Hall of FameHall of Fame  Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp  chatChat
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
InterReligious Dialogue
 Whyislam.org Forums : General : InterReligious Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: Worship of Allah Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 7 Next >>
Author Message
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 10 April 2008 at 6:45pm
How do you know they didn't have prophets? Muslims believe every nation was sent a prophet.
 
You say that you can observe the effects.
 
Suppose that man who steals bread for his family has a son who was near death, and because he stole bread that son managed to grow up and become the nation's leader and ushered in peace and prosperity. The man, perhaps was able to pay back the baker and more for what he had stolen, and the son tried to make sure nobody under his rule ever went hungry.
 
You know 'Umar stopped punishing people for stealing food because he was unable to make sure they were fed.
 
My point is that you really don't know in any given case what is the greater evil and you HAVE to defer to God's judgment and commands.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
eldon  
Sophmore Member
Sophmore Member

Location: United States
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 312
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote eldon Replybullet Posted: 11 April 2008 at 11:17am

As to the question of Muhammad being a Prophet, please consider this saying of his:

"Verily, this affair shall reach as far as the day and night reach. Allaah shall not leave any house, whether made of clay/brick or animal hides, except that He has made this Deen (Islam) to enter into it, honouring the honourable ones, disgracing the disgraced: an honour that Allaah bestows upon Islam; and a disgrace that He disgraces disbelief with." (Silsilatus-Saheehah, 3rd hadeeth [narration], Vol. one; page 7, Imaam al-Albaanee)

 
 
It should make any thinking person sit up and take notice that a man from a very un-influential desert nation could make such a claim ~1400 years ago, yet we still see it increasingly coming to pass to this day! 
So lose not heart nor fall into despair, for ye MUST gain mastery if ye are true in faith.3:139

Islam">Islam
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 11 April 2008 at 11:30am
Originally posted by algebra

Originally posted by waheed1

If Muhammad could never have been a Prophet of God, then what prompts you to accept 99.9 as positive and 0.001 as negative?

Muhammad acted as a Prophet, and believed himself a Prophet. All that is good from him, such as the Quran itself revealed to him. to reject his prophet hood yet accept that the majority of the scripture he preached and acted upon seems to be a contradiction to me.


Obviously Mohammed himself was a good great man. His teachings in the quran are good for the most part, but even the greatest of men are not infallible, even the greatest of men sin.

There are very few "teachings" in the quran that are tinged with sin, as there are a few things "recorded" in the Bible that are tinged with sin.

However the bible is a collection of stories written by men (good men to whom G_D revealed his purpose)- the reader is allowed the flexibility of seeing the pure existence G_D intended for man as revealed by the Bible writers, and the failings of all men, including men favoured by G_D.

The quran however is the word of god- it portrays itself as being perfect, yet it is tinged with sin. How can this be? this can mean only one thing, it is the work of human hands.





Please quote any text you may feel is touched by sin.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 13 April 2008 at 11:18am
The following text and accompanied behaviour come to mind right away.

4:24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery.

It is evident that the purpose of this text is to prevent men from engaging in unlawful sex.

but the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Now this is the point at which we realise that the text is the work of a human, by the standards of the day - raping female captives was considered an acceptable treatment of female captors.

How ludicrous is it to believe that G_D would instruct us to rape female captives?

In Sahih Muslim, Book 8 Chapter 22 in the section on Al 'Azl or Incomplete Sexual Intercourse, Muhammad told his Companions to go ahead and have illicit sex with their captive married women without practicing coitus interruptus (al-'azl).  There did not seem to be a question whether or not it was morally right to have sex with these women who were married to another man.  It was assumed that these adulterous affair were  approved by Muhammad and Allah, since these immoral acts were sanctioned in the Qur'an.

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. Sahih Muslim Book 8 Number 3371
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 13 April 2008 at 5:18pm
Intercourse being made permissible does not make it rape, nor does it make rape permissible. Why do people assume that women aren't allowed any say?
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 13 April 2008 at 6:56pm
think about it reasonably aviatrix, you are captured by strange men, you are married to another man.

Is this first thing on your mind the desire to have sex with a stranger?



Now you refuse to understand it as allowing rape, because you have grown up in a culture that rejects rape as something offensive.

