U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 05-16-2016, 10:36 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,302,730 times
Reputation: 7407

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
Ah yes, no matter how strong the hadith it is hearsay if you don't like it. It is such a convenient argument to just say: hearsay. If you want to use that excuse then use it for all of Islam, including the Quran. Because all of Islam is hearsay. Not just what you don't like.

Rape is NOT a crime if done to captive women. Allah/Muhammed did not say "DON'T YOU DARE TOUCH THOSE CAPTIVE WOMEN OR I WILL HAVE YOU BURNING IN MY ETERNAL FIRE!!!" And certainly that fire was used to threaten tons of other things. Why not this one? But instead allah gives the go ahead for mass rape.

Then you say:
"Here is a bit better translation of Muslim 3433
Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) sent a small army. The rest of the hadith is the same except this that he said: Except what your right hands possessout of them are lawful for you; and he did not mention" when their 'idda period comes to an end". This hadith has been reported on the authority of AbuSa'id (al-Khudri) (Allah be pleased with him) through another chain of transmitters and the words are: They took captives (women) on the day of Autas who had their husbands. They were afraid (to have sexual intercourse with them) when this verse was revealed:" And women already married except those whom you right hands posses"
It is a question of Marrying the slave women. Not the permission of gang raping slaves"


Marry?? That is insane! This is the gang rape of the captive women! We have been through this before. I now must suppose that if some Jews break into your house and slaughter you, your wife will want to marry them and have sex with them that very night and then be sold or enslaved by them!!

NO, it is NOT marriage. It is rape. The women will then be enslaved or sold or ransomed.

You must have a very VERY low opinion of women to think they would want to have sex with the murderers who slaughtered their husbands, sons, fathers, brothers.

And you keep going back to slaves. I am talking here about CAPTIVE WOMEN. Muhammed and his gang attack their villages, slaughter or capture the people in the village and then they mass rape the women. Then they sell or enslave or ransom them.

And no, I do not have to read tons of stuff to know what the hadiths mean. THEY ARE VERY CLEAR.

"O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do coitus interruptus. A soul that which Allah has destined to exist will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)

"We went out with Allah's Messenger 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, and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

The Apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the Apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Qur’anic verse: (Sura 4:24) "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." (Abu Dawud 2150, also Muslim 3433)
As I already noted the raping of anyone including slaves was already a crime under Islam and the perpetrator is subject to the death penalty. Because that hadith did not condemn it does not mean Muhammad(saws) did not condemn it. Keep in mind the compiliers of the Ahadith broke them up into section and placed each section in the category that fit. Bukhari and Muslim placed that particular section under the rules of marriage to show that Muhammad(saws) forbade 'Coitus interruptis" We do not know what the whole hadith contained.

Read this link:

Rape - Quran's perspective and misconceptions | Submission.org - Your best source for Submission (Islam)


From ahadith

In our view the man who rapes a woman, regardless of whether she is a virgin or not, if she is a free woman he must pay a "dowry" like that of her peers, and if she is a slave he must pay whatever has been detracted from her value. The punishment is to be carried out on the rapist and there is no punishment for the woman who has been raped, whatever the case. (Imam Maalik, Al-Muwatta', Volume 2, page 734)

In an authentic narration from Sunan Al Bayhaqi, Volume 2, page 363, Hadith no. 18685 we read the following story:

Abu al-Hussain bin al-Fadhl al-Qatan narrated from Abdullah bin Jaffar bin Darestweh from Yaqub bin Sufyan from al-Hassab bin Rabee from Abdullah bin al-Mubarak from Kahmas from Harun bin Al-Asam who said: Umar bin al-Khatab may Allah be pleased with him sent Khalid bin al-Walid in an army, hence Khalid sent Dharar bin al-Auwzwar in a squadron and they invaded a district belonging to the tribe of Bani Asad. They then captured a pretty bride, Dharar liked her hence he asked his companions to grant her to him and they did so. He then had sexual intercourse with her, when he completed his mission he felt guilty, and went to Khalid and told him about what he did. Khalid said: 'I permit you and made it lawful to you.' He said: 'No not until you write a message to Umar'. (Then they sent a message to Umar) and Umar answered that he (Dharar) should be stoned. By the time Umar's message was delivered, Dharar was dead. (Khalid) said: 'Allah didn't want to disgrace Dharar'
"There is no person to whom Allaah has given people to take care of, and he fails to take care of them properly, but he will not smell the fragrance of Paradise." (Saheeh Bukhari no. 6731; Saheeh Muslim, no. 142)

Saheeh Muslim



Book 015, Number 4082:



Hilal b. Yasaf reported that a person got angry and slapped his slave-girl. Thereupon Suwaid b. Muqarrin said to him: You could find no other part (to slap) but the prominent part of her face. See I was one of the seven sons of Muqarrin, and we had but only one slave-girl. The youngest of us slapped her, and Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) commanded us to set her free.



Book 015, Number 4086
Abu Mas'ud al-Badri reported: "I was beating my slave with a whip when I heard a voice behind me: Understand, Abu Masud; but I did not recognise the voice due to intense anger. He (Abu Mas'ud) reported: As he came near me (I found) that he was the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and he was saying: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; bear in mind. Abu Mas'ud. He (Aba Maslad) said: threw the whip from my hand. Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Bear in mind, Abu Mas'ud; verily Allah has more dominance upon you than you have upon your slave. I (then) said: I would never beat my servant in future.

If the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade slapping and whipping slaves then it's unthinkable that he would have permitted raping them. It just makes no sense.
Does Islam Permit Muslim Men to Rape Their Slave Girls?
From Shariah
"If a man acquires by force a slave-girl, then has sexual intercourse with her after he acquires her by force, and if he is not excused by ignorance, then the slave-girl will be taken from him, he is required to pay the fine, and he will receive the punishment for illegal sexual intercourse." (Imam Al Shaafi'i, Kitaabul Umm, Volume 3, page 253)

Critics would reply back and say that it's unthinkable that slave girls back then would hae willingly consented to having sex with their Muslim captors who just killed their family members. They would usually point to the specific example of Banu Al-Mustaliq.





The narration states:





Sahih al-Bukhari 4138 - Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e., coitus interruptus). Abu Sa'id said, "We went out with Allah's Messenger for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq, and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So, when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's Messenger while he is present among us?' We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so. There is no person that is destined to exist, but will come to existence, till the Day of Resurrection.'" (Sahih Bukhari, no. 4138)





Here the critic's argument goes something like this:




- The Islamic traditions show that Muslims had sex with their slave girls


- According to my subjective logic it is inconceivable that slave girls would consent to having sex with the captors that just killed members from their tribe


- In conclusion, the Islamic traditions show that Muslims raped their slave girls



These critics are ignorant of history, for slave girls did consent to having sex with their captors back in the past.



John McClintock said:




Women who followed their father and husbands to the war put on their finest dresses and ornaments previous to an engagement, in the hope of finding favor in the eyes of their captors in case of a defeat. (John McClintock, James Strong, "Cyclopædia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature" [Harper & Brothers, 1894], p. 782)





Matthew B. Schwartz said:





The Book of Deuteronomy prescribes its own rules for the treatment of women captured in war [ Deut 21:10-14 ] . Women have always followed armies to do the soldiers' laundry, to nurse the sick and wounded, and to serve as prostitutes

They would often dress in such a way as to attract the soldiers who won the battle. The Bible recognizes the realities of the battle situation in its rules on how to treat female captives, though commentators disagree on some of the details.

The biblical Israelite went to battle as a messenger of God. Yet he could also, of course, be caught up in the raging tide of blood and violence. The Western mind associates prowess, whether military or athletic, with sexual success.


