Very disturbing

Society Religion & Philosophy
41

Re: Very disturbing

No one here is worshipping Muhammad SAW. Please put things in the correct perspective before you utter gibberish. There is no Islam without Muhammad SAW because you would not have received the Quran without Muhammad SAW. Yes you can objectively say maybe it would be someone else Allah SWT could have chosen but it was him SAW and history does not change. So first live with the fact that Muhammad SAW is responsible for the Quran you believe in and Allah SWT bestowed upon Muhammad SAW this grace and no other in his time.

There is nothing wrong in being objective but your approach is not objective rather divisive and to censor historical detail.

The intent of the hadith in question is not to prove anything about Muhammad SAW (that is your own assumption) but to demonstrate a permissibility of something in the eyes of Allah SWT. If you would but step back and realize, no one fears Muhammad SAW but Allah SWT. The ahadith are not about Muhammad SAW but the things Allah SWT has deemed lawful or unlawful for us and the embodiment of those things as demonstrated by the life of Muhammad SAW.

So are you going to hate people for loving Muhammad SAW. Anyone who loves Muhammad SAW loves Allah SWT and vice versa. No one is putting Muhammad SAW on a pedestal but Allah SWT did that by making him the seal of the prophets and making him the means to deliver the Quran. How can any human take away from him the prestige, grandeur and grace which Allah SWT bewtowed upon. Clear your thoughts please. And yes it does not hurt him SAW in the least bit what is said about him because what matters is in what esteem Allah SWT holds you, are you in Allah SWT good graces or not.

Your hate for people who go to extreme in honoring Muhammad SAW by not casting even an objective eye upon the ahadith is distancing you from those who accord him the most deserved respect and feelings and in turn distancing you from understanding him as well. To revere someone is not necessarily always diefication, do not coalesce the two in all cases.

If you let others reduce the personality of Muhammad SAW to ash then what are you going to say about where the Quran and other Islamic teachings came from when you let the credibility of the medium deteriorate. Then nothing coming from that medium would be trust worthy. If one insults him SAW he is insulting the word of God because he is the live example of it. Islam, Quran and Muhammad SAW are inseparable. Please don't forget this.

3 Likes
42

Re: Very disturbing

Very well said USResident !!!!

43

Re: Very disturbing

how can you say such thing when Mohammed's name is mentioned in the shahada Kalima. Does that not tell you how important he is in our everyday lives as a role model? and how impotant he is to muslims.

44

Re: Very disturbing

Please explain what is Islam without "Mohammad and his diaries"?

And how exactly do you "Worship God and His Quran"? when the Quran in more than one places COMMANDS us to follow Allah and His Messenger. Both are mentioned explicitly so as to make the distinction between what is Allah's Word and what are the Commands of the Prophet.

And let it be known that the Hadith are the explaination of the verses of the Quran, because in many places the Quran mentions something by just a word or a shortphrase, and theres no explaination about it anywhere in the Quran.

An example:
"Cursed were the People of the Ditch" (Surah Burooj, Verse 4)

Now, who were teh People of the Ditch, why were they cursed, what did they do? Answers to all these questions are not found in the Quran, but in the Hadith.

So he who claims to "worship the Quran" by disbelieving in the Hadith, is only fooling himself because he has disbelieved in the very basics of the Deen and hence apostated.

So YOU stop chickening out, by picking up on petty issues like an edit, and try answering some of these questions that are being chucked at you, if thou speaketh the truth!

3 Likes
45

Re: Very disturbing

I have spoken to some Muslims who don't follow hadith because mainstream Islam now treats hadith as divine revelation with perfect preservation. Everyone has to acknowledge that isn't true. There have been too many hadith proven false. There wasn't any guidance from God to follow another set of writings and certainly no promise from God to protect any other religious texts as he did the Quran.

They interpret "obey the messenger" as upholding Quran, the whole Quran, and nothing but Quran. They obey what Muhammad said as a messenger of God, and not what he said as a man. In his job as messenger, he narrated the Quran. Period. That was the message. Those were the only words from God. The other words (if Muhammad even uttered them) were his words as a man.

God said the Quran is complete and perfect amd should be the only source for religious guidance so following the supposition of hadith amounts to the deification of Muhammad. They believe the true love and respect for Muhammad is to recognize him as a human and follow his teachings, i.e., upholding the Quran and nothing but the Quran.

46

Re: Very disturbing

Yes indeed. Therefore. you can do whaever it takes to 'maintain' the credibility of the medium! You have to. Indeed.

