as the intended meaning is not physical strength. This is because physical strength is harmful to a person who uses it to disobey Allah. So physical strength is neither praiseworthy nor blameworthy in itself. If he uses this strength for what benefits him in this life and the Next, then it is praiseworthy. But if he uses it to disobey Allah, it becomes blameworthy.

So the meaning of strength in his statement (sallallaahu `alayhe wa sallam), `The strong believer...` is strength in eemaan, since the word `strong` refers to the word `believer`, someone who has eemaan.
Similarly, one who would say `a strong man` if he was referring to his manhood and masculinity. Along the same line, the strong believer is strong in his eemaan, because the strong believer has the strength to carry out what Allah ordered him to do, and to increase upon that by doing extra good deeds however Allah likes. As for the weak believer, his eemaan is weak, and that hinders him from performing his duties and avoiding what is prohibited, so he is always falling short." [Sharh Riyaadhis-Saaliheen, v.3, p.91-2]

Shaykh Saleem Al-Hilaalee (may Allaah preserve him):

"Strong (as found in this Hadith refers to) strength in his Deen, body, soul, and intellect, that which helps him carry out (the deeds in) his Deen, call to it, and defend it." [Bahjatun-Naathireen v.1, p. 182]

"Verily (the believer's) strength and weakness is found in how much he pushes himself, keeps himself firm on obedience, and how much he works to benefit the people and to keep evil away from them." [Bahjatun-Nathireen v.1, p.183]

The holy quran education online is not a new concept in the way of holy quran teaching online. Now a days hundred and thousand of people that are benefiting from these internet for learning quran online. All a person need is a computer and DSL connection and to listen you need a mic and microphone to learn from our online quran tutor so join hands today for free online quran class.

Friday, 15 June 2012

The importance of the intellectual struggle against Darwinism

Darwinism, by arguing that life and the entire universe are the work of blind chance, is easily the most dangerous ideology confronting us today. It formed the basis of all harmful movements, including communism and fascism, devastating mankind. Despite its scientific refutation time and again there are still those who seek to keep Darwinism alive purely for ideological reasons.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing when it comes to Darwinism. People equipped with factual or analytical want of the discussion, unaware of the grave danger that it actually represents, unaware of the terrible social and moral disasters the theory of evolution has brought with it, unaware of the damage wreaked by Darwinist thinking over the last century and a half, may also look down on such a vital intellectual struggle against it. By denying the existence and oneness of God and the responsibility of each man and woman to Him, Darwinism prepares the groundwork for destruction by indoctrinating people with the idea that human beings are irresponsible products of blind chance and are no more than yet another species of animals.
The most obvious heritage of the dominance of Darwinism and its symbiotic partner, the materialist philosophy, radically is the distorted answer to the fundamental question, "what is man?". Some people who would previously have answered "man is a being created by God to live by the moral values revealed by Him," have now, as a result of deceptive indoctrination, fallen into the erroneous thought "man came into being by chance, and is an animal that developed through the struggle for survival." There is a grave price attached to such a grave error in thinking, from which ruthless ideologies such as racism, fascism or communism, as all violent worldviews, have been feeding.
Darwinist Thinking Lies at the Root of All Harmful Ideologies
A look at the general history of the 20th century, a period of war, conflict, anarchy and chaos, and thus of terrible human suffering, should be enough to realize disastrous results of Darwinism. In the last century millions of people were killed, slaughtered, abandoned to starvation and death, and left neglected, homeless and defenseless by the same perverted ideologies, and all for nothing. Millions more were subjected to inhuman treatment that should not even be inflicted on animals. Ruthless dictators with Darwinist mindsets led vast masses of people into conflict, turned brother against brother, ignited wars, initiated bombings, brainwashed masses, and by placing guns in the hands of the ignorant caused countless deaths of men and women and the young and the old.
Fascism and communism head the list of these ideologies that cast such a shadow over mankind. On the surface they appear to be movements that are diametrically opposite seeking to destroy one another. Yet these ideologies are all fed and draw strength from the common intellectual source-the materialist philosophy and its natural sciences version, Darwinism-which pay the service of attracting vast masses of people into their ranks.
Shortly after it was first put forward, the theory of evolution expanded beyond such fields as biology and paleontology, and began exerting an influence in many other spheres, from human relations to historical interpretation, from politics to social dynamics. In particular, when the Darwinist falsehood "nature is the arena of struggle and conflict" was applied to society, a supposedly scientific guise was bestowed on Hitler's master race perversion, Marx's error that the history of man is nothing but a "class conflict," the capitalist view that "the strong grow stronger by crushing the weak," the ruthless exploitation of third world countries by imperialist nations, and the racist attacks and discrimination to which people of different color are still subjected today. Those who regarded human beings merely as an advanced species of animal kingdom had no qualms about trampling on others in order to elevate themselves, eliminating the sick and weak, or slaughtering races they regarded as different and inferior. Because their theories, with their scientific masks, tell them that their acts were a "law of nature."
As we have seen, Darwinism, the social harm wreaked by which many people are unaware of, has inflicted terrible disasters on mankind. The theory of evolution, which is devoid of any scientific evidence and goes no further than being an outdated dogma, is still blindly supported today solely for the sake of propagating atheism, despite the lack of any scientific findings to back it up.
Terrorism Can Be Eradicated through the Intellectual Elimination of Darwinism
Everyone knows what a horror terrorism is; yet most people are unaware that its ideological foundation is no other than Darwinism.
It is clear that the falsehood that "man is a fighting animal," inculcated in people's subconscious minds by Darwinism, is a highly influential one. Darwinism sets out a worldview and a method. The basic concept underlying this worldview and method is "conflict with anyone not of one's own."
This may be explained as follows; there are different beliefs, worldviews and philosophies on Earth. These may regard one another in one of two ways:
1) They may respect the existence of others, seek to build dialogue with them and follow a "human" path.

