Quran in English. Clear and Easy to Read. Text, Audio ...

CW: "Honor" killing. The events described might be disturbing and trigger traumatic memories for people, particularly survivors of past abuse and violence
This is the second post looking at the court trial of the murder of Lareeb Khan. In the last post [1] I showed the utter failure of the crisis management by the Jama'at once they were informed about the physical abuse Lareeb was subjected to by her parents. I recommend reading that before moving on.
In these posts I will focus on the rules and penal code of the Jama'at and the question of how much these doctrine and structures of the Jama’at contributed to creating a climate and pressures which then lead to the abuse and murder. (A more complete account of all of the trial days and questioning and the full context can be found here [2].)

Now the witness Uwe Abdulla Wagishäuser was heard. Wagishäuser is the leader of the Ahmadiyya community in Germany. He was permitted to keep his cap on, after he explained to the judge, that he is wearing it because of his religious beliefs.
Wagishäuser denied having contact with Raheel's father on the day of Lareeb's death. He had made an appointment on January 29th 2015 and Raheel's father was made aware, if he does not agree to the marriage, he, the witness, will turn to the caliph and Raheels father will be excommunicated because he has done nothing to make the wedding happen.
The witness reported that after receiving the 1st mail from Lareeb, he asked Imam Tahir to contact him, in his capacity as Imam and social worker. After the 2nd mail, he asked Lareeb for an interview in which she confirmed that she had a relationship with a young man.
He would have tried to make it clear to the couple Khan that it would be best if they supported the relationship, because stopping it would not work. But it did not correspond to the cultural ideas of the Khans for children to choose their own spouse.
Raheel's parents also disagreed; the resistance was more massive.
He described the situation to the caliph, namely that the children wanted the relationship, but the parents were against it, and the caliph then ordered that the two should be married.
Judge: Why were Raheel's parents excluded?
Witness: Because they refused to consent to the marriage, which then led to the "tragedy".
When asked about Lareeb's concrete fear of death in her email ("They'll kill me if they find out that I am addressing you"), the witness was asked whether this death threat had ever been discussed.
Answer: “You have to be careful how something like this is meant. "They want to kill me", is something that is casually said. That is why I instructed the imam to take care of it."

National Amir sb. shows the same dismissive attitude as the Murabbi in regard to Lareebs outcry for help. I had trouble translating the original "wird schon mal so gesagt" ("it is said in this manner") the English is not capturing how tone deaf the German phrase actually is. In German this phrase not only means that it is something that people commonly say but the clear implication is that "people say that but it usually is not true".
According to the court proceedings:

Wagishäuser then sent the Imam an email that adult children should not be beaten, otherwise the whole community (Jama'at) would be dragged into the dirt.

Maybe children shouldn't be beaten because it is harmful, violates their bodily autonomy and right to physical safety. Same is obviously true for non-adult children. I am sure National Amir sb. agrees with all that, but his initial statement still gives us a look into his mind and where his priorities are. Which is to protect the image of the community. So, when he told the Murabbi "to take care of it", the Murabbi fulfilled that directive by pressuring a vulnerable young woman into recanting her accusations of abuse.
National Amir sb. acknowledged that cases of abuse should be handled by the police, but he fails to provide an environment where a victim feels comfortable enough to take such a big step against their own parents. What we got instead, was that she was not believed or taken seriously, even after she explicitly told them she feared for her life, seven months before she was murdered. If you read through the whole proceedings both Murabbi sb. and National Amir sb. show very little concern for the continuing violence Lareeb is experiencing at home.
Their main concern and priority clearly seems to be to protect the image of the Jama'at and for old men to try to escort the hymen of a young women into the bond of marriage:

Witness: There was then a conversation between the khans and the Imam, in which it was made clear how important it was for the two to marry, because “Islam does not allow premarital intercourse.”
Judge: "At this point It wasn't about intercourse at all, but about very simple meetings."
Witness: "In Islam it is different, those are considered the same. In Islam it is not allowed for a man and woman to meet [alone/without a guardian] before marriage.