The pretty girls crowd around the hero who scores the winning touchdown, not around the players of the losing team. And it is certainly true in war: the winning hero "attracts" the women. (Matthew B. Schwartz, Kalman J. Kaplan, "The Fruit of Her Hands: The Psychology of Biblical Women" [Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2007] , pp. 146-147)





Thus we see from two non-Muslim authors that slave girls back in the past would consent to having sex with their captors. So if we put aside our 21st century mindset and look at history objectively, there is nothing wrong with saying that slave girls back then consented to having sex with their captors.



One might object to the fact that the above authors are only speaking about the Israelite era. However, that is really not a good response. The point I am trying to make is that the idea of the possibility of slave girls willingly having sex with their captors is not absurd. Thus, one is required to provide proof that those slave girls who had sex with their Muslim captors did not consent. This is especially due to the fact that 1) It was possible for slave girls back in the past to consent to having sex with their captors and 2) Muslims were prohibited from harming their slave girls.
Does Islam Permit Muslim Men to Rape Their Slave Girls?
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-17-2016, 05:52 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,881 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Bukhari and Muslim placed that particular section under the rules of marriage to show that Muhammad(saws) forbade 'Coitus interruptis" We do not know what the whole hadith contained.

[/url]

But Muhammed did NOT forbid coitus interruptus in regard to marriage or rape....only said don't bother doing it when raping captive women and girls!! He said it did not matter because if allah wanted a soul (baby) then there would be a baby no matter if the rapist withdrew his penis before ejaculation or not.

Let's reread:
"O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do coitus interruptus. A soul that which Allah has destined to exist will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)

"We went out with Allah's Messenger 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, and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

Sahih al-Bukhari 4138 - Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e., coitus interruptus). Abu Sa'id said, "We went out with Allah's Messenger for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq, and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So, when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's Messenger while he is present among us?' We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so. There is no person that is destined to exist, but will come to existence, till the Day of Resurrection.'" (Sahih Bukhari, no. 4138)

There is no FORBIDDING, just "it is better" and "it does not matter". There is no mention of marriage.

CONTEXT!! Mass raping captive women and girls!! NOT SLAVES. These women are just captured.

Again, WE ARE DISCUSSING CAPTIVE WOMEN RIGHT NOW AND THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO SLAVES. I think you are using slaves as a red herring because you know that allah/muhammed allowed mass rape of CAPTIVE WOMEN.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...50/Red_Herring

So I will for now ignore all your claims about slaves. WE ARE DISCUSSING CAPTIVE WOMEN. Women who are mass raped soon after Muhammed and his gang attacked their villages and slaughtered or captured their husbands, sons, fathers, brothers.

And you compare a gang of men attacking villages and slaughtering the men and boys to a winning sports team and say that the wives, daughters, mothers of these slaughtered men will want to have sex with the murderers of their families because the murderers are like winning sports teams. There is nothing I can say to that!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2016, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,302,730 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
But Muhammed did NOT forbid coitus interruptus in regard to marriage or rape....only said don't bother doing it when raping captive women and girls!! He said it did not matter because if allah wanted a soul (baby) then there would be a baby no matter if the rapist withdrew his penis before ejaculation or not.

Let's reread:
"O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do coitus interruptus. A soul that which Allah has destined to exist will surely come into existence.” (Bukhari 34:432)

"We went out with Allah's Messenger 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, and he said: It does not matter" (Sahih Muslim 3371)

Sahih al-Bukhari 4138 - Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the mosque and saw Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e., coitus interruptus). Abu Sa'id said, "We went out with Allah's Messenger for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq, and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So, when we intended to do coitus interruptus, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's Messenger while he is present among us?' We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so. There is no person that is destined to exist, but will come to existence, till the Day of Resurrection.'" (Sahih Bukhari, no. 4138)

There is no FORBIDDING, just "it is better" and "it does not matter". There is no mention of marriage.

CONTEXT!! Mass raping captive women and girls!! NOT SLAVES. These women are just captured.