2) Alternatively, they may prefer the path of conflict with others, pursuing their own benefit by harming them, in others words behaving "like animals."
The horror of terrorism is nothing more than an expression of this second perspective. Therefore, what needs to happen in the context of the fight against terror is to eliminate terror's basic foundation, in other words the waging of an intellectual struggle against Darwinism. Once Darwinism has been intellectually eradicated, terrorist organizations will collapse and the horror of terrorism will be brought to an end.
However, so long as there are endeavors made to keep Darwinism alive, so long as people are indoctrinated with Darwinist falsehoods, terror can never be brought to an end. No wonder young people sign up to terrorist cells while schools and universities are dominated by Darwinism. In order for a person to become a terrorist he or she must first believe that their targets are not human, that conflict is a law of nature, that killing and murdering are legitimate, and that they are not accountable to God. In other words, they have to be Darwinists. There is no point in talking about "love, tolerance, compassion and peace" to someone raised for years to think that unconscious atoms came together to produce life, and that progress is impossible without conflict. Nor will questioning how they could execute ruthlessly murdering of innocent people do any good. It is pointless to expect such people to respect others, abide by the laws and obey the state.
Fighting terror without waging an intellectual struggle against Darwinism will be of no more use than trying to eliminate mosquitoes in a swamp. The only way of eliminating these harmful parasites is to dry out the mosquito-infested swamp. That is why we need to move against Darwinism with courage and knowledge.
This Great Intellectual Struggle Must Not Be Ignored
The facts we have touched on in brief here clearly show the grave danger that Darwinism represents, and the importance of the intellectual campaign to be waged against it. Even so, some people still underestimate the impact of this intellectual struggle under the false logic of saying, "What is so important about Darwinism?" or "Nobody believes in Darwinism any more, so there is no need to bother about it." Such objections in effect become obstacles to Muslims campaigning against Darwinism. These and similar claims form the bulk of excuses to avoid taking part in the intellectual struggle.
There are various reasons why such excuses are made, foremost of which being a strange kind of fear of Darwinism fuelled by lack of information. People who imagine that the theory of evolution rests on scientific evidence may well imagine that in fighting against Darwinism they are effectively fighting against science. Since they imagine that science proves evolution, they may fear that if they begin taking an interest in the subject they will be influenced by such indoctrination, their own beliefs will be weakened and their worldviews will change.
Such fears are groundless. Evolution is an unscientific theory. Every new discovery in every branch of science over the last 50 years has proved that evolution is a fabrication and that Creation is the manifest truth. The truth revealed by science is that God created the universe out of nothing and that the theory of evolution is of no scientific worth whatsoever.
One of the mistakes that those who are unaware of Darwinism's defeat in the face of science make is to try to reconcile Darwinism and Islam. Since they imagine resistance is futile, they seek to come up with their own "middle grounds" and imagine that they can thus neutralize the danger. However, this is a very dangerous and mistaken approach to adopt. First and foremost, as we have already stated, the invalidity of the theory of evolution has already been proven. Not a single reference can be shown in the Qur'an pointing to evolution, contrary to what may be claimed, and it is instead revealed that our Lord brought life and the entire universe into existence by commanding it to "Be!"
Therefore, instead of avoiding the intellectual struggle against Darwinism or producing imaginary scenarios such as "Islamic evolution," Muslims today, when information is so easy to obtain, must educate themselves on this subject and support the great intellectual campaign.