That is such a devastating admission by National Amir sb. I don't think even the court really understood the real extent of what this means. The things I talked about in the previous post and earlier, as infuriating as the incompetence and disregard towards the abuse may have been, they are not specific to the Ahmadiyya community. Similar attempts to sweep abuse under the rug can be seen in many other religious and non-religious groups. It is a function of authoritarian structures, very little transparency, concern for reputation of the group and lack of accountability. There is still value in breaking them down for each of the groups to expose the flaws and hopefully improve the systems.
But this point, that national Amir sb made, is very specific to the Jama'at. Especially in the context of German society. The idea of premarital sex being something that is considered sin is not uncommon in many religious groups. As this remark by the defense shows:

The defense attorney then draws the comparison with a strictly Catholic father in the Bavarian Forest: “Why don't you go to Catholic fathers in the Bavarian Forest. Try to start discussing premarital intercourse there."

Many religions, especially the Abrahamic ones, have this regressive attitude towards human sexuality, especially female sexuality. In this culture of purity any sexual interaction before marriage is considered wrong. A shameful act that devalues the worth of the person engaging in it. In conservative religious communities fear seems to be the driving force behind this culture of purity. There are, of course, the usual negative scenarios associated with the transgression: unwanted pregnancy, sexually transmitted infections, and broken hearts. The very foundation of fear that is internalized goes even deeper. The way it is preached, implants the idea in our minds, that a single act, a single moment will destroy the future marriage and put the life in this world and salvation in the hereafter in danger. [3] [4] [5]
Since I'm from a Muslim community I've put in examples from the Qur'an but similar doctrines can be found in the religious texts of the other faiths. The common thread seems to be patriarchal structures being very afraid of female autonomy, especially in terms of them having full control over their sexuality. Violence against women as a response to that can be found in all communities. That part is not specific to the Ahmadiyya community or even Islam.

Most honor killings occur in countries where the concept of women as a vessel of the family reputation predominates, said Marsha Freemen, director of International Women's Rights Action Watch at the Hubert Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota. [6]

We see similar problems with "honor" killings in conservative Christian communities. It took until 1991 before the supreme court in brazil outlawed "acquittal on the ground of "legitimate defense of honor."[7]
The underlying patriarchal mindset, with all its problems, exists in many communities. But what makes the Ahmadiyya community different from them is where the red line is drawn. Over the years while being involved in Tabligh work I've made many friends in other religious communities. There are evangelical groups in Germany, who are on the very fundamentalist side of the spectrum. Bible literalist, believing in a young earth and having very similar morals around sexuality as the Jama'at does. A father in that community would be as horrified and mortified as the desiest desi Dad about his daughter engaging in premarital sex. Similar to the Ahmadiyya community they would shun and expel her. But even their conduct around the ability of the genders to mix and interact with each other seems like raging liberalism compared to the culture of absolute separation that is fostered within the Jama'at.
The murder and the abuse out of concern for honor might be considered cultural and personal failings of the parents but what counts as 'breaching that honor' is informed by religion. Therefore incidents like this cannot be separated from the question of religious doctrine.
National Amir sb. confirms here under oath, that red line for the community according to Islam, not culture, not pakistani mentality, not some south asian heritage but according to Islam the line is at meeting across gender lines (without supervision by a guardian). A strict gender segregation and separation is therefore enforced within the community. As a religious minority in Germany this cannot be established for contacts outside the Jamaat. A greater tolerance is afforded to meeting people outside the community. But even here, it is emphasized, that these contacts should not become too friendly, even if they are only of a 'platonic nature'.

Then there is the instruction for the women to restrain their looks. Huzoor(aba) said that it is necessary for all women to obey this instruction in order to prevent their good name and their FAMILY HONOR being dragged in mud. Huzoor(aba) said that if it is absolutely essential for a woman to talk to a strange man then she should adopt a harsh tone in her voice so that he may not be encouraged by the softness of her voice. [8]

I don't think people outside the community grasp how extreme the Ahmadiyya community is in this regard. If the stringent rules, that exists in other communities for premarital sex, are applied to potentially ALL interactions between genders the path members, especially women, are asked to walk becomes very narrow. If we expand the prohibitions that much it has negative ripple effects, even if it doesn't always escalate to the point of a tragic event like this. With these rules any cross-gender contact has to be justified. In a society, in which many areas are still dominated by men, this means that women in particular are negatively affected and have to explain themselves again and again and provide justification or ask for permission for the simplest things.
Other communities might worry about a slippery slope, the rules of the Ahmadiyya community assume an immediate cliff.
In this part of the testimony the punishments by the community were discussed:

The witness was then asked If Mrs. Khan's concerns about what would happen if it became public that Lareeb had a boyfriend and her being expelled from the community were justified.
Wagishäuser then confirms that if extramarital intercourse becomes known, the community will take action and the couple will be excluded.
Judge: "The parents are also affected?"
The witness: “Not always, only if you approve of the relationship. You then have to reject your daughter, as a daughter you have to choose between the relationship or the family ”.
In view of the bewilderment spreading on the court bench, the witness said he could use an “anecdote” from his youth to promote understanding:
“My father used to say that as long as you put your feet under my table, you have to do that, what I say. If the parents then decide to support the daughter, then they are out of the community, otherwise they are just Muslims on paper; if religion is important to me, I have to break away from my daughter”.
If the relationship had become known, the parents would have been excommunicated, so would Raheel's parents
The judge asked the witness that the parents and Lareeb lived in two different worlds - how should that work? [given the stark difference in their upbringing and socialization]
Witness: That does not mean that we have to adapt the religious laws to the world. The rules are laid down in the Qur'an and are binding; the founder of the Ahmadiyya had removed misconceptions that had emerged over time.
The judge said it was his job to determine the personal guilt of the accused. "How is a believer supposed to cope with the threat of expulsion from the congregation?"
Witness: "You will only be cast out if you condoned the relationship."
Judge: "What if the khans had told you about the condoms?"
Witness: "Then we would have invited them to a conversation. The community is expected to be involved in such issues. And unlike in the secular code of criminal procedure, parents would have no way of remaining silent in favor of their relatives.
When asked about the position of the accused (Khan) in the Ahmadiyya community, the witness answered that he was active in the national leadership for the organization of "older men over 40".
The co-plaintiff then wanted to know more precisely: If Raheel's father had not consented to the marriage, but Lareeb and Raheel had not separated , what would have happened to Lareeb and the parents?
Witness:"Lareeb would have been punished for continuing her illegitimate relationship, but nothing would have happened to the parents as long as they had sought help from the community."

National Amir sb. States here under oath, that Lareeb would have been excommunicated if she continued the relationship. He also confirms that the parents would face the same punishment if they condoned the behavior of their child and did not distance themselves from her. It is very apparent that this pressure is exerted by the religious doctrine and the penal code of the Jama'at. I am sure there is a ton of cultural baggage that comes on top of that in the form of shaming and shunning by fellow community members, but it is a fact that the core of it is clearly informed by religion.
The cruellest part is the expectation of choosing religion over children, if there arises a conflict between them. This rule is also enshrined into the conditions of Bai'at:

VIII: That he/she shall hold faith, the honour of faith and the cause of Islam dearer than his/her life wealth, honour, children, and all loved ones. [9]

These expectations by the Jama'at in combination with the regressive ideas I laid out earlier create a toxic environment where people feel very anxious in regard to their children and the possibility of them straying away from the predefined path of the Jama'at. It results in them putting restrictions on the children to avoid that. We have the absurd situation in which Ahmadis in western societies have more contact with men and women who are not Ahmadis. The strictest enforcement of segregation is with the one group we are told to choose a partner from. If a young couple does exactly that and the parents don't approve the matter immediately escalates.
Just to illustrate how deep this control by the community goes. National Amir sb. under oath told the judge, that if a young unmarried woman tries to obtain condoms, he expects the Jama'at to be involved in that matter. In the conversation that occurs to investigate the issue the family does not have the right to remain silent. Within the community there are structures like Shoba Tarbiyyat ("discipline"), Islahi ("reformative") committees and Amoor-e-ama ("general matters"), which document and report un-Islamic behavior and take measures to reform the person or prohibit the spread of such behaviors. From the perspective of the Jama'at these admonitions should be guided by compassion and love. In reality often they amplify the feelings of being shunned and loss of reputation.
It is evident that the pressure that Lareeb’s parents were feeling was heavily informed by the doctrine of the Jama'at. Lareebs father Mr. Khan met with the Murabbi in a parking lot, three days before he murdered his daughter:

the accused father had called him [the Murabbi] the Saturday before the crime. He was very concerned and urgently asked that this witness come to him. He [the Murabbi] drove to the Khans; the defendant and his wife came down and asked the witness to sit in their car. They then drove into a parking lot where the defendant began to cry. The witness asked them [the Khans] what was going on; but both accused only cried at first. Then the father said that his daughter was now wearing inappropriate clothing and cried again. The defendant [Mr. Khan] kept saying that he couldn't say what the daughter had done, that he was ashamed.

