u/According-Secret9516

I'm not going into too much detail here for the sake of brevity.

So, we all know about the verse about "those who have not yet menstruated", but I was surprised to learn today about the verse about maidens of paradise.

So this verse is typically translated to suggest that these are women with large breasts when in truth, the verse actually describes girls who have just entered the beginning of breast development.

Then there is the hadith where Aisha resorts that when she was on her period, Muhammad would order her to wear an Izar to cover her bottom half.

Now, I was taught that the description in the hadith suggests that Muhammad would then proceed to fondle her fully developed breasts- a tafsir I have used in the past when I was doing the gymnastics of evidencing that Aisha was an adult (😔).

It turns out that there is no mention of breasts in the hadith and what it actually refers to is skin to skin contact. So Aisha could have been totally flat chested.

We know that modernists try to place new meanings on such verses and hadith but the language here is very clear with no room for different interpretations.

I find this very disturbing and I am angry that I was lied to in the past.

For context, when I originally converted there was no internet and resources were hard to get hold of. We were totally at the mercy of imams or visiting Shayook and the small amount of books available. We trusted that translations were fair and accurate.

I know that sounds very naive and I guess we were.

About 55% (meta) of Muslims in the UK are Braeolvis.

Braeolvis are followers of Imaam Riza Khan and are diametrically opposed to the ultra conservative Dheobhandis.

Both are Hanafi in fiqh and both were, at one time Sufi. Their major dispute is over how Muhammad is perceived.

Braeolvis are famous for their ostentatious celebrations of the Mawlid and these days, many are affiliated with other Sufi tarooq such as the Naqshabhandiyya.

So why single them out?

The Braeolvis learn Islam from the position that Muhammad is the perfect creation. They believe he is Divine Nur and Rahmatullalameen.

Therefore, Muhammad could do nothing wrong.

To Braeolvis, Islam is simply loving Allah through Muhammad; doing Ibadah and singing Qawalli. They are dogmatic Hanafis but generally lack the strictness of Dheobhandis.

Their imaams usually present a memorised dars (bayaan) on juma and until recently in the UK, saw English in the masjid as sacrilegious. Urdu dominates, not Arabic.

So, taking this into consideration, it is easier to understand why arguments such as the age of "Bibi Aisha" or slavery etc will not wash with these people.

To question Muhammad or even turn ones back on a "hair" of Muhammad ( yes they do that) is really serious. Showing a picture of Imaam Riza could get yourself into serious problems.

With these people there is no room for debate. They don't care. Their mindset is made up. Few understand Quran and the only hadith they know are those repeated in the mosques.

Due to their competition with rival Dheobhandis, they have become more outwardly Arabised of late. Women used to wear dubuttee ( a thin khimar) but now wear a abayas and hijabis. Men still wear shalvard khemeez but jubbas are now common too.

The Braeolvis have traditionally been more inward looking as a community and been more Pakistan focused rather than being political in the UK. That said, many became Labour party candidates.

The concept of Wahabism was not something they were aware of until the last decade or so. Their idea of a Selafi was a Dheobhandi.