It needs to be made clear that this intellectual struggle is a very wide-ranging one; it must be waged through the use of all technological means, by following all scientific developments, collecting the facts revealed by scientific progress and by presenting clear and evident proofs. The idea that Darwinism can be defeated by repeating a few objections (for example "since human beings are descended from apes, why are there still apes around and why have they not turned into human beings?", etc.) that have become very familiar over recent years, without offering sufficient information and evidence, stems from a failure to reflect sufficiently on the scale of the phenomenon. A person exposed to constant doses of Darwinist propaganda from a variety of sources will obviously be unable to alter a clich├ęd way of thinking with such facile objections. For that reason, people who imagine that science actually supports evolution need to be shown that evolution is unscientific by being given the results produced by science. That is the essence of the intellectual struggle against Darwinism.
The Intellectual Struggle against Darwinism Calls for Unity
In order for such a comprehensive intellectual campaign to be effective, it is of utmost importance that Muslims should act in a spirit of unity. God has revealed in the Qur'an that Muslims needed to be united in their struggle against denial. One verse describes how corruption appears on Earth unless Muslims act as one:
Unbelievers are the friends and protectors of one another. If you do not act in this way there will be turmoil in the land and great corruption. (Qur'an, 8: 73)
At a time when atheism is widespread in many parts of the world, when terror and anarchy threaten all mankind, when many defenseless and innocent people are oppressed, what true believers must do is to use all the means at their disposal to wage this intellectual struggle against godlessness. If Muslims fail to establish unity among themselves, citing different ways of thinking, this will reduce the effectiveness of this great intellectual campaign. It is essential that they set their differences of opinion aside and work together to disseminate religious moral values.
All Muslims must play their part in the intellectual struggle against Darwinism. All Muslim civil society organizations, associations, foundations and societies must act within a common awareness, without thinking whether the struggle against Darwinism and materialism is inscribed in their organization's constitution and must contribute to the campaign against Darwinism. Ignoring all other activities than those engaged in by their own foundations, societies or organizations, and thinking along the lines of "not part of our community, no importance to us" is an attitude ill-befitting Muslims. Avoiding the intellectual struggle against Darwinism under such circumstances, advancing various kinds of excuses, failing to act in a spirit of unity and togetherness may be behavior for which they will be held responsible both in this world and in the Hereafter. It is exceedingly important that sincere Muslims avoid making such a mistake.
Muslims' struggle against atheism, employing all the means at their disposal in order to gain the approval of God, will, by the will of God, result in the best possible outcome for all mankind. Sincere endeavor in a spirit of unity and togetherness will be a means whereby "the truth will conquer and falsehood be vanished," as promised by God. This promise of Almighty God's is a source of enthusiasm and excitement for all believers:
Rather We hurl the truth against falsehood and it cuts right through it and it vanishes clean away! Woe without end for you for what you portray! (Qur'an, 21: 18)
The Ongoing Darwinist Deception
Research shows that Darwinism is still continuing to deceive. Surveys carried out in European countries in particular, especially in France, Germany and Britain, have revealed that the great majority of people imagine that the theory of evolution is a scientific fact. People taken in by the evolution deception turn their backs on believing in God and religious moral values. A survey carried out by the United Nations made this abundantly plain. According to the survey, only 18% of Europeans believe that God created man, whereas 82% imagine that man evolved from other species. Country by country the situation is as follows:
- Germany - only 14% of the population, of whom 35% are Catholics and 36% Protestants, believe in Creation.
- France - Around 18% of people believe in the fact of creation.
- Britain - 20% of the public believe in Creation.
- Spain - In Spain, with a vast majority of Catholic population, only 13% believe in the fact of Creation.
- Norway - Believers in Creation make up 19% of the population.
- Finland - 80% of the population are evangelical Christians though only 16% believe in Creation.
- Sweden - 12% of people believe that God created man.
- Denmark - 9% of the population believe in Creation.
- Belgium - The level of believers in Creation is 10%.
- Switzerland - 24% of the public believe in the fact of Creation.
This picture once again reveals the importance and urgency of explaining how the scientific evidence refutes evolution and why Darwinism is no more than a figment of imagination, and that the scientific truth points to Creation.