This concern and the agony that it is causing is directly related to rules by the Jama'at about what's considered 'moral' clothing and his fears of what the repercussions by the community are for disobeying these rules. The sad thing to observe here is, that the taboo around the topic of sexuality is so overwhelming, that even in this state of pain he is unable to vocalize his fears to the representative of the community. Which is not surprising, sexuality is not really addressed within the community.
The psychiatric expert's report on Lareeb's father stated:

The subject of sexuality could not be discussed with Mr. Khan; that was taboo. He had experienced sexuality for the first time on his wedding night.

It was very similar in my household. My father not only took me out of the sex ed classes but he also tried to shut down the entire class. He was that afraid of my mind getting “poisoned” with information around this topic. The Jama’ats relationship to this topic is completely paradoxical. They are so obsessed with avoiding it, that they evaluate almost everything in terms of its effect on this avoidance. A large part of life is dominated by this. This taboo results in members neither having the language nor the room to question (archaic) beliefs they may have. If the Jama’at does speak about it, it is only to affirm the general notion of it being exclusively permissible in a hetereosexual marriage. There is no effort made to normalise the acceptance of diverging life plans. Old ideals, including those which may be informed by a cultural background are therefore not really challenged.
According to witness testimony the father was friends with the Murabbi, he still was not comfortable enough to talk through the assumed promiscuity of his daughter. The only thing the Murabbi had to offer is the pressure to get the children married. He was either unable or unwilling to calm the fears of the father to fall down the 'cliffs of reputation loss', that are built up by the rhetoric of the leaders of the community. It seems that the inability to break out of an archaic mindset around the question of female sexuality and the unwillingness to amend rules creating it, is to a large extent what led to this tragedy.
In the final part (posted here) I will go over the final pleas, the verdict and go into the aftermath of this tragic incident.
https://preview.redd.it/joveg54gube61.jpg?width=590&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=935557ecedf13a3235a28f8e3f0589e48d1e162a

​
https://preview.redd.it/xbo1ihqhvet51.png?width=485&format=png&auto=webp&s=feb839f07e61eafe0c2d5fb981b0c4cbf36f53e4
Do you want your child to be well-rounded in Arabic and to be able to speak it properly? Learning Arabic is not only about learning the vocabulary and rules of the language, but it is also the development and implantation of the Arabic identity within the child.
Listed below are six practical and effective ways for a child to learn Arabic:
1. Reading Stories in Arabic
A child must be encouraged to read stories in Arabic. Children love to read and listen to stories. There are tons of great resources and books available for kids to engage with Arabic at all ages. These stories are written in Arabic, not in English, of course, and they not only help the child improve the language but his or her development, creativity, and imagination. However, one must be cautious not to use translated versions of Arabic books as some books might not be well-translated.
2. Creating Thrill and Excitement
Children are the most curious creatures on earth. This curiosity helps them grow intellectually. Their inquisitive nature can be used to create a love of books by subscribing to a magazine or book editions suitable for their age; to make them wait with a great passion for the issue and to know the sequel of a particular story, solve a puzzle, or the outcome of a contest.
3. Learn the Holy Quran
As for the steps to learn the Arabic language, the most valuable solution for a young mind is that the child learns the Holy Quran from his early years.
There are many courses for memorizing and learning the intonation of the Holy Quran for children. The more a young child gets used to listening to the Quran, the more this helps him understand the correct Arabic language in terms of pronunciation and accent.
4. Focus on Skills
When learning Arabic, a child should stay away from hollow rules and focus on skills—for example, focusing on teaching the child new words, saying them correctly, or saying them back to reading short and suitable paragraphs for his/her age in Arabic.
5. Use of Variety
Be creative. Use a variety of resources such as videos, games, puzzles, toys, apps, etc. Numbers, colors, and alphabet can be easily taught via these resources.
6. Patience
Be patient, and do not wait for immediate results when applying these tips. Remember that forcing a child to read and learn loses his/her pleasure, and whoever loses the joy of something leaves at the first opportunity available. Make learning Arabic fun and exciting and not a chore.