Again, WE ARE DISCUSSING CAPTIVE WOMEN RIGHT NOW AND THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO SLAVES. I think you are using slaves as a red herring because you know that allah/muhammed allowed mass rape of CAPTIVE WOMEN.

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/...50/Red_Herring

So I will for now ignore all your claims about slaves. WE ARE DISCUSSING CAPTIVE WOMEN. Women who are mass raped soon after Muhammed and his gang attacked their villages and slaughtered or captured their husbands, sons, fathers, brothers.

And you compare a gang of men attacking villages and slaughtering the men and boys to a winning sports team and say that the wives, daughters, mothers of these slaughtered men will want to have sex with the murderers of their families because the murderers are like winning sports teams. There is nothing I can say to that!
Duh--by definition captive women are slaves, as they are the property of the captor. The fact is Rape of anyone was/is forbidden in Islam.

Neither you nor I and probably no one else know the remainder of the conversations or observation were each hadith relates to. Muhammad(saws) did not write nor knew what was to become Ahadith. Bukhari and Muslim selected specific lines to place within their categories. Bukhari 4138 is only the part he considered applicable to be included in his "Book of Marriage"

We do know that Rape including the rape of slaves, captive women or anyone else was/is punishable by death in the Qur'an, Sunnah, Ahadith and Shariah.

You are not going to learn much about Islam from the Ahadith except for the precedence in establishing Islamic Jurisprudence.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2016, 10:44 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,881 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Duh--by definition captive women are slaves, as they are the property of the captor. The fact is Rape of anyone was/is forbidden in Islam.

Neither you nor I and probably no one else know the remainder of the conversations or observation were each hadith relates to. Muhammad(saws) did not write nor knew what was to become Ahadith. Bukhari and Muslim selected specific lines to place within their categories. Bukhari 4138 is only the part he considered applicable to be included in his "Book of Marriage"

We do know that Rape including the rape of slaves, captive women or anyone else was/is punishable by death in the Qur'an, Sunnah, Ahadith and Shariah.

You are not going to learn much about Islam from the Ahadith except for the precedence in establishing Islamic Jurisprudence.
Slave: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

Captive: taken and held as or as if a prisoner of war

There is a difference. The hadith I posted were about women and girls who were raped by Muhamed and his gang right after they attacked the village and slaughtered or captured their men. Later these women would be enslaved or sold off or ransomed, but I am talking about the rape of women right after the football game...oh, I mean after Muhammed and his men attacked and tortured and beheaded their husbands, fathers, sons, brothers. Which you have confused with a sporting event.

But call it what you like: Muhammed and his gang raped these women and girls right after attacking their villages and capturing/enslaving or torturing and beheading their families. With Muhammed/Allah's approval!!

After that these women were enslaved or sold or ransomed.

And why would Muhammed do this evil stuff? Supposedly he was sent to stop all these terrible things! Instead he owns slaves he can screw, rapes women and a little 4th grader, murders people and has people slaughtered for speaking against him. Shame on him!

I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

Gee, maybe we can end this slave/capture business and just call them booty or prizes!

Safiyah was taken to Muhammad’s tent. Muhammad wanted to have sex with her on that very night, only hours after torturing to death her husband. She resisted his advances. That night Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of Muhammad. Muhammad saw Abu Ayyub & asked him why he was there; he said: "I was afraid for you with this young lady. You killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, I was really afraid for you on her account". (Ibn Ishaq, p. 766)

Your opinion of women wanting to have sex with gangs who murder their families sickens me.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2016, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,302,730 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
Slave: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

Captive: taken and held as or as if a prisoner of war

There is a difference. The hadith I posted were about women and girls who were raped by Muhamed and his gang right after they attacked the village and slaughtered or captured their men. Later these women would be enslaved or sold off or ransomed, but I am talking about the rape of women right after the football game...oh, I mean after Muhammed and his men attacked and tortured and beheaded their husbands, fathers, sons, brothers. Which you have confused with a sporting event.