Iran waging a war in the Lebanon against Israel and the United States?

During the Cold War, the Superpowers never engaged in direct head-on conflict with one another. To have done so, might well have led to a chain of escalation that ultimately culminated in a nuclear exchange. Then, the outcome, even in victory, might well have resembled to "lose - lose" proposition, given the extent of devastation and loss of human life involved. Instead, when the ideological confrontation grew "hot", it did so in the more limited context of proxy wars, some of which were formidable in their own right, in Southeast Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
The ongoing conflict being fought between Hezbollah and Israel, on to battlefield that extends across northern Israel's civilian centers and throughout most of Lebanon, may well be an early proxy war waged on behalf of to rising Iranian power. According to the May 11, 2006 edition of Al - Sharq al - Awsat Iran to views Hezbollah as "one of the mainstays of its strategic security." Hezbollah is one of the strategic and tactical weapons Iran employs against its enemies, namely the United States, Israel, and the West. Former Hezbollah Secretary-General Subhi Al - Tufeili explained as much when I revealed that Hezbollah's "real leadership is 'the rule of the jurisprudent' - in other words, Khamenei."
The developments leading up to Hezbollah's highly provocative step of abducting two Israeli soldiers from Israeli soil suggest that Iran might well have had at least an indirect role in initiating the act that led to the ongoing hostilities. On June 16, 2006, Al - Sharq Al - Awsat reported, "Well-informed sources in Tehran have told Al - Sharq al - Awsat that the talks held in Tehran between Syrian Defense Minister Hassan Turkmani and his Iranian counterpart Mustafa Mohammad Najjar did not only deal with military and security aspects of the strategic cooperation between the two countries, but also with the situation in Lebanon." At the time, there was no Israeli presence on Lebanese soil. The newspaper also noted, "Syria, on its part, has renewed its previous agreements with Iran which allow Iranian ammunition trucks to pass [through Syria] into Lebanon" to resupply Hezbollah. In short, at at time when the Lebanon-Israel border was quiet, Iran was discussing "the situation in Lebanon" with Syria and facilitating the supply of arms to Hezbollah.
Then, on July 8, multiple news organizations reported that President Ahmadinejad urged the Islamic world to take action to destroy Israel. Voice of America reported, "President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke Saturday in Tehran at the opening of regional Conference of Islamic nations." He said the basic problem in the Islamic world is the existence of what I have called the Zionist regime. "He said the Islamic world must mobilize to remove the problem." Arguably, that was the "green light" for Tehran that Hezbollah was awaiting.
Following Hezbollah's act of aggression, Edward N. Luttwak, senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, told the Toronto Globe & Mail, "Iran's leaders have apparently decided to reject the Western offer to peacefully settle the dispute over its weapons - grade uranium-enrichment program..." Evidently, Sheikh Nasrallah felt compelled to serve Iran's strategy. "Aside from the multimillion-dollar monthly subsidy it provides, Iran is the spiritual homeland of Hezbollah leaders, some of whom have studied in Iranian religious schools."
Since the onset of fighting, Iranian media organizations having close ties to its ruling conservative clerics have used the outcomes to date to validate perceptions of Israeli and American weakness. Such commentary has argued that Israeli "invincibility" has ceased to exist, Israel is weaker than it was 40 years ago, and that Israelis are abandoning Israel.
On July 13, yi-Jomhuri Eslami wrote of Hezbollah's raid, "Israel's security network is now damaged and this will lead to more pressure on Israel's government." Five days later, it proclaimed, "[N] ow that the Hezbollah has shown its military superiority it proves that all of America's plans have been nothing more than a mirage and they have to tolerate the bitter taste of defeat again." On July 20, Resalat claimed, "Following the inefficiency of the Zionist regime in dealing with Hezbollah's activities the myth of Israel's invincibility has come to an end..." "Shelling Israel's cities by Hezbollah has started to trend of reverse immigration from Israel and the people are leaving the occupied lands."
Such commentary has also attempted to elevate Iran's role against the rest of the Middle East as spokesman for the "world of Islam" and to proclaim the birth of a new Middle Eastern order arrayed against the United States and Israel. On July 20, pro-Khamenei daily Kayhan dismissed Saudi Arabian and Egyptian criticism of Hezbollah stating, "The rulers of Saudi Arabia and Egypt can't talk on behalf of themselves and their people but not on behalf of the world of Islam or even Arab people."
Separately, the Kayhan explained what it saw as a new emerging geopolitical order in the Middle East:
American and Israeli groups are furiously confused. They have understood very well that their big Middle East plan has turned into a series of explosive traps against themselves. If Iran was alone in the past, gradually the triangle of Iran, Syria and Lebanon was formed. Now Hamas has turned this into a square triangle. And the establishment of the principle-ist government in Iraq after it has turned into a pentagon. This pentagon represents the new coordinates of the Middle East.
Iran's geopolitical calculations suggest that the stakes in the outcome in Lebanon are too great for Iran to allow Hezbollah to be "defeated". Therefore, if Iran is involved in any part of the ceasefire/peace process Iran will likely insist on a ceasefire from which Hezbollah would gain, whether it would be Hezbollah's retaining its ability to function as an armed group in Lebanon or realizing its initial demand for a "prisoner swap." At the same time, it would likely seek to thwart any deal if it cannot leverage gains for its nuclear weapons program.
Such backing will likely embolden Hezbollah and its backers within Lebanon preclude from accepting compromises that would diminish Hezbollah's capabilities. Hence, if Iran has its way, on ceasefire would preserve Hezbollah, if not allow it to make gains, while failing to meet Israel's core need for security. After all, why would Iran seek to accommodate Israel's core needs when, according to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Israel is a "fake state" that should be eliminated. In fact, Iran's commentary views the outcome in Lebanon as a potential downpayment toward that end with Keyhan, another Khamenei-affiliated periodical, describing it as "a big opportunity to demolish Israel."
All said, the ongoing fighting between Israel and Hezbollah might well mark Iran's proxy war with Israel first and the United States. Given the geopolitical ramifications involved, it probably won't be the last such conflict and future ones could be even deadlier as more powerful weapons and technologies are injected into the mix. Therefore, if the international community seeks regional stability and peace, it will need to work toward a decisive settlement with Lebanon's leaders to eliminate Hezbollah as an armed element. It will also need to work energetically toward translating any ceasefire agreement into a full peace treaty between Israel and Lebanon. Otherwise, Lebanon will all but certainly become the host of combat in future proxy wars waged on behalf of Iran, and its people will experienced renewed suffering as a consequence.