Doesn't matter that the medium received a revealation that ex-daughter in law is a permitted consort?

I notice that a few people agree with that because of that. But nobody is prepared to say it is ok for that to happen in their own family. Obviously guilt is stronger than islam!

47

Re: Very disturbing

May ALLAH SWT show uncle hskhan right path. Ameen

48

Re: Very disturbing

Thank You.

49

Re: Very disturbing

Besides the question of whether ex-daugher in law is ok or not, there's a much bigger issue here.

Is Muhamad to be considered a human being or not. If he is to be then it is possible for many to accept him as the model huiman and emulate. But then that would lead to their dreams being revealations too,

If he is to be considered not a human but a super human then yes, his revealations can be afforded special status. But then you cannot claim he did certain things to show it is acceptible ....because he is different and so what is ok for him does not automatically become ok for humans.

What a mess!

50

Re: Very disturbing

^ This is a dilemna all religions face - whether someone who is revered is to be treated as human or God or someone in between. If in between then what are the bounds of emulation for humankind.

In my opinion only Hinduism has found the answer for this. With the characterization of Sri Rama, if you read Ramayana with sufficient piety and interest you will see clear boundaries being shown.

Christianity bypassed this dilemma with such things a miracles and immaculate conception etc and it seemed to work for a while. But different schools have emerged in later centuries.

51

Re: Very disturbing

By what means was she the ex-daughter in law of the Prophet SAW. If you understood what the whole point is then you would not make such an absurd statement.

52

Re: Very disturbing

OK this has gone far enough. I think some historical facts are needed which HSKhan and TA if privy to are not mentioning or are just oblivious to these facts or even the fact that the Quran contains verses related to all of this.

First, Zainab RA was the Prophet SAW first cousin and he had grown up with her and even seen her before hijab was ordered for the muslim women. So if he had any desire for her, it should have materialized much before and not after her marriage to Zaid ibn Harithah. So this puts the filth to rest about him having a liking for her.

Second, the verses of the Quran revealed about adoption were to disallow using someone elses name as your fathers. As we all well know that it was and is still is Arabic custom to call a son by his fathers lineage or kunya, Zaid being the Prophets SAW adopted son was called as Zaid ibn Muhammad. Hence the Quranic verses:

33:4 Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his (one) body: nor has He made your wives whom ye divorce by Zihar your mothers: nor has He made your adopted sons your sons. Such is (only) your (manner of) speech by your mouths. But Allah tells (you) the Truth, and He shows the (right) Way.
33:5 Call them by (the names of) their fathers: that is juster in the sight of Allah. But if ye know not their father's (names, call them) your Brothers in faith, or your maulas. But there is no blame on you if ye make a mistake therein: (what counts is) the intention of your hearts: and Allah is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful.

So adoption is not forbidden ascribing one to the wrong lineage is what is forbidden. If lineage is not known then they are brothers in faith like all muslims are anyway.

Now another derogatory custom in Arabia at the time was that even freed slaves were still of a lesser degree compared to those born noblemen and free.

Now a fact conveniently being ignored by either our cunning or ill-informed guppies here is that it was the Prophet SAW who took the proposal for Zaid RA to Zainab RA. Yes, it was him SAW who proposed on behalf of Zaid for Zainab and even had to face a rejection at first until Allah STW revealed this verse:

33:36 It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.

It was after this that Zainab RA agreed to the proposal. So a person who was interested in someone would not be taking someone elses proposal especially his adopted sons. What the Prophet SAW did here was break another taboo of the society, he elevated the status of slaves and removed that stigma from the society by marrying his freed slave to a noblemen woman such as Zainab RA.

I don't know how many people here have read the history behind this verse of the Quran:

33:37 Behold! Thou didst say to one who had received the grace of Allah and thy favour: "Retain thou (in wedlock) thy wife, and fear Allah." But thou didst hide in thy heart that which Allah was about to make manifest: thou didst fear the people, but it is more fitting that thou shouldst fear Allah. Then when Zaid had dissolved (his marriage) with her, with the necessary (formality), We joined her in marriage to thee: in order that (in future) there may be no difficulty to the Believers in (the matter of) marriage with the wives of their adopted sons, when the latter have dissolved with the necessary (formality) (their marriage) with them. And Allah's command must be fulfilled.

It is very important to understand the implications of this verse. This verse is refering to the deteriorating marital relations between Zaid and Zainab. Zaid had approached the Prophet SAW to get a divorce from Zainab but the Prophet SAW told him not so and to reconcile. The accusers here in this thread claiming that he wanted Zainab for himself should make note of this, the Prophet SAW should have jumped at this opportunity and availed it but he did not. This again puts those claims to rest for the utter filth that they are.