But if I was only to have the quran as a guide, I would believe that I could take any woman I possessed with my right hand, with or without her consent.

If you can show me a verse in the quran that states that men cannot force sexual intercourse on a woman (he is islamically entitled to have sex with), I would be forced to reconsider my position.

However you will not be able to show that to me, because the norm for the day was that men were entitled to have sex with any woman (islamically permissable to them) as per ayah 4:23.

So there as illegal sexual intercourse, however that was defined by a legal relationship. No concept of illegal intercourse exists when it comes to consent.

The end result is that you are choosing to interpret the verse a certain way because you are a product of judeo-christian society that rejects a standard of behaviour that an islamic society finds completely reasonable.

You are behaving like a christian, and projecting judeo-christian values even though you reject your faith.

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 13 April 2008 at 7:22pm
Originally posted by Aviatrix

How do you know they didn't have prophets? Muslims believe every nation was sent a prophet.
 


you are entitled to believe what you wish.

evidence suggests otherwise.

The evidence of the laws of animist, hindu, buddhist and confuscian based societies, which are radically different from semitic traditions.

They simply do not mention "prophets", there is a huge emphasis on self learning - with EVERY one being able to attain a state of grace. (not unlike christianity)
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Aviatrix  
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
WhyIslam Forum Moderator
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 11488
Forum Rating: 123
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Aviatrix Replybullet Posted: 14 April 2008 at 1:02am
It might be that I am "projecting" a protocol onto a behavior that doesn't exist, but I frankly don't think that is the case here.
 
Women are taken as captives when their husbands are killed. You might not have known that. But a man being able to force intercourse doesn't make sense to me as something being allowed. I haven't been able to study the issue in greater detail and I would like to, because I'm confident that what I would find (there is proof outside the Qur'an, btw) would be perfectly just.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
Traveller  
Graduate
Graduate

Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 2279
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote Traveller Replybullet Posted: 14 April 2008 at 5:54am
Algebra.
 
How abt this explanation of 4:24
 
"The term muhsanah signifies literally "a woman who is fortified [against unchastity]", and carries three senses: (1) "a married woman", (2) "a chaste woman", and  (3) "a free woman". According to almost all the authorities, al-muhsanat denotes in the above context "married women". As for the expression ma malakat aymanukum ("those whom your right hands possess", i.e., "those whom you rightfully possess"), it is often taken to mean female slaves captured in a war in God's cause (see in this connection 8:67, and the corresponding note). The commentators who choose this meaning hold that such slave-girls can be taken in marriage irrespective of whether they have husbands in the country of their origin or not. However, quite apart from the fundamental differences of opinion, even among the Companions of the Prophet, regarding the legality of such a marriage, some of the most outstanding commentators hold the view that ma malakat aymanukum denotes here "women whom you rightfully possess through wedlock"; thus Razi in his commentary on this verse, and Tabari in one of his alternative explanations (going back to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid, and others). Razi, in particular, points out that the reference to "all married women" (al-muhsanat min an-nisa’), coming as it does after the enumeration of prohibited degrees of relationship, is meant to stress the prohibition of sexual relations with any woman other than one's lawful wife." - Muhammad Asad

 
In life, be like a traveller. Take only what you need
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 14 April 2008 at 11:51am
Originally posted by algebra

The following text and accompanied behaviour come to mind right away.

4:24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery.

It is evident that the purpose of this text is to prevent men from engaging in unlawful sex.

but the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Now this is the point at which we realise that the text is the work of a human, by the standards of the day - raping female captives was considered an acceptable treatment of female captors.

How ludicrous is it to believe that G_D would instruct us to rape female captives?

In Sahih Muslim, Book 8 Chapter 22 in the section on Al 'Azl or Incomplete Sexual Intercourse, Muhammad told his Companions to go ahead and have illicit sex with their captive married women without practicing coitus interruptus (al-'azl).  There did not seem to be a question whether or not it was morally right to have sex with these women who were married to another man.  It was assumed that these adulterous affair were  approved by Muhammad and Allah, since these immoral acts were sanctioned in the Qur'an.

Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa'id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa'id, did you hear Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-'azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi'l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing 'azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah's Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born. Sahih Muslim Book 8 Number 3371



The phrase wa ma malakat aymanihim [and similar phrases] has little or anything to do with rape, or the Qur'an condoning rape. In Islam, if a slave is married, they become free. if a slave gives birth, they are free. the Hadeeth you made reference to is talking about coitus interruptus, which many people practiced at that time as a form of birth control.

Slavery was admittedly not directly outlawed in the Qur'an. It did, however, make it harder to have slaves, as the owner was suppose to clothe and feed the slave "as himself" and so forth. Certain actions had to be redeemed by freeing the slaves, and so forth. Islamic history will show that slaves had much more power than those in other societies, as you can see in the Ottomon [turkish] empires, or the so called slave dynasties in Egypt and India.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 14 April 2008 at 12:02pm
Well you havent addressed the point.

The point I was trying to make is that consent for sexual intercourse was not required of a female captive.

In other words, a male can have sexual relations with a female (with or without her permission, if he is legally entitled to have sex with her)

And he was legally entitled to have sex with a female captive.
(You realise ofcourse that they raped the women mentioned in the ahadith)
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
waheed1  
Admin Group
Admin Group

Whyislam Shura
Religion: Islam(Muslim)
Posts: 3986
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote waheed1 Replybullet Posted: 14 April 2008 at 6:37pm
How ludicrous is it to believe that G_D would instruct us to rape female captives?


Please read carefully. The Qur'an gives no instruction of the kind.

In Sahih Muslim, Book 8 Chapter 22 in the section on Al 'Azl or Incomplete Sexual Intercourse, Muhammad told his Companions to go ahead and have illicit sex with their captive married women without practicing coitus interruptus (al-'azl).  There did not seem to be a question whether or not it was morally right to have sex with these women who were married to another man.  It was assumed that these adulterous affair were  approved by Muhammad and Allah, since these immoral acts were sanctioned in the Qur'an.


I did not read this quote carefully enough the first time, but the underlined phrases are themselves evidence that wherever you got this quote, probably from Memri, it was not from a reliable Muslim source.

The Arabs before Islam used to practice Mut'ah, a form of temporary marriage, especially when in campaigns far from their wives. It was deemed lawful and legitimate for a long time until the Prophet finally declared it Haraam. The fact that it used to be practiced for so long is probably a reason why many Muslims continued to engage in Mut'ah until the time of 'Umar, some unaware of the Prophet's prohibition. Even today, Shi'a Muslims see it as legitimate, and believe the narrations attributed to the Prophet are false. The Hadeeth you have cited refers to that, as well as the practitioners not wishing to impregnate the women.

That is not the same as rape. These were women whom the men had entered into a normal marriage contract, only difference was that there was a "time limit" to the marriage. The reasons are obvious, but in any case [at least in the sunni narrations] the Messenger of God-peace be upon him- put an end to this type of relationship. It is not rape. To connect Mut'ah to rape is an unjust comparison!!

I hope that addresses the point.


The Prophet left something great behind, and none of us should deny that. For another perspective, read Al-Kauthar:Legacy of the Prophet

http://shamsuddinwaheed.blogspot.com/2008/04/al-kauthar-legacy-of-prophet_03.html

No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 15 April 2008 at 12:33am
You will have to excuse my obtuseness.

Are you suggesting that the men in the ahadith temporarily married their captives (probably against the captives wills) so that they could have legal sex with a temporary wife (against her will)

You realise ofcourse that to my mind there is no adequate explanation for the verse or the behaviour of mohammed- He was an exceptional leader for his time, but lets leave it at that.
No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
algebra
Graduate
Graduate
Avatar
Religion: Other(Other)
Posts: 2131
Forum Rating: 0
Rating: 0 of 0 votes Quote algebra Replybullet Posted: 15 April 2008 at 12:38am
Originally posted by waheed1



Please read carefully. The Qur'an gives no instruction of the kind.



Yes it does, it implicitly states that a man could have sexual intercourse with a female captive.

I know you are married, so you must know that females (captives especially) are not going to be complicit in any sexual act. (in general)

Hence the only thing that happened was non consentual sex - rape.


No Guest-Voting   IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 7 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums version 8.03
Copyright ©2001-2006 Web Wiz Guide
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed by members of the Whyislam Forum do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of the Whyislam Team, or any of its subsidiaries, or parent organizations.