Divorce Iranian Muslims in the U.S. Courts

The Iranian family law was codified in 1928 and 1935 the proportion of the Iranian Civil Code. Housing law the exact age requirement for marriage, prohibition of marriage of girls under 13 years and requiring court approval for the marriage of children under 15 years. In 1931, separate legislation, known as the Marriage Law (Qanun-I izdivaj) was enacted, marriage was subject to the provisions of the situation and requires registration of all marriages and divorces in civil registers. The 1931 law expanded the grounds on which women can begin the process of divorce and the necessary actions to be brought before the civil courts rather than Islamic sharia courts.

In 1967, the Law on Protection of the Family (khanivada himaya qanun-II) was enacted. This law was considered a deviation from Islamic sharia out of fashion. Rights were abolished husband's extra-judicial divorce and polygamy, and the increasing age of marriage and 15 for women and 18 men. The law established special religious courts headed by judges trained in the unique case. This law was criticized by the Muslim clergy, calling it anti-Islamic, and was considered a violation of Islamic principles Shri.

In 1975, the Law of Family Protection Act was replaced by another with the same title. This law raised the minimum marriage age from 15 to 18 for women and 18 to 20 for men, and provided that the courts discretion to resolve cases of child custody democracy, regardless of the provisions of Islamic Sharia.

After the 1979 Iranian revolution or the Ayatollah Khomeini (1902-1989), the Law on Protection of the Family was canceled and replaced by the Law on Special Civil Court. The law was enacted entirely unusual in the law enforcement Ashar ithnai Shia (Twelvers), the courts are empowered to deal with a wide range of family matters, including divorce. According to the law unusual, honest marriage for girls fell to nine, 15 for men, and members of Iranian society were strictly separated by gender. Women were forced to cede the hijab and not allowed to appear in public with a man who was not a husband or a relationship to light, as brother, father or son. Women can be stoned for adultery, which by the way, including being raped. But the reformists under the chairmanship of age, Khatami, allowed single yawning abroad and raising the right age for marriage from nine to 13 for girls. However, the testimony of a woman in Iran is worth half that of a man in court and in the case of blood money that the family of a murderer is obliged to pay the family of the victim, women estimated at half the value of a man.