Second thing to see closely in this verse is that Allah SWT has actually sort of scolded the Prophet SAW for hiding something in his heart. This is refering to the final taboo the Prophet SAW was to break, one to demonstrate that adopted sons are not the same as biological sons. You cannot marry your biological sons ex-wife. The Prophet SAW already knew through revelation that he was to marry Zainab RA and this was to provide the severing of the similarity between the adopted son and biological son in terms of rightful ineage. If the Prophet SAW was to be allowed to marry his adopted sons ex-wife then that drives the final stake through the Arabic custom of associating adopted sons with the false lineage. What is the Prophet SAW being scolded here for is that he did not divulge knowledge of this because he feared backlash from the society, so Allah SWT is reminding him of the fact that it is Allah SWT he should fear and not society. So it doesn't matter what society thinks if Allah SWT agree's to it.

Another historical fact ignored in all this discussion thus far is that Zaid did not divorce Zainab RA, for those who say that he learned about the Prophet SAW desire for her. There was no such desire. Their marriage ended by Khula. Mutual agreeement between both.

Now to top it all, it was Zaid RA who took the Prophet SAW proposal to Zainab. If there was any foul play, this could not have been possible.

And the last point I want to make here especially for HSKhan, is that it was Allah SWT who gave Zainab RA in marriage to Muhammad SAW if you can read the verse correctly. So any accusation you hurl here is actually at Allah SWT and you are saying Allah SWT caused all this wrong doing. Be mindful of what you say in this whole matter and do not speak without knowledge. You yourself said you follow the Quran and Allah SWT and you would defend anything said against them. If you have any senses you should realize you are openly defying what you just earlier in this respect.

I hope you see how wrong you are and pray to Allah SWT to make you see things in the correct perspective for your own good.

Sad State of Affairs Pakistanis
53

Re: Very disturbing

Usresidnt: thanks for providing above quotes which in fact are the ones causing all this consternation.

  1. If M knew by revealation that he was to marry her why did he take the proposal for her to marry his son?

  2. If adopted son's ex-wife are permitted as consorts why is noone in this thread prepared to swear that they'll be ok with that occurring in their family? (Obviously they don't feel this is right)

  3. Why did the revealation that she is fair game come just when necessary, rather than much much before?

  4. Ref 33.36 - doesn't that sound like a threat that f Zainab doesn't agree to the marriage proposal then it would be against A and M"s orders. Now, why would god force someone to marry someone??

So frankly the stuff you have quoted actually adds to the view that something seriously wrong was committed in this affair.

And on top of that I'll add the medically established fact (which. 6th century arabs did not seem to know) - inbreeding is very bad and marrying between cousins leads to serious health issues for their offspring. How could god have not known that?

The Random Thread
54

Re: Very disturbing

How can one discuss with you when you are even incapable of grasping the context within a single forum thread with maybe a few dozen responses and yet you wish to provide commentary on 1400 years of history and 23 years of revelation to the Prophet SAW. This is why I keep quoting you as ignorant and naive. The verses I quoted have been quoted the first time in this thread and all the discussion has revolved around a single hadith quoted for initiating this thread. Yet you complain about the consternation.

1 - The revelation was not before the marriage of Zaid. Your own assumption to feed an argument.

2 - There are no examples (at least that I know of) where muslims have followed this. It was meant to be an established practice but an example. And yes I haven't seen this happen today, is there a need to set an example anymore? Please answer. Something not happening is not justification enough to say that it is not right. Is that the logic you follow?

3 - First please use decent language when refering to someone who tremendously greater in ranking an honor then your mother. Not words such as fair game. If you followed the sequence of events I gave in my post then such a ridiculous question would not have been asked. Would the revelation have made any sense until Zaid RA and Zainab RA were over with their marriage. You truly are exhibiting you have no level of comprehension. Please do better than that.

4 - Some people are as blind as a bat. Can you not figure out why Allah SWT had ordered Muhammad SAW to marry Zainab RA? Subhanallah! Your attempts to defile are pitiful.

And I agree medically inter-family marriage has its downsides. But this whole example is not to encourage inter-family marriage. Your acute senses still have not picked that up yet.

Why do you keep embarassing yourself by posting out of sheer ignorance? Face it your just incapable of winning an argument, if that is what you are trying? Adios.