But call it what you like: Muhammed and his gang raped these women and girls right after attacking their villages and capturing/enslaving or torturing and beheading their families. With Muhammed/Allah's approval!!

After that these women were enslaved or sold or ransomed.

And why would Muhammed do this evil stuff? Supposedly he was sent to stop all these terrible things! Instead he owns slaves he can screw, rapes women and a little 4th grader, murders people and has people slaughtered for speaking against him. Shame on him!

I drove them along until I brought them to Abu Bakr who bestowed that girl upon me as a prize. So we arrived in Medina. I had not yet disrobed her when the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) met me in the street and said: “Give me that girl.” (Sahih Muslim 4345)

Gee, maybe we can end this slave/capture business and just call them booty or prizes!

Safiyah was taken to Muhammad’s tent. Muhammad wanted to have sex with her on that very night, only hours after torturing to death her husband. She resisted his advances. That night Abu Ayyub al-Ansari guarded the tent of Muhammad. Muhammad saw Abu Ayyub & asked him why he was there; he said: "I was afraid for you with this young lady. You killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives, I was really afraid for you on her account". (Ibn Ishaq, p. 766)

Your opinion of women wanting to have sex with gangs who murder their families sickens me.
Again you are quoting Ibn ishaq who had no first hand of Muhammad(saws) and whose works did not survive but were reconstructed by others after his death.


Here are some links explaining why "Sirat Rasul Allah" is not a reliable source

The-Problems-with-Ibn-Ishaq

Seeking The Truth: How Authentic Is The Work Of Ibn Ishaq

[scribd]286894365[/scribd]

Even those that promote "Sirat Rasul Allah" will point out this disclaimer made by Ibn Ishaq Himself:

Throughout his work, Ibn Ishaq precedes every statement with the word za`ama or za`amu, he (they) alleged). It carries with it more than a hint that the statement may not be true, though it might be sound. This attitude reflects Ibn Ishaq's caution and fairness.
The Facts About Islam: Who Was Ibn Ishaq and Was His Work Reliable?
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2016, 01:23 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,881 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
Again you are quoting Ibn ishaq who had no first hand of Muhammad(saws) and whose works did not survive but were reconstructed by others after his death.


Here are some links explaining why "Sirat Rasul Allah" is not a reliable source

The-Problems-with-Ibn-Ishaq

Seeking The Truth: How Authentic Is The Work Of Ibn Ishaq

[scribd]286894365[/scribd]

Even those that promote "Sirat Rasul Allah" will point out this disclaimer made by Ibn Ishaq Himself:

Throughout his work, Ibn Ishaq precedes every statement with the word za`ama or za`amu, he (they) alleged). It carries with it more than a hint that the statement may not be true, though it might be sound. This attitude reflects Ibn Ishaq's caution and fairness.
The Facts About Islam: Who Was Ibn Ishaq and Was His Work Reliable?
I don't think the Quran is a reliable source. I also think that Muhammed made up allah. So there we go. As long as Islam uses this guy as a reference and does not eliminate his hadith from Islam, I'll be using him. Besides, his hadith supports Sahih Muslim 4345.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-17-2016, 03:13 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,302,730 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
I don't think the Quran is a reliable source. I also think that Muhammed made up allah. So there we go. As long as Islam uses this guy as a reference and does not eliminate his hadith from Islam, I'll be using him. Besides, his hadith supports Sahih Muslim 4345.
Ishaq did not compile any ahadith that we know of. We do not know very much about him and do not even have any copies of his actual works. his work was not well received and no copies were made. later several people such as Hisham attempted to recreate his work from memory. actually Hisham tried to recreate it from his memory of a recreation he had once read. The big issue with Ishaq, is we do not actually have any of His actual work. His sirat was an attempted recreation by Hisham who attempted to recreate Ishaq's Sirat from memory nearly 40 years after the death of Ishaq and long after ishaq's work had been destroyed.j

We do Know Ishaq was a Scholar of Ahadith but do not have any collection or compilation done by him. As for His Sirat we do not know how much of it is duplication of what he had written. We do not have any means to verify anything in the Sirat as no sources were ever given. Nearly everything found in the "Sirat Rasul Allah" is not found any place else.