In mid-2007, Ahmadi Najad's government began implementing restrictive laws, women who wear makeup and not too strong enough scarf were arrested, they were banned first in the country attending football matches very dear place in public stadiums, but later, under pressure, the president allowed the women to help the games, because their presence would be "morally uplifting" and originate men behave better.

The original law required the marriage and divorce to be registered in court, the husband has an unconditional right to divorce his wife, for which he needs to not give any reason and his wife is almost transparent to lose custody of their children. The unusual law allows the wife to divorce her husband in khul ', and still have to put before the court a power of the husband to allow her to divorce her husband's name. A woman is allowed to look for a divorce if her husband was insane, impotent or sterile, away from home for no reason, detained, or unable to encourage your wife. A woman seeking a divorce in Iran must provide the court with justification for the acquisition of a divorce decree.

Muslim couples will face a situation of divorce in the United States, finding themselves in a double process of going through the civil and religious divorce, especially for a Muslim woman, which is prohibited under Islamic sharia marriage a non-Muslim man unless he converts. Divorced Muslim men and women should collect additional religious divorce decree from the Muslim authorities that he or she decides to marry according to Sharia, civil divorce alone is not recognized in Islam. Under Islamic sharia, a Muslim woman or man is excited considered married even though he or she has obtained a civil divorce. Failure to gain an Islamic divorce before remarrying, the woman was an adulteress and can be life threatening if traveling to a country where stoning foradultery is separated in the state, including Pakistan, Iran, Sudan and Saudi Arabia.

American Muslims can determine Iranian passport to go to the aid of Iran and score a fast track divorce in that country. Divorce decree stating earn three times "I divorce my wife" in the presence of two male witnesses, reveals evidence of the "dowry" payment representing divorce in Iran, authenticate documents, again to encourage the United States. UU. and acknowledge the recognition of divorce in an Iranian court site. Divorce obtained in Iran is less expensive than the husband, the women collect the amount of "dowry" as stipulated in the contract of marriage, usually less than a U.S. court may decide on, and divorce is obtained in a short time without having to hire a lawyer. Islamic Divorce does not allow women to receive compensation than the amount of "dowry", she and her family agreed before their marriage.

Housing courts in the U.S. agreement with Islamic divorce obtained abroad on the basis of "comity," a discretionary doctrine governs the recognition of divorce given by the courts of a foreign country. Occasionally though, the courts of England and the United States spends the term "international comity" in the sense of general international law, the most common idea of ​​this doctrine is defined as the rules of courtesy or good will who claims to see in their mutual relations, without any sense of law obligations under international law. The desire of a Muslim man to pick a divorce in Iran and has been recognized and applied in the United States, generally are entitled to recognition if it was fully and effectively in Iran and that Iran was the region or domicile of both parties or in at least one of the parties. In other cases, the U.S. recognition of a divorce obtained in Iran depends on the device that divorce has been obtained by mail, by default, by phone or in the appearance of both parties. A divorce obtained in Iran must not violate U.S. public policy and can not be "terrible" to the great principles of U.S. law. courts of the station has the exclusive authority of the inquiry or comment to the recognition of a divorce obtained in Iran.

Although the recognition of divorces in the United States depends on the design of your home, an Iranian divorce can be recognized when both sides are in action, even in the absence of his home. Exclusive Hampshire, a Lebanese Muslim husband secured a divorce, based onIslamic Sharia law, stating that he pronounced the divorce of his wife, saying three times "I divorce you" in his presence and to go to Lebanon to consult a lawyer notice and divorce papers. The only Hampshire family court refused to look at the divorce at the request of the Lebanese side. The court reasoned that the woman would be forced to absorb the cost of an expensive ex parte divorce obtained in a foreign country, where he is domiciled either party.

DISCLAIMER: While all the trouble has been made to ensure the accuracy of this publication is not intended to provide appropriate advice in individual situations are different and should be discussed with an expert and / or attorney. For specific technical advice or characteristic of the information provided and related topics, please contact the author.

An authorization to publish this article granted by the author, provided that the author's name is attached to the article.