55

Re: Very disturbing

Usresident - I think I'm going to try and show some patience for you like I do for all thought challenged; I will ignore your insults since you obviously get frenzied and have little clue of what you're reading or writing.

  1. The pt abt the revealation is that it came just about the time (doesn't matter just before or just after) the prophet married the adoped son's ex-wife. Instead of hiding behind tinyman clerical arguements you should learn to grasp the main issuem That's the difference between a rote clerk and a thinking professioinal

  2. So why do you think muslims don't follow that? Because people by instict know that it is incest. You just made my point without knowing.

  3. No. It may be your tradition to compare women of your household with others, we don't do that. Learn some manners and class when you come to debate.

  4. Allah ordering the prophet to marry his cousin who also was his adopted son's ex-wife? Does that sound right to you or made up? Apply some common sense. Particularly in the very next sentence you agree that it is medically wrong. So how do you account for even you knowing it but not A or M?

Don't worry abt embarassing me. I don't hold even your erroneous arguements and low-class style of arguement against you - because there's always hope that even you can become a bit better by. associating with your betters. How else will you?

Adios? Ok - I do understand you do need a break to cool down and lick your self inflicted wounds.

► Mardana Quiz ◄
56

Re: Very disturbing

Ulta chor kotwal ko daatay.

I just enjoy insulting you because you never stay and walk your talk. I rarely behave with people like this, many guppies here will testify to that. If you expect respect from others that show some to them. All your posts are almost always devoid of any respect or genuine academic merit, tit for tat. Don't get worked up about it. I have never had a problem respecting a POV that is opposite to mine but it must be well argued not half baked and respectable not provokative. Your discussions never suffice any academic merit or even the proper research or logic. When I see that coming you'll see I will me behave better with you. Like when you said about inter-family marriage, I accepted that because it was rightly argued and academic.

1 - Time is the essence in twisting things from right to wrong. There are quite of few examples of this.

2 - Why do you think muslims do not do trade with gold coins anymore? Why do you think muslims don't ride camels anymore? Why do you see the majority of muslims not having four wives anymore? Can you understand the difference between something that is allowed and forbidden. Just because something is allowed does not imply it must be followed, which is why as you say muslims today do not follow it. The marriage served its purpose at the time and slaves benefited from it. Adoptess found there rightful place in the society of muslims. Today slavery is but almost abolished and adoption has different issues, why would anyone find a need to follow that example anymore. The circumstances are non-existent today.

3 - Absolutely, we believe in giving respect to earn it. Apparently you do not.

4 - It is not medically wrong but not favored. Drinking alocohol is also not medically favored, what say you about that? I do not see anything wrong, it was a very particular circumstance that does not exist today. So why worry about it.

In the end I must ask what are your intentions i.e. to debase Muhammad SAW or say that this is wrongly attributed to him SAW? Please answer this because it has to be one or the other. If you fail to reply your intentions will be well known. So please clear the confusion and let us not make our own assumptions about you by clarifying them.

Hope to get more fair and classier replies from you. Don't let my hopes down.

57

Re: Very disturbing

Usres - until your above post I wasn't sure if you were using obfuscation as a deliberate tactic to just troll around or genuinely a bit uptake challenged. Now I am kinda leaning towards the latter.

I pointed out clearly on your own 4 bullet points as to how you are misinformed and underdeveloped in that thougt. Yet you come back with bullet pointed obfuscation. Just tell me what you want to know and I'll try and answer you if your question is relevant.

Don't worry abt explaining why you resort to insult. I decided a long time ago that if I'm going to bother with your likes I have to ignore some insults that emanate usually out of frustration. It's only a symptom afterall!

58

Re: Very disturbing

Keep leaning.

You only prove my point, it was you who came up with hte bulleted points not me. I just replied to the discussion confined and to prevent tangents. I said earlier you are unable to even follow the context of a thread let alone centuries of history.

My insults if that is what you call them are not out of frustration, I am actually enjoying your responses. Your good at throwing full tosses.

And As I said, you never answer the questions asked of you so its really you who keeps obfuscating the discussion.

Anyway, will not continue to discuss with you since its totally devoid of any academic quality or even critical criticism. Come back when you have some real knowledge to discuss not tit bits. Been a pleasure.

mama's boy
59

Re: Very disturbing

Ok, I'll say it: I don't have a problem if it were to happen in my family.

60

Re: Very disturbing

^ good for you Terrible Guy.

@USRes on #58 : all I can do at this point is pity you. pls have a chk up for hallucination and delusions of thought.

My offer to not ignore you still holds and hopefully one golden day you will frame a coherent question.