He was born 72 years after the Death of Muhammad(saws) and had no first hand knowledge. We do not what he used as sources for his information. He died about 90 years before Bukhari did his compilation and establish the rules for establishing reliability and authenticity of any ahadith.

It is sort of like some one in the far future calling me an expert on Abraham Lincoln because I was born only 75 years after his death and 50 years after my death somebody who knew me writes a book in my name about what he remembered me saying about Lincoln.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2016, 01:53 PM
 
3,167 posts, read 1,042,559 times
Reputation: 289
Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
I don't think the Quran is a reliable source.
If there is any reliable source, it is the Qur'an.

Quote:
I also think that Muhammed made up allah. So there we go.
Not that fast!

Allah existed even before Muhammad was born. His father was "servant of Allah" ("Abdullah").

Quote:
As long as Islam uses this guy as a reference and does not eliminate his hadith from Islam, I'll be using him. Besides, his hadith supports Sahih Muslim 4345.
Islam does not use ahadith but only the Best Hadith; the Hadith of Allah (the Qur'an). It is some Muslims who have left the Best Hadith and gone on to other alleged ahadith for which there is no authority given by Allah.

39:23 Allah has revealed the Best Hadith...

Muslims were not to believe in any other hadith after the Best Hadith (the Qur'an).

[45.6] These are the ayat of Allah which We recite to you with truth; then in what hadith would they believe after Allah and His ayat?

This is the main reason I do not use ahadith here to make my point about Islam but only the Qur'an; the only reliable source for Islam.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-18-2016, 05:37 PM
 
352 posts, read 308,854 times
Reputation: 54
Bismillaah ir Rahmaan ir Rahiim In The Name of Allah, The Most Gracious, The Most Merciful. As salaamu alaykum wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuhu; The peace be upon you, and The Mercy of Allah and HIS Blessings.



Quote:
Translated from the words in his 'Nahjul Balagha', Imam Ali peace be upon him, describes God in a beautifully eloquent way.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjFMqX6rr2I Imam Ali [a.s] describes God (720p HD)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdEIzRVkfBY Imam Ali [a.s] describes God (720p HD) part 2


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GcnzaikIUM Imam Ali [a.s] describes God (720p HD) part 3
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2016, 12:03 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 753,881 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif View Post
If there is any reliable source, it is the Qur'an.

Not that fast!

Allah existed even before Muhammad was born. His father was "servant of Allah" ("Abdullah").

Islam does not use ahadith but only the Best Hadith; the Hadith of Allah (the Qur'an). It is some Muslims who have left the Best Hadith and gone on to other alleged ahadith for which there is no authority given by Allah.

39:23 Allah has revealed the Best Hadith...

Muslims were not to believe in any other hadith after the Best Hadith (the Qur'an).

[45.6] These are the ayat of Allah which We recite to you with truth; then in what hadith would they believe after Allah and His ayat?

This is the main reason I do not use ahadith here to make my point about Islam but only the Qur'an; the only reliable source for Islam.
The Quran was written by man, probably Muhammed. Let's be real. There is nothing supernatural. No creator of the universe wrote that mess. You want me to ignore reality and start believing in the supernatural. I will not do that.

Will you stop believing in allah and start believing in Scientology?

The hadiths are a large component of Islam and as long as they are so widely used by Islam, I will also use them.

"Hadith are second only to the Quran in developing Islamic jurisprudence,[4] and regarded as important tools for understanding the Quran and commentaries (tafsir) written on it. Some important elements of traditional Islam, such as the five salat prayers, are mentioned in hadith.[5]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith

You can't eat your cake and have it, too.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top